Re: Ubuntu 23.04 is Unusable with GNOME 44.0 Due to Major Bugs - Priority Must Be for GNOME 44.1 ASAP!

Do you have launchpad bugs for these issues? I do have freezes every now and then, and I have seen the cursor being stuck in the resize icon, and wanted to check if the reports match what I'm seeing on my system (xorg). On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 11:44 AM tothepoin...@gmail.com < tothep

Ubuntu 23.04 is Unusable with GNOME 44.0 Due to Major Bugs - Priority Must Be for GNOME 44.1 ASAP!

I am sure I am many who have already pointed this out, but Gnome 44.0 in Ubuntu 23.04 is plagued with bugs, windows not focusing, random freezes which requires a hard-reset, mouse cursor stuck on resize icon and do not even try using a Wayland session. And...And...It's a mess. Gnome 44.1

Bugs in building glibc

Hello, I would like to report two bugs I’ve encountered while trying to build glibc on Ubuntu 18.04. I’ve used glibc_2.27-3ubuntu1.3. I’ve only investigated the source of the second, since I’ve found a workaround for the first. 1 Problem: The following tests fail during the build: FAIL: misc

Re: bugs in php-xajax with PHP7

On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 5:34 AM Robie Basak wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 08:52:59PM -0500, Lindsay Haisley wrote: > > When I get some time, I'll go through PHP files and post a unified > > diff, but I'm pretty busy, so it may be a while. This must be fixed, > > though, or php-xajax is

Re: bugs in php-xajax with PHP7

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 08:52:59PM -0500, Lindsay Haisley wrote: > When I get some time, I'll go through PHP files and post a unified > diff, but I'm pretty busy, so it may be a while. This must be fixed, > though, or php-xajax is unusable as-is with PHP7. Thank you for offering a patch! Please

bugs in php-xajax with PHP7

I just upgraded a server to Ubuntu 16.04 LTS. This version supplies PHP7.0 leaving only a stub for PHP5. I have a number of system web applications which use xajax, and the package php-xajax v0.5-1ubuntu1 is offered with xenial, and is installed. The PHP code with this version of php-xajax

Scilab bugs 1739476 and 1739477 on launchpad

Dear Ubuntu and Debian developers! Please take care on the following bugs in Scilab: - https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/scilab/+bug/1739476 - Scilab 6.0 launches, shows its window and closes immediately on bionic - https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/scilab/+bug/1739477

Re: LibreOffice Bugs/failures part 221

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 20:31:45 +0200, Petter Adsen wrote: >On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 15:55:15 -0700 paulwheeler wrote: > >> When I click on LibreOffice from the menu or the panel shortcut, >> NOTHING HAPPENS! > >This is not a support list, and stop shouting. To emphasize it might be better to write

Re: LibreOffice Bugs/failures part 221

On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 15:55:15 -0700 paulwheeler wrote: > When I click on LibreOffice from the menu or the panel shortcut, > NOTHING HAPPENS! This is not a support list, and stop shouting. > My System: Linux Mint 17.3 Cinnamon 64-bit, Cinnamon version 2.8.8 This is not

LibreOffice Bugs/failures part 221

I used synaptic to remove all evidence of libreoffice from my system I did a search from "/" as root and found no libreoffice files. Just for paranoia sake and to remove doubt that there is some hidden directory containing office. Nothing found. I used synaptic to install libreoffice

Re: Bugs on Unity 8 in pc

las 13:40, Ramon Marquez escribió: >> i've installed Unity 8 manually through: >> >> sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade >> sudo apt-get install unity8-desktop-session-mir >> >> I would like to point you to the most common bugs I've found , but fi

Re: Bugs on Unity 8 in pc

-get dist-upgrade > sudo apt-get install unity8-desktop-session-mir > > I would like to point you to the most common bugs I've found , but first > they tell them the technical specs of my pc: > > - CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 2,8GHz x2 > - RAM Memory 4GB > - Graphics Card NVIDIA

Re: Bugs on Unity 8 in pc

Marquez escribió: i've installed Unity 8 manually through: sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade sudo apt-get install unity8-desktop-session-mir I would like to point you to the most common bugs I've found , but first they tell them the technical specs of my pc: - CPU Intel Core 2 D

Bugs on Unity 8 in pc

i've installed Unity 8 manually through: sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade sudo apt-get install unity8-desktop-session-mir I would like to point you to the most common bugs I've found , but first they tell them the technical specs of my pc: - CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E740

outdated kilo release packages with critical bugs

Hello! I have just deployed OpenStack on trusty from ubuntu cloud archive, and it seems like packages was not updated since june 2015. This is the bugfix in upstream stable/kilo branch dated by 29 Jun :

Compiz has hundreds of critical bugs in Unity ( other desktop session with compiz) on Utopic not usable for everyday use

Hi, On Utopic (after fresh install updates) I am experiencing tons of bugs in Unity almost nothing really works. The real issue is that, these bugs affects taking screenshot desktop video recording which is preventing me to report any new bugs. I. 'Show Desktop' on launcher crashes compiz

Launchpad - Tagging of bugs

Hi all, Recently I have seen many new or unknown tags being added to launchpad bugs that are not present on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Tags or its sub pages. One example is 'kern-key' that is not listed for the kernel. There are others. It would be nice if related devs could update

Reporting bugs directly to Launchpad?

I must have missed some new revision, as I no longer seem to be able to post bugs directly to launchpad. I go to https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/saucy and click on Report a bug on the top right hand side of the page. Rather than taking me to a bug report screen, this now takes me

Re: Reporting bugs directly to Launchpad?

On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Patrick Goetz pgo...@mail.utexas.eduwrote: I must have missed some new revision, as I no longer seem to be able to post bugs directly to launchpad. I go to https://bugs.launchpad.net/**ubuntu/saucyhttps://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/saucy and click

Re: Reporting bugs directly to Launchpad?

On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 12:17:23AM +0300, Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Patrick Goetz pgo...@mail.utexas.eduwrote: I must have missed some new revision, as I no longer seem to be able to post bugs directly to launchpad. I go to https://bugs.launchpad.net

Re: mdadm bugs 946758 and 946344 (was: Re: Private bugs - mdadm)

. What is the best forum for discussing these specific bugs? And, as an affected user, how can I assist in working to identify cause, and/or possible fixes [the affected systems are my work desktop, and my main home system, so I don't want to put alpha code on either of them]? I browsed

Re: mdadm bugs 946758 and 946344

the same information as in bug 946344. What is the best forum for discussing these specific bugs? And, as an affected user, how can I assist in working to identify cause, and/or possible fixes [the affected systems are my work desktop, and my main home system, so I don't want to put alpha code

mdadm bugs 946758 and 946344 (was: Re: Private bugs - mdadm)

Dmitrijs, On Mon, 2012-07-02 at 12:35 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: On 02/07/12 12:25, Tim Frost wrote: I am one of a number of people affected by an apparent bug in mdadm. The official master bug in launchpad is marked as private - #946758 [trimmed] Automatically filed bugs via apport

Private bugs - mdadm

I am one of a number of people affected by an apparent bug in mdadm. The official master bug in launchpad is marked as private - #946758 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/946758 for those who have access to it). My best reference (which I have subscribed to) is #946344 (https://bugs.launchpad.net

Re: Private bugs - mdadm

On 02/07/12 12:25, Tim Frost wrote: I am one of a number of people affected by an apparent bug in mdadm. The official master bug in launchpad is marked as private - #946758 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/946758 for those who have access to it). My best reference (which I have subscribed

LTS regressions and duplicate bugs

have no idea if the reports were sent at all. I wonder if this happens by design or it is just something that went overlooked by the apport team. [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/912134 -- [] Alexandre Strube su...@ubuntu.com -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss

Where to report bugs in immutable wiki pages? Plus, one such report

I can't find anything on the wiki about where to report errors in immutable pages. The one I'm thinking of is in: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Troubleshooting/Freeze where it says: Alternatively, you can disable DRI support in your xorg.conf (see below). This makes sense in the context (it's

Re: How to target bugs and features to future Ubuntu releases

One word to describe my feelings on thisHallelujah! On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 12:15 -0600, Kate Stewart wrote: For those of you who target bugs and features to releases, you may have noticed that there is now an o-series and p-series available. This means that it is now possible to target

compiz 0.8.4-0ubuntu2.1 alleged bugs report

Hello, I'd like to report few bugs I believe are due to the compiz component on a fresh ubuntu amd64 If this mail should not be sent here, please direct me to the proper location. *** summary: recent upgrade has it wrong when resizing windows, running `Window management scale', Ring switcher

Re: compiz 0.8.4-0ubuntu2.1 alleged bugs report

On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 17:50 +0200, Emmanuel Michon wrote: Hello, I'd like to report few bugs I believe are due to the compiz component on a fresh ubuntu amd64 If this mail should not be sent here, please direct me to the proper location. Hi Emmanuel, Thanks for your interest

logging bugs for pre-release versions

Having abandoned Karmic, I've been installing Lucid Alpha 3 on a number of different systems, mostly for testing, and am finding lots of bugs. For example, on an old Acer Aspire 3000 laptop, after a completely generic Alpha 3 install + or - up to March 8 daily updates: 1. The console driver

Re: Triaging Bugs with Patches

(or another dev) should then check the patch, commit it, and close the bug. The bugs with patches are already flagged this way in bug listings, the dual band-aid icon, additionally e-mail notifications now indicate when attachments flagged as patches are added to bug reports. The sponsorship

Re: Triaging Bugs with Patches

On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Brian Murray br...@ubuntu.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:42:34PM -0500, Evan wrote: I've been triaging a few bugs, and I came across a pair of bugs in libpcap which had patches [1][2]. I found and checked the wiki page on triaging bugs with patches

Triaging Bugs with Patches

I've been triaging a few bugs, and I came across a pair of bugs in libpcap which had patches [1][2]. I found and checked the wiki page on triaging bugs with patches [3], and after completing the available steps, I ran into a wall. The complete text of the section describing what to do with a bug

wvdial postinst script bugs

Hi, The wvdial postinst script runs wvdialconf which tries to detect modems and write out /etc/wvdial.conf. There have been several bugs reported where wvdialconf hangs while probing serial ports and the wvdialconf process must be killed, leaving the package unconfigured. You may wish to scan

Re: making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

. If that was happening, it should be easy to grab the section labeled WORKAROUND:, right? Well, I saw not many of these labeled bugs. I think we whould start a different process to identify a workaround solution for an issue that will not be fixed. Yes, they are used far less than

Re: making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

that takes part in the bug discussion, a workaround that has to be confirmed in order to be posted in the workaround for bugs web page. This is good if we want to provide a service with careful info (for example this could be mandatory if web page is a sort of official web page maintained by Canonical). So

Re: making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

:, right? Well, I saw not many of these labeled bugs. I think we whould start a different process to identify a workaround solution for an issue that will not be fixed. Yes, they are used far less than ideal. Still, they should be used (and when I find a bug that is missing a workaround

making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

Often Ubuntu users (expecially new users or user that doesn't know much of Ubuntu bug fixing procedure) are disoriented by the fact that bugs, in LTS releases, aren't fixed (or they are marked as fix released if they aren't present anymore in next Ubuntu releases) if they aren't security issues

Re: making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

Am 07.01.2010 um 12:53 schrieb Marco Pallotta: we cannot ignore this user perception and I think we have to study to try to fix it (also because LTS has seen as a sort of a very stable release). To use some of Mark's words: I agree with you wholeheartedly. So the bug triager [...]

Re: making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Marco Pallotta marco.pallo...@gmail.com wrote: Often Ubuntu users (expecially new users or user that doesn't know much of Ubuntu bug fixing procedure) are disoriented by the fact that bugs, in LTS releases, aren't fixed (or they are marked as fix released

Re: making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

that bugs, in LTS releases, aren't fixed (or they are marked as fix released if they aren't present anymore in next Ubuntu releases) if I'm still surprised that supposedly supported versions don't have bug fixes. You get these kinds of reports: - 7.10 is a great release - 8.04 is the worst

Re: making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

that bugs, in LTS releases, aren't fixed (or they are marked as fix released if they aren't present anymore in next Ubuntu releases)  if I'm still surprised that supposedly supported versions don't have bug fixes. You get these kinds of reports: - 7.10 is a great release - 8.04

Re: making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

of Ubuntu bug fixing procedure) are disoriented by the fact that bugs, in LTS releases, aren't fixed (or they are marked as fix released if they aren't present anymore in next Ubuntu releases)  if I'm still surprised that supposedly supported versions don't have bug fixes. You get these kinds

Bugs expiry

Hi. The expirable bugs page shows over 8500 bugs. https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+expirable-bugs The oldest one is over 300 days old. Are these bugs going to be closed automatically? What are the settings for bugs expiring in Ubuntu? Is the Launchpad Janitor still working or is it turned

Re: Bugs expiry

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:58:35PM +, Przemek Kulczycki wrote: Hi. The expirable bugs page shows over 8500 bugs. https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+expirable-bugs The oldest one is over 300 days old. Are these bugs going to be closed automatically? Not at this point in time. What

This new report bugs using ubuntu-bug requirement is a mess!

in this case - and using valuable resources uploading it to Launchpad, I punched in the summary to learn that this bug was already filed. Interestingly, since we are now strongly discouraging users from using the awesome web interface for Ubuntu related bugs, there's an extra, jarring step where before I could

Re: This new report bugs using ubuntu-bug requirement is a mess!

On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 09:55 -0700, Dylan McCall wrote: Okay, here is a quick, true story :) ***snip*** Perhaps ubuntu-bug should just be strongly encouraged instead of completely enforced. -- Dylan McCall dylanmcc...@gmail.com It isn't completely enforced though. There is a

Re: This new report bugs using ubuntu-bug requirement is a mess!

On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Chris Coulson chrisccoul...@ubuntu.com wrote: It isn't completely enforced though. There is a link on the wiki page that you are redirected to, which you can use to avoid the redirection and submit a bug normally through the web interface. Append this to the

Re: Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

Let me suggest that Ubuntu appoint an usability triager/ombudsman, to determine (from the Ubuntu users' perspective, not from an Ubuntu developers' perspective) how much attention ought to be paid to each and every usability-related bug report. My 2c: I have to whole-heartedly agree. Probably

Re: Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

Hi Vincenzo, You might have more luck if you describe your changes as feature requests. Whether or not you personally think they're bugs, calling them new features should avoid the always been that way reaction from developers. You might also want to try helping out with the improved me too

Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

Dear all, sorry for crossposting, please notice it before replying to all. I tend to report all usability bugs I find, in the hope that ubuntu will become better. The hudred-papercut effort shows that I am not wrong in reporting those as bugs. However, it is very easy that a developer does

Re: Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

Il 22/07/2009 18:47, Vincenzo Ciancia ha scritto: Dear all, sorry for crossposting, please notice it before replying to all. I am possibly a bit of an idiot for what I did, but luckily the other list which has nothing to do with my target has a moderator. I generate too much noise. My

Re: Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

Agreed. Ubuntu developers either don't understand my usability reports or tag them as low priority bugs, which gets triaged for many releases. Once I have submitted a bug report on an usability issue that caused information loss, which is serious. In certain PDF files, I can't search for accented

Re: Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

Il 22/07/2009 19:04, Henrique Almeida ha scritto: Agreed. Ubuntu developers either don't understand my usability reports or tag them as low priority bugs, which gets triaged for many releases. This is because these are not crashers and typically just affect a small portion

Re: Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

is that Ubuntu doesn't write most of the softwares it distribute and the current team doesn't have the manpower to work on those and isn't well placed to decide on behavior changes that should be done a software they are not writing. Ideally submitters would open those bugs upstream too and argue

Re: Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

and the current team doesn't have the manpower to work on those and isn't well placed to decide on behavior changes that should be done a software they are not writing. Ideally submitters would open those bugs upstream too and argue directly there. I would like to speak up for the users out

Re: Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

Il 22/07/2009 22:53, Mikus Grinbergs ha scritto: Let me suggest that Ubuntu appoint an usability triager/ombudsman, to determine (from the Ubuntu users' perspective, not from an Ubuntu developers' perspective) how much attention ought to be paid to each and every usability-related bug report.

Re: Reporting usability problems: please be more tolerant when you triage bugs!

+1, me too, etc... See the comments in bug 294523 at https://bugs.launchpad.net/hundredpapercuts/+bug/294523 A few users have tried to report/push/discuss for this for a few releases already but it seems the bug is low priority even though its a usability pain and that too right at the start of

Re: Few notes on filing papercut bugs

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mat Tomaszewski wrote on 12/06/09 12:07: ... The response so far has been overwhelming and we are already finding it difficult to filter out bugs that indeed are papercuts from the ones that aren't. On that note, I think we need a clearer

Apport retrace service invalidates valid crasher bugs...

-desktop). Also, Synaptic installs works just fine *without* scrollkeeper. Seems like something is wrong with the retrace service, and I wonder how many legitimate crasher bugs have been invalidated because of this? I really hope not too many other packages are impacted, and I think it might

Re: Apport retrace service invalidates valid crasher bugs...

and replaced by rarian-compat (which is a dependency of ubuntu-desktop). Also, Synaptic installs works just fine *without* scrollkeeper. This sounds very similar to the this bug I reported recently: https://launchpad.net/bugs/341358 Seems like something is wrong with the retrace service, and I

Re: Apport retrace service invalidates valid crasher bugs...

/bugs/341358 I had already filed a bug too: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/+bug/355481 (I've marked it as a duplicate of your report.) I see you were also concerned about other crasher bugs being hidden, but according to Martin those bug reports have useless stacktraces anyway

Re: Apport retrace service invalidates valid crasher bugs...

Luka Renko [2009-04-05 9:40 +0200]: This sounds very similar to the this bug I reported recently: https://launchpad.net/bugs/341358 Indeed it is the same reason. I'll work on this ASAP. At least the impact is not that big, since it only rejects those crashes if the retrace is really unusable

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

a petty that the apport logs are lost when you mark it as a dupe of an existing one. I've seen triagers/devs request for that info. I've even filed new bugs just to have apport upload the data, and then manually dupe it to the master bug, mentioning that I have a dupe with new apport data. Cant

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

for the same bug, then if I find one I cancel apport. Its just a petty that the apport logs are lost when you mark it as a dupe of an existing one. I've seen triagers/devs request for that info. I've even filed new bugs just to have apport upload the data, and then manually dupe it to the master bug

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

, or is it preferable to let apport finish and then mark the new bug as a duplicate? When I encounter a crash, I usually let it collect data and upload, and then check out Launchpad's proposed list of existing bugs. For crash bugs, the hit rate is usually close to perfect. For bug reports less so, of course, since

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

. Is this what I should be doing, or is it preferable to let apport finish and then mark the new bug as a duplicate? When I encounter a crash, I usually let it collect data and upload, and then check out Launchpad's proposed list of existing bugs. For crash bugs, the hit rate is usually close

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

. You might be interested to know that reportbug has been modified in Jaunty[1] and that the package override is being changed to not point people to ubuntu-users[2]. [1] http://launchpad.net/bugs/228183 [2] http://launchpad.net/bugs/326091 -- Brian Murray

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

Matt Zimmerman wrote: I've noticed that, even among Ubuntu devleopers, not everyone is applying our best practices for reporting bugs. In particular, reporting bugs directly to Launchpad is usually *NOT* the best approach. This should only be done if there is no better option. In almost

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

Hi Matt Zimmerman wrote: our best practices for reporting bugs. In particular, reporting bugs directly to Launchpad is usually *NOT* the best approach. This should only Perhaps Launchpad could specifically discourage this within /ubuntu/ and offer up much the same information in your mail

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:38:44PM +, Chris Jones wrote: Matt Zimmerman wrote: our best practices for reporting bugs. In particular, reporting bugs directly to Launchpad is usually *NOT* the best approach. This should only Perhaps Launchpad could specifically discourage this within

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

Matt Zimmerman wrote: On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:38:44PM +, Chris Jones wrote: Matt Zimmerman wrote: our best practices for reporting bugs. In particular, reporting bugs directly to Launchpad is usually *NOT* the best approach. This should only Perhaps Launchpad could

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

On Wednesday 25 March 2009 11:08:11 am Derek Broughton wrote: Matt Zimmerman wrote: On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:38:44PM +, Chris Jones wrote: Matt Zimmerman wrote: our best practices for reporting bugs. In particular, reporting bugs directly to Launchpad is usually *NOT* the best

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

Mackenzie Morgan wrote: On Wednesday 25 March 2009 11:08:11 am Derek Broughton wrote: Matt Zimmerman wrote: On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:38:44PM +, Chris Jones wrote: Matt Zimmerman wrote: our best practices for reporting bugs. In particular, reporting bugs directly

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

for reporting bugs. In particular, reporting bugs directly to Launchpad is usually *NOT* the best approach. This should only Perhaps Launchpad could specifically discourage this within /ubuntu/ and offer up much the same information in your mail? Indeed, it does give

Re: Best practice for reporting bugs

Matt Zimmerman wrote: That's going to be news to the average user, of which a noticeable number are _still_ using the old bug tools to file a bug straight to ubuntu-users We don't install those tools by default, while we do install apport. I know, but there's still a significant number of

Re: Introducing apport-collect: attach apport hook information to existing bugs

Bryce Harrington [2009-02-19 16:27 -0800]: This is a very cool feature. I notice that it sends a separate email for each file attached. Any chance it could be modified to attach all the files in one go, so only one email is produced? Unfortunately not, launchpadlib does not offer this

Re: Introducing apport-collect: attach apport hook information to existing bugs

Olá Martin e a todos. On Thursday 19 February 2009 13:03:26 Martin Pitt wrote: A long standing request [2] was to provide a tool which provides the same functionality for already existing bugs. I. e. if a submitter reported a bug against xorg directly through the Launchpad UI, you can now ask

Re: Introducing apport-collect: attach apport hook information to existing bugs

(``-_-´´) -- BUGabundo [2009-02-19 16:10 +]: I would love to see this, but its failing to build https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/0.132/+build/875501 Should be fixed now, python-central had a bug which got fixed today. Martin -- Martin Pitt|

How to push bugs upstream

Hello all, one of my bug reports (282379) didn't get any attention and, as it's a problem likely better solved upstreams, I'd like to push the bug upstreams myself. Is there any recommended or standardized procedure to do so?

Re: How to push bugs upstream

2008/12/26 Markus Hitter m...@jump-ing.de: Hello all, one of my bug reports (282379) didn't get any attention and, as it's a problem likely better solved upstreams, I'd like to push the bug upstreams myself. Is there any recommended or standardized procedure to do so?

Re: How to push bugs upstream

procedure to do so? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/virtualbox-ose/+bug/282379 Thanks, Markus / Traumflug - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ Yes, this is what the bugsquad uses: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage

Re: bugs

Olá Bryce e a todos. On Tuesday 21 October 2008 01:36:24 Bryce Harrington wrote: This is not the right place to report bugs. Please use launchpad. Bryce, you could at least provided the (new) user with Launchpad URL. I'm always amazed by huge number of Ubuntu users that dont know about

Re: bugs

and nothing else. I also suggest you to check Volume Control (Right click on speaker icon in top right coner) and see volume levels for Master and PCM. Cheers, Mortigi tempo, Peter. 2008/10/9 Evan Billy [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Here are some bugs I have found in the kernel (if it helps) 1. my sound is crackly

bugs

Here are some bugs I have found in the kernel (if it helps) 1. my sound is crackly, when a sound is supposed to play it just plays crackles 2. the new kernel has some kind of booting problem or error on my computer; it displays what it is doing and I have to press enter multiple times to get

Re: bugs

This is not the right place to report bugs. Please use launchpad. Also, when reporting bugs, please find and follow the bug guidelines for the thing you're reporting bugs against. For the linux kernel, guidelines are at: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeamBugPolicies More info on debugging

Re: Backtracing, Invalidated Bugs and Quality

text already. One of the bugs I've filed shows how things can go wrong: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/evince/+bug/260715 Another one went a lot better: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-control-center/+bug/ 269595 Minutes after I've Apport-reported the later bug

Re: Backtracing, Invalidated Bugs and Quality

Gday everyone. As part of my work with the QA Team I want to contribute to fixing the process gaps in this area. Can I summarise what I see as the problem: Problem situation: I'm increasingly noticing that certain types of bugs are being marked invalid or incomplete with boilerplate type messages

Re: Backtracing, Invalidated Bugs and Quality

Thanks for all the discussion on this folks. :) Just now I had a crash in totem with apport leading me to 9 previously reported bugs that are either invalid or incomplete because the bug reporter did not do a backtrace to help fix the problem. Now I have the same issue, when it was originally

Re: Bugs for NM 0.7

On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 11:31:07AM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote: On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 12:26:50AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: To be fair to NM, this is a Debian/Ubuntu integration issue. System-wide configuration is

Re: Bugs for NM 0.7

On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 11:51:59AM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote: On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: The thread was discussing the removal of network-admin - doesn't that modify /etc/network/interfaces? Yes it does that atm. But if network-admin is still wanted

Re: Bugs for NM 0.7

On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:53:42AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 11:51:59AM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote: On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: The thread was discussing the removal of network-admin - doesn't that modify

Re: Bugs for NM 0.7

On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 11:31:07AM +0200, Alexander Sack wrote: On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 12:26:50AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: To be fair to NM, this is a Debian/Ubuntu integration issue. System-wide configuration is present but requires a system-specific backend. NetworkManager has

Re: Bugs for NM 0.7

On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 12:26:50AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 10:27:10PM +0300, Peteris Krisjanis wrote: Btw, I haven't seen that system wide configuration on OpenSUSE and Fedora. I would like to see it in action. So far I am very nervous about ditching

Re: Bugs for NM 0.7

On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Jordan Mantha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Peteris Krisjanis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Btw, a slight offtopic from this message, but does it mean that there will be no network-admin from g-s-t in Ibex? Would be very sad if that

Re: Bugs for NM 0.7

2008/9/7 Wouter Stomp [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Jordan Mantha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Peteris Krisjanis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Btw, a slight offtopic from this message, but does it mean that there will be no network-admin from g-s-t

Re: Bugs for NM 0.7

bother with the GUI? I'm not saying NM is perfect, of course; it still rejects all WEP keys if you use an Intel wireless card (yes, bugs are filed, driver is being blamed), but at least it can handle DHCP and show the available networks! -- Mackenzie Morgan http

Re: Bugs for NM 0.7

On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 10:27:10PM +0300, Peteris Krisjanis wrote: Btw, I haven't seen that system wide configuration on OpenSUSE and Fedora. I would like to see it in action. So far I am very nervous about ditching network-admin, because no matter how it was stuck in development, or it

Re: Bugs introduced in GCC?

In terms of actual volume of patches against upstream, and excluding SVN updates, the diff from the base Debian 4.2.3-2 version and Ubuntu 8.04's 4.2.3-2ubuntu7 is about 40 KB. If so, what is it meant to change? Matthias (CCed) should be able to give more information on any

  1   2   3   >