Ubuntu 10.10 fails to boot on Intel Macs
Hi. I'd like to point you to a serious bug that seems to affect all Intel based Macs. https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/633983 Ubuntu 10.10 beta fails to boot on Intel Macs. The Mac will hang right after Boot Camp/rEFIt with a black screen showing: - 1. 2. Select CD-ROM Boot Type : - This looks like an issue with the new release of Syslinux 4.x series, which has trouble working with Apple EFI implementation. I'd like to ask other owners of Intel based Macs and Macbooks to test the latest daily live ISO on their hardware. Regards, -- # Przemysław Kulczycki ## Jabber/XMPP/Gtalk/Tlen ID: azrael[na]jabster.pl ## (Co to jest? Zobacz na: http://jabberfaq.info ) # www: http://reksio.ftj.agh.edu.pl/~azrael/ -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
is python-pymtp maintained?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pymtp/+bug/575091 is 4 months old, has 2 patches to fix this library (which is completely broken in lucid) but no one on the Ubuntu side has responded, F -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: is python-pymtp maintained?
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Fergal Daly fer...@esatclear.ie wrote: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pymtp/+bug/575091 is 4 months old, has 2 patches to fix this library (which is completely broken in lucid) but no one on the Ubuntu side has responded, Alas, I'm sure this is due to resource constraints (i.e., fewer active and able maintainers in Ubuntu for the huge pool of universe sources). Thanks for raising it, however. Looking at the patch, much of it seems to be unnecessary whitespace changes, which explodes the diff. The actual changes themselves seem reasonable, but there needs to be a lot of testing for both Maverick and Lucid at this point. If patches can be generated against the Maverick and Lucid sources separately and posted to the bug report, that would help tremendously. The changes would need to include the relevant bit from Debian's 0.0.4-2 upload, too. Best, -Dan -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: is python-pymtp maintained?
On 25 September 2010 14:58, Daniel Chen seven.st...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Fergal Daly fer...@esatclear.ie wrote: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pymtp/+bug/575091 is 4 months old, has 2 patches to fix this library (which is completely broken in lucid) but no one on the Ubuntu side has responded, Alas, I'm sure this is due to resource constraints (i.e., fewer active and able maintainers in Ubuntu for the huge pool of universe sources). Thanks for raising it, however. Looking at the patch, much of it seems to be unnecessary whitespace changes, which explodes the diff. The actual changes themselves seem reasonable, but there needs to be a lot of testing for both Maverick and Lucid at this point. If patches can be generated against the Maverick and Lucid sources separately and posted to the bug report, that would help tremendously. The changes would need to include the relevant bit from Debian's 0.0.4-2 upload, too. The first attachment is a patch (not a new version of the file) and has no extraneous whitespace. As for testing, basic operations like listing tracks or playlists segfault right now. The ABI has changed. The python library is not swigged, it uses python's module for accessing C structs and calling C function. Since extra fields have been inserted in a C structs, the python library is then off by some number of bytes and starts using the modifcation time or some other field as the pointer to the next item in the list. So I claim that no testing whatsoever was done on this library before now, I don't see why that suddenly becomes a barrier, F Best, -Dan -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: is python-pymtp maintained?
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Fergal Daly fer...@esatclear.ie wrote: The first attachment is a patch (not a new version of the file) and has no extraneous whitespace. I see only one attachment for that bug report, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pymtp/+bug/575091/+attachment/1535455/+files/pymtp_patched.py, which doesn't seem to be a patch but in fact a complete source file (sha256sum): 4ce862a14a0041bb9b6c447959930482291b8d73ef6ed7cfb1b0b2e03b3d5543 pymtp_patched.py So I claim that no testing whatsoever was done on this library before now, I don't see why that suddenly becomes a barrier, I believe there has been a misinterpretation of my response, which was simply a set of points to take into consideration when going through the StableReleaseUpdates procedure. Best, -Dan -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: is python-pymtp maintained?
On 25 September 2010 15:40, Daniel Chen seven.st...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Fergal Daly fer...@esatclear.ie wrote: The first attachment is a patch (not a new version of the file) and has no extraneous whitespace. I see only one attachment for that bug report, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pymtp/+bug/575091/+attachment/1535455/+files/pymtp_patched.py, which doesn't seem to be a patch but in fact a complete source file (sha256sum): Yeah, I'm sure I pressed at least some of the buttons necessary to attach a patch a long time ago. Sorry about that. It's attached now. 4ce862a14a0041bb9b6c447959930482291b8d73ef6ed7cfb1b0b2e03b3d5543 pymtp_patched.py So I claim that no testing whatsoever was done on this library before now, I don't see why that suddenly becomes a barrier, I believe there has been a misinterpretation of my response, which was simply a set of points to take into consideration when going through the StableReleaseUpdates procedure. Fair enough, F Best, -Dan -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
