Do mirrors for daily snapshots exist?
I'm using rsync with us.cdimage.ubuntu.com (it's the only one I know of other than cdimage.ubuntu.com and every time I use it I get this message: > "Welcome to the Ubuntu Master Releases mirror rsync server. > > This server is located in London, United Kingdom. > > If you are not an Ubuntu official country mirror, please consider > using a Ubuntu releases mirror closer to your physical location. > > This server has limited resources. A list of Ubuntu archive mirrors > which support rsync can be found here: > > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+cdmirrors > > If you host a Ubuntu mirror, public or private, please register your > mirror in Launchpad if you have not already done so. > > Registrations can be made here: > > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+newmirror > > If you require assistance with your public mirror, please contact the > Ubuntu mirror team at the following address: > Fine and dandy but https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+cdmirrors only lists mirrors for *releases*, not for daily snapshots. BTW, it looks like cdimage.ubuntu.com and us.cdimage.ubuntu.com are the point to the same site. How odd... -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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: anyone else seeing X breakage with this AM's hardy updates?
Mackenzie Morgan spake thusly: > I'm in the middle of downloading them right now. Should I stop? What > video driver are you using? X was so hosed on mine the other day I had to start from scratch. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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: Fedora 9 Beta does sound. Ubuntu Hardy does not?
Scott (angrykeyboarder) spake thusly: > > Yes, I've (added to) bug reports... > Speaking of which... https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/179095 It's not mine, but it describes my problem. I added my notes confirming it. This bug was filed on 28 December 2007. And it's still "undecided". Did Creative Labs do something to annoy Ubuntu devs? ;) -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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
Fedora 9 Beta does sound. Ubuntu Hardy does not?
Both are betas and both use PulseAudio. Why is it that it works out of the box in Fedora but not in Ubuntu? All things being equal, I *much* prefer Ubuntu but not having sound doesn't make things equal. This is driving me mad. I just did (yet another) fresh install of Hardy yesterday with the most current daily live CD. The only sounds I hear are at GDM login screen and when I do the hardware test. Otherwise, nothing, nada, zilch. Double-click on any file in /usr/share/hwtest/data. Totem opens, appears to be playing but no sound. Import music collection into RhythmBox, play one of the songs (in FLAC, ogg & mp3). Nothing. Try to view an ogg Video file in Totem. I can see it but I can't hear it. What is Fedora doing right? Why does this work out of the box there but not here? Again I REALLY prefer Ubuntu, but not without sound. Yes, I've (added to) bug reports... -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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: Got Hardy? With Sound?
Conrad Knauer spake thusly: > On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 9:42 PM, Scott (angrykeyboarder) > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> I've been unsuccessful in getting sound working, despite lots of >> >> tweaking. > [...] >> are you running Hardy and otherwise getting sound? >> >> I've been running Hardy for about 3 weeks now and I've *never* had >> sound of any kind. > > I have had sound, no problem, on my main computer; but do note that I > have only been running Hardy for about a week on it. > > I vaguely recall having an audio problem with Hardy a while back with an > old notebook that I was testing until I did a clean install from a newer > source. > > So... I would recommend downloading the beta Live CD > (http://www.ubuntu.com/testing/hardy/beta) and testing it to see if IT > has sound; if so, then just reinstall :) Actually, I did just that night. I went a step further and downloaded the daily live CD. I did a fresh install. Still no sound... I have SoundBlaster Audigy 2 ZS. It's a very popular card (although it's not being marketed anymore - it' s been replaced by the X-Fi - which ALSA says doesn't work in Linux, period - but that's another story). There are scads of them out there. So it's nothing unusual sound wise. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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: Got Hardy? With Sound?
(``-_-´´) -- Fernando spake thusly: > On Thursday 20 March 2008 12:33:50 Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote: >> I've been unsuccessful in getting sound working, despite lots of >> tweaking. > > I've seen it too. I use skype a lot, and many times after updates, I'll > have to reboot (or rather init 2 followed by init 5) to get sound > working. Not entirely sure its kernel, or at least not alone, since I've > experience this even in days that dont update kernel. Skype doesn't work with PulseAudio, period. That's been documented. But are you running Hardy and otherwise getting sound? I've been running Hardy for about 3 weeks now and I've *never* had sound of any kind. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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: Got Hardy? With Sound?
Jonathan Jesse spake thusly: >> Yes I do, in fact w/ Gutsy I had to setup ALSA myself (using Kubuntu w/ > KDE4) having no problems with my Intel Sound Card. I'm talking about Hardy in this case. > It was always a pain to remember to rebuild ALSA manually. Rebuild from source? That shouldn't be necessary. But now we have PulseAudio in the mix and every distro I've used lately (I'm an OS junkie) that utilizes PulseAudio has presented teh same problem. No sound. However, Mandriva does include (bu default) separate audio controls for PulseAudio. As of a week ago, they were not part of the default install in Hardy (I don't know if that has changed since then). I had to install them manually. However, they didn't help, either. > > Jonathan > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 8:07 PM, Stefan > Potyra < href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > Hi, > [...] Please use plain text for mailing lists. No HTML. Thanks. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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: Got Hardy? With Sound?
Stefan Potyra spake thusly: > > did you try sound with anything else but pulseaudio (e.g. running > speaker-test to check alsa?) How do I run a speaker test? > Also, please report bugs to launchpad, thanks! > I've been hesitant to do so, because I don't know what to say other than "I don't have sound". And I've first want to check around and see if my problem was affecting others. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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
Got Hardy? With Sound?
I've been unsuccessful in getting sound working, despite lots of tweaking. I've had the same problem with other recent distros using PulseAudio as well. I do note though, that the others include the PulseAudio controls by default where Hardy does not. They *are* in the archive though and I installed them, giving one access to the PulseAudio specific controls. However, just like with the "other guys" I still can't get sound working at all. In fact, right now about the only distro I *can* get sound working in is Knoppix 5.1 (but that's a year old). I wonder if this is a kernel issue? But I digress... -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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
Thank you for XULRunner in Hardy!
This has been long overdue. It's *wonderful* not to have Gecko-based apps depending on Firefox. Now if one chooses (not that I do) they can uninstall Firefox without taking other apps with it (and essntially "breaking" ubuntu-deskop). I'm thrilled. :) So to those involved, thanks again. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. I'm angrykeyboarder™ and I approved this message. -- 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 there a list for Hardy users?
(``-_-´´) -- Fernando spake thusly : > On Monday 19 November 2007 02:15:43 Jason Spiro wrote: >> Is there a mailing list for users of Ubuntu Hardy? If not, could you create >> one? (Fedora has a list for rawhide users called fedora-test).[1] >> >> Regards, >> Jason >> >> ^ [1]. as described on http://lwn.net/Articles/257564 > > There's a #Ubuntu+1 > > Would it work for you? Um.. he's looking for a mailing list, not an IRC channel. :) -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Emmet Hikory spake thusly: >If an issue is > encountered with a package, it is much preferable to report it to > Ubuntu, as it may or may not affect the upstream package (and the > Ubuntu developers will forward the report if it does). I often report it to both Ubuntu and Upstream. Things tend to get fixed more quickly that way. Ubuntu bugs can sit for *months* (and even over a year) untouched. >> >> Is it Ubuntu's policy to do Q&A on all the packages it puts in the >> repositories? > > Yes, every update to a release goes through a QA process to ensure > that it does not cause regressions in behavior. Packages in each > development cycle are tested thorugh a series of Alpha and Beta > releases, where the developers attempt to address any discovered > outstanding bugs. Further, near the end of a development cycle, and > for the life of a supported release, effort is made to not update the > software in such a way that might introduce new bugs, specifically > meaning that while additional patches are applied to address old bugs, > new version are only very rarely imported, to reduce the chance of a > new change causing additional bugs. But if a package was buggy (notably those in Universe) in the previous release of Ubuntu and wasn't causing problems/conflicts with any other package, it's bumped up to the next release "as is" (with all bugs in tact). So much for "QA". -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Aaron C. de Bruyn spake thusly on 249490952 :: >> Aaron C. de Bruyn: >>> Upgrading simply because there is a newer version number is the wrong >>> attitude. >> It's not that fact that it's a newer version (number): it's that it's a >> final, stable release versus a non-final non-stable release. > > And what makes a release stable or non-stable? The version number? > No. It's the code that goes into it. > So unless you are running into a bug, there is no need to take a developer > away from working on Gutsy to have him fix a problem that no one is having. And how do you know that no one is having a problem? Oboviusly *somebody* is or the latest release would not be 4.0.1. You may be surprised to learn this but quite a few people using buggy software just put up with it. They never bother to report bugs. I suspect this is especially true of users new to Linux (from Windows or Mac) who are not accustomed to bug reporting anyway as it doesn't exist in thier world (at least not in the same fashion as is it does in the FLOSS world). And just becasuse Ubuntu users haven't reported the bugs that the GIMP devs cite, doesn't mean they don't exist. And lastly, what are the Ubuntu devs *developing* in the case of compiling existing source code from the GIMP? As far as I can tell there is nothing different between the version of the GIMP shipped with Ubuntu Feisty as there was with Fedora 7 (both now *old* Linux distros). -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Greg K Nicholson spake thusly : > Aaron C. de Bruyn: >> Upgrading simply because there is a newer version number is the wrong >> attitude. > > It's not that fact that it's a newer version (number): it's that it's a > final, stable release versus a non-final non-stable release. BINGO! -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Aaron C. de Bruyn spake thusly: >> Wouldn't logic dictate that if their latest release was for bugfixes, >> that they would recommend an update? Or do developers update software >> "just for the heck of it"? > > I haven't done an official study or anything, but I'd be willing to bet that > a month after Gutsy is out, about half the packages are out-of-date if you > look at version numbers. > > So what? > > Upgrading simply because there is a newer version number is the wrong > attitude. I agree. And if this were about 4.0 to 4.1 or 4.3 to 4.7, I would be 100% with you. But this is not the case. Ubuntu shipped with a *pre-release* version of GIMP. Would it ship with a *pre-release* of GNOME or Metacity? I think not... This is a package in the *main* (*supported* free software) repository. It's not one of the 23523 packages from Universe. This is a program so good and so popular that Ubuntu (like most every other distro on the planet) chose to include it with a default installation. As someone else pointed out, the masses (particularly the newbies that the SABDFL wants very much to attract) have been (for the most part) trained that alpha, beta and any pre-release software is unstable and ill-advised. Granted, many pre-releases are identical (or virtually identical) to the final release. But many are *not*. And if you look at the changelog on the GIMPs site you'll note that there are *numerous* bugfixes already in the .1 release (not unusual .0 releases are notoriously buggy - in any program). But even if it were 100 bug-free. We're not talking about just a simple version number change here *sigh* -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Scott (angrykeyboarder) spake thusly: > Sebastian Heinlein spake thusly: >> Am Donnerstag, den 08.11.2007, 20:58 -0700 schrieb Scott >> (angrykeyboarder): >>> None that would "interest" [some Ubuntu] developers, I suppose >> You should get used to talk about facts. > > As I implied previously my internet probably doesn't coincide with that > of anyone who "matters". woops... That's "...my *interest*... -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: Release candidates in main - was: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Kai Schroeder spake: > Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote: >>> Gutsy shipped with a *non-final* release of The GIMP (2.4 RC3, to be >>> specific). > > Apart from the question whether an update should land in updates or > backports, I think there definitely is a valid point here: Users have > been taught that beta software (or release candidates) should not be > used on production machines. Now, every time they start the gimp, a > splash screen appears which says "release candidate" and a lot of them > (correctly imho) feel they should not get beta software during a > distribution upgrade. As someone has said in this thread, the version > shipped with Ubuntu may even have additional patches to the official > release candidate. Perhaps, in the future one should think about > renaming release candidate software (at least when this is so clearly > visible on a splash screen) to "Ubuntu version" or something like that? THANK YOU!!! -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GetDeb Project
Scott Kitterman spake thusly: > > You provide packages that are newer/not in the official repositories. With > the exception of packages that are legally questionable for the official > repositories, why? Why? Because people want newer packages. And trying to get them through "official channels" (e.g. syncs) can be very difficult to say the least. We make a syncs requests and they just *sit there*. Considering there are bugs that date back *a year* or more this is not surprising. So, if we want newer packages, we often have to go to outside sources to get them. This is too bad, really. It can indeed cause problems later on. But when Ubuntu is unwilling to provide it's users with updated packages in a timely fashion, they have no choice (outside of waiting for months for the next release or going to a distro that provides the types of updates they are looking for - e.g. Fedora). -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Reinhard Tartler spake thusly: > "Scott (angrykeyboarder)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> None that would "interest" [some Ubuntu] developers, I suppose >> >> OK... >> >> Off to plan B. >> >> getdeb.net >> >> Oh wait, Ubuntu developers get upset when users go elsewhere for updated >> versions of software... >> >> OK.. >> >> Off to plan C. >> >> ? > > Language, please. See please see http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct > for guidelines. 1. I don't see any foul language. Perhaps I'm overlooking something? 2. Considering the offensive nature of the message I was responding to, I feel I was quite reserved. In fact my response was (thankfully) written after a personal "timeout". > > You should have mentioned https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/157642 in your > first message in this thread, so that developer can see the current > status about this issue. I beg your pardon, I *did* mention it. What are you seeing as the fist message in this thread? > ATM nobody seems to be assigned to it [1]. I'd > expect more people interested in the issue will subscribe and eventually > a developer will assign the bug to itself and do the SRU procedure. But > please stop this hostile tone on public mailing lists. I asked for help I got arrogance. Arrogance doesn't go over well with me. My apologies. You keep saying "public mailing lists". Is a "hostile tone" OK on private ones? ;) > > [1] well, I don't consider bugs assigned to a team as bugs assigned to a > specific person, but that's another issue. As I mentioned in the message (that's somehow fallen into a black hole here, yet can be found in it's entirety in the archive[1]) that *started* this thread my involvement began as a request (bug report) for a sync from Debian Sid. []1https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2007-November/002266.html > .I requested a sync from Debian Sid (sid > currently has GIMP 2.4.1). My request was marked as a duplicate of the > following: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/baltix/+source/gimp/+bug/157642. > > The initial response to that bug was "THank you for your bug report. I'm > marking this as triaged." > > The bug was then quietly changed from "Triaged" to "Wishlist"(!). > > In my worst case scenario GIMP 2.4.x would eventually land in Gutsy > backports. In my best case scenario it would (more logically) land in > main and in the next week. > > It seems this has become a "back burner bug". > > How might I get it back to the "front burner" and how might I get GIMP > 2.4.x to land in a Gutsy updates or backports place within, say the > next week? > > Please note: > > I'm not a developer. > I'm not package maintainer. > I'm just an ordinary user. > > Thank you. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: Windows Program Support
Evan spake thusly: >less technical users may purchase > off-the-shelf software written for Win/Mac and expect it to run [in Ubuntu]. Surely, you just... -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Christopher Halse Rogers spake thusly: > On 11/9/07, Scott (angrykeyboarder) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... >> >> For some strange reason I'd rather have a final release of a program >> rather than a beta or a release candidate. I'm weird like that. >> > Release candidates (especially later ones) tend to be nearly identical > to the actual release (unless you're MPlayer, apparently). Often the > release *is* the final release candidate, just with a version bump. I'm aware of this. It's often (but not always) true. > > All of this means that, yes, we'd like to see the bugs that are fixed > in the new release over RC3, so we can weigh up the risk of breaking > stuff against the benefits of the bug fixes. And the best way to > notify the people who can do something about it is generally not on > ubuntu-devel-discuss, but on launchpad in bug(s) against the gimp > package. See the message that started this thread for details. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Emmet Hikory spake thusly: > On 11/9/07, Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote: >> Scott Kitterman spake thusly : >>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 16:48:55 -0700 "Scott (angrykeyboarder)" wrote: >>>> Gutsy shipped with a *non-final* release of The GIMP (2.4 RC3, to be >>>> specific). >>>> >>>> In situations of this type (my) logic would dictate that Gutsy would be >>>> updated (gutsy-updates?) with the Final version soon after it's release >>>> (rather than leave users with an unfinished product in main). >>>> >>> As a rule, developers aren't terribly impressed by version numbers. >>> What problem are you having that you think this would fix and that is >>> severe enough to warrant a stable release >>> update? >> None that would "interest" [some Ubuntu] developers, I suppose >> >> OK... > > It is important to understand the nature of the issue. Many of > the bugfixes that are applied in upstream GIMP 2.4 final are also > included in the current Ubuntu package (although the version number is > different). This is to confuse us, correct? ;) > If there is a specific bug that needs to be addressed, or > a specific patch that should be applied, emphasis on this issue would > spur resolution. *Of course* there are (were) bugs. Upstream stable is now a .1 release. https://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/lists/gimp-announce/2007-October/89.html > > If the only issue is the text of the version string, without > behavioral impact, the developer time may be more beneficially > applied to resolution of more significant bugs, or preparation of the > next release. > >> Off to plan B. >> >> getdeb.net >> >> Oh wait, Ubuntu developers get upset when users go elsewhere for updated >> versions of software... > > No so much upset, but that packages from external repositories > cannot be supported (as the specifics of the packaging are not > controlled by Ubuntu). It may be that the getdeb.net package is > perfect, but it may also be that it is not. And my whole point is that if developers would start thinking more like users (especially the users the SABDFL strives to attract) getdeb.net wouldn't exist. For the record, I'm no fan of getdeb.net. In general, If Ubuntu isn't interested in providing me with the software I want or need, I go to prefer "third party" apt repositories. They tend to make for much smoother installs (comments on the getdeb.net page for GIMP 2.4.1 are a classic example of why). > >> Off to plan C. >> >> ? > > https://launchpad.net/gutsy-backports/+filebug will be the solution, > been there, done that. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gimp/+bug/157642/comments/6 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gimp/+bug/157642/comments/8 >... > once available packaging for gimp 2.4.1 is adjusted to include > existing Ubuntu changes. This effort is currently in queue for > available developer time. This effort may be accelerated by > investigation of the relevant Ubuntu variation, and the presentation > of a patch for review by developers (although it may be slowed by > interruption of the developers for repeated review of an incomplete > patch). I see. I guess I must get over "beta/rc" stigma.. For some strange reason I'd rather have a final release of a program rather than a beta or a release candidate. I'm weird like that. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Sebastian Heinlein spake thusly: > Am Donnerstag, den 08.11.2007, 20:58 -0700 schrieb Scott > (angrykeyboarder): >> None that would "interest" [some Ubuntu] developers, I suppose > > You should get used to talk about facts. As I implied previously my internet probably doesn't coincide with that of anyone who "matters". >To support your request you > could for example write to the GIMP authors or contact them on IRC and > ask if they would recommend an update. This would only cost a minute. Wouldn't logic dictate that if their latest release was for bugfixes, that they would recommend an update? Or do developers update software "just for the heck of it"? https://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/lists/gimp-announce/2007-October/89.html -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Scott Kitterman spake thusly: > > If you want to install software simply because it has a different version > number, you are clearly interested in different things than I am. Indeed. I'm interested in Musical Theatre, Commercial Aviation and R&B Music. How about you? > You are > quite welcome to risk breaking your system however you want. You *totally* missed my point. The reason Getdeb *exists* is because there are developers who have your attitude about software updates. Personally, I won't use it. If I'm desperate enough (I'm not at this point) I'll find a "third party" apt repo to update with. They tend to be somewhat less likely to "Break my Ubuntu". > > If it's been uploaded to Hardy (I haven't looked) it should be possible to > backport it to gutsy-backports. It's not been uploaded yet, hence my request for a sync that's seemingly been killed. Do I request it again or will that be marked a "duplicate"? > > My main concern is that if there are serious problems that are fixed in the > later releases, we should fix them in gutsy-updates. Of course your definition of "serious" might be different than another developer's. Perhaps you should respond to this email: https://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/lists/gimp-announce/2007-October/89.html You could say something like "And we should care because???" -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Daniel T. Chen spake thusly: > On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 19:26 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: >> As a rule, developers aren't terribly impressed by version numbers. What >> problem are you >> having that you think this would fix and that is severe enough to warrant a >> stable release >> update? > > Really seems like a gutsy-backports candidate, not a gutsy-updates one. Cool. Leave us with a *major* app (ordinarily in the main repository) for months without official support. Sounds like a good plan to me. Here's hoping that next week, Hans (or is it Franz) Von Trapp of Podunkund, Austria (with nothing better to do) finds a that "specially crafted" .xcf opened in GIMP prior to version 2.4.1 file could wreak havoc on a users home directory. But I digress... Even for backports, it has to be synced to Hardy first [1] That's been requested. It was once triaged and is now downgraded to "wishlist". And MDZ claims (to paraphrase) "it's s easy to get updated apps via 'official' channels". Why would anyone have to resort to unofficial packages!" Right... [1]http://packages.ubuntu.com/hardy/graphics/gimp (retrieved 2007-11-09 at 04:26 UTC) "Package: gimp (2.4.0~rc3-1ubuntu7)" -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Scott Kitterman spake thusly : > On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 16:48:55 -0700 "Scott (angrykeyboarder)" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Gutsy shipped with a *non-final* release of The GIMP (2.4 RC3, to be >> specific). >> >> In situations of this type (my) logic would dictate that Gutsy would be >> updated (gutsy-updates?) with the Final version soon after it's release >> (rather than leave users with an unfinished product in main). >> > As a rule, developers aren't terribly impressed by version numbers. > What problem are you having that you think this would fix and that is severe > enough to warrant a stable release > update? None that would "interest" [some Ubuntu] developers, I suppose OK... Off to plan B. getdeb.net Oh wait, Ubuntu developers get upset when users go elsewhere for updated versions of software... OK.. Off to plan C. ? -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: Easier and more reliable ISO downloads, with error correction
John Richard Moser spake thusly on 218814416 :: > OK, I had issues with bittorrent recently. Changing my tune. > Whew! For a moment there you had me thinking you believe BitTorrent was the greatest thing since sliced bread... -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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
GIMP *final* release for Gutsy?
Gutsy shipped with a *non-final* release of The GIMP (2.4 RC3, to be specific). In situations of this type (my) logic would dictate that Gutsy would be updated (gutsy-updates?) with the Final version soon after it's release (rather than leave users with an unfinished product in main). As this has not been the case, I requested a sync from Debian Sid (sid currently has GIMP 2.4.1). My request was marked as a duplicate of the following: https://bugs.launchpad.net/baltix/+source/gimp/+bug/157642. The initial response to that bug was "THank you for your bug report. I'm marking this as triaged." The bug was then quietly changed from "Triaged" to "Wishlist"(!). In my worst case scenario GIMP 2.4.x would eventually land in Gutsy backports. In my best case scenario it would (more logically) land in main and in the next week. It seems this has become a "back burner bug". How might I get it back to the "front burner" and how might I get GIMP 2.4.x to land in a Gutsy updates or backports place within, say the next week? Please note: I'm not a developer. I'm not package maintainer. I'm just an ordinary user. Thank you. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)like. ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: 4 More days...
Sarah Hobbs spake thusly : > Oh, just let me wave my magic wand, and fix it all! Good luck. There are scads of bugs with "Undecided" status on them. You've got your work cut out for you even with that magic wand. > Yay for unproductive mails! My first "productive" email here was completely ignored. > Sometimes i wish even ubuntu-devel-discuss > was moderated, so we don't get utterly useless mails like this. Yes, well you can't always get what you want and neither can I. :) -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: 4 More days...
Matthew Garrett spake thusly: > With the exception of the Thunderbird and timidity issues (and I can't > reproduce the timidity one here at all), every bug you've responded to > in gutsy appears to be down to your issue with Hal. And, judging by the > log there, your system was entirely broken: > > 03:13:09.373 [W] ids.c:294: Couldn't stat pci.ids file > '/usr/share/misc/pci.ids', errno=13: Permission denied > 03:13:09.373 [W] ids.c:515: Couldn't stat usb.ids file > '/usr/share/misc/usb.ids', errno=13: Permission denied > 03:13:09.373 [E] osspec.c:310: Unable to inotify_add_watch() for > '/usr/share/hal/fdi/preprobe': Permission denied > > indicates either filesystem corruption or that something has heavily > screwed with the permissions. It certainly doesn't look anything like a > hal bug. What are you actually complaining about? I'm a lowly user who only knows somewhat more than the average Joe, but is pretty much in the dark about a lot of this stuff. In fact, I can read descriptions of programs like hal and dbus and still not fully grasp their purpose. Bearing that in mind, there are plenty out there who know a fraction of what I do. They are the ones Ubuntu is catering to by all the (very nice and convenient I might add) apps that give little reason for new users to ever open a terminal. But I digress All of this stuff you quoted from my report is utter gibberish to me. I do understand "permission denied" and found that quite odd and that alone told me that something wasn't right. I had no way of knowing what the problem was other than it seemed related to HAL because only when attempting to upgrade to a new version of HAL did that problem rear it's head. If it was a filesystem corruption or messed up permissions, then it only seemed to be affecting the installation of HAL. You know how many updates there are on a given day. Well virtually all of them went without a hitch (they now number in the hundreds I'm sure). The ones that didn't were generally due to a conflict in a package that shared the same file with other (something I've noticed in a number of KDE apps from time to time over the past few years). There are easy workarounds for those (although I wouldn't have known that a few years ago). So up until your response here I had no reason to believe it was anything but a corrupt installation of HAL. And the only thing that could have caused that based on my own behavior is a corrupt package or packages or maybe a broken install or corrupt download or something similar. I had no way of knowing if the problem was on your end, my end or en route... Now... I thank you for the helpful information you have given me today but I have to ask... Why (as of this writing) is this not mentioned in the bug itself? Wouldn't that have been the place it should have gone to begin with? Since you're a developer and you took a look at my bug and came to that conclusion, why not add that information to the bug rather than here? This is one example of how poor communication with regard to bug reports can be a big cause of frustration. And the bug in question was only "bolstered" by the "me too" comments that followed. As well as a very similar bug I happened upon earlier today when I was browsing HAL-related bugs. From all appearances (as of this writing) that bug report is STILL "undecided". Isn't that a tad odd? As far as the Thunderbird issue was concerned, I know it's minor in the scheme of things and therefore the bug will probably be in the same state 3 months from now as it is today... Frustrating? Yes. Important in the big scheme of things? No, not really, but it was sort of like throwing gasoline on a (my) fire at this point. As luck would have it, Feisty missed the cutoff for Thunderbird 2.0 by a matter of a few weeks, so I'd been looking forward to using Ubuntu's version once again (I used Mozilla's instead - why wait 5 months when you don't have to). So it looks like I'll be back to square one there. Again, minor in the big scheme of things, but not to this user. Oh and as far as timidity, goes - definitely minor. I barely remember even filing the bug. I do try to help out when I can by filling bugs though so that's why it was there. At the time it was a problem. I've not even reinstalled it when I did a clean install recently. There are several other annoying bugs out there that I've just not had the time or patience to file (or add to). But they are more fuel to the fire. And why would Ubuntu or Kubuntu include a default install of a desktop search application that seems to do more harm that good? I've yet to hear anybody sing the praises of Beagle/Kerry (or strigi as is now the case of Kubuntu - they went from one bad one to another). But I'll save that for comments on what I'm sure are existing (but probably "undecided" bugs as we only have a few days to go). *sigh* -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com I've never used an OS I didn't (dis)li
Re: 4 More days...
John Dong spake thusly on 317253208 :: > This is not very constructive. All of us here put our heart and effort > into the distro and comments like this don't help. Exactly what things > are bug-ridden that need attention? It's one thing to raise awareness of > last-minute important bugs, but this seems to be nothing more than > flamebait > It wasn't meant as flamebait. It was my foolish way of venting pent-up frustration (see my replies to others in this thread). -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: 4 More days...
Onno Benschop spake thusly: > On 15/10/07 07:31, Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote: >> till the release of the most bug-ridden Ubuntu release yet (unless the >> devs go into overdrive in the next few days)! >> > > I have to say that I was quite offended by your statement. It's not > constructive in any way and it does not reflect the amount of effort, > both paid and unpaid, put in by the community. I'm infamous for opening mouth and inserting foot and I tend to fly off the handle (irrationally at times - hence my nickname). I don't deny that a lot of people have put a lot of effort into this release as they always do. Perhaps the problem isn;'t so much the bugs themselves but the responses (or lack thereof) from devs to the bugs. And I want to see Ubuntu succeed. I "play" with several distros and any given time (in virtual machines) but Ubuntu is my base system. Why, because despite it's shortcomings i still best meets my needs. And I'm generally impressed with the community (despite my perceived statements to the contrary). > > If you're frustrated with the development process perhaps you should > find another way to contribute to its success. I've been running Gutsy for a little over two months now. In part because I wanted to help out. But it's quite disheartening to file bug reports (some of which are seemly serious) only to find that they don't merit any kind of response other than "undecided" for days (or perhaps weeks) on end. I realize that most bugs are rather trivial in the big scheme of things, but bugs that affect everyday operation of the system (or of widely regularly used applications - e.g. those in main) are something else). And in case anyone was wondering.. No, I'm not just speaking of bug reports I've filed (or added to). I've browsed through a number of others and found they garnered little or no response other than "undecided" as well. I get more constructive response on my bug reports from devs to on this mailing list than I do in the bug reports themselves. What's wrong with this picture? -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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
4 More days...
till the release of the most bug-ridden Ubuntu release yet (unless the devs go into overdrive in the next few days)! -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: Gutsy's HAL is "broken".
Caroline Ford spake thusly on 328153984 :: > On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 05:05 -0700, Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote: > > This really belongs on the bug tracker not here. Pardon moi? I never said that > >> X Error: BadDevice, invalid or uninitialized input device 171 >> Major opcode: 149 >> Minor opcode: 3 >> Resource id: 0x0 > > What is this? X always seems to think I have a Wacom tablet. I think that's related to it's misjudgment. > Do you have any interesting hardware? All of it is utterly fascinating. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: Gutsy's HAL is "broken".
Scott James Remnant spake thusly: > On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 18:28 -0700, Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote: > >> I *can't* be the only one with this problem. >> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hal/+bug/147963 >> > It's entirely possible that you could be. :( > > Perhaps you could provide more information on the bug, e.g. output from > syslog, I browsed through the syslog and couldn't find anything that seemed relevant (but then maybe I did it wrong?). > what happens if you run HAL manually, etc. I'm not sure how to gather the needed output from syslog and I'm not really sure I understand how to run HAL manually. Let's see here... - $ sudo /etc/init.d/hal stop * Stopping Hardware abstraction layer hald [ OK ] $ sudo /etc/init.d/hal restart * Restarting Hardware abstraction layer hald $ - The response on both was immediate but you'll note the lack of an "OK" on the restart. OK, I'll try this.. - :~$ sudo /etc/init.d/hal stop * Stopping Hardware abstraction layer hald [ OK ] :~$ sudo /etc/init.d/hal start * Starting Hardware abstraction layer hald - It just hangs.. And now for the last of the commands I know of... - :~$ sudo /etc/init.d/hal stop * Stopping Hardware abstraction layer hald [ OK ] :~$ sudo /etc/init.d/hal force-reload * Restarting Hardware abstraction layer hald - Another quick response but no "OK" on the force-reload. So then.. - $ sudo dpkg --configure -a Setting up hal (0.5.9.1-6ubuntu1) ... * Reloading system message bus config... [ OK ] * Starting Hardware abstraction layer hald dpkg: error processing hal (--configure): subprocess post-installation script killed by signal (Interrupt) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of gnome-mount: gnome-mount depends on hal; however: Package hal is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing gnome-mount (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of kubuntu-desktop: kubuntu-desktop depends on hal; however: Package hal is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing kubuntu-desktop (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of gnome-volume-manager: gnome-volume-manager depends on hal (>= 0.5.5.1); however: Package hal is not configured yet. gnome-volume-manager depends on gnome-mount; however: Package gnome-mount is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing gnome-volume-manager (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of xubuntu-desktop: xubuntu-desktop depends on gnome-mount; however: Package gnome-mount is not configured yet. xubuntu-desktop depends on hal; however: Package hal is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing xubuntu-desktop (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of update-notifier: update-notifier depends on hal; however: Package hal is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing update-notifier (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of xfce4-session: xfce4-session depends on hal; however: Package hal is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing xfce4-session (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of ubuntu-desktop: ubuntu-desktop depends on gnome-volume-manager; however: Package gnome-volume-manager is not configured yet. ubuntu-desktop depends on hal; however: Package hal is not configured yet. ubuntu-desktop depends on update-notifier; however: Package update-notifier is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing ubuntu-desktop (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of network-manager: network-manager depends on hal (>= 0.5.7.1); however: Package hal is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing network-manager (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of thunar-volman: thunar-volman depends on gnome-mount; however: Package gnome-mount is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing thunar-volman (--config
Gutsy's HAL is "broken".
I *can't* be the only one with this problem. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hal/+bug/147963 -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: *blocking* bugs in development versions (e.g. Gutsy).
Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote: > Dean Sas wrote: >> Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote: >>> How does one convey the message that a bug is severe? >> Including a bug number in your mail would get more eyes looking at it. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Dean > > oops. :) > > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hal/+bug/146741 > > ..which leads to... > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hwdb-client/+bug/147480 > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hal/+bug/147478 > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-power-manager/+bug/146768 > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-mount/+bug/146760 > Correction. I just filed a new bug. It in turn, is the cause of 146741 I'm surprised I'd not seen this bug before (I'm sure it's there but I somhow missed it so mine will probably end up as a dupe). But Just in case... https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hal/+bug/147963 -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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: *blocking* bugs in development versions (e.g. Gutsy).
Dean Sas wrote: > Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote: >> How does one convey the message that a bug is severe? > > Including a bug number in your mail would get more eyes looking at it. > > Thanks, > > Dean oops. :) https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hal/+bug/146741 ..which leads to... https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hwdb-client/+bug/147480 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hal/+bug/147478 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-power-manager/+bug/146768 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-mount/+bug/146760 -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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
*blocking* bugs in development versions (e.g. Gutsy).
How does one convey the message that a bug is severe? A recent update to HAL (0.5.9.1-1ubuntu9) in Gutsy won't install/upgrade due to errors and therefore it's dependents (and their defendants) won't install/upgrade I've been running Gutsy for weeks and this is the biggest bug I've run into (and of course we're now in the beta phase). I have to manually configure eth0 at every boot. I can no longer access external hard drives. I've reported this (as have others) and it's still "undecided"? Things that make you go humm.. -- Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com ©2007 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wites Wesewved -- 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
