Re: Bug report
The user guide clearly outlines how to file a bug against Ubuntu 20.04:
https://help.ubuntu.com/stable/ubuntu-help/report-ubuntu-bug.html.en
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs
Hope that helps,
Jeff
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 11:09 AM wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I can't find the right way to report the bug I found in Ubuntu 20.
>
> I had a problem with the "PulseAudio network sound devices access" since
> I upgraded to Ubuntu 20 (this bug is also on the new system
> installation, saw it on an other pc)
> The network access couldn't be activated in the paprefs because paprefs
> wasn't linked to the correct directory of modules
>
> (an example of the error:
> access("/usr/lib/pulse-13.99/modules/module-esound-protocol-tcp.so",
> F_OK) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)...)
>
> I fixed that bug on my system and would recommend to fix it in the
> Ubuntu 20 version to avoid a rush of inquiries.
> -> strace paprefs 2>&1 |grep /lib/pulse
> -> sudo ln -s /usr/lib/pulse-13.99.1 /usr/lib/pulse-13.99
>
> If you have further questions or you would help me to report this bug on
> your page please don't hesitate to contact me :)
>
> Best regards
> Kashia
>
> --
> Ubuntu-quality mailing list
> Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
--
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > Gustavo Silva: >> >> Please, do it right this time. > > > Seems legit, except because that degree of agreement doesn't seem possible. What degree of agreement was there before you unilaterally decided to replace the existing page with the one you have been working on? > Just see the latest email from J, for example. He basically suggested that > everything is wrong, half of which was already like that in the original > guide. The difference between your version and the previous version (as I pointed out twice) is that you took all the context, explanation and alternatives OUT of the original version, reducing it to essentially a bunch of barely or not-at-all explained terminal commands. If you believe my comments to be erroneous or mitigated by some other information in your new version, please do provide refutation of my points. I will gladly admit to a bit of nit picking in some places. You asked for discussion, you said no one disagreed with you. I just disagreed with you. I have no issue at all with removing cruft from technical documentation. I have issues with removing the context that informs newbies WHY they shouldn't do something, leaving them no further explanation beyond "run this command, I'm not going to tell you why, or what to expect, or how to navigate the menus and options, but just run this command". These pages are NOT for people who know how to file bugs and don't need the education. They are for people who don't know how to file the bugs and need to learn how and when to do so. > If I had to deal with that I would spend months just for one page, and he > finally would disagree. That's the kind of criticism I receive 100% of time I'm not the only person who disagreed, and that's a lot of conjecture assuming my opinions on this (or any) topic are immutable. > when I bring any suggestion of change to the table, and in fact in this > topic people have been more peaceful than usual (which I greatly > appreciate). > > Also understand that 95% contributors won't have the degree of persistence I > have on dealing with conflict. They would simply give up. That's the part > that really worries me, not that people disagree with me in particular but > that I see newbies having to deal with that crap and everyone agreeing it's > cool. > > So tell me Gustavo, how would you deal with these disagreements? -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: Showstopper bug report (17.04): WiFi not working
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > After a period of a week nobody opposed, and I have addressed all the > individual issues that people reported about it. Ok... below. > Moreover my latest poll was also performed outside of Ubuntu. And it showed > that were half the outsiders disagreed, hundred percent of insiders > disagreed. And the polls were verbatim. Link? the last poll I saw was one about adding unnecessary external artwork to which 100% of respondents said "No" > So in my view I cannot take disagreement too seriously here. I'm open to > consider any option, except staying the same that proves not to work. But you wanted critque, so here it is: > Etiquette > Keep in mind that many software in Ubuntu is maintained by people in their > spare time, brought to you for free. This seems pretty incomplete. So what if people maintain it in their spare time? What consideration should I provide here because of this statement? This isn't a rule of etiquette, this is just a statement about where it comes from. > If you care about an Ubuntu release not having bugs, test the daily image > five months before launch. So developers have time to fix it. Since you suggest I test the daily image... how do I do that? Where do I learn more? What is the process for testing? How do I get these images? You suggest potentially new and inexperienced testers do a thing, then fail to tell them how to do that thing, or where to find more information on doing that thing. > If writing more doesn't make a tangible difference, write less. What does this mean? To someone who has never written a bug, or written very few, what is tangible between more and less? YOU may know, I may know, Brian may know, but the newbie who just downloaded Ubuntu for the first time has no idea what is and isn't worth mentioning in a bug report, and as someone who FIXES bugs, I would much rather have too much info than a bug report that is simply "X doesn't work" which is the "less" end of the spectrum. > If you have any doubt, you can ask any time. You should also point them to IRC. > Not bugs > You shouldn't file a bug here if you are: > Using a BIOS or firmware which can be causing the problem I'm a newbie, how the heck do I know if BIOS can be causing a problem? So because I have firmware (and know nothing about firmware, so theoretically, it COULD be a cause) I shouldn't report a bug? There are plenty of times where you don't know it's firmware until well after the bug has been filed, triaged and investigated. > Requesting support Bugs ARE support requests. They are "I am having trouble running X because Y happens which prevents me from using X" > Requesting new software Feature Requests ARE valid bugs, LP and Github are FULL of feature request bugs. > Discussing ideas That I can agree on, bugs are not meant for discussion, but you don't really tell people how to find the appropriate avenue for discussing those ideas. > Using software outside the official repositories I use all sorts of software outside of official repositories, so I should never file a bug? Because that is how that item reads to me. This says, exactly, "You shouldn't file a bug if you are using software outside the official repositories" > Reporting misspells Misspellings, typos and other minor issues are still valid bugs. Why shouldn't they report them? The point is, the original version of this actually took the time to explain WHY these don't count, and provided other means to address these issues. You just tell users to not file bugs and provide no other information beyond that. > Reporting windowed applications > In the Terminal application enter: > ubuntu-bug -w > Reporting non windowed applications > 1. Using the Synaptic application and the list of common packages, determine > which software package is the most likely to be affected. Use Synaptic for what? I don't use synaptic and I've been using Ubuntu for almost 10 years now, I've NEVER used or even installed synaptic. I'm a newbie, how do I use Synaptic to file a bug? Again, you suggest doing a thing without telling newbies how to do that thing. What about determining the command used and dpkg -S to find the package? You give no screenshots to explain what you're telling people to do, so someone who has never seen those tools will have no idea what to expect and could end up blindly clicking "things" hoping they are correct. Remember the discussion about imagery? THIS is where images are appropriate, to highlight and further explain a plain text statement. > 2. In the Terminal application enter the following, substituting PACKAGE with > your package name: > ubuntu-bug PACKAGE What happens when ubuntu-bug tells me a package is not an official ubuntu package? > 3. Or if you haven't been able to determine the package, just enter: > ubuntu-bug > Reporting offline systems > If the system internet does't work, do the following: You misp
Re: I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide
On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 8:37 PM, Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote: > > This is what the page looked like before: > https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs?action=recall&rev=299 > > Personally I'd like to see much of what you removed be reinserted. One > possibility might be to make the page consist of a brief summary at the top > followed by a more in-depth description. +1. Could someone please revert that to the previous version until Alberto's proposal has been vetted, tweaked and agreed upon by the rest of the team? This is a pretty major overhaul of existing documentation to be just unilaterally pushed into production without some sort of consensus. -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: #1543046 wrongly marked as fixed for Wily
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 9:13 PM, php fan wrote: > > And if it is not, then it would get marked "Won't Fix" when > > someone goes through and does post-EOL-release cleanup. > > It sounds like that would be the right thing to do. If it's not going to be > fixed, let's at least avoid people the frustration, confusion, and possible > waste of time caused by having bullshit information on Launchpad. > > Note also that, given that this bug was claimed to be fixed for Wily and it > isn't, I am quite skeptic that it's really fixed in Trusty too. If I were a > member of a QA team, I would test it on Trusty. There's a simple, > copy-pastable command to run to see whether or not the bug is fixed. I > would test it myself if I had any box with Trusty. > Looks like this was just an oversight, and should make it into Wily before EOL. Good. > > and prepare your environments > > for upgrading to Xenial when Wily dies on the 28th. > > Speaking of "preparing my environments" (that's funny btw: you shouldn't be > supposed to have to "prepare" anything at all for an upgrade), so is there > some "preparation" I can do to make sure that I don't brick my computer > with the upgrade as per issue 1551623? Or at least, some check I can do to > know whether my system is affected, so that I don't upgrade in that case? > (I'd rather have a "dead" Wily, dead as in "past the EOL", than a dead > system, dead as in "it doesn't boot"). > Not sure that's really even a bug anymore. But since it seemed to worry you, I tried a fresh Wily desktop install, fully updated and upgraded to Xenial. Not a problem for me, I was not able to recreate this bug: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/18862815/ I tried it twice and both times, I was able to successfully upgrade from Wily to Xenial with no failed packages. -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: #1543046 wrongly marked as fixed for Wily
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 5:02 PM, php fan wrote: > This critical issue: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thermald/+bug/1543046 > (whose importance btw is wrongly set to just "high") > > is marked as "fix released" in Wily, however it is not fixed at all in > Wily. > Given that Wily is completely EOL in a few days, I doubt you're going to get any traction on this. If this is that critical, your best course is to re-try on Xenial and open this bug against that. Or go to Trusty and/or Yakkety and verify if it is or is not resolved there since both the Trusty and Ubuntu tasks are also marked Fix Released. -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: replacing the Startup Disk Creator
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 8:42 PM Marc Deslauriers < marc.deslauri...@canonical.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for trying it. > > On 2015-09-18 06:01 PM, J wrote: > > I'm just going to throw this out there, because I abandoned SDC > > (usb-creator-gtk) ages ago in favor of unetbootin, and this thread > prompted me > > to spend some time this afternoon checking it out and seeing if it was > usable or > > not. > > > > Keep in mind, this is my sample size of one, but I tried three ISOs: > > > > original 14.04, most recent 15.04 and todays 15.10 daily live. > > > > I also tried 3 different USB sticks, an ADATA 16GB USB3, a Sony 8GB USB2 > and a > > generic 4GB USB2 stick. > > > > I use LTSs for desktop, thus I have a current and fully updated 14.04.3 > system. > > I also, for grins, tried creating these using both a USB3 hub that I use > mostly, > > and directly attached to a USB3 port on my system, an HP Z220 > workstation. > > > > 1: Not all of the options via CLI seem to work > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/usb-creator/+bug/1497431 > > I can reproduce this on vivid. Thanks for reporting it. > FWIW, that particular command is also broken in the all Trusty versions (original, the version currently in updates, and the version in proposed). I presume the fix (which is linked already to the bug) will SRU at some point into Trusty. > 2: I was, using three different sticks, three different ISOs on my > updated > > trusty system, unable to create ANY successful usb stick: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/usb-creator/+bug/1497445 > > This is because the usb-creator that is in trusty-proposed, and already > marked > as "verification-failed" is broken. Could you please try it again with the > version that is in trusty? > As noted in the bug, I tried (just the 14.04.3 ISO this time) with the version in trusty-updates AND the original trusty version, and both failed at the bootloader install point. Bug updated. > > 3: I discovered that not only was I unable to create a usb stick using > > usb-creator-gtk, it also fails to clean up after itself after it fails > to create > > usb sticks, leaving all sorts of mounted filesystems behind: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/usb-creator/+bug/1497449 > My first failure today was because of no available loop devices... I tried a few more things yesterday and forgot to clean up all the loop mounts, so when I tried this morning, I couldn't mount anything because all the loop devices were used up. > > > > So, point is, I completely understand the frustration that the others > feel, > > because I feel it myself, and have for some time, especially when > usb-creator > > has over 450 open bugs right now of varying importance, 205 of which are > still > > in the New state going all the way back to Lucid and still untriaged. I, > > myself, have 10 bugs filed against it, none of which were every moved > beyond New > > or Confirmed. > > > > There appear to be 899 total bugs for usb-creator > > 424 in some open state (New, Confirmed, Triaged, Incomplete) > > 0 in In Progress or Fix Committed > > 229 in Fixed Released > > That's not so bad, there are currently 3676 open bugs for the kernel and > 2018 > open bugs for Unity :) Good point. Thats a different perspective, certainly :D > Today, when I want to try a daily image, I use a VM because I don't have > to make > > a bootable usb stick to boot a VM. If I want to install to bare metal, > I have > > to use unetbootin, because for all its flaws, it works far more often > than not, > > and certainly more often than SDC, for me. > > > > And I can only base this on my one experience, because while you may, > somehow, > > be able to build USB sticks all day long using this tool, I, generally, > have had > > the opposite experience with it, going all the way back to pre-Lucid. > > So it would seem to me that there are quite a few open and reported > issues for > > usb-creator that present the perception of essentially being ignored. > > > > In any case, the above is my personal experience, and I don't presume to > speak > > for anyone else in this discussion, so grain of salt, YMMV, and all that. > > Every bug is important. What's needed is volunteers to help fix them. > True, the perception remains though, and honestly, with a nod to Nick, I don't have an answer for that issue. It stems, I think, from (AIUI) the fact that most bugs filed are filed by users, not developers (e.g. people who really haven't got the skill set
Re: replacing the Startup Disk Creator
I'm just going to throw this out there, because I abandoned SDC (usb-creator-gtk) ages ago in favor of unetbootin, and this thread prompted me to spend some time this afternoon checking it out and seeing if it was usable or not. Keep in mind, this is my sample size of one, but I tried three ISOs: original 14.04, most recent 15.04 and todays 15.10 daily live. I also tried 3 different USB sticks, an ADATA 16GB USB3, a Sony 8GB USB2 and a generic 4GB USB2 stick. I use LTSs for desktop, thus I have a current and fully updated 14.04.3 system. I also, for grins, tried creating these using both a USB3 hub that I use mostly, and directly attached to a USB3 port on my system, an HP Z220 workstation. 1: Not all of the options via CLI seem to work https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/usb-creator/+bug/1497431 2: I was, using three different sticks, three different ISOs on my updated trusty system, unable to create ANY successful usb stick: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/usb-creator/+bug/1497445 3: I discovered that not only was I unable to create a usb stick using usb-creator-gtk, it also fails to clean up after itself after it fails to create usb sticks, leaving all sorts of mounted filesystems behind: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/usb-creator/+bug/1497449 So, point is, I completely understand the frustration that the others feel, because I feel it myself, and have for some time, especially when usb-creator has over 450 open bugs right now of varying importance, 205 of which are still in the New state going all the way back to Lucid and still untriaged. I, myself, have 10 bugs filed against it, none of which were every moved beyond New or Confirmed. There appear to be 899 total bugs for usb-creator 424 in some open state (New, Confirmed, Triaged, Incomplete) 0 in In Progress or Fix Committed 229 in Fixed Released Today, when I want to try a daily image, I use a VM because I don't have to make a bootable usb stick to boot a VM. If I want to install to bare metal, I have to use unetbootin, because for all its flaws, it works far more often than not, and certainly more often than SDC, for me. And I can only base this on my one experience, because while you may, somehow, be able to build USB sticks all day long using this tool, I, generally, have had the opposite experience with it, going all the way back to pre-Lucid. So it would seem to me that there are quite a few open and reported issues for usb-creator that present the perception of essentially being ignored. In any case, the above is my personal experience, and I don't presume to speak for anyone else in this discussion, so grain of salt, YMMV, and all that. Jeff -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: Toshiba Laptop 305A
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Smith, Ralph W DLA CTR AVIATION wrote: > I have a Toshiba laptop 305A I purchased in 2009. What would be the best > version of Ubuntu to run on it? Hi Ralph, First, you'd probably do better asking this on a general discussion list or over on the Ubuntu forums, this list is pretty specific and focused on QA and Testing efforts, Second, you need to provide better information there. If you're asking for help, it helps to be specific and detailed in your request. You've essentially said "I have a car, what kind of fuel should I buy?" The answer could be one of Gasoline, Diesel, Kerosene, BioDiesel, E85, Harvested Souls. It all depends on the internals. So without knowing anything more about your laptop, it's really hard to give you a useful answer. Good luck Jeff -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: Possible Listing Page
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Braden Wolfe wrote: > Hey all, > So I decided to purchase the domain ubutest.info as a possible website for > registering as a bug tester, as well as having contact information to all > current testers if they would want to be listed. Any thoughts on this? > Thanks again! > Your favorite 15 year old, > Braden Wolfe First, that's some enthusiasm! Don't lose it :) However, Ubuntu Teams should, AFAIK, be using Launchpad for that, yes? Here you go: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-testing I just checked and noticed that there is another team but it's not active on LP: Nick, do you know anything about this one: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-quality > > -- > Ubuntu-quality mailing list > Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality > -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: Forget iOS 7, Ubuntu Touch Image 56 (20130918.1) is the new hotness!
Huh, yeah, working now. Cool then :) Call it a "network glitch" or something then On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: > J, weird, those links work for me. Perhaps a temporary hiccup -- can you > access them now? > > nicholas > > > On 09/19/2013 09:17 AM, J wrote: >> >> FYI: I was reading up about testing here: >> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/TouchTesting >> >> and these two links return 403 errors: >> Changes in current: >> http://people.canonical.com/~j-lallement/touch/changes/current/ >> Changes in pending: >> http://people.canonical.com/~j-lallement/touch/changes/ >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 7:02 AM, Alan Pope >> wrote: >>> >>> Avengers, Accrue! >>> >>> Check out the Green Lantern^w Lights on the attached image! >>> >>> The latest "current" image is now 20130918.1, which relates to system >>> image *56*. You can see what's new in detail via the changelog:- >>> >>> http://people.canonical.com/~j-lallement/touch/changes/20130918.1.html >>> >>> In summary:- >>> >>> Package changes between 20130918 and 20130918.1 >>> === New Packages === >>> python-psutil >>> >>> === Upgraded Packages === >>> autopilot-touch from 1.3.1+13.10.20130906.1-0ubuntu1 to >>> 1.3.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> calendar-app from 0.4bzr118saucy0 to 0.4bzr119saucy0 >>> gallery-app from 0.0.67+13.10.20130905-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.0.67+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> grilo-plugins-0.2-mediascanner:armhf from >>> 0.3.93+13.10.20130906.2-0ubuntu1 to 0.3.93+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> history-service from 0.1+13.10.20130917-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.1+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> hud from 13.10.1+13.10.20130904-0ubuntu1 to >>> 13.10.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> indicator-location from 13.10.0+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to >>> 13.10.0+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> indicator-network from 0.5.0+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.5.0+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> indicator-power from 12.10.6+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu2 to >>> 12.10.6+13.10.20130918.2-0ubuntu1 >>> indicator-sound from 12.10.2+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to >>> 12.10.2+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> language-pack-en from 1:13.10+20130912 to 1:13.10+20130917 >>> libhistoryservice0:armhf from 0.1+13.10.20130917-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.1+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> libhud-client2:armhf from 13.10.1+13.10.20130904-0ubuntu1 to >>> 13.10.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> libhud2:armhf from 13.10.1+13.10.20130904-0ubuntu1 to >>> 13.10.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> liblxc0 from 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu3 to 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu4 >>> libmediascanner-1.0-1:armhf from 0.3.93+13.10.20130906.2-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.3.93+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> libmtpserver1 from 0.0.1+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.0.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> libpython-stdlib:armhf from 2.7.5-4ubuntu1 to 2.7.5-4ubuntu2 >>> libpython3.3-minimal:armhf from 3.3.2-3ubuntu1 to 3.3.2-7ubuntu1 >>> libpython3.3-stdlib:armhf from 3.3.2-3ubuntu1 to 3.3.2-7ubuntu1 >>> libsystemsettings1:armhf from 0.1+13.10.20130910.3-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.1+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> lxc from 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu3 to 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu4 >>> mediaplayer-app from 0.20.5+13.10.20130905-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.20.5+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> mediascanner from 0.3.93+13.10.20130906.2-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.3.93+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> mtp-server from 0.0.1+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to >>> 0.0.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> music-app from 0.6bzr105saucy0 to 0.6bzr109saucy0 >>> notes-app from 1.4+13.10.20130903.3-0ubuntu1 to >>> 1.4+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> python from 2.7.5-4ubuntu1 to 2.7.5-4ubuntu2 >>> python-autopilot from 1.3.1+13.10.20130906.1-0ubuntu1 to >>> 1.3.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 >>> python-minimal from 2.7.5-4ubuntu1 to 2.7.5-4ubuntu2 >>> python3-lxc from 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu3 to 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu4 >>> python3.3 from 3.3.2-3ubuntu1 to 3.3.2-7ubuntu1 >>> python3.3-minimal from 3.3.2-3ubuntu1 to 3.3.2-7ubuntu1 >>> qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-history0.1:armhf from >>> 0.1+13.10.20130917-0ubuntu1 to 0.1+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-ui-extras-browser-plugin from >>> 0.22+13.10.20130903.3-0ubuntu1 to 0.22+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 >>> qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-ui-extras-browser-plugin-assets from >>> 0.22+13.10.20130903.3
Re: Forget iOS 7, Ubuntu Touch Image 56 (20130918.1) is the new hotness!
FYI: I was reading up about testing here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/TouchTesting and these two links return 403 errors: Changes in current: http://people.canonical.com/~j-lallement/touch/changes/current/ Changes in pending: http://people.canonical.com/~j-lallement/touch/changes/ On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 7:02 AM, Alan Pope wrote: > Avengers, Accrue! > > Check out the Green Lantern^w Lights on the attached image! > > The latest "current" image is now 20130918.1, which relates to system > image *56*. You can see what's new in detail via the changelog:- > > http://people.canonical.com/~j-lallement/touch/changes/20130918.1.html > > In summary:- > > Package changes between 20130918 and 20130918.1 > === New Packages === > python-psutil > > === Upgraded Packages === > autopilot-touch from 1.3.1+13.10.20130906.1-0ubuntu1 to > 1.3.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > calendar-app from 0.4bzr118saucy0 to 0.4bzr119saucy0 > gallery-app from 0.0.67+13.10.20130905-0ubuntu1 to > 0.0.67+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > grilo-plugins-0.2-mediascanner:armhf from > 0.3.93+13.10.20130906.2-0ubuntu1 to 0.3.93+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > history-service from 0.1+13.10.20130917-0ubuntu1 to > 0.1+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > hud from 13.10.1+13.10.20130904-0ubuntu1 to 13.10.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > indicator-location from 13.10.0+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to > 13.10.0+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > indicator-network from 0.5.0+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to > 0.5.0+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > indicator-power from 12.10.6+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu2 to > 12.10.6+13.10.20130918.2-0ubuntu1 > indicator-sound from 12.10.2+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to > 12.10.2+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > language-pack-en from 1:13.10+20130912 to 1:13.10+20130917 > libhistoryservice0:armhf from 0.1+13.10.20130917-0ubuntu1 to > 0.1+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > libhud-client2:armhf from 13.10.1+13.10.20130904-0ubuntu1 to > 13.10.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > libhud2:armhf from 13.10.1+13.10.20130904-0ubuntu1 to > 13.10.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > liblxc0 from 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu3 to 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu4 > libmediascanner-1.0-1:armhf from 0.3.93+13.10.20130906.2-0ubuntu1 to > 0.3.93+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > libmtpserver1 from 0.0.1+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to > 0.0.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > libpython-stdlib:armhf from 2.7.5-4ubuntu1 to 2.7.5-4ubuntu2 > libpython3.3-minimal:armhf from 3.3.2-3ubuntu1 to 3.3.2-7ubuntu1 > libpython3.3-stdlib:armhf from 3.3.2-3ubuntu1 to 3.3.2-7ubuntu1 > libsystemsettings1:armhf from 0.1+13.10.20130910.3-0ubuntu1 to > 0.1+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > lxc from 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu3 to 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu4 > mediaplayer-app from 0.20.5+13.10.20130905-0ubuntu1 to > 0.20.5+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > mediascanner from 0.3.93+13.10.20130906.2-0ubuntu1 to > 0.3.93+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > mtp-server from 0.0.1+13.10.20130913-0ubuntu1 to 0.0.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > music-app from 0.6bzr105saucy0 to 0.6bzr109saucy0 > notes-app from 1.4+13.10.20130903.3-0ubuntu1 to 1.4+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > python from 2.7.5-4ubuntu1 to 2.7.5-4ubuntu2 > python-autopilot from 1.3.1+13.10.20130906.1-0ubuntu1 to > 1.3.1+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > python-minimal from 2.7.5-4ubuntu1 to 2.7.5-4ubuntu2 > python3-lxc from 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu3 to 1.0.0~alpha1-0ubuntu4 > python3.3 from 3.3.2-3ubuntu1 to 3.3.2-7ubuntu1 > python3.3-minimal from 3.3.2-3ubuntu1 to 3.3.2-7ubuntu1 > qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-history0.1:armhf from > 0.1+13.10.20130917-0ubuntu1 to 0.1+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-ui-extras-browser-plugin from > 0.22+13.10.20130903.3-0ubuntu1 to 0.22+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-ui-extras-browser-plugin-assets from > 0.22+13.10.20130903.3-0ubuntu1 to 0.22+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > rtkit from 0.10-2build1 to 0.10-2ubuntu1 > ubuntu-keyboard from 0.99.trunk.phablet2+13.10.20130912-0ubuntu1 to > 0.99.trunk.phablet2+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > ubuntu-keyboard-data from 0.99.trunk.phablet2+13.10.20130912-0ubuntu1 > to 0.99.trunk.phablet2+13.10.20130918-0ubuntu1 > ubuntu-mobile-icons from 13.04+13.10.20130812-0ubuntu1 to > 13.04+13.10.20130917.1-0ubuntu1 > ubuntu-system-settings from 0.1+13.10.20130910.3-0ubuntu1 to > 0.1+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > ubuntu-weather-app from 0.3bzr114saucy0 to 0.3bzr117saucy0 > webbrowser-app from 0.22+13.10.20130903.3-0ubuntu1 to > 0.22+13.10.20130918.1-0ubuntu1 > > Please update and test accordingly! > > The instructions on the wiki are up to update. Either flash cleanly or > update over the air as appropriate. > > http://wiki.ubuntu.com/Touch/Install > > Cheers, > > -- > Alan Pope > Engineering Manager > > Canonical - Product Strategy > +44 (0) 7973 620 164 > alan.p...@canonical.co
Re: How to Create an Automated Benchmarking Test
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Thomas Corwin wrote: > Hello everyone! > > I am going a science project for school on the differences between 32 and > 64-bit operating systems and I have decided to use Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS. > > Can anyone help me out? > > Thanks, > Thomas Corwin Hi Thomas, First, just to get it out of the way, please don't quote the entire digest ;-) To answer your question, as Ali Linx pointed out, you'd probably do better asking on a genreal topic list rather than this QA list. That said, I do testing as it is, including automated testing (both functional and performance type) so feel free to send me an email directly: j...@ubuntu.com There is no easy answer based on what you've asked so far, there are a lot of different things you can test or benchmark, and they need to be considered individually rather than in aggregate. Maybe I'll be able to help, maybe not, but I'll help as best I can :) Cheers Jeff -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
QATeam - Introduction
Hello, My name is Julian. I have been using Ubuntu for a number of years. I don't have any experience with any of this. I just want to help out. I figured this would be a good way to give back to Ubuntu. I am also back in school, taking a course on Python. Maybe doing this will help me learn the language faster. Thanks, Julian smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: UDS:R -- the story so far
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: > Chris, I would love to see what you have. There is some existing libreoffice > test cases as well -- we need to do some work on exposing all the > application testcases we have in an easier to see manner. However, until > then, have a look here: FWIW, Chris, it's not churlish at all ;-) There are also, if I counted correctly, 37 user application tests defined in checkbox in /usr/share/checkbox/jobs/user_apps.txt that could/should be expressed here as well. Some of them are for OpenOffice/LibreOffice and could use some sprucing up. -- Ubuntu-qa mailing list ubuntu...@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
