Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
Public bug reported:
Currently Qt 4 has been dead upstream and we are starting to have
problems maintaining it, like for example in the OpenSSL 1.1 support
case.
Following in the footsteps of Debian[1], all packages directly or
indirectly depending on qt4-x11 (like this one) must either get porte
This bug was fixed in the package ubuntu-release-upgrader - 1:18.04.12
---
ubuntu-release-upgrader (1:18.04.12) bionic; urgency=medium
[ Simon Quigley ]
* Port away from kdesudo.
[ Brian Murray ]
* Increase the size of the buffer used when calculating the free space to
es
Thanks, but that's not a usable log. Please try this:
dmesg | grep -v apparmor > kernel.txt
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1756092
Title:
Screen freeze for some time when unlocking
Thanks for testing that. The next step is to report the problem to
libinput developers. So please do that here:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=wayland&component=libinput
and mention that you are using libinput 1.10.3
Once that new bug has been created, please tell us here wha
This bug was fixed in the package ubuntu-release-upgrader - 1:18.04.12
---
ubuntu-release-upgrader (1:18.04.12) bionic; urgency=medium
[ Simon Quigley ]
* Port away from kdesudo.
[ Brian Murray ]
* Increase the size of the buffer used when calculating the free space to
es
I'm not sure but this seems to suggest "yes" (?):
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UEFI/SecureBoot/DKMS
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1756877
Title:
Input latency in 18.04
To manage notific
** Tags removed: targetmilestone-inin---
** Tags added: targetmilestone-inin1804
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1714485
Title:
Ubuntu 16.04: kdump fails with error "kdump-tools[1532]:
We know Wayland sessions in Gnome Shell have a lot of performance
problems. And that's one of the reasons why we default to, and recommend
Xorg sessions.
** Summary changed:
- Minecraft makes Ubuntu GNOME extremely slow
+ Minecraft makes Ubuntu GNOME extremely slow (in Wayland sessions only)
**
fixed with 8.5.29-1 in bionic
** Also affects: tomcat8 (Ubuntu Artful)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: tomcat8 (Ubuntu Trusty)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: tomcat8 (Ubuntu Bionic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: Triaged
** Als
Public bug reported:
Under previous versions of Okular, I have been able to embed annotations
within a PDF file by using File > Save As... Recently I found that this
operation was no longer embedding the annotations. In other words, the
annotations were no longer present when annotated PDFs (saved
** Changed in: kernel-sru-workflow/prepare-package
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
** Changed in: kernel-sru-workflow/prepare-package-meta
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
** Description changed:
This bug is for tracking the upload package. This
bug will contain status
** Changed in: libinput (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1751086
Title:
Xorg assert failure: Xorg: ../src/evdev-mt-touchpad-tap.c:1002:
Public bug reported:
I just upgraded to Ubuntu bionic which currently has WebKitGTK 2.20.0,
and WebProcess is now crashing when Geary's WebExtension is attempting
to print a console message.
This is a moderately severe issue, since it stops any email that causes
a console message to be printed to
I've reported the bug upstream, adding the LP bug here so it can be
tracked.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1757582
Title:
WebProcess crash rendering some email in Geary
To manage no
Alex,
You shouldn't ever have to run synclient manually again. See comment
#36:
"Once you know the synclient syntax you want you can apply it
automatically at login by running 'gnome-session-properties'."
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is su
I think the question is whether the lid problem occurs _after_ cold
boots or warm boots only.
A cold boot is from power-on. A warm boot is a reboot.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/17544
@Robie,
Updated [Regression Potential] as shown below:
The patch will check all ports under each profile, if a profile only
contains unavailable ports, this profile will be set to unavailable as
well. Without this patch, all profiles are always available, then if a
profile includes a unusable hdm
** Tags added: bionic
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1668079
Title:
crash after apply_settings in keyboard plugin
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1668079 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1668079
Thank you for taking the time to report this crash and helping to make
this software better. This particular crash has already been reported
and is a duplicate of bug #1668079, so is being marked as such.
Public bug reported:
Couldn't finish the OEM installation.
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 16.04
Package: ubiquity 2.21.63.6
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 4.13.0-36.40~16.04.1-generic 4.13.13
Uname: Linux 4.13.0-36-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.20.1-0ubuntu2.15
Architecture: amd64
Casper
** Also affects: snapcraft (Ubuntu Bionic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: snapcraft (Ubuntu Xenial)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: snapcraft (Ubuntu Artful)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notificat
This bug was fixed in the package update-manager - 1:18.04.9
---
update-manager (1:18.04.9) bionic; urgency=medium
* Keep PEP 8 checks happy
-- Balint Reczey Wed, 21 Mar 2018 17:53:59 +
** Changed in: update-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
--
Y
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1725654 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1725654
Thank you for taking the time to report this crash and helping to make
this software better. This particular crash has already been reported
and is a duplicate of bug #1725654, so is being marked as such.
** Branch linked: lp:~unit193/libappindicator/build-depends
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1757574
Title:
development libraries missing depends listed in *.pc files
To manage notific
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1755769 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1755769
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1755769
linux-azure-edge: 4.15.0-1003.3 -proposed tracker
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribe
This bug is even worse on Wayland as gksu doesn't work anymore :/
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/513903
Title:
wireshark must be run as root unless wireshark-common is reconfi
Public bug reported:
On my latest Ubuntu 17.10 I am unable to use my WiFi, only Ethernet.
Didn't happen before I upgraded from 16.10.
The `sudo lshw -C network` command tells me the AR5416 Wireless Network
Adapter is UNCLAIMED:
```
└─❱❱❱ sudo lshw -C network
*-network
de
I have the same error, only when I click on the shutdown icon. A command
line shutdown does not get this error. I am running Mint 18.3 on oracle
virtualbox.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
Public bug reported:
As the title says, the development libraries are missing depends on
other libraries that are listed in the pkg-config files, this will cause
failures if something else doesn't pull them in. I started hitting it
with after the upload of
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lib
Removing packages from bionic:
telepathy-logger-qt5 0.5.1-0ubuntu4 in bionic
libtelepathy-logger-qt5-0 0.5.1-0ubuntu4 in bionic amd64
libtelepathy-logger-qt5-0 0.5.1-0ubuntu4 in bionic arm64
libtelepathy-logger-qt5-0 0.5.1-0ubuntu4 in bionic a
** Tags removed: need-duplicate-check
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1757571
Title:
package libsane1 1.0.27-1~experimental2ubuntu2.1 failed to
install/upgrade: trying to overwrite s
A fixed version is now in the archive
** Package changed: aspectc++ (Ubuntu) => ubuntu
** Changed in: ubuntu
Status: Confirmed => Fix Released
** Changed in: ubuntu
Assignee: (unassigned) => Reinhard Tartler (siretart)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
Public bug reported:
Got confused trying to start Synaptic with GKSUDO, SUDO, etc several times.
Eventually gave up and I have now booted into XORG instead Wayland. I hope it
works better.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 17.10
Package: libsane1 1.0.27-1~experimental2ubuntu2.1
ProcVe
BTW, have we set the baseline of "good" in this bisection with xenial
configs?
> 4.13.0-36(xenial HW) - good (0 of 119 - 0%)
Does HWE kernel man with xenial configs? Or was it built with the source
release config i.e. artful?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubu
The tests run during the build failed on my machine yet the build did
not fail:
Error creating passphrase-encrypted packet: Unknown error getting encryption
result
FAIL tests/packet_roundtrips.sh (exit status: 1)
Testsu
Correction: Does HWE kernel mean it's with xenial configs? Or was it
built with the source release config i.e. artful?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1753662
Title:
[i40e] LACP bondin
$ sudo ls -l /usr/share/sendmail/dynamic
ls: cannot access '/usr/share/sendmail/dynamic': No such file or directory
Thank you Romain, hopefully this can be fixed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad
I have this problem under Ubuntu 17.10, with the same line right before
a total freeze and audio loop:
Mar 21 18:35:01 bigbaby-ubuntu CRON[8572]: (root) CMD (command -v
debian-sa1 > /dev/null && debian-sa1 1 1)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
401 - 500 of 1065 matches
Mail list logo
