[Bug 830404] Re: Proposed removal of GNOME Classic desktop would be a serious usability and accessibility regression
Yes, I'm going to be switching to Mint at the earliest opportunity. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/830404 Title: Proposed removal of GNOME Classic desktop would be a serious usability and accessibility regression To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-session/+bug/830404/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 912589] Re: pytz should be dropped for dateutil as soon as epsilon is dropped for dateutil
Thanks for these changes, they will simplify dependency issues for the S3 backend of Tahoe-LAFS. dateutil is a good choice -- simple and well- tested. (It's unfortunate that its Python 3 variant is a higher version number for the same package rather than a different package, but that can be worked around.) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to txaws in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/912589 Title: pytz should be dropped for dateutil as soon as epsilon is dropped for dateutil To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/txaws/+bug/912589/+subscriptions -- Ubuntu-server-bugs mailing list Ubuntu-server-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server-bugs
[Bug 912589] Re: pytz should be dropped for dateutil as soon as epsilon is dropped for dateutil
Thanks for these changes, they will simplify dependency issues for the S3 backend of Tahoe-LAFS. dateutil is a good choice -- simple and well- tested. (It's unfortunate that its Python 3 variant is a higher version number for the same package rather than a different package, but that can be worked around.) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/912589 Title: pytz should be dropped for dateutil as soon as epsilon is dropped for dateutil To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/txaws/+bug/912589/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 418242] Re: Incorrect call to output plugins (with persistent error message) on copy
I'm not using xfce or any of the download or clipboard managers mentioned, but I see the same traceback as comment #21 when copying. This is with a file created by Inkscape on Windows, with text objects using fonts that are not available on Ubuntu -- similar to the original report in the bug description. Are we sure there is not more than one bug here with similar symptoms? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/418242 Title: Incorrect call to output plugins (with persistent error message) on copy To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/418242/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 811721] Re: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty
'tahoe debug trial' is indeed the correct way to run the tests for the installed version. The following failure: twisted.trial.unittest.FailTest: We seem to be testing the code at '/usr/lib/pymodules', (according to the source filename '/usr/lib/pymodules/python2.7/allmydata/__init__.pyc'), but expected to be testing the code at '/home/eutopia'. Please run the tests from the root of the Tahoe-LAFS distribution. is an upstream bug and can be ignored in this particular case. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/811721 Title: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pycryptopp/+bug/811721/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 427029] Re: E: Could not get lock /var/cache/apt/archives/lock - open (11 Resource temporarily unavailable) E: Unable to lock the download directory
Is it considered acceptable that doing anything involving package management can fail due to bad luck? Perhaps the dist-upgrade should be holding the lock for a much shorter time, and/or perhaps the error message could say what the actual problem is (for example by identifying the process holding the lock). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/427029 Title: E: Could not get lock /var/cache/apt/archives/lock - open (11 Resource temporarily unavailable) E: Unable to lock the download directory To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-manager/+bug/427029/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 811721] Re: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty
If someone can point to some thorough test procedure, please do. The test suite can be run using 'python setup.py trial'. Thanks for the manual testing; the test suite isn't intended to replace that. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/811721 Title: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pycryptopp/+bug/811721/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 134944] Re: Keyboard locks up randomly while typing
I often have to type my letters twice as the characters are not being registered. Typing slowly makes the process a bit manageable. That doesn't really sound like the same bug. The other reports here are of the keyboard becoming completely unresponsive. (I've had that symptom since my last report above, although I forgot to check the interrupts.) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/134944 Title: Keyboard locks up randomly while typing To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-input-evdev/+bug/134944/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 811721] Re: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty
Bug 843000 was a duplicate. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/811721 Title: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pycryptopp/+bug/811721/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 843000] Re: tahoe-lafs is incompatible with the version of pycryptopp it depends on
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 811721 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/811721 ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 811721 update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/843000 Title: tahoe-lafs is incompatible with the version of pycryptopp it depends on To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tahoe-lafs/+bug/843000/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 665580] Re: apt-get automatically starts and uses 100% CPU forever after each boot
This was a critical performance regression in 10.10, and certainly should be fixed there. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/665580 Title: apt-get automatically starts and uses 100% CPU forever after each boot To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/apt/+bug/665580/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 815397] Re: Sync tahoe-lafs 1.8.2-3 (universe) from Debian unstable (main)
If I understand correctly, this has only been fixed in Oneiric. It is also broken in Natty. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/815397 Title: Sync tahoe-lafs 1.8.2-3 (universe) from Debian unstable (main) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tahoe-lafs/+bug/815397/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 815397] Re: Sync tahoe-lafs 1.8.2-3 (universe) from Debian unstable (main)
Broken in Natty due to bug 769935, I mean. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/815397 Title: Sync tahoe-lafs 1.8.2-3 (universe) from Debian unstable (main) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tahoe-lafs/+bug/815397/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 830404] [NEW] Proposed removal of GNOME Classic desktop would be a serious usability and accessibility regression
Public bug reported: In https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/739812/comments/5 , Mark Shuttleworth said, ... we have the Classic desktop fallback in Natty, but will not in Oneiric. This is worrying. Any attempt to remove support for the Classic desktop is likely to cause serious problems for many Ubuntu users, either because Unity doesn't work on their hardware for some reason, or because they just don't like it -- and it's abundantly clear that many people don't like it. For the purpose of this bug, it doesn't really matter why people don't like Unity or why it breaks for them. (In my case, it's because I have a 4480x1440 total display area, for which many of the tablet-oriented design decisions in Unity make absolutely no sense.) It could be argued that that anyone who doesn't want Unity can stay with Maverick or Natty. However, since those aren't LTS releases, they are only supported until April 2012 and October 2012 respectively (including for security fixes). So that's not really an acceptable alternative to continuing to provide the Classic desktop until at least the next LTS release. In my case, I switched from Windows having no idea that Ubuntu would make such drastic changes to the interface in the very next release. (If I'd known that, I might have installed Lucid instead. But downgrading from Maverick to Lucid to get the LTS support doesn't make sense; that would just cause stuff to break.) It is possible to switch to KDE or some other alternative to Unity, of course (although making that switch from a GNOME/Metacity-based install is not without problems). Other environment/window manager combinations are usually selected using the same login screen menu that is used to select Classic vs Unity. Assuming that menu is still there in Oneiric (it will be, right?), and assuming that all the classic desktop packages are still available in the Oneiric apt repositories (they will be, right?), I wonder what simplification is really available from removing Classic as one of the environment/window manager options. If no simplification is available, then there is no justification for removing the option. So, we need some clarity: * what does we will not [have the Classic desktop fallback] in Oneiric mean precisely? Does it just mean not installing packages needed for the Classic desktop *by default* on new installs (but keeping them in the repositories and in a working state, and not messing about with them on existing installs), or does it mean more than that? * will anything that might be necessary for a particular setup currently using the Classic desktop to work, be uninstalled or disabled on an upgrade to Oneiric? (such as disabling the proprietary NVidia drivers as in bug 772019, for example) * if a user has explicitly changed the default environment back to Classic desktop in Natty, will installing Oneiric override that preference, and if so will changing it back again cause regressions like there were with the Maverick-Natty upgrade? (bug 734373 and bug 735861, for example) * for those users who do use Unity, will critical usability and accessibility regressions such as bug 654988, bug 739812, and (not specific to Unity) bug 762806, block the Oneiric release? ** Affects: ubuntu Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/830404 Title: Proposed removal of GNOME Classic desktop would be a serious usability and accessibility regression To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/830404/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 772019] Re: kubuntu upgrade 10.10 - 11.04 ended up in unusable state
Sounds like I dodged a bullet by not upgrading to 11.04. Why on earth is the upgrade removing or disabling any video driver? How can that not end up screwing peoples' systems? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/772019 Title: kubuntu upgrade 10.10 - 11.04 ended up in unusable state To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/772019/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 134944] Re: Keyboard locks up randomly while typing
I also have keyboard lockups on Ubuntu Maverick with KDE 4.5.5 (kubuntu- desktop packages on top of a Gnome install). Ctrl-Alt-F1 does *not* work when the keyboard is locked up, in my case. This is the laptop keyboard, not a USB keyboard, on a Dell Pavilion dv8 ea1110. (Not quite the same system as the original poster, but close.) A workaround is to software-suspend and resume -- presumably hibernate would also work -- and then the keyboard responds again. I can't remember whether Caps Lock works (I have Caps Lock swapped with Esc, so that might be misleading anyway). I've bound 'konsole -e watch cat /proc/interrupts' to a panel icon, so the next time it happens I should be able to see whether I'm getting keyboard interrupts. Currently I can see one of the fields incrementing by two for each keypress, so I know which field to look at. Also using binary NVidia drivers at the moment, but I don't have any reason to believe it's related to that. When I was using the nv drivers this problem would still happen occasionally. $ lspci --nn 00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Core Processor DMI [8086:d132] (rev 11) 00:03.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Core Processor PCI Express Root Port 1 [8086:d138] (rev 11) 00:08.0 System peripheral [0880]: Intel Corporation Core Processor System Management Registers [8086:d155] (rev 11) 00:08.1 System peripheral [0880]: Intel Corporation Core Processor Semaphore and Scratchpad Registers [8086:d156] (rev 11) 00:08.2 System peripheral [0880]: Intel Corporation Core Processor System Control and Status Registers [8086:d157] (rev 11) 00:08.3 System peripheral [0880]: Intel Corporation Core Processor Miscellaneous Registers [8086:d158] (rev 11) 00:10.0 System peripheral [0880]: Intel Corporation Core Processor QPI Link [8086:d150] (rev 11) 00:10.1 System peripheral [0880]: Intel Corporation Core Processor QPI Routing and Protocol Registers [8086:d151] (rev 11) 00:1a.0 USB Controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 5 Series/3400 Series Chipset USB2 Enhanced Host Controller [8086:3b3c] (rev 05) 00:1b.0 Audio device [0403]: Intel Corporation 5 Series/3400 Series Chipset High Definition Audio [8086:3b56] (rev 05) 00:1c.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 5 Series/3400 Series Chipset PCI Express Root Port 1 [8086:3b42] (rev 05) 00:1c.1 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 5 Series/3400 Series Chipset PCI Express Root Port 2 [8086:3b44] (rev 05) 00:1c.4 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 5 Series/3400 Series Chipset PCI Express Root Port 5 [8086:3b4a] (rev 05) 00:1c.7 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 5 Series/3400 Series Chipset PCI Express Root Port 8 [8086:3b50] (rev 05) 00:1d.0 USB Controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 5 Series/3400 Series Chipset USB2 Enhanced Host Controller [8086:3b34] (rev 05) 00:1e.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 82801 Mobile PCI Bridge [8086:2448] (rev a5) 00:1f.0 ISA bridge [0601]: Intel Corporation Mobile 5 Series Chipset LPC Interface Controller [8086:3b03] (rev 05) 00:1f.2 SATA controller [0106]: Intel Corporation 5 Series/3400 Series Chipset 6 port SATA AHCI Controller [8086:3b2f] (rev 05) 00:1f.3 SMBus [0c05]: Intel Corporation 5 Series/3400 Series Chipset SMBus Controller [8086:3b30] (rev 05) 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: nVidia Corporation GT216 [GeForce GT 230M] [10de:0a28] (rev a2) 01:00.1 Audio device [0403]: nVidia Corporation High Definition Audio Controller [10de:0be2] (rev a1) 02:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Intel Corporation Centrino Advanced-N 6200 [8086:4239] (rev 35) 03:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller [10ec:8168] (rev 03) 04:00.0 FireWire (IEEE 1394) [0c00]: JMicron Technology Corp. IEEE 1394 Host Controller [197b:2380] 04:00.1 System peripheral [0880]: JMicron Technology Corp. SD/MMC Host Controller [197b:2382] 04:00.2 SD Host controller [0805]: JMicron Technology Corp. Standard SD Host Controller [197b:2381] 04:00.3 System peripheral [0880]: JMicron Technology Corp. MS Host Controller [197b:2383] 04:00.4 System peripheral [0880]: JMicron Technology Corp. xD Host Controller [197b:2384] ff:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Core Processor QuickPath Architecture Generic Non-Core Registers [8086:2c52] (rev 04) ff:00.1 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Core Processor QuickPath Architecture System Address Decoder [8086:2c81] (rev 04) ff:02.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Core Processor QPI Link 0 [8086:2c90] (rev 04) ff:02.1 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Core Processor QPI Physical 0 [8086:2c91] (rev 04) ff:03.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Core Processor Integrated Memory Controller [8086:2c98] (rev 04) ff:03.1 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Core Processor Integrated Memory Controller Target Address Decoder [8086:2c99] (rev 04) ff:03.4 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Core Processor Integrated Memory Controller Test Registers
[Bug 134944] Re: Keyboard locks up randomly while typing
Oh, another symptom is that *sometimes* when this happens, the system behaves as though the shift key were held down (e.g. left mouse clicks cause a selection rather than a click). However I'm pretty sure that none of the modifier keys are physically stuck down; if that were the problem, I wouldn't expect suspend/resume to unlock the keyboard. ** Changed in: ubuntu Status: Invalid = New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/134944 Title: Keyboard locks up randomly while typing To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/134944/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 410098] Re: Installing python-nevow breaks twisted trial
Zooko: the bug is explained in http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.distutils.devel/7363/focus=7409 . -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/410098 Title: Installing python-nevow breaks twisted trial To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nevow/+bug/410098/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 410098] Re: Installing python-nevow breaks twisted trial
... and I don't think it is the same bug as http://bugs.debian.org/cgi- bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521663 . -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/410098 Title: Installing python-nevow breaks twisted trial To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nevow/+bug/410098/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 811721] Re: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty
What Zooko said. (I reviewed the changes to pycryptopp and they all look harmless or low-risk.) Bear in mind that debian/control in Tahoe-LAFS also needs to be changed to depend on python-pycryptopp (= 0.5.20) here: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~jtaylor/ubuntu/oneiric/tahoe- lafs/fix-769935/view/head:/debian/control#L16 . Otherwise, if we are on an x86[-64] machine and the installed pycryptopp package declares its version as = 0.5.14 but 0.5.20, it won't be upgraded (if I understand the behaviour of .deb-based package managers correctly) and so the dependency in Tahoe's _auto_deps.py won't be met. For future reference, it would be better if any Ubuntu- or Debian- patched version of pycryptopp (or any other Tahoe dependency) would declare its version in a way that allows us to recognize and accept it in the setuptools dependency language. For example, if the patched pycryptopp had declared itself as as 0.5.17.post1, then we could have written the Tahoe dependency as pycryptopp == 0.5.17.post1, = 0.5.20, and everything would have gone much more smoothly. The version numbers should follow http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0396/ . This would probably be a good policy for Python packages in general. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/811721 Title: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pycryptopp/+bug/811721/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 811721] Re: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty
I meant http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0386 . -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/811721 Title: update pycryptopp to version 0.5.29-1 in natty To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pycryptopp/+bug/811721/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 782461] Re: too high version dependency on pycryptopp
If I understand correctly, the fact that pycryptopp 0.5.29-1 has been uploaded means that the change in http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~jtaylor/ubuntu/oneiric/tahoe-lafs/tahoe- lafs-fix/revision/9 is no longer required or desired. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/782461 Title: too high version dependency on pycryptopp To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pycryptopp/+bug/782461/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 743761] Re: Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome-session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog
I haven't been able to reproduce this bug (although I'm sure it was valid). I frankly don't understand why there are debugging assertions in the Gnome code that don't log a stacktrace automatically (logging it at the point of the assertion would give more information than nothing, even if that's not the point in the code that is responsible for the bug). It's not surprising that asynchronous bugs don't get fixed while this is the case. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/743761 Title: Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome- session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-settings-daemon/+bug/743761/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 782461] Re: too high version dependency on pycryptopp
Paul Hummer wrote about this bug on the tahoe-dev mailing list, and I replied: On 07/06/11 01:17, Paul Hummer wrote: Hi folks- The context of this email is here: https://code.launchpad.net/~jtaylor/ubuntu/oneiric/tahoe-lafs/tahoe-lafs-fix/+merge/63631 Some of the autodeps sort of stuff I purposefully patch out specifically because I make that sort of stuff static in the packaging metadata, and the setup usually ends up complicating things (and going out to the internet, which the Ubuntu buildds explicitly aren't allowed to do). I'm curious about stepping back on pycryptopp. I'm curious why we can't just update the pycryptopp instead of downgrading the pycryptopp library. There is a good reason why Tahoe depends on at least pycryptopp 0.5.20 (on x86 and x86-64). It's documented in src/allmydata/_auto_deps.py: # pycryptopp v0.5.20 fixes bugs in SHA-256 and AES on x86 or amd64 # (from Crypto++ revisions 470, 471, 480, 492). Now, in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tahoe-lafs/+bug/782461/comments/4 Zooko said: # ... since Ubuntu's distribution of pycryptopp uses the system (Ubuntu # distribution of) Crypto++ then it is not vulnerable to that issue. But hang on, how do we know that Tahoe will use the Ubuntu distribution of pycryptopp? It will use the pycryptopp that is first on the sys.path in the Tahoe process. The sys.path depends in an impossibly difficult- to-predict way on the history of installations of Python packages (by setuptools, other Python-specific installers, and OS package managers), including Python packages that might seem completely unrelated. When Tahoe starts, it will sanity-check that the version of the pycryptopp it imported is = 0.5.20. However, there is no direct check on which version of Crypto++ the imported pycryptopp is using. I don't see what the difficulty is in upgrading the Ubuntu pycryptopp package to 0.5.20. That is the simplest way for Tahoe to be as sure as it can be (against accidental misconfigurations) that it is getting a pycryptopp that will use a Crypto++ that fixes these SHA-256 and AES bugs. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/782461 Title: too high version dependency on pycryptopp -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 782414] Re: tahoe-lafs can't start because foolscap packaging metadata doesn't declare the fact that it supports secure_connections
OK, the foolscap packaging error is fixed in the package for foolscap 0.6.1-2. But the Tahoe-LAFS package doesn't require foolscap 0.6.1-2, does it? So a user of Tahoe-LAFS can still hit the error if that package dependency isn't updated, IIUC. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/782414 Title: tahoe-lafs can't start because foolscap packaging metadata doesn't declare the fact that it supports secure_connections -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 743761] Re: Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome-session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog
Well, can you suggest a way to get a stacktrace at the point where the assertion fails? Since it does not crash, apport won't work. However I can add debugging code to gnome-session if necessary. (BTW, the Firefox hang was probably a red herring. It has happened since without any interaction with FF. That instance of gnome-session is not still running, but the bug happens once every few days or weeks.) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/743761 Title: Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome- session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 743761] Re: Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome-session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog
As I clearly said in the report, there is no possibility of getting a crash trace. I know this message is automated, but closing bugs as invalid without reading them is impolite and discourages feedback. I will think twice about bothering to file bugs against Gnome in future :-( (And yes, asynchronous bugs are challenging to deal with. Auto-closing them doesn't help with that.) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/743761 Title: Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome- session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 743761] [NEW] Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome-session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog
Public bug reported: Binary package hint: gnome-session The icons, fonts, and some (but not all) window styling in Gnome suddenly reverted to the default theme. At the same time, an instance of Firefox crashed, although I don't know whether the Firefox crash caused the Gnome problem or vice-versa. This line in /var/log/syslog appeared to be logged also at the same time: Mar 27 18:05:46 shiny gnome-session[1470]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed Opening the System | Preferences | Appearance applet caused the configured theme to be restored. (The theme uses Crux controls and TangoDance borders, with some custom edits to .gtkrc-2.0 and the TangoDance metacity-theme-1.xml file, but I'm not sure that's relevant.) These symptoms are similar to http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1575703 , but I don't have the segfault in gnome-settings described there, so the cause may be different. Because this only happened once and gnome-session did not actually crash, I can't get a stacktrace from the time of the crash. If there's any other information I should collect, please say. The instance of gnome-session is still running. Ubuntu version: 10.10. gnome-session version: 2.32.0-0ubuntu1 ** Affects: gnome-session (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/743761 Title: Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome- session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 743761] Re: Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome-session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog
Correction: Firefox hung, it didn't crash. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/743761 Title: Gnome reverts partially to default theme and fonts; gnome- session[...]: GLib-GObject-CRITICAL: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed in syslog -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 577916] Re: lucid regression: does not resume from hibernation
The VirtualBox-related bug is on the VirtualBox tracker as http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/7716 . I suggest not considering that issue to be part of this one, since it has different symptoms, and seems quite deterministic unlike this one. It almost certainly doesn't have anything to do with having two swap partitions (I have that bug with only one swap partition). ** Bug watch added: Virtualbox Trac #7716 http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/7716 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/577916 Title: lucid regression: does not resume from hibernation -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 576434] Re: UserWarning: Unbuilt egg for setuptools [unknown version] (/usr/lib/python2.6/dist-packages)
We are seeing this bug on one of the Tahoe-LAFS buildslaves: http ://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1235 ** Bug watch added: Tahoe-LAFS Trac #1235 http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1235 ** Also affects: tahoe-lafs via http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1235 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown -- UserWarning: Unbuilt egg for setuptools [unknown version] (/usr/lib/python2.6/dist-packages) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/576434 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 606022] Re: zfec dependencies are broken
Another option is for Ubuntu to package the slim version of zfec that doesn't depend on pyutil: http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/zfec/ticket/2 I don't know exactly what this omits. Zooko? ** Bug watch added: tahoe-lafs.org-zfec trac #2 http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/zfec/ticket/2 -- zfec dependencies are broken https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/606022 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 606022] Re: zfec dependencies are broken
I wrote: iAnother option is for Ubuntu to package the slim version of zfec that doesn't depend on pyutil.../i Oh, I was confused. That just changed zfec not to bundle pyutil; it still depends on it. -- zfec dependencies are broken https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/606022 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
