[Bug 318625] Re: Rhythmbox shouldn't set illegal / special characters on filenames (i.e. ?; question mark) when ripping to NTFS volumes
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 230906 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/230906 As a hint to others who stumble across this bug: this same problem comes up on CIFS shares. The work around there is to mount the share with the mapchars,iocharset=utf8 options. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/318625 Title: Rhythmbox shouldn't set illegal / special characters on filenames (i.e. ?; question mark) when ripping to NTFS volumes To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rhythmbox/+bug/318625/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 230906] Re: Using special characters in filenames prevents Windows from opening
I like Rygle's proposed solution. Compatibility is a good thing here. I'd also suggest adding mapchars,iocharset=utf8 as default options for CIFS mounts for the same reason. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/230906 Title: Using special characters in filenames prevents Windows from opening To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ntfs-3g/+bug/230906/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 50153] Re: window performance sluggish in 2.6.15-25-686 vs 2.6.15-23-686
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 30557 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/30557 This problem was fixed about a year ago, but I'm glad to see you guys have some time to clear out the bug database. See bug 30557 for a complete description of the problem and the fix. ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 30557 cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong -- window performance sluggish in 2.6.15-25-686 vs 2.6.15-23-686 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/50153 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 30557] Re: [Bug 30557] Re: cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong
I think you can check that you are using the new kernel this way: $ cat /proc/version Linux version 2.6.15-26-686 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 4.0.3 (Ubuntu 4.0.3-1ubuntu5)) #1 SMP PREEMPT Thu Aug 3 03:13:28 UTC 2006 You may need to edit /boot/grub/menu.lst (CAREFULLY) or use the grub boot menu to switch to the new kernel. -- cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong https://launchpad.net/bugs/30557 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 30557] Re: [Bug 30557] Re: cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong
Dell Inspiron 6000. Problem solved. @anonym - if you've got the time and the patience, check to see whether upstream kernels fix your problem. git-bisect can help you narrow it down to which change fixed the bug. -- cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong https://launchpad.net/bugs/30557 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 30557] Re: cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong
The problem and the fix are described in these notes to LKML: http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/12/8/304 There are some further changes upstream to deal with bugs in the first set of patches. Right now I'm running the Ubuntu 2.6.15-26 code with this set of patches, and things look good: 5a07a30c3cc4dc438494d6416ffa74008a2194b3 6eb0a0fd059598ee0d49c6283ce25cccd743e9fc d25bf7e5fe73b5b6d2246ab0be08ae35d718456b 76b461c21468f41837283b7888d55f1c0671f719 -- cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong https://launchpad.net/bugs/30557 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 30557] Re: cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong
Both problems are reproducible in kernel.org 2.6.15.7. Both appear to be fixed in 2.6.16. -- cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong https://launchpad.net/bugs/30557 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 30557] Re: cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong
Neither bug, the /proc/stat issue or the lousy X performance, is reproducible in 2.6.17.5. I'm going to try to figure out which kernel rev resolved the issue(s). -- cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong https://launchpad.net/bugs/30557 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 30557] Re: cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong
Well, my problem goes away if I change my config from CONFIG_HZ_250 to CONFIG_HZ_1000. The change from 1000 to 250 was done in 2.5.15-24, which corresponds nicely to when I started to see problems with sluggish performance. * i386/amd64: Change HZ=1000 to HZ=250. The high frequency was causing high power consumption on some laptops, and also some latency under certain I/O loads. Even when I rebuild with CONFIG_HZ_1000, the idle time in /proc/stat continues to go up very slowly. Seems more and more likely we're talking about different problems. Nonetheless, I'd much prefer it if the ubuntu 686 kernel didn't hose X performance on my laptop. I doubt regressing the HZ=250 change would count as progress, but if anyone has suggestions for further research into why HZ=250 causes problems on my machine, I'd be interested in hearing them. I'd also be interested whether anybody else reporting issues sees a change when HZ is set to 1000 instead of 250. -- cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong https://launchpad.net/bugs/30557 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 30557] Re: cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong
I've put together a test program that demonstrates the performance degradation introduced by this bug. The attached tar ball contains information about the test program and oprofile runs demonstrating the differences in performance with max_cstate=1 and max_cstate=8. I believe Ubuntu defect 50153 is a duplicate of 30557 because the symptoms and workarounds are the same. However, 50153 is not reproducible in 2.6.15-23. I first noticed the problem in 2.6.15-25. This is in conflict with what some other reporters have experienced, with 30557 first appearing in 2.6.15-15. The attached tar file contains the oprofile reports, the test program, and a more detailed description of my tests. -- cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong https://launchpad.net/bugs/30557 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 30557] Re: cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong
This problem still occurs if I use the stock kernel.org 2.6.15 source (or the Debian source) with the Ubuntu 686 config file. I see a couple of possibilities: 1) There are two separate bugs being discussed here. This would explain several discrepancies in the bug reports, particularly why some people see serious performance degradation, and others only reduced battery life. 2) These are the same bug with different environments producing different symptoms. Given that the bug I'm seeing (which is probably the same as the one Steve Bourg is seeing) can be reproduced using the stock kernel source code, should this issue be pushed upstream? -- cpu idle time in /proc/stat wrong https://launchpad.net/bugs/30557 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 50153] window performance sluggish in 2.6.15-25-686 vs 2.6.15-23-686
Public bug reported: This morning I was prompted to upgrade around 80 package in my Dapper Drake installation. I upgraded all of them. After rebooting, starting applications such as firefox and gnome-terminal from the gnome application panel was noticeably slower. Before: clicking the firefox icon in the gnome panel started firefox in less than half a second. After: clicking the firefox icon in the gnome panel started firefox in about a second. It was possible to watch the zooming window effect progress slowly across the screen. The problem does not occur when I boot 2.6.15-23-686 instead of 2.6.15-25-686. Note: the original reporter indicated the bug was in package 'linux- image'; however, that package was not published in Ubuntu. ** Affects: Ubuntu Importance: Untriaged Status: Unconfirmed ** Attachment added: list of package upgrades that introduced this problem http://librarian.launchpad.net/3085019/newpkgs.txt -- window performance sluggish in 2.6.15-25-686 vs 2.6.15-23-686 https://launchpad.net/bugs/50153 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
