[Bug 302693] Re: apt-cacher-ng hangs and corrupts packages (intrepid)
Could you Ubuntu folks please stop attacking upstream with a threat to pull a package? That is just assy behavior. Upstream pointed out a flaw in the selection/release/update workflow that is used to prevent a fix from becoming manifest. It was good advice from upstream, for free, based on their intimate familiarity with the code, and they don't deserve to be treated that way. They don't have to do anything for Ubuntu, especially for some guilt-tripping threat about ruining some perceived fame by being included in a distro. 1. Asking upstream to go into the past and bake out a special patch just for Ubuntu by some hint about finding a patch is just rude. This is an Ubuntu maintainer's job if a newer version is known to work. And BTW, that makes Ubuntu a test pilot for some wierdo patch that wasn't necessary in the first place. 2. Citing Ubuntu's tight release process for witholding a fix, and then noting that the package is in universe (which is not supported by Ubuntu) is contradictory. 3. I don't think is not an answer about admittability of a patch. The patch was rejected by the people who decide has actual backbone. 4. And since when does the size of the patch matter if a problem is fixed? Really, some projects will go through a refactor, and there is simply no way to get a small patch for situations like that. Ubuntu does not get to choose when they get this free windfall from upstream. 5. And upstream called Ubuntu out for grabbing some bizarro version and locking it into a stable release, when it's not. Ubuntu is famous for this. This thread is making Ubuntu maintainers sound like a bunch of sysadmins instead of software developers. And the description of the release cycles implies that using a non-LTS version implies greater stability for all those packages that are not in main. And BTW, I have the problem, too, over a year since 250974 was opened. I have the 0.1.9-1 version, because it's not in main, universe, multiverse, updates, or backports. -- apt-cacher-ng hangs and corrupts packages (intrepid) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/302693 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 396205] Re: ia32 compat on ubuntu 64 9.04 breaks apt-get update
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 402833 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/402833 Marked as dup of 402833 because the original complaint of this bug included debian servers, which is caused by a hard-wired config in a file owned by ia32-archive. ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 402833 ia32-archive causes repository reload to take long time -- ia32 compat on ubuntu 64 9.04 breaks apt-get update https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/396205 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 402833] Re: ia32-archive causes repository reload to take long time
This appears to be caused by the package configuration spending time hitting sid from debian.org, and converting all the packages on its list. This is exacerbated by the fact that sid packages change very frequently. Specifically, /usr/lib/ia32-archive/bin/apt-update has the following items hard-wired, instead of being written as its own FIXME suggests: ... # FIXME: use /etc/ia32-libs/sources.list PACKAGES=$HOMEDIR/dists/sid/*/binary-*/Packages URL=http://ftp.debian.org; REMOTE_DIR=debian DIST=sid SUITES=main contrib non-free SRC_FILTER=$HOMEDIR/conf/sources.filter PKG_FILTER=/usr/lib/ia32-libs-tools/packages.list LOGDIR=$HOMEDIR/logs ... I'd like to suggest (most of) this launchpad bug is not an upstream issue, but one where the Ubuntu package maintainer should/would apply diffs for: 1. Ubuntu.com repos instead of debian.org 2. The Ubuntu dist instead of sid (the increased stability here will save much time) 3. Maintain any changes to the suggested packages listed in sources.filter as needed by Ubuntu 4. Maintain any changes to the suggested packages listed in packages.list as needed by Ubuntu The notion of where these diffs should be applied, however, can be done by upstream (i.e. writing their FIXME), so that the diffs all exist in the /etc/ia32-libs/sources.list instead of /usr/lib/ia32-archive/bin /apt-update (i.e. a config file instead of a script). Also, a dialog warning at preinst could be created, whereby users are warned that the build time is longest at the first install, and asking them if they really want to be using this package if it's going to hang up apt-get update. -- ia32-archive causes repository reload to take long time https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/402833 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 402833] Re: ia32-archive causes repository reload to take long time
Marked 396205 as a dup of this bug, as the offending file is owned by this package. -- ia32-archive causes repository reload to take long time https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/402833 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 402833] Re: ia32-archive causes repository reload to take long time
Also may want to suggest to upstream that the rules in /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/00ia32-archive be changed so that: 1. The Update rule generates a list of what needs to be converted. 2. The Upgrade rule actually performs the conversion. Currently, the update action performs the conversion, which seems to be more logically done during an upgrade. -- ia32-archive causes repository reload to take long time https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/402833 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 367562] Re: Stuck in Mirror Screen mode w/ Dual Monitors-no menu bar
xrandr was reporting a virtual screen that was too small. This is why the display properties app prompts to allow a write of the config file. It seems that this write is Virtual 2048 2048 in SubSection Display of Section Screen, which is too small to allow the (modern 24) screens to be manipulated correctly, so the display app goes back to mirror after the logout/login. It appears that this Virtual declaration is still required due to the default choices made by X if it is not present. Also, if there is more than one physical display adapter, the display properties app appears to (or may) write this to the wrong Screen, which is tied to the other Device. Proposed solution: 1. Display Preferences (i.e. gnome-display-properties) calculates usable maximum virtual dimensions for both above+below and left+right, (and both), and makes the final choice of the virtual setting written based on which virtual dimensions fit the chosen screen orientation (this could include a near-diagonal arrangement of monitors). 2. Display Preferences checks to see that nothing in the config file will cap the virtual screen size it uses for xrandr. 3. Display Preferences makes more careful examination of the available gadgetry in xorg.conf as well as xrandr to ensure the correct gizmo is written to for the required virtual screen size to work on the correct monitor(s)/card(s). 4. Display Preferences should handle and show multiple video cards, to allow better user selection and placement of monitors. -- Stuck in Mirror Screen mode w/ Dual Monitors-no menu bar https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/367562 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 367562] apport-collect data
Architecture: amd64 DistroRelease: Ubuntu 9.04 NonfreeKernelModules: fglrx ProcEnviron: SHELL=/bin/bash PATH=(custom, no user) LANG=en_US.UTF-8 Uname: Linux 2.6.28-15-generic x86_64 UserGroups: -- Stuck in Mirror Screen mode w/ Dual Monitors-no menu bar https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/367562 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 367562] Re: Stuck in Mirror Screen mode w/ Dual Monitors-no menu bar
I ahve this problem on two different machines, different X drivers I also have this problem on a laptop running the vesa driver, but when I try to run apport-collect 367562 on that machine, it says it is closed and no additional information collected. -- Stuck in Mirror Screen mode w/ Dual Monitors-no menu bar https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/367562 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 366757] Re: [HD 3870] Display Preferences causes 100% CPU usage and does not open correctly
This is still happening for amd64 / x86_64, presumably because Jaunty's xorg-driver-fglrx package is still 2:8.600-ubuntu2. Symptom is 100% CPU taken by the X process on one core when launching gnome-display- properties. Also terrible problems with OpenGL screensavers. I have an HD4850, kernel 2.6.28-15-generic x86_64, X.org 1.6.0 (fglrx, randr extensions loaded) ...basically the current Jaunty with 'proposed' and 'backports' in sources.list. Is this 2:8.620-0ubuntu2 version going into x86_64? Thanks! -- [HD 3870] Display Preferences causes 100% CPU usage and does not open correctly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366757 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 366757] Re: [HD 3870] Display Preferences causes 100% CPU usage and does not open correctly
Umm, I mean is it going into Jaunty-proposed or Jaunty-backports? -- [HD 3870] Display Preferences causes 100% CPU usage and does not open correctly https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/366757 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 274421] Re: Cannot download fonts, Error parsing proxy URL http://:8080/
Confirmed bug. I am a proxy wizard...all other proxy functions work (other than other known bugs). Browser, GNOME, http_proxy, synaptic proxy...all work, except for the sloppy scripts in this one package that I can't remove because that doesn't work, either (see below). env | grep http http_proxy=http://poppafuze:my;proxy;passw...@myproxy.mydomain.tld:80/ Error parsing proxy URL http://poppafuze:my;proxy;passw...@myproxy.mydomain.tld:80/: Bad port number. ...also failed to parse... env | grep http http_proxy=http://poppafuze:my;proxy;passw...@myproxy.mydomain.tld:80 Error parsing proxy URL http://poppafuze:my;proxy;passw...@myproxy.mydomain.tld:80: Bad port number. Also, please note the related symptom: The rm script attempts to download the packages again upon removal. So if someone wants to remove that package because it can't auth to a proxy, the package removal fails because it tries to use the proxy upon removal. This is actually a separate bug. -- Cannot download fonts, Error parsing proxy URL http://:8080/; https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/274421 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
