User1: jbicha, I suppose this is probably a bit much for an SRU? https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=683060#c71
User2: Gnome bug 683060 in lock-screen "Impossible to unlock screen if not using GDM" [Major,Resolved: fixed]
User1: I suppose we could get away with just the shell patch however
User1: this is the ubuntu bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/1064354
User2: Ubuntu bug 1064354 in gnome-shell (Ubuntu) "When running lightDM user locking doesnt work" [Undecided,Confirmed]
User1: jbicha, http://paste.ubuntu.com/1288183/, would this be more suitable for SRU (only patches gnome-shell, rather than 3 packages!)
User1: ricotz, is this ok for an SRU? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/1064354 (this is my first attempt at one)
User2: Ubuntu bug 1064354 in gnome-shell (Ubuntu) "When running lightDM user locking doesnt work" [Undecided,Confirmed]
User3: darkxst, i guess you tested it, but the solution doesnt look that good though
User1: ricotz, yes I tested, and that was halfline's suggestion
User3: darkxst, wouldn't it be better to let dbus spawn the service
User1: the problem is its only needed for shell on lightdm
User3: meaning changing the flags to have the gnome-screensaver autostarted some lines later
User1: halfline said that wouldnt work
User3: why?
User1: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-screensaver/commit/?id=3365eec74643773d8d5aa92901b39bdc9496e19b
User1: is it safe to remove the DO_NOT_AUTO_START flag?
User1: <halfline> won't help
User1: <halfline> since http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-screensaver/commit/?id=3365eec74643773d8d5aa92901b39bdc9496e19b
User3: dpkg -S org.gnome.ScreenSaver.service
User3: gnome-screensaver: /usr/share/dbus-1/services/org.gnome.ScreenSaver.service
User3: it is still there though
User3: darkxst, 05_dbus_service.patch is adding it back in
User3: * debian/patches/05_dbus_service.patch:
User3: - restore the dbus service that upstream dropped
User3: in 3.2.0-1ubuntu1
User3: so if this is going to an ubuntu patch for gnome-shell then the relying on dbus seems better
User3: or should your patch go upstream?
User1: yeh my patch will go upstream
User3: darkxst, ok, you probably want to follow this https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/PatchSystems#Patch_Tagging_Guidelines
User3: to clean up the patch header
User3: http://bugzilla-attachments.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=226790
User3: keep the blank line in the imports and add a blank line after the spawn
User3: http://paste.debian.net/plain/201741
User1: add them to the upstream patch header or both
User3: i noticed the proposed patch after it, which includes a bug reference
User3: so using the  "git format-patch" is fine too
User1: oh ok, although sometimes they don't apply cleanly to ubuntu version
User3: using the git patches directly is the best way imo since it includes all needed information
User3: fixing fuzz if needed is easy enough
User1: ok, so I updated the debdiff to use the git patch
User3: darkxst, ok
User3: no need to use UNRELEASED here
User3: use quantal-proposed
User3: gnome-shell (3.6.1-0ubuntu1.1) quantal-proposed; urgency=low
User1: 1.1 or 2?
User3: i would go with 1.1
User3: which is the preferred policy irc
User1: a policy which seems to change depending on packages ;)
User1: anyway updated
User3: good
User1: well that or jbicha has just been tweaking my changelogs with out saying anything.
User1: ricotz, anyway thanks for you help
User1: I don't suppose you can upload it for me?
User1: anyway dinner time here...
User3: sorry, i can't upload it
User1: ricotz, np, will get jbicha onto it when he wakes up
User4: looks like we have a problem to burn to USB
 * everaldo investigating
User4: btw, http://www.webupd8.org/2012/10/prefer-gnome-shell-download-ubuntu.html
User5: Hello... This is the UGR channel?
User5: I am fairly adept at creating debian based install isos. I had read that there were difficulties and would like to know if I can help.
User6: https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-gnome-dev/+junk/iso-build-script
User6: User5 I believe our script basically does what it needs to but there's likely still room for improvement
User5: I can make it jibe with Startup Disk Creator if it is not currently.
User5: I just heard about the project this morning, so I am still catching up to where you are.
User6: ah, I think the Startup Disk Creator problems are because Startup Disk Creator is broken in Quantal
User6: it works fine in Precise though
User5: Oh, great...
User5: Ok then... I will just middletonwilliam@example.net.
 * L3mce is a dev for linuxmce
User6: it did take me a few months to figure out how building an iso worked which meant that this release cycle was a bit short but it worked out ok
User5: Well I will load it up and see how we both middletonwilliam@example.net. If there are any things you want it doing that it is not, let me know. Otherwise I will just look.
User6: well for instance when I published yesterday I had to manually copy the filesytem.manifest and create the torrent
User6: those 2 steps should be easy to add to the script
User5: Yours is very lean and mean. Ours is a bit of a monster as we pre-install most of the system... but we are an appliance, not a distro... so we have a lot of plumbing to install before people stick their grubby fingers in it.
User5: nice job :) /me was really hoping he could help more there...
User6: yeah, we're trying to do all the configuration stuff & patching in Ubuntu itself
User6: well I didn't write the original script and I'm not the only one that's been maintaining it
User5: after we do a build we create a dd image with our needs http://svn.linuxmce.org/trac.cgi/browser/people/posde/image.sh and then create the iso after shoving a lot of stuff around  http://svn.linuxmce.org/trac.cgi/browser/people/l3mce/lmcemaster.sh
User5: we are also using the mirrors scheme, because it just seemed easiest. eg deb mirror://mirrors.ubuntu.com/mirrors.txt $DISTRO main restricted universe multiverset deb mirror://mirrors.ubuntu.com/mirrors.txt $DISTRO main restricted universe multiverse
User5: sorry for the double tap there.
User6: ah ok, we just piggy back off ubiquity (Ubuntu's installer) which handles that for us
User6: logging off for a bit
User5: we use a central core and pxe boot everything else, so this way when folks install it is 90% there, and we just detect and install for GPUs etc, and the diskless stuff is allready packaged and plug n play...
User5: ok... will look more where I can help. have a good one.
User7: jbicha, congrats on the final release of UGR 12.10 !
User8: so is UGR official in 12.10?
User8: i.e. is it an official derivative :P
User6: User8 no
User8: when's that happening :p
User8: ... damn... i broke it...
 * TheLordOfTime goes to fix php5 again
User6: well we have to ask first
User6: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RecognizedFlavors
User6: User1 VBox 4.2.2 supports xorg 1.13, now we just have to figure out how to backport that to quantal
User1: jbicha, so we probably need to update the entire vbox packages, but quantal is still on 4.1.x
User1: so probably a major update
User1: jbicha, can you upload this? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/1064354
User2: Ubuntu bug 1064354 in gnome-shell (Ubuntu) "When running lightDM user locking doesnt work" [Undecided,Confirmed]
User6: uh, that will be fun, FFe https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess
User6: (for a new major version of vbox I mean)
User6: User1 yes but I won't get to it today
User1: ok thats fine
User1: have you had any trouble with current vbox on Q (apart from the guest additions)
User6: I've actually been using virt-manager these days
User6: I got tired of the vbox bugs and wanted to experience the virt-manager bugs instead :)
User1: lol, I gave up on vbox several years ago
User1: but when I did still use it, I was always running the packages of vbox repo
ubuntu-gnome
Ubuntu IRC