[Bug 341168] Re: please be compatible with python 2.5

2011-01-20 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
** Changed in: gobject-introspection (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gimp in ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/341168 Title: please be compatible with python 2.5 -- desk

[Bug 341168] Re: please be compatible with python 2.5

2009-08-25 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
I guess this doesn't matter for Karmic. It is too bad about the incompatibility on 9.04, but I suppose it isn't worth the effort of backporting a fix to 9.04? -- please be compatible with python 2.5 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/341168 You received this bug notification because you are a membe

[Bug 372287] Re: If you drag and drop a file whose name is invalidly encoded and whose mangled name collides with an extant file then the window doesn't refresh. (sometimes!?)

2009-05-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
** Summary changed: - If you drag and drop a file whose name is invalidly encoded and whose mangled name collides with an extant file then the window doesn't refresh. + If you drag and drop a file whose name is invalidly encoded and whose mangled name collides with an extant file then the window

[Bug 372287] [NEW] If you drag and drop a file whose name is invalidly encoded and whose mangled name collides with an extant file then the window doesn't refresh.

2009-05-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Public bug reported: Binary package hint: nautilus Suppose you have two files in one directory, each one has a filename two bytes long. The bytes of the first one (in hex) are 0xad34 and the bytes of the second one (in hex) are 0xd334 . If your locale is utf-8, then Nautilus will render these t

[Bug 341168] [NEW] please be compatible with python 2.5

2009-03-11 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Public bug reported: Does gobject-introspection *really* use some new feature in Python 2.6 which doesn't work in Python 2.5? If it doesn't, please mark it as Python 2.5-compatible in the Dependencies. If it does, that's too bad. But I would be slightly surprised -- it isn't that easy to write c

[Bug 337793] [NEW] Internal data flow error.

2009-03-04 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Public bug reported: The file "1190ogghigh.m3u" in the following terminal transcript was downloaded from http://radio1190.org/1190ogghigh.m3u . (I previously reported https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/337754 about being unable to play this m3u file with the mozilla plugin.) Possibly related ticket

[Bug 7839] Re: Ubuntu bug reporting tools need to point to Ubuntu bug systems

2006-06-23 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Many of the ideas and plans discussed in this thread are good ones, but the current reportbug is worse than useless -- it is actively harmful to community contributions, unless Corey Burger continues to manually catch all bug reports sent by reportbug. Please remove reportbug from edgy *now*. Put

[Bug 29390] Re: fails to uninstall

2006-04-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
I use lots of versions of Ubuntu. The version that was in use that day was probably a subset of Dapper circa 2006-01-22. The version of gdm was probably 2.13.0.5-0ubuntu2 (I'm infering this was the related bug report https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/gdm/+bug/29389). The message th

[Bug 29389] Re: fails to install -- possibly due to implicit dependency on default-display-manager?

2006-04-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
I don't really know how to answer the question of "what version of Ubuntu". It was some combination of packages drawn from breezy and/or dapper during the dapper process. The version of the gdm package was 2.13.0.5-0ubuntu2. I kind of feel like you aren't trying very hard to investigate the pr

[Bug 29389] Re: fails to install -- possibly due to implicit dependency on default-display-manager?

2006-04-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Setting this back to "Unconfirmed" -- I hope that is okay. ** Changed in: gdm (Ubuntu) Status: Rejected => Unconfirmed -- fails to install -- possibly due to implicit dependency on default-display-manager? https://launchpad.net/malone/bugs/29389 -- desktop-bugs mailing list desktop-bugs

[Bug 29390] Re: fails to uninstall

2006-04-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Setting Status back to "Unconfirmed". I hope my explanation is helpful. ** Changed in: gdm (Ubuntu) Status: Rejected => Unconfirmed -- fails to uninstall https://launchpad.net/malone/bugs/29390 -- desktop-bugs mailing list desktop-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/li

[Bug 29390] Re: fails to uninstall

2006-04-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
I don't understand what more information is needed. Of course, if one moves /etc/init.d/gdm aside then it works. This is the same thing as I reported in my original report: I removed /etc/init.d/gdm and it worked. The problem is that the gdm package cannot be uninstalled in the case that "/et

[Bug 29390] fails to uninstall

2006-01-22 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Public bug reported: https://launchpad.net/malone/bugs/29390 Affects: gdm (Ubuntu) Severity: Normal Priority: (none set) Status: Unconfirmed Description: When /etc/init.d/gdm stop returns nonzero, then gdm won't uninstall. Perhaps this is intentional, but if so then dpkg ne

[Bug 29389] fails to install -- possibly due to implicit dependency on default-display-manager?

2006-01-22 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Public bug reported: https://launchpad.net/malone/bugs/29389 Affects: gdm (Ubuntu) Severity: Normal Priority: (none set) Status: Unconfirmed Description: newcomputer:~$ ls /home/gdm /var/lib/gdm ls: /home/gdm: No such file or directory ls: /var/lib/gdm: No such file or dir