For what it's worth, the only thing that ended up helping in my case was
to power off the machine, unplug it for 5 minutes (yes, unplug it,
simply powering off didn't help), and then turn it back on. That
process reset the network card and it came back up fine.
--
You received this bug notificat
Unfortunately I lost access to the box I had been using for testing and
I haven't been able to bring up a similar box to run the test on. To
make matters worse, I've now left the job that this was all for :(
I had really hoped to test this before my last day but the stars never
quite aligned. I
I'm having this issue on Precise (after upgrading from Lucid, which also
used the 8169 driver but had no issues). Currently my network card is
stuck at 10baseT which is slower than my internet connection :)
mii-tool output:
eth0: negotiated 10baseT-FD flow-control, link ok
product info: vendor
Oh, and ethtool output for what it's worth:
Settings for eth0:
Supported ports: [ TP MII ]
Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
1000baseT/Half 1000baseT/Full
Supports
Just a stab in the dark here, but could this be as simple as the fact
that 1000baseT-HD is listed before 1000baseT-FD in the capabilities? I
noticed the FD comes before HD for 100 and 10.
eth0: negotiated 1000baseT-HD flow-control, link ok
product info: vendor 00:07:32, model 17 rev 2
basic m
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/990892
Title:
package slapd 2.4.28-1.1ubuntu4 failed to install/upgrade: subprocess
installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1
To
Public bug reported:
Attempted to install slapd for the first time, but on a machine recently
upgraded from 10.04. I had already installed autofs-ldap before
attempting to install slapd. This is my first experiment with LDAP so
that's about all I know.
Setting up slapd (2.4.28-1.1ubuntu4) ...
Casper was installed on my system by remastersys, which I used to create
a backup before upgrading. Nice synergy :)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/984276
Title:
installing casper on
The host I had been testing on has died a horrible death. I'm trying to
find a new place to test this. On the bright side, the new host won't
have ever had the old -proposed package to interfere with the upgrade,
so if that was my problem, it should just work.
Fingers crossed.
--
You received
I'm having numerous problems installing the -proposed package on Lucid.
Sometimes the upgrade succeeds, sometimes it fails. I haven't been able
to figure out why yet (I think I'm starting from the same state each
time, but maybe there's a file somewhere I'm not considering).
If the package upgra
Is that what broke? I tried it Monday and my NIS broke and reverting
didn't fix it. I never checked the configs though. Thanks!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569757
Title:
NIS ups
Is it in a PPA somewhere I can try it? If getting into -proposed is
hard, seems like it should be tested first :)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569757
Title:
NIS upstart dependency
Steve/Martin:
I'm not seeing the updated nis package in lucid-proposed. Should I be?
Thanks!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569757
Title:
NIS upstart dependency broken for lucid
T
Tested the proposed package in Lucid and it appears to depend on Upstart
0.9.7-2 but Lucid only has 0.6.5-8. So trying to upgrade marks "nis" as
broken and wants to remove it.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bu
Is that change to CRON backported to Lucid? I'm guessing not, but that
would be nice.
As for gdm/lightdm/atd I think the crucial one there is atd. The login
stuff probably takes long enough to start that NIS will be up by then
(plus that's nowhere near an exhaustive list of *dm's and adding all
Thanks for working on this! Once you get Oneiric/Precise working, are
you planning to fix this in Lucid? Lucid is still going to be around
for a few more years :)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad
Verified. Tag updated to verification-done-lucid
** Tags removed: verification-needed-lucid
** Tags added: verification-done-lucid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/790863
Title:
Unabl
So far so good. My container is running fine along with everything
else. I'll keep running this build and report if I see any issues, but
I think it's good. Let me know if there's anything else I need to test.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
Tim,
Thanks for getting a test version out! I've been swamped the last few
weeks but I can test it out this weekend and post my results. I also
admit I thought this was a VSFTP patch (from Jamie's note) when I
skimmed it the first time, not a new kernel. Oops :)
--
You received this bug notif
Stefan,
I have to agree with Henrik regarding the logic seeming backwards, but I
suppose that's because the "solution" hurt me.
Did Serge Hallyn ever take a look at it? I got the impression someone
was going to try to backport part of the fix, but it sounds like that
path was rejected.
Regardin
I've been pinned at 2.6.32-31 since this began. I experimented with the
various backports but each caused more problems than it solved.
Bad answer Canonical. Sigh. At least 12.04 is only 6 months away, plus
3 months to stabilize.
By the way, where exactly was this decision documented? I'd lik
The Maverick and Natty kernels also "work" for some people. However,
depending on the rest of your configuration, installing backported
kernels can break other things. Definitely not the ideal answer. The
fact that Maverick backport was broken for a month is an example.
I'd complain about how l
Sorry for my ignorance, but if it's "released" when should I expect to
see it in Update Manager?
Thanks!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/824913
Title:
LUCID linux-headers-generic-lts-
Installing the package from https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/amd64
/linux-headers-2.6.35-30/2.6.35-30.55~lucid1 is a workaround (at least
it gets Update Manager to stop complaining)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
htt
Public bug reported:
The linux-headers-generic-lts-backport-maverick package has been updated
and wants to upgrade linux-headers-2.6.35-30-generic but that depends on
linux-headers-2.6.35-30 which appears to be missing from the LUCID
repositories.
** Affects: ubuntu
Importance: Undecided
Ah, I didn't realize that about 10.04.3. Thanks for clearing that up.
Also thanks for the quick turnaround on a package update.
Unfortunately, installing the new version failed for me:
Preparing to replace nis 3.17-31 (using
.../nis_3.17-32ubuntu2~lucid1~ppa1_i386.deb) ...
* Stopping NIS servi
Could this be backported to Lucid, or perhaps a simple version of it?
This should be enough, applied to python-software-properties version 0.75.10.1:
--- /usr/share/pyshared/softwareproperties/ppa.py.orig 2010-04-14
15:05:59.0 -0400
+++ /usr/share/pyshared/softwareproperties/ppa.py
Clint,
My attached files based on your original suggestion of two new upstart
jobs should do the trick as far as a minimally invasive fix for many
users. Anything more substantial would probably be hard to get approved
for a point release right?
It looks (from Christian's latest comment) like th
Could this be targeted for 10.04.3? This is really a pretty bad problem
with 10.04, and the 10.04.x releases are going to get further apart
after 10.04.3.
Thanks!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad
Reading through the discussion on the kernel list, I think the flawed
logic in this decision was: "Let's avoid a POTENTIAL regression due to
lots of lines of code changed by introducing a DEFINITE regression". I
think we've all been there. Still, not a great call.
--
You received this bug notif
Seriously guys... What the heck were you thinking? The whole reason
people choose to run an LTS is to avoid this kind of thing.
I can downgrade for now, but please fix soon!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bu
** Attachment added: "NIS-wait upstart job"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nis/+bug/569757/+attachment/2070219/+files/nis-wait.conf
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569757
Hopefully this works. I'm attaching a working nis.conf and nis-
wait.conf based on the comments so far. Put the files in /etc/init and
that should be all that's necessary for most configurations. You
shouldn't even need to remove the /etc/rc?.d nis links since it should
just determine it's alrea
It looks to me like the problem was with xorg-driver-fglrx, which still
had some diversions registered for /usr/lib32/libGL.so.1.2 and
/usr/lib/libGL.so.1.2 despite it no longer being a real package. So
when fglrx tried to restore the libGL.so stuff it failed causing the
entire uninstall to fail.
** Attachment added: "BootDmesg.txt"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/626027/+attachment/1525890/+files/BootDmesg.txt
** Attachment added: "CurrentDmesg.txt"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/626027/+attachment/1525891/+files/CurrentDmesg.txt
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http
Public bug reported:
Immediately after upgrading from 9.10 to 10.04.1, VDPAU acceleration
wasn't working within XBMC so I attempted to uninstall the fglrx
proprietary driver and got this failure.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: fglrx 2:8.723.1-0ubuntu4
ProcVersionSignatu
Finally got a chance to test this last night and it works like a charm
on my 2 systems. Thanks!
--
black screen after a few user switches
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/546578
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: apport
This is an enhancement request.
Currently when there are multiple failures to report, the Gnome applet
shows me one error at a time. I can't go back and forth in the list, my
options are 'submit' or not. What I think might be better is if there
I've attached the dist-upgrade directory contents as a tar file. Sorry
i didn't get to it sooner!
I'm not sure how to read the log, but it kinda looks like some module
plugged in to Python failed to parse in the new version and that's why
the Python install failed, leading to all the other failur
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929880/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929881/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package python-cairo 1.8.8-1 failed to install/upgrade: dependency problems -
leaving u
Public bug reported:
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
12th.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: python-cairo 1.8.8-1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-22-generic i686
Architecture:
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929942/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929943/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package python-gobject 2.21.1-0ubuntu3 failed to install/upgrade: dependency
problems -
Public bug reported:
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
13th
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: python-gobject 2.21.1-0ubuntu3
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-22-generic i686
Archi
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929674/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929675/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package python-support 1.0.4ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: dependency
problems - le
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: python-support
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
11th.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: python-support 1.0.4ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname:
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929419/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929420/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package gnome-keyring 2.92.92.is.2.30.1-0ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade:
dependency
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: gnome-keyring
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was
the ninth.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: gnome-keyring 2.92.92.is.2.30.1-0ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929581/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929582/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package gksu 2.0.2-2ubuntu2 failed to install/upgrade: dependency problems -
leaving un
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: gksu
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
10th.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: gksu 2.0.2-2ubuntu2
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-22-g
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929068/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929069/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package gconf2 2.28.1-0ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: dependency problems -
leaving
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: gconf
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
seventh.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: gconf2 2.28.1-0ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929172/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48929173/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package libgksu2-0 2.0.13~pre1-1ubuntu4 failed to install/upgrade: dependency
problems
Public bug reported:
Upgrading Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
eighth.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: libgksu2-0 2.0.13~pre1-1ubuntu4
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-22-generic i686
Archit
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48928788/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48928789/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package hwtest 0.9.1 failed to install/upgrade: dependency problems - leaving
unconfigu
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: checkbox
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
sixth.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: hwtest 0.9.1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-22-gen
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48928564/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48928565/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package checkbox 0.9.1 failed to install/upgrade: dependency problems - leaving
unconfi
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: checkbox
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
fifth.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: checkbox 0.9.1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-22-g
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48924053/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48924054/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package python-uno 1:3.2.0-7ubuntu4 failed to install/upgrade: dependency
problems - le
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: openoffice.org
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
third.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: python-uno 1:3.2.0-7ubuntu4
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48923912/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "VarLogDistupgrade201005220412.gz"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48923913/VarLogDistupgrade201005220412.gz
--
package python 2.6.5-0ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade:
https
Public bug reported:
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several errors, this was the
first.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: python 2.6.5-0ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-22-generic i686
Architecture: i
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48923980/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "DpkgTerminalLog.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48923981/DpkgTerminalLog.txt
--
package python-central 0.6.15ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: dependency
problems - l
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: python-central
Upgrading from Hardy to Lucid there were several failures. This was the
second.
ProblemType: Package
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: python-central 0.6.15ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-22.33-generic 2.6.32.11+drm33.2
Una
The following workaround does restore the display:
Alt+F2
Type: xgamma -gamma 1.0
(for more displays you can use "xgamma -display 1.0 -gamma 1.0")
More possibly related bug reports:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/indicator-session/+bug/549632
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/g
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: fast-user-switch-applet
Not sure this is the right applet, but it seems to be affecting a number
of people.
1) Ubuntu 10.04 LTS (lucid)
2) Unknown (I assumed fast-user-switch-applet, but I can't find a version
number for it, so maybe this isn't part of
Oops! I must have missed the request back when I switch my email to a
different system. Sorry about that. I haven't used Miro in 10 months
so this is quite safe to close.
--
miro.real crashed with TypeError in walk()
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/361466
You received this bug notification beca
I haven't seen anything like this in quite a while. I think it's safe
to say it's been addressed in the more recent Karmic kernel releases.
--
WARNING: at /build/buildd/linux-2.6.31/fs/sysfs/dir.c:487
sysfs_add_one+0xc5/0x130()
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/467172
You received this bug notifi
Sorry I didn't come back and close this sooner. It was fixed in one of
the early Karmic kernel revisions. I haven't tested on Lucid yet since
everything is working so nicely right now :)
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Fix Released
--
[Hewlett-Packard Presario C300 (
Same here except I'm using vmware player 3.0.1 to do the install.
2010-03-26 daily desktop x64 cd.
--
ubiquity crashed with AttributeError in __init__()
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/546153
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu
** Attachment added: ".home.jyoder..cache.ubuntuone.log.oauth.login.log.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/37863266/.home.jyoder..cache.ubuntuone.log.oauth.login.log.txt
** Attachment added:
".home.jyoder..cache.ubuntuone.log.syncdaemon.exceptions.log.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/3
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: ubuntuone-client
Sorry, I don't actually know what happened. I didn't witness the crash,
it was caught for me. I'm hoping the attached files will have enough
info to be useful.
ProblemType: Bug
.home.jyoder..config.ubuntuone.ubuntuone.client.conf:
[ub
** Attachment added: "AlsaDevices.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/34799250/AlsaDevices.txt
** Attachment added: "AplayDevices.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/34799251/AplayDevices.txt
** Attachment added: "ArecordDevices.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/34799252/ArecordDevices.t
Public bug reported:
I was playing some youtube videos full screen. I had one paused for
about 20 minutes when this happened.
ProblemType: KernelOops
Annotation: Your system might become unstable now and might need to be
restarted.
Architecture: amd64
AudioDevicesInUse:
USERPID ACCESS
This is probably a false error. The restart works, but reports a
failure due to a race condition between loading modules and start-stop-
daemon. If you look at the process list, "lircd" is probably running.
Mario: The fix to this is to change /etc/init.d/lirc to pass --oknodo
to start-stop-daem
** Changed in: lirc (Ubuntu)
Status: New => In Progress
--
Please support auto-detection, à la gnome-lirc-properties
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/441150
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing li
Hmmm. I can't assign the bug to me. This is something that I'm working
on though.
The general goal is to take the detection logic in gnome-lirc-properties
and move it to a new package. Then gnome-lirc-properties and lirc can
both make use of the autodetection and configuration without requiring
** Changed in: lirc (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
Hauppauge HVR-1600 Remote Not Detected
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/454371
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.
It looks like lirc_pvr150 has been floating around for a long time. I
can't find anyone who "owns" a version. The file contains some firmware
code, which is the source of the copyright worries.
If someone were to take ownership of it and patch it up for the newest
kernel, I think the best distri
This appears to be a problem with the 2.6.31 kernel drivers.
>From Jaron Wilson on the LIRC mailing list:
The root of the problem is that the i2c client model changed significantly
in 2.6.31, and some drivers (such as the cx18 driver for the HVR-1600)
weren't updated soon enough for the 2.6.31
Public bug reported:
Almost fresh install of 9.10 Karmic. Tried a hibernate and it failed to
hibernate at all. I tried a suspend and it suspended but I couldn't
resume.
ProblemType: KernelOops
Annotation: This occured during a previous suspend and prevented it from
resuming properly.
Architect
** Attachment added: "AlsaDevices.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/34082051/AlsaDevices.txt
** Attachment added: "AplayDevices.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/34082052/AplayDevices.txt
** Attachment added: "BootDmesg.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/34082053/BootDmesg.txt
** Att
Yeah, this bothered me too, but that was done in the most recent Debian
package (0.5.2-3). I figured keeping the debian diff smaller was
probably better than pulling those patches back out again.
I'd be happy to make these separate patches again if that's the
consensus and then I'll just fight wi
I just tried an upgrade from a customized 0.5.2 to 0.5.3 to see what would
happen. The following user-modifiable config files are updated in 0.5.3:
/etc/LCDd.conf
/etc/lcdexec.conf
/etc/lcdproc.conf
/etc/lcdvc.conf
Of those, lcdproc and lcdvc changes are inconsequential (comments only).
The chan
Yes, it does conffile migration (conffile changes were very minimal) and
it does a mkdir /var/run/lirc in /etc/init.d/lirc if it doesn't exist.
I'm not sure how many different machines this has been tested on, but my
package has been very well received in the feedback I've gotten,
including from t
If you're still having problems you can try the LIRC 0.8.6 package in my PPA:
https://launchpad.net/~jyoder/+archive/ppa
Many bugs were fixed in 0.8.6. After you're done updating, you should
run dpkg-reconfigure lirc
Let me know if you have any problems.
--
LIRC: removed client
https://bugs.la
Please try installing the LIRC 0.8.6 package from my PPA:
https://launchpad.net/~jyoder/+archive/ppa
many problems were fixed in 0.8.6
--
irw doesn't recognize all possieble keys
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/396749
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, wh
Please try the LIRC 0.8.6 package in my PPA and let me know if it solves your
problem:
https://launchpad.net/~jyoder/+archive/ppa
--
Unsupported Remote for Mythbuntu 9.04 - Pinnacle HDTV Pro Stick (801e SE)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/398362
You received this bug notification because you are
I believe this is a false failure message, which is corrected in my PPA:
https://launchpad.net/~jyoder/+archive/ppa
I'm still very confused with the bug system though, so I'm not sure how
to take this/confirm it/etc.
If I'm right, the problem is simply that loading the lirc modules
automatically
** Summary changed:
- Please update to 0.5.3
+ Please update LCDproc to 0.5.3
--
Please update LCDproc to 0.5.3
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/432669
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-b
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: lirc
I have a bzr branch with an updated lirc for 0.8.6 here:
https://code.launchpad.net/~jyoder/+junk/lirc-CVS
And a PPA here:
https://launchpad.net/~jyoder/+archive/ppa
I would like this considered for a FeatureFreeze exception to Karmic.
This release
Public bug reported:
I've created a bzr branch for lcdproc 0.5.3 here:
https://code.launchpad.net/~jyoder/+junk/lcdproc
I would like a FeatureFreeze exception to get this into Karmic. It supports
several new drivers, and fixes many bugs. It compiles/links/upgrades just fine
in my testing. I'
91 matches
Mail list logo
