Just a quick note that I got hit by this a week or two ago, months after
moving from 22.04 to 24.04 and disabling sd-resolved by hand way back
then. IOW, it apparently happens on 24.04.0 -> 24.04.1 as well.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is su
Sorry Wimpy - I just did fresh installs of two machines with 20.04.4,
and the bug triggered on one of them, i.e. the fix is incomplete.
Examining the .panel and .layout files in pluma, I can see that the
problem element (mate-control-center) is listed in the files twice
(elements 2 and 15) - which
wb. :) I'll try to tackle it, but my health's not that great right now.
IMO one should really prioritize fixing "easy" bugs ahead of doing
massive rewrites to things, but you don't work for me, so... :)
The bug's already made it into one LTS. It would be pretty ridiculous
for it to still be the
I take it Victor is no longer involved with the project.
For whoever picks this up: when I discussed this with him at the time,
he knew exactly what had caused the bug: he'd "hacked the window borders
wider so that they could still be grabbed properly after gtk3 broke
that" - I assume by padding t
Just happened with 21.04 (on a pi4), albeit with a minor variation: this time,
the suggestion was "change the home directory of user irc?" (the pi was a
server install originally, with the desktop packages added later).
When I clicked "Help" it resized the window to fill the desktop, and I can JU
Also still broken in 18.04.
I should have some free time in the next couple of months, so I'll see
if i can turn it into an ACE. :)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1758642
Title:
eom
One additional note for anyone still stuck using this trainwreck for
whatever reason:
Even if you use the keyctl hack to get mounting your private data to
work, you will be unable to UNmount it because of bugs in ecryptfs-
umount-private. The workaround for THAT bug is to just call
"/sbin/umount.e
Sorry Kai - I got swamped by real-life issues.
I finally got the time to look into this a few days ago, and when I went
to check on it then in case a kernel update had fixed things already, it
looks like it has (or at least, mostly so) - peaks are back to 80+, so
that's within wifi variance again.
The package update-manager/xenial-proposed 1:16.04.17 fixes the bug for
me as well.
enabled -proposed and pulled in those files via synaptic, leaving the
other packages as is. ran update-manager and changelogs show properly
again on those packages.
--
You received this bug notification because y
I wonder what the thought process was that led to disabling user resize
of this window in the first place. As with the absence of the other
window controls there's no reason for it at all, and simply not doing so
would have prevented this bug from being application-breaking.
--
You received this
No, you can't. The window EXPANDS to where it's unusable, but then
doesn't resize back DOWN when you toggle details back off.
The only way out is to kill update-manager (which doesn't even have a
Close icon, so you also have to know that you can do it from the main
menu, which some distros are now
Thanks Kai.
Yes, I really want to use Ubuntu kernel to bisect: or at least, I need
the option to be able to - because if the problem is coming from the
Ubuntu patchset, I could spend weeks bisecting mainline and never find
it, whereas if I bisect the Ubuntu tree I'm guaranteed to find it and
that
Had the affected machine in here (i.e. "where the router is") for other
reasons, so I was able to check those conditions too. As expected, it's
a power / antenna / etc issue:
Linux 5.3.0-19-generic #20-Ubuntu SMP Fri Oct 18 09:04:39 UTC 2019 x86_64
Fri 08-Nov-19 03:29
sent 459,277,171 bytes recei
Public bug reported:
For the last few weeks, update-manager fails to show the changes for new
packages. Running it from a terminal, I see:
~ $ update-manager
/usr/bin/update-manager:28: PyGIWarning: Gtk was imported without specifying a
version first. Use gi.require_version('Gtk', '3.0') befor
#34 said:
This bug affects a cryptographic (read: highly sensitive) feature, is 15 months
old, a patch was proposed 12 months ago, but it is still of "Undecided"
importance and still "Unassigned"? Come on! Are the ecryptfs-utils and systemd
packages unmaintained at Ubuntu?
Well, this bug is now
Okay - the 18.04.3 release I tested in September, which was fine, has
5.0.0-23.
-29 is broken, as mentioned above. That's a pretty narrow window to work with.
I'd prefer it if someone from Canonical took it from here.
(Heck, there are probably few enough commits to that driver in that timeframe
t
16.04.6 turned out to have 4.15.0-45, which is one of the known-broken
releases. Unsurprisingly, it delivered the same poor results as 5.3.
I'm running low on sensible options here.
I no longer have the bootable 18.04 stick I used before, but I can
create a new one easily enough (as long as I rem
Any specific params you want for iperf BTW?
I ran some basic tests against a VM after all: it might have lost a few
%, but wireless is so slow that it's not going to make any meaningful
difference.
[ ID] IntervalTransferBandwidth Reads Dist(bin=16.0K)
[ 4] 0.-11.4354
I expect so. I don't usually have a machine available to run as a server
though, hence the preference for rsync.
If you're concerned that the NAS might be the bottleneck, don't be.
That's a sensible point to raise, but it's GbE and saturates it wired.
(To say nothing of the months during which the
The dist-upgrades have wiped out all the previous kernels, of course.
The only one left on the machine at all was the 5.0 from 19.04, and that's no
good either. :(
Linux 5.0.0-29-generic #31-Ubuntu SMP Thu Sep 12 13:05:32 UTC 2019 x86_64
Wed 23-Oct-19 04:47
sent 459,277,171 bytes received 35 by
That machine doesn't have access to launchpad, so until someone fixes
the bugs (referenced out in the other thread) so that "ubuntu-bug -c"
works, I can't provide that info.
Kai - this is a low-power HTPC, with very little disk space. Assuming it
can even clone the kernel, it will likely take week
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1847892
Title:
large performance regression (~30-40%) in wifi with 19.10 / 5.3 kern
Public bug reported:
Probably relevant:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1795116
Card is an RTL8723BE.
On 16.04 with the HWE stack, after 1795116 was fixed performance was a
stable 75-80Mb/s.
Linux 4.15.0-55-generic #60~16.04.2-Ubuntu SMP Thu Jul 4 09:03:09 UTC 2019
x86_64
Don't know if this has been fixed at some point, but *with the theme I
use* on 19.10 the buttons resize correctly. So either it's fixed, or the
problem is with the specific theme (Ambient-Dark or whatever) that
you're using.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
IDK why launchpad insists on filling in the Package field incorrectly
every time I file a bug! I expect firefox is actually to blame and has
decided to autofill things. Sorry about that.
** Package changed: marco (Ubuntu) => update-manager (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because y
Also note that the window doesn't even have a Close button, so they
can't exit it that way either.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1846474
Title:
Distribution Upgrade unusable on low-r
Public bug reported:
When performing a distribution upgrade, update-manager initially
presents a usable (though badly-sized) window. Clicking the "Details"
button though resizes that window (by, I'm guessing, the vertical space
needed for the new information) and pushes the window's buttons off th
Both bugs, that is. (Sorry, forgot to check the second one before).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1841854
Title:
netspeed applet icon not correctly sized
To manage notifications abo
Just to confirm, the bug is still present in 19.10 Beta.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1841854
Title:
netspeed applet icon not correctly sized
To manage notifications about this bug
I got tired of putting them back in the right place, and after the next
reboot I noticed that they actually KEEP moving up (and left, when
possible) each time. Funky. :)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.lau
** Attachment added: "session-restore-position-bug.png"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/marco/+bug/1845822/+attachment/5292438/+files/session-restore-position-bug.png
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https:
Some more info, without which that session file isn't much use:
The display is 1920x1200. Ignore the bottom edge, since that has a panel
on it.
The caja window is @ 791 x, + w = 1,902. The x="-10" for a window
on the LHS means the borders are that wide (even though they clearly
aren't, so th
Launchpad made a bad guess on the package, and ignored my change to it
on the submission. :)
** Package changed: mate-screensaver (Ubuntu) => marco (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/b
Public bug reported:
In the 19.10 Beta:
session restore is moving all windows placed at the bottom of the screen
up by ~8 pixels, and moving all windows placed at the right-hand edge of
the screen left by ?about? the same amount. 19.04 didn't have this
problem.
A window that was "docked" in the
> We'll eventually add phased updates to APT too, but we're not there
yet.
I'm not sure it's a good idea to go out of your way to make it
impossible for users to get the current version of a package by any
means. The update-manager behavior is defensible, and even sensible; but
there's enormous va
Thanks for the link. It's a bit hard to defend it as "not technically a
bug, because we're *deliberately* ignoring what you said to do", but I
do understand the position (and even mostly agree with it, for what
that's worth).
It's very confusing when you have multiple machines though, with some
ra
Public bug reported:
With "Security" and "Other" updates both set to "Display Immediately",
Update Manager simply ignores any "Other" updates. It's done this for
all of 16.04, IIRC, and certainly for months even if not that long.
Today, for example:
$ apt list --upgradable
Listing... Done
bsduti
This bug is still present in 16.04, but seems to be fixed in 19.04. I
don't see an explicit commit for it though, which makes me wonder if
it's a memory corruption issue in the GTK layer.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
This shouldn't be marked as "Fix Released" when the LTS's still don't
have an update available. I realise the "real" work is done, but we
can't have LTS's being treated as second-class citizens to the extent
that this crippling defect doesn't even show up as an active issue to
their users in Launch
That bad run was an outlier. No idea what caused it, but cron'd tests
over the past couple of days have all shown results similar to the
pre-33 breakage.
So it looks like this is finally fixed, thanks. It's a shame testing
didn't catch it, but understandable. It's a bit more worrying that the
regr
Hooray, it seems that it has - but possibly only partially.
Peak and Avg throughput were both a few % down compared to -32, but well
within the sort of variance wifi suffers from. High-70s for download is
certainly good enough to use.
What's less encouraging, to the point of being an outright con
Thanks, but that seems unlikely: I'm aware of the ant_sel issue on HP
laptops etc, but this machine isn't one and has never benefitted from
it. If it was using the wrong one of two antennae, it wouldn't hit 70/70
at 20ft away through walls, nor would the throughput be almost half of
what it was wit
Although, I see what appears to be an unrelated (to ant_sel)
+ if (rtlpriv->cfg->ops->get_btc_status())
+ rtlpriv->btcoexist.btc_ops->btc_power_on_setting(rtlpriv);
added in that commit as well. I can't go digging into the source right now to
see what that's doing, but since
Still hopelessly broken. :(
Throughput with the latest kernel was down to about 45Mb/s when I tested it a
few days ago.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1795116
Title:
large performan
Just reverted to the -142 to double-check, and that does indeed build
just fine.
5.1.38 is of course the version in the Ubuntu repository for xenial, so
the obsolescence issues have to be ignored.
I don't know what the process for resolving the conflict is here, but
-143 breaks xenial guests, and
This appears to have either gone too far or not far enough, since the
current xenial of:
4.4.0-143-generic #169-Ubuntu SMP Thu Feb 7 07:56:38 UTC 2019 x86_64
x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
now fails to build the virtualbox client modules with:
---
/tmp/vbox.0/r0drv/linux/memobj-r0drv-linux.c
Public bug reported:
after updating multiple packages including the kernel, choose "restart later".
note: in this particular case i deferred the update for a specific package
(thunderbird) - no idea if that's required to trigger this bug or not.
when update manager pops up again after about 10s
given the link quality observations in #11 and the behavior in #12, it's
pretty clear that the problem is with the radio power management.
since it isn't improved at all via any of the PM settings, that suggests
it's simply broken rather than overly-aggressive.
for reference, the head for the las
the machine is usually ~20 feet away from the router, through multiple
walls and a floor. i moved it last night so it was 6 feet away with LOS,
and the results from that are very interesting:
Linux brix 4.15.0-36-generic #39~16.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue Sep 25 08:59:23 UTC
2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU
> prior to the transfer [on the buggy versions] the link quality is
62-64 and the signal similarly weaker because of power saving, but once
packets are in flight it looks perfect
-32 doesn't seem to have that problem: it's been 70/70 every time i've
looked, even with the link speed showing as 15Mb
> on channel 8(+4), 4.19 typically performed on par with -32 and older.
apparently only because of some fluke. the router switched to 4(+8) some
time in the past couple of days, and the newer kernels are certainly
sucking hard on that too:
---
Linux brix 4.15.0-32-generic #35~16.04.1-Ubuntu SMP
so, the methodology is, reboot, wait for things to settle (i.e. for the
initial "performance" cpu period ubuntu uses to pass), run a simple
script that dumps out some diags and rsyncs that 400MB iso.
--
Linux brix 4.19.0-041900rc6-generic #201809301631 SMP Sun Sep 30 16:32:51 UTC
2018 x86_64 x86
ok - it's a failure in the doc, since the kernel image can't be
installed without them.
also note that the headers package can't be installed on 16.04 because
of a change in the ?libssl? dependency. (from memory: might be the wrong
dependency).
that aside, the results with 4.19 are ... odd, so fa
sure, i'll try.
sidenote, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelMainlineBuilds is missing any
reference to kernel modules, which seem like they might be kind of
important for bugs like this. is that a failure in the doc, or is the
goal here just to test e.g. the tcp changes in -33 rather than any
changes
marked as confirmed per #3 and #4.
i have the apport file stashed away and can upload it as an attachment
upon request if anyone's interested.
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, whic
unfortunately, the instructions on
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs don't seem to work:
>>
If this is to be added to an existing bug report, also use the -u option:
ubuntu-bug -c FILENAME.apport -u BUGNUMBER
<<
$ ubuntu-bug -c /mnt/nas/wifi.apport -u 1795116
Usage: ubuntu-bug [op
obviously i've tested this with 32/33/34 a dozen or so times, but the
performance regression shows up in all of them, so i've only copied that
particular one. the best (i.e. "least bad for the bugged kernel") result
so far was "only" -18%, and most runs are down by 25-30%.
** Package changed: ubun
Public bug reported:
16.04 install using the HWE stack. after several weeks of uptime on -32,
an update to -34 showed a major drop in wifi throughput, dependent
solely on the kernel chosen:
$ uname -a && ./wifibench.sh
Linux brix 4.15.0-32-generic #35~16.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Fri Aug 10 21:54:34 UTC
Public bug reported:
With a cifs device (a NAS, in my case) mounted via a "normal" mount,
caja counts the files in subdirectories despite being set not to. This
destroys the performance of the NAS if you have a few hundred
directories at any given level in an open caja window, and takes forever
to
** Description changed:
When a directory of TGAs is opened in eom, either from caja or via "eom
", it displays the first image correctly. Advancing to the next
image then fails with "Unrecognized image file format", and returning to
the first image at that point also then fails.
+
+ 14.04
Public bug reported:
When a directory of TGAs is opened in eom, either from caja or via "eom
", it displays the first image correctly. Advancing to the next
image then fails with "Unrecognized image file format", and returning to
the first image at that point also then fails.
PNG and JPEG collect
Public bug reported:
as a result, X blanks the screen after 10 minutes regardless of what the
screensaver is told to do (ie "don't blank the screen").
$ ps ax |grep screensa
1478 ?Sl 0:00 mate-screensaver
$ xset q
[snip]
Screen Saver:
prefer blanking: yesallow exposures: yes
** Patch added: "eog-bug-551171.patch"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/eog/+bug/255030/+attachment/1949305/+files/eog-bug-551171.patch
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/255030
Title:
Eog
other way around sebastien: those are all added lines. which i guess
means the files were diffed the wrong way round, sigh - i'm used to real
sccs's, not diffpatches. thanks for spotting it: re-uploaded with the
inversion fixed
** Patch removed: "eog-bug-551171.patch"
https://bugs.launchpad.ne
and sent to the mailing list, which is what i actually came here to post
but forgot...
heh - i'm not going to redesign and rewrite *that*, Mike: it's so
integral it would probably be quicker to just start again from
(near-)scratch. it's not ideal, but it seems to work for everything
outside of the
replaced the patch with a debdiff (was rcs) and used the gnome bug id
rather than a distro-specific one. semi-pointless i know, but it'll be
easier for anyone who wants to patch eog themselves.
** Patch added: "eog-bug-551171.patch"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/eog/+bug/255030/+attachment/19422
** Attachment removed: "foo"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/eog/+bug/255030/+attachment/1939623/+files/foo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/255030
Title:
Eog creates thumbnails even when
> There is no gnome-wide disable-thumbnail setting, and I doubt you'll
convince anyone that it is worth having one.
Exactly so Mike: except that piece appears to have been oversnipped from
my notes, yay 4am editing...
> gThumb has a disable-thumbnail setting, although it can only be
enabled throu
duplicate of https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/eog/+bug/578061 ,
but this identifies the root of the problem and that one doesn't
luis: debian introduced the bug, so installing from the GNOME repository
will fix it, though you'll probably have to compile it yourself.
--
You received this
note that the "GLib-GIO-CRITICAL" errors in the OP are red herrings
caused by https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/eog/+bug/578061
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/565722
Title:
eo
It's not about "paranoia" Mike: it's that a user who has explicitly
stated that they don't want thumbnails, ever; in the only place they
*can* specify that preference, is given the impression that their
decision is being ignored. I don't think you can blame them for
considering it to be a bug.
eog
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: eog
(no apport - it failed to ever complete after over a minute, and btw,
the cancel button on it doesn't work)
not a dupe of #42571, since that's supposedly fixed - despite reports to
the contrary since the claimed fix...
also not a dupe of #192629, si
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39305095/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "ProcMaps.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39305096/ProcMaps.txt
** Attachment added: "ProcStatus.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39305097/ProcStatus.txt
--
mouse
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: gconf-editor
setting to 0 by double-clicking on the key and getting the *dialog box*
turns into 1.1754943508222875e-38 etc
setting to -1 in the dialog is reset to 0
both work correctly if edited directly into the value column
"short description" is "si
jep, that's why i set it to invalid. then i reopened it to put the right
key in for the next of the 5000 people looking for a way to disable it,
but it took 20 minutes to find it.
$ sudo -u gdm gconftool-2 --set /desktop/gnome/sound/event_sounds --type
bool false
sorry to have wasted your time -
** Changed in: ubuntu
Status: New => Invalid
** Changed in: ubuntu
Status: Invalid => New
--
gdm simple-greeter ignores gconf settings
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/522714
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Public bug reported:
gconf-editor / apps / gdm / simple-greeter / settings-manager-plugins /
sound / active: unchecked
gdm still plays the incredibly annoying drums when showing the login panel
after a logout
(it may also play them on first-logins, but i can't tell because of pulse/alsa
auto-mu
** Attachment added: "AptOrdering.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39141543/AptOrdering.txt
** Attachment added: "Dependencies.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39141544/Dependencies.txt
** Attachment added: "Dmesg.txt"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39141545/Dmesg.txt
** Attachment
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: grub2
grub crashed during 9.10 auto-update after first reboot after installing
to a new machine. apparently (faict) because after diffing my+upgrade
/etc/default/grub, i clicked "back" and it wanted me to click "forward"
instead, as ridiculous as that sou
79 matches
Mail list logo
