lamontso lets see.. do we want to have 00list-25.1* in the 26 upload?12:19
lamonthrm.. actually, I don't see the atapi patch update either...12:20
=== lamont will pester fabbione tomorrow morning his time
=== lamont_r [~lamont@phantom.acmeps.com] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
=== zul [~chuck@CPE0006258ec6c2-CM000a73655d0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
zulso what did i miss?03:01
lamontyou know, we could break up the kernel into a package that just builds the -doc and -source packages, and then others that just build-depend: -source, have nothing in them except maybe config files, and then do the build...  that'd let the buildd's spread the load of a new source tree out a bit...04:08
=== lamont waits to get pummeled
zulgood idea but we arent redhat04:08
zulor any rpm based distro04:08
zuldoes debian do the same way?04:09
zulie how we build our kernel...oh this is channel is logged now isnt it?04:09
lamontyeah, should be logged04:30
lamontt-bone was doing it, I expect fabbione has picked that up and incorporated it into the wiki bound logs04:30
lamontdebian is heading to the same place we are, not sure who is further down the path yet.04:31
zulit should have big black warning signs04:31
lamontprior to the 2.6 package, it was actually a kernel-tree and kernel-patch-2.4.27-powerpc type world04:31
jbaileymdz: I made a bad on 1440 - It looks like scd0 *is* there.  I had windows open to both SATA machines.  I did the kernel upgrade on one and looked at the other afterwards.04:45
jbaileymdz: ii  linux-image-2. 2.6.10-25.1    Linux kernel image for version 2.6.10 on PPr04:46
jbaileySorry, obviously being in the rush to get out caught me. =(04:46
=== smurfix [~smurf@smurfix.developer.debian] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
fabbione+# this is a hack for Ubuntu buildd's07:27
fabbione+if [ -e /CurrentlyBuilding ] ; then07:27
fabbione+       fork := $(cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep ^processor | wc -l)07:27
fabbione+       fork := $(expr $fork \* 2)07:27
fabbione+       export CONCURRENCY_LEVEL := $fork07:27
fabbionesomethinig like this in debian/rules07:27
fabbionewould speed up the kernel build N times07:27
lamontfabbione: i386 is 4 way, amd64 2, ppc 1.07:29
lamontppc is the blocker07:29
fabbionelamont: i did test on davis.. -j15 flies07:29
lamontand the other 2 finish in about 2 hours..07:29
fabbionestill slow but clearly much better than -j107:29
fabbionespecially if the code is ccached07:30
lamontyeah - feel free to add the hack...07:30
fabbionewe can give it a shot for 2607:30
fabbioneand see how it goes07:30
fabbioneyou get the delta for it, don't you?07:30
lamontI get what?07:30
fabbionedelta in build time.. to see if we gain or we lose07:31
lamontyes] 07:31
lamontlast line of the build logs07:32
lamontlrwxrwxrwx  1 root root 9 Mar 10 06:37 /usr/sbin/sendmail -> /bin/true07:43
=== lamont takes a large bo-staff to debootstrap
fabbione* committed kernel-team@ubuntu.com--2005/kernel-debian--mainline--2.6.10--patch-2607:45
fabbioneok 25.2 is up07:45
fabbionelamont: want to check if the changes to the umask are ok?07:45
lamontfind ~lamont/public_html/Archives ! -user lamont -perm -0200 ! -perm -02007:47
=== lamont grumbles
fabbionedoes sftp actually load .bash_profile?07:48
fabbionebecause that's where i changed the umask07:48
=== lamont sets it in .bash_profile and .bashrc
fabbioneumask 00207:50
fabbionealso in .bashrc now07:50
fabbionei can try to branch and see if that works07:51
lamontwell, if you go chmod g+w those two files, then _I_ can commit to mainline....07:52
fabbionedone.. they are actually 2 dirs..07:54
fabbionelet me try to branch and see if sftp will load .bashrc07:54
fabbionei can still fix the permissions on the fly07:55
fabbionelooks about right07:56
fabbione* committed kernel-team@ubuntu.com--2005/kernel-debian--pre26--2.6.10--patch-708:09
fabbionelamont: all the syncs/merges should be ok now08:09
fabbionelamont, mdz: would i be crossburned if i kill this patch madness for hoary?09:01
T-Nonehey fabbione !09:02
fabbionehi T-None 09:02
mdzfabbione: not at all09:02
lamontfabbione: I have yet to see what useful purpose it serves...09:02
T-Nonewell in my humble opinion i would praise you for doing so ;)09:02
lamontwhich is to say, kill away09:02
T-Nonelamont: lol09:02
mdzit should be pretty easy to ensure that it doesn't regress09:02
fabbionelamont: i am not 100% how make-kpkg will interact with linux-ubuntu-patches09:02
mdzas long as it still builds and no patches are dropped, it is fine with me09:03
mdzit should save minutes on the kernel build too :-P09:03
T-Nonethe only purpose i see is finding out which kernel rev introduced a borkage. Since we take care not to uplaod before builds (do we), it's obviously the last one :)09:03
fabbionemdz: minutes? ages!09:03
T-Nonehell yes09:03
fabbioneagain.. we only build the kernel this way09:04
fabbionebut i am not 100% about the linux-ubuntu-patches09:04
fabbioneand it is used when building from linux-source package09:04
=== T-None will look at that later, already much too late at work, have to run
T-Nonesee yall09:05
=== lamont tries to decide if 2.25GB of ram is overkill on a dual P3-1.2GHz machine
Mithrandirlamont: nah, it's just fine.09:11
fabbionelamont: i just committed the CONCURRENCY_LEVEL to speed up the build on the kernel09:19
fabbioneon the buildd even09:19
fabbionethat should speed up to Ncpus * 209:20
fabbioneif the code is ccached we could fork much more09:20
fabbionebut it is dangerous09:20
lamontheh.. make that a 2-way P3-993MHz box.09:42
=== abelli [~abelli@host-84-222-39-20.cust-adsl.tiscali.it] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
fabbione--- orig/rules10:00
fabbione+++ mod/rules10:00
fabbione@@ -55,8 +55,7 @@10:00
fabbione .PHONY:                monolith10:00
fabbione monolith:      stamp-monolith10:00
=== jani [~jani@iv.ro] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
fabbione-stamp-monolith:        stamp-monolith-prepare \10:00
fabbione-       $(foreach revision,$(revisions),stamp-monolith-$(revision))10:00
fabbione+stamp-monolith:        stamp-monolith-prepare stamp-monolith-$(revision)10:00
fabbione        rm -rf $(DIFFDIR)10:00
fabbione        touch $@10:00
fabbioneif you apply this patch to your debian/rules10:00
fabbioneonly the last patch set will be applied10:00
fabbionekilling the patch madness10:00
fabbioneafter that this make-substvar is called10:01
fabbioneand it fails10:01
fabbionedebian/make-substvars linux version.Debian debian/monolith/list > debian/substvars.safe10:01
fabbioneLine 1: patch patch-2.6.10-26 is not well-founded10:01
fabbionePatch for 2.6.10-26 must be listed10:01
lamontah, so we need to create the input file that it wants, without bothering to actually apply the patches...10:02
=== lamont can work on that
=== jani [~jani@iv.ro] has left #ubuntu-kernel []
fabbione( cd /home/fabbione/linux-source-2.6.10-2.6.10/debian/diffdir; diff -Nur linux-source-2.6.10-2.6.10-25.2 linux-source-2.6.10-2.6.10-26 || true ) > debian/monolith/patch-2.6.10-2610:13
fabbioneit uses incremental patches10:13
fabbionegot it10:16
=== c_ [~abelli@host-84-222-39-20.cust-adsl.tiscali.it] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
=== lamont sleeps
fabbionegood night10:18
fabbionei found another bug10:45
fabbionethanks god it affects only hppa atm10:45
=== calc [~ccheney@ip70-185-4-246.ma.dl.cox.net] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
=== c_ [~abelli@host-84-222-39-20.cust-adsl.tiscali.it] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
=== abelli [~abelli@host-84-222-39-20.cust-adsl.tiscali.it] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
fabbionebaz commit -s'Kill patch madness'02:15
=== lamont [~lamont@mix.mmjgroup.com] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
=== zul [~chuck@] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
jbaileyHeya.  Waldi filed a bug against initrd-tools in Debian which propagated its way into Ubuntu.  Apparently on his systems /proc/scsi isn't populated, and on ours it is.   His claim is that 2.6.10 did away with that.  Have we tweaked it so that ours still has that info?03:54
zulnot sure maybe you should ask in -devel04:02
jbaileyNah, I'll just pull the source and look.04:03
zulor youo could do that04:06
=== abelli_ [~john@81cb825560dfabcb.node.tor] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
=== lamont_r [~lamont@phantom.acmeps.com] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
jbailey## DP: Description: restore generic SCSI proc_info function in drivers/scsi/scsi_proc.c04:29
jbaileyThat would probably be the one.04:29
zuloh it was a kernel question...im not awake yet04:35
zulhey fabbione 04:35
jbaileyHeya Fabio =)04:38
jbaileyzul: *lol* =)04:38
zulfricking palm04:39
fabbionei am testing the new patch thingy04:40
fabbioneit seems to work fine04:40
zulwhich patch thingy?04:40
fabbioneno more 192891821 patch/unpatch04:40
zulah good04:40
fabbionezul: baz update?04:40
zulooh you fixed it so it doesnt patch/unpatch a billion times?04:41
zulsweet! 04:41
fabbionethere were several changes to do04:43
fabbione+ an important bug fix04:43
=== smurfix [~smurf@smurfix.developer.debian] has joined #ubuntu-kernel
fabbionehey smurfix 04:45
abelli_ciao smurfix 04:46
fabbionesmurfix: what was the perfect command to verify the ABI compatibility?04:46
smurfixfabbione: one sec04:46
fabbionesure.. also 2 or 304:47
smurfixsomething along these lines ..:04:50
smurfix grep vmlinux Module.symvers.old_kernel |sort >/tmp/symvers.old04:50
smurfixditto new04:50
smurfixcomm -23 old new04:50
smurfixmust be empty04:50
smurfixassuming you build with CONFIG_MODVERSIONS04:51
fabbionewhere Module.symvers.old_kernel = Systemmap?04:51
smurfixfabbione: no, the "Module.symvers" file that's generated by building the kernel04:52
fabbioneyes and we don't ship it04:53
smurfixLet me check if you can extract that somehow04:53
fabbionethe idea is to automatically check the ABI with the previous kernel at build time04:56
fabbioneprevious version04:56
fabbionenow we can also start shipping that file04:56
fabbioneit's not a tragedy04:56
fabbioneif we start shipping it in 2604:57
smurfixfabbione: The kernel doesn't export that info any more because it now has a built-in relocator04:57
fabbionefrom 27 we can add the check at build time04:57
smurfixso you probably should start shipping it.04:57
fabbionethis would add a Build-04:57
fabbionethis would add a Build-Dep: on the most recent version of the kernel04:58
fabbioneor just on a linux-abi package04:58
fabbionethat can collect all the MOdule.*04:58
fabbionewhat do you think?04:58
smurfixHmm, better do an abi package.04:59
fabbionenext upload needs to bless a new package anyway05:00
fabbioneso one more or one less won't change much05:00
smurfixWould be nice to have that available for cross-compiling. You can put the .config files in there too.05:00
fabbionesmurfix: configfiles are in /boot with the images05:01
smurfixfabbione: true. Doesn't hurt to also ship them in an -abi package, people like me who still habitually build their own kernels would like that. But, your call.05:03
fabbionewhat scares me a bit is how to ensure that we always build against the $previousversion -abi05:03
fabbionewithout having to control that manually05:03
fabbioneupload -105:04
fabbionethere is no previous -abi05:04
fabbioneso we skip the check05:04
fabbioneand it FTBFS on ppc05:04
fabbionehow do we upload -2 that will check the abi for all arches other than ppc?05:04
fabbionethe code needs to be very smart05:05
smurfixfabbione: What are you going to do if/when the ABIs don't match?05:07
zultake a large wooden hammer05:07
smurfixfabbione: ... or do you decree that any -1 is an ABI change but -2+ isn't?05:07
fabbionesmurfix: FTBFS?05:09
smurfixfabbione: Well, someties you do need to change the ABI :-/05:09
fabbionesmurfix: clearly the -1 is a new abi05:09
fabbioneyes of course you must change the ABI05:09
fabbionebut an ABI change require also a new control file05:09
fabbioneto reflect that change05:10
fabbionefor example05:10
fabbioneif i start doing heavy patching05:10
fabbioneor security patching to the kernel05:10
fabbionerunning a build should be able to tell me if that change will introduce an ABI change05:10
smurfixOK, so you check the old linux-abi package's version number, and skip the ABI check if it doesn't match what you're building05:10
smurfixexcluding the -X version of course05:11
fabbionekinda yes05:11
fabbionebut if for example05:11
fabbionewe are building -1-2.6.10 ver 2.6.10-205:11
fabbionei want it to compaer with -1-2.6.10 ver 2.6.10-105:12
fabbioneif the ABI does not match05:12
fabbionei want it to FTBFS05:12
fabbioneso that i can prosuce a -2-2.6.1005:12
fabbionethat is the correct way05:12
fabbionesince there is an ABI change05:12
fabbionei mean.. i know i could do all of this manually05:12
fabbionebut for N arches in N flavours05:12
fabbioneit's a royal pain05:13
smurfixfabbione: sure, but I fail to see how that differs from what I've been saying05:13
fabbionethan probably i misunderstood you :-)05:13
fabbionebut ok05:13
smurfixLet's say you create a linux-kernel-abi package05:17
smurfixsome file in it contains the magic string "2.6.10-4"05:18
fabbioneit would need to contain the ABI version too05:19
smurfixI thought that is* the abi version05:19
fabbioneyeah i get you now05:19
fabbionei was thinking in terms of 2.6.10-1 (starting from scratch)05:19
smurfixDoesn't really matter, you'd get the magic string "2.6.9-5" or whatever05:20
smurfixdifferent, so skip check.05:20
fabbionethat would solve all the problems05:23
smurfixsame when you FTBFS, the failed arch would keep its old l-k-a package which still has the old magic string in it.05:23
fabbioneit won't match the ABI and therefor skip the test05:24
fabbionebecause hte next upload will have a different ABI05:24
fabbionegood idea05:24
smurfixThe only problem I see is how to build-dep on the latest l-k-a package05:26
smurfixunless you just want to wing it ;-)05:26
smurfix(probably not a good idea, now that I think about it)05:26
fabbionewell the first upload will create the package05:27
fabbionefrom the second one we will build-dep on it05:27
fabbionein case of troubles we can always remvoe the build-dep05:27
fabbioneand unroll the loop05:28
smurfixYeah, but if the second build installed the package from the first run on the autobuilder, but changes the ABI, then the third build may still see the first package if it happens not to be cleared out05:28
fabbionethat shouldn't be a problem05:29
smurfixso a mistaked ABI change from 2->3 might be missed05:29
fabbionethe ABI is supposed to be the same between first, second and third05:29
smurfixUmm, it's supposed to be the same from -2 to -3, but I wan't talking about that05:30
fabbioneoh you mean if there is an ABI change between -1 and -205:30
fabbioneand we upload -305:30
fabbioneand there can still be abi from -1 in the buildd05:31
fabbioneat that point the ABI check should be skipped05:31
fabbioneand it will due to the magic file05:31
fabbionebut yes.. that can actually skip a test that should be done05:32
smurfixExactly. I don't know how to guard against that other than asking the archives for the current version when you prepare the source package05:33
smurfixDunno whether you'd want to go that far.05:33
fabbionewell preparing the source package is still manual05:34
fabbioneand we can still hack on it05:34
smurfixOK, then you need to remember never to forget to update the dependency when you prepare a new version. ;-)05:35
smurfixor write a script that does it. Good enough I'd say.05:35
fabbionesmurfix: that is why we have a control.stub that we can mangle as we like :-)))))05:35
fabbionesmurfix: the next question would be.. are you for this challenge?05:39
smurfixfabbione: gah  ;-)   I need to fix the keyboard chooser first05:40
fabbionefair enough05:40
smurfixfabbione: it needs a confirmation dialog05:40
fabbionei think we can postpone this feature to hoary+105:42
fabbioneeven if it would make pitti's life 1029292 times simpler05:42
fabbionealso for us that will have to maintain this kernel for 18 months05:42
fabbionelast script to test the anti-patch-madness fix05:57
smurfixfabbione: If for hoary, when would you need it?05:59
fabbionewithin monday05:59
fabbionebut i guess i can try to work on it05:59
fabbionei will have the weekend free!05:59
fabbioneYEAH YEAH05:59
fabbionewife -> her sisterm06:00
fabbionesister even06:00
=== lamont will be offline from sometime this weekend until sometime tuesday or so
fabbionelamont: don't worry06:12
fabbionei won't upload very soon06:12
fabbionenot with these big changes06:12
fabbionei am still testing some stuff06:12
lamontfabbione: it means that you're baz bitch for a few days... :-)06:12
fabbionei might get up -26 to get the ATAPI thingy in again06:12
fabbioneand the new idiotify patch06:13
fabbioneand the antipatchmadness06:13
fabbionethe ABI stuff can come later06:13
fabbioneok confirmed 100%.. the patch madness is gone06:27
fabbioneall the scripts are working06:27
=== T-Bone reads 3 lines back and ^5s fabbione !
=== T-Bone wonders if lamont is around and has some "good" news... (who knows ;o)
zulheh im almost always here07:00
zulwhoa...224 changes in the last day07:13
zulin linus bk tree07:46
lamontbusy boy07:52
zulwell with the g5 he must be :)07:53

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!