[05:54] <fabbione> yay
[05:57] <fabbione> lamont: should we start branching 2.6.12?
[05:58] <fabbione> i have the orig and a few changes ready for it
[06:00] <lamont> fabbione: works for me
[06:00] <lamont> probably should start with --mainline--2.6.10 and branch to --mainline--2.6.12
[06:00] <fabbione> ok.. what policy do you suggest?
[06:00] <lamont> policy?
[06:00] <fabbione> sorry.. s/policy/way to proceed/
[06:01] <lamont> hrm...
[06:01] <lamont> baz switch kernel-team@ubuntu.com--2005/kernel-debian--mainline--2.6.10
[06:01] <lamont> baz branch kernel-team@ubuntu.com--2005/kernel-debian--pre1--2.6.11.90
[06:02] <lamont> and make it 2.6.12_2.6.11.90-1
[06:02] <lamont> then the actual ship of 2.6.11.90-1 becomes a baz branch  ....--mainline--2.6.11.90
[06:02] <lamont> and if we get bulky enough to roll another .orig.tar.gz, it becomes 2.6.11.91, etc.
[06:03] <fabbione> hmm sounds about right
[06:05] <fabbione> are you going to do it? or should I?
[06:05] <dilinger> 2.6.11.90?
[06:06] <fabbione> dilinger: aka 2.6.12rc2
[06:06] <dilinger> is that a -bk snapshot or something?
[06:06] <dilinger> ah
[06:06] <fabbione> just to keep some space before 2.6.12
[06:06] <dilinger> right
[06:12] <fabbione> since we are going to switch to gcc4, it is completely pointless to keep working on 2.6.10
[06:12] <fabbione> much better to get ready with .12
[06:12] <fabbione> break it early > *
[06:30] <lamont> fabbione: either way, if you haven't already done it, I'll do it now
[06:30] <fabbione> no i didn't
[06:30] <lamont> doing it now
[06:30] <fabbione> i am fixing the last debian/rules glitches
[06:30] <lamont> where are we going to put the orig.tar.gz then?
[06:31] <fabbione> major and wrong assumption is that linux-source-$(pkgnameversion) ($(debversion)) are the same
[06:31] <fabbione> lamont: i will put it on people as soon as it is ready
[06:31] <fabbione> that will take like 20 seconds
[06:32] <fabbione> right now i am working on getting debian/rules to understand that there is a difference
[06:32] <lamont> right
[06:32] <fabbione> otherwise there is no way you can even get to edit a patch
[08:01] <fabbione> dpkg-deb: building package `linux-image-2.6.12-1-386' in `../linux-image-2.6.12-1-386_2.6.11.90-1_i386.deb'.
[08:03] <fabbione> and no..
[08:03] <fabbione> it's not .12rc2 yet
[08:04] <fabbione> just fixing the debian/rules insanity adding more mess
[10:12] <T-Bone> ola!
[10:14] <T-Bone> fabbione : ping?
[10:14] <fabbione> hi T-Bone 
[10:15] <T-Bone> howdy!
[10:15] <fabbione> pretty busy
[10:16] <T-Bone> fabbione : ok, might discuss that later then. Just wanted to let you nkow in case you haven't noticed we've had some discuss with dholbach and lamont yesterday about universe kernel images
[10:16] <fabbione> T-Bone: no, i haven't read the scrollback
[10:16] <fabbione> and i need to do something for the next hour or so
[10:17] <T-Bone> ok np
[10:17] <fabbione> bbl
[10:18] <T-Bone> fabbione : btw, i got my hands on a bunch of sparc and ultrasparc systems, i might give a shot at Ubuntu sparc this week end (and maybe provide build power if needed :)
[10:18] <T-Bone> fabbione : you see, i don't hate you 8)
[10:21] <fabbione> T-Bone: there is no way to install sparc atm. sparc.u.c is out of sync (but not due to the buildd). i will explain later
[10:21] <fabbione> i have to run
[10:22] <dholbach> bye fabbione 
[11:04] <fabbione> re
[11:05] <T-Bone> re
[11:06] <fabbione> the problem with sparc are multiple
[11:07] <T-Bone> shot
[11:07] <T-Bone> +o
[11:07] <fabbione> one I need to able to give you access to w-b
[11:07] <fabbione> or move w-b somewhere that all can access
[11:07] <Lathiat> w-b?
[11:07] <T-Bone> if you want me to participate to the build effort, yeah
[11:07] <fabbione> my sparc is special cased.
[11:07] <Mithrandir> does sparc have trouble keeping up?
[11:07] <fabbione> it's the only external buildd allowed to upload binaries
[11:07] <fabbione> Mithrandir: not for main
[11:07] <T-Bone> i have a Ultra30, a SS20 and potentially a U5
[11:08] <fabbione> but for breezy we will need more than one.. that's for sure
[11:08] <T-Bone> maybe more will come up in the next few days
[11:08] <fabbione> the major issue would be to sign the packages and upload them to archive
[11:08] <fabbione> since none of you is allowed to
[11:08] <Mithrandir> I have two U5s I could use.
[11:08] <T-Bone> ?
[11:08] <T-Bone> fabbione I am
[11:08] <Mithrandir> T-Bone: no, not binaries.
[11:08] <fabbione> T-Bone: you are not allowed to upload binaries
[11:09] <fabbione> only sources
[11:09] <T-Bone> Mithrandir : i have a key that is
[11:09] <T-Bone> s/is/will be soon/
[11:09] <T-Bone> for hppa binaries
[11:09] <fabbione> the sparcbuildd has a specially blessed for sparc
[11:09] <fabbione> T-Bone: yes.. and only hppa
[11:09] <Mithrandir> fabbione: didn't Mark say we would buy buildds for arches which were maintained properly?
[11:09] <fabbione> Mithrandir: that's where i was going now
[11:09] <fabbione> Mark already agreed on buying sparc buildd's
[11:09] <T-Bone> fabbione : then if i can do hppa, i guess it's a matter of turning the right knob to do sparc as well :)
[11:09] <fabbione> given that there is enough community interest
[11:10] <fabbione> so my plan was to get sparc announced immediatly after hoary
[11:10] <T-Bone> fabbione : tell him to sell ia64 ones and buy sparc/hppa instead ;] 
[11:10] <fabbione> *no comments*
[11:10] <T-Bone> fabbione : amusingly enough, lamont and I plan to do the same for hppa :}
[11:11] <fabbione> if there will be enough hits on sparc.u.c 
[11:11] <fabbione> than i will ask Mark to give the final green light for the buildds
[11:11] <Mithrandir> fabbione: so we should set up a box to continously reinstall and upgrade and stuff?
[11:11] <fabbione> Mithrandir: that would be perfect
[11:11] <fabbione> d-i has received only my love
[11:12] <fabbione> and it works here
[11:12] <fabbione> but i have no idea if X does for example
[11:12] <fabbione> since my machine is headless
[11:12] <Lathiat> i have a monitor for mine
[11:12] <Lathiat> and i can steal a keyboard from the UCC
[11:12] <T-Bone> fabbione : if you need help to build hoary's universe, i can probably do something quite similar to what I've done for hppa: build all binaries, make them available for you somewhere and let you do the bad upload thing...
[11:12] <fabbione> Lathiat: problem is (as i wrote before) that sparc can't be installed atm
[11:12] <Lathiat> right
[11:12] <Lathiat> why is that?
[11:13] <T-Bone> fabbione : please explain that, you told me the installer was working...
[11:13] <fabbione> T-Bone: there is very little point in doing it
[11:13] <fabbione> yeah the problem is that the server where sparc.u.c is hosted
[11:13] <fabbione> is too overloaded
[11:13] <T-Bone> fabbione : your call. I'm offering CPU power that's all ;)
[11:13] <Mithrandir> fabbione: you host sparc.u.c home?
[11:13] <Lathiat> perhaps that can be rectified
[11:13] <fabbione> and basically the sparc packages are built, uploaded but not integrated into that archive
[11:13] <Mithrandir> s/home/at &/?
[11:13] <fabbione> Mithrandir: no. it's at the DC
[11:14] <fabbione> T-Bone: there is more than that. Once sparc is approved, lamont will have to rebootstrap it from scratch anyway
[11:14] <fabbione> T-Bone: like for hppa
[11:14] <T-Bone> ?
[11:14] <fabbione> simply because all the binaries must come from the DC
[11:14] <fabbione> it's a rule dude...
[11:14] <T-Bone> a stupid one
[11:14] <Lathiat> i disagree
[11:15] <fabbione> both of you can disagree as much as i did
[11:15] <Lathiat> (i mean i disagree that its a stupid rule)
[11:15] <fabbione> Lathiat: ah ok
[11:15] <T-Bone> i know why it's there
[11:15] <Mithrandir> *shrug*, it's a rule and we play by it.  It's not like it really matters much anyhow.
[11:15] <T-Bone> there are other ways to achieve what's intended
[11:15] <T-Bone> thus a stupid rule. My call.
[11:15] <fabbione> Mithrandir: well it does to a certain degree
[11:16] <fabbione> T-Bone: and what is intended?
[11:16] <T-Bone> fabbione : security
[11:16] <T-Bone> i suppose
[11:16] <fabbione> that is only one of them.
[11:16] <Mithrandir> fabbione: it matters somewhat security and buildability-wise, but it doesn't matter for the port per se.
[11:16] <Mithrandir> it's just a rebuild.
[11:16] <T-Bone> the other being buildd system not being exportable yet
[11:16] <T-Bone> fabbione : that might cahgne at some point
[11:16] <fabbione> Mithrandir: our buildd's compile with different options
[11:17] <T-Bone> lamont had a hope for that, given how we plan to deal with hppa
[11:17] <fabbione> T-Bone: whatever.. until that part is not exported, we need to play by the rule
[11:17] <fabbione> so the rebuild is mandatoru
[11:17] <fabbione> mandatory
[11:17] <T-Bone> fabbione : maybe you shouldn't try too hard for now then
[11:17] <T-Bone> fabbione : lamont told me he had good hope to get it changed *soon*
[11:18] <fabbione> T-Bone: eh? 
[11:18] <T-Bone> given i host 99% of the hppa build power...
[11:18] <T-Bone> and given lamont's attachment to hppa ;)
[11:18] <fabbione> T-Bone: well.. when it will change we will take appropriate actions.. right now i am happy as it is
[11:18] <fabbione> also
[11:18] <fabbione> a rebuild at the DC is way faster than what you do at home/uni
[11:18] <T-Bone> ?
[11:18] <fabbione> so if they decide to rebuild sparc i am not going to say no..
[11:18] <fabbione> i simply can't care less :)
[11:19] <fabbione> T-Bone: i have one sparc one cpu
[11:19] <Mithrandir> T-Bone: the buildds at the data centre are way faster than any U5s we can muster
[11:19] <T-Bone> fabbione : ah sure. I was talking about hppa there :)
[11:19] <fabbione> if Mark buys the buildd there will be at least 4 boxes with 8 CPU, GIGS of RAM and tons of disks
[11:19] <T-Bone> yum ;] 
[11:19] <T-Bone> though
[11:19] <fabbione> so basically.. rebuilding a port is a breeze
[11:20] <T-Bone> what's the point of 8CPU when the autobuilder does single threaded build?
[11:20] <T-Bone> unless... yours do multithreaded ones... :P
[11:20] <Mithrandir> it can run 8 sbuilds
[11:20] <fabbione> T-Bone: sbuild can fork....
[11:21] <fabbione> T-Bone: time to RTFM?
[11:21] <T-Bone> fabbione : i'm sorry, default setup can't simply fork
[11:21] <T-Bone> for you need several chroots to do that
[11:21] <fabbione> T-Bone: yes it can :)
[11:21] <T-Bone> and it's quite a pain to setup
[11:21] <fabbione> and no.. you don't need more than one chroot
[11:21] <T-Bone> oh? And how do you manage builddeps?
[11:22] <fabbione> afaik it doesn't attempt to build packages with build-dep in conflicts
[11:22] <T-Bone> that's not the point
[11:22] <fabbione> what is the point than?
[11:22] <T-Bone> you have package A with set a of build deps, package B with set b
[11:22] <T-Bone> you build both packages at the same time
[11:22] <fabbione> yes
[11:23] <T-Bone> if package A uses some in set b without declaring it, it'll build fine anyway
[11:23] <T-Bone> and that's the least of the worst examplse i can come with
[11:23] <fabbione> the cases that something like this will happen is very low
[11:23] <T-Bone> i think such an example would already be enough to make lamont go nuts
[11:24] <T-Bone> fabbione : this breaks the whole point of sbuild/chroots
[11:24] <T-Bone> which is: build package in an isolated environment with the exact set of build-deps they need
[11:24] <fabbione> T-Bone: see.. that's why you don't fork always
[11:24] <T-Bone> that's why you *never* fork
[11:25] <T-Bone> that's why RTFM won't help. Such a feature, if existing, shouldn't be used :P
[11:25] <fabbione> T-Bone: wrong
[11:25] <Mithrandir> T-Bone: sbuild isn't a tool for checking build-deps, pbuilder is.
[11:25] <T-Bone> Mithrandir : builders don't use pbuilder
[11:25] <fabbione> T-Bone: so?
[11:25] <T-Bone> Mithrandir : we're talking about buildd/sbuild setup here
[11:25] <Mithrandir> T-Bone: I know, but the buildds are there to build packages, not catch all kinds of random errors.
[11:25] <fabbione> give me a reference in Debian policy that says that buildd should be used to verify Build-Dep
[11:26] <fabbione> and i will agree with you
[11:26] <T-Bone> anyway, you have your views and i have mines, and unless lamont tells me i'm wrong i wont change my mind, for i'm French and stupid (which is the same, heh? :)
[11:26] <T-Bone> Mithrandir wrong
[11:26] <Mithrandir> T-Bone: reference?
[11:26] <T-Bone> fabbione : if it wasn't the case, we would use sources-dependencies on ubuntu, and we don't
[11:27] <fabbione> T-Bone: well if you don't even bother to see other people truth.. just wait for lamont next time
[11:27] <fabbione> source-dependecies?
[11:27] <T-Bone> fabbione : lamont made it very clear that we want to *fix* invalid sourcedeps, not *workaround* them
[11:27] <fabbione> ok i am not going to discuss this anylonger
[11:27] <T-Bone> neither do i
[11:27] <T-Bone> i take my info from the guy running the buildds, i think that's authoritative enough :P
[11:28] <T-Bone> so back to topic, i can offer sparc cpu, and maybe some help to the extent of my limited time.
[11:28] <fabbione> ok thanks
[11:28] <fabbione> i will keep that in mind
[11:28] <fabbione> i want to see input from the community before start building a big sparc infrastructure
[11:29] <T-Bone> certainly the best thing to do
[11:29] <Mithrandir> are newer sparcs quieter than the old ones?
[11:38] <T-Bone> fabbione : on a different topic, i've been reading the posts about patches on the k-t m-l, why would we move away from dpatch?
[11:39] <fabbione> because it's hutter crap
[11:39] <T-Bone> huh?
[11:41] <T-Bone> can you illustrate?
[11:41] <fabbione> dpatch is ok when you handle one source/one build
[11:42] <fabbione> in our situation where we might need to start building different sets of packages with different patches, is a royal pain in the ass
[11:42] <T-Bone> ah
[11:42] <T-Bone> i thought we aimed at building all kernels from the same source?
[11:42] <fabbione> yes we do
[11:42] <T-Bone> of course if it's no longer the case i understand dpatch is a mess
[11:42] <fabbione> but not all kernels get the same set of patches.. like *cough*hppa*cough*
[11:43] <T-Bone> that should be fixed in breezy
[11:43] <fabbione> and when i started working on xen packages
[11:43] <T-Bone> s/should/will/
[11:43] <Mithrandir> dpatch could fairly easily be extended to use a arch-specific list of patchs if that exists.
[11:43] <fabbione> i realized how bad it is to add per image patches
[11:43] <fabbione> Mithrandir: it does already, but not like we need it
[11:43] <fabbione> Mithrandir: that would require more work from us
[11:43] <T-Bone> and it would break "one source to rule them all", if i get it right
[11:44] <fabbione> T-Bone: no.. it won't break that, but it gets messy to maintain afterwards
[11:44] <fabbione> T-Bone: just checkout the experimental branch i did for xen
[11:44] <fabbione> and look at it
[11:44] <fabbione> you will understand yourself what i mean
[11:44] <T-Bone> fabbione : err, so you consider that building different kernels with different patchsets doesn't break "build all on the same source" ?
[11:44] <T-Bone> ok will do
[11:45] <fabbione> we need to redesign the build system from scratch in a more neat way
[11:45] <T-Bone> like, *again*? ;o)
[11:45] <fabbione> T-Bone: no. because you grab one source and build everything out of it
[11:45] <fabbione> T-Bone: it is still the same source
[11:45] <T-Bone> fabbione : ah ok. My understanding was that we wanted all kernels to be exactly the same
[11:46] <fabbione> T-Bone: that is not possible due to kernel upstream
[11:46] <fabbione> if i had to apply to your concept, hppa wouldn't exist
[11:46] <fabbione> so better you accept my view of it :)
[11:46] <T-Bone> fabbione : well, not really: take for example the hppa mess, if you build everything but hppa on the current package set, then add the hppa patches to build hppa images, hppa kernels have several *major* changes in them
[11:47] <T-Bone> fabbione : yeah you're right ;)
[11:47] <fabbione> T-Bone: that's because hppa is not fully merged upstream
[11:47] <T-Bone> fabbione : my understanding is that we would only work on fully merged architectures :)
[11:47] <fabbione> baz rm debian/*/hppa/*
[11:47] <T-Bone> but i can see this is wrong in the long run
[11:47] <fabbione> ah shit.. wring window
[11:47] <T-Bone> lol
[11:47] <T-Bone> fabbione : our current patchset to upstream is <200k now
[11:47] <T-Bone> uncompressed
[11:48] <fabbione> T-Bone: no.. the issue of having one source is for security related reasons
[11:48] <T-Bone> fabbione : yeah i got that as well
[11:48] <fabbione> one upload will trigger the rebuild everywhere
[11:48] <fabbione> it is just to be more practical
[11:48] <T-Bone> fabbione : but then, if we differentiate patches accross kernel builds, it's gonna be quite painful to track this, no?
[11:48] <T-Bone> s/this/security changes/
[11:48] <fabbione> T-Bone: can you please checkout the branch, look at it and read again what i said?
[11:49] <fabbione> security changes go in for everybody
[11:49] <T-Bone> i'd love to, i'm at work atm... :P
[11:49] <fabbione> if there is a security patch specifically for hppa
[11:49] <fabbione> it is not my business to get it in...
[11:49] <fabbione> there are porters for a reason
[11:49] <T-Bone> eww
[11:49] <fabbione> that should take care of it
[11:49] <T-Bone> nogood
[11:49] <fabbione> + usually security fixes are upstream the same day
[11:49] <fabbione> so
[11:49] <fabbione> i don't really see this problem you are trying to create
[11:50] <T-Bone> if there isn't one guy knowning everything about security fixes, this is likely to cause issues in the long run
[11:50] <fabbione> really.. this is not a problem
[11:50] <T-Bone> right
[11:50] <T-Bone> agreed
[11:50] <T-Bone> my idea was that some arch-specific patches might introduce security issues. But then again it's a porter's issue
[11:50] <fabbione> exactly
[11:51] <fabbione> plus..
[11:51] <fabbione> our kernel is already doomed in that direction
[11:51] <T-Bone> and i bet that with an efficient patching system in the kernel build, this should be easy to track down :)
[11:51] <T-Bone> so yes, let's have such an efficient patching machine :)
[11:51] <fabbione> already the fact that we apply an external patch for an i386 driver, it will make the i386 kenrel different from the others
[11:51] <T-Bone> right
[11:52] <fabbione> introducing a security problem for i386
[11:52] <T-Bone> so we don't mind this. Ok, i'll keep that in mind
[11:52] <fabbione> so it's take or leave it basically :)
[11:52] <T-Bone> indeed
[11:52] <dilinger> anyone particularly good w/ sparc asm?
[11:52] <T-Bone> i was really confused by what i thought was an attempt to build all kernels from the exact same bits ;)
[11:53] <fabbione> dilinger: meh.. no
[11:53] <fabbione> and i need to grab some food...
[11:53] <fabbione> bbl
[01:31] <dholbach> what shall i do about the broken powerpc-kernel-2.4?
[01:32] <dholbach> if we don't have any alternative, i'll ask elmo to remove it from the archive
[01:32] <dholbach> please note: i feel *very* uncomfortable with kernel issues/decisions in universe :-/
[01:36] <Mithrandir> did we end up with a kernel that supports i2o stuff on amd64 now?
[01:38] <T-Bone> dholbach : i think this hasn't been discussed enough, unfortunately
[01:38] <T-Bone> (re kernel in universe issues)
[01:38] <dholbach> we should discuss it in the next TB meeting
[01:39] <T-Bone> hmm, i thought there was none before hoary releases?
[01:40] <fabbione> Mithrandir: we did add it a while ago
[01:40] <dholbach> yes... but i'm not sure if we can have a complete consensus in the next 15 hours
[01:40] <Mithrandir> fabbione: hm, ok.  So it should be in the d-i images?
[01:40] <fabbione> dholbach: remove it
[01:40] <dholbach> fabbione: thanks
[01:40] <fabbione> Mithrandir: yes. in the scsi udeb
[01:40] <T-Bone> fabbione : what about all other images then?
[01:41] <fabbione> T-Bone: they will stay
[01:41] <T-Bone> fabbione : what for?
[01:41] <fabbione> T-Bone: read the backlogs in the channel
[01:42] <T-Bone> fabbione : is that the "some users need them" argument?
[01:42] <T-Bone> fabbione : why should i do that when you don't do it yourself, btw?
[01:43] <fabbione> T-Bone: because it has been discussed to death, and for once that i didn't read the backlog yet, you are making a tragedy
[01:43] <T-Bone> i'm not
[01:43] <fabbione> T-Bone: people.ubuntu.com/~fabbione/irclogs/
[01:43] <T-Bone> yeah looking there right now
 fabbione : why should i do that when you don't do it yourself, btw?
[01:43] <T-Bone> could you just point me a the right date please?
[01:44] <fabbione> T-Bone: it has been discussed 2/3 times.. i can't remember the date
[01:44] <T-Bone> fabbione : if you happen to find yourself some time to read yesterdays backlog, you'll notice signficant concern has been raised, not only by me, for a change
[01:45] <T-Bone> one of the biggest being "these kernel are in the hands of MOTUs, and won't be supported"
[01:45] <T-Bone> anyway, i guess i'm lacking crucial elements, reading the logs
[01:47] <fabbione> T-Bone: at what time you and lamont had the talk?
[01:47] <T-Bone> fabbione : just a 2cents btw, when such a decision is made, it'd be nice to state it on k-t, so that everyone involved is aware of it. Not everybody can follow irc, you see...
[01:47] <fabbione> was i here in logged in the chan?
[01:48] <fabbione> T-Bone: clearly you miss 2 points here
[01:48] <fabbione> 1) kernel-packages -> universe
[01:48] <fabbione> 2) MOTU's are searching advice
[01:48] <fabbione> i expressed my wishes
[01:48] <fabbione> motivating them
[01:48] <T-Bone> at the time your logger was mostly offline. I only see the end of the discussion at 8:16 in april 06's log
[01:49] <fabbione> i don't rule MOTU's decisions
[01:49] <fabbione> and universe is not kernel-team problem
[01:49] <T-Bone> fabbione : your "wishes" are blessed as god's decision, in case you haven't noticed
[01:49] <dholbach> and i'm glad you're giving us the advices, it's just i'm not clever enough to judge
[01:49] <fabbione> T-Bone: yes, i was offline, together with ubuntulog
[01:49] <fabbione> T-Bone: i am not god..
[01:49] <fabbione> i never stated to be.. probably joking...
[01:49] <fabbione> but that's it
[01:50] <T-Bone> i expressed my wishes, have been significantly backed up by lamont and kyle, dholbach agreed to some of my concerns, yet *you* rule... (not that i'm bitter) :P
[01:50] <fabbione> ok if everybody has agreed to kill 2.4
[01:50] <fabbione> go ahead
[01:50] <dholbach> i will gladly put in universe what people want and what works
[01:50] <fabbione> it's fine with me
[01:50] <fabbione> dholbach: kill them
[01:50] <dholbach> NO
[01:50] <fabbione> KILL THEM ALL!
[01:50] <fabbione> KILL THEM ALL!
[01:50] <fabbione> KILL THEM ALL!
[01:50] <dholbach> that's not what i said
[01:50] <dholbach> !
[01:50] <T-Bone> fabbione : look at 08:45
[01:50] <fabbione> YEAH BURN THEM IN THE FLAMES OF HELL!
[01:50] <dholbach> fabbione: calm down :-)
[01:51] <fabbione> dholbach: i am kidding man :)))
[01:51] <dholbach> i know :-)
[01:51] <T-Bone> fabbione : actually you may have the most interesting part in the logs, between 08:22 and 08:45
[01:51] <dholbach> it's just: i feel VERY uneasy about judging kernel stuff
[01:51] <fabbione> T-Bone: yes i read that bit, and still users can't claim support from us, if the packages are in universe
[01:51] <dholbach> i hope our MOTU team will grow soon and much cleverer people can work on that
[01:52] <T-Bone> fabbione : my point is that 1) i see no reason of keeping these in universe (on the ground of point 08:45) and 2) they will confuse our users (same grounds) and 3) if we don't need them let's remove them. Including 2.6 btw
[01:52] <fabbione> dholbach: once we kill 2.4 there will be almost nothing left of kernel stuff in universe
[01:52] <T-Bone> now i'm really open to suggestions, it's just bad that question rises 24h before the release
[01:52] <fabbione> T-Bone: i told dholbach to kill 2.6 the same morning
[01:53] <dholbach> MorgueCandidates is what elmo is processing atm
[01:53] <T-Bone> fabbione : well, then we all agree, what the fuck are we fighting for then? ;o))
[01:53] <fabbione> T-Bone: my point one and simple. some users (like me btw) can't run 2.6 everywhere
[01:53] <fabbione> leaving a couple of packages in universe might be handy for the user
[01:53] <T-Bone> fabbione : i tend to think that kind of user will build their own kernel anyway
[01:53] <fabbione> and give him time to evaluate transition to 2.6
[01:53] <fabbione> T-Bone: not really
[01:53] <Lathiat> T-Bone: alot of people don't anymore
[01:54] <T-Bone> fabbione : in that view, leaving just source is enough, my guess
[01:54] <fabbione> T-Bone: that's a bad assumption
[01:54] <T-Bone> fabbione : ok describe why youo can't run 2.6?
[01:54] <fabbione> T-Bone: yes, but in out archive there cannot be source without binary afaik
[01:54] <T-Bone> ah
[01:54] <dholbach> i agree: keeping the images might be handy
[01:54] <T-Bone> sure that's a problem :P
[01:54] <fabbione> T-Bone: lvm/lvm2 issues
[01:54] <T-Bone> dholbach : this is a *bad* idea for the reason i explained yesterday...
[01:54] <T-Bone> fabbione : that's a server issue, right?
[01:55] <T-Bone> fabbione : on servers, usually you want fine tuned kernels, don't you?
[01:55] <fabbione> T-Bone: yes, that is my specific problem
[01:55] <fabbione> T-Bone: you are assuming again
[01:55] <fabbione> look at RH
[01:55] <T-Bone> fabbione : in every company i've been working at, as well as univ, on sensitive servers, home brewed kernels are being run
[01:55] <fabbione> if you touch the kernel, they don't provide support anymore
[01:55] <T-Bone> fabbione : ok you got a point. Yet we're not RH :)
[01:56] <fabbione> T-Bone: i didn't run home made kernels at work
[01:56] <fabbione> i couldnt
[01:56] <T-Bone> fabbione : that's irrelevant for us (support): we don't support universe anyway...
[01:56] <fabbione> T-Bone: i really don't understand why you need to assume what people wants
[01:56] <fabbione> i have a tech issue upgrading to 2.6
[01:56] <fabbione> other people might have to
[01:56] <T-Bone> i'm not assuming. I'm hypothetising
 fabbione : on servers, usually you want fine tuned kernels, don't you?
[01:57] <fabbione> mp
[01:57] <fabbione> n
[01:57] <fabbione> NO
[01:57] <fabbione> i don't
[01:57] <fabbione> i just need a kernel that works
[01:57] <T-Bone> fabbione : so instead of having users use their home brewd kernels, you want to let them use untested, unreviewed, unsupported kernels randomly built (and not security updated) by the buildds?
[01:57] <fabbione> and 2.6 doesn't on my machine
[01:57] <fabbione> (sorry for the CAPS)
[01:58] <fabbione> T-Bone: dude.. do you realize that 99% of the people outthere don't even know what the kernel is?
[01:58] <T-Bone> fabbione : excuse me if i'm rude, but asking for something for our users based on *your* needs looks much like an assumption to me, if not worse :P
[01:58] <T-Bone> fabbione : hell yes. those should be running supported kernels
[01:59] <T-Bone> fabbione : if they can't, either they have very specific hardware, and know what kernel is (otherwise they're fucked up), or we have a problem with our kernel, and shuold fix it. Don't you agree?
[01:59] <fabbione> T-Bone: dude.. you clearly 1) can't get a general picture 2) keep indicating me as the only one in this world, given that i explained to you that i have one specific problem, likewise other people do
[02:00] <fabbione> T-Bone: you are making assumptions again. Having specific hw doesn't give you kernel knowledge and viceversa
[02:00] <fabbione> and this discussion is not going anywhere
[02:00] <dholbach> i want to end the discussion for me and state: 1) it's ok for me to include something, somebody else needs and has tested 2) i just have to trust, since i'm not clever enough
[02:00] <T-Bone> fabbione : you have answered none of my two arguments: 1) the un-everything-ness of the universe kernels, 2) our need of supporting our users
[02:00] <fabbione> dholbach: kill all kernel from universe please
[02:01] <fabbione> T-Bone: you keep asking nonsence questions.. therefor you get no answers
[02:01] <T-Bone> fabbione : how comes lamont and kyle both understood my concerns and answered them then?
[02:01] <dholbach> fabbione: honestly: i'll keep it and have NO problem with that
[02:02] <T-Bone> fabbione : do we have an italian/french communication issue? Please send me some wine! :)
[02:02] <fabbione> dholbach: the kernel-team has agreed on killing them and it is fine by me
[02:02] <dholbach> fabbione: elmo is just killing a HUGE amount of packages - i will have a look at what's left later, ok?
[02:02] <fabbione> T-Bone: i did write some reasons why we can keep unsupported kernels in universe. tho you didn't get them trying to circunventing them with other arguments.
[02:03] <T-Bone> fabbione : i'm not cicumventing, really not.
[02:03] <T-Bone> +r
[02:03] <fabbione> dholbach: if something is left, please kill it
[02:03] <T-Bone> at least this is not my goal
[02:04] <T-Bone> i'm really trying to either understand your point or try to make you understand mine, so that we can reach an agreement. Which is the base of "discussion", as Socrates means it ;] 
[02:04] <fabbione> dude.. i understand your point to a certain degree
[02:04] <fabbione> packages in universe have NO support
[02:04] <T-Bone> that's it
[02:05] <fabbione> so what is your problem to have a 2.4 source/binary around to help transitions and users like me?
[02:05] <T-Bone> and i should add: if a user can install his box with install cds, he *shouldn't* (in the best and ideal case) need the other kernels
[02:05] <T-Bone> fabbione : because how are you going to manage to have these users upgrade?
[02:05] <fabbione> T-Bone: you are assuming that people always install from scratch :)
[02:06] <T-Bone> fabbione : i'm assuming that those who don't know what they do (and they'd really better do :)
[02:06] <fabbione> i have my server running on experimental for almost 5 years now
[02:06] <T-Bone> fabbione : of course, but that kind of attitude isn't Mr Foo's one... :)
[02:07] <fabbione> T-Bone: we do support upgrades from woody.. you know that, don't you?
[02:07] <T-Bone> and you were telling me about users who don't know what kernel is. These don't run experimental, i hope
[02:07] <T-Bone> i do
[02:07] <T-Bone> i'm just wondering:
[02:07] <T-Bone> if someone keeps using a debian kernel on ubuntu,
[02:07] <T-Bone> when/how will s/he move to the Ubuntu supported kernel?
[02:08] <fabbione> IF (and i am assuming now)
[02:08] <T-Bone> have we tested such a transition?
[02:08] <fabbione> i was an almost clueless user
[02:08] <fabbione> T-Bone: yes i did test it with warty
[02:08] <fabbione> first i would have upgraded to warty/hoary
[02:08] <fabbione> and see what was there
[02:09] <T-Bone> fabbione : dude, is your testing really enough to make sure it works? we're talking about corner case users who can't run stock kernel off hands, right? :P
[02:09] <fabbione> noticing the 2 or more new entry in the boot menu
[02:09] <T-Bone> go ahead
[02:09] <fabbione> i would have ask for help/suggestion or something
[02:09] <fabbione> (note i am considering the average luser here)
[02:09] <T-Bone> ("average user" is such an interesting concept ;] )
[02:10] <fabbione> and i would have been told: hey dude.. test 2.6.. if it doesn't work file a bug and keep using 2.4
[02:10] <dholbach> ok, here goes MOTU decision: people who want to have such a 2.4-kernel will have to 1) enable universe, 2) know what a kernel is - i assume at that stage they know how to select the 2.6 kernel in lilo to get everything back -- we trimmed the source package count down to 5-6 kernel source packages (patches, images) in universe and i feel comfortable, if they make 1-2 users on the planet happy
[02:10] <T-Bone> fabbione : and please tell *where* in your process are universe kernels needed?
[02:10] <T-Bone> fabbione : upgrading means you can keep the debian one
[02:10] <T-Bone> fabbione : it will show in "orphaned/removed" in aptitude,
[02:11] <T-Bone> which is a *very good hint* the user should try to move away
[02:11] <dholbach> i think our user-base is too diverse to make general decisions
[02:11] <fabbione> that is exactly why you don't want them to disappear
[02:11] <fabbione> if they purge them by miskate
[02:11] <fabbione> and the new kernel doesn't work for them
[02:11] <fabbione> bam
[02:11] <fabbione> you are doomed with a user: "Hey ubuntu destroyed my machine"
[02:11] <dholbach> with packages like kudzu on the loose, a 2.4 kernel doesnt hurt
[02:12] <T-Bone> i think they do, but i know some may think otherwise and ack it
[02:12] <fabbione> T-Bone: exactly.. someone might notice.. others won't
[02:12] <fabbione> we don't know
[02:12] <T-Bone> fabbione : i must confess not knowing aptitude enough to figure out how easy it is to purge something by mistake
[02:12] <fabbione> T-Bone: i think synaptic has it by default...
[02:13] <fabbione> dholbach: thanks for the info :)
[02:13] <T-Bone> fabbione : purging orphaned package??!
[02:13] <fabbione> dholbach: btw.. for breezy we can kill the rest..
[02:13] <dholbach> fabbione: i feel comfortable with that
[02:13] <fabbione> T-Bone: i have no clue really.. i still play dpkg -i
[02:13] <T-Bone> fabbione, dholbach : please confirm that all 2.6 kernels are removed from universe (i want to make that clear)
[02:14] <dholbach> T-Bone: elmo is processing the list
[02:14] <fabbione> T-Bone: but when i dist-upgraded from warty i THINK  i saw a bunch of purges
[02:14] <dholbach> T-Bone: i will confirm after that
[02:14] <T-Bone> fabbione : i really doubt that's the case. Truth told, I think your example doesn't hold ;)
[02:14] <T-Bone> fabbione : wow, that'd be very new to me, and a good thing to know :P
[02:14] <dholbach> do you think we can discuss the academic arguments in the breezy release cycle?
[02:14] <fabbione> T-Bone: houneslty... i used synaptic 2 times in my life
[02:15] <T-Bone> fabbione : i use apt-get ;)
[02:15] <fabbione> dholbach: i don't think there will be any need
[02:15] <T-Bone> dholbach : that would certainly be a better time i guess
[02:15] <Mithrandir> oh fun.
[02:15] <Mithrandir> 14:15 < Ueland> error: unknown bus, please report to
[02:15] <Mithrandir>                 <linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> 'i2o'
[02:15] <T-Bone> as fabbione said though
[02:15] <fabbione> our libc6 will not support 2.4
[02:15] <T-Bone> lol
[02:16] <T-Bone> fabbione :so how are you going to help users transitionning, dude? ;o)
[02:16] <fabbione> so the users had 1 year / 2 releases to upgrade
[02:16] <fabbione> or learn how to build their kernels
[02:16] <T-Bone> or trash their buggy hardware ;)
[02:16] <fabbione> seriously.. it's not only question of hw :(
[02:17] <fabbione> i did a mistake creating my lvm/raid setup 5 years ago
[02:17] <fabbione> inexperience mainly
[02:17] <T-Bone> ah... shit happens :P
[02:17] <fabbione> and i landed with something i can't move to 2.6 easily, due to the requirements i have from the server
[02:17] <T-Bone> what kind of mistake, so that i know how to avoid it? :)
[02:17] <fabbione> T-Bone: yeah...
[02:17] <dholbach> http://people.ubuntu.com/~james/paste/001.txt
[02:17] <fabbione> T-Bone: now you cannot make it anymore
[02:17] <fabbione> since they changed the default for vgcreate
[02:18] <T-Bone> dholbach : all these should be killed
[02:18] <T-Bone> straight and hard
[02:19] <dholbach> any ++ from anybody else?
[02:19] <T-Bone> i can detail why if needed
[02:20] <T-Bone> dholbach : do you want me to argument? :)
[02:21] <dholbach> no, but if 2 of you say: go, kill, it's ok for me :-)
[02:21] <T-Bone> boot-floppies was used on woody (the installer): pointless.
[02:21] <T-Bone> i rule ia64, i say linux-kernel-di-ia64 must die ;)
[02:22] <T-Bone> and the others are a bunch of deprecated packages not used anymore
[02:22] <dholbach> ok, they go
[02:23] <T-Bone> they are all supplementary to some (arch-specific) 2.4 packages
[02:23] <T-Bone> (mostly i386, afaict)
[02:23] <T-Bone> given we just agreed to kill those... ;] 
[02:24] <fabbione> dholbach: i finished the review of the 2 packages
[02:24] <fabbione> meh 3
[02:25] <dholbach> fabbione: added a note to MOTUNewPackages?
[02:25] <fabbione> dholbach: yes
[02:25] <dholbach> fabbione: thank you so much!
[02:25] <fabbione> no problem
[02:25] <T-Bone> btw, to those of you interested in the recent RCM issues in linux kernel community, here's an interesting article: http://kerneltrap.org/node/4966
[02:26] <fabbione> T-Bone: 2 days old news kid :)
[02:26] <T-Bone> fabbione :depends on your TZ
[02:26] <T-Bone> fabbione : but yeah, sorta :)
[02:26] <fabbione> T-Bone: we are in the same TZ
[02:27] <T-Bone> well it's 1 day and 14h old then ;)
[02:38] <dholbach> http://people.ubuntu.com/~james/paste/002.txt
[02:41] <zul> hey
[02:42] <dholbach> hey zul
[02:42] <zul> whats up?
[02:42] <fabbione> hey zul
[02:42] <dholbach> opinions on: http://people.ubuntu.com/~james/paste/002.txt and http://people.ubuntu.com/~james/paste/003.txt
[02:42] <dholbach> elmo is just _trying_ to remove stuff from universe
[02:42] <dholbach> and i'll need your input
[02:42] <zul> just reading the backlog now
[02:42] <T-Bone> dholbach : i don't know these. My guess is they need to be reworked to work with our kernel system. and linux-kernel-di-i386 can be removed
[02:43] <T-Bone> dholbach : they won't probably work without some love, so maybe they're best removed?
[02:43] <T-Bone> as of xen, you want to ask fabbione 8)
[02:43] <zul> ah...i see fabbione hasnt taken his pills today
[02:44] <zul> 	fabbione	KILL THEM ALL!
[02:44] <zul> 01:50	fabbione	KILL THEM ALL!
[02:44] <zul> 01:50	fabbione	KILL THEM ALL!
[02:44] <zul> 01:50	dholbach	that's not what i said
[02:44] <T-Bone> zul : LOL ;)
[02:45] <dholbach> other views?
[02:45] <zul> still reading
[02:46] <zul> i have to read with like moving my mouth
[02:46] <dholbach> zul: try it... if it works better... :-)
[02:51] <lamont> T-Bone: don't confuse my answers with agreeing with you.
[02:51] <lamont> the kernel isn't special
[02:51] <fabbione> linux-source-2.6.12 (2.6.11.90-1) breezy; urgency=low
[02:52] <fabbione>   * New upstream release (based on 2.6.12rc2):
[02:52] <fabbione>     - Update debian/control.stub.
[02:52] <fabbione>     - Modify debian/rules in several sections to cope with a version different
[02:52] <fabbione>       from the one specified in the package name.
[02:52] <fabbione>     - Add empty ChangeLog-2.6.11.90.
[02:52] <fabbione>     - Remove ChangeLog-2.6.10.
[02:52] <fabbione>     - Clean up debian/patches/00list*. 00list-1{,.hppa} are pristine copies 
[02:52] <T-Bone> lamont : i didn't say you agreed, did i? I said you understood
[02:52] <fabbione>       from the previous release.
[02:52] <fabbione> this is the first cut
[02:52] <zul> sweetness i can start working again ;)
[02:52] <fabbione> zul: not yet.. i will need a few more commits and to publish the orig for you to start working
[02:52] <T-Bone> lamont : FYI, we're getting very close to 94% ;)
[02:54] <zul> For the universe stuff couldnt we just leave the kernel-source for 2.4 and say to the user if it doesnt work compile it yourself (as a compromise)
[02:55] <T-Bone> zul : you haven't read backlog hard enough :P
[02:55] <dholbach> what about the lists (http://people.ubuntu.com/~james/paste/002.txt and http://people.ubuntu.com/~james/paste/003.txt)?
[02:55] <zul> T-Bone: meh...i just got up like an hour ago
[02:56] <zul> T-Bone: i see where you are coming from and i see where fabbione is coming from im just trying to think of a compromise
[02:56] <T-Bone> zul : i already mentioned that compromise and it can't be done: fabbione explained we can't distribute source without binaries
[02:56] <zul> heh...this can obviously be killed linux-kernel-di-i386/universe
[02:56] <zul> okie dokies 
[02:57] <T-Bone> zul : anyway, please don't interfere with the agreement fabbione and i have reached 8))
[02:57] <lamont> zul: that's what we do for universe right now
[02:57] <dholbach> killed cpqarrayd, gfs-kernel and gnbd-kernel as well
[02:58] <fabbione> gfs?
[02:58] <T-Bone> http://buildd.slashdirt.org/logs/mkhppa3/lkcdutils_6.0.0-2_20050407-0834 <- i love this one
[02:58] <fabbione> what version is that?
[02:58] <fabbione> well nevermind.. i can grab it from debian
[02:58] <fabbione> if it is global filesystem from rh, we want it
[02:59] <T-Bone> "mkdir: cannot create directory `/home/micah': Permission denied"
[02:59] <T-Bone> that DD must have been on *very hard crack*
[03:00] <fabbione> i am preparing the orig now zul...
[03:00] <fabbione> it might take sometime before it's up
[03:02] <zul> fabbione: no probs im at work so i havent to concentrate on work stuff today..how am i dong so far? ;)
[03:02] <T-Bone> syntax error in zul's statement all over the place ;] 
[03:03] <zul> i havent loaded the punctunation module yet..
[03:04] <zul> need...to...wake..up
[03:04] <T-Bone> zul : HOW'S THE HEAD? 8)
[03:05] <zul> fine...but still not awake..
[03:05] <zul> oh my team made the finals of the league im in
[03:06] <T-Bone> zul : that had to happen when you were asleep, right? 8)
[03:06] <zul> nope...the other team didnt show up
[03:07] <T-Bone> lol
[03:10] <T-Bone> erm, joining #u-motu right now isn't very easy :(
[03:10] <T-Bone> oops
[03:10] <T-Bone> wrong window
[03:11] <zul> heh...do you need a tutorial on how to use irc?
[03:12] <T-Bone> zul : no. But i'd make good use of a tutorial on how to properly kick your nuts 8)
[03:12] <zul> just make sure you hit them fair and true
[03:13] <T-Bone> oh i will, believe me 8)
[03:14] <zul> fabbione: just let me know when they are up
[03:14] <T-Bone> you sick-psycho ;)
[03:14] <zul> you sick perv :)
[03:15] <fabbione> zul: yeah, i am cleaning up the last bits
[03:15] <zul> what does your gf have to say about that
[03:15] <T-Bone> my last gf said i was a perv, but she found it nice and normal, seemingly 8)
[03:16] <zul> T-Bone: last no current?
[03:17] <T-Bone> i don't have a regular current one. I'm not an old married geezer you see? ;)
[03:18] <zul> ah...just bring it out im making my shitlist today :)
[03:18] <T-Bone> tssks
[03:30] <fabbione> fabbione@gordian:/usr/src/wartydevel/kernel/crack$ scp linux-source-2.6.12_2.6.11.90* rookery.warthogs.hbd.com:public_html/.
[03:30] <fabbione> it's on the way
[03:30] <fabbione> zul: do you know what is the next step?
[03:31] <fabbione> no i will tell ya :)
[03:31] <fabbione> you are too sleepy :)
[03:31] <zul> gee would it be this linux-source-2.6.12_2.6.11.90-1.diff.gz 
[03:32] <fabbione> nah it's copying diff.gz, dsc and orig
[03:32] <fabbione> you will need them together with the debian/ from baz
[03:32] <zul> ok cool
[03:33] <zul> ill try it this afternoon dpending on how this goes here
[03:33] <fabbione> if you don't want to end up spending another day trying to understand why a make clean will wipe debian/
[03:33] <fabbione> zul: and don't run a make clean..
[03:33] <zul> k
[03:33] <fabbione> there is more stuff that needs to be done before that
[03:35] <zul> ls
[03:35] <zul> bah
[03:35] <fabbione> yeah right :)
[03:49] <fabbione> ok.. the orig & co are on people.u.c/~fabbione/
[03:49] <fabbione> REMEMBER NOT TO USE THE CLEAN TARGET
[03:49] <zul> sweet..
[03:49] <zul> yep..
[03:49] <fabbione> next step is:
[03:49] <fabbione> disable all the patches from 00list-1
[03:50] <fabbione> and slowly start checking one at a time
[03:50] <fabbione> some of them are upstream
[03:50] <fabbione> and needs to be killed
[03:50] <fabbione> other updated
[03:50] <fabbione> other rediffed
[03:50] <fabbione> now.. i suggest that you kill all the known patches that come from documented external drivers
[03:51] <fabbione> they are all mostlikely obsoleted
[03:51] <fabbione> that will reduce the number of a few zillions
[03:51] <zul> heh
[03:51] <fabbione> after that check what is left that has been applied upstream
[03:51] <fabbione> and stop there
[03:51] <zul> ok will start this afternoon then
[03:51] <fabbione> it's already a lot of work
[03:51] <fabbione> that we cannot fork unfortunatly
[03:52] <fabbione> not without a good coordination
[03:52] <fabbione> zul: also.. your archive was offline a few days back...
[03:52] <fabbione> do you plan to put it back online?
[03:52] <zul> yeah..we had a lot of power outages the past couple of days
[03:52] <zul> should be up now
[03:52] <fabbione> ok
[03:53] <zul> frig...
[03:53] <zul> stupid dyndns
[03:54] <zul> uh...it should be up today :)
[03:55] <fabbione> zul: ok.. tomorrow i will be online later than usual
[03:55] <fabbione> if you can either add your archive to the topic
[03:55] <fabbione> or send me a mail
[03:55] <fabbione> or do in such a way that somebody here can tell me where to merge from :)
[03:56] <zul> sure..
[03:56] <fabbione> i need some rest now...
[03:56] <fabbione> it's like 10 hours that i am here no stop
[03:56] <fabbione> bbl
[03:56] <zul> k...sleep tight :)
[03:57] <fabbione> nah.. i am not going to sleep
[03:57] <fabbione> i just need to rest
[03:57] <zul> or have some french wine
[04:12] <T-Bone> i'm sure that'd help ;)
[04:27] <zul> heh this is funny we have a contractor who is on  a six day contract and whose boss is not in this week
[04:27] <zul> so she "worked" from home yesterday, and not in today
[04:40] <fabbione> ehhe
[04:40] <T-Bone> is she good? ;)
[04:40] <zul> no everybody hates her like crazy..
[04:40] <T-Bone> LOL
[04:41] <zul> the people who work with her dont want to work with her
[04:41] <T-Bone> schweet
[04:41] <T-Bone> and she's not "physically intelligent" to help that a bit, i suppose? :)
[04:42] <zul> there are no women kernel developers for ubuntu ;)
[04:42] <zul> heh..its an old boys club :)
[04:42] <T-Bone> gosh, i can breathe then ;-)
[04:42] <zul> unelss fabbione hasnt told us something
[04:42] <T-Bone> LOL
[04:44] <zul> fabbione: my site is back up i just have to put stuff there
[04:45] <fabbione> ok
[04:45] <fabbione> no there are no women here.. that i know off..
[04:45] <T-Bone> woot! lamont: 94.06% ;o)
[04:45] <fabbione> T-Bone: is that phase1 or 2?
[04:45] <fabbione> http://kecy.roumen.cz/roumingShow.php?file=architectural_geekery.jpg
[04:46] <fabbione> aahaha
[04:46] <T-Bone> fabbione : what are you calling "phase"? :)
[04:46] <fabbione> first build on top of debian or the second rebuild of hoary on top of hoary?
[04:46] <T-Bone> that's hoary on top of hoary
[04:46] <fabbione> ok so you are making golden debs... 
[04:46] <T-Bone> fabbione : lol at the pic ;)
[04:46] <fabbione> good good
[04:47] <fabbione> daniels: for some reason xorg doesn't detect my monitors :)
[04:47] <fabbione> ops
[04:48] <zul> i like the other pictures on that site..especially the cracks
[04:48] <T-Bone> lamont : we're basically left with kde cruft, ghc6 cruft, and a bunch of broken packages. roughly 250 ones
[04:49] <zul> fabbione: i think im in love http://kecy.roumen.cz/roumingShow.php?file=ridder.jpg
[04:51] <fabbione> zul: i didn't browse the site at all
[04:51] <fabbione> ehehhe
[04:51] <T-Bone> zul : LOL, *that* is ugly ;)
[04:51] <fabbione> looks like T-Bone
[04:51] <T-Bone> fabbione : no way, i can prove it ;)
[04:52] <T-Bone> fabbione : i'm french, remember? I'm not some kind of Viking of the past ;)
[04:53] <T-Bone> lol
[04:53] <zul> its xena
[04:53] <T-Bone> this is completely different. Where do you see a Mehnir here? :)
[04:53] <T-Bone> Menhir, even
[04:53] <zul> asterix and obelix rocks hard
[04:53] <T-Bone> zul : in my memories, xena looked much nicer on TV :)
[04:54] <zul> by belinos and toutatis
[04:55] <T-Bone> tssks
[04:55] <T-Bone> Belenos
[04:56] <T-Bone> you numnuts ;)
[04:56] <zul> these french are crazy
[04:56] <T-Bone> lol
[04:56] <T-Bone> these ROMANS are crazy
[04:57] <T-Bone> zul : see, fabbione is overwhelmed already by our number of 2 ;)
[04:58] <zul> hehe
[04:58] <fabbione> oh shut up you two little piece of choaked meat...
[04:58] <T-Bone> lol
[05:01] <zul> hmmm...i guess linus has stopped used bk
[05:01] <fabbione> zul: yeah apparently
[05:01] <zul> he man sucks
[05:02] <fabbione> uh why?
[05:02] <zul> because he just does 
[05:03] <fabbione> so does T-Bone .. but there is a reason at least.. he is french
[05:03] <zul> that is so true
[05:05] <T-Bone> zul : he stated on lkml that he would immediately cease to use bk
[05:05] <zul> i didnt see that
[05:05] <T-Bone> zul : that's because you don't see everything (read: you're blind): http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/293914
[05:06] <zul> i dont have to take this :)
[05:06] <T-Bone> fabbione : i will not even bother responding with due slappyness to such a low kick ;)
[05:06] <kylem> zul, http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=111280216717070&w=2
[05:07] <T-Bone> kylem : too late already ;)
[05:07] <kylem> heh.
[05:08] <fabbione> T-Bone: have you already finished your ideas?
[05:09] <kylem> question... what are all these odd directories i get when i 'baz update'? ,,changes.1111166685.18992.95/
[05:09] <kylem> more to the point, can i just delete it... :)
[05:09] <fabbione> kylem: did you have some local uncommitted changes?
[05:09] <kylem> fabbione, nope.
[05:09] <fabbione> did you interrupt any operation?
[05:09] <T-Bone> fabbione : which ones? Don't you know i *never* run out of ideas? :)
[05:09] <fabbione> but yes you can delete them safely
[05:09] <kylem> fabbione, don't think so...
[05:10] <T-Bone> kylem : ',,' prefixed files are temp files, iirc
[05:10] <kylem> ok.
[05:10] <fabbione> kylem: for example a baz undo would create a ,,undosomething
[05:14] <T-Bone> fabbione : am i correct in my remembering that ,, files are temporary ones?
[05:15] <fabbione> T-Bone: TTBOMK yes
[05:15] <T-Bone> i don't know that acronym ;l
[05:15] <fabbione> to the best of my knowledge
[05:15] <T-Bone> ah ok :)
[05:16] <T-Bone> ithought this was some kind of displeasing saying of yours... ;)
[05:16] <T-Bone> i feel martyrised ;)
[05:16] <fabbione> T-Bone: you still don't know me..
[05:16] <T-Bone> fabbione : i guess i'd rather not 8)
[05:16] <fabbione> you haven't seen my worst side yet
[05:16] <T-Bone> eww
[05:17] <T-Bone> you're my father?
[05:17] <T-Bone> ;)
[05:17] <T-Bone> you speak through a black breathing mask
[05:17] <T-Bone> and can use the Force?
[05:17] <fabbione> T-Bone: please.. please. you are really pushing me to say stuff i don't want t o:)
[05:17] <T-Bone> of course I am ;)
[05:18] <T-Bone> i'll make the fortune file available tonight i guess. Gonna be fun :)
[05:19] <kylem> the parisc fortunes file is great.
[05:19] <T-Bone> i have some updates for it :)
[05:19] <T-Bone> i'm actively maintaining it, you see :)
[05:20] <zul> ooh...am i in them?
[05:20] <T-Bone> zul : sure
[05:20] <T-Bone> in the ubuntu one that is
[05:20] <zul> cool...its my contribution to open source 
[05:20] <fabbione> i am sure i am there too
[05:20] <zul> besids some other stuff...
[05:20] <T-Bone> 170 Ubuntufortunes
[05:21] <zul> where can i see them?
[05:21] <T-Bone>  grep fabbione Ubuntufortunes | wc -l
[05:21] <T-Bone> 57
[05:21] <fabbione> zul: you can get that on your tomb: "in my life i contributed to opensource with a fortune file's line"
[05:21] <zul> hehe
[05:21] <T-Bone> zul : you can't yet, i said i'll publish them tonight :)
[05:21] <zul> but i want them now..
[05:21] <fabbione> come on T-Bone 
[05:21] <fabbione> put them out now
[05:22] <fabbione> otherwise i won't be able to see them before tomorrow or monday
[05:22] <T-Bone> tssks
[05:22] <T-Bone> ok, i'll make the raw (yet unedited, and not featuring today's fortunes) file online
[05:23] <T-Bone> that'll be my friendly action toward both of you A-holes of the day ;o))
[05:23] <zul> seet...more stuff to slack off with
[05:23] <zul> T-Bone: i didnt start it..you did..
[05:23] <T-Bone> lol
[05:23] <T-Bone> kylem : are we having issues with palinux.e.h.c ? I can't connect...
[05:24] <kylem> i can connect...
[05:24] <T-Bone> ah yes, here it goes. Strange, i got bounced twice
[05:24] <T-Bone> http://parisc-linux.org/~varenet/Ubuntufortunes
[05:24] <zul> maybe its trying to tell you something no french kniggits
[05:25] <T-Bone> can be fed to strfile
[05:25] <T-Bone> zul : when i'm world emperor, i'm going to make you suffer such a pain, you'll beg for being killed ;0)
[05:26] <zul> T-Bone: you forget im married
[05:26] <T-Bone> zul : i can live with that, and make it worse ;)
[05:26] <zul> i can take it
[05:27] <T-Bone> zul : you don't really know me, mind you =] 
[05:28] <zul> well you are going to have to meet my wife when its that time of month...and dont put that in your fortunes file she has the internet as well
[05:28] <T-Bone> LOL
[05:28] <T-Bone> you said that on a publicly logged chan, dude. You're doomed already, fortuning can only help it ;)
[05:29] <zul> im screwed anyways you have a short attention span dont you
[05:29] <T-Bone> a varying one ;)
[06:02] <T-Bone> kylem : just updated theparisc one, enjoy.
[06:44] <zul> heh...Mandriva
[06:45] <lamont> zul: as opposed to Womandriva?
[06:46] <zul> www.mandrakesoft.com
[06:47] <zul> even better http://www.mandrakesoft.com/company/press/pr?n=/pr/corporate/2551
[06:53] <lamont> lol
[07:03] <T-Bone> looks like french companies have a taste for sucky (and often expensive) names post-merger :P
[08:54] <zul> mmm...skittles
[08:58] <jbailey> North American skittles aren't vegan.
[08:59] <zul> they still gimme a buzz though
[09:03] <lamont_r> "Jbailey says sugar not vegan (when mixed with animal fat).  Film at 11."
[09:03] <lamont_r> sorry - couldn't resist
[09:03] <zul> hehe
[09:03] <jbailey> lamont_r: Actually the sad part os that most white sugar is not vegan for the most strict case (which I'm not when I'm out in public)
[09:04] <jbailey> Although in this case I was refering to the gelatine. =)
[09:04] <lamont_r> ah, ok
[09:04] <lamont_r> what's in white sugar in the strict case?
[09:21] <T-Bone> lamont: ROTFL
[09:22] <T-Bone> jbailey: if you take into account that most vegetables are finding nutriments in decompositing bodies, they are not vegan :P
[09:22] <jbailey> lamont_r: Usually ground animal bones to use as a filter.
[09:22] <jbailey> lamont_r: That's the processes that whitens the sugar.
[09:23] <jbailey> T-Bone: I don't know where you garden.  MY garden has no bodies buried in it.
[09:23] <T-Bone> lol
[09:23] <jbailey> T-Bone: The cops look there first...
[09:23] <T-Bone> lol
[09:23] <T-Bone> silly you. Are you looking for every dead bug, rodents, bird and the like? :)
[09:23] <T-Bone> are you cultivating vegetables in actual soil? :)
[09:23] <jbailey> Ah, different class of 'bodies' =)
[09:24] <T-Bone> hohoho
[09:24] <jbailey> download finished, time to start rsync.
[09:24] <T-Bone> compromising heh?
[09:24] <T-Bone> trying to find valid excuses? You pitiful pseudo-vegan of my b*llocks ;}
[09:25] <jbailey> *lol*
[09:26] <T-Bone> jbailey: you *really* handed me the stick to slap you, on that one ;o)
[09:26] <T-Bone> I owe you a [vegan]  beer for that ;)
[09:36] <zul> heh so tomorrow i would be running stable...cant have that can we?
[10:06] <zul> later..