[06:09] <fabbione> morning
[07:43] <fabbione> Mithrandir: so.. why do we need unionfs udebs?
[07:44] <Mithrandir> for the live cd
[07:44] <Mithrandir> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LiveCDFeatures
[07:45] <fabbione> ok
[07:45] <fabbione> i am unfucking the baz repo now
[07:45] <fabbione> to resync with the last 2 kernel uploads
[07:46] <fabbione> and after that we can open devel dances again
[08:44] <Mithrandir> fabbione: so you've added unionfs now?
[08:44] <Mithrandir> or should I?
[08:45] <fabbione> Mithrandir: i am still branching and merging...
[08:45] <Mithrandir> ok
[08:46] <fabbione> Mithrandir: but i can do it.. so don't worry about it
[08:47] <Mithrandir> cheers
[08:50] <fabbione> there
[08:50] <fabbione> baz resynced
[08:54] <Mithrandir> is there anything explaining what the logic in the version string is? :-)
[08:54] <fabbione> pre <- prerelease
[08:54] <fabbione> X <- hidden abi number
[08:55] <fabbione> ,11 <- next deb version
[08:55] <Mithrandir> prerelease as in "not yet uploaded", not "prerelease from kernel.org"?
[08:55] <fabbione> not uploaded yet
[08:55] <Mithrandir> and what do you mean by hidden abi number?  Might break multiple times before next public breakage?
[08:56] <fabbione> hidden abi is a trick to avoid more than a devel branch...
[08:56] <fabbione> example:
[08:56] <fabbione> when we upload 6,10 it means ABI =6 ver 10
[08:56] <fabbione> but during the devel cycle of 11
[08:57] <fabbione> we don't know if the abi is going to break
[08:57] <fabbione> so you can't name the pre branch as 6,11
[08:57] <fabbione> so we hide it
[08:57] <Mithrandir> ok
[08:57] <fabbione> because it might easily land as 7,11
[08:57] <fabbione> look at preX,Y as HEAD
[08:58] <fabbione> where we all commit
[08:58] <Mithrandir> mm
[08:58] <fabbione> once it's ready we merge it mainline--2.6.12
[08:58] <fabbione> from there we branch the tag release and the next pre
[08:58] <fabbione> don't ask me why this schema
[08:58] <fabbione> lamont did create it in early stage :)
[08:58] <fabbione> but clearly merging from other repos is ok
[08:59] <Mithrandir> it makes some kind of sense, I guess.
[08:59] <Mithrandir> if I'm touching stuff, do you prefer me to commit into the kernel-team repo directly or work in my own space and then later merge it when it's ready?
[09:00] <fabbione> Mithrandir: i don't care either way
[09:00] <fabbione> if you keep your repo, you need to ping me manually for merge or merge yourself
[09:01] <Mithrandir> but kernel-team@ is supposed to be kept "working at all times" or are temporary breakages ok?  (I presume the former)
[09:01] <fabbione> but if you commit directly, in most of the cases your changes will be test-builded by me each time i do a change
[09:01] <fabbione> well the former is better, but if it breaks it's not a tragedy
[09:02] <Mithrandir> ok
[09:02] <fabbione> let say that i don't mind "it did break by mistake"
[09:02] <fabbione> but breaking it on purpose i am a bit less happy
[09:02] <Mithrandir> ok
[09:02] <fabbione> or at least tell me in advance :)
[09:03] <Mithrandir> I'm fine with doing on-purpose breakages in my own space. :-)
[09:04] <fabbione> Mithrandir: btw.. unionfs is/should be available on all arches
[09:04] <fabbione> when you have one module only in a list, mark it as ? is pointless
[09:04] <fabbione> because kernel-wedge will fail later with an empty udeb
[09:05] <fabbione> so either is everywhere, or you need to create a per arch list
[09:05] <Mithrandir> ok
[09:05] <fabbione> if there is more than one module and one is available everywhere, than it makes sense to have other optionals
[09:05] <fabbione> but iirc unionfs is available on all our kernel images
[09:05] <Mithrandir> 'k
[09:11] <fabbione> is there a bug assigned for unionfs udebs?
[09:16] <Mithrandir> not to my knowledge
[09:16] <fabbione> ok
[09:17] <fabbione> * update pristine tree (kernel-team@ubuntu.com--2005/kernel-debian--preX,11--2.6.12--patch-1 => kernel-debian--preX,11--2.6.12--patch-2)
[09:17] <fabbione> this is the commit you want to look at
[09:21] <fabbione> Jeg er s travlt og der kun i frst dag p arbejde
[09:25] <Mithrandir> thanks
[10:02] <Mithrandir> should (udeb) modules call depmod -a in their postinst?
[10:02] <fabbione> no idea.. kernel-wedge takes care of creating that stuff
[10:03] <Mithrandir> oh well, apparently it doesn't.  I'll add a workaround in casper, then
[10:04] <fabbione> i think depmod -a is executed after all kernel modules have been downloaded
[10:04] <fabbione> but i dunno about casper...
[10:04] <fabbione> that's anna taking care of that
[10:04] <fabbione> or at least it should
[10:10] <Mithrandir> I've added a workaround and I'll speak with Colin once he's back again
[10:43] <Mithrandir> live cd testing takes tiiiiime
[10:43] <fabbione> eheheh
[10:43] <fabbione> i am doing a test build to create the unionfs udeb
[10:44] <Mithrandir> is unionfs supposed to be the slowest thing since sliced bread?
[10:45] <fabbione> no idea
[10:46] <Mithrandir> I think something I did made debconf unhappy
[10:58] <fabbione> that's not difficult :)
[10:59] <Mithrandir> I need to find something to generate Release files for me.
[11:23] <Mithrandir> apt-ftparchive release seems to work
[11:27] <fabbione> yup.. i use it here :)
[11:48] <fabbione> (breezy-chroot)fabbione@davis:~ $ dpkg -c unionfs-modules-2.6.12-6-powerpc64-smp-di_2.6.12-6.11_powerpc.udeb
[11:49] <fabbione> -rw-r--r-- root/root   1718210 2005-08-15 09:41:53 ./lib/modules/2.6.12-6-powerpc64-smp/kernel/fs/unionfs/unionfs.ko
[11:57] <Mithrandir> cheers
[12:48] <Mithrandir> fabbione: when can we have that in the archive?
[12:49] <Mithrandir> fabbione: I would really like to have it in quickly so we can get some unionfs testing
[12:50] <Mithrandir> since I just uploaded a casper which needs it.
[01:01] <fabbione> Mithrandir: meh... in a few days :/
[01:02] <fabbione> you should have told me it was urgent :/
[01:02] <Mithrandir> fabbione: can I push a new version up with just that small change?
[01:03] <fabbione> Mithrandir: let me see a couple of things...
[01:03] <fabbione> i might be able to upload today...
[01:03] <Mithrandir> that'd be great. :-)
[01:03] <Mithrandir> sorry about the miscommunication
[01:03] <fabbione> yeah but it means pushing a big bunch of security fixes for the next upload...
[01:08] <fabbione> we also need elmo/mdz for NEW love...
[01:08] <fabbione> the new udeb will stall buildd -> archive movement
[01:09] <Mithrandir> argh, true :-(
[01:10] <Mithrandir> can we see when mdz gets around in a few hours?
[01:10] <fabbione> i have no problems with it, but i must leave around 3:30 pm
[01:10] <fabbione> (our time)
[01:11] <fabbione> so i can upload.. (untested) but you need to follow up with mdz
[01:14] <fabbione> anyway.. food now :)
[01:16] <Mithrandir> ok, cheers
[01:18] <mjg59> fabbione: I'm going to have patches to feed you from laptop testing
[01:18] <mjg59> Need to do a bit more back and forth with upstream on a couple first, though
[01:32] <fabbione> mjg59: ok, but don't wait too long
[02:03] <fabbione> we need to update heaps load of stuff in the kernel
[02:03] <fabbione> TheMuso:
[02:03] <fabbione> bah
[02:03] <fabbione> SO :
[02:03] <fabbione> 1) i am going to upload -6,11 basically untested...
[02:03] <fabbione> 2) NOBODY please plan to push URGENT stuff for a few days that needs an upload yesterday
[02:05] <fabbione> push but wait...
[02:15] <Mithrandir> fabbione: actually, you don't need to hurry with the kernel, my casper upload got rejected.
[02:17] <fabbione> Mithrandir: ok!
[02:17] <fabbione> perfect
[02:17] <fabbione> that will give me the time to break it in unreasonable new ways :)
[02:18] <zul> morning
[02:18] <fabbione> hey zul
[02:20] <zul> hey fabbione good vacation?
[02:22] <Mithrandir> fabbione: I'd  love it if you can get it in a couple of days, though.
[02:22] <fabbione> Mithrandir: 2/3 days should be fine.. 
[02:22] <fabbione> zul: more or less
[02:23] <fabbione> zul: i saw you missed me :)
[02:31] <zul> heh...
[02:31] <zul> at little...but not much
[02:31] <chmj> heh 
[02:32] <fabbione> zul: do you have anything that i need to merge?
[02:32] <zul> yeah a couple of bug fixes from bugzilla
[02:33] <zul> its in my arch under ,9
[02:33] <zul> uh...we are at ,11 now?
[02:33] <fabbione> zul: mind to update to ,11 ?
[02:33] <fabbione> yes.
[02:33] <fabbione> .11
[02:34] <fabbione> zul: i did import this morning the 2 uploads that have been done outside baz
[02:34] <zul> ok
[02:35] <zul> sigh gimme a sec
[02:35] <fabbione> take your time
[02:35] <fabbione> i will leave in less than one hour
[02:35] <fabbione> so i will defenetely not upload today
[02:36] <zul> ok good because im at work right now
[02:36] <doko> fabbione: the i386 biarch compilers are in the archive, hint, hint ...
[02:37] <fabbione> doko: are you hinting me that you just offered volunteer to build the kernel?
[02:37] <fabbione> since you got biarch done, you must have more spare time now :)
[02:39] <Mithrandir> is lrm in baz?
[02:39] <fabbione> doko: more seriously.. i need to build an amd64 kernel on i386..
[02:39] <fabbione> right?
[02:39] <fabbione> Mithrandir: nope.. lrm is crap.. we don't want it :)
[02:39] <fabbione> doko: if so.. what is the usecase for it?
[02:40] <Mithrandir> fabbione: ok, since I need to fix it up a bit.  It's br0ken.
[02:41] <fabbione> Mithrandir: eheh ok
[02:41] <zul> fabbione: i just branced and merged my stuff in my arch so my changes are in X,9 in my arch
[02:41] <fabbione> zul: ok... can you just branch to ,11 ?
[02:42] <fabbione> so we work on same versions?
[02:42] <fabbione> it's already confusing enough :/
[02:43] <zul> ok..will do on my break
[02:45] <fabbione> zul: thanks
[02:46] <doko> fabbione: use case is: install i386 on amd64 to have better 32bit compatibility, and be able to do things for 64bit as well, i.e. a chroot
[02:47] <fabbione> you mean installing a 64bit kernel with a 32bit userland?
[02:47] <doko> yes
[02:47] <chmj> is that possible  ?
[02:47] <fabbione> chmj: yes
[02:48] <fabbione> doko: i *THINK* i can do it...
[02:48] <fabbione> but i won't make more than one flavour...
[02:48] <fabbione> only a generic kernel
[02:48] <fabbione> that also means bloating the i386 CD with udebs...
[02:48] <doko> fabbione: sure, that should be sufficient
[02:48] <fabbione> did you mention that to Kamion?
[02:48] <fabbione> because it's another kernel to ship...
[02:49] <doko> no, not yet. how much is that in size?
[02:49] <doko> but at least it's mentioned on our ToolchainRoadmap
[02:49] <fabbione> doko: a bunch of MB
[02:49] <fabbione> changes that needs to be done in the installer
[02:49] <fabbione> and several other things...
[02:50] <fabbione> it's not exactly trivial to do all of the above
[02:50] <doko> ouch
[02:51] <fabbione> and for sure i am not going to do that in the installer while Kamion is away
[02:51] <zul> i...dislike...sybase
[03:11] <fabbione> YAY for the ABI change!
[03:14] <fabbione> -+#define OCFS2_BUILD_VERSION "0.99.17"
[03:14] <fabbione> ++#define OCFS2_BUILD_VERSION "1.1.0"
[03:17] <fabbione> Mithrandir: whatever fix you have for lrm, better you upload it asap
[03:17] <fabbione> next kernel upload will bump the ABI
[03:17] <Mithrandir> fabbione: it's already uploaded.
[03:17] <fabbione> ah cool
[03:19] <fabbione> let see in which wonderful ways the kernel is going to break :)
[03:19] <fabbione> i already noticed a target that goes banana with the debian version made of 2 digits :)
[03:20] <Mithrandir> heh
[03:21] <fabbione> impressive...
[03:21] <fabbione> the force is strong in the bumpabi target...
[03:31] <fabbione> later fellas...
[04:43] <lamont-away> fabbione: I did it that way because I sometimes forget to tag...  But I almost always remember to branch for the new version
[04:43] <lamont-away> or rather, I'm far less likely to release from non-mainline than I am to forget to tag from mainline
[05:39] <doko> fabbione: "x86_64 kernel on i386 system" on u-u ml
[05:46] <zul> hey BenC 
[05:46] <BenC> hey
[09:03] <fabbione> hey BenC
[09:04] <fabbione> welcome to the team
[09:04] <fabbione> BenC: i am going to have dinner and i will be back later (if wife will allow me ;))
[09:04] <fabbione> so we can talk a bit
[09:12] <zul> you are so whipped
[09:12] <zul> but thats ok so am i
[09:15] <BenC> ok
[09:21] <zul> hey lamont 
[09:21] <lamont> hey zul
[09:22] <mjg59>  /win goto #ubuntu-devel
[09:22] <mjg59> Hrngh.
[10:19] <fabbione> re
[10:21] <fabbione> BenC: still around?
[10:23] <fabbione> lamont-away: ping?
[10:23] <fabbione> bah something is wrong with this client
[10:26] <lamont> sup>
[10:26] <fabbione> lamont: did you read my email about util-linux patch?
[10:27] <lamont> not yet
[10:27] <fabbione> ok
[10:28] <lamont> generally, I've tried to not deviate from upstream unless there was good cause.  I haven't really looked at the 200+ line patch, but it seems to be relatively isolated in it's changes... something as invasive as the hurd patch won't be in until upstream takes it.
[10:29] <fabbione> lamont: the patch is much smaller than it looks like
[10:29] <lamont> right
[10:29] <fabbione> due to static int foo it needs to move a function a few lines above
[10:29] <lamont> it looks to be like it just calls the helper for the fs type if said beast exists
[10:29] <lamont> ah, even better
[10:29] <fabbione> exactly
[10:30] <fabbione> so it's pretty simple in itself
[10:30] <lamont> let me look at it tonight and I'll upload to both
[10:30] <lamont> and fire it upstream
[10:30] <fabbione> sure...
[10:30] <fabbione> i think Manish did try to get it upstream with no success
[10:30] <fabbione> or no response from upstream....
[10:31] <lamont> right - upstream has bounced around a bit...
[10:31] <fabbione> who is upstream? 
[10:31] <fabbione> vietse?
[10:31] <lamont> it might be semi-stable, esp since there's a new upstream version now as well
[10:31] <lamont> adrian bunk, iirc
[10:31] <fabbione> ah...
[10:31] <lamont> the debian maintainer before me took it over upstream recently
[10:31] <fabbione> ok
[10:32] <fabbione> btw.. we are bumping ABI for the next kernel upload
[10:32] <fabbione> so if you have something intrusive to push, it's the right time
[10:33] <fabbione> AH GREAT.. the second sparc buildd managed to die in less than 12 hours
[10:36] <lamont> mtg
[10:40] <lamont> just because acpi seems to be intrusive
[10:40] <fabbione> lamont: if you build with ACPI disable, does it boot?
[10:40] <fabbione> bah i come back to talk with Ben and he disappeared :)
[10:48] <BenC> fabbione: ping
[10:59] <fabbione> BenC: pong
[10:59] <fabbione> i tought you left...
[10:59] <fabbione> and i was close to go away :)
[11:01] <BenC> sent you an email
[11:01] <fabbione> yeah i just saw it...
[11:01] <fabbione> i think there are 2 groups of bugs we are interested in..
[11:01] <fabbione> USB and ACPI related
[11:01] <fabbione> USB seems to be a royal pain
[11:01] <BenC> yeah, I saw a lot of ACPI related bugs
[11:01] <fabbione> ACPI is well.. mjg59 crack
[11:02] <fabbione> but it still needs extra love...
[11:02] <fabbione> on the other side we are already in Feature Freeze for Breezy
[11:03] <fabbione> so we need to avoid extra breakage if we can
[11:03] <BenC> right
[11:03] <fabbione> .10 was a crappy release
[11:03] <fabbione> too many patches coming from too many upstreams
[11:03] <fabbione> .12 is looking quite good compared
[11:03] <BenC> are there any show stoppers, or are the issued mainly non-regression things we want fixed?
[11:03] <fabbione> show stoppers none that i am aware of...
[11:03] <BenC> any serious regressions?
[11:04] <fabbione> there is a Serial PATA patch that is sort of a problem
[11:04] <BenC> PATA?
[11:04] <BenC> or did you mean SATA?
[11:04] <fabbione> we had a patch in hoary pulled from atadev for a mistake
[11:04] <fabbione> #13298
[11:04] <fabbione> (and other related bugs)
[11:05] <fabbione> PATA...
[11:05] <fabbione> zul: you need to learn to write Subjects in the email.. see.. i can't even copy paste without looking stupid :)
[11:05] <BenC> hehe
[11:06] <fabbione> the issue is that jgarzik almost crossburned me for inclusion of that patch
[11:06] <fabbione> because it can cause data corruption
[11:06] <fabbione> now everybody is including it and we are not....
[11:06] <BenC> have the libata head patches been tested?
[11:06] <fabbione> and tbh i have no fucking clue who to trust
[11:06] <fabbione> they have been in hoary....
[11:07] <fabbione> right now they are not in breezy
[11:07] <fabbione> because i did expected to find them in .12
[11:07] <fabbione> while they are not...
[11:07] <BenC> anyone besides the submitter able to test things?
[11:07] <fabbione> not from our team
[11:08] <BenC> hardware specific testing....the downside to all this :)
[11:08] <BenC> ok, I'll put that on my list
[11:08] <fabbione> ehhe no shit!
[11:08] <BenC> anything else?
[11:08] <BenC> btw, I have my G4 installed with ubuntu now
[11:08] <BenC> so I can test some ppc32 things
[11:09] <fabbione> ah nice
[11:09] <fabbione> it looks like Jeff didn't make too much noise on redhat bugzilla...
[11:09] <fabbione> but the bug explains that:
[11:09] <BenC> it's UP and only 512megs of ram, which is the stable type system that doesn't seem to show in most reports about ppc
[11:09] <fabbione> a) ghetto pulled the patch from jgarzik HEAD
[11:10] <fabbione> b) we pulled from ghetto
[11:10] <fabbione> c) fedora and redhat did pull it from us
[11:10] <fabbione> d) jgarzik that works for RH got pissed
[11:10] <fabbione> GO FEDORA!
[11:10] <BenC> who/what is ghetto?
[11:10] <fabbione> gentoo
[11:10] <BenC> ah, ok
[11:10] <fabbione> dude.. you should know that by amok ;)
[11:11] <BenC> lol
[11:11] <BenC> Amok, the wiki of IRC
[11:11] <fabbione> so true :)
[11:12] <BenC> haven't worked with ATA much, but libata is a kernel driver library right? (not userspace)
[11:12] <fabbione> yup
[11:12] <fabbione> the patch is much much cleaner than the old one
[11:13] <fabbione> it seems safe to me
[11:13] <fabbione> BenC: did you manage to strech your wings on baz?
[11:14] <fabbione>  http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2005-08/msg00190.html <- (from doko
[11:15] <fabbione> BenC: but if you feel lucky i have a few tons of security bugs for hoary :)
[11:17] <BenC> you can dump as much on me right now as you like...haven't been here long enough to be "busy" :)
[11:17] <fabbione> BenC: ahahah
[11:17] <fabbione> enjoy it till you can
[11:19] <fabbione> BenC: get a bit familiar with the kernel build.. we have a bunch of extra features that debian does not have 
[11:19] <fabbione> like the ABI checker..
[11:20] <fabbione> and some extra madness in debian/rules...
[11:20] <fabbione> like we build all from one source...
[11:20] <fabbione> including udebs
[11:24] <dilinger> fabbione: debian now builds all from one source, btw.. but not udebs.
[11:25] <fabbione> dilinger: uh yeah...
[11:25] <fabbione> sorry forgot about that
[11:33] <BenC> To: bcollins@kernel.org
[11:33] <BenC> sweet
[11:34] <fabbione> ehehhe
[11:35] <fabbione> i have the BAD feeling i just managed to fuck up the sparc buildd....
[11:35] <BenC> impossible, sparc is unfuckable
[11:35] <fabbione> i can manage..
[11:35] <fabbione> :)
[11:36] <fabbione> ah here it is
[11:39] <fabbione> no shit it doesn't show anything on console..
[11:39] <fabbione> the cable is disconnected....
[11:42] <fabbione>  dists/breezy/main/binary-sparc/:Bus error
[11:42] <fabbione> i guess sid is sort of broken...
[11:47] <BenC> what command caused a bus error?
[11:51] <fabbione> apt-ftparchive
[11:51] <fabbione> after a glibc upgrade...
[11:53] <BenC> c++
[11:54] <fabbione> dpkg: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.3.4' not found (required by dpkg)
[11:54] <fabbione> AH CRAP
[11:55] <fabbione> i should have downgraded dpkg first....
[11:55] <fabbione> SEE I CAN MANAGE TO DESTROY SPARC! :)
[11:58] <BenC> ar/tar
[11:58] <BenC> maybe dpkg-deb will work
[11:59] <fabbione> yeah..
[11:59] <fabbione> ar x 
[12:02] <fabbione> night guys
[12:02] <fabbione> cya tomorrow