[01:17] <rikai> Hooray for sky2 causing cpu softlocks. :)
[01:33] <zul> hey
[07:38] <fabbione> BenC: ping?
[07:38] <BenC> fabione: yo
[07:38] <fabbione> BenC: hey dude.. it looks like .20-3-* did drop the obppath patches from davem and me?
[07:39] <fabbione> fabbione@vultus5:/sys$ find . -name "*obp*"
[07:39] <fabbione> fabbione@vultus5:/sys$ 
[07:39] <BenC> I didn't drop any patches
[07:39] <BenC> they got pulled in git, I didn't revert anything
[07:39] <fabbione> WTF
[07:39] <fabbione> and git pull is slow to death as usual
[07:41] <fabbione> this is so fucking annoying
[07:42] <BenC> where did I pull that from?
[07:42] <fabbione> davem
[07:42] <fabbione> he did push it directly to hera
[07:42] <fabbione> or master
[07:42] <fabbione> can't remember
[07:42] <fabbione> i am still pulling git
[07:42] <fabbione> it will take a while as usual
[07:43] <BenC> sparc-2.6.21?
[07:43] <fabbione> yes
[07:44] <BenC> looks like they were never in my tree, but I just pulled it
[07:46] <fabbione> but...
[07:46] <fabbione> but...
[07:46] <fabbione> remote: aborting due to possible repository corruption on the remote side.
[07:46] <fabbione> fatal: early EOF
[07:46] <fabbione> fatal: unpack-objects died with error code 128
[07:46] <fabbione> Fetch failure: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bcollins/ubuntu-2.6.git
[07:46] <fabbione> screw git
[07:47] <fabbione> BenC: can you upload a kernel with these 2 patches pleasE?
[07:47] <fabbione> i really need to finish silo-installer changes ASAP
[07:49] <fabbione> it would be ok for me if i can have the debs builded by monday morning
[07:49] <fabbione> so i can just upload a d-i to catch up the new kernel
[08:18] <fabbione> BenC: it's strange tho.. the whole_disk attr is there
[08:18] <fabbione> and it was coming from sparc-2.6.21 too
[08:18] <fabbione> so it seems only one is missing
[11:25] <fabbione> BenC: i double checked.. the one for the whole_disk is already in. we are missing only the one for the obppath in sysfs
[01:43] <Keybuk> why doesn't the linux-meta version match the kernel ABI version?
[01:44] <Mithrandir> is there a reason why it should, really?
[01:49] <Keybuk> sanity? :p
[01:53] <fabbione> -ENOSUCHTHINGHERE
[04:29] <zul> hiho
[04:30] <kylem> morning
[04:34] <zul> how is it going kylem 
[04:34] <kylem> slow
[04:34] <kylem> didn't sleep well, having a hard time focusing
[04:34] <zul> lay off the coffeee :)
[04:37] <zul> i was going crazy for a sec
[05:12] <zul> muhahha...xen 3.0.4 ported to 2.6.19
[05:18] <_MMA_> Hi BenC.
[05:18] <_MMA_>  joejaxx is getting together the metas for Ubuntu Studio. We are wondering what makes better sense?
[05:18] <_MMA_> To use -lowlatency in our base install or make it a depend of our -audio package?
[05:22] <cjwatson> _MMA_: generally it's best to teach base-installer to install it
[05:22] <cjwatson> _MMA_: you might need to tweak base-installer a bit, and then see how the server CDs do it with preseeding
[05:25] <_MMA_> Ok. Sounds good.
[05:29] <Keybuk> BenC: ping
[05:30] <BenC> Keybuk: ponger
[05:30] <Keybuk> BenC: is there any particular reason why linux-meta for the 2.6.20-4.6 kernel is 2.6.20.3
[05:30] <Keybuk> ?
[05:31] <BenC> Keybuk: I didn't start uploading linux-meta for 2.6.20 until 2.6.20-2
[05:31] <Keybuk> ok
[05:31] <Keybuk> so just an odd inconsistency then :p
[05:31] <Keybuk> there's no LRM for 4.6 yet?
[05:31] <BenC> there should be
[05:31] <BenC> I uploaded it
[05:31] <Keybuk> hmm
[05:31] <Keybuk>  linux-restricted-modules-2.6.20 (2.6.20.1-5) feisty; urgency=low
[05:31] <Keybuk>  .
[05:31] <Keybuk>    * ABI bump for 2.6.20-4.5.
[05:32] <BenC> that should work for -4.6, same ABI
[05:32] <Keybuk> i386 build of linux-restricted-modules-2.6.20 2.6.20.1-5 in ubuntu feisty RELEASE
[05:32] <Keybuk> Status: 	Dependency wait
[05:32] <Keybuk> Missing Dependencies: 	linux-headers-2.6.20-4-lowlatency
[05:32] <BenC> i386 is in dep-wait
[05:32] <BenC> fuck
[05:32] <BenC> Mithrandir: ping
[05:33] <cjwatson> kylem: we do need to be extra-careful about that extra dapper-security change - I don't want there to be more bugs linked to https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/security-update-qa
[05:34] <BenC> cjwatson: I have another dapper kernel patch that I'd like to get an exception on
[05:34] <cjwatson> (because then mdz would kick my ass for saying yes)
[05:34] <BenC> it's actually pretty serious, and is one of those cases where things are broken now, and it can only get better
[05:34] <cjwatson> BenC: is -updates particularly clogged for the kernel at the moment? 'cos I'd prefer to speed that up rather than having too many exceptions via -security
[05:34] <kylem> cjwatson, -updates contains a *lot* of patches, which is why it's taking so long for me to upload
[05:35] <BenC> cjwatson: We never take the kernel from -updates to -security directly
[05:35] <cjwatson> I know
[05:35] <BenC> we process each patch separately
[05:35] <BenC> ok
[05:36] <cjwatson> BenC: I've promoted the -lowlatency stuff
[05:36] <BenC> cjwatson: Plus patches like bug 57265 are causing "cannot install" issues
[05:36] <BenC> cjwatson: Thanks, only the headers needed promoting, not the actual images
[05:36] <cjwatson> the images were due for promotion according to anastacia though?
[05:36] <cjwatson> "cannot install" issues won't be resolved until the next point release anyway
[05:36] <BenC> promotion to main?
[05:37] <cjwatson> yes
[05:37] <cjwatson> so I'm not concerned about fast-tracking installation breakages through -security
[05:38] <cjwatson> images/lowlatency> if that's wrong, please remove linux-image-lowlatency from the supported seed
[05:38] <BenC> cjwatson: There's a special reason for this one though..installation is fixed outside of our control, and putting it in -security will help existing installs
[05:38] <cjwatson> if they can't install due to a busted disk driver, they won't be able to get far enough to upgrade to the fixed kernel, though?
[05:39] <cjwatson> unless you mean upgrades from breezy
[05:39] <BenC> no, I mean a vendor is creating fixed kernels for their customers, and I want -security updates to not break them
[05:40] <BenC> cjwatson: let me forward an email to you
[05:40] <cjwatson> oh, there's an actual vendor involved?
[05:42] <cjwatson> ok, if you're very sure that that return code is correct (I haven't looked at the call stack context), then I guess it's not too bad
[05:42] <BenC> cjwatson: It matches edgy+, which is the only reason I would consider it...this is an upstream patch
[05:45] <BenC> cjwatson: BTW, who requested promoting -lowlatency to main?
[05:46] <BenC> I didn't want it there, because I wanted to be able to just close bugs on lowlatency that aren't reproducible on -generic
[05:46] <BenC> I said from the start that it would not be supported by me
[05:47] <cjwatson> BenC: check bzr annotate for the supported seed?
[05:47] <cjwatson> BenC: I've demoted linux-image-*lowlatency again
[05:50] <cjwatson> BenC: ok, that patch is fine for fast-tracking
[05:53] <BenC> cjwatson: thanks
[05:56] <cjwatson> oh, I see; supported has:
[05:56] <cjwatson>  * %linux-meta
[05:56] <cjwatson> which takes everything from the linux-meta source
[05:57] <cjwatson> we may need to stop doing that :(
[05:57] <cjwatson> and it also has linux-image-debug-*
[05:58] <BenC> yeah, debug and lowlatency images can go in universe
[06:09] <BenC> cjwatson: amd64 and i386 l-r-m went back to dep-wait
[06:11] <cjwatson> BenC: yeah, they should auto-retry after this publisher run
[06:12] <BenC> ok, thanks
[06:45] <Mithrandir> BenC: hi
[06:52] <BenC> Mithrandir: sorry, unping...Colins got it for me
[06:52] <BenC> Colin I mean
[08:27] <BenC> Mithrandir: Ok if I do another kernel upload before Monday?
[08:29] <Mithrandir> BenC: if you nag me or another archive admin so it's in and everything's built by monday, sure.
[08:29] <BenC> Mithrandir: great, thanks
[09:27] <Lure> BenC: is bug 74877 supposed to be fixed in 2.6.20-4? It is not for me (tried it from KDE as well as from console/recovery mode)... :-(
[10:01] <Lure> it looks like fedora 7 will have tickless kernel - any plans regarding this in ubuntu?
[10:44] <BenC> Lure: When it's in mainline kernel, we'll have it
[10:46] <palancar> hello all, i have a quick q about edgy's kernel
[10:47] <palancar> i heard a rumor that ubuntu was going to be adding a low latency pro audio engine in the kernel by default, anyone know if this is true
[10:47] <palancar> ?
[10:50] <gnomefreak> palancar: there is a lowlatency kernel
[10:50] <palancar> do you know if it is built into edgy?
[10:50] <palancar> thanks btw
[10:51] <cjwatson> palancar: no, only feisty, and not by default
[10:51] <palancar> ahhh ok thanks for the info i'll go look that up
[10:51] <palancar> cheers
[11:03] <BenC> "low latency pro audo engine"?
[11:05] <Lure> BenC: I have added some ideas in bug 74877 - I may be completely off though ;-)
[11:17] <lifeless> BenC: around ?
[11:18] <lifeless> I've had a weird thing start happening just from yesterday
[11:20] <lifeless> BenC: I've had my machine suddenly power off with no warning, and my keyboard will stop responding or do various whacky things like inserting ' `' after every character. I haven't dropped or otherwise abused my hardware, so I'm wondering if theres any kernel changes that could be related.
[11:21] <lifeless> I managed to grab /var/log/messages output after one incident, by sshing in when the keyboard was non responsive, and hibernating/resuming it, but it was not enlightening for me.
[11:21] <lifeless> BenC: any thoughts ? worth filing a bug, or should I complain to Dell about hardware ?