[02:39] <imbrandon> in the package linux-backport-modules does the debian/config/0list file apply to all arches ?
[02:40] <imbrandon> or must i change debian/config/{i386,amd64,etc etc etc}
[08:05] <kraut> moin
[16:15] <zul> freaking power outages its like living in the 3rd world again
[16:18] <johanbr> zul: You're Canadian, right? We had outages all around Halifax last night.
[16:18] <zul> johanbr: yeah its like a regular occurence in ottawa these days
[16:18] <johanbr> Same here...
[16:22] <zul> and i was just in the middle of a rediffing too
[16:48] <Lutin> kylem: around ?
[18:12] <lamont> BenC: 121978... does a -updates upload of lrm make sense for that?
[18:13] <BenC> lamont: yeah
[18:13] <lamont> BenC: want me to do it?
[18:13] <BenC> lamont: sure
[18:14] <lamont> and is there anything else that should go in?
[18:19] <BenC> lamont: for lrm, there's a bug about invisible files not getting removed in nvidia-glx packages
[18:20] <BenC> Bug #106217
[18:20] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 106217 in linux-restricted-modules-2.6.20 "Hidden file does not get removed when switching from nvidia-glx-new/nvidia-glx-legacy to nvidia-glx causing X not to start due to mismatch of versions" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/106217
[18:20] <BenC> there's a patch
[18:20] <lamont> rock
[18:21] <lamont> applying provided patches is about my effort level today
[18:23] <lamont> BenC: the one that went to the kernel team last week?
[18:25] <BenC> lamont: that bug report has a patch to fix the hidden files remaining
[18:28] <lamont> right
[18:35]  * lamont notes in passing that his definition of "test" for this lrm upload consists of making sure it compiles on gutsy/i386
[18:36] <zul> sounds about right :)
[18:38]  * lamont then needs to debug his laptops video regression with gutsy
[19:11] <zasf> hi all
[19:11] <zasf> I'd like to build latest fglrx driver
[19:11] <zasf> but (like every time) I have to fight with the kernel headers
[19:12] <zasf> it says that the UTS release doesn't match current version: 2.6.22.9
[19:12] <zasf> in gutsy
[19:12] <zasf> why that? should kernel version be 2.6.22-14-generic?
[19:12] <zasf> should NOT kernel version be 2.6.22-14-generic?
[19:21] <Lutin> kylem or BenC : would you mind having a look at bug #129910 please ?
[19:21] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 129910 in linux-source-2.6.22 "tty[1-6] are active but display nothing in Gutsy" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/129910
[19:21] <BenC> zasf: sudo apt-get install linux-headers-generic
[19:22] <zasf> BenC: I have that installed
[19:22] <BenC> Lutin: I don't have time to look at it yet
[19:22] <Lutin> BenC: ok
[19:22] <BenC> zasf: then you have some local problem, or fglrx has a broken build setup
[19:23] <BenC> zasf: maybe force the kernel directory somehow
[19:23] <BenC> Should point to /usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.22-14-generic
[19:23] <BenC> zasf: are you building an old fglrx?
[19:23] <BenC> zasf: and why not use the one we include?
[19:23] <Lutin> (this bug is mistakenly shown as new, it's set as critical on initramfs-tools)
[19:24] <zasf> because 8.42.3 brings aiglx support :D
[19:24] <zasf> It could be my fault, but I make-kpkg modules_image doesn't work
[19:24] <maks_> Lutin: 129910 is a .config story
[19:24] <zasf> The UTS Release version in include/linux/version.h
[19:24] <zasf>      "2.6.22-14-generic" 
[19:24] <zasf> does not match current version:
[19:24] <zasf>      "2.6.22.9" 
[19:25] <BenC> how does it get 2.6.22.9 as the current version?
[19:25] <zasf> I just remove the package and reinstalled it (linxu-headers-generic)
[19:25] <BenC> zasf: what does "uname -a" show?
[19:25] <zasf> # uname -a
[19:25] <zasf> Linux gutsy 2.6.22-14-generic #1 SMP Sun Oct 14 23:05:12 GMT 2007 i686 GNU/Linux
[19:25] <Lutin> maks_: don't catch why :/
[19:26] <maks_> Lutin: fb not build modular, BenC had been asked to revert that change irc
[19:26] <zasf> that happened before in feisty and edgy. I always have to do a combination of 'make-kpkg debian', make scripts, etc to get it working
[19:27] <zasf> and editing include/linux/version.h
[19:27] <BenC> maks_: s/revert/re-apply our local patch/
[19:27] <zasf> I like installing kernel modules with "make-kpkg modules_image" and not using mod-ass
[19:27] <BenC> maks_: stock kernel doesn't let you build vga16fb modular
[19:28] <maks_> /boot/config-2.6.23-rc9-amd64:CONFIG_FB_VGA16=m
[19:28] <Lutin> maks_: it's modular. the issue is that it's not in /lib/modules/whatever/initrd and that the modprobe option used to load the modules in the initrd scripts is different, from what I've read
[19:28] <Lutin> s/initrd/initramfs-tools/2
[19:28] <BenC> maks_: maybe it's vesafb that can't be modular then
[19:28] <BenC> one of them we've been patching forever and a day
[19:31] <maks_> yes we kicked the b0rked Xu vesafb patch :P
[19:34]  * Lutin doesn't understand if what happens to the fb in gutsy is wanted or not
[19:39] <maks_> Lutin my logs have this
[19:39] <maks_> 21:22 <Lutin> maks_: yeah, but here is the point :) in ubuntu the scripts for an
[19:39] <maks_> y *fb) module. which can't be found, as the framebuffer is not a module in gutsy
[19:39] <maks_>  :)21:22 <mjg59> Because somebody changed the config for no obvious reason
[19:39] <maks_> 21:23 <mjg59> BenC: I thought you were changing that back? :)
[19:39] <maks_> #ubuntu-kernel.2007-09-28.log
[19:41] <mjg59> Yes, that was supposed to get changed back
[19:44] <Lutin> maks_: well now that's module, but stilln vesafb and fbcon aren't in /lib/modules/whatever/initrd , which still causes them not to be loaded, unless I'm mistaken
[19:45] <BenC> mjg59: yeah, rtg got the modular patch back in
[19:45] <maks_> check /usr/share/initramfs-tools/hooks/kernelextras
[19:45] <maks_> Lutin also update-initramfs has a "-v" switch
[19:46] <maks_> tells you exactly whats added to initramfs
[19:47] <Lutin> maks_: it tells me it doesn't load it in the initrd
[19:51] <maks_> well then this hook is faulty
[19:54] <Lutin> maks_: not sure ... ${MODULESDIR}/initrd/* refers to /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/initrd, right ?
[19:55] <maks_> Lutin have not the ubuntu hook under the eyes, but below there should be other stuff
[19:57] <Lutin> maks_: after that there's a case which loads some extra modules, depending on the content of ${MODULESDIR}/initrd/
[19:58] <Lutin> hence my question :)
[19:58] <imbrandon> BenC, what is the policy about adding FS's to linux-backport-modules , as the name implied i assume it can be done post release ...
[19:59] <zasf> there must be something wrong in debian/ruleset/modules.mk, since it keeps saying that I have 2.6.22.9
[19:59] <BenC> imbrandon: generally that package isn't for adding things, it's mainly for updating hardware drivers
[20:00]  * Nafallo wants to shrink an xfs :-/
[20:00] <BenC> imbrandon: what fs are you talking about?
[20:00] <zul> fatx probably
[20:00] <imbrandon> fatx , i have been working with zul to get the patches right, its being looked at upstream and fedora has it
[20:00] <Nafallo> hehe. imbrandon wants xbox format still ;-)
[20:01] <imbrandon> Nafallo, well thanks to zul we got it working ;)
[20:01] <zul> BenC: ive added the patch to linux-ubuntu-modules but not backport
[20:01] <Nafallo> boxbuntu :-P
[20:01] <imbrandon> BenC, if not thats cool, i can deal with just trying to get it in for hardy
[20:01] <imbrandon> i was just wondering 
[20:02] <Lutin> maks_: yep, that's it. comes from fbcon and vesafb not being in /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/initrd
[20:03] <BenC> imbrandon: oh, we can get it in for hardy in linux-ubuntu-modules (backports-modules is for post-release updates that are too intrusive for linux-source/lum)
[20:03] <zul> BenC: ill send a patch tonight then
[20:03] <imbrandon> ahh sounds great, i was just hopeing ;) i'll keep poking zul then and we'll just target hardy
[20:04]  * zul is swiss cheese
[20:04] <imbrandon> zul, btw i'll leave that .img file up too incase someone wants to test it without an xbox
[20:04] <imbrandon> at the same url
[20:04] <zul> sure
[20:05] <imbrandon> i was looking too fatx is VERY similar to fat32
[20:05] <imbrandon> lol
[20:05] <imbrandon> to bad it couldent have "just worked"(tm)
[21:55] <JordiR> hello
[21:55] <JordiR> can somebody tell how can I blacklist a restricted driver?
[21:55] <JordiR> I mean, to not be loaded on boot time
[21:56] <JordiR> what is the file that I need to modify?
[22:04] <JordiR> Nobody knows it?
[22:06] <Lutin> /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist-* ?
[22:06] <Lutin> (don't know, just guessing)
[22:08] <JordiR> I've found it googling it's /etc/default/linux-restricted-modules-common 
[22:08] <JordiR> Thanks anyway
[23:47] <tonyyarusso> Hi, I was wondering if someone could please give an answer regarding a) The reasoning behind the changes that caused, and b) The most "proper" way to go about fixing Bug #129910.  (I'd be very grateful to the person who gives me my consoles back...)
[23:47] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 129910 in linux-source-2.6.22 "tty[1-6] are active but display nothing in Gutsy" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/129910
[23:47] <tonyyarusso> (Note the _17_ duplicates too)
[23:51] <Lutin> tonyyarusso: asked the channel before, got no real answer. although the causes of the bug are well known, there doesn't to be a hurry about fixing that bug
[23:51] <tonyyarusso> Lutin: :(
[23:52] <tonyyarusso> Well, I'll wait and see what I can learn for now at least.
[23:53] <Lutin> I'd be happy to work on a patch if needed, and even more to get a real answer. the fact that it got no answer while being set as critical for a month is quite disappointing
[23:53] <mjg59> Remove vga= from your kernel command line
[23:55] <tonyyarusso> mjg59: That results in a completely unusable console resolution.
[23:55] <Lutin> mjg59: or fox on you system, I know. what I don't get is why no one in the team even bothered answering to the bug. if you don't want to support fb, I can't get why don't you tell it and close the bug
[23:55] <Lutin> fix*
[23:56] <tonyyarusso> mjg59: It works for an occasional cp or whatever, but trying to run irssi or anything else meaningful is a lost cause.