[00:44] <BenC> lamont: newer == better, IMO
[00:44] <BenC> No idea what is in the ubuntu changes though
[00:46] <lamont> the current changes are using tcl8.4 instead of 8.5 (could proabbly chnage for intrepid??) and dropping the cvsps depends (universe)
[00:46] <lamont> I was curious so I looked
[00:46] <lamont> if I get bored tonight, maybe I'll prepare a merge to pester folks with
[00:46] <lamont> just wanted you to have a chance to say "nonono" if you wanted to, before i worked.
[09:26] <qense> I've got a bug with a patch for ubuntu-modules inside a comment: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24/+bug/196811
[09:27] <qense> Do you think you can use it?
[09:27] <qense> The patch comment: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24/+bug/196811/comments/16
[12:37] <gnomefreak> what are the general rules for backporting kernels? AFAIK its a big no but would like it confirmed for someone here
[16:48] <BenC> gnomefreak: yeah, big NO
[16:48] <BenC> gnomefreak: we've considered it, but never justified the time and testing it would take
[16:48] <BenC> gnomefreak: that may change for hardy (LTS) if we find it is warranted at some later point
[16:49] <gnomefreak> BenC: thanks if i see the bug again ill let them know that its not gonna happen :)
[16:50] <gnomefreak> its a driver IIRC that the bug is about but it requires kernel backport someone added but ill be back later and look at it
[20:14] <soren> mjg59: You're probably most likely to know this: Is the wattage reported by powertop reliable? I can get my laptop to report under 10W, which is only around twice that of my NSLU2, which sort of brings its usefulness/wattage ratio into question.
[20:15] <soren> ...or does it not actually represent the "real" power consumption (i.e. what I will be billed by the power company)?
[21:43] <mpetersen> Can anyone tell me the best way to build a kernel module package that will replace a linux-ubuntu-module (specifically drbd 0.8 to 0.8.2)  I built the package no problem, but I have to either --force-overwrite to install or end up with 2 drbd.ko modules?  
[23:07] <BenC> mpetersen: put the other module in /lib/modules/`uname -r`/updates/ and it will override the one in lum
[23:10] <mkrufky> !
[23:10] <mkrufky> i wish i knew that 
[23:11] <mkrufky> BenC: i can tell the v4l/dvb build system to install modules to THAT location if it detects an ubuntu dir
[23:11] <mkrufky> ...that might help users that want bleeding edge driver support without worrying about trashing LUM or whatever's in-tree
[23:18] <BenC> mkrufky: it's default for module-init-tools to handle that (IOW, not ubuntu/debian specific)
[23:19] <mkrufky> thats very good to know -- i was previously not aware of that
[23:19] <mkrufky> perhaps v4l/dvb should install to that location for everybody
[23:19] <mkrufky> ....that would have avoided all the cx88 / saa7134 complaints after that alsa issue was addressed
[23:28] <BenC> mkrufky: just remember, that's where lbm installs them too (which is how we can override drivers ourselves)
[23:30] <mkrufky> hmm... "lbm" ?
[23:30] <mkrufky> apparantly thats a popular acronym
[23:32] <BenC> linux-backports-modules
[23:32] <mkrufky> i should have known
[23:32] <mkrufky> lol
[23:32] <mkrufky> i will leave v4l/dvb as it is 
[23:41] <mpetersen> BenC: so 'install -m644 -b -D drbd/drbd.$(KO)o $(CURDIR)/debian/$(PKGNAME)/lib/modules/$(KVERS)/updates/drbd.$(KO)o' instead of 'install -m644 -b -D drbd/drbd.$(KO)o $(CURDIR)/debian/$(PKGNAME)/lib/modules/$(KVERS)/ubuntu/block/drbd/drbd.$(KO)o' should work?  nifty, I'll try that.