| elkan76 | Hi! | 00:52 |
|---|---|---|
| elkan76 | I 've a doubt, on september 12th an update, drops down my wifi, and i report the bug (#269533), today another update was fixiing the bug (#259816) fix my wifi , but a half hour later it drops down like the first time, i repport this and go tu the second bug tu link them because the work to fix it has effects on my system. I'm using the proposed kernel. | 00:58 |
| philsf | where can I get the kernel 2.6.27, that is mentioned in possibly all kernel related bug reports, for hardy? | 03:10 |
| nullack | Hi kernel team :) Does the intrepid alpha kernel have any debugging code that would slow it down | 03:10 |
| nullack | Im trying to chase down some performance problems | 03:10 |
| nullack | philsf Such a configuration would be unsupported and would need to be compiled by you | 03:12 |
| nullack | philsf Intrepid has that kernel revision but its Alpha software so it comes with the usual caveats | 03:12 |
| philsf | so, the ubiquous message from ogasawara across the bug reports actually calls for intrepid testing, and not just the kernel? | 03:13 |
| nullack | yep, no .27 in hardy | 03:13 |
| philsf | what about the bugs in hardy, won't they be fixed? | 03:13 |
| nullack | They might be as backports | 03:13 |
| philsf | I see, thanks for the info, then | 03:14 |
| philsf | nullack: as a side question, some bugs I subscribe to are considered "fixed" because they no longer appear in intrepid. Shouldn't hardy deserve the fix as well, being LTS? | 03:15 |
| nullack | philsf If the fix works in Intrepid then it might be considered for backporting onto Hardy | 03:16 |
| philsf | nullack: what can I do, as a user, to make it happen? | 03:16 |
| nullack | https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports | 03:17 |
| philsf | well, duh, I should've known better by now :) thanks again | 03:18 |
| wgrant | nullack: No. That's not for backporting fixes. | 03:19 |
| wgrant | Important fixes may be SRUed, but Ubuntu Backports are not for fixing bugs.; | 03:20 |
| nullack | wgrant : Wouldnt a new version of a package be backport? The difference between SRU and Backports isnt clear to me | 03:21 |
| wgrant | SRU is for fixing bugs. | 03:22 |
| wgrant | Backports are for new version. | 03:22 |
| wgrant | Kernels will not be backported. | 03:22 |
| wgrant | Backports will not be granted to fix bugs. | 03:22 |
| nullack | wgrant : So an SRU could involve a version upgrade by fixing a bug? Whereas a backport is to get new features offered in new versions? | 03:23 |
| wgrant | An SRU will involve only the minimal patch needed to fix the bug. | 03:23 |
| wgrant | Unless you are Mozilla. | 03:23 |
| nullack | wgrant : right, thanks mate for helping me understand :) Makes sense from a regression point of view | 03:23 |
| wgrant | Yes. We do not do crazy things like some other distros. | 03:24 |
| philsf | and yet are no so conservative as debian | 03:24 |
| philsf | *not | 03:24 |
| wgrant | With regard to SRUs we are rather close. | 03:25 |
| wgrant | Except that they do them all at once. | 03:25 |
| philsf | is the -updates repo only for SRUs, or are there other kind of updates there? It's a rather dynamic repo there | 03:26 |
| wgrant | -updates is only for SRU. | 03:26 |
| wgrant | +s | 03:26 |
| wgrant | Well, security updates are also copied into there now for various reasons, but they're generally even more conservative. | 03:27 |
| lukehasnoname | bug #59695 | 05:28 |
| nullack | Im trying to chase down some performance problems in Intrepid. Can any kernel folk advise me if the Intrepid Alpha has debug code in it slowing it down? | 05:53 |
| nullack | i.e. The Alpha kernel | 05:54 |
| TheMuso | nullack: I wouldn't think so. I think the debug code for the kernels is in a separate package. | 06:04 |
| TheMuso | However, I am not a kernel dev, so don't know for sure. | 06:04 |
| nullack | TheMuso : Thanks, btw, Im on your PPA for PA, working well | 06:10 |
| TheMuso | nullack: Sounds good, however I think 0.9.10 will be used for intrepid. Too many regressions from other users that need addressing at he alsa level. | 06:11 |
| TheMuso | As well as stream switching, and usb card/speakers issues. | 06:11 |
| nullack | TheMuso : yep thats why having test coverage as wide as possible is important :) | 06:12 |
| TheMuso | nullack: Totally. | 06:12 |
| TheMuso | Maybe for jaunty. | 06:12 |
| persia | Good day. I've some questions about kernel packaging, and hoped someone could direct me. | 15:02 |
| persia | Firstly, I've noticed that the linux-meta package seems to be arch-dependent, rather than arch: all. I wondered if this was due to convenience of packaging with the git tree, or was chosen to meet the constraints of "depending on the latest kernel". | 15:03 |
| persia | Also, I've noticed that the various ports all seem to have linux-$(architecture) as the name of the package. Would it be sensible for an arch-dependent metapackage to also provide "linux" that depends on e.g. "linux-powerpc"? | 15:04 |
| persia | Lastly, I'm wondering how the -meta packages are tracked. Is there a script that pulls them out of git, or are they handled as source packages directly? | 15:04 |
| === chuck__ is now known as zul | ||
| === chuck__ is now known as zul | ||
| === BenC1 is now known as BenC | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!