[07:22] <dholbach> good morning
[07:26] <YoBoY> hi
[15:10] <bddebian> Boo
[15:21] <hggdh> hum. getting timeouts on lp
[15:24] <pedro_> it's pretty slow for me
[15:26] <wgrant> hggdh, pedro_: It's because Karmic is being initialised, so the DB is fairly well loaded.
[15:26] <wgrant> It shouldn't be too much longer.
[15:55] <BUGabundo> foo
[16:33] <hggdh> wgrant, thanks
[16:52] <thekorn> uff, it looks like launchpad is on a release party right now
[17:10] <stpere> hi
[17:10] <stpere> #ubuntu is overcrowded
[17:10] <stpere> someone know the md5sum of the iso? (desktop edition, i386)
[17:13] <persia> stpere, see MD5SUMS in the download directories.
[17:14] <stpere> thanks
[17:14] <stpere> the ubuntu website should be updated
[17:14] <stpere> wiki page UbuntuHashes
[17:16] <persia> stpere, I completely agree.  Maybe you'd like to start the update?
[17:16] <stpere> I could, if I have some freetime this afternoon
[17:17] <persia> That'd be great.  Thanks.
[17:18] <persia> You might check in with #ubuntu-doc beforehand, just to avoid edit conflicts, in case someone else tries.
[17:40] <vixey> launchpad seems down.. the site about existing bugs
[17:41] <vixey> so I was wondering.. is this bug known about?  You change screen res in display prefs and wait 10 seconds for it to revert back... but it can't revert back because it of 'file not found'
[17:57] <hggdh> vixey, should not happen
[17:57] <vixey> what shouldn't happen?
[17:57] <hggdh> 'file not found' when reverting to the original setting
[17:58] <hggdh> unfortunately, LP is sort of very slow right now...
[18:02] <pace_t_zulu> hggdh: I have noticed the same about LP
[18:02] <vixey> oh I agree!
[18:02] <vixey> It's a terrible bug
[18:03] <vixey> the revert should probably not use any files so that it cannot happen I guess
[18:03] <vixey> but yeah I couldn't find out if someone already reported it
[18:59] <jooozek> hello
[19:00] <jooozek> i'm having problem with booting my Ubuntu 9.04 installation
[19:00] <jooozek> https://bugs.dogfood.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/312554 - this is what happens
[19:01] <jooozek> 32bit, desktop version
[19:01] <stpere> I read somewhere I could run into issues with older ATI cards
[19:01] <stpere> what kind of issue? non working compiz, or not booting issues?
[19:02] <stpere> I didn't found details on it
[19:12] <jooozek> brb
[19:18] <joumetal> jooozek: Could you boot without initrd?
[19:31] <greg-g> dogfood.launchpad.net? really? for a demo server?
[19:32] <persia> greg-g, It's not quite a demo, but yes.
[19:34] <greg-g> persia: just curious how that person was on that server, really.  Never saw the name before.
[19:37] <persia> greg-g, It's an open server, with roughly the same auth rules (modulo DB update rates).  It's only useful for reading, as it's typically out of date, and the changes overwritten.  But when LP is having issues (like now), it can be useful for checking older stuff.
[19:38] <greg-g> right right, makes sense, just new to me :)
[19:38] <greg-g> I mean, I've seen staging and possile another demo server, but not that specific one. Anywho. Happy Release Day.
[19:39] <persia> staging. is another one.  I don't really know what code drops happen to dogfood or staging, or when (you could ask in #launchpad), but I've previously used staging to test code that talked to LP feeling safe that I wouldn't damage the normal bug DB.
[19:39] <persia> Happy Release Day :)
[19:39] <greg-g> :)
[20:07] <jooozek> hello once again
[20:08] <jooozek> i tried removing the initrd line in GRUB, but then i got something like this: kernel panic - not syncing :VFS: unable to mount root fs on unknown block
[20:10] <jooozek> if it matter i used WUBI to install it
[20:10] <jooozek> matters*
[20:17] <persia> jooozek, The root filesystem is stored in the initrd: unless you provide some other root value for booting, that's normal.
[20:17] <jooozek> i see
[20:18] <jooozek> so any other solutions to https://bugs.dogfood.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/312554 ?
[20:24] <joumetal> joozek: using option like root=/dev/sda1 instead of uuid could work.
[20:28] <jooozek> http://rafb.net/p/nBN51Q47.html
[20:28] <jooozek> that's how my menu.lst looks
[20:28] <jooozek> grub says that my linux is on hd1,0
[20:30] <jooozek> ah, you are speaking about fstab
[20:30] <jooozek> i have no access to it
[20:35] <kklimonda> jooozek: no - he's talking about passing it to kernel in grub
[20:35] <joumetal> yep. you can remove initrd and edit kernel line to root=/dev/sdb1 or hdb1.
[20:36] <jooozek> ah, that way
[20:36] <jooozek> ok, ill try it right now
[20:54] <jooozek> so anyway, like i said earlier
[20:54] <jooozek> i've used the WUBI-installer
[20:55] <jooozek> and the whole disk is in one file
[20:55] <jooozek> on a windows partition, i have no way to access /dev/hdb1 since it doesn't exist
[21:00] <joumetal> hmm. it is marked as fix released. are you using via processor?
[21:00] <jooozek> nope
[21:00] <jooozek> amd athlon 64 3000+ venice, socket 939
[21:12] <joumetal> last two comments were about via. i have no more ideas :(
[21:42] <bdmurray>  /win 15
[21:43] <BUGabundo> bdmurray: ?
[21:43] <bdmurray> seems there was a space on my line
[21:44] <kklimonda> yeah
[21:57] <mrooney> how might I test a -proposed version of a package (I have the source added) if a newer version exists in a PPA that I have added?
[21:57] <mrooney> I commented out the PPA and did an update but it still seems to show that
[21:58] <bdmurray> mrooney: try manually reinstalling like apt-get install gspot
[21:58] <persia> It's more complicated than that, because of maintainer scripts.
[21:59] <persia> mrooney, You'll want to first try to downgrade to the non-PPA version, and then upgrade to the -proposed version.
[21:59] <mrooney> persia: oh, I just removed the PPA version
[21:59] <persia> Note that this won't catch all issues, as it may be that something in the maintainer scripts for the PPA version doesn't support clean downgrades.
[22:00] <persia> Oh, you can do that too :)  Cleanest way to downgrade is to purge and install the earlier version.
[22:00] <mrooney> I seem to have broken apt though
[22:00] <persia> (just be sure to *purge* rather than just uninstall, as otherwise you may end up with a config that was adjusted by the PPA version)
[22:00] <persia> mrooney, apt-get autoclean sometimes fixes it.
[22:01] <persia> Alternately, you might have a dependency from some other PPA package causing an issue.
[22:01] <mrooney> http://paste2.org/p/190294 :[
[22:02] <mrooney> oh I see, I dumb
[22:02] <mrooney> to enable proposed I *changed* my main source line from jaunty to jaunty-proposed
[22:03] <persia> Ah, yes.  That *would* confuse apt.
[22:03] <persia> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed
[22:03] <mrooney> yeah I read that but assumed I could just change jaunty to jaunty-proposed for no good reason
[22:04]  * BUGabundo users should not manually edit sources.list
[22:04] <BUGabundo> guess we need something like visudo for apt sources
[22:04] <mrooney> BUGabundo: how would you recommend doing it on a server?
[22:04] <BUGabundo> mrooney: ^^^^^^
[22:04] <mrooney> well, do we have that? ;)
[22:04] <jcastro> do-release-upgrade
[22:04] <BUGabundo> AFAIK no
[22:05] <BUGabundo> jcastro: humm you seem out of context
[22:05] <persia> visudo doesn't solve the issue.
[22:05] <persia> It would be more something like having checkboxes in software-sources that could enable proposed easily.
[22:05] <BUGabundo> persia: not visudo per si, but a similar tool to edir sources
[22:05] <mrooney> there's nothing wrong logically with what I did, someone might want to only use -proposed packages for some reason
[22:05] <jcastro> BUGabundo: right, I am saying, if you use do-release-upgrade you don't have to mangle source lines
[22:06] <BUGabundo> mrooney: would fail. regular propose depend on stuff in main
[22:06] <mrooney> persia: there already is that checkbox
[22:06] <jcastro> a little curses thing would be nice
[22:06] <BUGabundo> (or universe )
[22:06] <persia> mrooney, I was just checking.  Right.  Mind updating the wiki to be really clear that one should use that checkbox?
[22:06] <persia> jcastro, We have GTK and QT tools: why would we want curses?
[22:07] <sbeattie> persia: why would we want GTK and QT?
[22:08]  * sbeattie ducks and runs.
[22:08] <persia> sbeattie, Because that way we don't have to wait for anyone to implement anything new?
[22:08] <persia> (plus, it's that many fewer things for you to test)
[22:09] <jcastro> persia: I was talking about for server
[22:11] <mrooney> yes, I don't have gtk or qt on my server
[22:12] <persia> So do we have nothing equivalent to "Software Sources" on Server?
[22:13] <BUGabundo> persia: nano sources.list
[22:13] <jcastro> ...
[22:14] <persia> BUGabundo, That's not equivalent.
[22:14] <BUGabundo> I know!
[22:14] <BUGabundo> that's where I started all this talk
[22:14] <BUGabundo> it would be nice to have a visudo like tool for apt sources