[06:49] hi, any tips to solve the "sudo: must be setuid root" issue when running "sudo" command in a chroot+qemu-arm-static environment? [06:52] * persia tests [06:53] Well, it doesn't happen in my lucid armel chroot (on amd64), so I wonder if there is some other factor involved. [06:53] What does `ls -l /usr/bin/sudo` show? [06:53] it's of correct attribute [06:54] -rswr-xr-x ? [06:54] -rwsr-xr-x 2 root root 98880 Jan 29 15:29 /usr/bin/sudo [06:54] the problem, I think, is in /usr/bin/qemu-arm-static [06:54] is it? [06:55] Hrm. I saw this before when the rootfs data had been copied in and out of a FAT32 filesystem, but that's not your issue.] [06:55] Well, I'd agree, except that I don't get that message :) [06:55] How did you construct your chroot? [06:55] build-arm-chroot lucid [06:56] I chroot this arm rootfs in a x86 PC [06:56] so "sudo" after "chroot" is executed via qemu-arm-static actually [06:56] Indeed. [06:57] Looking at build-arm-chroot, I don't know of any reason that command wouldn't build the chroot you expect. [06:57] so, do you mean you could run sudo command correctly in such a chroot env? [06:57] I'm on amd64. Are you on i386? I wonder if that might be a difference. [06:58] y [06:58] I'm running Karmic on i386 [06:59] In that case, I'm inclined to agree with you that it's qemu-arm-static, as that seems to have been changed between karmic and lucid. [06:59] I tried chroot into an "installed arm rootfs from livecd" as well. same error. [06:59] build-arm-chroot is the same. [07:01] so I don't think it's caused by build-arm-chroot. [07:01] Neither I, as my chroot is also created by build-arm-chroot (albeit embedded from another script) [07:02] Anyone else using build-arm-chroot with Karmic? Do you get the error eggonlea mentions? [07:06] persia, what's your Ubuntu version on amd64? [07:07] lucid [07:07] Upgraded just a few hours back. [07:07] I don't recommend this for production use unless you're prepared to get two pieces when it breaks, but it's a good way to check to make sure one's preferred bugs get fixed. [07:08] * eggonlea testing in Lucid/vmware [07:08] Now there's an idea! [07:09] If you see a difference, file a bug clearly indicating that it doesn't work in karmic and it does work in Lucid. I'm not sure we can get an update, but a backport is likely possible if a few people can test. [07:19] * eggonlea hates the slow network... [07:19] Indeed. [07:52] same error in lucid/vmware + build-arm-chroot/qemu-arm-static [07:56] Very odd. I wonder why I don't get the error. [07:57] Please file a bug about this (`ubuntu-bug qemu-kvm`) [07:57] do you have i386 host? [07:57] ok [07:58] I don't. Just amd64. [08:09] bug filed. [08:09] thanks for your kindness. [14:16] persia: Great to see qemu-arm-static support in ubuntu-dev-scripts! You might want to test for presence of build-arm-chroot instead of checking whether the arch is either i386 or amd64 (error would then be "you need the qemu-arm-static package..." and you could use a suggests instead of recommends); BTW the package just got renamed to qemu-kvm-extras-static [16:12] asac: hi [18:05] lool: I did in mk-sbuild-lv. I'm not as sure how to do that with pbuilder-dist. I'd appreciate a hand if you have any ideas. [18:10] persia: Sure [18:10] persia: I thought you implemented that though? [18:12] python != shell :) [18:12] Plus, the logic in pbuilder-dist is particularly opaque to me. [18:13] (plus I don't use pbuilder, which makes verification interesting) [18:22] persia: Sorry, to clarify: you're more confortable writing shell than python and you would prefer me to improve the logic in pbuilder-dist; correct? [18:22] dmart: asac is travelling in the west coast; might be easier to email him [18:23] lool: please :) [18:23] lool: I did... not urgent anyway. Thanks [18:24] dmart: hi [18:24] Oh, hi there [18:24] what can i do ;)? [18:24] how's the sprint? [18:24] lool: He isn't travelling, he's at the sprint, and has been for 4 days [18:24] quite good ... some crisis here and there ;) ... but we seem to have a good new lead on dove [18:24] will know more soon [18:25] StevenK: He is not at home, so he is on travel for work, hence travelling; sorry if my English explanations suck, but the effect is the same :-) [18:26] * persia blames the awkwardnesses of English spelling and grammar [18:27] at least it's not C++ grammar [18:27] :P [18:27] Haha [18:27] At least that's documented in a single way :) [18:28] * StevenK laments his lack of C++ to make a joke that builds on dmart's joke [18:28] C++? haha [18:28] dmart: wonder ... could you add examples or give pointers how to properly do the "mov" fixes for thumb2 [18:28] ? [18:29] would like to get the thumb2 list down a bit more this week [18:30] I had some thoughts about that... did you get a chance to look at the stuff on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/Thumb2PortingHowto [18:30] It still rather incomplete, but progressing gradually. [18:31] I've tried to keep the amount of extra information down, but it may still be quite indigestible to a newcomer. [18:33] I was thinking maybe we should schedule a sort of mini-sprint with some mobile team guys sometime next week... the best way to get people up to speed may be for everyone to pick up a package and try to work out how to fix it... then watch the discussion on IRC. [18:33] Does that sound like a good idea? [18:35] dmart: no ... didnt know that page exists [18:35] * asac checks [18:35] looks like a good start [18:35] will check that [18:35] thanks [18:35] dmart: ^ [18:36] dmart: yes. i like the idea of making porting sessions [18:36] i think we fixed almost all swp ones now [18:36] (boost upload pending) [18:36] so mov is the most pressing one left i think [18:36] Yes... particularly since these don't generally show up as ftbfs, we need to be more careful. [18:38] OK; I'll probably try and flesh out the missing bits of that wiki page by early next week and we can discuss the way forward at the ubuntu-mobile IRC meeiting. [18:40] asac: ^ I was trying to look at the evolution-data-server update to help sanity-check, but looking in debian/patches I couldn't find the new patches described in the update. [18:40] Should I see the patches after apt-get source, or do I actually need to build the package (or look in bzr etc.) [18:43] dmart: i also committed it to bzr, yes. [18:44] dmart: you couldnt find the patches? [18:44] hmm [18:44] guess i messed that [18:44] darn ;) [18:44] I think I have the right package version; debian/changelog mentions the patches [18:45] I tried a build anyway... it hasn't fallen over yet, but it's not finished... [18:45] yes [18:45] i think i failed to add it to bzr [18:45] darn [18:45] sigh ... i knew i should have uploaded without doing bzr first [18:45] guess i have to redo it [18:46] * asac hopes he still has the build tree somewhere [18:46] As far as I can tell, if one uploads whilst ignoring bzr, automated systems do the right thing. [18:46] good still have it in a porter bux [18:47] persia: i remembered seb wanting me to commit it [18:47] so i wanted to be nice [18:47] * asac goes and redoes [18:47] asac: You might have it in your checkout still [18:47] or in the package itself [18:47] Ah no [18:47] Your debdiff is definitely empty [18:48] i did the checkout in /tmp/ ;) [18:48] but i found it on the porter machine :-P [18:48] \o/ [18:49] dmart: you can check boost1.40 [18:50] ok... I'll try and take a look, probably tomorrow. [18:51] yes [18:51] make more sense [18:51] dmart: check boost1.40 [18:51] i think thats uploaded ;) [18:51] ok, will do [20:29] hi all, I'm looking for some information about running openjdk on ARM, does anybody here have links to some info on this (are there binary packages available for it, etc..)? [20:39] Marrs: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openjdk-6 [20:40] Marrs: The latest lucid version is still building on armel, but yes, there are usually binaries available for armel [20:40] There's been a couple reports about some code paths causing VM issues, so heavy testing and reporting of any issues would be very welcome. [20:40] ideally, I'm looking for a stable binary release, so that would be the karmik one? [20:41] karmic that is :) [20:41] persia: I'm definitely going to try to kick its tires :) [20:42] karmic is a stable binary release, but if you find issues, those are easier to fix in lucid (and moreso if previously verified in lucid). [20:42] I'd recommend starting with karmic, and maybe testing against lucid in a chroot if you encounter issues. [20:42] persia: understood [20:43] btw, I'm not so experienced in the ARM architecture, I'm more of a Java guy, could you take a look at this ARM based board and tell me if you think it will run openjdk? (looking up link now..) [20:44] Better question is whether it can run Ubuntu, and which releases :) [20:44] Running OpenJDK is mostly a side-effect of that. [20:44] fair enough... supplier says it can run ubuntu, I have yet to find out which version, but this is the board: http://www.msc-ge.com/de/produkte/com/exm32/3640-www.html [20:45] whoops, that was the german page, hit the english flag in the top right corner for an instant translation ;) [20:46] Deutsh ist also gut. [20:46] * persia can't spell today [20:46] ;) ok [20:47] I'd recommend against this one. I think it can run Jaunty with a custom kernel, but it wouldn't be able to run karmic or lucid. [20:48] ouch :( [20:48] what's the main problem? [20:50] or, what type of board should I look for [20:56] You want something that can handle the ARMv7 ISA. [20:57] So, if looking at something using an i.MX processor, you'll want at least the i.MX51. [20:57] There's also stuff from other vendors, of course :) [20:59] ok [21:03] if you have any links to a board you could recommend, that would be welcome [21:06] Marrs: The boards which are officially supported in Ubuntu kernels aren't that cheap or common, but it's improving quickly; popular boards around here are OMAP 35xx or 34xx based boards e.g. beagleboard [21:06] beagleboard is probably the one we get the most pinged about [21:06] thanks [21:06] I'll look for those and see if we can use them [21:16] lool: +available