[08:36] <eggonlea> hi mobile team, as we knew, Karmic gave up clutter and netbook-launcher on ARM because of lacking powerful OpenGL (ES) support on ARM platforms. While this has improved much now, will we have any fancy GUI on Lucid ARM port?
[08:37] <eggonlea> 1) clutter based netbook-launcher
[08:37] <eggonlea> 2) OpenGL ES based compiz
[08:37] <eggonlea> 3) EFI based 2D launcher
[08:37] <eggonlea> which one would be chosen in Lucid? Or just keep gnome based ubuntu-desktop?
[09:26] <lool> eggonlea: I can't speak for the mobile team, but I understand the focus is to produce an EFL Ubuntu Netbook image
[09:26] <lool> so 2D acceleration only
[09:32] <eggonlea> lool: thanks. but till now we didn't see this EFI 2D GUI in livecd.
[09:33] <eggonlea> maybe I miss something, or it should be there already since alpha3 is coming.
[09:33] <lool> eggonlea: I didn't try the images at http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-netbook/ports/daily-live/current/
[09:33] <lool> eggonlea: But the manifest lists the packages in there
[09:33] <lool> netbook-launcher-efl 0.2.2-0ubuntu2
[09:34] <eggonlea> I mean, the default GUI is still gnome desktop after installation.
[09:35] <lool> Is it?  odd
[09:35] <lool> asac: ^ Is it a known bug perhaps?   Or perhaps there's an easy work around?
[09:36] <eggonlea> y. let me double check the latest livecd.
[10:24]  * eggonlea is reinstalling the latest livecd on the board.
[10:25] <asac> latest live images should have the netbook launcher
[10:25] <asac> problem is that shortly after we switched to ue images mono breakage killed our images
[10:25] <asac> so for a week or so there were no images at all afaict
[10:26] <asac> eggonlea: ^^
[10:27] <eggonlea> aha, I see
[10:27] <eggonlea> I was wondering why the daily zsync did nothing.
[10:29] <asac> yeah. but seems we have images today again \o/
[10:29] <asac> seems we recovered from mono probs ;)
[10:30] <lool> asac: Well done on mono
[10:30] <lool> I wonder whether it actually works
[10:30] <eggonlea> good news indeed. congratulations~. but I'm unlucky to try it for some days because of our LONG Chinese new year holiday.
[10:31] <asac> lool: i would think its similar flaky
[10:31] <asac> as in karmic
[10:31] <asac> in karmic 40 tests failed
[10:31] <eggonlea> Hopefully I can catch it tonight. Do you know how long I should wait for it?
[10:31] <asac> now 36
[10:32] <eggonlea> I mean, how many hours does it take to generate the coming livecd?
[10:33] <asac> you mean the next run?
[10:33] <asac> hmm good question
[10:33] <asac> ogra: persia: when is the image run?
[10:34] <asac> so looking at the timestamp it will be in 18hours or so
[10:34] <asac> assuming its done once in 24h
[10:35] <asac> eggonlea: todays image isnt good enough?
[10:35] <asac> imo that would be ok
[10:36] <asac> if not let me know whats broken
[10:38] <lool> ARCHES='armel+dove' buildlive ubuntu-netbook && ARCHES='armel+dove' for-project ubuntu-netbook cron.ports_daily-live
[10:38] <lool> That's at 1:55 am london time, but after the imx51 build
[10:38] <lool> Whoever wrote this line for it wrong though
[10:39] <eggonlea> asac: installing... some minutes left.
[10:39] <lool> StevenK, ogra: You might want to run a single cron.ports_daily-live; at least that's what I was told should be done back when I added the first desktop armel images
[10:41] <lool> StevenK, ogra: see e.g. kubuntu-netbook
[10:44] <ogra> lool, i thought StevenK discussed it with slangasek at the sprint when he changed ti 
[10:44] <ogra> *it
[10:45] <ogra> effectively it doesnt do any harm atm though, we dropped a lot of flavours
[10:45] <ogra> (and still hope for an additional livefs builder)
[10:46] <lool> I think it will cause two revs of the ubuntu-netbook/ports dir
[10:47] <ogra> oh, right, i see what you mean
[10:47] <ogra> for-project ubuntu-netbook cron.ports_daily-live shouldnt be there twice, i'll talk to StevenK 
[10:47] <lool> There should be a single for-project ubuntu-netbook cron.ports_daily-live in the whole crontab basically
[10:48] <ogra> yeah, that would make sense
[10:48] <ogra> but getting the timing right might be problematic 
[10:48] <ogra> especially for ports 
[10:48] <ogra> will require some measuring
[10:48] <lool> It shouldn't be
[10:49] <ogra> well, i have no idea how long a livefs build for sparc, ppc or ia64 takes 
[10:49] <lool> There currently is only one line whether this occurs
[10:49] <ogra> i know hard numbers for armel only 
[10:49] <lool> It doesn't matter
[10:50] <lool> Just change ARCHES='armel+imx51' buildlive ubuntu-netbook && ARCHES='armel+imx51' for-project ubuntu-netbook cron.ports_daily-live ; ARCHES='armel+dove' buildlive ubuntu-netbook && ARCHES='armel+dove' for-project ubuntu-netbook cron.ports_daily-live to ARCHES='armel+imx51' buildlive ubuntu-netbook; ARCHES='armel+dove' buildlive ubuntu-netbook && ARCHES='armel+imx51 armel+dove' for-project ubuntu-netbook cron.ports_daily-live
[10:50] <lool> Well actually s/&&/;/ in the new version
[10:50] <ogra> no
[10:50] <ogra> then dove wont build if imx fails
[10:50] <ogra> the && was explicitly added 
[10:51] <ogra> we had some runs where there were kernel package issues which then teared down all builds
[10:51] <lool> You're confused, there's no && between imx51 and dove
[10:51] <ogra> there should be :)
[10:51] <lool> I disagree
[10:51] <ogra> between the two buildlive runs
[10:51] <lool> No
[10:51] <ogra> but then the second one wont be attempted if the first one fails
[10:51] <lool> It's not what we ever did and it's not what buildlive does
[10:52] <ogra> it was changed a while ago
[10:52] <lool> Precisely, the point is that you do want to try dove even if buildlive imx51 failed
[10:52] <ogra> after i had a long discussion with slangasek how to make dove still build if imx51 fails
[10:52] <lool> This is currently the case
[10:52] <ogra> we want to
[10:52] <lool> and would still be after my changes
[10:53] <ogra> the ; between the commands makes cron stop the process if the first one exits non zero
[10:53] <lool> No
[10:53] <ogra> well, thats what happened several times
[10:55] <ogra> ; is fine between the buildlive runs and for-project ... since we dont want the latter if the first failed but we want bot buildlive runs to happen inependently so one subarch doesnt block the other
[11:21] <StevenK> lool: I've thought about all this
[11:21] <StevenK> lool: I can't come up with a shell snippet to do what I want
[11:23] <StevenK> lool: I don't like your suggestion either
[11:23] <ogra> StevenK, ARCHES='armel+imx51' buildlive ubuntu-netbook && ARCHES='armel+dove' buildlive ubuntu-netbook ; ARCHES='armel+imx51 armel+dove' for-project ubuntu-netbook cron.ports_daily-live
[11:23] <ogra> that should be a good start
[11:23] <StevenK> ogra: And then imx51 fails and dove doesn't build
[11:23] <ogra> he is right in saying we dont want cron.ports_daily-live twice
[11:23] <ogra> no
[11:23] <ogra> the && should avoid that
[11:24] <StevenK> ogra: If imx51 fails buildlive, dove's buildlive won't get attempted
[11:24] <ogra> if you use ; it wont, if you use && it will
[11:24] <ogra> at least thats what slangasek worked out 
[11:25] <StevenK> Yes, and read your shell snippet. imx51 buildlive && dove buildlive ; imx51 dove publish
[11:26] <ogra> oh, you mean we need another &&
[11:26] <ogra> right, that might be
[11:28] <persia> Um, No.  We *don't* want && because that means "only do this if the previous succeeded"
[11:29] <StevenK> Yes, we don't want "imx51 buildlive && dove buildlive && imx51 dove publish"
[11:30] <persia> Right.
[11:30] <persia> If we trusted things to work, we could do that, but we don't.
[11:31] <ogra> well we dont want "imx51 buildlive; dove buildlive; imx51 dove publish" either
[11:31] <ogra> that has proven to not work often enough
[11:31] <StevenK> "I wonder if (imx51 buildlive ; dove buildlive) && imx51 dove publish" would work
[11:31] <StevenK> Moving the " to the right place, of course
[11:32] <ogra> hmm
[11:33] <persia> No.
[11:33] <persia> Or at least `(true; false) && echo works` doesn't do what I'd like.
[11:34] <persia> Seems () returns the last return code from the series of commands in the subshell.
[11:34] <StevenK> Bah
[11:38] <persia> What we need is something like || that isn't optimised
[11:57] <ogra> StevenK, how about doing all three of them in separate entries at different times ? 
[11:57] <ogra> (with the necessary gaps indeed)
[12:01] <persia> Why is that better than using ;; to do them sequentially?
[12:01] <persia> Putting in gaps creates a race condition
[12:02] <ogra> not if the gaps are big enough ... putting in ; obviously generates probelms
[12:22] <persia> StevenK: `export DRESS="frumpy"; do-this && export DRESS="success"; do-that && export DRESS="success"; [ "$DRESS" == "success" ] && do-it-all`
[12:22] <persia> (and yes, this is incredibly ugly
[12:26] <StevenK> Hah
[12:27] <persia> But now that I've typed that, I've actually started to process backscroll, and realise I'm kinda slow and that better solutions exist.
[12:27] <persia> (like just fixing buildlive to not fail on first failure if it does)
[12:53] <lool> StevenK: I see that got resolved on #ubuntu-devel since (shell snippet)
[13:01] <persia> I think "resolved" isn't quite the right word, but here is no longer the right forum :)
[13:02] <lool> Well cjwatson shared a shell snippet to the effect of what StevenK was asking
[13:02] <StevenK> Which is ugly as sin
[13:02] <lool> You could put that in a script
[13:02] <lool> That might even be in moreutils  ;-)
[13:02]  * StevenK waves his arms
[13:03] <lool> "either_of_do"
[13:03] <StevenK> I don't care, I did slangasek suggested, and I'm going to bed
[13:03] <persia> lool: It's a rare enough case not to matter.
[13:04] <lool> I'm just replying to uglyness in crontab
[13:05] <lool> (I agree crontabs are not a proper place to write this kind of shell snippet)
[13:06] <persia> heh.  context leak :)
[23:26] <lamalex> hi everyone, is there a list of windows that dont fit on netbooks that need fixing/have been fixed?
[23:32] <persia> lamalex: I don't know of any list of these, but there's been lots of fixes in that area.
[23:32] <persia> Some of the 576 veritical pixel machines seem to still have lots of issues, but those aren't getting much sympathy from most deelopers.
[23:33] <persia> But there's still some stuff that doesn't fit in 600 pixels, although I don't think anything left in the default images.
[23:44] <lamalex> thanks