| === rberger_ is now known as rberger | ||
| bottiger | I've tried to manage my upstart services with both "rcconf" and "bum" to make some services start (or not start) automatically. However, it simply does not work. If I disable "mysql" it shows up as disables in both rcconf and bum, but it still starts up when I boot | 09:53 |
|---|---|---|
| bottiger | any idea what the problem could be | 09:54 |
| sadmac2 | bottiger: that's more of a debian/ubuntu question | 13:12 |
| donEduardo | hi there. | 15:41 |
| donEduardo | is this the correct group for upstart in ubuntu? | 15:41 |
| donEduardo | or is this group rather general? | 15:41 |
| Keybuk | this is the general group for the different distribution maintainers developing upstart | 15:42 |
| Keybuk | if you're having ubuntu problems, you should ask in #ubuntu | 15:42 |
| donEduardo | if got an upstart problem in ubuntu 10.04 alpha... ok, i'll try at #ubuntu | 15:47 |
| donEduardo | s/if/i've | 15:47 |
| === elpargo_ is now known as elpargo | ||
| Ng | so process supervision :) | 20:03 |
| Ng | is there any way for upstart to indicate that something has been respawned other than its syslog entries? | 20:03 |
| Ng | (I'm thinking that as a sysadmin I'd want realtime alerts that $IMPORTANTDAEMON has died and been restarted, ideally not by having to do realtime syslog analysis) | 20:04 |
| sadmac | Ng: you could detect the starting event from another job and have that fire off whatever | 20:09 |
| Ng | oh interesting | 20:10 |
| Ng | oh the starting event, not a specific respawning event? | 20:17 |
| Ng | actually what I'd care about is the *dying* of a process, but that's implied by it having been restarted ;) | 20:18 |
| sadmac | Ng: I think you get a stopping event too | 20:19 |
| sadmac | there's no respawning event though | 20:19 |
| sadmac | you definitely don't get a stopped event when respawning. it doesn't make it all the way down. | 20:19 |
| Ng | it might be a little annoying if booting a machine triggered a bunch of alerts ;) | 20:20 |
| === elpargo_ is now known as elpargo | ||
| === elpargo_ is now known as elpargo | ||
| wasabi | `script` stanza could use an extension: | 21:45 |
| wasabi | script /bin/bash | 21:46 |
| wasabi | \tfoo | 21:46 |
| wasabi | end script | 21:46 |
| Keybuk | but then we don't know whether what you give supports /proc/self/fd | 21:46 |
| Keybuk | and we don't know whether it supports "-e" | 21:46 |
| wasabi | True. | 21:46 |
| Keybuk | we don't know whether it supports being able to give single commands with "-c" | 21:47 |
| wasabi | I'd probably just say: yeah. if it support -e, you have to add it | 21:47 |
| Keybuk | I like the fact that script -es by default | 21:47 |
| Keybuk | script sh | 21:47 |
| Keybuk | ... | 21:47 |
| Keybuk | end script | 21:47 |
| Keybuk | would bypass that | 21:47 |
| Keybuk | and be remarkably inconsistent | 21:47 |
| wasabi | that is true. | 21:47 |
| wasabi | well, you see where I'm going. | 21:48 |
| wasabi | script python | 21:48 |
| wasabi | blah | 21:48 |
| wasabi | I'd probably just say adopt the same semantics any +x file has | 21:48 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: what if we allowed you to pipe part of the job definition to the exec stanza's argument? | 21:54 |
| sadmac | exec python <<<END | 21:54 |
| sadmac | import foo | 21:54 |
| sadmac | main() | 21:54 |
| sadmac | END | 21:54 |
| wasabi | That looks weird. | 21:54 |
| wasabi | It might be an argument for not using 'script', but instead extending 'exec' into a block stanza./ | 21:55 |
| wasabi | with script being locked to sh -e | 21:55 |
| wasabi | s | 21:55 |
| sadmac | wasabi: it does, but it skirts most of Keybuk's arguments semantically. I'm in the habit of doing this. Eventually it results in Really Cool Things. | 21:55 |
| wasabi | exec python | 21:55 |
| wasabi | import foo | 21:55 |
| wasabi | main() | 21:55 |
| wasabi | end exec | 21:55 |
| wasabi | Since exec is already defined as not passing any arguments. | 21:56 |
| wasabi | I think it might be more appropiate too | 21:56 |
| sadmac | that makes the grammar ambiguous if you keep the one-liner exec | 21:56 |
| wasabi | as 'script' might not always even be the right name for it. | 21:56 |
| Keybuk | sadmac: I'm just wondering to myself what that exec line would do now ;-) | 21:56 |
| Keybuk | since technically exec is just a shortcut for | 21:56 |
| Keybuk | script | 21:56 |
| Keybuk | exec ... | 21:56 |
| Keybuk | end script | 21:56 |
| Keybuk | ;-) | 21:56 |
| wasabi | Heh | 21:56 |
| wasabi | what about a utility that reads from stdin to process commands... that you want executed every now and then | 21:57 |
| wasabi | but it's clearly not a scripting language | 21:57 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: it would do the same as always, but make stdin a pipe first, then it'd write the python script into it | 21:57 |
| wasabi | shit, nc | 21:57 |
| wasabi | exec nc host | 21:57 |
| wasabi | \tstuff | 21:57 |
| wasabi | end exec | 21:57 |
| Keybuk | right | 21:57 |
| Keybuk | there's three different types of program | 21:57 |
| Keybuk | 1) those that take commands on command-line, e.g. sh -c "foo;bar;baz" | 21:58 |
| sadmac | wasabi: I spent a week in my security class trying to find ways to trick users into doing that. Making it easier to do voluntarily seems wrong | 21:58 |
| Keybuk | 2) those that take a script filename on command-line, e.g. sh /foo/bar.sh | 21:58 |
| wasabi | heh | 21:58 |
| wasabi | sendmail then. :) | 21:58 |
| Keybuk | 3) those that take commands on standard input | 21:58 |
| wasabi | exec sendmail admin@isillc.com | 21:58 |
| wasabi | shit's busted | 21:58 |
| wasabi | end exec | 21:58 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: shock moment, what if we just supported shebang lines | 21:58 |
| sadmac | script | 21:58 |
| sadmac | #! /bin/python | 21:58 |
| sadmac | etc | 21:58 |
| sadmac | end script | 21:58 |
| wasabi | heh. | 21:58 |
| Keybuk | sadmac: no way to execute that ;-) | 21:59 |
| Keybuk | chmod +x /proc/self/fd/4 | 21:59 |
| Keybuk | doesn't quite work | 21:59 |
| wasabi | What about symbols in front of the cmd name to specify how the body is passed to it? | 21:59 |
| Keybuk | symbols would be ick | 21:59 |
| sadmac | what does the command have to do to supprt /proc/self/fd? | 21:59 |
| Keybuk | but I like the idea that you should be able to run things with stdin | 21:59 |
| wasabi | maybe. but there's um | 21:59 |
| wasabi | what's the word for it | 21:59 |
| Keybuk | I already want to be able to run things and capture stdout after all | 21:59 |
| wasabi | crap. brain dead. | 21:59 |
| Keybuk | sadmac: to do #! you need a filename | 22:00 |
| wasabi | exec - sendmail jhaltom@isillc.com | 22:00 |
| wasabi | foo | 22:00 |
| wasabi | end exec | 22:00 |
| wasabi | that gets passed to stdin | 22:00 |
| wasabi | (making stuff up) | 22:00 |
| Keybuk | why not perlish? | 22:00 |
| wasabi | because i don't know perl. | 22:00 |
| Keybuk | exec |sendmail jhaltom@isillc.com | 22:00 |
| wasabi | heh | 22:00 |
| wasabi | That's sort ofe stablished elsewhere too | 22:00 |
| wasabi | /etc/aliases | 22:00 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: same reason we couldn't do | 22:00 |
| sadmac | script /bin/python | 22:01 |
| sadmac | end script | 22:01 |
| sadmac | then | 22:01 |
| Keybuk | one sec, changing machines | 22:01 |
| sadmac | ah, wing-commander. I missed that box | 22:02 |
| wasabi | exec >sendmail jhaltom@isillc.com | 22:02 |
| wasabi | or | I guess | 22:02 |
| wasabi | Got me | 22:02 |
| Keybuk | sadmac: lol, "missed it" ? | 22:02 |
| wasabi | I don't like symbols like that. | 22:02 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: there's a lot you don't know that happened between me and your computer. | 22:02 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: don't judge us. we were young. we did what felt right. | 22:03 |
| Keybuk | should I dunk my laptop in bleach? | 22:03 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: yes. and you might want to get a new refridgerator. | 22:04 |
| Keybuk | syntax aside for a moment | 22:04 |
| Keybuk | what magic input/output/commandline things should we support here? | 22:04 |
| sadmac | stdin makes sense | 22:05 |
| sadmac | whatever the most standard syntax is, it should work by the same mechanism as #!, that is if an interpreter works in a #! line it should work in a job definition with minimal effort | 22:05 |
| Keybuk | right #! is "append filename to the #! line" | 22:06 |
| Keybuk | which should mean we can append /proc/self/fd/N | 22:06 |
| sadmac | really. thought it was pipe-through | 22:06 |
| Keybuk | no, cause you can do | 22:06 |
| Keybuk | echo "#!/usr/bin/sendmail" > casey.dahlin@redhat.com | 22:06 |
| Keybuk | chmod +x !$ | 22:06 |
| sadmac | yeah, you're right | 22:06 |
| Keybuk | ./casey.dahlin@redhat.com | 22:06 |
| Keybuk | Subject: foo | 22:06 |
| Keybuk | etc. | 22:06 |
| wasabi | stdin and last argument make sense to me. | 22:06 |
| wasabi | anything else can be done by hand | 22:07 |
| wasabi | exec /proc/fd/0 | 22:07 |
| wasabi | exec foo --name=/proc/fd/0 anyways | 22:07 |
| Keybuk | I also want to support capture-standard-output | 22:07 |
| wasabi | same. | 22:07 |
| Keybuk | for programs that write FOO=bar as standard output | 22:07 |
| wasabi | Where would you send it, though? :) | 22:07 |
| Keybuk | it'd be part of the job's environment | 22:07 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: that's always felt a bit special to me | 22:07 |
| wasabi | Hmm. | 22:07 |
| Keybuk | sadmac: it's used by just about everything "agent-esque" | 22:08 |
| Keybuk | dbus downards | 22:08 |
| wasabi | Yeah. That would be much nicer. | 22:08 |
| wasabi | Simply scrape the env exported by dbus when launching a dbus service | 22:08 |
| wasabi | no work done. | 22:08 |
| wasabi | except to export it in dbus | 22:08 |
| wasabi | and make sure your job somehow fires with that env. | 22:08 |
| Keybuk | right, dbus-daemon writes its session address and stuff to stdout | 22:08 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: I like a more general solution | 22:08 |
| Keybuk | so any job with "while dbus-daemon" would have that in its environment | 22:09 |
| wasabi | Yeah. That's rad. | 22:09 |
| sadmac | exec dbus-session-bus | xargs upstart-set | 22:09 |
| Keybuk | xargs? :) | 22:09 |
| Keybuk | I guess | 22:09 |
| Keybuk | then I have to care about process groups | 22:10 |
| sadmac | yeah, the forking is a bit funny around that | 22:10 |
| Keybuk | we do need some kind of initctl to set environment though | 22:12 |
| wasabi | I'm fine with parsing name=value pairs. | 22:12 |
| wasabi | that's super standard. | 22:12 |
| wasabi | It would be better in some way if you could have dbus communicate in another way that didn't involve any parsing | 22:13 |
| Keybuk | lots of people seem to try and parse things in pre-start then punt to exec | 22:13 |
| Keybuk | but I think that's partly because exec sucks and you can't use cat if you're using fork-following | 22:13 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: look at augeas any? speaking of parsing. | 22:14 |
| Keybuk | sadmac: no, not yet | 22:14 |
| Keybuk | but I have now sent all my patches to halfline, so I suck less, so can look at that in a bit | 22:14 |
| sadmac | cool | 22:14 |
| Keybuk | the good news is we found a major bug with pre-stop in upstart ;) | 22:15 |
| Keybuk | (as a result of plymouth issues) | 22:15 |
| sadmac | I'm figuring this JSON stuff we've been discussing will need a parser anyway, so I'm going to complete nih-parse either way | 22:15 |
| Keybuk | not crasher - as in "clearly this approach is insane" | 22:15 |
| sadmac | ah, cool | 22:15 |
| Keybuk | and pre-stop was the only thing stopping me from getting rid of all four scripts | 22:15 |
| Keybuk | so now I can get rid of all four scripts and be happy | 22:15 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: so we have just one job now? | 22:16 |
| wasabi | JSON stuff | 22:16 |
| wasabi | So, JSON parsing will be in upstart. | 22:16 |
| wasabi | So it's hardly surprising that name=value parsing is | 22:16 |
| sadmac | wasabi: yeah, talking about using it for cross-upgrade stuff | 22:16 |
| Keybuk | just one process per job | 22:16 |
| Keybuk | so job and process become the same thing | 22:16 |
| sadmac | name=value is hardly even parsing. Its regular for chrissake. | 22:16 |
| wasabi | Yeah | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | but multiple jobs/processes defined in one conf file | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | given what we talked about the other day: | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | on foo | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | exec ... | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | it doesn't seem unreasonable to have a kinda "on self" | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | on self starting | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | exec ... | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | that's a task as we chatted about | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | so that's basically identical to the current pre-start script | 22:17 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: where do names come from then? | 22:17 |
| Keybuk | sadmac: names? | 22:17 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: yes, names for jobs | 22:18 |
| Keybuk | right, so then i got thinking well | 22:18 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: they come from file names now | 22:18 |
| Keybuk | pre-start exec ... | 22:18 |
| Keybuk | that's a named process called "pre-start" | 22:18 |
| Keybuk | reload exec ... | 22:18 |
| wasabi | Oh. Odd. | 22:18 |
| Keybuk | those would fire automatically | 22:18 |
| Keybuk | it's not "there" yet | 22:18 |
| Keybuk | (syntaxwise) | 22:18 |
| Keybuk | but I think it works process-wise | 22:18 |
| sadmac | so with the hierarchy thing we get all of it | 22:18 |
| sadmac | foo exec whatever in a file called stuff.conf creates a stuff foo job | 22:19 |
| sadmac | which is a silly name, but real world examples would make sense | 22:19 |
| Keybuk | right exactly | 22:19 |
| sadmac | we can parse it, to be sure. | 22:20 |
| * sadmac needs to finish up the parse tool | 22:21 | |
| sadmac | my code quality has been wildly inconsistent. I'm going to throw away what I'm writing, but then maybe I'll copy paste some of it. I can't decide if I give a shit whether it leaks memory or not. | 22:22 |
| sadmac | the joys of writing a program who's first and only task is to rewrite itself :) | 22:22 |
| Keybuk | ll | 22:22 |
| Keybuk | lol | 22:22 |
| Keybuk | memory's cheap these days | 22:23 |
| Keybuk | they can buy more | 22:23 |
| sadmac | the good news is it won't need many tests. It tests itself just by being compiled :) | 22:23 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: that's not funny. Java people still say that with a straight face | 22:23 |
| sadmac | no wonder 2/3 the core dumps I get in during $dayjob report more memory than my hard disk. | 22:24 |
| Keybuk | heh | 22:27 |
| wasabi | trying to do this: which is failing. not sure why. | 22:27 |
| wasabi | script | 22:27 |
| wasabi | \t /bin/bash << EOF | 22:27 |
| wasabi | bunch of crap. blah blah. | 22:28 |
| wasabi | EOF | 22:28 |
| wasabi | end script | 22:28 |
| wasabi | Seems to break when I add my first complicated line of script: l=( backup users profiles ) | 22:28 |
| wasabi | Can't imagine why any of it would need to be escaped for any reason | 22:28 |
| Keybuk | two shells? | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | you need to escape it from the first shell for the sceond to see it | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | script | 22:29 |
| wasabi | sh is reading from a file in proc, right? | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | FOO=bar | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | /bin/bash << EOF | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | FOO=baz | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | echo $FOO | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | EOF | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | end script | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | will echo bar not baz | 22:29 |
| Keybuk | wasabi: yes | 22:29 |
| wasabi | I see. | 22:30 |
| Keybuk | the outer shell applies full expansion to everything | 22:30 |
| Keybuk | even the bits between << EOF and EOF | 22:30 |
| wasabi | still no worky though | 22:30 |
| wasabi | /bin/bash << EOF | 22:30 |
| wasabi | FOO=bar | 22:30 |
| wasabi | EOF | 22:30 |
| wasabi | fails. returns 2 | 22:30 |
| wasabi | << isn't like, not sh compatible, is it? | 22:31 |
| Keybuk | it is afaik | 22:31 |
| wasabi | Ahh. | 22:31 |
| wasabi | Comments in the script body | 22:31 |
| wasabi | even unindented ones | 22:31 |
| wasabi | not sure why they're breaking it, but they are. | 22:31 |
| wasabi | oh. | 22:32 |
| Keybuk | can't have comments in strings maybe? | 22:32 |
| wasabi | they're probably being expanded when they shouldn't? | 22:32 |
| Keybuk | right | 22:32 |
| wasabi | would have thought upstart would have removed them | 22:32 |
| wasabi | guess not | 22:32 |
| Keybuk | why? | 22:32 |
| Keybuk | upstart passes everything between script and end script | 22:32 |
| wasabi | including leading indents? k | 22:32 |
| Keybuk | actually | 22:32 |
| Keybuk | no ;) | 22:32 |
| wasabi | heh. | 22:32 |
| wasabi | see. | 22:32 |
| Keybuk | it kinda de-dents everything | 22:32 |
| wasabi | i knew it didn't do that | 22:32 |
| wasabi | so I assumed it realized that a non-indented line was an upstart command | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | but that's actually good for you | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | cause | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | exec sendmail | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | blah | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | blah | 22:33 |
| wasabi | and upstart would fail if it wasn't # or end script | 22:33 |
| sadmac | Keybuk: could be a slight problem if we allow different interpreters, including python | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | end exec | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | gets de-dented | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | and | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | exec python | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | blah | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | blah | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | blah | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | end exec | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | gets de-dented too | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | sadmac: it only removes the initial whitespace common to *all* lines | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | so that comes out as | 22:33 |
| wasabi | I'd adopt python rules. Each line must be indeneted with the same amount and type of whitespace. :) | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | blah | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | blah | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | blah | 22:33 |
| wasabi | And that is auto removed by one level. | 22:33 |
| Keybuk | wasabi: that's what it does | 22:34 |
| wasabi | So why is # being passed to the script | 22:34 |
| sadmac | context sensitive lexical languages make me cry | 22:34 |
| Keybuk | wasabi: because it doesn't remove comments | 22:34 |
| wasabi | But the comment is not indented. | 22:34 |
| wasabi | So it should be invalid. | 22:34 |
| wasabi | And refuse to run the task | 22:34 |
| Keybuk | why? | 22:35 |
| wasabi | OR it should remove it. :) | 22:35 |
| Keybuk | neither | 22:35 |
| wasabi | <wasabi> I'd adopt python rules. Each line must be indeneted with the same amount and type of whitespace. :) | 22:35 |
| wasabi | <Keybuk> wasabi: that's what it does | 22:35 |
| Keybuk | the comment means your block is simply not de-dented | 22:35 |
| wasabi | oh. | 22:35 |
| wasabi | hah. | 22:35 |
| Keybuk | it doesn't throw out your entire script because you used a space instead of a tab | 22:35 |
| Keybuk | that's just un-necessarily pedantic | 22:35 |
| Keybuk | it just doesn't de-dent | 22:35 |
| Keybuk | it finds the common prefix from each line that consists entirely of whitespace characters | 22:36 |
| Keybuk | and removes that | 22:36 |
| Keybuk | if all lines begin \t\t then that is removed | 22:36 |
| Keybuk | if all lines begin " \t " then that is removed | 22:36 |
| Keybuk | if, as you've done there, one line isn't indented - then nothing is removed | 22:36 |
| Keybuk | it probably doesn't need to screw with it at all ;-) | 22:36 |
| wasabi | gotcha | 22:36 |
| Keybuk | but it does | 22:36 |
| Keybuk | it makes debugging perttier | 22:36 |
| wasabi | Trying to remember what i have to escape in this script to script then | 22:37 |
| sadmac | is that french? | 22:37 |
| wasabi | $ becomes $$... | 22:37 |
| Keybuk | no that's something else | 22:37 |
| Keybuk | $ becomes \$ in shell ;-) | 22:37 |
| Keybuk | $ -> $$ is make | 22:37 |
| wasabi | ahh | 22:37 |
| wasabi | duh | 22:37 |
| * sadmac remembers windows programming | 22:38 | |
| sadmac | C:\\Windows\\System.... | 22:38 |
| sadmac | or \\\\Shared\\Folder | 22:38 |
| wasabi | windows programming is all I do | 22:38 |
| wasabi | @"C:\Windows\System" | 22:38 |
| sadmac | wasabi: I'm sorry :) | 22:39 |
| wasabi | Fine with me. | 22:39 |
| sadmac | anyway, time to go eat.\ | 22:39 |
| wasabi | I enjoy getting things done. :0 | 22:39 |
| Keybuk | wasabi: didn't you end up at Google? | 22:39 |
| sadmac | wasabi: I don't have time to flame you. please pick this fight again later that we might finish it :) | 22:39 |
| wasabi | No. Didn't take it. | 22:40 |
| Keybuk | ahh | 22:40 |
| wasabi | They keep asking though. | 22:40 |
| Keybuk | they do that | 22:40 |
| Keybuk | Mountain View seems like such a long time ago! | 22:40 |
| wasabi | yeah, it does. | 22:40 |
| wasabi | I think about how much fun I had talking with people who knew what the hell I was talking about | 22:40 |
| wasabi | often | 22:41 |
| Keybuk | heh | 22:42 |
| Keybuk | UDS again in not-so-long | 22:42 |
| wasabi | I'm not remotely involved enough to get travel paid for, work is super busy (and has been for 2 years). | 22:42 |
| wasabi | I'd love to go though. | 22:42 |
| wasabi | Can't afford the out of the states trips though. | 22:43 |
| Keybuk | yeah | 22:44 |
| Keybuk | this one's in the middle of NOWHERE | 22:44 |
| wasabi | I didn't make it to the Dallas one. | 22:44 |
| wasabi | Because of work. | 22:44 |
| wasabi | I LIVE IN DALLAS | 22:44 |
| Keybuk | heh, fail | 22:45 |
| wasabi | Total. | 22:45 |
| wasabi | I saw desrt though. Made him come out and drink. | 22:45 |
| wasabi | Which he did little of. | 22:45 |
| wasabi | And then left early. | 22:45 |
| wasabi | Oh well. | 22:45 |
| wasabi | double escaping this is becoming hard to think about | 22:46 |
| Keybuk | was he at Dallas? | 22:46 |
| wasabi | Yeah | 22:46 |
| Keybuk | UDS has got so big now | 22:46 |
| wasabi | Dallas can be a great city too. I wanted to come and be the local guy showing everybody where to party. | 22:46 |
| Keybuk | I don't think I went into the desktop room once | 22:46 |
| wasabi | Because it's completely non-obvious where to go. | 22:46 |
| wasabi | \${n//-/--} | 22:47 |
| wasabi | Hmmm | 22:47 |
| wasabi | Hah. Got it. | 22:47 |
| wasabi | \${n//\\-/\\-\\-} | 22:47 |
| === Keybuk_ is now known as Keybuk | ||
| === solj_ is now known as solj | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!