[00:24] <psusi> cjwatson, well I'm trying to attach what I think is the final draft of that patch to the bug report but firefox is being fubar and won't select the right file.... going to see if an update and reboot fixes it...
[00:52] <siddhartha> hello,sorry about the noob-ness.. i have a question: i was running a karmic installation.. i somehow managed to change change my release type to eeebuntu after adding some package repos.  Recently i added lucid repos. Is there any way to change the distribution release type ? lsb_release -a tells me im still running eeebuntu.
[00:54] <siddhartha> hello,sorry about the noob-ness.. i have a question: i was running a karmic installation.. i somehow managed to change change my release type to eeebuntu after adding some package repos.  Recently i added lucid repos. Is there any way to change the distribution release type ? lsb_release -a tells me im still running eeebuntu.
[00:55] <arand> siddhartha: -> #ubuntu or #ubuntu+1
[00:56] <Sarvatt> slangasek: I'm guessing its the vga=795 (aka 1280x1024x24bpp) boot option they are passing to a vga16fb.. :D
[00:58] <siddhartha> leave #ubuntu-devel
[02:14] <slangasek> Sarvatt: nope, the fact that they're *using* VGA16 is proof that the vga= option had no effect (which probably means they're using grub2)
[02:16] <slangasek> Sarvatt: if vga= had worked, /proc/fb would show vesafb as fb0 instead of vga16fb
[03:13] <nixternal> slangasek: any pointers on creating a custom plymouth theme? the one I created yesterday will not work with the new plymouth, it always falls back to the ubuntu one
[03:13] <slangasek> nixternal: are you using update-alternatives?
[03:13] <nixternal> yes
[03:13] <nixternal> update-alternatives --config default.plymouth
[03:14] <slangasek> er - you're not doing that in the maintainer scripts, are you?
[03:14] <nixternal> no no, I am doing this locally
[03:14] <slangasek> ok
[03:14] <nixternal> not in packaging at all
[03:15] <slangasek> well, the only fallback path is between default.plymouth and text.plymouth
[03:15] <slangasek> does /etc/alternatives/default.plymouth point where you expect?
[03:15] <nixternal> yup
[03:15] <slangasek> can you post the theme somewhere?
[03:15] <slangasek> sounds like the theme is simply failing to load
[03:15] <nixternal> oh, no it doesn't
[03:15] <nixternal> there is the problem
[03:15] <slangasek> ok :)
[03:15] <nixternal> hrmm
[03:15] <nemo> Did you guys drop libcaca from libSDL?
[03:16] <nemo> (Karmic/Lucid)
[03:18] <nixternal> hrmm
[03:18] <nixternal> still falls back to ubuntu dangit
[03:19] <nixternal> I am guessing we can't use the fade-in example with anything other than ubuntu now slangasek?
[03:20] <slangasek> ScottK: so there's one flaw in the proposed methodology on foundations-lucid-supportable-binaries: we know whether the source package FTBFS at the beginning of the cycle, but we don't know whether there were binaries *of that version* in the archive at the time without doing a lot of LP parsing; so if the package was FTBFS /at the time it was uploaded/, but has subsequently built, we have no good way to distinguish those binaries that we
[03:21] <slangasek> ... successfully built *afterwards* from those that were built *earlier*.
[03:21] <slangasek> nixternal: what do you mean?
[03:21] <slangasek> the fade-in theme isn't Ubuntu-specific; it doesn't even include an Ubuntu logo
[03:22] <nixternal> but it uses the ubuntu logo no matter what
[03:22] <nixternal> wth...I just did the xubuntu-logo theme, and on shutdown it worked, but on startup it went back to the ubuntu logo again
[03:22] <slangasek> did you forget to rebuild an initramfs?
[03:23] <nixternal> shush :p
[03:26] <nixternal> slangasek: ok, got it working, however the fade-in theme is locked to the ubuntu logo...i have another fade-in theme from fedora that was the stars and it worked yesterday
[03:28] <slangasek> ScottK: so - if we remove all the binaries that are built from source <= the version that failed in the rebuild test, we risk nuking some that do actually build successfully now, and only FTBFS then because of a bug in a different package
[03:29] <slangasek> ScottK: I can't say how many packages will be affected by this - if I could say, I wouldn't have to worry in the first place :) - but the number of source packages showing up in my report is much lower than the number in Lucas's latest rebuild
[03:29] <slangasek> ScottK: so I'm inclined to propose them all for removal anyway
[03:30] <slangasek> nixternal: ah yes, I can confirm this in the source - the logo path has to be compiled into the splash plugins, and points at /lib/plymouth/ubuntu-logo.png
[03:30] <slangasek> nixternal: so if you want to use one of the other splash plugins with a different logo, you'll need to dpkg-divert /lib/plymouth/ubuntu-logo.png
[03:32] <slangasek> nixternal: note that if you do a dpkg diversion of this file in a package, you will need to also Conflict: with any other theme packages that want to divert the same file
[03:32] <slangasek> (maybe this should have also been an alternative, hmm)
[03:37] <nixternal> slangasek: yeah, I don't feel like doing a divert, so I will go with something else in the mean time
[03:42] <slangasek> nixternal: oh, and if this is for packaging, the only base theme that integrates with mountall is the ubuntu-logo theme; so I don't advise basing off any of the others if you're planning to ship this by default for a flavor release
[03:43] <nixternal> right, that is what I am basing the kubuntu one off of now
[03:45] <superm1> slangasek, is there going to be an alternative for just replacing the logo in the ubuntu-logo theme?  it seems kind of silly to reproduce all the logic in the script in individual themes and have to keep up with syncing it all the time then
[03:50] <slangasek> superm1: if you're only replacing the logo and want to leave the colors and fonts the same, dpkg-divert on the logo would do the job; but an alternative may be the better way to go for scalability, so I'd suggest filing a bug on plymouth about this and I'll talk to Keybuk on Monday
[03:51] <superm1> oh yeah, i forgot that the default background for ubuntu-logo isn't black, so some folks might not want that
[03:52] <superm1> i'll file a bug though still
[04:15] <slangasek> superm1: hum, see my follow-up
[04:16] <slangasek> superm1: perhaps that unblocks you for what you're trying to do
[04:17] <superm1> slangasek, yeah that should help a lot, thanks!
[04:28] <ScottK> slangasek: What about doing on the list at the start of the cycle and still out of date?
[04:29] <ScottK> I think that gets us to the same place.
[04:29] <slangasek> ScottK: that misses packages that are up-to-date because they built prior to lucid and haven't been uploaded since
[04:29] <slangasek> ScottK: so do we want the false-positives, or the false-negatives?
[04:29] <ScottK> Right.
[04:31] <ScottK> slangasek: On the list at the start of the cycle and (still out of date or version == the version on the list)?
[04:32] <slangasek> that runs into the same false positives as before
[04:33] <slangasek> it doesn't tell us if it was on the list at the start of the cycle because of a bug in the package, or a bug in its build-deps
[04:33] <ScottK> slangasek: We don't care why, just that we can't build it.
[04:34] <slangasek> it doesn't tell us we /can't/ build it, it tells us we /couldn't/ build it then
[04:34] <ScottK> OK.  One more try.
[04:35] <slangasek> I'm ok to say "yes, we may be removing packages that build fine now in the rare case that they built before, failed to build in November, and are buildable again today"
[04:35] <slangasek> I just want to be clear that this is what we're saying
[04:36] <ScottK> Check that list against the latest rebuild list.
[04:37] <slangasek> ah, that works
[04:37] <ScottK> If it isn't on that list, then it's OK.  If it's not out of date, ignore it, if it's out of date, give it a retry.
[04:37] <ScottK> Does that work?
[04:38] <slangasek> yep (hmm, which of us is lagged? :)
[04:39] <psusi> well that was messed up... had to delete my firefox profile to get it to stop inserting the wrong file in the upload dialog on lp... it kept putting in the one above the one I clicked.... in the process I noticed two other things really fubar... the first was ctrl-alt-F1 no longer switches to a tty, and the second is when I logged in a guest session, it got access denied trying to ls /home despite the fact that /home is world readable
[04:39] <psusi> were either of those last two intentional?  and if so, how the hell was the second one done? ;)
[04:40] <slangasek> the guest session is done with apparmor
[04:40] <slangasek> ctrl-alt-f1 is not intentional
[04:40] <psusi> plymouth bug?
[04:41] <slangasek> no
[04:41] <slangasek> not unless you're running an old version of plymouth
[04:41] <psusi> just upgraded
[04:42] <ScottK> slangasek: I was lagged.  My wifi router was bought when we had one wifi device in the house.  I think we have about 10 now.  Every now and then it has a conniption.
[04:43] <ScottK> Also we have 4 7 year olds over for a slumber party tonight, so every now and then, I have to go restore order.
[04:43] <psusi> grrr.... well I guess that explains it... still very frustrating getting access denied on something world readable, heh...
[04:55] <slangasek> ScottK: right - cross-referencing with http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu_ftbfs.cgi removes 103 source packages from the cull list, leaving 125
[04:56] <ScottK> I'm suprised it's not more.  That's good news I guess.
[04:56] <ScottK> Of the 103 are any currently out of date and needing to be tried again?
[04:56] <ScottK> If there are, shoot me a list and I'll take care of them.
[05:00] <slangasek> hmm, let me see
[05:07] <slangasek> ScottK: libpoe-component-client-dns-perl is the only one
[05:07] <ScottK> OK.  I'll have a look
[05:07] <ScottK> Thanks.
[05:08] <ScottK> Retried, we'll see.
[05:16] <ScottK> slangasek: Odd.  The retry on that failed.
[05:16]  * ScottK throws up his hands and says "Perl, meh!"
[05:16] <slangasek> is it possible that it failed to be included in lucas's latest rebuild run at all?
[05:17] <slangasek> (the page I'm pulling from only shows me confirmed failures, it doesn't confirm the names of the packages that succeeded)
[05:17] <ScottK> Perhaps.
[05:17] <ScottK> Maybe lucas will read the scrollback and check.
[05:17] <slangasek> lucas: ^^ :)
[05:19] <slangasek> "t/06_hosts.t" - looks suspiciously like a test suite whose success depends on the buildd environment's network config
[05:20] <ScottK> Wouldn't suprise me.  Since it's arch all it never hits a buildd in Debian.
[05:28] <genii> I'm affected by bug 545585  , 2 days ago the bug report says "This bug was fixed in the package linux - 2.6.32-18.27"   Is there a timeline when -18 will be in the repositories?
[05:29] <crimsun> genii: it's already in the repo.
[05:30] <genii> crimsun: Weird. dist-upgrade reports nothing available (I'm still on -17 but using -16 for stability due to this bug)
[05:31] <crimsun> genii: your mirror probably hasn't synced yet
[05:33] <genii> Strange. apt-cache search shows it but dist-upgrade reports no kernel updates.
[05:34]  * genii manually installs
[05:37] <wgrant> It looks like the new linux-meta isn't out yet.
[05:37] <wgrant> That's required to pull in the new ABI.
[07:28] <diwic> How do I easiest make a debug build of a package?
[07:29] <wgrant> diwic: There are pre-built debug symbols for all packages in the archive. See ddebs.ubuntu.com
[07:30] <diwic> wgrant, yes, I've tried that, but when I try to debug the line just jumps up and down, I guess I need to build with -O0 to avoid that
[07:31] <diwic> i e when I press "next" in ddd/gdb the next line is often not the expected one
[07:32] <diwic> I guess, due to aggressive inlining and other optimizations
[09:01] <lucas> slangasek: yes, tests hanged, so I had to kill it manually => did not fail, but did not succeed.
[09:01] <slangasek> lucas: could you give me a list of those?
[09:04] <lucas> slangasek: on http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~lucas/ubuntu-nbs/, there are files with the full results on i386 and amd64
[09:13] <slangasek> lucas: so the 'Unknown's in http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~lucas/ubuntu-nbs/res.lucid.{i386,amd64} are what I'm looking for?
[10:40] <pecisk> kenvandine, ping? :)
[11:01] <geser> slangasek: removals in Debian are still imported into lucid, right? or are removal bugs needed?
[11:03] <gnomefreak> were the daily alt. ISo's moved?
[11:03] <gnomefreak> http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily/current/ doesnt have them
[11:07] <lifeless> gnomefreak: releases.ubuntu.com
[11:09] <gnomefreak> lifeless: those are daily builds? why wasnt desktop image moved
[11:09] <gnomefreak> http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-live/current/ has daily desktop
[11:11] <gnomefreak> releases.ubuntu is the latest released ISO (beta1)
[11:12] <sabdfl> slangasek: what's the protocol to request a sync from Debian now, for schroedinger?
[11:29] <lifeless> sabdfl: well, its a new upstream, so requestsync --lp -d unstable -e schroedinger
[11:29] <lifeless> unless 1.0.8->1.0.9 is bugfix only from upstream, in which case drop the -e
[11:36] <mattn> hi
[11:36] <mattn> i'm trying to build a package that adds a new entry to /etc/services
[11:36] <mattn> is there a debian-way to do this?
[11:38] <pecisk> mattn, why would you do that?
[11:39] <mattn> to see the service when doing netstat -l for my package ;)
[11:39] <mattn> or should one not add local services at all?
[11:39] <lifeless> submit a patch to netbase
[11:40] <aburch> Actually, ask IANA (see the header of /etc/services)
[11:41] <lifeless> aburch: actually, I think you need to see the header :)
[11:41] <Laney> I'm getting this aptitude core reasonably reliably now
[11:41] <lifeless> "or are needed by a Debian package" is in that header.
[11:41] <lifeless> mattn: you could see the nmap package, a comment in services suggests that nmap might add more, in some fashion.
[11:42] <mattn> good idea - thanks
[11:43] <mattn> looks like it delivers some own service file
[11:45] <cjwatson> lifeless: (gnomefreak has left, but FYI) daily builds are never on releases.u.c - if they're missing from cdimage, it's because the build failed (probably several times in succession)
[11:46] <cjwatson> geser: you need to file removal bugs - semi-automatic removal processing stops at DIF
[12:46] <lifeless> cjwatson: oh, ok
[12:47] <lifeless> cjwatson: thanks
[14:10] <WoAnerges> hi guys!
[14:10] <WoAnerges> have VAIO with "ATI mobility radeon HD 4570" and Intel Core2 DUO T6600 @ 2.2GHz.
[14:10] <WoAnerges> can't install ubuntu 10.04 normally. problems with video appearance.
[14:10] <WoAnerges> need help.
[14:11] <WoAnerges> i know - the image in attachment - it looks like video card owerheat, but it's not an owerheat of vc processor. i am sure about that, because i had a vc that was damaged by owerheating. this is not that case. i think there's a compability problem with laptop hardware. dear development team,,, you must fix it :S
[14:11] <WoAnerges> don't leave me without ubuntu. (=
[14:11] <WoAnerges> http://ubuntuforums.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=151676&d=1269750326
[14:12] <azeem> WoAnerges: please ask in #ubuntu
[14:12] <WoAnerges> they sent me here
[14:12] <WoAnerges> :(
[14:12] <WoAnerges> i feel like in a hospital!!!
[15:45] <lucas> slangasek: yes
[16:39] <BenHoltz> hey everyone i need some help with my ubuntu instalation.  I have upgraded to the 10.04 version and I'm having problems with grub loading.  Can someone point me in the right direction to re-configuring grub?
[16:40] <BenHoltz> i just  read the topic, i will take this to #ubuntu
[18:13] <slangasek> geser: I think a removal bug is a good idea
[18:33] <ari-tczew> can we add a patchsystem in SRU?
[18:50] <blistov> oi. Lucid Beta, up to date as of this minute, host disk is a single 7500RPM SATA2 disk which moves ~90MBps, ext3/ext4 fs, libvirt/kvm linux guests get ~20MBps max, and windows guests get <4MBps max, using any emulation mode (ide/scsi/usb, and virtio for linux)
[18:51] <blistov> If I put the guest image on dev/shm, I get about 20MBps in Windows guests and about 250MBps in Linux guests.
[18:51] <blistov> Any idea's?  Haven't found any bug report yet.
[18:52] <sladen> blistov: file one please
[19:09] <blistov> sladen, do you think this should be filed under kvm or libvirt?  Same response from qemu.
[19:10] <cnd_mini> I'm working to clean up the linux-firmware-nonfree package, and I've come across the lintian tag stating that there's no valid copyright statement in debian/copyright
[19:10] <cnd_mini> I'm not sure who the copyright should be assigned to
[19:11] <cnd_mini> it's a native package with no upstream, and it's just a bunch of non-distributable firmware files
[19:20] <sladen> blistov: you can attach the same bug to both
[19:21] <sladen> blistov: eg. created it again qemu, then click "also affects distribution (Ubuntu)" and add kvm/etc
[20:27] <cjwatson> ari-tczew: please don't - just work with whatever's in place right now
[20:28] <cjwatson> cnd_mini: there doesn't have to be a single answer - you're supposed to list all the copyright statements and licences and which parts of the package they apply to
[20:54] <psusi> cjwatson, you get a chance to look at my last revision of the parted patch?
[21:02] <jono> can anyone tell me where the purple ubuntu wallpaper lives on an ubuntu system
[21:03] <zyga> jono: I think it's called warty-final
[21:03] <zyga> just dpkg -S warty
[21:04] <zyga> it should find it
[21:04] <zyga> it's in /usr/share/backgrounds AFAIR
[21:06]  * psusi kicks debugfs... says there are extra inode fields there, but won't show what they are or let you manipulate them
[21:11] <rlameiro> what is the name of the propietary drivers installer?
[21:12] <crimsun_> jockey?
[21:12] <rlameiro> ok
[21:14] <rlameiro> ok jockey gives me this error SystemError: installArchives() failed
[21:14] <rlameiro> trying to install a broadcom driver
[21:14] <rlameiro> does anyone here come into this?
[21:16] <zyga> rlameiro: did you run it from command line?
[21:16] <rlameiro> yes
[21:16] <rlameiro> zyga, it doesnt output nothing
[21:16] <rlameiro> does it have a verbose option?
[21:17] <rlameiro> no it doesnt have verbose option
[21:17] <rlameiro> it just output a error message saying
[21:18] <rlameiro> SystemError: installArchives() failed
[21:18] <zyga> hmm, if it's written in python (SystemError hints that)
[21:19] <zyga> it probably has a log file somewhere, can you check the source code of what it does?
[21:20] <rlameiro> try to look at it
[21:23] <cjwatson> psusi: I haven't been at my laptop all day, sorry
[21:23] <zyga> rlameiro: me?
[21:24] <rlameiro> zyga, no, me :D
[21:24] <rlameiro> I didnt find anything
[21:24] <psusi> cjwatson, ahh, ok... well I'm satisfied with those parted changes and have gone back to working on e2defrag... hope you get them in for beta 2
[21:25] <cjwatson> psusi: I certainly intend to!  I want to get those bugs closed
[21:25] <zyga> rlameiro: did you run jockey-gtk or jockey-text?
[21:25] <cjwatson> psusi: it's on my list for Monday
[21:25] <rlameiro> gtk version
[21:26] <rlameiro> zyga running the text version now
[21:26] <zyga> rlameiro: I'm checking the source now, please run the text version
[21:26] <rlameiro> it outputs nothing
[21:26] <rlameiro> just says searchinf for available drivers and then quits
[21:28] <zyga> rlameiro: I ran jockey-gtk via strace to check if it opens any files but it seems not to
[21:28] <zyga> so chances for log files are none
[21:28] <rlameiro> in text mode i made this
[21:28] <rlameiro>  sudo jockey-text -e kmod:wl
[21:28] <rlameiro> and the result was exactly the same
[21:29] <rlameiro> i think there are some bugs already
[21:29] <rlameiro> but this on beta1,
[21:29] <rlameiro> i am running ubuntustudio, could it be for that?
[21:30] <zyga> rlameiro: I think that some part of jockey is catching exceptions and not showing the backtrace
[21:30] <zyga> rlameiro: I don't know
[21:30] <rlameiro> zyga, maybe jockey is calling some lib or other script ...
[21:31] <rlameiro> do i have a way to know that?
[21:31] <zyga> rlameiro: most likely apt stuff
[21:31] <rlameiro> without having to read all the code :D
[21:31] <zyga> rlameiro: yes, check what it imports
[21:31] <zyga> no
[21:31] <zyga> :-)
[21:31] <zyga> just see the imports
[21:31] <rlameiro> lol
[21:31] <zyga> and imports of imports that don't look like standard python stuff or gtk stuff that cannot possibly install software
[21:33] <rlameiro> well it imports a lot of dbus stuff
[21:33] <rlameiro> and oslib...
[21:34] <zyga> rlameiro: I think the actuall stuff is somewhere inside jokey's libraries
[21:35] <rlameiro> zyga, well
[21:35] <rlameiro> i will ty to reboot now and see how it goes
[21:35] <rlameiro> cya
[21:39] <rlameiro> zyga, it works now
[21:39] <zyga> rlameiro: I checked oslib, it imports apt module
[21:39] <rlameiro> It seams that the problem might be related with the indexing of the apt list or something...
[21:40] <rlameiro> this is straight from install
[21:40] <rlameiro> it shouldn't happen
[21:40] <rlameiro> fort the firstcommers this can be very scary :D
[21:45] <zyga> rlameiro: you should file a bug about that though
[21:45] <zyga> rlameiro: include the output from jockey
[21:45] <zyga> if anything the error handling code should be more user friendly
[21:46] <rlameiro> zyga, what is the handling code?
[21:46] <zyga> well the details are not important unless you want to fix this and dig deeper
[21:46] <zyga> but the part that broke was this:
[21:46] <zyga> the UI was bad
[21:46] <zyga> something was not working
[21:47] <zyga> but the UI didn't tell you anything about which part is broken
[21:47] <rlameiro> yeap
[21:47] <zyga> didn't include any logs or any other reference for tracking this for power users
[21:47] <rlameiro> but the text version had the same problem also
[21:47] <zyga> did you run apt-get update or similar before rebooting?
[21:47] <zyga> rlameiro: yes, both versions didn't handle that error condition very well
[21:47] <rlameiro> no
[21:47] <rlameiro> ok
[21:47] <zyga> rlameiro: so it was fixed by magic, that's not good
[21:47] <zyga> I was hoping you can still reproduce it
[21:48] <rlameiro> ok i will file that bug
[21:48] <rlameiro> so i will file that on jockey bugs
[21:48] <rlameiro> is there some tool to give info of my sistem, so devs can now?
[21:49] <rlameiro> zyga, for reproducing it i will need to do a fresh install again :D
[21:49] <zyga> since jockey itself didn't crash nothing can help us directly
[21:49] <zyga> I think it's best to include the actual output
[21:49] <rlameiro> ok
[21:49] <rlameiro> maybe i go and ask about it on ubuntu-bugs
[21:49] <zyga> (and the commands you launched)
[21:49] <zyga> as well as the fact that reboot fixed the problem
[21:50] <rlameiro> ok
[22:20] <rlameiro> zyga
[22:20] <rlameiro> !bug #550503
[22:20] <rlameiro> you can go ther if you want
[22:20] <rlameiro> i did mentioned you
[22:20] <rlameiro> :d
[22:42]  * psusi is deeper into the innards of the ext4 fs than any human ever should be...
[22:46] <dottedmag> psusi: So Theodore Ts'o is not a human? Is he a superhuman officially now? :)
[22:46] <psusi> hehehe.... if I could have him over my shoulder working on this ancient code of his I would ;)
[22:47] <psusi> this stuff was written when dinosaurs ruled the earth...
[22:47] <psusi> and now I'm going over the new headers trying to figure out what has changed and update it to use the new features... like extents
[22:50] <psusi> didn't ted used to hang out in here?  not seen him lately
[23:31] <arand> Daviey: If not already aware (sorry if), plymouth-theme has now switched over to be provided by lubuntu-plymouth-theme instead of mythbuntu-default-settings, also Bug #550237 exists.
[23:34] <Daviey> arand: I don't think it's a bug with mythbuntu tbh
[23:34] <superm1> arand, i think the recommends of plymouth need to be fixed to recommend "plymouth-theme-ubuntu-text | plymouth-themes" instead.
[23:34] <Daviey> lubuntu-plymouth-theme is alphabetically before myth*, which is why you are now seeing lubuntu*
[23:35] <superm1> Yup
[23:36] <arand> Yea, it's in the recommends  pulled in by plymouth that the issue lies, I assume
[23:36] <slangasek> hmm, fixoring plymouth then
[23:36] <arand> Wouldn't recommending plymouth-theme-ubuntu-logo have a place as well?
[23:37] <slangasek> arand: metapackages will already pull in -ubuntu-logo by default, and it's an open question whether we want that on server; we only need to recommend one default, so -text should be it
[23:38] <arand> Ah, ok
[23:40]  * slangasek uploads the fix
[23:40] <arand> So I can set a confirmed for the plymouth task then at least, to get some communication out to the bug-lookers?
[23:40] <slangasek> if you do it fast :)
[23:40] <psusi> hrm.... odd.... /etc/mke2fs.conf says in the defaults section to use 256 byte inodes, but does not set the extra_isize flag... I don't think you're supposed to do that... if it isn't 128 bytes that flag should be set....
[23:41] <slangasek> arand: please also advise them to manually remove lubuntu-plymouth-theme / mythbuntu-default-settings
[23:41] <arand> slangasek: Done, so the updated package won't solve things automatically for people who alreadty installed it?
[23:42] <slangasek> arand: nope, an update won't cause these theme packages to be kicked out
[23:45] <Daviey> the joy of running beta :)
[23:46] <superm1> slangasek, as it stands today, plymouth-theme-ubuntu-logo appears to be a dependency of ubuntu-standard.  should that perhaps be moved to the desktop and netbook seeds respectively so that server doesn't pull in the logo'd themes too?
[23:46] <Daviey> superm1: I think the logo'd theme is "as designed" :(
[23:47] <slangasek> superm1: as I said, it's "an open question" :)
[23:47] <Daviey> i'm meaning to see how that works with serial console.
[23:47] <arand> slangasek: Are those reasonable instructions: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/404764/ ?
[23:47]  * Daviey will sulk and throw his toys if serial console is busted. :)
[23:49] <slangasek> arand: sure
[23:49] <slangasek> superm1: bug #548954