| slangasek | doko__: so the net effect of this is that ipv6 transitional addresses would only be used for connecting to IPv6-only sites? that seems reasonable | 03:23 |
|---|---|---|
| ScottK | Unfortunately the IETF consensus seems to be that breaking IPv4 NAT is a feature, not a bug. | 03:34 |
| ScottK | So we get stuck trying to make it work in the real world. | 03:34 |
| slangasek | well, as described, it doesn't *break* NAT; the only argument for making this change is that IPv6 transitional addresses are less reliable than established IPv4 NAT | 03:36 |
| ScottK | Which I think is a fair statement. | 03:37 |
| slangasek | that hasn't been my experience, FWIW - I find them equally reliable, with certain obvious benefits to being able to use a public address in the former case - but I'm ok with this change if others find that to be the case | 03:39 |
| slangasek | (I had to think through it to assure myself that it wasn't going to make 6to4 and teredo /completely/ useless, since if someone has deployed either of those they've done so for a reason) | 03:39 |
| * ScottK nods | 03:40 | |
| slangasek | cjwatson: you added a note to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BetaProcess right after 8.04.1 asking for a u-d-a announcement about post-release plans, but I don't find anything in my mail history about this; what level of detail were you looking for, if you remember? | 09:11 |
| cjwatson | hm, nothing in wetware memory ... | 09:12 |
| * cjwatson searches the external memory store :-) | 09:12 | |
| cjwatson | 13:59 <mdz> this thread on -devel has gotten me wondering... | 09:17 |
| cjwatson | 13:59 <mdz> did anyone tell the community about the 8.04.1 plan? | 09:17 |
| cjwatson | 14:07 <cjwatson> hmm, I mentioned the team focusing on 8.04.1 in a public meeting, and the .1 team meetings were on the fridge, but I'm not seeing anything where the whole plan was laid out | 09:17 |
| cjwatson | 14:10 <mdz> I think we should try to do better at that for the next LTS | 09:18 |
| cjwatson | 14:10 <mdz> whatever our approach is | 09:18 |
| cjwatson | 14:10 <mdz> it seems big enough (certainly in retrospect) to have warranted a -devel-announce email | 09:18 |
| cjwatson | 14:27 <cjwatson> as at least a probably-good-enough placeholder, I've added a note to BetaProcess about it | 09:18 |
| cjwatson | (private conversation on 2008-07-07; seems to be nothing secret though) | 09:18 |
| slangasek | ok | 09:18 |
| slangasek | are there any plans for 10.04.1 like there were for 8.04.1? | 09:19 |
| cjwatson | and I think that the thread being referred to was https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2008-July/025720.html and thread | 09:19 |
| cjwatson | hmm, I haven't been told that there wasn't, and my understanding was that the 8.04 cycle was setting a pattern for future LTSes | 09:20 |
| cjwatson | but I see that LucidReleaseSchedule doesn't have anything explicit about it | 09:20 |
| slangasek | in terms of dedicating folks to work on post-release fixes? | 09:20 |
| cjwatson | robbiew: ^- has this been discussed among the platform managers? | 09:20 |
| slangasek | I mean, I've assumed there would be LTS point releases again staggered at roughly the halfway point of the cycle | 09:21 |
| ttx | cjwatson: the slight drawback of using debian-installer/splash=false is that existing server installation preseeds will have to be modified to keep the "old" (as in pre-10.04) server boot behavior | 09:35 |
| ttx | cjwatson: or am I understanding it wrong ? | 09:35 |
| slangasek | ttx: isn't the server ISO setting that by default on the boot commandline? | 09:36 |
| ttx | slangasek: I was thinking about netboot-ers | 09:36 |
| slangasek | ah | 09:36 |
| slangasek | then yeah | 09:36 |
| ttx | I just saw the splash screen on my just-installed netbooted UEC setup :) | 09:37 |
| slangasek | it's purty! | 09:37 |
| ttx | (tbh I have to look very fast to see it) | 09:38 |
| cjwatson | ttx: yes - I don't really see a way round that | 09:38 |
| cjwatson | I think I suggested release-noting that in the bug, though I don't remember for sure | 09:38 |
| cjwatson | in any case, preseeding has never been guaranteed to be stable from release to release | 09:38 |
| ttx | cjwatson: that works for me, we just need to document that well. | 09:38 |
| cjwatson | we don't break it gratuitously, but we've never hesitated to change it when we need to | 09:39 |
| ttx | (togather with the Alt-F7 trick) | 09:39 |
| ttx | cjwatson: The beta2 behavior has been working for me so far, I still have to debunk some spotty reports of failure (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-server/2010-April/004022.html) | 09:40 |
| quadrispro | hello folks | 10:33 |
| quadrispro | could anyone take a look at this? bug 561316 | 10:34 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 561316 in codelite "Sync codelite 2.5.2.4031~dfsg-1 (universe) from Debian unstable (main)" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/561316 | 10:34 |
| === ogra_ is now known as ogra | ||
| === rgreening_ is now known as rgreening | ||
| === barry` is now known as barry_ | ||
| === barry_ is now known as barry | ||
| mvo | pitti: what are the chances for a FFe for bug #45129 (diff http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/update-manager/main/revision/1778) ? I'm trying currently to do a formal FFe, but LP won't let me :/ | 15:17 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 45129 in update-manager "update-manager should have per-package changelog locations (was: uses changelogs.ubuntu.com for all packages)" [Wishlist,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/45129 | 15:17 |
| pitti | mvo: sub'ed -release and approved | 15:20 |
| pitti | mvo: it's half a bug fix anyway | 15:20 |
| mvo | pitti: nice, thanks! | 15:20 |
| mvo | pitti: I felt so too, but wanted to check with you first | 15:20 |
| pitti | thanks to you! | 15:21 |
| lamont | slangasek: wanna kick another livecd-rootfs build on acorn, just to see? | 15:34 |
| lamont | it's kinda disk abused atm, but that's just to see if I can make it fall over faster - so don't take this run as indicative of time needs | 15:34 |
| ogra | lamont, archive is out of sync on armel atm | 15:56 |
| ogra | (gnome-c-c needs to finish building and promotion) | 15:56 |
| lamont | ogasawara: doesn't matter so much - acorn fell over | 17:45 |
| slangasek | lamont: is acorn less over-fallen now? Any use in another livefs try? | 20:00 |
| lamont | slangasek: well, it'll either work or fall over..drives arrive in a day or 2 | 20:07 |
| slangasek | so doing another try doesn't tell you anything new :) | 20:07 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!