[00:27] <Keybuk> mbiebl, sadmac: what did you two want anyway? :)
[03:29] <sadmac> Keybuk: I just wanted in on the joke ;)
[04:44] <Keybuk> sadmac: I hate you
[04:44] <sadmac> Keybuk: good. Hate keeps a man alive
[04:46] <Keybuk> :D
[04:51] <Keybuk> sadmac: I thought of you when I was j/o earlier
[04:51] <Keybuk> no, wait, that's not what I mean
[04:51] <Keybuk> I thought of you when I filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/upstart/+bug/567691
[04:52] <sadmac> Keybuk: go far enough west of my location and they'll hang you for comments like that. Or south. Or east. Really anywhere a bit further from downtown Raleigh...
[04:53] <sadmac> Keybuk: here it only makes my penis harder... no wait... 
[04:54] <Keybuk> they'd probably hang me in downtown Raleigh too
[04:54] <Keybuk> but ironically
[04:54] <sadmac> Keybuk: they'd kill you as an example of what less tolerant people might have done.
[04:57] <Keybuk> also https://bugs.launchpad.net/upstart/+bug/567693
[04:57] <Keybuk> Caesar will like that one
[04:58] <sadmac> Keybuk: /etc/sysconfig is...something else.
[04:59] <Keybuk> is it?
[04:59] <Keybuk> what do you use for that kind of thing?
[05:00] <sadmac> Keybuk: its any sort of configuration that is parsed and put into effect directly by init scripts. Usually that ends up being environment variable formatted for ease, but it also has, for example, iptables rules
[05:00] <sadmac> Keybuk: also the definition has gotten loser as other parts of the system have had to parse things in there (networkmanager for example)
[05:02] <sadmac> Keybuk: actually now that I read the ticket again it is effectively the same thing. The analogy I drew at first was more to rc.local
[05:02] <sadmac> which is something else entirely
[05:02] <Keybuk> right
[05:02] <Keybuk> so I was right ;)
[05:02] <Keybuk> we use /etc/default for that
[05:02] <Keybuk> but I've been persuaded by everyone (including you) that Upstart needs an equivalent
[05:02] <Keybuk> except it'd be an empty-by-default directory
[05:03] <sadmac> Keybuk: ugly, nasty thing to implement
[05:03] <sadmac> once I finally get out from under this parser thing I need to set up an upstart-next branch on launchpad and make with the gutting.
[16:10]  * Caesar likes https://bugs.launchpad.net/upstart/+bug/567693
[19:59] <Keybuk> sadmac: so, I'm confused; did Upstart make it into RHEL 6 or not?
[19:59] <sadmac> Keybuk: yep. its in there.
[20:00] <Keybuk> ah, I see it mentioned in "Discontinued Packages"
[20:00] <Keybuk> which version went in?
[20:00] <sadmac> Keybuk: 0.6
[20:00] <Keybuk> \o/
[20:00] <Keybuk> phew
[20:01] <sadmac> Keybuk: you're saying phew. I'm the only person in RH's support organization who understand's Upstart
[20:01] <Keybuk> ;-)
[20:01] <Keybuk> yeah
[20:01] <Keybuk> because it makes getting LSB on board MUCH EASIER
[20:01] <Keybuk> I was fearing you shipping 0.3 - it would have put back LSB adoption of Upstart to after RHEL 7
[20:02] <sadmac> is LSB still relevant?
[20:02] <sadmac> the attitude of the public on that subject seems to shift a lot.
[20:04] <Keybuk> it's relevant to killing off init scripts
[20:04] <Keybuk> since the LSB still mandates them
[20:05] <sadmac> though if they follow RHEL they might use 0.6 as the standard, which is slightly undesirable.
[20:05] <Keybuk> sure, but 0.6 in RHEL now means we can at least start moving
[20:06] <sadmac> true
[20:06] <sadmac> and if we actually manage this backward compatibility stunt we might be able to coax 0.10/1.0 into 6.x
[20:08] <Keybuk> that was the idea ;-)
[20:08] <sadmac> KVM went in in a minor. I don't see why we couldn't.
[20:08] <Keybuk> I *really* intend that to work; you should be able to update Upstart on RHEL 6 or Ubuntu 10.04 LTS and things should carry on working
[20:09]  * sadmac is glad plautrba gets to deal with the problems in the meantime.
[20:09] <notting> kvm probably had a bit more customer demand 
[20:10] <sadmac> notting: I thought it was more engineering bile. I always figured we did it so we could hope to push the customers of xen and kill it dead that much sooner.
[20:10] <sadmac> cuz, y'know, xen sucks
[20:17] <JanC> you mean, xen is owned by a competitor?  ;)
[20:17] <sadmac> JanC: no. I mean xen sucks.
[20:23] <ilmari> that's why rh didn't buy them?
[20:23] <JanC> at least it sucks less than hyper-v -- I mean, it actually works  ;)
[20:52] <wasabi_> So that's pretty neat. It's cool to see something that I spent so much mental effort thinking about make it into RHEL.
[20:52] <wasabi_> Rock on fellows.