[08:20] <crimsun> dholbach: someone mentioned that you might have a greasemonkey script to extract git SHA1s from LP bug reports
[08:21] <dholbach> crimsun: erm, no - I'm sorry - bdmurray maybe?
[08:21] <wgrant> bryce mentioned it in a session yesterday.
[08:21] <wgrant> That he had one, that is.
[08:21] <wgrant> Or something to do with extracting git SHA1s from bugs, at least.
[10:05] <james_w> statik: you should be good to go
[10:35] <sicksquirrel> hi all
[10:38] <sicksquirrel> anyone there?
[10:41] <sicksquirrel> hello?
[10:42] <joaopinto> sicksquirrel, most people is at the UDS right now
[10:42] <cjwatson> sicksquirrel: the Ubuntu development summit is going on at the moment, and most people are not paying huge amounts of attention to IRC.  In any case, it is better form to simply ask your question, rather than asking whether you may ask it
[10:44] <slangasek> sicksquirrel: from #ubuntu-testing, where you didn't wait for an answer, I understand your question is about whether 10.04 LTS is "stable compared to 9.04".  That's a question that needs so much more information to answer usefully that I recommend you just try it and see if it works for your needs.
[10:45] <slangasek> sicksquirrel: if you have further questions, #ubuntu is probably a better channel
[11:27] <nxvl> just discovered that most of the packages in lp/debian are completely outdated
[11:27] <StevenK> nxvl: Known bug
[11:27] <nxvl> StevenK: ubuntu-dev-tools are broken because of that
[11:28] <crimsun> w3m+PTS+duct tape!
[11:28] <nxvl> to much work
[11:28] <StevenK> nxvl: The Sources.gz in sid/main for Debian is being mis-generated
[11:28] <geser> nxvl: requestsync in u-d-t trunk has some work-arounds for this
[11:29] <lucas> StevenK: do you have a (debian) bug number for that?
[11:29] <StevenK> lucas: Indeed. Let me fetch it for you.
[11:30] <StevenK> lucas: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=577759
[11:30] <lucas> thanks
[11:31] <StevenK> It also affects unstable, but the title doesn't say so
[12:31] <perlsyntax> What package do i need with my apt-get to make my own deb?
[12:33] <perlsyntax> ?
[14:17] <cjwatson> Keybuk: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=578635#20 suggests that the version of dpkg in my PPA should address your performance problems
[16:00] <ricotz> pitti, hello, me and Laney were just arguing about a SRU for "docky" (2.0.2 to 2.0.3.1) which only contains bugfixes and translation update. this results in a quite large debdiff which was the center of discussion
[16:02] <pitti> ricotz: if you could attach a debdiff with the autoconf noise and po files filterdiff'ed out, it will make it much easier to review
[16:03] <ricotz> Laney, could you do this? ^
[16:03] <Laney> pitti: but it being in the uploaded debdiff doesn't invalidate the SRU candidacy?
[16:04] <pitti> Laney: the uploaded debdiff still needs to be checked of course
[16:04] <pitti> but for those cases we just generally ignore the autoconf generated noise
[16:05] <Laney> yes
[16:05] <Laney> good, that's what I was hoping for
[16:05] <Laney> thanks a lot
[16:05] <ricotz> great
[16:05] <pitti> bbl
[16:05] <Laney> jdong: ^^^
[16:32] <dholbach> who can mark https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~lfaraone/ubuntu/lucid/accerciser/libgail-dep/+merge/23773 as merged/closed?
[16:33] <Laney> not me
[16:33] <Laney> which is weird, we had a bug like that fixed recently
[16:34] <dholbach> james_w can probably help, or cjwatson
[16:34] <Laney> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/540250
[16:35] <cjwatson> if I can, I don't see how
[16:35] <cjwatson> I thought it was supposed to notice automatically
[16:35] <cjwatson> oh
[16:35] <cjwatson> the merge target is lp:ubuntu/lucid/accerciser
[16:36] <dholbach> I think it's ~ubuntu-branches members?
[16:36] <cjwatson> was it merged into *lucid*?
[16:36] <Laney> I should be able to edit the status anyway
[16:36] <Laney> e.g. if I'm rejecting it
[16:36] <cjwatson> I'm a member of ~ubuntu-branches, and I don't have any special UI to edit it AFAICS
[16:36] <Laney> right?
[16:36] <dholbach> no, a different fix from debian was imported into maverick
[16:37] <dholbach> usually there's an icon next to "status"
[16:37] <cjwatson> anyway, I don't know the right way to deal with that and don't want to mess with it
[16:37]  * Laney suggests an LP bug
[16:38] <dholbach> cjwatson: ok, thanks anyway
[17:01] <blendmaster1024> how do i configure something with the autotools configure so that it is compiled in debug mode?
[17:03] <blendmaster1024> oh wait "not support not app devel"
[18:28] <sash_> hello, everyone. i am trying to build netbook-launcher in fedora13. i will also have to adopt some libraries, whatever. my problem is that in f13 contrary to f12 the build fails because of a change in f13-s ld-beahviour (read https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UnderstandingDSOLinkChange if interested). well. as i see, the configure-script is not compatible to that, so ...
[18:28] <sash_> ... does anyone know, if and when ubuntu, which is the netbook-launcher-upstream as i see, will adopt that behaviour? or am i completely wrong with my guess?
[19:06] <Yitzach> I ran a number of programs last night that required more RAM than I had. Did I see correctly that Ubuntu killed one of the programs for the RAM? If so, would it be possible that the next release asks which program to kill before killing it?
[19:09] <jpds> Yitzach: Are you referring to the OOM-killer?
[19:11] <Yitzach> I have no idea. The #ubuntu channel is telling me that the kernal will kill processes for RAM if RAM is lacking. I just want it to kill Google Earth which was the source of the problem and not my Internet browser with an open job application.
[19:11] <Daenyth> Hi
[19:12] <Daenyth> I have a quick question about upstart and init.d scripts. We have a custom init.d script stopping on runlevels 0/6, but it never gets run on shutdown. Does upstart not send "stop" commands to init.d scripts?
[19:13] <Daenyth> Also, I haven't been able to tell via a quick look at the docs, but can I do "start on shutdown" in an upstart config file?
[19:14] <Daenyth> or something to that effect?
[19:17] <kklimonda> Yitzach: I don't see it being possible to display user with a list of potential processes to kill in case of running out of memory anytime soon.
[19:18] <Yitzach> I think there are two solutions for killing active processes when RAM is short, ask the user which one, or kill the most recently started one as the user will have done the least with it and then give a message to effect of RAM had run out.
[19:19] <Yitzach> The reason for the option is it will be the least rude to the user. Likewise, the killing the most recent start for second least rude.
[19:20] <Yitzach> I understand it will be sometime in comeing. I just wanted to provide feedback on that feature.
[19:20] <kklimonda> you can't really ask user because it would require both knowledge of how to communicate with user and resources which kernel already doesn't have.
[19:21] <Daenyth> If the kernel has so little memory as to start OOM killing, it does not have enough memory to ask the user what to kill
[19:21] <kklimonda> it already tries to kill processes that are the most likely to not cause any loss of work
[19:23] <Yitzach> Which is why killed the internet browser and not VirtualBox. I think it should put the last opened in que to kill first as it probably caused the short in RAM and the user will have done the least with it.
[19:23] <Daenyth> I don't really see how that's a FR for ubuntu
[19:24] <Daenyth> go talk to the kernel developers :/
[19:24] <Yitzach> And where might they be hiding?
[19:24] <kklimonda> Yitzach: it does that - the longer process runs the smaller score it has
[19:24] <Daenyth> Yitzach: LKML seems a likely place to start
[19:25] <Yitzach> kklimonda: The browser was open for 3 hours; Google Earth, the cause, was just opened. Why did it not kill Google Earth
[19:26] <Daenyth> :/
[19:26] <kklimonda> Yitzach: I don't know - probably browser was using much more ram which made it a better target.
[19:29] <Yitzach> kklimonda: The RAM is what did it. I think time open is the more important consideration. And then a note from the kernal: "Your program died due to insufficient RAM." Thank you. I'll let the kernal development people know my thoughts on that.
[19:37] <directhex> wait, Yitzach wants the oom-killer to suck less? sgi have been fighting kernel upstream for years to get changes to the retarded oom-killer behaviour
[20:27] <ibeekman> Has ubuntu mobile (ununtu MID) been discontinued?
[20:33] <ibeekman> Has ubuntu mobile (ununtu MID) been discontinued, or merged with a different project? (Moblin maybe?)
[20:47] <ccheney> ibeekman: probably closest version is UNE
[20:47] <ccheney> ibeekman: though i don't know much about the MID version
[20:47] <ccheney> ibeekman: UNE is Ubuntu Netbook Edition
[20:48] <ccheney> http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download-netbook
[21:09] <ibeekman> ccheney: so it has been discontinued?  Was it really short lived?  It looks like it was there for 9.x only.
[21:10] <ibeekman> I want to make a touchscreen beagle board and am trying to figure out what OS to run (ideally some debian derivative, even more ideally an ubuntu derivative)
[21:10] <ibeekman> maybe maemo or peppermint or something.
[21:12] <Tm_T> ibeekman: normal Ubuntu wouldn't do?
[21:13] <abogani> ibeekman: Perhaps #ubuntu-arm is a better place to obtain replies! :-)
[21:20] <ccheney> ibeekman: yea asking the arm team would be better
[21:27] <StevenK> Ubuntu MID was only released for 8.04 and 8.10
[21:33] <ccheney> yuck sony is still releasing new poulsbo netbooks
[21:36] <ccheney> hmm according to the atom model number it seems intel is releasing new higher speed poulsbo also