=== jenkins is now known as ubuntujenkins === ubuntujenkins is now known as jenkins === BPower_ is now known as BPower [04:37] I am currently unable to install lirc-modules-source in a fully updated maverick install - not sure if it is buggy package or weak admin though [04:38] (initially complains about being unable to find include/linux/autoconf.h - when i symlink include/generated/autoconf.h over it then just bombs out completely - implicit declaration of functions - assignment makes pointer without cast, etc) === LSD|Ninj1 is now known as LSD|Ninja === Jeruvy_ is now known as Jeruvy === jenkins is now known as fedorajenkins === fedorajenkins is now known as slackwarejenkins === slackwarejenkins is now known as jenkins === jenkins is now known as jenkins2 === jenkins2 is now known as jenkins === look is now known as soundlikeadog === soundlikeadog is now known as look === om26er_ is now known as om26er === Daviey_ is now known as Daviey [10:16] http://ubuntuforums.org/ seem to be down on my computer, I guess these things happen from time to time. [10:18] HappyNwb: Yes; they're down for maintenance. === jenkins1 is now known as jenkins [11:35] hi guys, is there a guide on how to update my lucid to alpha2? or woudl i be better off installign the iso [11:36] !upgrade [11:36] For upgrading, see the instructions at https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UpgradeNotes - see also http://www.ubuntu.com/desktop/get-ubuntu/upgrade [11:37] Fudge: that is what you are looking for i think [11:37] k ty mate [11:38] np [11:48] i didnt see on those links upgrading from lucid lts to the alpha2 of maverick. did i not look properly? [11:51] Fudge: in on lucid, just $ update-manager -d [11:51] that's it [11:52] great thankyou :D [11:55] not really [11:55] you need to change prompt==normal. it says it on the second link [11:56] look for networkupgrade (recommended) [11:56] network upgrade using ubuntu servers i think is the name of it [11:59] gnomefreak: I think that is actually no longer needed (the change to "normal") [11:59] but confirmation if that works (or not) would be nice [11:59] mvo: it should [12:00] since LTS always default to LTS upgrades [12:00] mvo: cool [12:00] unless -d does some magic [12:01] there is some new magic, I hope it works [12:01] mvo: new magic? [12:03] lunch [12:03] what is ist time for release of alpha2 [12:03] kickingintender: unknown [12:03] when its ready [12:04] ok the release date is today itself right [12:04] quadcores report cpu loads yuckyly [12:05] kickingintender: that does not mean it will be released this week [12:06] is Luke from the dev team in this chan? [12:06] * gnomefreak hoopes they get to normal sixe ISO,s before A2 release [12:06] s/sixe/size [12:06] Fudge: that depends luke is a common name [12:07] he does a lot of accessibility stuff [12:07] Fudge: better off asking in #ubuntu-bugs [12:07] thanx for heads up [12:07] Fudge: the whole core dev team does that [12:07] ah ok [12:11] i was curious if the new speakup had been fixed for the alhpa yet but not sure where to fin dout === echidnaman is now known as JontheEchidna === gordon is now known as Guest2507 [14:34] alas when will the alpha 2 will release [14:44] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MaverickReleaseSchedule kickingintender [14:48] heh, I totally misread the slashdot header today :) [14:48] empathy is for the birds === jenkins1 is now known as jenkins [15:16] patdk-wk: Then I thought of Empathy vs Pidgin, etc [15:16] what I was thinking [15:18] I was all Telepathy FTW! :3 [15:19] * patdk-wk really doesn't want his im program talking for me [15:21] nothing like jumping off a bridge to learn how to fly [15:21] h00k: pidgin FTW [15:22] BUGabundo_remote: :( === villemv is now known as villev === villev is now known as villemv === villemv is now known as villev [17:23] alpha2 is out? [17:27] Not yet. [17:28] but website changed alpha-1 dir to alpha-2 [17:33] iddo: When A2 comes out there will be an annoucement on the devel-announce mailing list and we will update the topics here. Just because someone created a new directory on the webserver doesn't mean that isos are finished testing or even close to finishing. [17:34] is there a chance that the image i'm downloading now will be same as A2 ? === ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu+1 to: Official Ubuntu Maverick Meerkat support/discussion | IRC Guidelines: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcGuidelines | Lucid support in #ubuntu | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MaverickReleaseSchedule | Alpha 2 Released! See http://www.ubuntu.com/testing/maverick/alpha2 [18:15] where is the devel announcement ? === Me is now known as Guest57848 [18:21] iddo: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2010-July/000731.html [18:22] thanks [18:22] np [18:24] i'm gonna try to install it now [18:24] good luck [18:24] using usb-creator of jaunty, i hope it's ok [18:49] Quick question: 10.10 - any idea why prntscrn key won't take screenshot? [18:57] press it harder [19:05] What additional software is included in the DVD version? [19:07] callaghan: mainly language support [19:08] guntbert: ah, ok, thanks [19:09] callaghan: you're welcome :-) see http://www.ubuntu.com/desktop/get-ubuntu/alternative-download#dvd [19:12] guntbert: thanks, that is what I was looking for [19:12] callaghan: no problem [19:46] did the download links die? [19:47] http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/maverick/alpha-2/ is empty [19:59] why were the alpha 2 images taken down? [19:59] * Pici looks for answers [20:07] ubuntu seems to be back online, but not kubuntu. any changes since initial release? [20:10] I suspect shuffling of stuff on Canonical's servers. === poutine is now known as Yahweh [21:21] can i choose btrfs when installing alpha2? grub2 supports it? [21:23] iddo: You need to use the alternate installer and /boot needs to be on non-btrfs (default ext3 afaik). [21:23] oh [21:23] i already downloaded the normal installer [21:23] i wonder why it lets me choose btrfs [21:24] Oh it does? That's new.. [21:24] i wonder if i should continue.... [21:25] i'm in manual partitioning screen in installer now [21:25] Well, btrfs in ubuntu is unstable... That's one thing to take in cntext... [21:26] i'm trying the whole / in single partition... so far it didnt complain that i chose btrfs [21:26] but i wonder if grub2 would work? [21:26] Afaik, it doesn't, yet. [21:27] so i'll just waste time and have to install again, i guess? [21:27] i tried to ask in #grub [21:29] ahh installer says not supported when trying to contuinue [21:29] sorry for misinfo :( [21:32] how big should the /boot partition be? [21:34] why do you need to create a seperate boot partition? [21:34] I think 300-500 is standard in some cases, but don't take my word for that.. [21:34] $ du -sch /boot/ [21:34] 92M /boot/ [21:34] 92M total [21:34] Ian_corne: btrfs [21:34] $ du -sch /boot/ [21:34] 199M /boot/ [21:34] 199M total [21:34] ah ok [21:34] grub still doesn't work with btrfs? [21:34] I'd go for 500mb just to be sure [21:35] it depends on how regularly you kill old kernels [21:35] the 199 one has alot of old ones [21:35] Hi [21:35] I never do it manually :p [21:35] person in #grub says it doesnt work because of gpl2 license issue... http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg03107.html [21:35] It's in progress I think, that dear licensing issue... [21:36] ok [21:36] i don't think you need more than 200mb unless you go through entire alpha+beta without cleaning up [21:36] so should /boot be ext3 ? or ext2 ? [21:37] iddo: mine is ext3 [21:38] whats this btrfs talk? [21:39] btrfs is the new kid on the block [21:39] trying to see if normal alpha2 install will work with btrfs [21:39] void^: yep, altough not that new [21:40] is ubuntu one currently broken in nautilus? [21:43] knittl: last I heard - Yes [21:43] Ian_corne: ok, thanks [21:43] :) [21:53] Was wondering what folder does empathy keep all the user data so I can back it up and move it to a fresh install [21:55] Spirits-Sight: ~/.missin-control5 or something for account data, ~/.telepathy might have some... etc.. [21:55] thanks will check this is under the username right? [21:56] Spirits-Sight: Indeed. But that's an #ubuntu question, right? [21:57] yes yes I am trying to back up the stuff so I can install latest ubuntu :-) [21:58] sorry it could be both I believe here and #ubuntu but no one is answering over there the question [21:59] This looks interesting https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-m-grub2-boot-framebuffer ,but what does it mean that Grub 2 and Plymouth won't be so horrible in 10.10? I hope so :) [22:01] Goal is to boot like apple I guess... Only with purple and bongo-drums.. [22:03] i've just downgraded to grub1 and killed everything that smelled like a splash. my nerves can only take so much. [22:07] void^: oh? [22:07] arand: well the boot up really does suck for 10.04, they haven't done Plymouth properly, unlike other distros [22:08] arand: and then it gets even worse for loads of us that do propritary Nivida or ATI drivers [22:08] Yea I know, although at least it's reasonable quick, so I don't get the blackscreen for too long.. [22:09] arand: someone has even been trying to remove Plymouth from 10.04, without messing up the system recently, but he hasn't had much luck so far it seems [22:09] heh? [22:09] I thought it was easy to remove plymouth [22:09] patdk-wk: @ what? [22:09] patdk-wk: nope [22:09] not properly [22:09] and my systems don't seem to be broken at all [22:09] unless you want to take a load of stuff that should be installed with it [22:09] I just delete all plymouth stuff out of /etc/init and /etc/init.d [22:10] defently not recommended, but hasn't broken any of my systems (yet) [22:10] Nah, dunno if they made it a dependency when it turnen out their testers were uninstalling it and refusing to put it back in fear of it breaking during the test cycle >_< ... [22:10] patdk-wk: I do this like text boot fix, that isn't exactly working properly on the other computer. [22:10] arand: Plymouth is part of ubuntu-desktop [22:10] the issue is, fsck is piped to plymouth [22:10] I heard something like that, dunno if that was the cause though... [22:11] so if you completely kill plymouth, and your harddrive needs checking, your screwed [22:11] patdk-wk: oh? [22:12] * patdk-wk should submit patchs to debian [22:12] Yea, mountall-plymouth became very integral as it turned out, and now we're stuck with it. I don't personally complain, but as far as I can see it's a bit WFM.. [22:12] patdk-wk: andersk anyway and can't just do xsplash instead, even though its in the repo [22:13] arand: yeah Plymouth is well some people no problem with it at all, and many others yep problems [22:13] arand: probably most Ubuntu users don't really get issues with it, because they aren't even installing propritary drivers [22:14] Well I guess you could run fsck from another root, but the scheduled or forced check might be lost with mountall... [22:14] according to the plymouth readme file, removing the theme packages is one clean way to stop it from splashing [22:14] that seems to work for me [22:14] however even without the propritary driver on the other computer, it wasn't always working properly [22:14] Oh, I would actually guess the majority of ubuntu users are on the blobby drivers.. [22:15] well I hope 10.10 really does improve the boot up, including Grub, and by the looks of that blueprint I liked to, that may be indeed the case [22:15] linked to, above [22:16] i'm not so sure about grub2 in vbe mode. it might be good if you never use the grub menu, but then how does it matter either way? [22:16] also I hope this transparent feature that is coming will be worth it, for me 10.04's default themes are really half baked [22:16] I mean the two new themes for 10.04 one of which is the default [22:16] void^: I am not sure what vbe mode is even [22:17] Yea, Scott talked about the issue with blob drivers particularly and how plymouth wasn't really all the way there, at UDS, so at least they're very aware of it. [22:17] yeah the propritary drivers don't work properly with Plymouth and such [22:17] vesa graphics mode. on my system it features horrible redrawing performance, selecting a boot option a little further down the list feels becomes unpleasant. [22:18] -feels [22:19] void^: well as long as Grub 2 and Plymouth, look good, but also work properly on the computer, I will be happy I guess or happy enough I guess. [22:19] i'm not sure i get what it is all about [22:19] oh and of course accounts once logged in as long as things work alright there as well, but i'll have more stuff to remove in 10.10 for accounts I guess, but I don't know exactly what yet [22:20] initially your system boots in text mode, why is it important to switch to a graphics mode in grub? [22:20] void^: most people dual boot with Windows that use Ubuntu, so Grub needs to show [22:21] most people? [22:21] * patdk-wk doesn't know anyone [22:21] void^: and I guess like 10.04 it will show, when its a dual boot, but without a dual boot nope, and press esc if wanting it. [22:22] patdk-wk: well I say most people, going by #ubuntu ,but to be exact thats only a selection of users, however I guess even on the forums most people are dual booting with Windows. [22:22] * patdk-wk would assume the reason they are in the irc channel or the forums asking for help is they are windows users in thefirst place :) [22:22] well for dual booting it's even worse, bios in text mode -> grub in graphics mode -> windows loader in text mode ..? [22:23] I have >30 systems with ubuntu, none dualboot [22:23] void^: bios? what? people don't see their bios, unless they go into it [22:23] bios in text mode? all my bios are in graphics modes [22:23] same here some sort of graphical bios thingey [22:24] that's your bios setup, typically your system is in text mode when the bios initiates the boot process [22:24] void^: when a computer boots, it will show a manufacutre logo useually and yeah text [22:25] void^: thats what you mean? [22:25] i think we're not really connecting in this discussion [22:26] void^: yeah maybe not quite. Anyway by the way why did you downgrade to Grub 1? Grub legacy [22:26] less mode switching delay, no problems with btrfs [22:27] heh? [22:27] there's a few other things that don't work in grub2 yet, but i can't remember.. [22:27] I have no mode switching in grub2 (but I have grub2 in text mode I think) [22:27] void^: mode swithcing delay meaning? also I would have thought that btrfs was needed with Grub 2 [22:27] and no issues with btrfs [22:28] * sebsebseb still haven't done a 10.10 vm with btrfs, but soonish [22:28] maybe they've patched it now, that was a 10.04 grub2 [22:28] hasn't, above [22:28] you have /boot formatted with btrfs? [22:28] of course not [22:28] then it doesn't matter what grub you use :) [22:29] that sucks when meant to have a seperate /boot [22:29] I always do a seperate everything [22:29] patdk-wk: why? [22:29] normally I make / 2gigs [22:29] Hello everyone, I just tried to install Maverick Alpha 2 with a 1GB ext4 (/boot) partition and the rest as a btrfs (/) file system. After restarting, i get the following message: FATAL: Error inserting btrfs, and a initramfs prompt. I guess it still doesn't work? [22:29] doesn't matter much anymore [22:29] it does when grub-probe chickens out upon (not) detecting btrfs [22:29] but when I was using freebsd, it would always pause to check root [22:29] and do the others in the background [22:29] so if root was small [22:30] it would boot fast :) [22:30] cclocker: why Ext4 for boot not Ext3? [22:30] my /boot is ext4 [22:30] on lucid and maverick [22:30] patdk-wk: ok why did you go with Ext4 not Ext3? [22:30] sebsebseb: ehm, no idea, maybe because it was at the top :) [22:30] cause that is the installer default :) [22:31] are you using grub2? [22:31] actually that doesn't matter [22:31] cause you made it to inittab [22:31] initramfs [22:31] anyway if btrfs needs a seperate boot, by the time Ubuntu uses btrfs by default probably in 11.04, I guess things will be sorted out, so that people don't need to make seperate /boot :) [22:31] heh [22:32] there are craploads of laptops that can't access the harddrive >128gigs still [22:32] those still need seperate boots [22:32] I nearly did 9.04 with XFS, or whatever, but needed sepeate /boot and I was like, nah bugger that [22:32] patdk-wk: whats that? [22:32] what is what? [22:33] the lap top thing [22:33] ? [22:33] even grub2 can handle xfs now i think [22:33] the laptop thing I just explained? [22:33] I explained it, so what is to what about it? [22:33] patdk-wk: ok I read again [22:33] ya, grub2 does xfs [22:33] now I understand [22:33] lap tops that cant access a hard drive if it is bigger than 128GB [22:33] yep [22:34] I still have systems that can't access >8gig harddrives [22:34] patdk-wk: a harddrive yiou meant partition? [22:34] no [22:34] ok so why do those lap tops need seperate /boot ? [22:34] I mean the bios can only access the first 128gigs of drive [22:34] so the bios can locate all the boot files it needs [22:34] if your root has /boot on it [22:34] and you start to fill the drive [22:34] your new kernel will be >128gigs [22:34] and your system won't boot [22:35] happens all the time [22:35] the new kernel, will be put on towards the end of the hard disk space, you mean? [22:35] if your /boot partition is at the start of the time, that problem will never happen [22:35] well, with ext, if it places it after 128gig mark [22:35] I guess it doesn't have to be full for ext [22:35] used to ntfs always having this issue [22:35] cause most peple have xp on them :) [22:36] ah right [22:36] resize c: to <128gig, no problem [22:36] well I didn't know this stuff [22:36] the bios is always the limit [22:36] first it was 32megs [22:36] then 512megs [22:36] then 2gigs, 4gig 8gig 32gig 128gig, ... [22:37] Why does btrfs want seperate /boot though? [22:37] I don't see support for btrfs in grub2 yet [22:37] or XFS for that matter, well maybe not now [22:38] seperate /boot when the boot loader lacks support for the file system ? [22:38] patdk-wk: so this means that btrfs should work with a separate /boot? [22:38] cclocker, I have no issues :) [22:38] ext4 /boot and btrfs / [22:39] patdk-wk: how big is your /boot ? [22:39] 500m [22:39] yeah I was thinking something like that as well [22:39] patdk-wk: did you use the standard maverick alpha 2 cd? [22:39] 500MB or whatever I was thinking before [22:39] na, I upgraded from lucid awhile ago [22:39] cclocker: oh uhmm the ot her day [22:40] cclocker: on omgubuntu.co.uk [22:40] cclocker: they mentioned how the dailys got btrfs support, but [22:40] cclocker: only the alternate CD [22:40] I haven't tried this stuff yet [22:41] or read something, so I don't know if the desktop CD installer has support now, I guess it does [22:41] I manually converted my system, didn't use the installer or any gui thing to do it [22:41] It install quite easily, you need to go manual though.. [22:41] arand: well ok, but thats what it was like with 9.04 and the optional Ext4 support as well [22:41] I haven't figured out how to delete snapshots yet though, which I guess is an inceonvenience.. [22:41] that is easy :) [22:41] which apparnatly wasn't perfectly stable, since people lost data before, and the kernel or whatever, I naver had problems though :) [22:41] Yea, and that's the plan afaik.. [22:42] hm, I just tried it using the "select your partitions manually" option, I had to create a separate /boot, then it installed without problems, after a reboot i get this: http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?31,103432 [22:42] well, i will go with the alternate, then [22:42] patdk-wk: well if its like Ext3 being converted to Ext4, you can't quarrantee you then have the proper thing, some will say you have it, others will say do a new partition with the file system [22:42] cclocker: so you tried with the destop CD and manual install and did btrfs and won't work? [22:42] heh? [22:43] I have no idea what your talking about [22:43] Oh oh, Alpha 2 is out :) [22:43] sebsebseb: exactly [22:43] sebsebseb, ext3 -> ext4 is nothing at all like * -> btrfs [22:43] patdk-wk: I am saying the Ext3 to Ext4 conversion may not be good enough for those wanting complete support for the file system, and that Ext4 to btrfs conversion will probably be like that as well [22:43] maybe you should learn what ext3, ext4, btrfs are before commenting [22:43] dupondje: yes [22:44] dupondje: doesn't seem to offer much advantage though from what I read [22:44] patdk-wk: I know that Ext and btrfs are rather differnet [22:44] but do you know what is different between all 3 of them? [22:45] if you don't, how can you even talk about it? [22:45] Ah well we go with the flow :) [22:45] ext3 to ext4 is fine, you don't benifit from extents with your old files though [22:45] patdk-wk: to be honest I don't know much about btrfs yet, since I haven't read much about it yet, or tried it [22:45] some archive admin needs to accept Opal btw :P [22:45] but btrfs is completely different and works totally differently [22:46] patdk-wk: altough I will be trying btrfs in a vm soon, altough probably better to test a file system on real hardware than in a vm occasionally really. [22:46] patdk-wk: yes next generation file system, with snapshots and such, and the alternative to the Solaris ZFS which apparently is the best file system [22:46] no [22:46] that is what the user sees [22:46] patdk-wk: no? [22:46] completely not how it works :) [22:47] I hate zfs [22:47] why? [22:47] it's nothing but a pain [22:47] How so? and yes I have never used it [22:47] everyone I know is trashing it also [22:48] trashing as in replaceing with another file system? replacing with what? [22:48] the only people keeping it around I believe is solaris [22:48] yep [22:48] I dunno what they are switching too, or even they know yet [22:48] i must say converting ext->btrfs is neat; you get the old ext fs as a file in the new fs [22:48] void^: oh? [22:48] as a snapshot [22:48] oh right [22:49] * sebsebseb needs to read a bit more about btrfs really, and yeah try in a virtual machine at least [22:49] 302megs of updates :( [22:49] lol [22:49] void^: so basically the old Ext4 data is there, in a snapshot or what? [22:49] yep [22:50] btrfs is basically a cow system [22:50] it does mean that you need over 50% free space to convert [22:50] it never overrites [22:50] void^: well my vms have that [22:50] void, no [22:50] you only need enough space to double your inodes [22:50] not data [22:50] * sebsebseb should maybe try converting one of his 10.10 vms or both of them, from Ext4 to btrfs ? [22:51] that was in 3rd person or whatever its called :D ^ [22:51] my 10.10 vm is a bit odd acstaully, doesn't show all of the top panel like its meant to [22:51] desktop version [22:52] hmm, right. in theory it shouldn't take as much space. [22:52] maybe i've had more modified files than expected [22:52] void^: how to convert Ext4 into btrfs anyway? [22:53] patdk-wk: did you do it like that?: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Conversion_from_Ext3 [22:53] ^ that link explains it well enough [22:53] pretty much [22:53] http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=246520 [22:54] * sebsebseb will probably clean install the other computer, when Ubuntu uses btrfs by default. [22:54] altough that just came from someone who hasn't tried btrfs in a vm yet, or read more about it [22:54] ok, this looks good, i'll give it a try, thanks [22:55] still downloading updates :( [22:56] oh, openoffice update :( [22:56] I should uninstall openoffice [22:56] are you using a 56k modem or what? ;) [22:57] downloading at 6-8mbit [22:58] I should probably setup one of my colo servers as a mirror [22:59] it's the download from uk thing that slows it down [22:59] dunno why, but, us.archive.ubuntu.com always points to a uk mirror [23:00] because its IP balanced? [23:00] ask jpds [23:00] its his doings [23:00] heh :) [23:00] well, once I download it once, it's cached for my other systems [23:01] archive.ubuntu.com is quite fast here :) [23:01] doesn't help I only have one maverick system so it's never cached for it :) [23:01] us.archive.ubuntu.com and archive.ubuntu.com gives me the same exact ip's [23:02] all in the uk [23:04] vlc audio does stutter here [23:04] any help? [23:05] using 10.04? [23:05] 10.10 [23:06] patdk-wk: the main canonical servers are in the uk so they are the same [23:06] sometimes the irish ones are better than the uk ones though [23:07] I would use the usa ones [23:07] our ones are on a 20 gigabit line [23:07] but they seem to get outdated fast :( [23:07] patdk-wk: are you in the us? [23:07] d.c. [23:07] then dont use the main or uk ones [23:07] because they would have a serious lag for you [23:08] hmm, that is why I use us.* [23:08] between the use and eu is 4 seconds [23:08] ok [23:08] if ubuntu has updated ubuntu mirrors in the us, shouldn't it have us servers? [23:08] and us to eu is 100ms [23:08] dunno where you get 4000 [23:08] freaking you can go around the whole world in 400ms [23:08] any help with vlc? i am using pulse-output but still the sound stutters. video is fine... [23:09] just installed vlc [23:09] now I need a video to test :) [23:09] when I play heroes of newerth between ireland and the us is 600 ms - 1500ms [23:09] patdk-wk: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archivemirrors [23:09] oh ok [23:09] oh thanks patdk-wk [23:10] patdk-wk: ask the mirror admins to update it more then [23:10] most mirror admins have it ok [23:10] the uk mirror is only updated every 6 hours [23:10] * patdk-wk notes only 7 of the usa mirrors are uptodate [23:11]