[11:18] <diwic> anyone still around for ubuntu-audio-dev meeting?
[11:26] <diwic> ok, I assume not
[15:00] <pitti> cjwatson, kees, mdz: TB meeting
[15:00] <kees> \o
[15:01] <pitti> sabdfl excused himself, Keybuk's connection is only spotty
[15:01] <cjwatson> hi
[15:01] <pitti> did anyone hear from mdz?
[15:02]  * kees just woke up, so I haven't. :)
[15:02] <cjwatson> he mailed to say he wouldn't be able to make it
[15:02] <cjwatson> Subject: Next meeting
[15:02] <pitti> SMS on the way
[15:02] <pitti> ah, ok
[15:03] <pitti> so, let's start
[15:03] <pitti> #startmeeting
[15:03] <MootBot> Meeting started at 09:03. The chair is pitti.
[15:03] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[15:03] <pitti> [TOPIC] action review
[15:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  action review
[15:03] <pitti> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda has a list
[15:03] <pitti> I propose we just carry mdz's until next time, objections?
[15:04] <pitti> I'll ping bdmurray off-meeting about his'
[15:04] <cjwatson> fine by me
[15:04] <pitti> [TOPIC] Default ntpd configuration (bug 104525)
[15:04] <MootBot> New Topic:  Default ntpd configuration (bug 104525)
[15:05] <pitti> now, I've skimmed through it, and must say that I didn't see a strong reason either way
[15:05] <pitti> apparently using pool.ntp.org is discouraged by its owners
[15:05] <pitti> and having them create something ubuntu specific doesn't seem much different than what we have today
[15:05] <xavier_robin> So I asked for ubuntu specific pool
[15:06] <pitti> so from my POV this is by and large a commitment from IS about how we can currently handle the load and whether we are ok with continuing it?
[15:06] <cjwatson> um, I don't agree with that
[15:07] <cjwatson> the thing that is discouraged is using pool.ntp.org *directly* rather than asking them for *.ubuntu.pool.ntp.org; my understanding is that they welcome the latter
[15:07] <cjwatson> I think the latter would be quite reasonable for people using ntpd, probably better than using centralised ntp.ubuntu.com for that use case
[15:07] <cjwatson> the question raised by sabdfl by e-mail was whether the reliability of *.pool.ntp.org lived up to its advertising
[15:08] <cjwatson> and he asked whether perhaps IS could look into that
[15:08] <pitti> cjwatson: right, that's what I meant (not using pool.ntp.org literally)
[15:08] <cjwatson> that much seems reasonable enough to me, although I don't think we should take forever about it
[15:08] <cjwatson> it's not accurate to say "how we can currently handle the load", though, AIUI
[15:08] <cjwatson> because I don't think the proposal is for ntp.ubuntu.com to be taking the bulk of this, although it might be one of the nodes
[15:09] <pitti> in http://launchpadlibrarian.net/62623058/ntp.conf.diff it is indeed one of the nodes, yes
[15:09] <pitti> i. e. this uses both ntp.u.c. and *.ntp.org
[15:09] <cjwatson> still: we could surely make the global pool essentially equivalent to the current list, if we wanted
[15:10] <xavier_robin> The GUI to configure NTP is currently crowded with many servers.
[15:10] <Keybuk> apologies
[15:10] <xavier_robin> It would greatly simplifiy it to have only a few servers from the pool.
[15:10] <pitti> xavier_robin: I thought the point of that was that you are able to select one near you?
[15:10] <pitti> xavier_robin: does pool.ntp.org have some geolocation magic to always send you one close to you?
[15:11] <pitti> hey Keybuk
[15:11] <cjwatson> AFAICS the concern in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-January/000672.html is the only significant one that's been raised
[15:11] <cjwatson> I suggest that we check back with James to find out if that concern is still current, and to see whether there's anything we could do to get good details
[15:12] <pitti> sounds good; I don't think I'm informed enough right now to be able to decide on this
[15:12] <kees> yeah, me either
[15:12] <xavier_robin> @pitty: yes there is geolocation so only pool servers from the area are chosen
[15:13] <pitti> xavier_robin: that's really nice then
[15:13] <cjwatson> if it's not still current, a pool seems to make good sense - it means that we won't have the embarrassing situation where we hardcode addresses for non-consenting servers
[15:13] <cjwatson> it> James' quality concern
[15:13] <xavier_robin> This was bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-system-tools/+bug/674868 where stratum 1 servers were hard coded
[15:14] <cjwatson> xavier_robin: and other vendors have had that kind of problem too
[15:14] <pitti> at least I get three German IPs with "host pool.ntp.org"
[15:15] <xavier_robin> I get local IPs with X.ubuntu.pool.ntp.org
[15:15] <pitti> as a plan of record, I'm happy to talk to James about this and we'll contine by mail/on next meeting?
[15:16] <cjwatson> xavier_robin: what management facilities are available for ubuntu.pool.ntp.org?
[15:16] <xavier_robin> Nearly nothing.
[15:16] <xavier_robin> http://www.pool.ntp.org/manage/vendor/zone?id=439
[15:16] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://www.pool.ntp.org/manage/vendor/zone?id=439
[15:16] <xavier_robin> not sure you can see it.
[15:16] <cjwatson> needs a login
[15:16] <xavier_robin> But I have a contact in the pool and they are pretty responsive.
[15:16] <cjwatson> well, what I mean is, do we need to arrange for a group of people to have access to pool management?
[15:16] <pitti> xavier_robin: did they create *.ubuntu.n.o upon your request?
[15:17] <xavier_robin> The would like a contact from canonical
[15:17] <cjwatson> if there's very little management to be done that way, I don't mind
[15:17] <xavier_robin> @pitty: yes
[15:17] <cjwatson> can we give them the technical board as a role contact?
[15:17] <cjwatson> not all of us work at Canonical (now :-) ) but if it's "ubuntu" it should match Ubuntu project governance rather than corporate structure
[15:18] <xavier_robin> Yes, that's it: someone more involved than me should handle that…
[15:19] <xavier_robin> in fact they'd like someone to register to their mailing list
[15:19] <xavier_robin> http://groups.google.com/group/ntppool-vendors
[15:19] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://groups.google.com/group/ntppool-vendors
[15:20] <xavier_robin> Regarding admin link (http://www.pool.ntp.org/manage/vendor/zone?id=439), there's nothing there, just my request
[15:20] <pitti> so we can try setting the TB mailing list as contact point; I assume these are very low-traffic
[15:21] <xavier_robin> Yes it's claimed to be low traffic
[15:21] <cjwatson> list->list forwarding might not be ideal, but I'm guessing any of us would be prepared to be a contact point and forward things on if they're needed?
[15:21] <pitti> or at least shepherd posts through moderation
[15:22] <pitti> but yes, that doesn't sound like a big burden indeed
[15:23] <pitti> xavier_robin: ok, thanks for the info
[15:23] <pitti> [ACTION] subscribe techboard ML to pool.ntp.org vendor list
[15:23] <MootBot> ACTION received:  subscribe techboard ML to pool.ntp.org vendor list
[15:23] <cjwatson> Keybuk is having problems reconnecting; Freenode wants SASL, perhaps because he's connecting over 3G
[15:24] <pitti> I can do that
[15:24] <pitti> and talk to elmo about an update of the quality assessment (check whether he has any info)
[15:24] <cjwatson> thanks, that sounds helpful
[15:24] <pitti> once we have both, adding these seems reasonable to me
[15:25] <pitti> wrt. the security issues, spoofing DNS will hit ntp.u.c. just like any other host name, so I don't see that as a big concern
[15:25] <pitti> kees: ^ or am I missing something?
[15:26] <kees> yeah, DNS is DNS.
[15:26] <kees> unless there is a functional DNSSEC chain
[15:26] <pitti> xavier_robin: anything else we should discuss here?
[15:26] <xavier_robin> I don't think so
[15:27] <xavier_robin> I'll contact the NTP pool about this discussion
[15:27] <pitti> xavier_robin: ok, thanks for joining!
[15:27] <pitti> [TOPIC] SRU microrelease exception for seamonkey
[15:27] <MootBot> New Topic:  SRU microrelease exception for seamonkey
[15:27] <pitti> This already hit the TB list, and got two +1 from Mark and me
[15:27] <kees> +1 from me too
[15:28] <pitti> cjwatson: do you need a heads-up, or can you vote right away?
[15:28] <cjwatson> one minute?
[15:28] <cjwatson> oh, right, that
[15:28] <cjwatson> I can vote right away
[15:28] <pitti> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/technical-board/2011-January/000664.html
[15:31] <pitti> ... in the meantime: kees, can you chair the next time?
[15:32] <cjwatson> oh, sorry, I was expecting a mootbot vote thingy :)
[15:32] <cjwatson> +1
[15:32] <pitti> ah, deadlock, sorry (we already half-voted on the ML)
[15:32] <kees> pitti: sure, though it's Keybuk's turn?
[15:32] <cjwatson> Keybuk has given up trying to reconnect
[15:33] <pitti> kees: I can put him down, and you can be the fallback?
[15:33] <kees> sounds good
[15:33] <pitti> "put him into the minutes as chair", I mean
[15:33] <pitti> [TOPIC] AOB
[15:33] <MootBot> New Topic:  AOB
[15:33] <pitti> ?
[15:34] <pitti> going once..
[15:34] <pitti> going twice..
[15:34] <pitti> Sold!
[15:34] <pitti> thanks everyone
[15:35] <pitti> #endmeeting
[15:35] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 09:35.
[15:59] <Daviey> o/
[15:59] <smb> \o
[16:00] <dantalizing> \o/
[16:01] <zul> hi
[16:01] <Daviey> hai
[16:01] <SpamapS> o/
[16:01] <Daviey> hurray!
[16:01] <hallyn> yo
[16:01] <SpamapS> always tight getting the wife and kids out the door in time ;)
[16:01] <Daviey> heh
[16:01] <SpamapS> a moment please...
[16:01] <RoAkSoAx> \o/
[16:02] <SpamapS> #startmeeting
[16:02] <MootBot> Meeting started at 10:02. The chair is SpamapS.
[16:02] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[16:02] <SpamapS> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[16:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[16:02] <SpamapS> ALL: please check the SRU tracker for 'needs-verification' bugs
[16:02] <SpamapS> How does everyone feel about the needs-verification bugs?
[16:03] <SpamapS> I see that most are getting turned around quickly
[16:04]  * SpamapS taps the mic
[16:04] <SpamapS> this thing on?
[16:04] <hallyn> stupid question:  process-wise, how does someone mark something verified?  just a comment?  a tag?
[16:05] <Daviey> change the tag
[16:05] <hallyn> ie do we need to do something to kick the nxt step in sru process?
[16:05] <hallyn> ok
[16:05] <SpamapS> A comment, the SRU team will accept it by tagging verification-done
[16:05] <Daviey> a comment also helps :)
[16:05] <hallyn> kthx
[16:05] <RoAkSoAx> but isn't it that done but someone in QA?
[16:05] <Daviey> no, RoAkSoAx - that was dropped
[16:05] <zul> it was?
[16:05] <SpamapS> We don't have any QA resources allocated for verifying server SRU's
[16:06] <SpamapS> The requirement is that its done by somebody other than the developer or the SRU team member
[16:06] <Daviey> It used to be the case that QA had to verify it... that was inefficent
[16:06] <Daviey> Although, there have been occassions i have -done, my own fixes - which really, really sucks.
[16:06] <RoAkSoAx> I see.
[16:06] <SpamapS> yeah, it undermines the whole point of verification
[16:07] <SpamapS> so anyway, we can certainly verify eachothers' bugs..
[16:07] <SpamapS> tho its even better if the reporter can do it, or somebody who is affected
[16:08] <SpamapS> anyway, the current process doesn't seem to tax people or be too inefficient, so I think we'll just keep it up. I think we can drop this action item.
[16:08] <Daviey> +1
[16:09] <SpamapS> actually, we should do one thing.. add it here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam/GettingInvolved
[16:09] <SpamapS> I'll take that action on myself
[16:09] <Daviey> +1 :)
[16:09] <SpamapS> [ACTION] SpamapS - add SRU verification to ServerTeam GettingInvolved page.
[16:09] <MootBot> ACTION received:  SpamapS - add SRU verification to ServerTeam GettingInvolved page.
[16:10] <SpamapS> [TOPIC] Natty Development
[16:10] <MootBot> New Topic:  Natty Development
[16:10] <SpamapS> Anybody have anything big to report?
[16:10] <SpamapS> Seems like our alpha2 chart looks a little behind
[16:11] <SpamapS> is it time to start postponing things?
[16:11] <zul> alot of the stuff already has been postponed
[16:11] <zul> or if you have some little things that can be knocked off do them ;)
[16:12] <SpamapS> right, thats the dip on Jan 13 .. we're still *way* over scope from where we started, at 60 or so work items
[16:12] <smoser> i am making progress.
[16:12] <smoser> i promise
[16:12]  * SpamapS cracks the whip
[16:12] <SpamapS> smoser: back to work!
[16:12] <JamesPage> I've got a few non-Hudson bits and pieces I intend to complete this week
[16:12] <smoser> i'll get a cloud-init in tonight or tomorrow that will move all IN_PROGRESS on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/cloud-server-n-cloud-init
[16:13] <Daviey> RoAkSoAx, How is the cluster stack spec looking?
[16:13] <SpamapS> \O/
[16:14] <RoAkSoAx> Daviey: well so far I just have one more bug, on which I'm waiting for upstream to give the last word
[16:14] <Daviey> smoser, Don't be afraid to scream for help btw.
[16:14] <Daviey> RoAkSoAx, Oh great
[16:14] <SpamapS> Hey did you guys notice the "development over time" bit at the bottom of the burndown page?
[16:15] <SpamapS> 2011-01-1462 (+10)22 (-37)
[16:15] <Daviey> SpamapS, packageselection-server-n-upstart-server-enhancement are the remaining A2 critical?
[16:15] <Daviey> THE remaining, rather.
[16:16] <SpamapS> Daviey: yeah, it'll be done
[16:16] <Daviey> win
[16:16] <SpamapS> I'm not so sure about some of the webscale tech ones .. specifically handlersocket and percona are tricky because they have to build inside the mysql tree
[16:16] <SpamapS> but I'll postpone those if need be
[16:17] <JamesPage> but some proposed licensing changes from Oracle in Hudson may hold things up on the Hudson packaging front :-(
[16:17] <zul> SpamapS: that would be a good idea because its a mess right now
[16:17] <SpamapS> JamesPage: BLOCKED is good when you're waiting on somebody else. :)
[16:18] <SpamapS> Anyway, I think we can move on.
[16:18] <JamesPage> SpamapS: OK
[16:18] <SpamapS> robbiew: any thoughts btw?
[16:18] <robbiew> nope...get'em done
[16:18]  * SpamapS knows robbiew is probably waiting for a highlight to look up from his angry birds
[16:18] <robbiew> or postpone
[16:19] <robbiew> heh
[16:19] <SpamapS> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[16:19] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[16:19] <robbiew> postponing to alpha-3 is okay...just don't overload it
[16:19] <SpamapS> hggdh: you're up
[16:20] <Daviey> hggdh, I might ask at some point if you fancy testing a Euca Maverick SRU. :)
[16:20] <Daviey> (SRU candidate)
[16:20] <SpamapS> smb: you ready? We can skip hggdh for now...
[16:20] <smb> sort of :)
[16:21] <SpamapS> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb)
[16:21] <MootBot> New Topic:  Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb)
[16:21] <SpamapS> sounds good enough to me, GO
[16:21] <smb> Ok, so the main achievment is fixing bug 686602
[16:21] <smb> err
[16:21] <smb> EWRONGNUM
[16:22] <smb> Anyways should be the not booting natty on ec2 t1.micro
[16:22] <smb> Apart from that added two other SRU items for Lucid ec2
[16:23] <SpamapS> so i386 t1.micro's work on Natty now?
[16:23] <smb> Well... it will... next time a kernel is uploaded
[16:23] <smb> actually amd64 and i386
[16:23] <SpamapS> right.. next time the team delivers the bags of candy...
[16:23] <robbiew> heh
[16:23] <smoser> nice work on that admin menu, smb
[16:24] <smb> admin menu?
[16:24] <SpamapS> yeah what would we do without Pluck CMS
[16:24] <smoser> so, is there a -13 kernel now ?
[16:24] <smoser> smb, it was a bad joke. from your bad bug paste.
[16:24] <smb> smoser, Currently only my test kernels
[16:24] <smoser> when is -13 due ?
[16:24] <smoser> and will that be in it?
[16:24] <smb> smoser, Doh! :)
[16:25] <smoser> i'm looking forward to natty booting on i386 (which i believe is in -13), and also t1.micro, which i'm not sure if will make -13.
[16:25] <smb> soon
[16:25] <smb> but it will have the fix
[16:26] <smb> Right, there was the one bug about nx protection (i386)
[16:26] <smb> Not sure this made it into the current upload but we turn off that option in the next kernel
[16:26] <smoser> oh great. so we're expecting to be able to boot on all instance types. that is huge.
[16:26] <smb> Upstream seems about to have a real fix for it
[16:27] <smb> I am following that and will re-test as soon as that is there
[16:27] <smoser> current (-12) kernels do not boot on i386 on ec2.
[16:27] <smoser> you rock, mr smb.
[16:27] <smb> Until then we just turn the config option off for i386 virtual
[16:28] <smb> I thanks that is all I had
[16:28] <SpamapS> ok, anybody have more questions?
[16:28] <SpamapS> I don't see sommer or kim0
[16:28] <SpamapS> :(
[16:28] <SpamapS> hggdh: ping?
[16:29] <SpamapS> Ok, well that brings us to...
[16:29] <SpamapS> [TOPIC] Open Discussion
[16:29] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion
[16:30] <Daviey> Nothing here
[16:30] <SpamapS> I was thinking of adding one thing to the meeting standard stuff..
[16:30] <SpamapS> upcoming events
[16:30] <SpamapS> Dustin will be at Strata next week
[16:30] <SpamapS> Several other team members will be at events all over the place..
[16:30] <SpamapS> would be good to talk about them here
[16:31] <SpamapS> So, I'll add it to the meeting agenda for next week.
[16:31] <SpamapS> Anything else?
[16:31] <SpamapS> I had one actually
[16:31] <SpamapS> does anybody else notice that natty server boots to a blank screen instead of getty?
[16:31] <hallyn> bring it on
[16:32] <hallyn> i haven't.  i HAVE noticed tha i get the same qeustions 3 ties during install
[16:32] <SpamapS> I haven't tried an ISO more recent than 10 days ago.. but the VMs I've installed from that ISO never boot to getty
[16:32] <robbiew> SpamapS: what graphics card are you using?
[16:32] <hallyn> blank screen on a serial console install?
[16:32] <SpamapS> robbiew: kvm
[16:32] <robbiew> vms...nevemind
[16:32] <SpamapS> :)
[16:32] <JamesPage> SpamapS: well mine did until I tried today but they now seem to be OK
[16:32] <hallyn> who controls the installer?
[16:33] <hallyn> i tried one yesterday and it booted fine
[16:33] <hallyn> console on tty1
[16:33] <hallyn> but i did get repeated questions about location/kbd
[16:33] <SpamapS> Ok.. probably got fixed in the recent plymouth stuff
[16:33] <robbiew> hallyn: cjwatson typically does server installer stuff
[16:33] <zul> have you tried doing alt-f2?
[16:33] <hallyn> ok, maybe i'll talk to him about it next week
[16:33] <hallyn> (i know he's still hip-deep in plymouth :)
[16:33] <SpamapS> [TOPIC] Announce next meeting date and time
[16:33] <MootBot> New Topic:  Announce next meeting date and time
[16:34] <SpamapS> Tuesday, February 1 2011 16:00 UTC
[16:34] <SpamapS> That is all! Thanks everyone
[16:34] <SpamapS> #endmeeting
[16:34] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 10:34.
[16:34] <RoAkSoAx> \o/
[16:49] <hggdh> Daviey: another SRU?
[16:49] <Daviey> hggdh, Yeah.. but i might see if OEM would like to do it.
[16:50] <Daviey> hggdh, It really needs access to something like RightScale to be able to test it.
[16:51] <hggdh> oh
[16:51] <hggdh> Daviey: yeah, I agree
[16:59] <JFo> o/
[17:00]  * smb plops in
[17:00] <jjohansen> \o
[17:00] <bjf> #startmeeting
[17:00] <MootBot> Meeting started at 11:00. The chair is bjf.
[17:00] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:00] <apw> o/
[17:00] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[17:00] <bjf> [LINK] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Natty
[17:00] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting
[17:00] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/ReleaseStatus/Natty
[17:00] <bjf> #
[17:00] <bjf> # NOTE: '..' indicates that you are finished with your input.
[17:00] <bjf> #
[17:00] <bjf> [TOPIC] ARM Status (bjf)
[17:00] <MootBot> New Topic:  ARM Status (bjf)
[17:00] <bjf> Nothing new
[17:00] <bjf> ..
[17:00] <bjf> [TOPIC] Release Metrics (JFo)
[17:00] <MootBot> New Topic:  Release Metrics (JFo)
[17:00] <JFo> Release Meeting Bugs (11 bugs, 11 Blueprints)
[17:00] <JFo> [17:00] <JFo>  * 1 linux kernel bugs (no change)
[17:00] <JFo>  * 0 linux-ti-omap bugs (no change)
[17:00] <JFo>  * 0 linux-meta-ti-omap bug (no change)
[17:00] <JFo> [17:01] <JFo>  * 20 linux kernel bugs (up 8)
[17:01] <JFo>  * 0 linux-ti-omap bugs (no change)
[17:01] <JFo>  * 0 linux-meta-ti-omap bug (no change)
[17:01] <JFo> [17:01] <JFo>  * 6 blueprints (Including HWE Blueprints)
[17:01] <JFo> [17:01] <JFo>  * 56 Linux Bugs (no change)
[17:01] <JFo> [17:01] <JFo>  * 95 Linux Bugs (down 2)
[17:01] <JFo> [17:01] <JFo>  * [[https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bugs?field.has_patch=on | Bugs with Patches]]
[17:01] <JFo>  * [[http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ogasawara/csv-stats/bugs-with-patches/linux/ | Breakdown by status]]
[17:01] <JFo> thanks to apw and smb for patch pilot work done on the bugs with patches
[17:01] <JFo> so far.
[17:01] <JFo> ..
[17:01] <apw> wow we had more effect than i expected
[17:01] <JFo> yep :)
[17:01] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Natty Bug Handling (JFo)
[17:01] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-bug-handling
[17:01] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Natty Bug Handling (JFo)
[17:01] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-bug-handling
[17:02] <JFo> * There are a number of items in various stages of flight. I will be following up with those parties I am
[17:02] <JFo> holding for information on, but I will begin aggressively closing these items.
[17:02] <JFo> ..
[17:02] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Kernel Configuration Review (apw)
[17:02] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-config-review
[17:02] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Kernel Configuration Review (apw)
[17:02] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-config-review
[17:02] <apw> PV on HVM support (XEN_PCI_PLATFORMDEV) testing is mow complete. The only other remaining action here currently is to report on the final config at beta time, this is waiting on the final kernel version.
[17:02] <apw> ..
[17:03] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Enhancements to the firmware test suite (cking)
[17:03] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-firmware-test-suite-enhancements
[17:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Enhancements to the firmware test suite (cking)
[17:03] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-firmware-test-suite-enhancements
[17:03] <cking> Changes to fwts (natty development branch):
[17:03] <cking>  * add uefidump to dump out annotated uefi vars from /sys/firmware/efi/vars
[17:03] <cking>  * fix cmosdump hex dump (it was dumping too much data)
[17:03] <cking>  * klog test: add test to check for "Denied AML access to ports"
[17:03] <cking>  * add -s4-min-delay, --s4-max-delay, --s4-delay-delta options
[17:03] <cking> ..
[17:03] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Review of the Stable Maintenance Process (sconklin / bjf)
[17:03] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-process-review
[17:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Review of the Stable Maintenance Process (sconklin / bjf)
[17:03] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-stable-process-review
[17:03] <bjf> Nothing new
[17:03] <bjf> ..
[17:03] <bjf> [TOPIC] Status: Cert. Team  (ara)
[17:03] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status: Cert. Team  (ara)
[17:04] <ara> hello!
[17:04] <ara> So, I need to cover a couple of things today. The first one is the SRU testing for Maverick and Lucid.
[17:04] <ara> Lucid is looking well, we have already covered 62 of the scheduled 75 systems, and we haven't found any regressions on those. Maverick, we have covered 67 systems of the 75 that we have scheduled. Same thing, so far, we haven't found any regressions. I would like to point out that we are now using the SRU test suite that Jeff put together.
[17:04] <ara> As usual, you can check the progress of our testing at:
[17:04] <ara> [LINK] http://people.canonical.com/~hwcert/sru-testing/current/
[17:04] <MootBot> LINK received:  http://people.canonical.com/~hwcert/sru-testing/current/
[17:04] <ara> We want to finish testing Lucid today, to be able to have CDs from -updates as soon as possible. We will follow up the tracker bugs once we are done.
[17:05] <ara> The second thing I wanted to cover is those bugs that are blocking certification for some of the systems that should be certified for 11.04. The list of those bugs can be retrieved at:
[17:05] <ara> [LINK] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bugs?field.tag=blocks-hwcert
[17:05] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bugs?field.tag=blocks-hwcert
[17:05]  * JFo makes a note
[17:05] <ara> Please, check the list to avoid those bugs be forgotten.
[17:05] <ara> ..
[17:05] <apw> JFo, are those on our key bugs list ?
[17:05] <JFo> yep
[17:05] <JFo> :)
[17:05] <apw> ..
[17:05] <JFo> ..
[17:06] <tgardner> ara, why is bug #686333 on that list? Isn't that a wishlist item?
[17:06] <tgardner> did we used to have support?
[17:06] <ara> tgardner, is a work that HWE did in 10.04 and that should get back to Ubuntu before 11.04
[17:07] <tgardner> ara, hmm
[17:07] <apw> ara is that for natty yes ?  CONFIG_RTL8192CE=m ... i suspect we may have it in the next upload
[17:07] <tgardner> ..
[17:07] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Ubuntu Kernel Delta Review (apw)
[17:07] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-ubuntu-delta-review
[17:07] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Ubuntu Kernel Delta Review (apw)
[17:07] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-ubuntu-delta-review
[17:07] <apw> All 19 of the 19 personal patch reviews are now done, and all of the outcomes applied. Some work remains on compcache which is now superceeded by zram in staging, but some userspace work is required to switch to it.
[17:07] <apw> ..
[17:08] <bjf> should we remove this item from the agenda?
[17:08] <apw> bjf, erm, i'll confer and get back to you next week
[17:09] <bjf> ok
[17:09] <apw> i suspect a couple of them are boring nw
[17:09] <apw> now
[17:09] <bjf> [TOPIC] Blueprints: Kernel Version and Flavours (apw)
[17:09] <bjf> [LINK] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-version-and-flavours
[17:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  Blueprints: Kernel Version and Flavours (apw)
[17:09] <MootBot> LINK received:  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/hardware-kernel-n-version-and-flavours
[17:09] <apw> Nothing to report here.
[17:09] <apw> ..
[17:09] <bjf> [TOPIC] Status: Ecryptfs (jj)
[17:09] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status: Ecryptfs (jj)
[17:09] <jjohansen> moved underlying fs checks to mount time
[17:09] <jjohansen> fixed uninitialized value bug
[17:09] <jjohansen> fixed bug where using interposed dentry value before dentry was interposed
[17:09] <jjohansen> fixed unencoded shortname being containing invalid values (/\000) this would cause problem with older versions of ecryptfs if they tried to list the files in the directory
[17:09] <jjohansen> experimenting with Graceful fallback, where shortname can be used regardless of longname xattr - this allows
[17:09] <jjohansen> - graceful fallback if longname xattr is missing
[17:09] <jjohansen> - older versions of ecryptfs to mount  dirs with longname xattrs, though the longname xattrs may become wrong then
[17:09] <jjohansen> still need to deal with:
[17:09] <jjohansen> - collision of shortnames with
[17:09] <jjohansen>   - other shortnames
[17:09] <jjohansen>   - plaintext pass through files
[17:09] <jjohansen> refcounting of shared xattr name, or making xattr name uniq to dir + shortname
[17:10] <tgardner> jjohansen, are upstream taking your patches?
[17:10] <jjohansen> tgardner: I am going to post out the latest to ecryptfs mailing list today, and am hoping to push out to LKML later this week
[17:11] <tgardner> ..
[17:11] <jjohansen> ..
[17:11] <bjf> [TOPIC] Status: Natty (apw)
[17:11] <MootBot> New Topic:  Status: Natty (apw)
[17:11] <apw> The main distro kernel remains at 2.6.37-12.26 (v2.6.37 final based).  We are about to upload a v2.6.38-rc2 + git based kernel, this seems to be the first mostly stable version.  Much testing will be needed.  Good progress the last couple of weeks on work-items, and we are close to caught up for alpha-2 and well below the line overall.
[17:11] <apw> ..
[17:12] <bjf> [TOPIC] Security & bugfix kernels - Maverick/Lucid/Karmic/Hardy/Dapper (sconklin / bjf)
[17:12] <MootBot> New Topic:  Security & bugfix kernels - Maverick/Lucid/Karmic/Hardy/Dapper (sconklin / bjf)
[17:12] <bjf> || Package                                    || Upd/Sec              || Proposed             ||  TiP || Verified ||
[17:12] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:12] <bjf> || dapper   linux-source-2.6.15               || 2.6.15-55.90         || 2.6.15-55.91         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:12] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:12] <bjf> || hardy    linux                             || 2.6.24-28.81         || 2.6.24-28.84         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:12] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:12] <bjf> || karmic   linux-ec2                         || 2.6.31-307.23        || 2.6.31-307.24        ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:12] <bjf> || ---      linux                             || 2.6.31-22.70         || 2.6.31-22.71         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:12] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:12] <bjf> || lucid    linux-ec2                         || 2.6.32-311.23        || 2.6.32-312.24        ||    5 ||        5 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-meta-lts-backport-maverick  || 2.6.35.22.34         || 2.6.35.23.35         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-lts-backport-maverick       || 2.6.35-22.34~lucid1  || 2.6.35-23.41~lucid1  ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux                             || 2.6.32-27.49         || 2.6.32-28.55         ||    5 ||        5 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-meta                        || 2.6.32.27.29         || 2.6.32.28.31         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-meta-ec2                    || 2.6.32.311.12        || 2.6.32.312.13        ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:13] <bjf> || maverick linux-backports-modules-2.6.35    || 2.6.35-24.15         || 2.6.35-25.16         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-meta-ti-omap4               ||
[17:13] <bjf> || maverick linux-backports-modules-2.6.35    || 2.6.35-24.15         || 2.6.35-25.16         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-meta-ti-omap4               ||                      || 2.6.35.903.6         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux-meta                        || 2.6.35.24.28         || 2.6.35.25.32         ||    0 ||        0 ||
[17:13] <bjf> || ---      linux                             || 2.6.35-24.42         || 2.6.35-25.44         ||   21 ||       21 ||
[17:13] <bjf> ||                                            ||                      ||                      ||      ||          ||
[17:13] <bjf> We've entered the testing phase of the current kernel cycle. The next cycle timing may
[17:13] <bjf> be affected by the Lucid .2 release, but the stable kernel team will proceed as normal
[17:13] <bjf> and produce kernels for -proposed.
[17:13] <bjf> We encountered a regression in the Maverick -proposed kernel that affected user with
[17:13] <bjf> Radeon hardware. The offending patch was identified and reverted, and the new kernel
[17:13] <bjf> in -proposed has been verified to be fixed. This is the bug for that issue:
[17:13] <bjf> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/703553
[17:13] <bjf> ..
[17:14] <bjf> [TOPIC] Incoming Bugs: Regressions (JFo)
[17:14] <MootBot> New Topic:  Incoming Bugs: Regressions (JFo)
[17:14] <JFo> Incoming Bugs
[17:14] <JFo>  93 Natty Bugs (up 36)
[17:14] <JFo>  1116 Maverick Bugs (down 7)
[17:14] <JFo>  994 Lucid Bugs (down 51)
[17:14] <JFo> Current regression stats (broken down by release):
[17:14] <JFo> [17:14] <JFo>   * 30 maverick bugs (up 5)
[17:14] <JFo>   * 74 lucid bugs (down 1)
[17:14] <JFo>   * 6 karmic bugs (no change)
[17:14] <JFo>   * 0 hardy bugs (no change)
[17:14] <JFo> [17:14] <JFo>   * 218 maverick bugs (up 30)
[17:14] <JFo>   * 203 lucid bugs (up 8)
[17:14] <JFo>   * 38 karmic bugs (down 1)
[17:14] <JFo>   * 2 hardy bugs (no change)
[17:14] <JFo> [17:14] <JFo>   * 17 maverick bugs (up 4)
[17:14] <JFo>   * 3 lucid bugs (no change)
[17:14] <JFo>   * 1 karmic bug (no change)
[17:14] <JFo> ..
[17:15] <bjf> [TOPIC] Incoming Bugs: Bug day report (JFo)
[17:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Incoming Bugs: Bug day report (JFo)
[17:15] <JFo> The next bug day will be on Tuesday next week. I have sent out the e-mail for it and I will also be blogging to our team voices page.
[17:15] <JFo> ..
[17:15] <bjf> [TOPIC] Triage Status (JFo)
[17:15] <MootBot> New Topic:  Triage Status (JFo)
[17:15] <JFo> We have gotten a lot of help from various people in the #ubuntu-bugs channel. I'd like to thank charlie-tca specifically and several others in there whose nicks escape me at the moment for directing questions about kernel bugs to me. There have also been a ton of requests through irc to look at specific bugs. In those cases, and many like them, I am directing folks to the bug triage pages of our wiki. I hope that some of these folks will become r
[17:15] <JFo> egular triagers, but that remains to be seen. :)
[17:15] <JFo> .
[17:15] <JFo> ..
[17:16] <bjf> [TOPIC] Open Discussion or Questions: Raise your hand to be recognized (o/)
[17:16] <MootBot> New Topic:  Open Discussion or Questions: Raise your hand to be recognized (o/)
[17:16] <diwic> o/
[17:16] <bjf> diwic, go
[17:17] <diwic> I was just wondering about the status of the "document derivative flavour", it'd be great if it was done soon...
[17:17] <apw> diwic, its on my list ... just not done yet
[17:17] <diwic> ...as it serves as a base for creating these kernels,
[17:17] <diwic> which then needs to be tested thoroughly.
[17:17] <apw> 'these' kernels ?
[17:18] <diwic> apw, well, the primary one would be the ubuntu-studio kernels, but I wouldn't be surprised if others would follow.
[17:18] <apw> diwic, if you are going to be making deriv kernels, then perhaps we can talk and get you going, and you can help doc the process too
[17:18] <apw> ..
[17:19] <diwic> apw, I probably won't be the one making the kernel myself
[17:19] <apw> diwic, well its not a blocker for my work, so its not high on the list right now
[17:20] <diwic> apw, and so my point is that it is a blocker for other people's work
[17:20] <diwic> i e ubuntu-studio people
[17:20] <apw> diwic, ok, lets talk aout it off line to work out priorities
[17:20] <diwic> ok
[17:21] <bjf> thanks everyone
[17:21] <bjf> #endmeeting
[17:21] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 11:21.
[17:21] <JFo> thanks bjf
[17:21] <cking> thanks bjf
[17:21] <ara> thanks bjf
[17:21] <smb> thanks bjf
[17:21]  * diwic chimes in with the crowd
[17:21] <kamal> thanks bjf
[17:22] <diwic> apw, here and now or somewhere/somewhen?
[17:23] <apw> diwic, come chat on #u-k or mumble