[04:05] <ScottL> i'm hoping after the alpha2 image is tested we can make progress on updating the menu for new applications, are there any takers out there?
[04:05] <holstein> ScottL: hey
[04:05] <holstein> i was going to try and take that on
[04:05] <ScottL> it's pretty simple to fix and i can walk someone through an example
[04:05] <holstein> right?
[04:05] <ScottL> oh, yeah...i forgot about that holstein 
[04:05] <ScottL> :)
[04:05] <holstein> i'll give it a go
[04:06] <holstein> i'll ping you when im sitting around bored
[04:06] <holstein> should be some of that this weekend i hope
[04:06] <ScottL> holstein, i'm not in a huge rush currently, just wanted to make sure someone was lined up for it
[04:07] <ScottL> ideally it would be nice to have it completed before alpha3 through
[04:07] <holstein> ScottL: i feel like i can do that
[04:07] <holstein> i remember it not looking too crazy
[04:08] <ScottL> yeah, it's really not, once you understand what needs to be done and how it just becomes tedious
[04:08] <ScottL> :P
[04:08] <ScottL> i start my rpm challenge this week
[04:09] <ScottL> i'm lining up the songs now, playing around with them and thinking of more lyrics
[04:09] <ScottL> i should start recording by this weekend for it but only have the month of february
[04:09] <holstein> i thought i had missed that
[04:09] <ScottL> i've had significant improvement each of the last two years, both quantitatively and qualitatively
[04:10] <ScottL> i think this year will not be an exception to that :)
[04:10] <holstein> awesome
[04:11] <ScottL> this is kinda why i like doing it...first, because if i don't i'll probably put off recording *anything* all year and secondly, because if i keep doing it i'll get better as well
[04:23] <ScottL> i need to also look at the release planning page and see what else is in the queue
[04:23] <ScottL> i suppose i also need to file out the team report for january since it will be due february 10th as well
[04:24] <holstein> meeting is on the radar too
[04:25] <ScottL> ah yeah, we defintely need that
[13:41] <rlameiro> good morning
[13:42] <rlameiro> ScottL, testing Iso now. anything you want me to look at especially?
[15:08] <rlameiro> ScottL, well, generic tested... quite impressed
[15:08] <rlameiro> problem is taht pd doesnt like much the 3 + periods of buffer
[15:08] <rlameiro> installing abogani kernel now
[15:47] <rlameiro> well quite strange the testing.
[16:07] <rlameiro> scott-work, having some weird stuff happening on testing
[16:07] <scott-work> rlameiro: yeah?
[16:08] <rlameiro> well, lot of xruns
[16:08] <rlameiro> even on low latency
[16:08] <rlameiro> but at first generic run very nice....
[16:09] <rlameiro> but as i oushed with a pd patch, a pretty simple one it gives a lot of xruns and cracks on pd
[16:09] <scott-work> rlameiro: are you running kernel version 2.6.37?  if so it has known problems
[16:09] <rlameiro> well, i should say i am using 8 channels output...
[16:09] <scott-work> there is a whole email about cgroups and not being able to get -rt privileges
[16:09] <rlameiro> no. 2.6.38-1
[16:09] <scott-work> oh, hmmm that should work then for .38
[16:10] <scott-work> i wonder if the -lowlatency is .38 yet
[16:10] <rlameiro> there is one ther3
[16:10] <rlameiro> there
[16:10] <scott-work> i think abogani was going to work on that, don't know if he's got it yet
[16:10] <rlameiro> there is one on the ppa
[16:11] <rlameiro> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RealTime#Natty%20Benchmarks
[16:11] <rlameiro> over here the kernel is .38 low latency
[16:11] <scott-work> i've had signficiant instability with my natty installs lately and haven't been testing much, just trying to fix some bugs and leaving my computer on when i manage to get it booted
[16:11] <rlameiro> scott-work, well, it could be that too
[16:12] <scott-work> rlameiro: if you could add your test results to that wiki page that would be awesome
[16:12] <scott-work> rlameiro: especially if you are realling loading the comptuer too
[16:12] <rlameiro> well i need to understand them first :D
[16:12] <scott-work> rlameiro: well yeah, that is true :)
[16:12] <rlameiro> i am documenting some with screenshots for memory purposes
[16:13] <scott-work> rlameiro: i say that because so far we have experience comparable performance between -generic and -lowlatency
[16:13] <rlameiro> rebooting now
[16:13] <rlameiro> lets see how it goes
[16:13] <scott-work> persia mentioned heavily loading the computer during testing
[16:13] <rlameiro> i made a little project to record all the 8 channels on ardour... 
[16:14] <rlameiro> lets see how it goes
[16:14] <scott-work> perhaps his thought was that we would discover a performance differential between -generic and -lowlatency when the computer is loaded heavily
[16:15] <rlameiro> yeap
[16:15] <scott-work> i think so far the tests have been relatively light, i know my original one was
[16:15] <scott-work> so i'm really curious to see how your results compare :)
[16:16] <rlameiro> there is a problem tough
[16:16] <rlameiro> noone mentioned on the wiki wich architecture are using
[16:16] <rlameiro> i am testing x64.....
[16:17] <rlameiro> the xruns are really hard on low latency
[16:20] <abogani> rlameiro: Could you test 2.6.37-lowlatency also, please?
[16:21] <rlameiro> 12 xruns in 1 minute at 8 ms.... unacceptable...
[16:21] <rlameiro> abogani, sure :D
[16:22] <abogani> rlameiro: Thanks :-)
[16:22] <abogani> https://launchpad.net/~abogani/+archive/ppa/+sourcepub/1428989/+listing-archive-extra
[16:22] <rlameiro> i have your ppa already
[16:24] <abogani> ah ok
[16:25] <rlameiro> abogani, there is no headers for it...
[16:27] <abogani> rlameiro: grab those from previous link
[16:34] <rlameiro> abogani, it depends on linux-headers-2.6.37.12 not linux-headers-2.6.37.12-lowlatency
[16:34] <rlameiro> :/
[16:46] <rlameiro> well abogani, i will try it later
[19:38] <JFo> persia, did you see the 'Search for possible duplicate bugs when a new bug is filed' checkbox now available under https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/<pkg>/+edit for any value of <pkg>?
[19:39] <JFo> wasn't reported anywhere that I have seen, but I think it was one we discussed before.
[19:39] <persia> JFo, I didn't, but I'm all sorts of excited that it exists.
[19:39] <JFo> :)
[19:39] <JFo> I thought you would be