[00:00] <TheMuso> Is dbus still failing in chroots for anyone else?
[02:29] <TheMuso> @pilot out
[04:06] <achiang> what's the proper shorthand to refer to a debian BTS bug in a changelog?
[04:07] <StevenK> achiang: (Closes: #....)
[04:07] <achiang> StevenK: hm, ok... so, LP: #.... for ubuntu bugs, and just plain ol' #.... for debian bugs?
[04:08] <StevenK> Not really. (LP: #...) for Ubuntu bugs, (Closes: #...) for Debian bugs.
[04:08] <achiang> StevenK: got it, thanks
[04:09] <achiang> and... there we go. vim highlights the (Closes: #...) for me, similar to how it highlights (LP: #....)
[04:09] <StevenK> achiang: You're welcome :-)
[04:09] <achiang> computers are truly magical
[04:12]  * achiang wonders how network-manager-applet builds in maverick; during link phase, i get: /bin/sed: can't read /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.la: No such file or directory
[04:12] <achiang> we don't ship *.la files anymore, as per #665768
[04:13] <achiang> (although debian does -- http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=607000)
[04:14] <achiang> very mysterious
[04:16] <micahg> achiang: Debian policy says new ones shouldn't be added and the old ones phased out over time IIRC
[04:17] <achiang> micahg: sure, i have no quarrel with policy. i'm just wondering how nm-applet physically built at all, since the libgdk-pixbuf-dev in maverick doesn't ship those files, and the maverick nm-applet seems to need them
[04:17] <micahg> achiang: it was removed, readded, reremoved IIRC
[04:18] <achiang> must've been.
[05:31] <c2tarun> what does this mean in a Makefile LIBS=@LIBS@
[07:24] <didrocks> good morning
[07:29] <pitti> Good morning
[07:30] <sladen> morning pitti
[08:12] <dholbach> good morning
[08:13] <ion> that
[09:26] <janimo> Riddell, how would you prefer the armv7 atomic SMP safety patch, a separate one or merged with the thumb build fix (the latter is a detail in the former)
[09:28] <Riddell> janimo: I don't think I know what you're talking about, I'm also away for the next week
[09:29] <janimo> Riddell, there's a kubuntu_22_fix_armel_ftbfs or similar now in qt4-x11
[09:29] <janimo> there's also a request to fix the arm atomics code in qt4, which touches (replaces) the same file that patch affects
[09:29] <Riddell> kubuntu_22_thumb2_support.diff ?
[09:29] <janimo> Riddell, who else can upload qt4-x11 if you're missing?
[09:29] <janimo> Riddell, right
[09:29] <janimo> that patch touches two lines in a file
[09:30] <janimo> which a new patch would replace completely.
[09:30] <janimo> well not completely but with many more changes
[09:30] <Riddell> mobile folks like ogra or NCommander could upload, kubuntu folks like ScottK or apachelogger or debfx too
[09:31] <Riddell> I just uploaded 4.7.2
[09:31] <janimo> Riddell, saw that, I'll rebase the patch I prepared for the previous version
[09:32] <janimo> Riddell, someone needs to commit to debian-git packaging before uploading to ubuntu?
[09:32] <Riddell> janimo: no, although fabo is the guy to poke if you want them to pick it up
[09:32] <janimo> Riddell, ok thanks, have a nice next week
[09:33] <Riddell> thanks janimo
[09:56] <NCommander> Riddell: what needs an upload?
[10:17] <mvo> doko: apt FTBFS because doxygen-latex is in universe - we don't actually need the latex stuff in apt so I don't need a MIR. what is the best way to get apt building again?
[10:18] <mvo> (and doxygen depends on doxygen-latex)
[10:19] <Daviey> Riddell, Would you mind finishing an SRU mv from -proposed to -updates?  bug #717397 has had 39 duplicates and they still keep coming.
[10:19] <Daviey> (Or any other AA)
[10:20] <mvo> if a AA could move doxygen-latex to main, that would be good for now, its just a split out from doxygen, so no harm here
[10:21] <Riddell> Daviey: needs ubuntu-sru to approve
[10:28] <Daviey> Riddell, I guess you wouldn't accept - "<slangasek> Daviey: if the latest issue is not a regression, then I guess it's verification-done"   :)
[10:29] <nigelb> nice try :p
[10:37] <cjwatson> Daviey: I'll look at it
[10:41] <cjwatson> well, the code mentioned in the latest issue isn't in the updates->proposed diff
[10:42] <cjwatson> so I think it's OK to track that in bug 726348
[10:42] <pecisk_darbs> hi people, I wanted to ask - what are Ubuntu/Canonical plans with GNOME 3 (except GNOME Shell of course, as Canonical moves forward with Unity)?
[10:42] <cjwatson> Daviey: released
[10:43] <pecisk_darbs> will it be available in main or universe in 11.10?
[10:43] <Daviey> cjwatson, hurray!  Thanks... hopefully my inbox will thank you aswell :)
[10:44] <Daviey> cjwatson, Whilst i've got you.. can you look at bug #711425... I have a debdiff on the bottom, but didn't want to upload sysvinit without talking to your team first.
[10:44] <Daviey> Currently a rebuild FTBFS.
[10:45] <Daviey> pecisk_darbs, You might get a faster response in #ubuntu-desktop.
[10:48] <ogra> Riddell, janimo, is that the fix that works around the toolchain bug ?
[10:49] <cjwatson> Daviey: sure, that's fine
[10:49] <cjwatson> go ahead
[10:49] <janimo> ogra, no, the SMP-safety one
[10:49] <ogra> ah, k
[10:49] <janimo> the toolchain workaround stays until new gcc is here - I see it is in linaro 2011.3 gcc
[10:50] <pecisk_darbs> Daviey, thanks ;)
[10:51] <ogra> janimo, right, i thought it was that one
[10:54] <Daviey> cjwatson, thanks
[11:15] <Daviey> cjwatson, As it turns out, mvo uploaded the same fix an hour ago :)
[11:23] <pitti> change-override.py -S -c universe hal hal-info
[11:23] <pitti> go hal, and never come back *evil face* :)
[11:24] <cjwatson> Daviey: heh
[11:31] <ev> pitti: yay! Now lets pretend it never existed.
[11:56] <rolloperson> ev
[12:14] <debfx> cjwatson: are you aware of bug #728764?
[12:17] <cjwatson> debfx: thanks, will look
[12:53] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: around?
[13:27] <pitti> seb128: sizes of http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-live/20110304/ look a lot better :)
[13:28] <seb128> pitti, \o/
[13:30] <pitti> mvo: are you still running the automatic upgrade tests, or is that QA now? I wonder if we can just close bug 711896, it looks like a temporary uninstallability during X.org transition?
[13:40] <mvo> pitti: I still run it, it did not show up there (this particular failure)
[13:40] <pitti> mvo: ok, thanks; I'll close it
[13:43] <mdz> did anyone else have nautilus and gnome-terminal crash with today's updates?
[13:43] <mdz> for me, apport was upgraded in the same run, so there were no crash reports left :-/
[13:45] <pitti> mdz: I did see terminal crashes during dist-upgrade (and only then); it was already reported on LP, so I didn't file another one
[13:45] <pitti> not today, but a few days/weeks ago
[13:50] <mdz> pitti, hmm, I installed updates yesterday morning and didn't have a problem, but when I installed updates today, I had both crash
[13:50] <mdz> [175077.487871] gnome-terminal[2001] general protection ip:7f9ddc1dfcfd sp:7fff32b76770 error:0 in libgobject-2.0.so.0.2800.1[7f9ddc1ac000+4e000]
[13:50] <mdz> [175082.019491] nautilus[8873]: segfault at fe82 ip 00007f5bd0773d28 sp 00007fff784ec690 error 4 in libgobject-2.0.so.0.2800.1[7f5bd0740000+4e000]
[13:50] <mdz> almost simultaneously
[13:54] <mdz> pitti, so most likely it's not caused by the same update
[13:54] <mdz> pitti, I'm having trouble finding the bug, do you happen to have it around?
[13:57] <pitti> mdz: hm, I don't remember any more in which function it crashed, I'm afraid
[13:57] <seb128> pitti, what bug?
[13:58] <mdz> seb128, gnome-terminal (and in my case nautilus) crashing while installing updates
[13:58] <pitti> seb128: terminals crashing during dist-upgrade
[13:58] <seb128> urg
[13:58] <seb128> mdz, pitti: do you have a stacktrace?
[13:58] <mdz> seb128, I don't. apport was being upgraded at the same time, so it was turned off :-(
[13:59] <seb128> hum
[13:59] <seb128> upgrading apport turns it off?
[13:59] <pitti> seb128: dh_installnit stops/starts during dist-upgrade
[13:59] <pitti> seb128: it was already reported on LP, and I forgot the signature, sorry
[14:00] <seb128> ok
[14:00] <pitti> seb128: I recently looked at bug 718098
[14:00] <pitti> which got fixed recently
[14:00] <seb128> no worry, I was rather curious
[14:00] <pitti> could have been that, but not sure
[14:00] <scott-upstairs> ScottK, ping
[14:00] <pitti> argh, silly me, I was looking at gnome-terminal
[14:00] <pitti> seb128, mdz: I got bug 721915
[14:01] <pitti> definitively, I confirmed it
[14:01] <ScottK> scott-upstairs: Pong
[14:01] <scott-upstairs> ScottK, we spoke several weeks ago backporting ubuntu studio applications and wanted to follow up with a few questions
[14:01] <seb128> pitti, is that still happening?
[14:01] <scott-upstairs> originally i had already intended to start but was delayed
[14:01] <ScottK> OK
[14:01] <pitti> seb128: I got several crashes during upgrade in the last week or two; didn't see it in this week though, I think
[14:01] <seb128> we got pretty much all libdbusmenu known crashers fixed for the a3 image
[14:01] <seb128> bug some of the fixes landed only tuesday this week
[14:02] <seb128> but if you still have issues on current versions let us know
[14:02] <mdz> ah, I've experienced similar crashes as in bug 721915 but hadn't noticed it being correlated with installing updates
[14:02] <pitti> seb128: above bug is still open
[14:02] <seb128> chrisccoulson fixed it I think
[14:02] <scott-upstairs> ScottK, in working with luke i usually built stuff in ppa with a ppa version number (e.g. -1ubuntu1~ppa1) and luke corrected it when pushing to the repos
[14:02] <scott-upstairs> ScottK, i want to make this closer to what is expect so...
[14:03] <seb128> it's just that sometimes launchpad cleaning is not done
[14:03] <seb128> chrisccoulson, ^
[14:03] <scott-upstairs> ScottK, i need to build in ppa for others to test but i was going to update the changelog with 'dch -i'
[14:03] <pitti> seb128: so I guess mdz still had an older libdbusmenu running at the time of the upgrade?
[14:03] <scott-upstairs> ScottK, will this be acceptable as a version number or would you prefer something else?
[14:04] <mdz> pitti, that's possible
[14:05] <seb128> well in any case if anyone get libdbusmenu issues with current version let us know
[14:05] <ScottK> scott-upstairs: If the thing you want to backport is (for example) 1.2.0-1ubuntu1 it will be backported to maverick as 1.2.0-1ubuntu1~maverick1.  You should put it in the PPA as 1.2.0-1ubuntu1~maverick1~ppa1 so that people can upgrade to the proper backport once it's done.
[14:06] <ScottK> You can do this with dch -bv1.2.0-1ubuntu1~maverick1~ppa1
[14:06] <scott-upstairs> ScottK, oustanding!  the plan again is for me to build in ppa, two others to test and report in bug report, and i will include a debdiff to the report
[14:07] <scott-upstairs> ScottK, i should start either today or during this weekend :)
[14:07] <ScottK> scott-upstairs: OK.  One other tester is sufficient.  Two doesn't hurt though.
[14:07] <scott-upstairs> ScottK, even better :)  thank you
[14:22] <smoser> anyone locale knowledgeable here ?
[14:22] <smoser> i am completely not
[14:22] <smoser> after installing something like 'language-pack-fr language-pack-gnome-fr'
[14:23] <smoser> is there anything else i have to do?  my goal is to get functional french gnome-desktop.
[14:23] <pitti> smoser: that should work
[14:24] <pitti> that'll take care of creating the necessary locales, then you just need to pick the language in gdm
[14:24] <smoser> do i need to run locale-gen ?
[14:24] <pitti> smoser: no, it should happen autoamtically
[14:25] <pitti> after installation, locale -a should have the French ones
[14:25] <smoser> ok.
[14:55] <hallyn_> interesting - I just did 'debcommit -r -R --changelog=changelog', and ended up with
[14:55] <hallyn_> committer: Serge Hallyn <serge@peq>
[14:56] <hallyn_> even though my ubuntu.com address is in both the changelog and $DEBEMAIL
[15:06] <mvo> doko: apt FTBFS because doxygen-latex is in universe - we don't actually need the latex stuff in apt so I don't need a MIR. what is the best way to get apt building again? does a archive-admin need to move it to main?
[15:06] <doko> mvo: no, should be main. I thought I had accepted it as such
[15:07] <mvo> doko: rmadison still tells me universe, does it take a while to propergate?
[15:07] <cjwatson> it says universe on the master archive too
[15:07] <doko> just promoted
[15:08] <mvo> cool, thanks
[15:08] <doko> mvo: so in about 90min
[15:45] <dholbach> Last day of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDeveloperWeek starting in 15 minutes in #ubuntu-classroom
[15:56] <nemo> http://m8y.org/tmp/temp.txt - worth a bug?
[16:16] <ev> mvo: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mvo/+junk/apt-clone/revision/21 - couldn't you do that with fakechroot, to avoid the root dependency?  Just a thought, if it's fine as uid 0 with you, it doesn't bother me one bit :)
[16:19] <mvo> ev: excellent idea, let me try that
[16:19] <ev> cool
[16:25] <hallyn> mvo: I pushed a new commit to lp:~vmbuilder-dev/vmbuilder/packaging.  Is there anything else I need to do to make a build happen?  (it has the upstream bzr commit id in it, ...)
[16:27] <hallyn> mvo: nm, i was thinking the buidl would get automatically triggered, but i recon i need to build a src package and dput it
[16:27] <mdz> hallyn, yes, eventually we want that to trigger a build but we're not quite there yet
[16:28] <mvo> hallyn: bzr-buildpackage -S in the meantime :)
[16:28] <mdz> hallyn, you want bzr builddeb
[16:28] <mdz> mvo, or that, bzr builddeb is shorter :-)
[16:33] <mvo> mdz: heh :) bzr bd trumps all!
[16:34] <mdz> mvo, ah! didn't know about that :-)
[16:34] <mvo> mdz: a bit too terse for my taste. I guess i use bzr-buildpackage because it allows bzr-<tab>
[16:35] <hallyn> mdz: mvo: thanks :)
[16:35] <mvo> yw!
[16:35] <hallyn> I'm never quite sure about the subtle differences between aliases, so I went ahead with 'bzr-buildpackage -S' this time
[17:50] <mdz> bdmurray, I was thinking of writing a script to semi-automatically fix the bugpattern tags on bugs for which bugpatterns exist. or is that something you have already?
[17:52] <bdmurray> mdz: no that is not but it sounds useful
[18:57] <bdmurray> @pilot in
[19:28] <mdz> bdmurray, do you see any reason for https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/desktopcouch/+bug/451767 to be private?
[19:29] <mdz> I think it's a mistake
[19:39] <ari-tczew> is there anyone who is familiar with udev?
[19:40] <Ampelbein> ari-tczew: there sure is anyone.
[19:40] <ari-tczew> Ampelbein: you?
[19:41] <Ampelbein> ari-tczew: unless you ask the question you have, I don't know if I can help.
[19:42] <ari-tczew> if Debian has blocked dh_installudev in d/rules and we have in delta changes related to udev, should do I enable dh_installudev in d/rules?
[19:44] <nigelb> kirkland: ping, re:lightning talks
[19:45] <nigelb> stgraber: ping, you around?
[19:46] <Ampelbein> ari-tczew: you only need dh_installudev if you have a udev rule file to install. what package are you looking at?
[19:46] <ari-tczew> Ampelbein: sane-backends-extras
[19:48] <mdeslaur> c2tarun: fyi, last time you merged sbuild, you appear to have dropped a whole revision from it
[19:48] <nigelb> highvolt1ge: hey, you around?
[19:49] <mdeslaur> c2tarun: ie: 0.60.8-1ubuntu3
[19:49] <kees> c2tarun: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/natty/sbuild/natty/revision/39#debian/changelog
[19:50] <nigelb> ok, does anyone have a way of getting to stgraber and kirkland? phone number perhaps?
[19:51]  * nigelb prays and quickly sends an email
[19:52] <Ampelbein> ari-tczew: in that package, the debian way of not installing the empty udev rule seems ok and as long as you don't add devices you don't need to install the rule file. But there should be some documentation for the enduser to have an easy way of adding devices
[19:53] <cody-somerville> nigelb, Sent kirkland a text message for you.
[19:53] <stgraber> nigelb: yep
[19:53] <stgraber> nigelb: what's up ?
[19:53] <nigelb> cody-somerville: thank you!
[19:53] <ari-tczew> mdeslaur: you shall send grievances to sponsor as well
[19:53] <nigelb> stgraber: lightning talks at UDW :)
[19:53] <stgraber> nigelb: yep, in 7 minutes right ?
[19:53] <nigelb> stgraber: could you join #ubuntu-classroom-backstage so I can coordinate the show better? :)
[19:53] <nigelb> stgraber: yup, 7 and a few more
[19:53] <nigelb> I'll go in order
[19:54] <mdeslaur> ari-tczew: ah, yes, good idea
[19:54] <nigelb> cody-somerville: I owe you :)
[19:56] <ari-tczew> Ampelbein: so if user wants to add device, he has to change d/rules and rebuild package?
[19:57] <c2tarun> mdeslaur: ping
[19:57] <mdeslaur> c2tarun: yes6
[19:57] <Ampelbein> ari-tczew: no, he has to create an udev rule
[19:58] <c2tarun> mdeslaur: what do you mean by revision?
[19:58] <ari-tczew> Ampelbein: if we keep enabled dh_installudev, does still user need to create an udev rule?
[19:58] <mdeslaur> c2tarun: 0.60.8-1ubuntu3 was already in the archive, and you did a merge, but started with 0.60.8-1ubuntu2
[19:58] <ari-tczew> c2tarun: 0.60.8-1ubuntu3 <- that's Ubuntu revision of sbuild package.
[19:58] <Ampelbein> ari-tczew: no, then he only has to enter device id in the rulefile
[19:59] <ari-tczew> Ampelbein: It looks like Ubuntu is very problematic system for common user.
[20:00] <c2tarun> I am extremely sorry for that, but I can't merge by myself, I mean I dont have merging rights. Anyway thanks for telling :) I'll keep that in mind from next time. What can I do about it now?
[20:00] <Ampelbein> ari-tczew: not really. the cases where a script has to be run for a hardware device to work are rather rare.
[20:01] <Ampelbein> ari-tczew: in most cases it should work out of the box
[20:01] <ari-tczew> Ampelbein: Yep, I just wanted to write about out of the box.
[20:01] <ari-tczew> Ampelbein: Anyway, I'll stick with Debian. Thanks! ;-)
[20:02] <mdeslaur> c2tarun: nothing, I have fixed it. Just make sure that your merge requests are against the current package. Your sponsor should have caught that, but apparently didn't.
[20:02] <mdeslaur> c2tarun: I just wanted to let you know so you know to look for that in the future.
[20:03] <c2tarun> mdeslaur: I am very sorry about that mistake, I am new and the time I have asked for that merge I might be a bit confuse, but  I have a pretty good idea how thing works now, Thanks a lot for telling, I'll keep that in mind
[20:03] <highvolt1ge> nigelb: yup
[20:03] <mdeslaur> c2tarun: it's ok :)
[20:03] <nigelb> highvolt1ge: I wanted to get to stg raber, but found him :D
[20:04] <highvolt1ge> nigelb: yeah sorry I guess I should've caught up with backlog before answering :)
[20:04] <nigelb> highvoltage: heh, no no.  Thanks for the pong :)
[20:06] <ari-tczew> mdeslaur: don't you merge sbuild with Debian?
[20:08] <mdeslaur> ari-tczew: what do you mean?
[20:09] <ari-tczew> mdeslaur: There is newer version in Debian unstable.
[20:09] <mdeslaur> ari-tczew: what's your point?
[20:10] <ari-tczew> mdeslaur: Merge with Debian unstable. I thought that you're going to merge with Debian unstable.
[20:10] <mdeslaur> ari-tczew: no, I just added back a ubuntu-specific change that got left out during the last merge
[20:10] <ari-tczew> mdeslaur: I know why c2tarun has forgot about *ubuntu3 changes.
[20:11] <mdeslaur> ari-tczew: why
[20:11] <ari-tczew> mdeslaur: c2tarun used Merge-o-Matic for merge. ubuntu3 was uploaded by kees 17th Feb, but last MoM update was 15th Feb. So merge delivered by MoM bases on ubuntu2.
[20:12] <ari-tczew> mdeslaur: look https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2011-March/032627.html
[20:12] <mdeslaur> ari-tczew: yes, and either he or his sponsor should have noticed that before uploading
[20:13] <ari-tczew> mdeslaur: probably sponsor based on MoM as well.
[20:13] <kees> a proper debdiff between what was in the archive (or bzr tree) vs the pending upload should have caught that.
[20:14] <mdeslaur> Don't we usually turn MoM off after feature freeze?
[20:15] <ari-tczew> kees: Well, I understand that contributor and his sponsor (developer) should be more careful, but if you would work day-to-day with MoM, you would trust it, so I would like to forget they as human error.
[20:16] <ari-tczew> mdeslaur: why?
[20:16] <ScottK> mdeslaur: Canonical used to do that, but that hasn't been the intent for some time.  Merges can be bug fix, so it makes sense to keep it running.
[20:17] <kees> ari-tczew: sure, it's human error. however, doing good checks before upload reduces those chances of error.
[20:17] <mdeslaur> ScottK: yeah, that makes sense
[20:17] <ari-tczew> ScottK: +1, I mentioned it on lists.
[20:23] <GunnarHj> bdmurray: Hi Brian, do you possibly have time to help with a couple of uploads to lucid-backports and maverick-backports? It's bug 719815.
[20:23] <bdmurray> GunnarHj: I'll take a look
[20:25] <bdmurray> GunnarHj: actually I don't have upload rights for gdm.  Sorry!
[20:25] <GunnarHj> bdmurray: Ok, I see.
[20:30] <bdmurray> GunnarHj: you might check with micahg or NCommander
[20:41] <GunnarHj> bdmurray: Thanks for the tips; will do.
[20:41] <bdmurray> GunnarHj: Either of them are likely to be around now. I'd htink.
[20:48] <GunnarHj> NCommander: Hi Michael, looking for somebody with gdm upload rights. Do you possibly have time to help with a couple of backports uploads? It's bug 719815.
[20:56] <bdmurray> @pilot out
[21:16] <cnd> stgraber, one of the packages in the utouch package set is libgrip, which isn't in universe yet
[21:16] <cnd> it's now ready to be uploaded
[21:16] <cnd> am I able to help out with this initial upload?
[21:16] <cnd> or does that require a motu?
[21:17] <cnd> bdrung, cody-somerville ^^?
[21:18] <broder_> cnd: the last comment on the bug was that it looks like it needs an FFe
[21:18] <cnd> broder_, yeah, we're working on that
[21:18] <cnd> will have that done shortly
[21:19] <broder> cnd: cool. i don't know how the lp permissions work in this case, but i'm happy to take your word that it's ready to be sponsored as someone who has permissions on that set if you can't upload it
[21:19] <cnd> broder, ok
[21:20] <cnd> I suppose it probably doesn't hurt for me to try to dput it when the time comes
[21:20] <cnd> worst that should happen is a reject
[21:36] <bdmurray> @pilot in
[21:48]  * ari-tczew got sponsors overview less to 6.
[21:54] <cyphermox> ari-tczew, would you mind looking at my merge again, please?
[21:56] <ari-tczew> cyphermox: yes
[22:05] <cyphermox> ari-tczew, thanks
[22:08] <stgraber> cnd: what's your LP login ? (just to check you upload acls)
[22:28] <cnd> stgraber, chasedouglas
[22:29] <ari-tczew> pitti: could you take a look on bug 729352 as well?
[22:32] <cnd> stgraber, are the acls publicly viewable?
[22:48] <ari-tczew> cyphermox: looks fine. however, lack of time for sponsor it today. it will go tomorrow.
[22:49] <cyphermox> ari-tczew, np, thanks a bunch