[00:08] <kirkland> i have a byobu with a healthy set of good bug fixes;  any chance of getting such an upload accepted?
[00:16] <slangasek> a healthy set of bug fixes at this stage is a small one... is it small? :)
[00:17] <slangasek> ScottK: python3-defaults accepted
[00:18] <kirkland> slangasek: hmm, well, it fixes 11 separate bugs of varying sizes;  none of which I'd call "large";  the most critical one is probably that dpkg-diversion you helped me with;  i suppose i could cherry pick a couple
[00:19] <kirkland> slangasek: no big deal if you said "no way jose"
[00:19] <kirkland> slangasek: but I'm comfortable with them, and i'd rather people not suffer from these bugs for all of 11.04
[00:21] <slangasek> kirkland: 11 bugs is a bit on the high end, but you can upload it to the queue for review
[00:21] <kirkland> slangasek: thanks, that's fair
[00:26] <kirkland> slangasek: okay, sent to the queue for review
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
[01:47] <Daviey> kirkland, pro tip - don't raise bugs for your fixes.. makes the medicine go down easier :P
[02:32] <kirkland> Daviey: heh, i doubt it ;-)
[04:10] <ScottK> slangasek: Thanks.
[09:39] <jibel> ogra_, there are some untested arm/omap images on the tracker, what's their status ? http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/build/all/untested
[09:39] <jibel> ogra_, kubuntu mobile failed according to GrueMaster's comment, but I can't find a bug associated with it.
[10:26] <ogra_> jibel, netbook is a duplicated entry, its the same as "Ubuntu ARM"
[10:27] <ogra_> for kubuntu ask GrueMaster, dunno which ones he tested
[10:27] <ogra_> but i think he said it was a complete fail across the board
[10:28] <cjwatson> skaet: looks like somebody had already done it
[10:28] <jibel> ogra_, yes, I don't know why Ubuntu ARM has been reset.
[10:28] <jibel> for Kubuntu GrueMaster> kubuntu-mobile armel is not ready for publishing in my opinion.  It is not bootable as it sits.
[10:29] <jibel> no news since this comment. I'll check with GrueMaster
=== doko_ is now known as doko
[11:24] <cjwatson> I've created all the milestones for oneiric based on OneiricReleaseSchedule
[11:27] <doko> cjwatson: about bug 735020 ... I could prepare an upload in a PPA enabling these bits, but otoh, I could have the ppa upload disabling the bits, and enabling them in the distro.
[11:27] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 735020 in eglibc (Ubuntu) "Ubuntu 11.04: Support AMD Bulldozer processor - glibc (memset) (affects: 1) (heat: 128)" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/735020
[11:29] <cjwatson> doko: correctness should trump performance, IMO - that bug is about performance, whereas the other one was actually causing wrong behaviour.  (though if there's a smaller hammer that would fix the flash bug, I wouldn't object.)
[11:33] <doko> ok, building the performance version in the ubuntu-toolchain-r ppa
[12:48] <ev> pitti: could I have your eyes on 759804 whenever you have a chance?
[12:48] <ev> err bug 759804
[12:48] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 759804 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "Installation of -pae kernel happens after jockey -C, causing removal of built DKMS modules (affects: 2) (heat: 14)" [High,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/759804
[12:49] <pitti> ev: I'm about to log off, my train station is coming soon
[12:49] <pitti> ev: will do later when I'm back online
[12:49] <ev> pitti: sure thing, whenever works for you :)
[12:49] <ev> thanks
[13:55] <skaet> cjwatson,  thanks for creating those milestoned.   :0
[13:56] <skaet> :) even
[14:54] <cjwatson> I've moved foundations-y bugs from the beta-2 milestone to final.  Please could somebody do the same with other bugs where appropriate?
[14:55] <cjwatson> (and a review of console-setup from the queue would be lovely)
[15:01] <skaet> cjwatson,  will do
[15:02] <skaet> for the bug moving,   not sure what you mean by review of the console-setup, so will leave that for someone else.
[15:04] <cjwatson> skaet: just like any of the other reviews of uploads to the queue.
[15:15] <skaet> cjwatson,  can you go in and disable beta-2 milestone?
[15:15] <cjwatson> skaet: done
[15:16] <skaet> thanks
[15:22] <tgardner> skaet, who should I annoy to get the linux-ti-omap4 kernel approved?
[15:24] <cjwatson> tgardner: queuebot annoys us about it alreay
[15:24] <cjwatson> +d
[15:24] <cjwatson> I'll do it once I've finished with this sync run
[15:25] <tgardner> cjwatson, thanks
[15:42] <stgraber> ogra: I'm guessing bug 760035 should be targeted for release and made slightly more important, right ?
[15:42] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 760035 in python-apt (Ubuntu) "Ubuntu.info template doesn't allow deb-src lines using archive.ubuntu.com on ports architectures (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/760035
[15:42] <ogra> yes, please
[15:43] <stgraber> ok, done
[15:43] <ogra> thx
[15:44] <GrueMaster> jibel: Morning.  Kubuntu-mobile is an incomplete image.  It has no boot partition for eithr omap3 or omap4 images.  Aside from that, they also do not boot into their gui environments.  No bugs were filed, as I wouldn't know what to file a bug against.
[15:45] <cjwatson> skaet: if I take bug 736743 off the agenda, will it return?  this is unlikely to be fixed for natty, and I don't think it's RC
[15:45] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 736743 in grub2 (Ubuntu) "environment block not implemented on btrfs (affects: 6) (heat: 155)" [Wishlist,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/736743
[15:46] <skaet> cjwatson,  if its unlikely to be fixed, better it be surfaced now.
[15:46] <cjwatson> I don't understand, sorry
[15:46] <cjwatson> what does surfaced mean in this context?
[15:47] <skaet> I'd rather it be given a status that indicates it isn't being fixed.  (wishlist)
[15:47] <cjwatson> that's the status it already has
[15:48] <cjwatson> it's triaged, wishlist, not targeted to natty
[15:48] <cjwatson> the only reason it ended up on the agenda was that it came up in iso testing
[15:50] <skaet> thanks,  needed to understand that bit of context (iso testing triggering it)
[15:50] <cjwatson> well, at least that's the only reason I can see
[15:51] <skaet> Have gone in and targetted it to be considered in Oneiric.
[15:51] <cjwatson> ok, I'll remove it from the agenda then
[15:51] <skaet> thanks
[15:52] <cjwatson> (it's still not High for Oneiric, though, it's still Wishlist. :-) )
[15:52] <skaet> heh,  ok,  should I update the bug to task it to Natty, and put in an explicit won't fix to make it clear?
[15:53] <cjwatson> I don't see a need - most bugs aren't explicitly targeted
[15:53] <cjwatson> targeting to oneiric is clear enough, I think
=== chuck_ is now known as zul
[16:53] <GrueMaster> Can we fix the release image naming process for armel images prior to final?  Every release so far has had duplications in the names.  I.e. ubuntu-headless-11.04-beta2-preinstalled-headless-armel+omap4.img.gz
[16:54] <cjwatson> GrueMaster: can you file a bug on the ubuntu-cdimage project for that, please?
[16:55] <GrueMaster> Will do.
[16:55] <cjwatson> it should be doable, but I have no time for it today (and on holiday Mon, Tue)
[17:06] <GrueMaster> Ok, Bug 761915 filed.
[17:06] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 761915 in ubuntu-cdimage "Name redundancy in the armel release image names (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/761915
[17:11] <skaet> cjwatson,  GrueMaster +1 on getting those names cleaned up.
[17:14] <GrueMaster> I'm not even sure why they get changed that way anyways.  The natty-desktop-,arch> and natty-server-<arch> end up as ubuntu-<release version>-desktop-<arch> and ubuntu-<release version>-server-<arch> without the extra desktop or server nominclature.
[17:21] <cjwatson> GrueMaster: I know why, it should be fixable by me next week
[17:21] <cjwatson> desktop is just 'ubuntu' as far as cdimage is concerned, and ubuntu-server is special-cased (as ubuntu-headless can be)
[17:21] <cjwatson> actually, if we're going to spend time talking about it, I'll just fix it now.
[17:25] <cjwatson> or maybe not, will take longer than the five minutes I have.  It actually looks like it's a bug in publish-image-set.py, so reassigning
=== chuck_ is now known as zul
[17:46] <GrueMaster> I filed a bug for kubuntu-mobile armel images and marked them both as failed in the tracker for completeness.  I would have filed the bug earlier, but lp wasn't working for me yesterday or Wednesday night when I tested them.
[17:57] <Riddell> cjwatson: how does cdimage/www/simple/kubuntu/HEADER.html get generated?
[18:13] <cjwatson> Riddell: by hand
[18:20] <slangasek> um, why did I just get mail saying I uploaded sea-defender when I didn't?
[18:24] <ScottK> slangasek: Apparently LP thinks you did: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sea-defender/0.9-2
[18:24] <ScottK> Perhaps an accidentally misattributed sync request.
[18:24] <slangasek> yeah, that seems to be the case
[18:25] <slangasek> oh
[18:25] <slangasek> no, it's not misattributed at all \o/
[18:26] <slangasek> well, it sorta is... I filed a ftbfs bug on sea-defender, tjaalton turned it into a sync request :)
[19:17] <hyperair> hi. regarding bug #760902, do i need a FFe for that?
[19:17] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 760902 in banshee (Ubuntu) "Banshee's Library Watcher should be disabled by default in Ubuntu 11.04 (affects: 2) (heat: 12)" [Wishlist,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/760902
[19:17] <hyperair> to summarize, the library watcher isn't polished enough, so it would be better to disable it by default (and let users enable it if they want to)
[19:19] <hyperair> for some context, it was previously enabled, and distropatched by didrocks, who agrees that we should disable it by default