[02:11] <BenC> sconklin: I thought I had verified that patch already
[02:28] <chadhogg> jjohansen: I was unable to boot with the kernel you built me; details on launchpad
[05:28] <twb> Stupid question: why does lucid-backports have linux kernels up to .35, but e.g. "compat wireless" modules up to .38?
[05:29] <twb> Oh, I see, it looks like it's the driver taken from the .38 tree and compiled against .32
[07:42] <smb> morning
[08:24] <apw> smb morning
[08:25] <diwic> apw, before my vacation I traced down a bug in PulseAudio that could be a gcc bug. Do you know how to proceed with that?
[08:26] <apw> diwic, normally one would file a bug against gcc, they will want the minimum code fragment that causes the miss-compile and a good description of how it is miss compiled
[08:27] <apw> against gcc-4.5 or whatever i guess
[08:27] <apw> how do we know it is a compiler problem ?
[08:27] <twb> apw: problem goes away when you change the compiler
[08:27] <apw> as unfortuanatly code which is relying on undefined side effects of some code forms can then change if you change the compiler
[08:28] <jjohansen> twb: all other parts of the environment the same?
[08:28] <apw> twb, one would really want to find the exact bit of code whihch is being miss built
[08:28] <diwic> apw, is bug 789031 filed against the right package?
[08:28] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 789031 in gcc-defaults "Built-in ASM constraint "rm" does not work" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/789031
[08:28] <twb> apw: granted
[08:29] <apw> diwic now that even sounds familiar, i wonder if something in the kernel ht the same issue
[08:29] <apw> diwic, i think i'd expect it to be gc-4.5 or gcc-4.6 depending on the version you are using
[08:30] <diwic> apw, actually in pulseaudio the problem was worse, it allocated one "r" and one "rm" into the same register
[08:31] <diwic> apw, but I couldn't get that done to a simple example
[08:31] <apw> so i think other than i think you want to do the right version, it looks good.  i would poke doko so he is aware, he is likely to recognise it if its come by already as a fix
[08:32] <diwic> ok
[08:33]  * diwic pokes in ubuntu-devel
[09:27] <akgraner> jjohansen, you around?  Was given your name for the person to contact for possible interview series?
[09:27] <jjohansen> akgraner: hey, of course I am around, what are you doing up so late
[09:28] <akgraner> jjohansen, late it's early here I'm about to start my day :-)
[09:28] <jjohansen> akgraner: ouch that is early
[09:28] <akgraner> nah just sleep decided to hid from me so I thought I would get some work done :-)
[10:29] <jazz2> hi, I upgraded my server from 9.04 to 10.04 (via 9.10); the server is connected in my lan via wlan(wpa2); ...
[10:29] <jazz2> the problem now is that the speed downloading from the server to the lan is down from ~700kb to ~100kb, while uploading to it is mostly not affected (~700kB). ...
[10:29] <jazz2> I tried: 
[10:29] <jazz2> a) using a wired lan connection->normal speed, 
[10:29] <jazz2> b) booting with kernel 2.6.28-19-generic -> wlan speeds are back to normal 
[10:29] <jazz2> c) booting with kernel 2.6.31-14-generic -> wlan speeds still degraded
[10:29] <jazz2> question now is: what changed between the kernels and where do I start to fix this? any help would be highly appreciated
[10:35] <erhart> has someone tried to run a natty kernel in lucid?
[10:37] <ohsix> jazz2: what wifi chipset?
[10:39] <erhart> intel wifilink 5100 agn
[10:39] <jazz2> ohsix, where do I look for it
[10:39] <jazz2> i think it's something like Realtek
[10:40] <jazz2> ohsix, zd1211rw
[11:08] <ppisati> cooloney: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=roc/ubuntu-lucid.git;a=commitdiff;h=fc58ea3748869d2fa811dff26aa0fa07490b22b2
[11:08] <ppisati> cooloney: i can't find any branch where this patch has been applied
[11:08] <ppisati> cooloney: is it in use at all?
[11:09]  * smb -> lunch
[12:09]  * ppisati out to get some food
[14:54] <sconklin> smb: your comment in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/681083 - sorry I'm not up on all the virt stuff - does his test imply that the bug has been fixed in the XenMotion case, or only that the kernel doesn't fail in a major way?
[14:54] <ubot2> Ubuntu bug 681083 in linux "Ubuntu Crashes/Freeze on XenMotion" [Medium,In progress]
[14:56] <smb> sconklin, Whatever they exactly do in xenmotion I actually do not know. But one part is running generic kernels (-pae in i386) as domU guests.
[14:56] <smb> So when he took that 2.6.35 kernel I provided and installed it into his Lucid guest, the Maverick kernel got tested
[14:57] <smb> sconklin, Probably another argument could be that this patch is now added for the next 2.6.32 (may or may not get picked for .35 as well) longterm tree
[14:58] <smb> So sooner or later it will come. But I heard you are slightly frustrated by longterm trees. :)
[15:02] <sconklin> BenC: I see your test results in the bug - It's that the SRU process requires that someone actually test the kernel in -proposed, and it looks like you tested a test build to validate the patch.
[15:03] <BenC> sconklin: Ok, I'll test the actual build
[15:03] <sconklin> thanks, much appreciated
[15:23] <flipside> hello
[15:35] <BenC> sconklin: Ok, confirmed...where do I add my two-cents?
[15:36] <sconklin> add a comment and I'll set the tag. Thanks!
[15:41]  * BenC has forgotten the bug report
[15:41] <sconklin> stand by
[15:41] <BenC> Found it in scrollback
[16:05] <apw> apw ...
[16:13] <apw> apw_ ?
[16:13] <bjf> apw ??
[16:39]  * smb wonders whether apw exploded...
[16:39] <apw> smb, trying out a new irc client was all
[16:40] <smb> apw, Ah. :)
[17:39]  * smb -> eod
[17:45] <jjohansen> apw: tangerine seems to be hanging on builds (not just in schroots), who do we hit up to look into it
[17:46] <apw> jjohansen, whats the symptoms
[17:46] <apw> cnd what you doing to tangerine?
[17:46] <sforshee> apw, fakeroot is hanging in the kernel trying to get some semaphore
[17:46] <jjohansen> apw: it just hangs, sforshee reported and I duplicated
[17:47] <apw> sforshee, anything specific, which sema ?
[17:47] <sforshee> apw, not sure
[17:47] <apw> i can bounce it if thats useful
[17:47] <sforshee> you'll see a bunch of faked-sysv processes in uninterruptible sleep
[17:48] <sforshee> /proc/<pid>/wchan shows call_rwsem_down_write_failed
[17:48] <sforshee> apw, yeah it prolly needs to be bounced when cnd is done
[17:49] <apw> ok well let me know when he is done, if he can be anythiong other than done
[17:49] <apw> sforshee, given its actual makes which are spinning, i'd say he is not making progress
[17:50] <apw> yeah they are dead i recon
[17:53] <apw> sforshee, i don;'t think cnd is making progress
[17:53] <apw> votes for bouncing ??
[17:53] <apw> jjohansen, sforshee ^^
[17:53] <jjohansen> +1
[17:53] <sforshee> +1
[17:54] <apw> in progress
[17:55] <sforshee> bjf, could you accept my natty nomination on bug #767192 ?
[17:55] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 767192 in linux "Wireless flaky on Acer Aspire 5100 after installing Natty" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/767192
[17:55] <sforshee> thanks apw
[19:16] <sforshee> anyone around that can accept my natty nomination on bug #767192 ?
[19:16] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 767192 in linux "Wireless flaky on Acer Aspire 5100 after installing Natty" [Medium,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/767192
[21:41] <Specialist> Hi there, are there any plans to publish a kernel update for natty based on a recent -stable (> 2.6.38.6) kernel version?
[21:43] <Specialist> I am asking because I am affected by bug #746860, which has already been fixed upstream
[21:43] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 746860 in linux "System sporadically freezes during suspend to RAM" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/746860
[21:49] <sconklin> Specialist: the natty kernel currently in -proposed is current thru 2.6.38.8 but has two known regressions that we will have to resolve before we can fix it and spin another release
[21:50] <sconklin> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/792013 is the tracking bug for that, and has other bugs linked from there for the regressions
[21:50] <ubot2> Ubuntu bug 792013 in linux "[Regression] linux: 2.6.38-10.44 -proposed tracker" [Medium,In progress]
[21:50] <Specialist> sconklin: thanks! i'll see whether those affect me and will probably just take the kernel from -proposed if they don't
[21:52] <sconklin> Specialist: if either of them affect you in a way you can reproduce, we could use help bisecting kernels to locate the problem. I think our main reporter is gone until Monday . . .
[21:53] <vanhoof> sconklin: ah cool, I didn't know -10 in -proposed carried all the way through 2.6.38.8
[21:53] <sconklin> Specialist: sorry, I got that wrong. The release in -proposed has up through 2.6.38.7
[21:53]  * vanhoof has a few bugs that will get closed out then :)
[21:53] <vanhoof> ah rats :D
[21:54] <sconklin> we've temporarily stopped taking upstream updates because of the load of regressions we got in the last batch
[21:55] <sconklin> vanhoof: anything you really care about, open an SRU bug even though it's in a stable update, and get it on the kernel list for acks.
[21:55] <Specialist> sconklin: np, as long as it's > .6, it's fine ;-) i'll let you know if i see anything unusual comparable to the two regressions with the -proposed version
[21:55] <Specialist> sconklin: is the bisect progress documented somewhere?
[21:55] <sconklin> vanhoof: sorry to push things into that path, but we're trying not to take another multi-week train wreck
[21:56] <sconklin> Specialist: hold in - herton has been doing those ^^
[21:57] <vanhoof> sconklin: well .8 will make its way in at some point
[21:59] <herton> Specialist: for bug 793796, the bisect progress is on last comment on bug report
[21:59] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 793796 in linux "2.6.38-10 panic after ejecting drive" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/793796
[22:00] <herton> it's waiting for the reporter to test the next step
[22:01] <herton> the other one (bug 794096) is on a bisect also with the reporter, he will only be able to test next bisect next week...
[22:01] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 794096 in linux "SMTP and posting to a web-form time out (probably due to netfilter changes)" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/794096
[22:02] <herton> this last one is weird, as reporter already tested with the most likely changes which could cause the issue reverted
[22:03] <herton> and there isn't much info yet which could point to real issue
[22:04] <herton> I tried to reproduce both here but without success, so if there is anyone else being able to reproduce the same and able to help would be great
[22:58] <Kano> hi, which config option is the problematic one that now a newer module-init-tools is required
[22:59] <Kano> rc2 worked fine with lenny, rc3 does not
[23:00] <Kano> but even with squeeze 3.0rc3 works,so you do not need that extreme depend
[23:00] <Kano> i lower it in my install scripts anyway
[23:00] <Kano> this just takes useless time
[23:58] <apw> Kano, its there becase we need it in the oneiric tree where the versions are correctly specified, and its getting copied to the mainline builds.  i'll fix it when i have time
[23:59] <apw> as you have noted you can actually fix it yourself as you make your own packages
[23:59] <Kano> no i use dpkg-deb
[23:59] <Kano> http://kanotix.com/files/fix/mainline/install-daily.sh
[23:59] <Kano> take a look