[08:02] <ev> lifeless: hi
[08:04] <lifeless> ev: wondering about 2 things
[08:04] <lifeless> ev: the crash dump discussion, and how horrible my patch was
[08:41] <cjwatson> ev: wubi> looks basically fine; could you (a) rename the hook to ubuntu_binary_build-wubildr.sh, which I think fits better into the naming scheme (b) make sure that the live-build patch is forwarded as a Debian bug report?
[08:41] <cjwatson> lifeless: sorry, not quite got round to it yet ... BTW do you have a GNU copyright assignment on file?
[08:43] <ev> cjwatson: sure
[08:44] <soren> Isn't bzr a GNU project these days?
[08:44] <ev> now to figure out how to wire this into cdimage.  Dug through the code a bit last night, but not being able run it on my local system will make this somewhat delicate.
[08:44] <ev> lifeless: what were you wondering about the crash dump discussion?
[08:45] <lifeless> cjwatson: yes
[08:46] <lifeless> cjwatson: (I have a GNU assignment from years ago, libtool, binutils, smalltalk)
[08:46] <lifeless> cjwatson: I haven't done one for work@canonical, but this was pretty personal :)
[08:47] <lifeless> soren: it is a GNU project, but it doesn't use the FSF assignment atm
[08:47] <soren> lifeless: Oh, ok.
[08:48] <lifeless> ev: is the project resourced? who will be hacking on it? what help can I give them?
[08:48] <cjwatson> lifeless: would that assignment cover a patch to grub?
[08:48] <cjwatson> ev: *cough* I never bother running cdimage locally :-)
[08:49] <lifeless> cjwatson: I don't know
[08:50] <ev> lifeless: I have a work item to create a job profile for an engineer to hack on it from the foundations team.  Matthew has written up the initial design specification: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CrashTracker
[08:51] <lifeless> ev: I'll look at that this weekish and offer feedback if I have any
[08:51] <ev> lifeless: brilliant, that would be much appreciated
[08:51] <ev> thanks
[08:51] <ev> cjwatson: :)
[08:52] <lifeless> cjwatson: if it doesn't cover one, I'm certainly happy to sign another assignment etc
[09:16] <ev> cjwatson: oh, there was one thing I wanted to ask you.  Do you feel that lzma'ing of the ext3 disk imagine and wubildr belongs more in live-build or lp:ubuntu-cdimage?
[09:20] <cjwatson> not sure I hugely care - putting it in live-build might involve adding a new option to lb config, which is more work and more coordination with Debian, but might be easier for users
[09:21] <cjwatson> e.g. if we want live-build's iso building mode to ultimately work for this case, it'll need to go in lb anyway
[09:21] <cjwatson> but I don't mind that much
[09:27] <ev> I'm not sure I follow how this relates to the iso building mode?  Would people want to generate an ISO of just the Ubuntu base image along with wubildr?
[09:33] <cjwatson> who knows
[09:33] <cjwatson> but ok, I guess it wouldn't be that common, this is mainly non-iso
[09:33] <cjwatson> so I guess I don't care, do whatever's easiest
[09:34] <ev> yay, my favorite answer
[10:34]  * ev tries to remember the magic runes to check if a livefs buildd is up to date
[10:34] <ogra_> ev, check the logs ?
[10:34] <ogra_> it used to print the versions at the top
[10:35] <ev> I mean the version of livecd-rootfs and live-build
[10:35] <ogra_> yes, it used to print that at the top of the log
[10:35] <ev> ah
[10:35] <ogra_> but i just checked, seems thats gone with live-build
[10:36] <cjwatson> feel free to fix (probably in livecd-rootfs/live-build/auto/build)
[10:36] <ogra_> if your upload is published to the archive it should auto-update the builder on startup though (at least it did in the past, i hope that dindnt change as well)
[10:37] <cjwatson> the livefs buildds are dist-upgraded before starting
[10:37] <ogra_> good
[10:37] <ev> ah awesome
[10:37] <ev> thanks
[10:37] <cjwatson> see BuildLiveCD, which does this
[10:37] <ev> will do, thanks
[11:51] <cjwatson> ev: could you take bug 806349?  looks like it should be straightforward
[11:51] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 806349 in ubiquity "OEM Install fails with - KeyError: "The cache has no package named 'python2.6-minimal'" - without network connection." [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/806349
[11:51] <cjwatson> hm, actually, that's not fair, it's my code :)
[11:57] <CIA-37> ubiquity: cjwatson * r4768 trunk/ (debian/changelog scripts/plugininstall.py):
[11:57] <CIA-37> ubiquity: Handle the case where one of the packages returned by 'pyversions -s' or
[11:57] <CIA-37> ubiquity: 'py3versions -s' is not installed (LP: #806349).
[12:30] <ev> heh, would've grabbed it but was out at lunch
[12:30] <CIA-37> installation-guide: cjwatson * r494 ubuntu/ (build/entities/common.ent debian/changelog): Bump kernelversion to 3.0.
[12:32] <CIA-37> installation-guide: cjwatson * r495 ubuntu/ (3 files in 3 dirs): Remove some 2.6 kernel specifics.
[12:32] <CIA-37> installation-guide: cjwatson * r496 ubuntu/ (debian/changelog en/welcome/what-is-ubuntu.xml): Bump GNOME version to 3.0.
[12:33] <CIA-37> installation-guide: cjwatson * r497 ubuntu/ (build/entities/common.ent debian/changelog): Bump release version and names for Oneiric.
[14:01] <cjwatson> ev: where have you been committing your livecd-rootfs changes to?  I just got an archive reject after committing to lp:livecd-rootfs and uploading.
[14:01] <ev> oh bum
[14:01] <ev> I didn't realize it was in version control
[14:01] <ev> should've checked
[14:01] <ev> I'll merge them in now
[14:02] <davmor2> ev: I redirect you to my twitter reply to your I'm cowboying the livecd-rootfs system
[14:02] <cjwatson> thanks.  I think the Vcs-Bzr field is correct
[14:03] <ev> it is, and I even have a local copy
[14:03] <ev> I just completely forgot about its existence :-/
[16:35] <ev> cjwatson: so I see that BuildLiveCD dist-upgrades the chroot before running live-build, but how does one notify the buildds to update their copy of livecd-rootfs to get the latest BuildLiveCD?
[16:35] <ev> is this just done in a cron job or is it a "bug lamont" thing
[17:02] <cjwatson> ev: the latter, via an RT ticket
[17:03] <cjwatson> I try to avoid changing BuildLiveCD unnecessarily, but sometimes it's needed
[17:03] <ev> it was seemingly necessary here, but noted
[17:03] <ev> given that this requires the RT runaround
[17:03] <ev> would you mind just reviewing the small change I made to it in trunk?
[17:04] <ev> just to make sure that's the interface you're happy with
[17:07] <cjwatson> seems fine