| TeT | hi | 03:58 |
|---|---|---|
| dtchen | hi | 04:01 |
| TeT | My zeitgeist-datah process is constantly in a zombie state, even just after rebooting the system. Is that worth reporting as a bug ? | 04:07 |
| TeT | (on natty) | 04:08 |
| micahg | TeT: already reported | 04:08 |
| micahg | I think, or maybe I just talked to seif about it... | 04:09 |
| micahg | yep, I already reported it, bug 739780 | 04:10 |
| ubot4 | Launchpad bug 739780 in zeitgeist (Ubuntu) (and 2 other projects) "Session starting with a zeitgeist-datahub zombie process (affects: 53) (dups: 3) (heat: 216)" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/739780 | 04:10 |
| micahg | err, rather I reported it and was duped to this | 04:10 |
| TeT | yup | 04:11 |
| TeT | i'm glad i asked, that's exactly it. I will add myself to that bug. Thanks ! | 04:11 |
| dtchen | yeah, it seems to work fine here | 04:11 |
| micahg | TeT: so, to get it fixed in natty, we'd need to cherry-pick the fix and SRU it | 04:11 |
| TeT | Well doesn't make too much sense to me to be honest. But i will read the report and see if i can get it :) Apparently it's not affecting the system in any way. It's just a problem about an already existing zeitgeist-datahub process right ? | 04:13 |
| micahg | right, that seems to be the conclusion | 04:14 |
| TeT | Ok. I thought that was the cause of the very bad crash i got randomly since months but it's not... Too bad ! I will have to dig more. Thanks for the info ! Bye ! | 04:17 |
| dtchen | what type of "very bad crash"? | 04:17 |
| TeT | It's totally random. I just loose control over the system and the memory seems to get used more and more. The hard drive is acting crazy. Sounds like a memory leak or something but i was never able to get where does that comes from. I should take a good look at the logs to get a clue. | 04:19 |
| dtchen | that symptom sounds a lot like thrashing, which yes would be caused by a badly-leaking app | 04:22 |
| dtchen | you might be able to tail -F /var/log/syslog (or try multitail) and look for OOM in the final throes | 04:23 |
| TeT | At first i thought it was related to VLC so i didn't really try to get it into a bug report. But it happens even when i'm not using VLC now. I will try to spend time on that tomorow and eventually come by here to get some help :) | 04:23 |
| TeT | I just check the syslog and there is definitely something in there. But it's too late now :) Good night guys ! | 04:24 |
| dtchen | 'night | 04:24 |
| === abhinav_ is now known as abhinav- | ||
| hggdh | penguin42: OK, you are in (in theory); end of this week we will add you, we need to wait a week for (additional) comments | 15:18 |
| penguin42 | Thanks | 15:18 |
| hggdh | I wish all applications were responded to as fast... | 15:18 |
| hggdh | and I thought I would be the first to answer... | 15:18 |
| penguin42 | Can I suggest a 'high' for bug 803685 - oops in btrfs isn't pretty (Severe impact on small portion; assuming lots of people aren't hitting it!) | 15:52 |
| ubot4 | Launchpad bug 803685 in linux (Ubuntu) "[kernel BUG at btrfs/tree-log.c:820!] Ubuntu cannot mount my btrfs /home partition (affects: 1) (dups: 1) (heat: 14)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/803685 | 15:52 |
| charlie-tca | I did not think btrfs was supported in 11.04 ? | 15:54 |
| penguin42 | hmm interesting | 15:54 |
| penguin42 | charlie-tca: Well we distribute the module and btrfs-tools is in main | 15:55 |
| * penguin42 doesn't know if the installer lets you do it | 15:56 | |
| hggdh | I think you can I do not know either; but I do not use btrfs (at least no FSs here), and it is still loaded on boot | 16:03 |
| hggdh | also, I would expect the installer to allow you to define btrfs partitions (either standard D-I on server, or alternate, IDK about desktop) | 16:04 |
| penguin42 | bug 788238 seems to be another instance of the same thing | 16:04 |
| ubot4 | Launchpad bug 788238 in linux (Ubuntu) "linux-2.6.38.8 btrfs System does not boot (hang in initramfs) (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/788238 | 16:04 |
| charlie-tca | Then perhaps it is valid? | 16:06 |
| charlie-tca | so, is the first one a dup of 788238? | 16:07 |
| penguin42 | I don't think you're supposed to dupe kernel bugs? | 16:07 |
| hggdh | penguin42: no, you are not, unless the hardware is identical (and the kernel) | 16:08 |
| hggdh | also, the kernel traces are slightly different, although both have btrfs_mount in the stack | 16:09 |
| charlie-tca | okay, 803685 done | 16:10 |
| penguin42 | hggdh: Yeh although they're both tripping the same BUG call and both via replat_one_buffer | 16:12 |
| hjd | could someone take a look at bug 416972. I closed it because the problem went away for the reporter, but someone in the last comment found another way to trigger it. Should I leave a comment encouraging that person to report a new bug? | 16:12 |
| ubot4 | Launchpad bug 416972 in debian (and 3 other projects) "GStreamer-CRITICAL **: gst_util_uint64_scale_int: assertion `denom > 0' failed (affects: 2) (heat: 7)" [Unknown,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/416972 | 16:12 |
| hggdh | hjd: better to ask the poster to open a new bug, the code is two releases apart | 16:13 |
| hggdh | and refer to this one | 16:14 |
| charlie-tca | penguin42: I agree if the partitioner allows use of btrfs, it should be valid | 16:15 |
| hjd | hggdh: by "refer to this one" you mean refer to the old bug from the new one, right? | 16:17 |
| hggdh | hjd: yes indeed, add a link to the old one | 16:21 |
| hjd | hggdh: ok, done. I was just slightly confused by that second sentence. | 16:24 |
| hggdh | hjd: sorry | 16:32 |
| yofel | penguin42: btrfs is an option in the installer, but very easy to break, I'm using for ~2months now on 2 systems and had 2 trashed filesystems already. Also, it might be a good idea to ask in #btrfs what data they might find useful. | 16:38 |
| penguin42 | yofel: Yeh I mean you won't get me using btrfs on anything important for a few years :-) | 16:38 |
| yofel | well, as long as you have a SSD it's usable, but I'm not trusting it my /home. And you need backups anyway | 16:39 |
| yofel | snapshotting *is* nice :P | 16:39 |
| * penguin42 must get an SSD - I fancy the pci-express ones | 16:40 | |
| yofel | I've got a 80GB PCIe one in my desktop PC. <3 | 16:41 |
| penguin42 | nice | 16:42 |
| yofel | loading the bios takes longer than booting natty :P | 16:42 |
| htorque | unfortunately that's also true with UEFI :( | 16:42 |
| hggdh | one day I will have the money to get a nice SSD... | 16:43 |
| htorque | time for coreboot to rule the world ;-) | 16:43 |
| === JoeMaverickSett is now known as MavJS | ||
| === jacob_ is now known as jacob | ||
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| RenatoSilva | can someone give an answer about bug 733393, comment 12? | 21:47 |
| ubot4 | Launchpad bug 733393 in emerald (Ubuntu Oneiric) (and 2 other projects) "[natty, SRU] emerald segfault on launch (affects: 42) (dups: 3) (heat: 227)" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/733393 | 21:47 |
| charlie-tca | We don't actually work for Canonical. Might want to ask by email direct to them. However, | 21:48 |
| charlie-tca | Canonical does not really produce Ubuntu, volunteers do | 21:48 |
| charlie-tca | as to emerald, it is obsolete and unmaintained. It is pretty hard to get a current version. | 21:49 |
| micahg | RenatoSilva: emerald is in universe and community maintained | 21:49 |
| charlie-tca | and since it was asked by the same person in several channels, you will get several answers | 21:50 |
| hggdh | oh, another one shotgunning a question on multiple channels :-( | 21:59 |
| RenatoSilva | micahg: ok, but in general, how would I find out which repo is it? what's the procedure you know, except for removing the local package so that the repo location 'appears' | 22:01 |
| micahg | RenatoSilva: if you need an update, you can just file a bug requesting an update and tag it upgrade-software-version | 22:02 |
| RenatoSilva | you didn't get the question | 22:10 |
| yofel | RenatoSilva: 'apt-cache policy <package>' will tell you the repository it's from | 22:11 |
| RenatoSilva | I have a locally installed newer package foo-2.0, but if I didn't, it would be foo-1.0 from repo. Having done it, it shows as local in synaptic, how to know the original source without uninstalling the local version so that foo-1.0 shows up as in repo xyz (rather than in local) | 22:12 |
| yofel | RenatoSilva: apt-cache policy will still show what version is in the archive and what component it's from | 22:13 |
| yofel | or look at the source page in launchpad. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/emerald in this case | 22:13 |
| RenatoSilva | yofel: sorry I didn't read your message before sending. I'd like some ui way but that works fine. Thanks! | 22:14 |
| yofel | I don't use GUIs much for package management. So there probably is a way, but I don't know one right now | 22:15 |
| RenatoSilva | ok thanks anyway! | 22:16 |
| * RenatoSilva tries to stick 'cache policy' into mind | 22:16 | |
| jbicha | RenatoSilva: you could also just visit the Launchpad page: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/emerald lists all the versions with which repo they are in | 22:43 |
| RenatoSilva | jbicha: yeah thanks, if I forget the command I can go to the package page :) | 22:47 |
| hggdh | well, synaptic will show where a package came from via right-click and selecting Properties | 23:26 |
| RenatoSilva | hggdh: you mean this? http://i.imgur.com/aeOXZ.png | 23:48 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
