[07:08]  * apw yawns
[07:33]  * smb yawns back
[07:33]  * RAOF organises a yawnathon.
[07:59]  * _ruben joins in
[08:01] <apw> they are contagious
[08:05] <apw> RAOF, while you are awake, https://bugs.launchpad.net/do/+bug/698009, this bug is rather confused, any oppinion on whether having vmwgfx is a good thing
[08:05] <ubot2> Ubuntu bug 698009 in linux "Request to enable vmwgfx driver in kernel config " [Wishlist,Confirmed]
[08:07]  * apw is inclined to say yes given those who ask for it.  and i suspect its safe
[08:07] <smb> (famous last words)
[08:07] <apw> heh, oneiric is so unstable its hard for me to "improve" it by much
[09:40] <RAOF> apw: Yes, I think having vmwgfx is likely to be a good thing.
[09:40] <RAOF> apw: I was going to bring it up at the next "what should the kernel config be" session at UDS; it's not urgent to enable.
[09:41] <apw> RAOF, ok thanks, works for me, may as well get it in for oneiric beta2 me thinks
[09:41] <RAOF> Aww, man.  That means we might want to enable the mesa bits, too.
[09:41] <apw> well that you can think about if we do it :)
[10:51] <apw> rsalveti, yo ... i was wondering if you'd see the email about "UBUNTU: SAUCE: omap3: beaglexm: fix DVI initialization" and whether it was needed etc
[12:01]  * ppisati -> lunch
[12:39] <rsalveti> apw: hm, not yet, will check
[13:37] <apw> yay terminator just dumped core ... bah
[13:40] <ogasawara> bug 830298
[13:40] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 830298 in linux "TOMOYO bugfix patches" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/830298
[13:40] <ogasawara> CVE 2011-2518
[13:40] <ubot2> ogasawara: ** RESERVED ** This candidate has been reserved by an organization or individual that will use it when announcing a new security problem.  When the candidate has been publicized, the details for this candidate will be provided. (http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2011-2518)
[13:40] <herton> ppisati: I just noted when reviewing that on fsl-imx51 we use 'Tracking bug' instead of 'Release Tracking Bug' in the changelog entries, not a problem, just a cosmetic thing (sru-report still should work with it). I think it could be left that way
[13:40] <ogra_> apw, well, plant it, water it and you might get lots of small terminators ;)
[13:46] <ppisati> herton: ok, take notice
[14:13] <herton> ppisati: more boring nitpicking :P, fsl-imx51 "distribution" entry should be lucid-proposed, not lucid on top changelog entry. same with ti-omap4 you just prepared, which should be maverick-proposed.
[14:16] <ppisati> herton: ok
[14:16] <ppisati> herton: do you fix it or i'll repush it?
[14:16] <herton> ppisati: yes, please repush and retag it
[14:17] <herton> s/yes,//
[14:17] <ppisati> herton: btw, can't find any natty/ti-omap4 -proposed tracking bug, right?
[14:17] <ppisati> ok, i'll do
[14:18] <apw> ogra_, heh
[14:19] <herton> ppisati: right, that's ok, no natty update in progress, the previous one didn't have yet the opened tracking bugs stuff
[14:19] <ppisati> herton: ok
[14:19] <ppisati> while rhese
[14:19] <ppisati> here
[14:20] <ppisati> i'll s/Tracking bug/Release tracking bug/
[14:20] <herton> ok cool
[14:22] <ppisati> herton: fsl-imx51 re-pushed, check it out
[14:22] <ppisati> herton: lucid/fsl-imx51
[14:24] <ppisati> herton: you already fixed lucid/mvl-dove
[14:25] <herton> ppisati: nope, lucid/mvl-dove was already ok. it was just fsl-imx51 and ti-omap4 that weren't -proposed
[14:25] <ppisati> herton: ok
[14:28] <ppisati> herton: maverick/ti-omap4 done too
[14:37] <herton> ppisati: ack, looks ok now
[15:15]  * ogasawara back in 20
[16:14]  * herton -> lunch
[16:23]  * apw bounces to test out a new kernel
[16:34] <apw> [    1.798684] WARNING: at /home/apw/build/ubuntu-oneiric/ubuntu-oneiric/fs/sysfs/dir.c:455 sysfs_add_one+0xc0/0xf0()
[16:34] <apw> [    1.798687] Hardware name: Studio 1537
[16:34] <apw> [    1.798688] sysfs: cannot create duplicate filename '/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:02.0/drm/card0/card0-LVDS-1/intel
[16:34] <apw> _backlight'
[16:34] <apw> ogasawara, am seeing this on most of my boxes, i assume it is todo with those backported backlight patches
[16:36] <ogasawara> apw: quite likely.  have you tested reverting to verify?
[16:36] <ogasawara> kamal: ^^
[16:36] <apw>  ogasawara, not as yet, just noticed it on a third box and decided it was real
[16:53] <kamal> apw, ogasawara: I'll take a look
[17:09] <kamal> apw, ogasawara: yes, I see that intel_backlight warning also -- yes, it is definitely caused by the backported backlight patch -- I'll dig deeper and sort it out.
[17:09] <cking> apw, perhaps we should have tests were we compare kernel logs before and after a kernel upgrade to catch these kind of regressions
[17:10] <apw> cking, dunno, maybe so, quite why apport isn't picking them up is more of a worry
[17:11] <kamal> does apport generally care about warnings?
[17:11] <ogasawara> kamal: not anymore
[17:11] <apw> rtg_, i vaguly reember you talking to bdmurray about doing something with warnings in apport
[17:11] <apw> did we turn the _all_ off ?
[17:11] <ogasawara> I believe they're no longer reported
[17:11] <apw> hmmmm
[17:12] <rtg_> apw, you mean WARN_ONCE and its ilk ?
[17:12] <bdmurray> any kernel oops with WARNING in it is not repored via apport / kerneloops anymore
[17:13] <ogasawara> kamal, apw: so we won't be flooded with bugs, but I would like to get this fixed if possible or revert and reapply with fix post beta-1
[17:14] <kamal> ogasawara: I'll look at this issue immediately (please don't revert just yet :-)
[17:15] <ogasawara> kamal: ack.  just fyi, the latest I can probably squeeze in an upload is tomorrow afternoon at the latest (my time, ie PDT) in order to make beta freeze.
[17:15] <kamal> ogasawara: ack
[17:59] <jjohansen> rebooting
[18:02] <kamal> ogasawara, apw: I see the cause of the intel_backlight issue -- testing a fix now.
[18:03] <ogasawara> kamal: ack
[18:06]  * tgardner --> lunch
[18:26] <kamal> ogasawara: will I need to file a new bug in order to submit this (tiny) backlight patch?  or can I use the same bug number (for BugLink:) as we used for the original backlight backport patch?
[18:27] <ogasawara> kamal: use a new bug number
[18:27] <kamal> ogasawara: ack
[18:27] <ogasawara> kamal: be sure to send it upstream too - https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/17/163
[18:27] <kamal> ah ha
[18:28] <kamal> yup
[19:29] <apw> kamal, thanks for looking at that, one less for the rest of us
[19:29] <kamal> apw: np -- i was the instigator of all this anyway :-)
[19:29] <apw> bad kamal
[19:49] <ogasawara> apw, tgardner: any other last minute patches you want in before I upload?
[19:50] <apw> ogasawara, nothing here, everything i am holding i want in first after beta-1
[19:50] <tgardner> ogasawara, nope, but I've recently pushed some build patches
[19:51] <ogasawara> tgardner: yep, saw those.
[19:51] <tgardner> ogasawara, lemme know if I've broken something
[19:51] <ogasawara> tgardner: will do
[19:51]  * ogasawara kicks off test builds
[19:52] <tgardner> ogasawara, shouldn't that top commit 'UBUNTU: i915: do not setup intel_backlight twice' be a SAUCE patch ?
[19:52] <ogasawara> tgardner: bah, yep.  I'll fix it up
[20:30] <tgardner> ogasawara, perhaps you should build master without any of the rules changes for now, just leave them on master-next.
[20:31] <ogasawara> tgardner: my test builds seems to be fine, but I can hold those patches for now till the first post beta1 upload.
[20:31] <tgardner> ogasawara, well, I've found at least one inconsistency. I'd like to run it through a PPA build before I'm sure of them.
[20:31] <ogasawara> tgardner: ack
[20:32] <tgardner> ogasawara, so, just cherry-pick the config and i915 patches onto master, right?
[20:32] <ogasawara> tgardner: yep
[20:33] <tgardner> cool
[22:38] <kamal> ogasawara: SAUCE?  oops.  I thought that it would only be SAUCE if it was Ubuntu-specific and not destined for upstream.  no?
[22:42] <vanhoof> kk
[22:42] <vanhoof> wrong window :)
[22:43] <openfly> anyone know if there are dox anywhere on how the ubuntu kvm packages are built?
[22:43] <openfly> like configure flags and the sort?
[22:44] <openfly> and if really lucky package definitions
[22:44] <RAOF> openfly: "apt-get source kvm"?
[22:46] <openfly> yeah i guess that's the best there is
[22:47] <openfly> just kinda wish it would be less of a pain
[22:48] <openfly> compiling custom packages with all the dependencies from that direction is going to be time consuming
[22:48] <openfly> was kinda hoping someone had scripted something
[22:50] <RAOF> openfly: No, it'll be easy.  If you need to change configure flags, just change them in debian/rules and then rebuild the package (optionally in a pbuilder or sbuild chroot).
[22:53] <ogasawara> kamal: SAUCE "This is a patch that the submitter has authored and is not yet upstream. The patch likely has been submitted to upstream but is of enough value for Ubuntu to carry it in our tree regardeless of upstream acceptance."
[22:54] <kamal> ogasawara: ok, got it (until I forget again ;-)
[22:55] <ogasawara> kamal: that's why we have tim OCD gardner to remind us :)
[22:55] <kamal> next time I'll mark it like "UBUNTU: OCD: fix the foobar frobnaz"
[23:02] <openfly> yeah but the dependencies on kvm are a nightmare
[23:02] <openfly> =/