[00:00] <lamont> is there anything mounted under chroot/proc?
[00:00] <infinity> Oh, derp.
[00:01] <infinity> llvm-* build-deps on binfmt-support.  Of course.
[00:01] <infinity> Now I feel silly.
[00:01] <lamont> so umount-chroot is just broken, because it assumes that reversing the contents of /proc/mounts (which is somewhat random) will give a nicely ordered list
[00:01] <infinity> lamont: So, we just need smarter umount ordering, probably.
[00:01] <lamont> just loop
[00:01] <infinity> lamont: Walk tree depths.
[00:01] <lamont> it's saner than trying to order
[00:01] <infinity> (or loop)
[00:01] <lamont> and life is short.  feel free to update the bug?
[00:02]  * lamont lets the panda fsck
[00:02] <lamont> 210GB disk... sigh
[00:03] <infinity> You know, screw sorting, I bet if you just inverted the list from the grep /proc/mounts, it would solve it.
[00:03] <infinity> And much more elegantly.
[00:03] <lamont> we already do that...
[00:04] <lamont> and that's probably because we needed it _that_ order
[00:04] <infinity> I don't see it inverted.
[00:04] <lamont> maybe that's just my brain messing with me
[00:05] <infinity> This is essentially what lp-buildd does:
[00:05] <infinity> root@shiva:~# grep oneiric-llvm /proc/mounts | cut -d\  -f2 | xargs -r -n 1 echo
[00:05] <infinity> /srv/chroot/oneiric-llvm/proc
[00:05] <infinity> /srv/chroot/oneiric-llvm/dev/pts
[00:05] <infinity> s/echo/umount/ for the real deal.
[00:05] <infinity> /srv/chroot/oneiric-llvm/proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc
[00:05] <infinity> Invert that list, bug fixed.
[00:06] <lamont> for now.  the ordering in /proc/mounts isn't exactly scientific
[00:06] <infinity> It's FIFO.
[00:06] <infinity> Sure, a package could mount -o=remount /proc in its postinst and mess with you, but... Eww?
[00:07] <infinity> (I guess you could keep the loop too, but still invert the list)
[00:09] <infinity> Anyhow, commented on the bug and the merge request.
[00:10] <infinity> Reversing the order would be more efficient, but the loop is probably a safe catch-all anyway.
[00:13] <infinity> lamont: The plus side is that there's no "underlying issue" or processes cleverly hiding from us, just a bit of umount PEBKAC, so I'm that much happier about your hack.  It will DTRT. :P
[00:13] <lamont> heh
[00:14] <lamont> thanks for digging into it
[00:14] <lamont> in other news, chort.buildd will shortly be another panda builder
[00:14] <infinity> \o/
[00:16] <lamont> so if the panda isn't at 115200, what speed should I try?
[00:17] <infinity> That's the only speed it should be...
[00:18] <lamont> that's sad
[00:18] <infinity> lamont: Actually, regarding the same bug.  No complex heuristics are required.  Piping a "sort -r" between the cut and xargs will DTRT.
[00:19] <infinity> lamont: Cause paths sort quite nicely. :P
[00:19] <lamont> for the non-pathological case, yes
[00:19] <infinity> Build me a case where it fails?
[00:20] <lamont> ���������� <-- I do not like it when hitting return several times gets me that..
[00:21] <infinity> I'm having BBS flashbacks.
[00:21] <lamont> they're only slightly faster than some of them
[00:22] <lamont> for the real BBS experience, you want a beaglexm or a bbg3
[00:22] <infinity> And a copy of LORD.
[00:25] <lamont> will that even run on arm?
[00:26] <infinity> Under freedos under qemu, sure!
[00:26] <infinity> Or something equally convoluted.
[00:37] <infinity> Well, time to go have a birthday.  I'll be around here and there on the weekend for releaseish stuff.
[00:50] <NCommander> infinity: happy birthday
[00:51] <infinity> Danke.
[01:04] <lamont> infinity: I just realized that serial console is somewhat overrated
[01:53] <lamont> until it isn't. :(
[08:48] <cjwatson> infinity: curl> I hadn't noticed it, but yeah, I'm probably biased.  If you want to, that'd be great
[08:48] <cjwatson> infinity: on the umount thing, maybe umount -l would be helpful as well?
[09:51] <infinity> cjwatson: Already did overrides and accepted the two new udebs.
[09:51] <infinity> cjwatson: As for the umount thing, I'm leaving it in the hands of lamont and the launchpad team at this point, I've commented more than enough on the bug. :P
[10:24] <cjwatson> ta
[12:45] <astraljava> Hello folks, I recently added a new bzr branch for a package (lightdm-theme) for our team, ~ubuntustudio-dev. We'd like to include it in oneiric, still. Does it need an FFe?
[15:25] <ScottK> astraljava: Technically yes, but on matters of flavor branding we'll approve whatever you all want, so whoever is the ubuntu studio lead just needs to say it should go in.
[15:31] <astraljava> ScottK: Thanks, just a minute ago I got a response on -devel, though, that I should file an FFe. It's here: http://pad.lv/852623
[15:48] <scott-work> ScottK: hi, ScottL here (ubuntu studio project lead) asking about getting a lightdm theme into the repos
[15:48] <scott-work> ScottK: anything special we would need to do?
[16:07] <ScottK> scott-work: Ack in the bug that you want it (I approved it for the release team based on that and then subscribe ubuntu-sponsors/find someone to upload it.
[16:08] <scott-work> ScottK: aye
[20:27] <lamont> cjwatson: umount -l feels way too much like a total hack to me.
[20:27] <lamont> 18 arm builders are making a bit of a dent in the rebuild test