twbOK, so I built 3.0 with "make deb-pkg" on hardy, and it gave stripped packages.  So I guess the builddeb script as at 2.6.32 is just too stupid to do that :-/00:01
twbI don't really wanna go back to make-kpkg00:01
twbActually make it wasn't stripped, I only looked at the .deb size (5MB instead of 150MB), but that might just be because I used defconfig instead of the allmodconfig-esque ubuntu .config00:07
twbnot stripped.00:10
twbAaand nor are the .ko's in my personal ones, so "make deb-pkg" doesn't normally strip, either.  Mea culpa.00:11
twbOK, it turns out to be simple -- pass INSTALL_MOD_STRIP=1 to build and then strip, or unset CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO in your .config to avoid building debugging symbols in the first place.01:05
twbThe former is handy if you want to go back and "make debug-package" or so (can't remember the exact target name).01:05
jonpryhow can i debug an acpi problem?02:21
cemchi. I'm trying to rebuild the latest hardy kernel package. I've got the .dsc, I've changed what I wanted, then uploaded it to my ppa, but it doesn't build: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/83147123/buildlog_ubuntu-hardy-i386.linux_2.6.24-29.94~cemc111019~ppa1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz . it's complaining about some missing ABI files. I have no idea what I need to do. never messed with a kernel package before. any pointers would be appreciated06:04
matei1hi, I have a question about Ubuntu 11.10 on EC2: is it possible to use transparent hugepages in the latest cloud kernel? the /boot/config-* file says that CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_MADVISE=y, and I have an application that uses madvise with MADV_HUGEPAGE, but I don't see any AnonHugePages created in /proc/meminfo06:33
=== smb` is now known as smb
smbcemc, Probably https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/KernelMaintenance#ABI is closest to help07:21
sroeckerhi, does the kernel bugzilla work again?08:20
smbDoes not seem so08:21
sroeckerbummer, i would like to have a look at http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36152 to fix bug 70603908:24
ubot2Launchpad bug 706039 in isight-firmware-tools "Can't produce data in UYVY" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/70603908:24
ubot2sroecker: Error: Could not parse XML returned by bugzilla.kernel.org: timed out (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/xml.cgi?id=36152)08:25
cemcsmb: thanks!08:59
apwbah everyone i go to answer has always gone, so frustrating09:00
smbapw, Was that the hugepage question?09:01
apwactually and one futher up in scrollback ... sigh09:01
smbHas been gone almost immediately after asking09:01
smb(well almost a bit strechted)09:02
smbapw, Actually you could answer me, I am not completely sure. Would say it should work, even finding some old information that it may depend on the hypervisor, too. 09:03
apwi would think it is very dependant on the hypervisor supporting it, as it would need to support the PTE formats etc09:04
smbRight, so ec2 actually may not work as they are on 3.4.x at most09:05
apwand even if it is available at the hypervisor i would expect it to be a configurable option and probabally off by default09:06
smbFound some 2yr old info about required boot arguments for the hypervisor and guests, but those did not appear in the current wiki. Which could mean the wiki is incomplete or the option is gone..09:06
apwyeah, i presume you can tell from the proc/cpuinfo cpu flags that xen gives you09:07
apwit also depends on xen giving you contigious physical ram, and i am not sure it does that either by default09:08
apwsmb, cifs is the in kernel samba implementation i think right?09:09
smbapw, well the sort of guest part I think09:09
apwright that bit yes09:10
apwdo you have a samba server on the network your hardy box is on ?09:10
* apw has a cve which i wonder if anyone can reproduce on hardy09:10
smbapw, Yes, the test system can access it09:11
apwso the bug in theory is you use cifs to mount it, then you use another user to mount it but without a password, and it "reuses" the password the kernel already has allowing the second user access too09:11
smbI guess I can give it a try...09:12
apwif you have time that would rock, as i have a patch for it, but who knows if it works09:13
smbapw, any preference on 32 or 64 bit?09:13
apwno specification either way in the bug, so i assume it is generic09:14
smbapw, Ok, so it seems to incorrectly work as you described it10:04
apwthat is awsome10:04
apwsmb, you 32 or 64 bit10:05
smbapw, 64bit10:05
alexblighI am attempting to build a new flavour of ubuntu kernel (oldstyle/xenlinux xen, for 3.3 hypervisor). My kernel builds fine, but as it makes a vmlinuz not a bzImage, it doesn't package. I can see there are bits in debian.master/rules.d to control this on a per arch basis (though I don't understand them). How do I control on a per flavour basis?10:05
apwalexbligh, how are you triggering the build10:06
alexblighfakeroot debian/rules binary-myflavour10:07
apwalexbligh, the output file requested is controled by the debian.<branch>/rules.d/<arch>.mk file10:07
alexblighright, but arch is amd64. I only have a flavour. Or do I need to do a whole new arch?10:07
apwinstall_file    = vmlinuz10:07
apwisn't a vmlinuz a bzImage anyhow ?10:08
apwits not an x but a z10:08
alexblighThe XEN patches cause it not to produce the bzImage.10:08
alexblighNo, I don't think they are the same10:08
apwbuild_image     = bzImage10:09
alexblighAt least not according to the debian patch which says "we can't load a bzImage so load a vmlinuz for now"10:09
apwhave you changed tha t?10:09
apwkernel_file     = arch/$(build_arch)/boot/bzImage10:09
apwand indeed that ?10:09
alexblighYou mean in debian.master/rules.d/amd64.mk?10:09
alexblighI haven't changed that file at all, because I wanted amd64 to continue to build. I only wanted the targets to change for my flavour.10:10
apwi am pretty sure we have the same problem with powerpc in older releases10:10
* apw isn't sure you can do that10:10
alexblighok. that's not the end of the world.10:10
alexblighso build_image should be vmlinuz10:10
apwalexbligh, we don't normally want to make the originals when we make a derived branch like that10:10
alexblighinstall_file should be vmlinuz (as it is at the moment)10:10
alexblighand kernel_file should be what?10:11
apwbuild_image should be what you type when you type make in a native tree10:11
apwkernel_file should be whatever it makes when it builds it when you do that :)10:11
apwits a bit of a guessing game10:11
alexblighKernel: arch/x86/boot/vmlinuz is ready  (#2)10:12
alexblighthat then :-)10:12
apwyeah that sounds about right10:12
alexblighapw, thanks10:12
=== gema_ is now known as gema
=== lag` is now known as lag
* apw notes that you are all going to get a spurious v3.1-rc10 build announcement ... i hope12:53
ogasawaraherton, bjf: just fyi http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru appears to mention there is a separate report for our kernel SRU's, but the url it points to is invalid, ie it points to http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru13:31
ogasawaraherton, bjf: bah, http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/reports/sru-report.html is the invalid url location13:32
bjfogasawara: nice, it actually points to the ~kernel-ppa location where it used to be13:32
bjfogasawara: i'll mention it to pitti13:32
ogasawarabjf: yah, didn't know if you wanted to set up a re-direct to get pitti to fix it13:33
bjfogasawara, it's been broken forever so not many people must be using it13:33
bjfogasawara: pitti has fixed his script and it will be fixed in the next update13:42
ogasawarabjf: cool13:43
* ogasawara back in 2014:12
=== ericm|ubuntu is now known as ericm-Zzz
hertonapw: ogasawara: did you saw this error before when uploading to c-k-t ppa? Changes file must be signed with a valid GPG signature: Verification failed 3 times: ['General error', 'General error', 'General error'] : Permission denied.15:43
hertonI'm trying to upload the new linux-lts-backport-oneiric, the packages were signed by bjf15:43
hertonI already uploaded packages signed by him and it went ok, may be the fact the package is new has something to do with it15:43
smbherton, whether new or not should not matter. maybe the signage key was accidentally not the one in lp...?15:45
hertonsmb: nope, the key is ok, matches the lp one15:46
ogasawaraI think if it's the first upload of the new package, you might new core dev privs to do so?  I swear I might have hit something similar doing lbm at one time15:46
ogasawaraherton: I think I had to have tgardner do the first upload, and after that I was ok15:46
smbogasawara, herton Oh, maybe right because its new new (as not in the upload rights list)15:47
ogasawarasmb: yep15:47
hertonogasawara: hmm ok, only tim is core dev?15:47
ogasawaraherton: and I think he's out until UDS?15:48
smbbut you could ask cjwatson to add the package to the list I guess15:48
hertoncalendar shows him on vacation until this friday. I'll ask cjwatson if he can see this15:50
bjfsmb, looks like tim's "hit by bus" rule applies here, we should probably get apw and ogasawara and maybe yourself as core dev ?15:52
bjfsmb, need more than one15:52
smbbjf, Yeah, me and apw have it on our list... Just always seemed "too hard"15:52
ogasawarasmb: yah, seems like a lot of extra work for not much more gain15:53
ogasawaraherton: have you gone before the DMB yet to get your kernel upload rights?15:56
* ogasawara meant to ack your application15:56
bjfogasawara, he hasn't yet15:57
hertonogasawara: I'm with my application ready, but the October 24th date is a not good one, since tim may be is away and sconklin too, and the timing is not good, I was thinking of sending the application for the meeting after15:57
hertonoctober 2415:57
smbherton, now try to upload lts-backport again...15:59
hertonsmb: still the same16:00
smbHm, bjf what is your lp username again?16:01
bjfsmb: brad-figg16:01
smbbjf, OK seems solved... It was only a fake error. And our upload rights actually do not matter as everything goes via ppa. But I guess it does not hurt if our package uploader rights mtach what damage we could do via the ppa16:10
hertonyeah, the builds are showing on c-k-t ppa despite the error, so should be ok16:11
ogasawarabjf, jsalisbury: are you guys going to want to have an official UDS kernel bug session, or can we just chat over a pint of beer at the bar16:55
bjfogasawara: beer!16:56
ogasawaraheh, I probably didn't even need to ask :)16:57
jsalisburyogasawara, beer works for me :-D17:01
jsalisburyogasawara, bjf or both17:01
bjfogasawara, jsalisbury, don't need a session17:02
jsalisburybjf, ok17:02
ogasawaraapw: before I forget again, we're planning on sticking with the 3 digit version scheme for Precise right?17:08
apwi think its likely, we should think about it at UDS and check before we upload 3.217:10
ogasawaraapw: yep, I pretty much forced us to the 3 digit when I uploaded 3.1.0 yesterday, but am banking on the fact we'll be using at least 3.217:11
jsalisburyogasawara, bug 876996 looks like a regression that prevents an install/upgrade of Oneiric21:03
ubot2Launchpad bug 876996 in linux "Ubuntu 11.10 fresh install crashed" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/87699621:03
hggdhogasawara: can you reset bug 871899? I wrongly set the kernel verification task as completed23:10
ubot2Launchpad bug 871899 in kernel-sru-workflow "linux: 2.6.32-35.78 -proposed tracker" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/87189923:10

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!