[08:17] <smb> morning
[10:04] <Laney> Can someone make sense of this please: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1698083/ http://paste.ubuntu.com/1698110/ - the second assert is failing in chroots for me but not on bare metal?!
[10:06] <Laney> for completeness here is a correct one http://paste.ubuntu.com/1698116/
[10:13] <Laney> ah, nm, was a root/non-root thing
[10:31] <apw> Laney, heh :)
[10:32] <Laney> that's the kind of thing that seems distressing when you don't realise what's going on
[10:32] <Laney> that or a cool bug
[10:32] <apw> :) yeah
[13:52] <apw> rtg, ogasawara, what should our default policy be for 'experimental' device drivers for scsi/ata disk drivers
[13:53] <rtg> apw, in mainline ?
[13:53] <apw> rtg, in raring and going forward
[13:53] <rtg> isn't experimental slowly going away ?
[13:54] <apw> rtg, EXPERIMENTAL as a config option is gone yes, but drivers still are marked (EXPERIMENTAL)
[13:54] <einonm> rtg: IT's been removed in the latest kernel 
[13:54] <rtg> apw, enable them as M if possible (I guess)
[13:54] <apw> einonm, only the confi option
[13:54] <apw> rtg, i was thinking the same, and indeed that is what we have been doing due to a bug :)
[13:54] <ogasawara> apw: heh, I'd say module as well
[13:55] <einonm> apw: ah, ok. Each driver should have it's own explanation of why it's experimental, iirc
[15:13] <doanac> bjf: WRT bug #1092924, we had desktop ISO's cached back to 2012-12-03. I saw the stack trace on all of them
[15:13] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1092924 in UTAH "Cobbler install of recent raring-desktop images failing" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1092924
[15:14] <bjf> doanac, well, that's not good
[15:14] <doanac> i was told UTAH has a way to take an ISO but use your own kernel.
[15:14] <doanac> so I was thinking about trying to bisect that way.
[15:14] <doanac> do you have a convenient place for me to get some old kernels?
[15:14] <bjf> doanac, we need to find a good kernel (if there is one)
[15:17] <bjf> doanac, https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/raring/+source/linux
[15:18] <doanac> bjf: thanks, I'll try and sift through this today
[15:34] <bjf> doanac, did you ever open another bug for the power-testing HW (you said it was having the same issue)
[15:35] <bjf> doanac, and do you use this same method for provisioning any other systems?
[15:35] <doanac> bjf: no. i wanted to get further on this. I think they are the same problem
[16:11]  * ogasawara back in 20
[16:31] <ppisati> brb
[18:02] <rtg> apw, hmm, looks like aufs will need the usual TLC sometime before 3.9-rc1 is released. Even though the rebase against linux-next was successful, I still ran into compile issues. dm-raid45 as well.
[18:02] <apw> rtg, ack will look into it tommorrow, see if there are any updates pending
[18:18]  * rtg -> lunch
[18:20] <infinity> zequence: Want to do something about verification-testing on those lowlatency SRUs?
[18:22] <zequence> infinity: Ah, sorry. Will do right away
[18:23] <infinity> zequence: Many thanks.
[18:23] <infinity> zequence: I plan to release the world this afternoon (ie: in a couple of hours), so some verification that your rebases/builds aren't complete duds would be swell. ;)
[19:35] <zequence> infinity: All done
[19:37]  * henrix -> EOD
[20:00] <infinity> zequence: Many thanks.
[20:02] <zequence> infinity: Thank you in return :)
[20:11] <infinity> bjf: You know what I'm going to ask, so I won't bother asking.
[20:11] <bjf> infinity, slapping the bot boss
[20:14] <infinity> bjf: If you just smack it over and over until everything on workflow appears to be waiting on me, that would be lovely.
[20:22] <rtg> jsalisbury, rebooting gomeisa for kernel update
[20:30] <jsalisbury> rtg, ack
[20:31] <rtg> jsalisbury, its already back
[20:31] <jsalisbury> rtg, ok to use again?
[20:31] <rtg> yep
[20:32] <jsalisbury> cool, thanks
[20:38] <rtg> jsalisbury, rebooting tangerine for kernel update
[20:38] <jsalisbury> rtg, ack
[20:38] <jsalisbury> cd linux-stable
[20:39] <bjf> infinity, the bot has done what i can at this point
[20:39] <jsalisbury> whoops :-/
[20:43] <herton> bjf, infinity, the bot doesn't go forward if you set regression-testing to invalid, I'm testing a quick fix now
[20:44] <bjf> herton, doh!
[20:44] <herton> bjf, it was assumet QA would always be done :)
[20:44] <herton> *assumed
[20:44] <bjf> i think i remember that now that you mention it
[20:44] <infinity> Yeah, which explains why some of them haven't progressed.  Oops.
[20:44] <infinity> I mean, I'm happy to start doing all the releases manually anyway.  I was just hoping the paperwork would be in order.
[20:47]  * rtg -> EOD
[20:48] <herton> bjf, infinity, pushed a fix to the bot
[21:15] <infinity> herton: Any chance that we can make http://people.canonical.com/~kernel/reports/kernel-sru-workflow.html go all orange with tasks for me, then?
[21:20] <bjf> infinity, i'm slapping both the bot and the report generator
[21:21] <infinity> You're really making me want to re-watch I Love You, Man.
[21:28] <bjf> infinity, i *think* you are all orange though the report generator is spewing chunks
[21:29] <infinity> I don't look all orange (see the ti-omap4 at the bottom)
[21:29] <infinity> But the bug is accurate, so that's fine.  Screw the report.
[21:29] <bjf> that's what i was sayin
[21:29]  * infinity nods.