[07:39] <caribou> Morning
[07:40] <smb> Morning
[08:00] <erle-> jsalisbury, now 3.11.5 failed one wake up
[08:00] <erle-> but it may have been another bug
[10:54] <erle-> jsalisbury, now it failed twice in a row
[10:54] <erle-> i will install 3.12 again
[11:05] <ppisati> debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk:
[11:05] <ppisati> sharedconfdir   := $(CURDIR)/debian.master/config
[11:05] <ppisati> debian/scripts/config-check:
[11:05] <ppisati> my $checks = "$commonconfig/enforce";
[11:05] <apw> ppisati, yes
[11:05] <ppisati> so, even a topic branch is tied to the enforce in debian.master
[11:06] <ppisati> just noticed it
[11:06] <apw> ppisati, yes deliberatly so
[11:06] <ppisati> ah k
[11:06] <apw> it may be a fool idea, but the idea behind that is we collect the knowledge of the critical components for ubuntu in one place
[11:07] <apw> of course that does fall appart when your topic branches are based of some old shit version
[11:07] <ppisati> ok, so it's by design, i see
[11:07] <apw> yeah i think the jury is still out on whether it was a good idea or not, but it is deliberate
[11:08] <ppisati> no prob, i just stumbled on it and i wondered why it was so
[11:57] <cking> brendand, I've updated the bug report for the fwts suspend/resume duration logging, if you can give it a quick test that would be useful :-)
[12:08] <brendand> cking, superb - i'll test them asap
[14:30] <ppisati> brb
[15:19] <rtg> has anyone done a 13.04->13.10 upgrade recently ? re: bug #1242210
[15:19] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1242210 in linux (Ubuntu) "Failed to install linux kernel" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1242210
[15:20] <apw> hmmm, i would be supprised if that was a common issue as that is one of the standard tests isn't it?  one which had a tick next to it on the iso tracker
[15:21] <rtg> apw, yeah, but I've not done it personally so was just making sure.
[15:21] <smb> Could it bee another full /boot
[15:21]  * apw probabaaly has a raring VM lying about i could clone and try it i guess
[15:21] <smb> It seemed in the past those error happened always after release for such reasons...
[15:22] <rtg> just out of sheer paranoia...
[15:22] <apw> smb, worth asking in the bug i recon
[15:26] <smb> apw, Oh, hm in the report there is at least an error related to the nvidia binary drivers I guess
[15:27] <smb> run-parts: /etc/kernel/postinst.d/update-nvidia exited with return code 1
[15:27] <rtg> smb, I don't think taht would cause his dependency problems though
[15:28] <smb> linux-image-generic depends on linux-image-extra-3.11.0-12-generic; however:
[15:28] <smb>   Package linux-image-extra-3.11.0-12-generic is not configured yet.
[15:28] <smb> So extra fails and thus the image fails on dependencies
[15:34] <smb> ah no not extra but linux-image, and the rest of dependency issues caused by that
[15:41] <rtg> has anyone had 'top' segfault with a 3.11 kernel ?
[15:42] <apw> rtg, not seen that here ever that i reall
[15:42] <apw> recall
[15:42] <rtg> hmm
[15:42]  * smb has not either
[15:43] <rtg> I've noticed it on my local server as well as tangerine.
[15:44] <smb> Does it stay persistent after observing it or is the next incantation working?
[15:44] <rtg> smb, it restarts just fine
[15:44] <rtg> it sometimes takes awhile
[15:44] <rtg> to crash I mean
[15:45] <smb> Sounds like a real pain to figure out
[15:45] <rtg> in other words, sucks to be me ?
[15:46] <smb> nah, more like some silent corruption which is hard to figure out
[15:46] <rtg> its 12.04 user space with an LTS kernel
[15:47] <smb> At least it is multiple servers which should rule out hw failure
[17:14] <apw> rtg, we seem to be missing the repo mirrors for trusty on gomeisa et al, i think you own that replication job ?
[17:17] <rtg> apw, ack
[17:17] <hallyn> rtg: to get CONFIG_USER_NS enabled in trusty, do i need to send a patch to ubuntu-kernel@?  Or is it better to bribe you on thursday?
[17:18] <rtg> hallyn, I prefer bribes :)
[17:18] <rtg> hallyn, but send a patch anyways so I remember to do it
[17:19] <hallyn> rtg: thanks, will do
[17:23] <rtg> hallyn, debian.master/config/config.common.ubuntu:CONFIG_USER_NS=y ?
[17:24] <hallyn> right
[17:24] <rtg> hallyn, its already enabled then. it'll be in the first kernel I upload (hopefully today)
[17:24] <hallyn> woohoo!
[17:25] <hallyn> rtg: thx.  will do some testing once i see it built
[19:27] <infinity> Are you sure you can't fire sconklin?
[19:29] <infinity> *cough*
[19:30] <infinity> sconklin: (Forgive my grumpy sense of humour today, I'm meant to be having a day off)
[20:52]  * rtg -> EOD
[21:04] <coredump> So, I checked out the repo for saucy but I can't find a tag for 3.10.17, is the naming different or something?
[21:08] <bjf> coredump, are you looking for an upstream stable version? we don't have those tags in our repos.
[21:09] <coredump> I am trying to get/compile the most recent 3.10 ubuntu patched kernel available.
[21:10] <coredump> kernel.ubuntu.com has a 3.10.17-saucy package
[21:10] <coredump> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v3.10.17-saucy/
[21:10] <bjf> coredump, why 3.10 and not 3.11 which is what saucy was released with?
[21:11] <coredump> If I tell you, you will probably laugh at me :)
[21:11] <coredump> I still wary of odd numbered kernels.
[21:12] <coredump> also, 3.10 is deemed 'longterm'
[21:12] <bjf> coredump, ok, but saucy is 3.11 and that's getting the stable updates. not 3.10
[21:13] <bjf> coredump, and upstream makes no distinction between even and odd numbered releases
[21:13] <coredump> yeah, I know
[21:13] <coredump> anyway, I don't see that on the git tags either (3.11)
[21:14] <bjf> coredump, you need to look at Ubuntu-3.11.0-x.y tags
[21:20] <coredump> so 0-12.18 is the latest package 
[21:20] <coredump> nice.
[21:20] <coredump> thanks
[21:20] <bjf> coredump, yes, np
[21:21] <coredump> any difference using ubuntu-saucy{-signed}?
[21:23] <bjf> coredump, -signed is for secure boot