[00:17] <pmatulis> will 12.04.5 include an upgraded kernel and xorg stack (ex: include the trusty xserver-xorg-video-intel)?  also, what is the ETA for 12.04.5?
[00:42] <RAOF> pmatulis: I don't think we'll be spinning a 12.04.5; that would be after 14.04 release. If you need newer hardware support to install than in 12.04.4, then 14.04 is your oyster.
[00:44] <RAOF> ...aha.
[00:44] <RAOF> Or perhaps I missed that thread :)
[00:46] <RAOF> pmatulis: So, now that I've remembered the “should we do a 12.04.5 release” thread; your answers are: (a) Yes, using the Trusty stack is the whole point, and (b) Probably August or September or such. Post 14.04.1
[03:44] <pmatulis> RAOF: thanks!
[04:04] <jarkko_> Bus 002 Device 003: ID 148f:3070 Ralink Technology, Corp. RT2870/RT3070 Wireless Adapter spams 16913.608602] ieee80211 phy0: rt2800usb_entry_txstatus_timeout: Warning - TX status timeout for entry 13 in queue this is reported and known issue could you do something about it?
[04:04] <jarkko_> it weakens the transfer speed also realibity 
[09:33] <jhenke> hi folks, bug 1294283 just reappeared after the latest kernel upgrade on 14.04 (3.13.0-23)
[09:33] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1294283 in linux (Ubuntu) "Memory balloning in Hyper-V generation 2 does not work" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1294283
[09:34] <jhenke> the vm is not able to get any more memory from the host, yesterday before I installed the latest updates all still worked
[12:49] <henrix> kamal: could you please take a look at this kteam-tools patch: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/7234771/
[12:50] <henrix> kamal: if you're ok with it, i'll just push it
[13:57] <kamal> henrix, your change omits the stripping of "[PATCH]" from the Subject: line ... but (?) that shouldn't be on the subject line by this point anyway, so its doesn't matter?
[13:59] <henrix> kamal: this will be used to build the email subject in the format: '[3.11.y.z extended stable] Patch "<SUBJECT>" has been added to staging queue
[14:00] <henrix> kamal: and this never contails the '[PATCH]' in the <SUBJECT>
[14:00]  * kamal has another sip of coffee and looks again
[14:00] <henrix> (maybe i'm just confusing you :) )
[14:01] <kamal> henrix, I'm talking about this line from your diff, which (before your change removes it) seems to exist in order to try to strip off "[PATCH]" in order to extract the rest of the subject line ...
[14:01] <kamal>     -            subject = sub("Subject: (\[PATCH[^\]]*\] )?", "", line.rstrip())
[14:02] <kamal> I'm saying, "hey, you removed that line, so the script won't strip 
[14:02] <henrix> ugh
[14:02] <kamal> '[PATCH]' anymore like it used to do.
[14:02] <henrix> kamal: i see what you mean now
[14:02] <kamal> ...  but I'm then also saying ...
[14:03] <kamal> I bet henrix has determined that that line was pointless anyway, since we *shouldn't* have [PATCH] on the subject lines at this point anyway.   yes?  no?  more coffee?
[14:04] <henrix> kamal: no, i believe you're absolutely correct. however....
[14:05]  * henrix goes look at the code again
[14:06] <kamal> henrix, ok, well despite my ramblings above, I think your change is actually fine -- so unless you find something actually wrong with it, you have my "ack"
[14:07] <henrix> kamal: cool, thanks! i'll just go fix the code (adding the '[PATCH]' removal from subject) and push it
[14:08] <kamal> henrix, that's fine
[14:25] <henrix> kamal: ok, pushed fixed patch to kteam-tools. thanks for reviewing!
[16:03] <infinity> BenC: Any chance of one more saucy/ppc update? :P
[19:05] <sconklin> o/
[19:41] <miseria> "disfruto como pasajero de la capsula terrestre, los ranchos viejos de paris o roma no son mas lindos que los que veo aqui" bienvenidos: http://castroruben.com *temo_a_un_ser_sin_rival*
=== hatch__ is now known as hatch]
=== hatch] is now known as hatch