[08:19] <D_Cent> tyhicks: hi! i just solved my name_to_handle_at problem - i re-compiled the libusb4java shared object on my other raspberry pi with raspbian and put this version into my project and it seems to work correctly now :)
[08:56] <FourDollars> Hi, what is the difference between ubuntu-15.04-snappy-amd64+generic.img.xz and ubuntu-15.04-snappy-amd64-generic.img.xz?
[09:21] <JamesTait> Good morning all; happy Monday, and happy Tell a Story Day! :-D
[10:00] <ruenoak> FourDollars: I think one is Stable and one is Edge a rolling dev version, just a guess though, but the download img's are named the same
[12:09] <hawkowl> hmm okay i am having some trouble with my Python app
[12:09] <hawkowl> there's no $TEMP or $TMP passed through, it seems, so it tries the system default places, which doesn't work
[13:04] <mvo> hey jdstrand, so you mentioned earlier that you see a upgrade hang on bbb?
[13:13] <jdstrand> mvo: hi!
[13:15] <jdstrand> mvo: I did see a significant delay, yes. I'm not sure if it was related to https://bugs.launchpad.net/snappy-ubuntu/+bug/1447652 or not
[13:16] <mvo> jdstrand: I think its because there is a thing called SyncBootloader files that will always cp /boot/a -> /boot/b which is now very slow because we use sync and also not needed because ubuntu-device-flash already did that
[13:17] <jdstrand> mvo: oh, interesting
[13:17] <mvo> jdstrand: so its a separate bug, but if you don't mind, please file it because I think we need to kill that function
[13:17] <mvo> jdstrand: if you ctrl-z and ps afx you probably see a "cp -a" there
[13:17] <mvo> cp -a /boot/a /boot/b
[13:17] <mvo> to be precise
[13:19] <jdstrand> mvo: https://bugs.launchpad.net/snappy-ubuntu/+bug/1449032
[13:19] <mvo> thanks jdstrand
[13:20] <jdstrand> np
[13:25] <mvo> jdstrand: I'm doing a stop-watch test right now and its already copying for >4min :(
[13:25] <jdstrand> yeah
[14:04] <tyhicks> D_Cent: great to hear that you're unblocked and I'm glad that we don't need to allow name_to_handle_at
[14:04] <tyhicks> D_Cent: thanks for the update :)
[15:34] <leandrosansilva> Hello to all. I am doing some research for a new product where I work and ubuntu snappy came up as a possible base for it. I am looking for a operating system which allows me to perform "atomic updates", avoiding the possibility of breaking my system in case of an update failure. Do you think ubuntu snappy may me suitable for such task?