[00:02] <zmoylan-pi> com.farnell.ie would be so... so... american... :-P
[01:38] <shauno> I think it should be com.ie.farnell, but that ship has sailed
[02:08] <Azelphur> http://pastebin.com/BBgutCEb wtf?
[02:08] <daftykins> it's a trap!
[02:08] <Azelphur> never thought I'd see such a daft error on Linux lol
[02:10] <shauno> heh, "danger will robinson, danger!"
[02:10] <daftykins> someone's replaced your 'cd' with a trick one
[02:11] <Azelphur> don't think so, it works fine before and after that
[02:11] <penguin42> oh that's impressive
[02:11] <shauno> or it's failed to write to ~/.bash_history
[02:11] <Azelphur> I see
[02:12] <daftykins> i found my nano_history owned by root today 0o
[02:25] <zmoylan-pi> type something nice for all the north korean hackers? :-)
[04:29] <zmoylan-pi> happy birds tweeting outside my window... probably leeching off my wifi... :-)
[05:32] <mappps> ;]
[08:40] <brobostigon> morning boys and girls.
[08:54] <foobarry> 5h37 of deep sleep :D
[08:54] <foobarry> allegedly
[08:54] <foobarry> 8h of sleep
[10:14] <TheProphet[S]> Hi all, anyone else having problems logging into graphical mode due to systemd? I'm referring to the bug "starting version 219"
[10:15] <TheProphet[S]> Bug #1432171
[10:16] <ali1234> "starting version 219" is the very first thing systemd prints
[10:16] <ali1234> just because it is also the last thing you see does not mean systemd is the problem
[10:17] <TheProphet[S]> Ok, it's not my assessment, it's what cro said in comment #17
[10:18] <TheProphet[S]> He says that by going back to upstart everything works fine
[10:19] <TheProphet[S]> His solutions are: " Either replace the display manager startup scripts to work with `systemd`, or remove `systemd` and replace it with `upstart-sys`"
[10:33] <TheProphet[S]> Now I can't even see the tty properly
[10:39] <AndChat|336756> Can't see anything now, I can still ssh lickily
[10:45] <TheProphet[S]> Should I just purge xorg and nvidia drivers and try to start from scratch? Is that even the right way to start from scratch short of formatting?
[11:27] <TheProphet[S]> This graphical problems I'm having are a nightmare
[12:05] <mrindeed> help, my computer doesnt lock and i want to be the hibernate which i enabled to be remove from the menu
[12:21] <mrindeed> help, my computer doesnt lock
[13:55] <StevenR> anyone else running xubuntu?
[13:56] <StevenR> I've noticed that when I go to shutdown my laptop, if I click cancel, it still shuts down.
[13:56] <zmoylan-pi> o/
[13:57] <zmoylan-pi> just clicked cancel... ::waits::
[13:59] <zmoylan-pi> one hippopotamus... two hippopotamus... three hippopotamus...
[14:00] <zmoylan-pi> taps spot where i'd have a wrist watch if i wore one...
[14:00] <zmoylan-pi> nope, not happening here sorry...
[14:01] <zmoylan-pi> same for logout, other options?
[14:02] <ali1234> StevenR: that's odd, can you report it please
[14:02] <ali1234> where exactly did you click on cancel?
[14:02] <ali1234> also i assume 15.04
[14:03] <ali1234> trying it in a vm
[14:04] <ali1234> doesn't seem to do it here
[14:05] <zmoylan-pi> touchscreen or mouse/trackpad?
[14:06] <ali1234> doesn't do it on the login screen either (it has a different ui)
[14:07] <brobostigon> do we have an xmpp/jabber client for ubuntu touch?
[14:08] <StevenR> ali1234: using the latest LTS
[14:09] <StevenR> ok. Can no longer replicate it. hmmph.
[14:10] <ali1234> where exactly did you click cancel?
[14:10] <ali1234> there's multiple ways to shutdown the computer
[14:11] <zmoylan-pi> http://catb.org/jargon/html/D/dancing-frog.html :-)
[14:11] <StevenR> ali1234: I click the little power logo on the bar, select shutdown, hit cancel, the computer shuts down. At least, that's what happened. Doesn't happen now.
[14:12] <StevenR> ali1234: the little logo has other options, like about this computer
[14:12] <ali1234> on the bar or on the start menu?
[14:12] <StevenR> on the bar
[14:12] <ali1234> wait, latest LTS? so 14.04?
[14:12] <StevenR> yup
[14:13] <ali1234> okay i am looking at the wrong version then
[14:13] <ali1234> i don't have a vanilla 14.04
[14:15]  * zmoylan-pi just checked... is on 14.04 my kitchen laptop
[14:18] <ali1234> i can't see any similar reports
[14:25] <SuperEngineer> if one switches channel and one sees...
[14:25] <SuperEngineer> ali1234> on the bar or on the start menu?
 on the bar
[14:25] <SuperEngineer> ...one does tend to laugh
[14:25] <ali1234> xubuntu has a start menu...
[14:27] <SuperEngineer> [so do many otther other distros, I was reading "bar" as "pub", much better for the brain]
[15:18] <SuperEngineer> Looking at the /topic I see the beer train [RAT] is still prominent... that must be one one heck of a hangover!
[15:20]  * SuperEngineer is jealous
[16:16] <ali1234> https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=V-pxI8PlY0o#t=1080
[16:16] <ali1234> "proactive suggestions"
[16:17] <ali1234> "help the user find value in the store"
[16:17] <ali1234> "beautiful pictures"
[16:17] <ali1234> no, adverts, adverts, adverts... everywhere
[16:26] <zmoylan-pi> so buy the hardwarem pay for a commercial os and get stuffed with ads...
[16:26] <zmoylan-pi> hmmmmm..... how about no
[16:30] <zmoylan-pi> wow the lag on that stylus sucks
[16:31] <ali1234> does anyone know of a normal PC case like this: http://www.scan.co.uk/products/4-bay-25-qnap-ts-451s-nas-solution-with-intel-celeron-dual-core-cpu-1gb-ram-sata-6gb-s-2x-gigabit-la
[16:31] <ali1234> those are 2.5" bays
[16:31] <mappps> so cold
[16:31] <mappps> 25c
[16:31] <mappps> ;/
[17:25] <penguin42> 9c :-(
[17:28] <mattcarver> Hello there, is it possible to get a quick hand configuring my synaptics touchpad with Ubuntu 15.04
[17:29] <mattcarver> I would rather appreciate it
[17:52] <knightwise> mornin peeps
[18:24] <directhex> ali1234: a PC case with multiple hotswap 2.5" bays?
[18:24] <ali1234> which is the same size as that one, yes
[18:25] <ali1234> same form factor, but a standard PC that I can install whatever i want on
[18:26] <directhex> er... can't think of anything like that from any of the big players in cases
[18:26] <ali1234> and it doesn't have to be hotswap, just front accessible
[18:26] <OerHeks> nice, 4 x 2.5" in 5.25" space http://www.mypccase.com/icydotomb4x2.html
[18:26] <ali1234> yeah, seen those. so then i'd just need a case with 1x 5.25" bay and nothing else
[18:27] <OerHeks> Not sure you can hotswap in linux though
[18:27] <ali1234> you can
[18:27] <directhex> okay, THAT i can find you
[18:27] <directhex> the smallest possible case with a 5.25" external bay?
[18:27] <ali1234> i'm interested...
[18:28] <directhex> mATX okay, or you want ITX?
[18:29] <ali1234> whichever has the widest selection of motherboards available i guess
[18:29] <ali1234> whichever is most "standard"
[18:29] <directhex> mATX by a mile, but mATX is much larger
[18:30] <directhex> mini-ITX is 17x17cm, mATX is up to 24x24cm
[18:30] <ali1234> what about NUC?
[18:31] <directhex> nobody's going to put a 3.5" bay on a NUC
[18:31] <directhex> and the motherboard in a nuc isn't something you get control over
[18:31] <ali1234> :(
[18:31] <directhex> there are a *limited* number of has-a-cpu-socket mini-ITX boards
[18:31] <directhex> and all micro-ATX boards do
[18:32] <directhex> but let's take http://www.kustompcs.co.uk/acatalog/info_0788.html as an example case
[18:32] <directhex> plus a motherboard from http://www.kustompcs.co.uk/acatalog/ITX_Motherboards.html and the enclosure suggested by OerHeks
[18:34] <directhex> or http://www.kustompcs.co.uk/acatalog/info_0874.html (available in a range of colours)
[18:34] <directhex> or http://www.kustompcs.co.uk/acatalog/info_0849.html
[18:34] <directhex> most mini-ITX cases use laptop slimline optical drives, if any
[18:35] <ali1234> i'm going to want something that runs cool and silent too
[18:35] <directhex> how about a pony?
[18:35] <ali1234> i don't want any optical drive
[18:36] <directhex> http://www.kustompcs.co.uk/acatalog/info_55245.html - passive cooling
[18:36] <directhex> ali1234: why do you think these cases have any 5.25" bays? just because you're looking to put 4x 2.5" bays in there, doesn't mean that's not why those cases have a 5.25" bay
[18:37] <ali1234> because they are designed for HTPCs
[18:37] <directhex> right
[18:38] <ali1234> i want to build a silent NAS with SSDs that can also run mythtv
[18:38] <ali1234> (backend not frontend)
[18:39] <directhex> okay. do it. i gave you three possible cases, and an array of motherboards
[18:42] <penguin42> ali1234: You can get the same CPUs as the NUCs on full size boards
[18:43] <directhex> yeah, that works too
[18:43] <directhex> you'll need to spend the time checking clearance heights for cases vs coolers
[18:44] <penguin42> directhex: Well, the passive ones you suggested are good - I've got the older MSI c834
[18:44] <penguin42> oops, c847
[18:44] <directhex> i am on an MSI kick right now, due to the "Linux out of the box" guarantees
[18:45] <penguin42> directhex: Well, in the end it's pretty much an Intel chip slapped on the board - not much else there
[18:45] <directhex> penguin42: ethernet? wifi? vaguely non-broken firmware?
[18:46] <penguin42> directhex: Yes (RTL), no, vaguely
[18:46] <directhex> penguin42: i mean in general
[18:46] <directhex> penguin42: if i buy a gigabyte & the firmware has "boot windows & only windows" breakage, their tech support people will tell me to take a flying leap
[18:47] <penguin42> directhex: Really it has that kind of breakage?
[18:48] <directhex> penguin42: such breakages exist
[18:49] <penguin42> directhex: Yeh, but they are rare and I've found firmware screwups on pretty much everything. TBH the firmware in the MSI doesn't do that much for me, it works but I had some startup problems when I first got it that I'd guess at firmware
[18:49] <directhex> http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/20187.html
[18:49] <penguin42> yeh, I remember that one
[18:50] <directhex> also, NUCs had the same issue in the shipping firmware
[18:51] <directhex> had to update to $latest to boot non-windows
[18:53] <penguin42> that does suck, I expect more from Intel, but was it a general non-windows or was it just a screwup?
[18:53] <penguin42> that's very different from that Lenovo one
[18:53] <directhex> in 99.9% of cases, it's screwups
[18:53] <directhex> even the lenovo one was a screwup
[18:53] <directhex> we have 40 years of bad BIOS bugs, and the workarounds/fixes to them. we only have a few years of bad UEFI bugs, and the workarounds/fixes to them
[18:53] <penguin42> yeh but that was a specific string compare screwup, as opposed to say a device setup that doesn't work with some kernels
[18:54] <directhex> basically, firmware developers are totally terrible at their jobs
[18:54] <penguin42> I agree on that
[18:54] <penguin42> my main desktop I have to pass a kernel parameter to get modern kernels to boot on it because of some interrupt remapping kernel
[18:54] <directhex> the NUC it was also a string compare error iirc
[18:54] <ali1234> maybe i should just buy the QNAP and use their virtualization thing
[18:54] <directhex> i.e. it was hardcoded to only boot Windows Boot Manager from the fixed disk
[18:55] <penguin42> directhex: Ah ok, thats dumb
[18:56] <directhex> so it would install, but not boot, linuxes (linuxorum?) in EFI mode. fine with BIOS emulation
[18:58] <penguin42> directhex: The EFI boot process isn't exactly simple
[18:59] <directhex> yeah... but the BIOS one is total nonsense in 2015
[19:00] <directhex> "hello, i am an 8088, i will now boot 16-bit 8088 machine code from the first 448 bytes of the first ATA device on the first ISA bus"
[19:00] <penguin42> yeh, technology
[19:02] <MartijnVdS> directhex: ATA drive? Hah!
[19:02] <penguin42> directhex: It's all actually a lot scarier than that; things like figuring out how many CPUs you've got involves reading values from the RTC
[19:02] <penguin42> all insane
[19:02] <penguin42> all reasonable bits of evolution at the time
[19:03] <penguin42> DOS mode FP exceptions, A20 lines etc etc
[19:03] <directhex> my 6-core 64-bit Haswell-EP is still also an 8088, just in case I want to boot it in the manner of my ancestors
[19:04] <directhex> er, Haswell-E. Haswell-EP is xeon
[19:04] <penguin42> yep
[19:05] <directhex> i expect that to go away, with windows 10 basically killing CSM
[19:06] <penguin42> directhex: It depends, if they still have to support it working in VMs they might keep the hardware
[19:07] <directhex> penguin42: well Windows 10 logo certified hardware basically won't have it
[19:07] <penguin42> directhex: 'wont have it' - you mean it wont have bios compatible boot ?
[19:08] <directhex> yup
[19:09] <penguin42> right, that's just the bios module
[19:46] <ali1234> what exactly is the reason that xeons exist?
[19:46] <ali1234> ECC support?
[19:46] <penguin42> ali1234: ECC, and multisocket on some of them
[19:46] <MartijnVdS> ali1234: more cores per package, ECC, Registered, more money per customer?
[22:14] <directhex> ali1234: reasons already given. multi-socket, ECC, more cache, more cores
[22:14] <directhex> my board takes an 18-core chip
[22:15] <penguin42> directhex: What board is that?
[22:15] <directhex> penguin42: an X99 board.
[22:18] <penguin42> and it lets you take the E5- series Xeons?
[22:18] <directhex> yes
[22:20] <directhex> my old PC would take xeons too. if it can't take a xeon, it's for plebs!
[22:20] <penguin42> interesting
[22:28] <directhex> when intel started doing core i3/5/7, i7 was "basically a xeon", with the i7-9xx range. but people moaned about price, and they shipped the "slightly faster i5" series, the "i7-8xx". it's continued to this day - there's "i'm not a xeon, honest" i7's, and "don't look too closely, or you'll see i'm an i5" i7's
[22:30] <directhex> so socket 1366 was used for i7 and uniprocessor xeon; 2011 was used for i7 and uniprocessor xeon; 2011-3 is used for i7 and uniprocessor xeon
[22:31] <penguin42> but aren't the 18 processor beasts multisocket only with different busses (CSI?)
[22:34] <directhex> X58, X79 and X99 (the relevant chipsets for the above sockets) use the same bus as xeon. hence supporting xeons :p
[22:35] <directhex> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_X99
[22:38] <penguin42> directhex: What's confusing me is that shows DMI2.0 as the interface from the Xeon, where as I thought Xeons used QuickPath
[22:38]  * penguin42 is just reading http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/xeon-e5-v3-datasheet-vol-1.pdf
[22:40] <penguin42> ah, it has both
[22:41] <directhex> QPI for communication between sockets
[22:42] <directhex> DMI for communication to motherboard chipset
[22:42] <directhex> my old X58 system was QPI for both
[22:42] <directhex> well, except for being uniproc
[22:42] <directhex> but still, QPI for the chipset comms
[22:42] <penguin42> directhex: Interesting, I hadn't realised this
[22:43]  * penguin42 observes from that doc that 'Enable Safe Mode boot' and 'Enable Intel Trusted Execution Technology Agent' are pins on the chip
[22:48] <ali1234> they should just make one CPU, it would be so much easier
[22:51] <penguin42> ah, the E7's still have a different socket
[22:53] <penguin42> hmm, although hmm,
[22:54] <penguin42> that data sheet says the E7v2 socket is 'Socket R1' LGA2011-1
[22:54] <penguin42> so that's still the same?
[22:54] <ali1234> okay next stupid question: why do they need so many different sockets? they all look pretty much the same
[22:54] <directhex> ali1234: It's Complicated
[22:55] <penguin42> ali1234: It sounds like the answer is they're slowly coming to not having many different sockets
[22:57] <directhex> ali1234: but, in essence, it's down to how many physical connections the chip needs to the motherboard - for example, an i7-5930k can drive 40 PCIe lanes, an i7-4790K can drive 16
[22:57] <penguin42> and also you need more pins to get more power into the chip
[22:57] <directhex> the i7-4790k can do dual-channel memory, the i7-5930k can do quad channel
[22:58] <directhex> in server chips, some pins are also for inter-socket links
[23:00] <directhex> IBM POWER8 has 15823 pins (!)
[23:01] <ali1234> whaaaaat?!?
[23:01] <penguin42> directhex: But your observation, which is interesting, is that now they're just using the same sockets on the xeons as the i7's and just ignoring the inter-cpu links
[23:01] <penguin42> directhex: I bet 90% of those are power/ground
[23:02] <directhex> penguin42: not quite 90%, but good guess
[23:02] <directhex> 6000 for power, 7700 for ground
[23:02] <penguin42> not far off :-)
[23:02] <ali1234> http://www.v3.co.uk/IMG/964/287964/ibm-power8-540x334.jpg?1429512233
[23:02] <directhex> ali1234: :D
[23:03] <shauno> 2099 for signals, apparently.  that's still quite a crazy amount
[23:03] <penguin42> they look quite boring compared to the old MCMs
[23:04] <penguin42> they also have to be careful just on layout - there's only so many pins you can get out through a PCB from teh centre of a package like that
[23:05] <ali1234> well, i would guess that's another reason why so many are power/ground
[23:05] <directhex> penguin42: not if you go deeper!
[23:05] <ali1234> since you have to route them on the die as well
[23:05] <penguin42> directhex: There'sa  limit to how many layers you can sanely do as well
[23:05] <ali1234> yep, power and ground will probably get a layer each
[23:05] <directhex> for ali1234 , that's another major issue - a socket with more pins needs more layers, and more layers are MUCH more expensive
[23:06] <shauno> aren't power8 usually used for supercomputers?  I think they can probably budget a few extra layers :)
[23:06] <penguin42> directhex: Yeh and they start to even get heavy when you get really thick boards - one place I worked did a backplane that was getting silly
[23:07] <penguin42> shauno: They're also available as servers - I think 2Uish
[23:07] <directhex> they're billing power8 as a cloud server chip
[23:07] <penguin42> directhex: By putting the word 'cloud' on the billing
[23:07] <directhex> :D
[23:07] <penguin42> shauno: http://www.tyan.com/campaign/openpower/
[23:08] <shauno> I can't imagine what makes it particularly cloudy, other than being 8-core
[23:09] <directhex> i'm going to bed
[23:09] <penguin42> that's a good place to be