[12:21] <spm_draget> Xenial #Alpha 2 is not yet feature-freeze, I know. But out of curiosity: Does it use the main (currently alpha) xenial repository and when it is officially released, an 'apt-get dist-upgrade' will get me to the very same state as the official release*, or is there anything special happening that would make it better to use a clean install from the official install media?  (* Configurations might change due to updated packages… but
[12:21] <spm_draget>  I assume could just use the pakcage maintainer verison or carefully merge my existing changes into the new one.)
[12:22] <spm_draget> I.e. for testing in a non-productive environment, can I install the alpha and use the same installe once it is stable for my production server?
[12:22] <spm_draget> *April
[12:23] <ikonia> I thought it was in feature freeze
[12:23] <ikonia> thought that happened a while ago
[12:27] <spm_draget> ikonia: According to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/XenialXerus/ReleaseSchedule 18th Feb
[12:29] <spm_draget> I am just a fan of 'clean installs'. I do not mind if here and there some package version still changes for my setup. I am used to rolling-release distributions on my personal computers :P I am just wondering if it makes sense to configure 16.04 already or if I should better reinstall anyways in april.
[12:31] <ikonia> I'd expect a clean install
[12:31] <ikonia> I certainly wouldn't want to roll forward from this early a release stage
[12:36] <spm_draget> Why not? It is not very likely that anything deeply wired into the system will change. More likely some apache 2.4.x to 2.4.y updates or some kernel bump, nothing that should cause major issues
[12:57] <Daekdroom> spm_draget, you can certainly use 'dist-upgrade' to get to the official release.
[12:58] <Daekdroom> In fact, that might not even be necessary. It's only needed when a package installed has dependency changes due to an update, I think.
[12:59] <Daekdroom> (but it's very likely you'll need it at some point, instead of 'upgrade'; that may happen even when you're using a stable version)
[13:00] <darkduke> why unity8 use qt?
[13:01] <darkduke> i don't think it is a good idea
[13:06] <spm_draget> Daekdroom: Okay, thanks. Then I will play around with Xenial and if I am happy in april, use it for production
[15:43] <MoPac> Hello. I'm running into a problem that prevents me from trying a Mir/Unity8 session using a live USB with 16.04.  I've reported the bug here (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity8-desktop-session/+bug/1539811) and was hoping that someone might be able to glance at it and see if there is anything obvious I should try? (Trying to mount the disk as rw? Not expecting this to work at all..?)
[15:46] <philinux> MoPac;~ you'll get more assistance here. http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=427
[15:59] <Voyage> Is 16.04 LTS?
[15:59] <Voyage> I just did release upgrade and it installed 16.04 from 14.04
[16:01] <MoPac> Voyage: Yes, it is to be the LTS release. (But it's only in Alpha now).
[16:01] <Voyage> I just did release upgrade and it installed 16.04 from 14.04. isnt that strange
[16:02] <MoPac> Voyage: In your software and updates app, under the "updates" tab, do you have "pre-release" checked?
[16:03] <Voyage> iam on console only
[16:05] <Voyage> any ways, how to know policy of an app. the version..
[16:05] <MoPac> try "nano /etc/apt/sources.list.distUpgrade"
[16:06] <MoPac> Actually, I didn't see the "proposed" change in that file when I did it in the app; I'll go see if I can figure out where it get changed
[16:09] <MoPac> okay, looks like the change would just be in the sources.list file
[16:10] <MoPac> So use nano or whatever text viewer to look at /etc/apt/sources.list
[16:10] <Voyage> hm
[16:10] <MoPac> And see if (probably toward the bottom) there is a "proposed" repository that is active rather than #commented out
[16:10] <Voyage> but this only shows sources list. not pre released or LTS etc choice
[16:11] <MoPac> I'm not 100% sure that this would be the culprit, but I'm curious if it is
[16:20] <Voyage> ok
[16:20] <Voyage> where is database.yml
[18:35] <ChibaPet> Where would op abuse like that best be reported?
[18:37] <k1l_> ChibaPet: op abuse is a harsh word. but you can report it in #ubuntu-ops and if that doesnt satisfy you you can email the ubuntu IRC council
[18:37] <k1l_> (like its mentioned in the guidelines)
[18:37] <ChibaPet> k1l_: Thank you. I'll fire off an email later.
[18:37] <k1l_> (and if you mean voyage: he has a long track record of causing issues with trolling)
[18:38] <ChibaPet> Ah, that would inform the situation more. I was unaware of that.