[01:32] <Fudge> mm
[03:48] <Fudge> been stable a while now
[04:04] <Fudge> for some reason my lease time is not 57 minutes
[06:28] <Fudge> not=now
[07:59] <lotuspsychje> morning
[08:00] <cwiggs> morning.
[08:00] <lotuspsychje> cwiggs: you can grab the iso from url in topic mate
[08:00] <lotuspsychje> cwiggs: keep in mind things can still break in this stage
[08:01] <cwiggs> can I try an upgrade first and if it fails try a clean install?
[08:01] <lotuspsychje> no
[08:01] <cwiggs> Ok, thanks
[08:11] <snpresent> how to enable zfs on ubuntu 16.04?
[08:18] <lotuspsychje> !zfs
[09:37] <lordievader> Good morning.
[09:42] <CrackerJack> morning in usa
[09:42] <CrackerJack> good day
[09:44] <lordievader> o/
[10:39] <ren0v0> why when i search for ubuntu 16.04 beta do i only get a link for MATE?
[10:39] <ren0v0>  where is the official place to download standard beta?
[10:41] <ren0v0> the only place i can find is  http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/16.04/beta-1/source/  but what is different between source images?
[10:45] <lordievader> ren0v0: You probably want http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/daily-live/current/
[10:46] <ren0v0> lordievader, huge filesize difference, how comes?
[10:48] <lordievader> You didn't link to the live images.
[10:48] <ren0v0> so there is no desktop image for beta 1, only daily builds ?
[10:48] <ren0v0> yet there is for mate?  http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-mate/releases/16.04/beta-1/
[10:49]  * ren0v0 is lost
[10:49] <lordievader> There doesn't seem to be builds for Ubuntu no. There ain't even a mention of Ubuntu on iso.qa.ubuntu.com for Xenial Beta-1. I do not know why.
[11:16] <CrackerJack> why not use the kernel 4.4.3 this beta
[11:16] <CrackerJack> or 4.5 rc5
[11:16] <CrackerJack> 4.4.0
[11:17] <CrackerJack> manual install but
[11:19] <SwedeMike> CrackerJack: 16.04 is slated to be using 4.4.x kernel as far as I can tell. Seems prudent considering it's an LTS and extra care should be taken to make sure it's stable out the door
[11:20] <CrackerJack> ok
[11:35] <ren0v0> hi, trying to boot from latest daily build and getting  "gfxboot.c32   COM32R image"
[11:40] <CrackerJack> nikolov@ubuntu-ivan:~$ inxi -F
[11:40] <CrackerJack> System:    Host: ubuntu-ivan Kernel: 4.5.0-040500rc5-generic x86_64 (64 bit)
[11:40] <CrackerJack>            Desktop: Unity 7.4.0  Distro: Ubuntu 16.04 xenial
[11:40] <CrackerJack> :)
[11:56] <CrackerJack> http://store.picbg.net/pubpic/96/F8/4a6794dd1d5396f8.png
[12:12] <BluesKaj> Hey all
[12:13] <CrackerJack> здрасти :)
[12:17] <BluesKaj> !ru | CrackerJack
[12:18] <CrackerJack> BluesKaj i am not russian i am BULGARIAN LAME
[12:18] <CrackerJack> hello e здрасти
[12:19] <BluesKaj> CrackerJack, sorry , but cyrillic is difficult to tell the difference between languages for us English speakers
[12:19] <CrackerJack> ok
[12:19] <BluesKaj> !ro | CrackerJack
[12:20] <BluesKaj> !bu | CrackerJack
[12:20] <CrackerJack> !bg BluesKaj
[12:20] <BluesKaj> !bg
[12:21] <BluesKaj> anyway CrackerJack your English seems quite good , ask your question in English if you have a problem
[12:22] <CrackerJack> no
[12:22] <BluesKaj> ok
[12:22] <CrackerJack> use beta is a good and new kernel 4.5 rc5 manula install is good tehnks
[12:22] <CrackerJack> thenks
[12:23] <BluesKaj> right
[13:34] <tete_> hi, can someone tell me where the advanced installer is gone in the alpha2 iso for amd64 desktops?
[13:35] <tete_> i used the mini.iso which was using that (the ncurses installer) and i really like it, the one from the official big iso is not useful for me. i guess i have to use another boot param?
[15:01] <blaze> !by
[15:01] <blaze> :(
[16:52] <tete_> really no one?
[16:58] <flocculant> tete_: not sure I know what the advanced installer is tbh
[16:59] <flocculant> if you mean the text installer - then the last time I saw that was on alternate images rather than desktop - other than the mini's as you've seen
[17:12] <tete_> hm
[17:13] <tete_> is there an alternate alpha image?
[17:16] <ChibaPet> There is no more "alternate installer". This is FUD and misinformation. There is a server installer that gives you the Debian installer.
[17:16] <tete_> ChibaPet, ok, the server installer is what i need - is there any other image than the mini.iso which has this installer on board?
[17:17] <ChibaPet> tete_: no
[17:17] <ChibaPet> and I've had the mini ISOs fail to work on UEFI, although that may have been fixed by now.
[17:17] <tete_> thats bad because the mini.iso does not work with UEFI
[17:17] <ChibaPet> The server installer is a decent go-to at roughly 700MB
[17:17] <tete_> hehe no, its not, thats my problem
[17:17] <ChibaPet> tete_: You will experience joy with the server installer then.
[17:18] <tete_> do you know if there is a bug report for the UEFI mini.iso bug?
[17:18] <ChibaPet> tete_: I'd mentioned it on a mailing list when I found it. I don't know if there's a formal bug report yet.
[17:19] <ChibaPet> FWIW, if you want to conserve bandwidth, I've become quite a fan of zsync.
[17:19] <tete_> Note: While the minimal iso image is handy, it isn't useful for installing on UEFI-based systems that you want to run in UEFI mode. The mini iso lacks the proper files for booting the computer in UEFI mode. Thus, the computer will boot in BIOS compatibility mode, and the installation will be in BIOS mode.
[17:19] <tete_> seems like not a bug
[17:19] <tete_> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/MinimalCD
[17:20] <tete_> so i have to wait for the alternate images/server images or use 15.10 alternate and upgrade if required
[17:20] <tete_> ok then at least i know whats going on
[17:20] <tete_> will use 15.10 tomorrow - thanks for the info
[17:22] <flocculant> ChibaPet: who said there was no more alternate installer ?
[17:23] <ChibaPet> flocculant: No one. Everyone says it exists. URL please?
[17:24] <flocculant> no idea - I didn't say it existed - I said ' the last time I saw that was on alternate images rather than desktop '
[17:24] <ChibaPet> tete_: Other than native ZFS root installs done with the desktop ISO, I've been quite happy with the server image.
[17:24] <flocculant> I didn't say recently ...
[17:25] <ChibaPet> flocculant: Alright. I didn't know if you were one of the #ubuntu experts that spread misinformation like it's their job. It used to exist, but it seems not to any more, with the server install filling the role of providing a nice Debian installer experience.
[17:25] <KiloJuliet> I love ZFS and Ubuntu and I see that in 16.04 is going to have it officially available. When I was running it on 14.04 it had a bit of instability on one of my machines and ate loads of ram in order to be happy. Is that still going to be the case when we start to roll out 16.04 test machines?
[17:25] <ChibaPet> The only downside is that it's a hefty download at 700 or so MB for folks with limited bandwidth.
[17:26] <KiloJuliet> Hoping to hear from someone who's tried it so I can make sure I'm not just wasting my time.
[17:26] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: It still wants a decent amount of RAM, but like Linux FS cache, ARC gives it up on demand.
[17:27] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: While not the minimum requirements, common advice is to run it with at least four gigs of RAM.
[17:27] <KiloJuliet> ya we were having a problem in 14.04 where it was not giving it up at all, and programs like java that requested a block of ram were like "no way its used"
[17:27] <KiloJuliet> we were running with 70-100GB ram and it was still just taking most of the memory
[17:27] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: You can manually cap ARC usage too. I'm not aware of any bugs presently that inhibit ARC reclamation, but I could be unaware.
[17:28] <KiloJuliet> we capped the ARC with some commands
[17:28] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: Oh, in that case, unless you're doing dedupe, you definitely want to cap ARC.
[17:28] <KiloJuliet> but it still eats about 6GB just to be happy
[17:28] <KiloJuliet> Ultimately dedupe would be a nice thing rather than buying loads more disks but one thing at a time
[17:28] <ChibaPet> "Happy" for ARC depends largely on your usage patterns. Big files vs small, frequent cache hits vs frequent cache misses.
[17:29] <KiloJuliet> one one of our systems we used a light lz4 compression too
[17:29] <ChibaPet> lz4 is a great default. It's computationally light enough that the disk will still be the gating factor.
[17:29] <KiloJuliet> I was thinking of cranking it up a bit since it never seemed to even touch our cpu
[17:30] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: So, FWIW, I'm running a mix of systems right now, both ZFS root (manual install) and ZFS for data (server installer, MD-RAID for root) and it's a leap ahead of 14.04 since it's not using DKMS.
[17:31] <KiloJuliet> we were using a simple ext4 for / and just stuck the zfs one /home where all the bulk files lived
[17:31] <KiloJuliet> The only place where root is on zfs is our smartos server
[17:32] <KiloJuliet> but it's lacking in several features and it's not ubuntu so it's not cool.
[17:32] <KiloJuliet> pci-passthrough for kvm's and other core needs.
[17:32] <ChibaPet> I like root-on-ZFS in principle, and I'd use it if it were supported out of the box, but I want to be as boring as possible, so I'm moving to just-for-data here.
[17:33] <flocculant> ChibaPet: nah - not at all - that'd not be me - avoid that channel :)
[17:33] <ChibaPet> Maybe The Xenial+1 LTS will support native ZFS root out of the box. It certainly has all the parts to do it.
[17:33] <KiloJuliet> Now all work aside, I plan to get a 16GB quad core low power system for my home and toss 16.04 on it with zfs and see if I can make myself a nice compressed file server and see if I can get some security cameras and home media on it.
[17:33] <ChibaPet> flocculant: Sorry, the question had the feel of one of their leading questions. :P Sorry for the wrong assumption.
[17:34] <KiloJuliet> That was the rumor, that it would have zfs out of the box, but some people, as always, started complaining about licensing so... I dont know
[17:34] <flocculant> :)
[17:34] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: Sounds fun. A few of us have decent instructions for ZFS root if you wanted it. The only issue I have so far is the shipped zfs mount unit files complain when everything's already set up by the initramfs.
[17:35] <ChibaPet> What they're shipping (or, will be when 16.04 is released) is a solid move in the right direction, and it's quite usable at a variety of different comfort levels.
[17:36] <KiloJuliet> as long as there's a well maintained package I'm happy. It doesn't have to ship in the installer really.
[17:36] <ChibaPet> (The licensing complaints are funny when you consider how hard, how fervently the FSF constituents are fighting to make it so people can't use this free software they dislike. This COPYLEFTed free software they dislike, even.)
[17:37] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: It is. Kernel modules, already built, no DKMS. FreeBSD and Illumos don't have it any better-integrated, honestly. It's just the installer and support scripts that aren't ready for it on root.
[17:38] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: In case you're interested: https://github.com/rlaager/zfs/wiki/HOWTO-Install-Ubuntu-to-a-Native-ZFS-Root-Filesystem
[17:38] <ChibaPet> I've got a variation of that for multidisk pools including boot-on-RAID and LUKS, but rlaager's guide is the general approach.
[17:39] <KiloJuliet> cool that looks like a good how-to to give to a buddy
[17:39] <KiloJuliet> thanks
[17:43] <ChibaPet> Oh, mine's also just for Xenial, which doesn't use DKMS. Hm.
[17:43] <ChibaPet> Hold on and I'll pastebin a new copy.
[17:44] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: This is exceedingly messy because I'm still working it out, and I need to do different versions for BIOS and UEFI, but: https://bpaste.net/show/d52fad07d395
[17:46] <Volkodav> Hi! I have my samba configured but today I got this: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/15217456/
[17:47] <ChibaPet> Volkodav: That might be an opportunity to use gksu.
[17:48] <ChibaPet> ...if I'm reading that correctly. Unsure.
[17:48] <KiloJuliet> Fairly sure people would be able to figure out the bios/uefi issues pretty easily
[17:48] <KiloJuliet> we have been dealing with them for years at this point
[17:48] <ChibaPet> KiloJuliet: Well. Yes. But I've added in the UEFI bits. It'll be cleaner when I take them out again and just do two similar guides. The goal is to end up with a hands-off installer script in any event.
[17:49] <Volkodav> ChibaPet: Did you even see the command?
[17:50] <ChibaPet> Volkodav: Let's be aggressive!
[17:51] <ChibaPet> I don't know. Does mainWindow.MainWindow refer to a curses/slang interface? I'm probably hopelessly confused and should stop using computers.
[17:52] <Volkodav> ChibaPet: No reason to be aggresive - either sudo or gksu errors the same///
[17:53] <ChibaPet> Hm, and the traceback is reversed from what is usual. That's a bit odd.
[17:53] <ChibaPet> Well. I need to get Samba up on a Xenial box later today, so I'll see if I hit the same issue, and I'll share what I find.
[17:54] <Volkodav> That's not the point - the point is to find a solution here is the gksu output http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/15217575/
[17:54] <Volkodav> Thanks ChibaPet
[17:55] <ChibaPet> Yeah, I was blindly thinking most-recent-first for the trace, which would have had what seems like a windowing event be the thing that bailed, but I had it backwards.
[17:55] <ChibaPet> Does /usr/bin/pdbedit exist? Does it have sane permissions?
[17:57] <ChibaPet> I need to bail for a social engagement, but I'll be back on as soon as I can. I'll spin up my samba project later (was planned already, as it turns out).
[17:57] <Volkodav> It does and it's root
[17:57] <Volkodav> laterz
[17:58] <KiloJuliet> ChibaPet, if you need any help testing after making any script changes moving toward automation /msg me ill run some tests
[18:03] <sandah> howdy. I was able to install xenial desktop on a n3000 nuc (which requires pretty new kernel drivers) but I can't get the 16.04 server install to detect anything. Is there a trick with the server install, or in this case should I do a custom install using the desktop installer?
[22:02] <Fudge> hi