[04:24] <hikiko> hello
[08:00] <Laney> ahoy ahohohohohohoy
[08:04] <Laney> bleddy europeans
[08:08] <willcooke> morning Laney
[08:11] <Laney> how do willcooke?
[08:11] <willcooke> typical lazy lefties
[08:12] <davmor2> Laney: you know we are Europeans right :P
[08:14] <davmor2> willcooke: you leave left handers out of it :P
[08:14] <Laney> I've ordered the tug boats to start pulling
[08:14] <Laney> by the end of the week we'll be 500m off NYC
[08:15] <willcooke> :D
[08:15] <davmor2> Laney: can you make it florida instead be nice to get some actual sun
[08:16] <Laney> pastrami
[09:13] <willcooke> 16GB USB flash drives are now 3 quid.
[09:13] <willcooke> ?!
[09:14] <duflu> willcooke: Yes. Or AUD$8-$10
[09:14] <duflu> They may not last more than a week though
[09:14] <willcooke> haha!
[09:14] <willcooke> Very true
[09:15] <duflu> Although the only one I remember dying of late was SanDisk brand
[09:15] <duflu> willcooke: More amazing are 128GB and now 256GB microSDs
[09:15] <willcooke> This is Toshiba, but I very much dobut that anyone who actually works at Toshiba has anything to do with it
[09:15] <duflu> Just stare at them in wonder
[09:16] <willcooke> O_o
[09:16] <willcooke> The world has gone mad
[09:16] <duflu> willcooke: I found the former recently for around 40 quid equivalent
[09:16]  * willcooke grumbles about kids today
[09:17] <willcooke> 1TB SSDs are still pricey, but I expect people want those to last a few years min.
[09:17] <duflu> More amazing that I can measure they do get the advertised 80MB/s
[09:18] <willcooke> incredible
[09:18]  * duflu also looks at the box of floppy disks he never sorted, and has no drive to read 
[09:19] <willcooke> ha! yes.
[09:52] <happyaron> willcooke duflu for performance I'd recommend sandisk cz80
[09:52] <happyaron> it's about 26gbp for 64gig
[10:00] <willcooke> happyaron, good to know, thanks
[10:03] <davmor2> duflu: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/221953327364?limghlpsr=true&hlpv=2&ops=true&viphx=1&hlpht=true&lpid=122&chn=ps&googleloc=1007249&poi=&campaignid=207297426&device=c&adgroupid=13585920426&rlsatarget=pla-131843261346&adtype=pla&crdt=0&ff3=1&ff11=ICEP3.0.0-L&ff12=67&ff13=80&ff14=122 no excuses
[10:05] <duflu> davmor2: OK then. I claim laziness now
[10:05] <duflu> Also time to make dinner :)
[10:41] <Trevinho> hikiko|ln: hey, there are several MPs about the expo/scale fixes for bottom launcher... I mean some from handsomefeng, other yours... They're almost the same, but not sure if I'm missing something... Why this duplication?
[10:45] <hikiko|ln> Trevinho, I think that handsome_feng is trying to fix the maximised window bug and for some reason he cloned my branches instead of starting from scratch
[10:45] <hikiko|ln> if you see the branches they are identical
[10:46] <hikiko|ln> I don't know why he used mine
[10:46] <Trevinho> mh, I see
[10:46] <Trevinho> well, unity side is different...
[10:47] <hikiko|ln> well, my branches fix the scale and the expo
[10:48] <hikiko|ln> feel free to merge them if they are ok
[10:48] <hikiko|ln> and then we just add a depends on ... branch to handsome feng's
[10:48] <hikiko|ln> so that we don't have duplicate changes
[10:51] <Trevinho> hikiko|ln: ok, as his branch is not relly using your commit... But the raw diff. Anyway, yours fine... BUt you've to do an one line change:
[10:51] <Trevinho> workArea.setBottom (optionGetYBottomOffset ());
[10:51] <Trevinho> has to be come:
[10:51] <Trevinho> workArea.setBottom (workArea.bottom () + optionGetYBottomOffset ());
[10:51] <Trevinho> hikiko|ln: can you fix this, so I can add it to the landing list?
[10:51] <hikiko|ln> sure give me a minute
[10:51] <hikiko|ln> 5 minutes :p
[10:51] <hikiko|ln> brb
[10:52] <Trevinho> hikiko|ln: ok
[11:04] <hikiko|ln> Trevinho, are you sure this is needed?
[11:05] <hikiko|ln> it won't make the area appear larger?
[11:07] <Trevinho> hikiko|ln: mhmhmh.... Well, let me think... it should be workArea.bottom () - offset actually... isn't it?
[11:07] <hikiko|ln> no
[11:07] <hikiko|ln> it should be == bottomYOffset
[11:07] <hikiko|ln> because when the workarea quad is made
[11:08] <hikiko|ln> the bottom is subtracted
[11:08] <Trevinho> hikiko|ln: well, workarea bottom could be not zero when you've two monitor stacked vertically
[11:08] <Trevinho> well, sorry I didn't want to mean 0.. but monitor height
[11:08] <hikiko|ln> certainly not 0 but I think it should be ybottom offset
[11:09] <Trevinho> hikiko|ln: yeah, but you've to take in consideration the old value for botom()
[11:09] <hikiko|ln> let me check
[11:09] <Trevinho> if you've two monitors stacked vertically, the top one has a bottom that is non zero...
[11:10] <hikiko|ln> right
[11:10] <hikiko|ln> I got it
[11:11] <hikiko|ln> so on single monitor bottom = 0
[11:11] <hikiko|ln> and we can safely do bottom + offset
[11:12] <hikiko|ln> ok :) give me a minute to run it and I push it
[11:36] <hikiko|ln> Trevinho, I pushed the change, thank you
[11:40] <hikiko|ln> wait a min where's the expo change :
[11:42] <hikiko|ln> Trevinho, wait a sec the expo change is missing from this branch
[11:43] <hikiko|ln> no it's there
[11:43] <hikiko|ln> :p
[11:43] <hikiko|ln> ignore :)
[11:46] <desrt> hello humans
[11:46] <willcooke> hi desrt
[11:47] <hikiko|ln> hi desrt
[11:49] <hikiko|ln> ttys again \m/ reboot :/
[11:58] <desrt> good morning willcooke, hikiko|ln
[11:58] <desrt> everyone have a good weekend?
[11:59] <hikiko> wow, I forgot it's monday :)
[12:37] <a1fa> ood day guys
[12:39] <andyrock> hey guys
[12:44] <a1fa> hikiko: i was finally able to document the bug with the disappearing windows
[14:42]  * Laney is attacking 3.20 css
[14:43]  * davmor2 sounds like the 3.20 css is winning, put some effort in laney ;)
[14:49] <Laney> I SHALL BE VICTORIOUS
[15:30] <Trevinho> Laney: you will
[15:32]  * davmor2 bets £80 on 3.20 css and £100 on Laney I like to edge my bets :)
[15:37] <Laney> quite bad currently
[15:37] <Laney> less bad than it was though
[17:08] <willcooke> gnight all
[18:07] <willcooke> meh, forgot about meetings later
[18:07] <willcooke> going afk, back to speak to robert_ancell later
[20:25] <Trevinho> Ouch, I'm getting a build failure in unity in yakkety ppc64el....  How can i debug that... I guess quemu isn't the best thing, right?
[20:25] <Laney> TREVINHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
[20:25] <Trevinho> LANEEEEEEEEEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
[20:26] <Laney> link?
[20:26] <Laney> can probably sort out access to a box
[20:26] <Laney> but tomorrow
[20:26] <Trevinho> Laney: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/259848746/buildlog_ubuntu-yakkety-ppc64el.unity_7.5.0+16.10.20160516.1-0ubuntu1_BUILDING.txt.gz
[20:26] <Trevinho> Laney: oh, that would be coooool
[20:26] <Laney> did you retry?
[20:26]  * Trevinho checks if there's something in the code that could trigger it... But that test lived there for years with no issue in all archs
[20:26] <Trevinho> so.....
[20:27] <Trevinho> Laney: yep
[20:27] <Trevinho> twice
[20:27] <Trevinho> same crash, same pos
[20:27] <Laney> k
[20:27] <Trevinho> Laney: thanks
[20:27] <Laney> pitti can also help with that
[20:31] <Trevinho> Mh, actually there's something that could trigger it in code.... But.... I see it only in that arch, so it's quite bizarre
[21:05] <willcooke> morning robert_ancell
[21:05] <willcooke> *pounce*
[21:05] <robert_ancell> willcooke, hikiko
[21:05] <willcooke> :)
[21:05] <robert_ancell> willcooke, or hi
[21:05] <willcooke> he!
[21:05] <willcooke> heh
[21:05] <willcooke> robert_ancell, attente - gimme 5 mins to finish this email and I'll be with you
[21:06] <hikiko> robert_ancell, hi
[21:06] <robert_ancell> hikiko, hi!
[21:12] <willcooke> robert_ancell, attente ok done
[21:50] <willcooke> g'night all
[21:52] <attente> robert_ancell: the branch is on git.gnome.org as wip/temp/ubuntu-xenial-rebased-corrected
[21:53] <attente> robert_ancell: at some point, i gave up on properly amending commits and just did a fix-up patch in the end
[21:53] <robert_ancell> attente, cool
[21:53] <attente> but basically it should be the same result as a resolved merge between GNOME_SOFTWARE_3_20_2 and wip/ubuntu-xenial
[21:57] <robert_ancell> attente, ok, I pushed to wip/rancell/ubuntu-xenial-rebase
[21:58] <robert_ancell> I think the merge commit got confused, but hopefully it worked..
[22:02] <attente> robert_ancell: ok, i'll check the diff after dinner
[22:39] <a1fa> xset m 0 0
[23:45] <a1fa> Andrea, you here?
[23:46] <a1fa> thanks for picking up that bug ;)