[11:28] Hey folks === pavlushka is now known as Guest30072 [15:44] nacc: I can't do it [15:45] tgm4883: me neither :) [15:46] I'm not sure why users think they need to hide stuff from us [15:46] tell the truth, take your lashing, and move on [15:47] The truth, the whole truth ...... and nothing but the truth; thank you . [15:48] it's like dealing with children sometimes.... [15:48] tgm4883: yeah, basically after 15 minutes, no difference -- ask the ppa owner for support :) [15:53] what's the state on snaps and support? are they supported in #ubuntu, or by the developer? [15:53] hmm, good question [15:53] ducasse: the developer I would think [15:54] ok. what about the canonical snaps? [15:54] :) [15:54] ducasse: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2321161 ; http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2327088 shed any light ? [15:54] ducasse: does canonical make snaps? [15:55] snaps should "Just work"(TM) so if they don't, it seems like support should be with the developer [15:56] tgm4883: well, they are listed as developer on some of them [15:57] tgm4883: ufw and nextcloud, for example [15:57] ducasse: we should probably define what support is. All it could likely be with any snap is "reproduce issue, figure out if issue is with package or snappy, file bug" [15:57] ducasse: UFW has a snap? [15:57] that... doesn't even make sense [15:58] tgm4883: for ubuntu core, i just noticed [15:58] eh, I guess so [15:58] since it's just configuring iptables [17:20] tgm4883: so you can put it on the list of things not to install? :) [17:20] yea pretty much [17:21] It would be also interesting to see if the user is just misinformed [17:21] maybe it just says it supports one version of the kernel [17:22] tgm4883: yeah, but given their response to why was "ask the devs /rof", I don't know if they know [17:24] Well gentlemen, we tried. [17:24] OerHeks: :) [17:29] * OerHeks is trying to upgrade 15.10-16.04 .. for 3rd day now .. too busy doing something else important [17:36] OerHeks: good luck. what IRC client are you using? [17:37] hexchat [17:37] ok. 16.04 comes with a new version of irssi that breaks a lot of configs, so just checking. [17:37] actually i am ready, backup done, usb ready with iso, just hit the upgrade button .. [17:38] i read that yesterday, irssi [17:39] it's easy to fix, just a bit frustrating when I didn't realize what was going on. :) [17:40] didn't know that issue, not seen in #ubuntu anyway [17:40] All of a sudden SASL was broken and I couldn't connect to freenode over proxy. [17:40] probably because the people that need help can't get connected. haha [17:41] likely, yes [17:41] but then they would go over to webchat. [17:41] Google gives an answer pretty quickly, though. [17:49] having trouble figuring out why the kernel versions are different between my two xenial machines. :/ [17:49] nicomachus: what are the two versions? [17:51] https://paste.ubuntu.com/19389046/ [17:52] so they both have 4.4.0-28 installed [17:52] the weird part is, Box 2 on that paste is using the -28 kernel, not the -41 [17:52] nacc: but Box 1 is using -31 (just installed) [17:53] nicomachus: you'd want to box 2 to be using -28, -41 is the 4.2.0 15.10 kernel [17:53] nicomachus: i think it's just a timing thing, my mirror just got the new kernel (-31) in the last 10 minutes [17:54] nacc: ah, I didn't consider the -41 being leftover from 15.10 [17:54] I suppose I may get the -31 for it later today. just checked and it wasn't there yet. [17:55] nicomachus: you could always switch to the primary archive (or use the same as box 1), but that update just rolled out today [17:55] they are the same, oddly. [17:56] strange! [18:08] 4.2.0.42.45 rolling in here too [18:08] 15.10 [18:10] brb [18:15] nowww I'm getting -31 on this box. [18:17] nicomachus: very strange! [18:47] you didn't need sudo to look in /boot :D [18:48] daftykins: yea you're right. oh well. [18:48] I was thinking it gave a more complete list, but it's the same. [18:48] :) [18:58] rsync is not a backup... [18:59] heh [19:05] It can do backup tasks... Dirvish, a backup utility, is a simple wrapper around rsync. [19:06] lordievader: I'd argue it's not doing a backup task then [19:07] but ok, rsync, without some sort of wrapper, is not a backup utility [19:07] Can still be. [19:07] lordievader: meh, it can be in the same way that cp can be [19:08] Yes, a very manual backup utility. [19:34] OerHeks: I must be irritable today [19:35] duplicity <3 [19:35] not in my ears [19:37] tgm4883: me too :0 [19:38] wth is deep trying to do? [19:38] something wrong, presuambly [19:38] but won't tell waht [19:40] yea [19:40] !slap jilocasin0 [19:41] heh [19:42] there is a repeat in #ubuntu .. [19:43] utoxication [20:01] nacc: pretty sure I found his issue [20:01] tgm4883: ack, is it just me or are those .bashrc modifications fubar? [20:01] yea they are all wrong I think [20:01] I'm verifying now [20:03] hmm, maybe not [20:06] there it is [20:06] nice find nacc [20:11] nacc: it's definitely that PATH=y [20:11] yep [20:15] tgm4883: it's like pulling teeth! [20:15] yep [20:15] ones where people can't copy&paste are especially difficult [20:15] I should go get lunch [20:16] * nacc too! it's afternoon already [20:17] Some days I wish you could curse in #ubuntu [21:09] Bashing-om hello [21:10] hey ole friend .. " ubuntuforums.org refused to connect." :( [21:11] Yeppers! You knew what i was going to ask...lol [21:12] runrickus: I had that idea .. #ubuntu-forums : < bapoumba> IS took it down again . [21:13] Boy that was fast...I was just reading that when it went down [21:16] runrickus: Whatever happened to a warning that we were going down ? [21:17] I will Pm you on that...good reason though [21:17] Hokay .. will look forward to the advisement. [22:16] nacc: maybe we should change our nicks. Add a -dds on the end [22:24] tgm4883: heh [22:32] nacc: has it always been this bad? [22:32] tgm4883: it seems especially bad today [22:32] ok, thought it was just me [22:33] and there are more ... helpful? ... people who are chiming in with potentially bad advice than normal [22:33] yea I noticed that too [23:23] nacc: I think I see the confusion earlier. linux-image isn't a metapackage [23:24] ah [23:25] so he should just need to remove linux-image (and the other kernels he doesn't want) [23:25] then be fine [23:25] provided he has the one that he wants installed [23:25] tgm4883: i was wondering about that [23:25] yea virtual packages are weird [23:25] I guess they don't really have a version number associated with them [23:26] rmadison says linux-image only existed in precise :) [23:26] linux-image-generic should be pinnable, though [23:27] nacc: perhaps [23:27] nacc: although [23:27] he's probably on trusty? [23:28] yeah, that's what i read based upon the kernel version [23:28] yea linux-image is in trusty too [23:29] i wonder why rmadison doesn't see it, maybe it went from real to virtual at that point