[03:30] <sky> is there a /var/mail directory in 16.04?
[03:31] <Javezim> Hey All, anyone had issues with Samba 4.3.11-Ubuntu on Ubuntu Server 14.04.4 and being able to Read/Write Data from Windows Clients? ""An Unexpected Network Error has occurred""
[03:31] <Javezim> log.smbd - http://paste.ubuntu.com/23336705/, log.<HOSTNAME> seeing a tonne of - http://paste.ubuntu.com/23336648/
[03:36] <sky> are /var/mail and /var/spool/mail somehow linked?
[03:37] <sky> i deleted a file in var/mail and the same file gets rmed from /var/spool/mail. but i cant tell that there is a symlink or anything
[03:38] <sky> oh, I fuound it
[03:38] <sky> looks like /var/spool/mail is a symlink to /var/mail
[04:22] <lucas_ai> How can I have execute permissions on my files in an NTFS drive? Can't I use it as my /home ?
[06:01] <Gorian> do you guys prefer to run LTS or non-LTS for your servers/
[06:17] <hateball> Gorian: I only use LTS, but it is personal preference really. Depending if you *need* newer packages.
[06:22] <Gorian> hmm.. okay
[06:27] <hateball> Gorian: and depending on your scale of course
[06:27] <hateball> upgrading every 6-9 months can be a headache
[06:27] <Gorian> that's a good point
[09:44] <maxagaz> Hi
[09:45] <maxagaz> my user is in the group www-data, ownership of /var/www/html is www-data:www-data, why I don't have permission to execute "touch myfile.txt" in this directory ?
[09:46] <sarnold> what are the permissions on /var/www/html?
[09:47] <maxagaz> sorry, my bad, chmod g+w fixed it
[09:48] <sarnold> :)
[09:50] <sarnold> maxagaz: investigate the bsdgroups mount option; with that you can setgid on the directory, and all new files/directories in a setgid directory will get the group ownership set correctly
[13:45] <jamespage> ddellav, coreycb`: creating stable/newton branches in all git repos now
[13:45] <coreycb`> jamespage, sounds good
[13:47] <coreycb`> jamespage, I have a pull-uca-source script working.  think I should push this to ubuntu-dev-tools?  http://paste.ubuntu.com/23338714/
[13:50] <jamespage> coreycb`, I don't see why not
[13:51] <coreycb`> jamespage, ok doing that now then
[14:00] <coreycb> jamespage, zul, ddellav: I pushed pull-uca-source to ubuntu-dev-tools:  http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-dev/ubuntu-dev-tools/trunk/revision/1451
[14:00] <ddellav> coreycb nice
[14:00] <zul> coreycb: sweet
[16:31] <powersj> rbasak: still around?
[16:34] <rbasak> powersj: o/
[16:34] <powersj> rbasak: there are 4 heimdal bugs all reporting install failures because of version mismatches.
[16:34] <powersj> thoughts on adding to backlog?
[16:35] <rbasak> Are they using yakkety-proposed by any chance?
[16:35] <powersj> all four have the tag "package-from-proposed"
[16:35] <rbasak> Dupe of bug 1617963?
[16:36] <rbasak> Looks like yakkety-proposed has not yet been cleared for SRUs.
[16:36] <rbasak> So using yakkety-proposed is currently still wrong.
[16:36] <rbasak> Though that's interesting, because I wonder if that's a problem for users?
[16:37]  * rbasak asked in #ubuntu-devel
[16:39] <powersj> rbasak: looks like the version each is trying to install is in fact the one from proposed.
[17:00] <zul> coreycb: ping
[17:12] <jamespage> zul, coreycb: any reason why we can't make the pylxd integration tests run in autopkg test
[17:13] <zul> jamespage: no
[17:13] <zul> jamespage: ill open up a bug to remind me
[17:14] <zul> jamespage: #1634207
[18:03] <basilAB> Noticed 4.4.0-43 kernel has added in xenial-updates on 10-14-2016. But the same didn't get added in trusty-updates. Does anyone know whether it is expected?
[18:46] <RoyK> basilAB: new kernels are added to the repos, but not installed automatically. If you (really) need the new kernel with its new features (read the changelog), just apt-get install it
[18:47] <RoyK> or apt install it, if you prefer the new method
[19:02] <basilAB> RoyK: I was looking at the trusty-updates repo and not seeing the 4.4.0-43.  Still can see only 4.4.0-42.
[19:03] <RoyK> basilAB: oh - I see - possibly some mirrors being out of sync
[19:04] <basilAB> In xenial-updates, I can see the latest though. Yeah, may be a sync problem
[19:05] <basilAB> I am running trusty lxd containers on top of Xenial with 4.4.0-43. To install new packages on trusty, some of dependencies are failing because of this.
[19:09] <tarpman> doesn't look like a mirror sync issue - there's no 4.4.0-43 upload on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-lts-xenial either
[20:42] <dannf> smoser: you still the right person to poke about maas-images? Need a merge to fix arm64/yakkety - https://code.launchpad.net/~dannf/maas-images/xgene-uboot-compressed-images/+merge/308515
[20:46] <smoser> dannf, myself or ltrager
[20:46] <smoser> i am ok with that change, i assume you've tested ?
[20:48] <dannf> smoser: i've built trusty & yakkety images and verified that the image has the correct metadata in each case. i have not pointed a maas server at a custom stream w/ it (maas server w/ those systems is production)
[21:09] <smoser> dannf, merged
[21:10] <dannf> smoser: thx!
[22:20] <drab_> hi, anybody running 14.04 on a proliant DL585?
[22:21] <drab_> this box has s 4 ports nic loadind the e1000 module, but then only one port is recognized per adapter
[22:21] <drab_> 2xquad nics pci-e
[22:21] <drab_> the weird this is that ifconfig -a shows 8 eth
[22:22] <drab_> but then I get no link on any of them
[22:24] <RoyK> drab_: never seen that - I've used ubuntu with quad e1000 cards, and it's worked well
[22:25] <RoyK> drab_: does ethtool tell you anything about link status?
[22:25] <drab_> the weird thing is that in both cases it's the top port that works, the bottom 3 don't on either
[22:25] <drab_> checking that, was trying with mii-tool
[22:28] <drab_> RoyK: it gives the same exact info as the ones that work minus Link detect: no
[22:28] <RoyK> switch config correct?
[22:28] <drab_> snd speed/duplex set to Unknown
[22:29] <mybalzitch> drab_: tried bringing the interface up to see if that does anything?
[22:29] <drab_> yeah I even tested taking out the cable of the nic that works
[22:29] <drab_> and putting into the one that does't, no joy
[22:29] <drab_> so port/cable is not the issue
[22:29] <RoyK> what happens if you do an ifconfig ethx up?
[22:31] <drab_> I need a /dighole alias I guess...
[22:31] <drab_> RoyK: it worked. I don't get it tho
[22:32] <drab_> why wouldnt' the light on the card come up? I don't think I've seen that before
[22:32] <RoyK> drab_: pastebin /etc/network/interfaces, please
[22:32] <drab_> I get tyhat an interface may not come up if you don't configure it, but the link should still show I thought
[22:32] <drab_> even if the itnerface is unconfigured
[22:33] <drab_> RoyK: it only has the two interfaces that were working
[22:33] <drab_> I guess my problem is that I assume link light should have shown regardless
[22:33] <RoyK> ok, add some more ;)
[22:33] <RoyK> will you be trunking some of these?
[22:34] <drab_> nah, gonna run 8 VMs, each one gets one
[22:34] <drab_> well, 7
[22:34] <drab_> one for the host
[22:34] <RoyK> erm - why? wouldn't VLANs be easier?
[22:35] <RoyK> just setup a trunk and VLANs and so on
[22:36] <drab_> RoyK: pardon my ignorance, why is it easier?
[22:37] <RoyK> drab_: it's not necessarily easier, but it's far more flexible and will give you more bandwidth to the switch
[22:37] <RoyK> drab_: and perhaps you learn a thing or two on the way ;)
[22:38] <drab_> I'm always up for learning, but I'd need at least a pointer, right now I'
[22:38] <drab_> m having issues to even see how that'd work
[22:38] <RoyK> given your switch supports VLAN, that is...
[22:39] <drab_> sure, it does, it's hp 2626, I'm using vlans on another that's the same model
[22:41] <drab_> you'd trunk 8 ports and put them on their own vlan and then the VMs would get an ip on that trunked host interface?
[22:43] <RoyK> I'd use 802.1Q between the host and the switch with as many ports as you might need and then allocate VLANs where needed - usually VMs can be on the same VLAN without issues unless there you need to isolate them due to security
[22:44] <RoyK> if the uplink on the switch isn't 10G, or perhaps just a few gigs, it doesn't make sense to use too many links in  the trunk
[22:45] <RoyK> don't put VMs on separate VLANs unless they're on separate IP (v4 or v6, doesn't matter) networks