[03:01] <salim> Anyone has an idea on the wireless display issue?
[06:03] <garybot> hello Ubuntu :]
[14:41] <kotof> hi
[15:51] <leaftype> I keep trying to get the M10 FHD to reflash, and it fails on waiting to renter recovery mode
[15:52] <leaftype> The device boots to system recovery, but the desktop never sees this
[15:56] <dobey> leaftype: are you using the correct recovery.img file when flashing with ubuntu-device-flash?
[15:56] <leaftype> dobey, I was using the recommended channel: ubuntu-device-flash touch --channel=ubuntu-touch/stable/bq-aquaris-pd.en --bootstrap
[15:57] <leaftype> teh channel I found from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Touch/ReleaseNotes/OTA-14
[15:57] <dobey> leaftype: the factory recovery is locked. you need the recovery image from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Touch/Devices#Working_with_ubuntu-device-flash
[15:57] <dobey> the recovery-frieza.img for M10 FHD, and you have to pass it to ubuntu-device-flash with --recovery-image arg
[15:59] <leaftype> alright, thanks. So ubuntu-device-flash --recovery-image ~/Downloads/revovery-frieza.img ?
[16:00] <dobey> yes
[16:00] <dobey> along with the other args for flashing the device, at the same time
[16:05] <leaftype> sweet, it's getting further than before. BTW, why does it still require the channel in the command to work, if it's using an image?
[16:07] <dobey> the recovery isn't the system image, it's just for the recovery to enable flashing
[16:07] <dobey> to enable adb in recovery to flash
[16:10] <leaftype> ah, thanks! This lets me give an answer on askubuntu as well :)
[16:15] <brunch875> guys, where does the ubuntu touch development discussion happen? Such as interface decisions... is it posible to spectate those?
[16:17] <leaftype> woo! brand new fresh install working :D
[16:19] <brunch875> good job, leaftype!
[16:25] <pmcgowan> brunch875, you mean snap interfaces?
[16:28] <brunch875> pmcgowan: I'm just wondering where the developers debate how they're going to implement snap, among other things. The mailing list I'm on has anouncements mixed with a lot of "I'm leaving ubuntu" whine.
[16:29] <pmcgowan> brunch875, there is a snapcraft mailing list where this mainly happens
[16:29] <pmcgowan> and in the PRs on github
[16:29] <pmcgowan> and on #snappy
[16:30] <brunch875> thanks!
[16:30] <brunch875> is there anything else not just exclusive to snappy, but for the ubuntu phone in general?
[16:32] <dobey> brunch875: you can watch MPs on unity8 and various projects i guess.
[16:32] <pmcgowan> brunch875, there is nothing else, we likely need to do a better job of informing that mailing list of the snap work, but the updates from sil2100 cover much of it
[16:32] <dobey> brunch875: for the large part of it, we're mostly "just do it" rather than a lot of discussion about it
[16:32] <brunch875> ah, I see!
[16:32] <pmcgowan> also true
[16:33] <dobey> there's a lot of work that needs to be done, and we know the general direction, so a lot of it is just fixing things to align with that and work in the snap world
[16:33] <brunch875> just what I needed, thanks! :)
[16:34] <dobey> i suppoise once we have a decently functioning u8 snap on top of ubuntu-core snap on x86, we'll start working on how to get the android bits working under that and flashable onto a device of some sort
[16:35] <brunch875> convergence sounds pretty close!
[16:35] <brunch875> exciting times
[16:38] <nhaines> dobey: I have interpreted "a device of some kind" as "my Nexus 7" and have emailed OMGUbuntu with the appropriate incindiary headline.  :)
[16:43] <dobey> i'm pretty sure there is no way that snaps will ever be flashed onto my nexus 7 :)
[16:43] <dobey> can't even flash current ubuntu images onto it, and android on it is even horrible
[16:46] <nhaines> dobey: OTA-14 (and the last rc-proposed updates) were pretty pleasant.
[16:47] <dobey> nhaines: 2012 n7 is not
[16:48] <nhaines> dobey: oh, no, of course not.  I was thinking the 2013 n7.
[16:49] <brunch875> the whole "android bits" bother me to no end. If only installing ubuntu was like on the pc...
[16:51] <nhaines> brunch875: yes, well, the unfortunate result of ARM's lack of standardization.  :)
[16:51] <brunch875> Are there no efforts to fix this issue?
[16:53] <dobey> brunch875: get a fairphone i guess?
[16:55] <nhaines> brunch875: there cannot be: most of the hardware used in commercial phones have no source drivers.
[16:55] <brunch875> is the fairphone more flashing-friendly?
[16:55] <brunch875> oof, so expensive
[16:56] <dobey> the fairphone i think is supposed to have all open source drivers or something, so theoretically it could be run without the android bits
[16:57] <dobey> but i could be wrong on that
[16:57] <brunch875> I'm definitely getting one of those then
[16:57] <dobey> ubports has a fairphone2 port
[16:58] <dobey> would probably be a good place to start with figuring things out, but really, the short answer is no. google probably has enough clout to do it, but they don't seem to want to either
[17:01] <brunch875> I wish the european union did something about this... buying a new phone to upgrade the linux kernel sounds insane to me
[17:03] <nhaines> brunch875: you wish the EU to require all hardware manufacturers to develop and release open source Linux drivers for their hardware?
[17:03] <brunch875> well, at some point; yes.
[17:04] <brunch875> I want a rampage in Stallman's name, but the current situation is bad
[17:04] <brunch875> I don't want a rampage*
[17:29] <nhaines> brunch875: I could live with such a rampage.  :)
[18:05] <dobey> nhaines, brunch875: well, it will certainly be interesting to see how the law suit against d-link pans out
[18:06] <brunch875> dobey: could you link me about this?
[18:07] <brunch875> what d-link lawsuit?
[18:07] <dobey> https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/blog/ftc-sues-d-link-over-router-and-camera-security-flaws
[18:08] <brunch875> thanks