[09:28] <jjohansen> cking: so there is a fix for the regression posted to the ml, and I have debs in the dir mentioned in the bug
[09:28] <cking> jjohansen, thanks, I'm just working on giving it a test. Thanks for sorting this out so quickly. Much appreciated
[09:29] <jjohansen> heh, its not just you who needed it, its been causing problems for snappy
[09:29] <jjohansen> oops :)
[09:29] <cking> oh fun.
[09:30] <jjohansen> yeah, but it showed up in a way we were thinking it was not a regression but showing up a new bug, ...
[10:08] <cking> jjohansen, it passes the tests, thanks, I've acked the patch
[13:22] <zyga> rtg: I think I just sent that first patch to the mailing list as you instructed
[13:23] <rtg> zyga, I just unmoderated it
[13:23] <zyga> rtg: not sure if I did things correctly
[13:23] <zyga> rtg: thank you for helping me out
[13:24] <rtg> zyga, it needs a Buglink, or at least an indication of what kernel to which it applies.
[13:24] <zyga> rtg: what is the usual way to specify that?
[13:24] <zyga> rtg: it is just an idea, this is not fixing a bug (more like adding a feature and asking for RFC)
[13:26] <rtg> zyga, sforshee is our namespace expert. He is the one that should review the patch, and then maybe you could submit it uptream. He'll know to whom it should be sent.
[13:26] <zyga> rtg: how should I ask sforshee for a review? just on irc here?
[13:27] <rtg> zyga, he'll notice in a bit when he comes online
[13:27] <zyga> rtg: I see, thanks
[13:31] <sforshee> zyga: I'm online already. I just looked at the patch briefly - that's userspace visible, so usually I'd expect that to go upstream first
[13:32] <zyga> sforshee: I'm not a kernel developer so I'm not familiar with the process, I chose to send it here to get feedback and discuss in a friendlier place than LKML
[13:32] <zyga> sforshee: it's not a patch that should be applied yet
[13:33] <zyga> sforshee: I'm working on an userspace problem that got somewhat stuck on being able to reliably detect that a given bind mount is already mounted
[13:34] <sforshee> zyga: I want to look at it some more before I decide what I think about it, but I need to step away for ~30 min. I'll reply on the list later.
[13:34] <zyga> sforshee: thank you
[16:49] <jdstrand> rtg: hi! I noticed https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/4.9.0-16.17 ftbfs. not sure if that was on your radar
[16:51] <rtg> jdstrand, yeah, sometimes it takes awhile for the signed image to get sorted out.
[16:51] <rtg> it is going to be superseded by 4.10 soon anyways
[16:52] <jdstrand> I see
[16:52] <jdstrand> rtg: ok, thanks!
[17:48] <zyga> sforshee: I replied to your reply, I think I understand the problem better now and that my patch can be discarded
[17:49] <zyga> sforshee: if you don't find any holes in my understanding of the topic and the reasoning I presented in the mail I think I can do everything I needed with an unmodified kernel
[17:59] <zyga> jdstrand: enjoy your time off :)
[18:26] <jdstrand> zyga: thanks! :)