| magicline | the problem ist back after 2 days of runtime :( https://pastebin.com/3ebc0H95 | 08:42 |
|---|---|---|
| === klebers_ is now known as klebers | ||
| magicline | https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-hwe/+bug/1705221 | 09:34 |
| ubot5 | Ubuntu bug 1705221 in linux-hwe (Ubuntu) "ata_piix swiotlb buffer is full " [Undecided,New] | 09:34 |
| === JanC is now known as Guest74368 | ||
| === JanC_ is now known as JanC | ||
| === mhcerri_ is now known as mhcerri | ||
| seb128 | hey there | 13:25 |
| seb128 | could someody tell me what's the status of the bug which is making java/libreoffice segfault on x86? | 13:26 |
| apw | seb128, if that is related to the stackclash fixes then we may well have applied the changes for that in the kernels in -proposed for xenial at least | 13:27 |
| seb128 | apw, any idea when the buildds are likely to run that kernel? ;-) | 13:29 |
| apw | seb128, hehe, not that i don't think i have any control over | 13:30 |
| apw | seb128, or indeed know if they are running xenial now i think about it | 13:30 |
| seb128 | I don't either | 13:30 |
| seb128 | I just know that libreoffice is stucked in artful-proposed due to that issue | 13:30 |
| seb128 | and holding others transitions | 13:30 |
| apw | because its test suite won't pass ? | 13:31 |
| apw | if so then we should just give it a pass as the one in -release won't pass either | 13:31 |
| smb | I think its a build time test. The fixup patches for that are part of this cycle for all but xenial where we added them to the re-spin | 13:32 |
| apw | yep | 13:33 |
| smb | So if builders were running xenial they would be good sooner | 13:33 |
| seb128 | apw, as smb said the test are part of the package build and failing the build | 13:37 |
| smb | Unfortunately those patches did only appeared upstream only over the weekend, so there is not really much chance to speed this up | 13:43 |
| apw | seb128, ok it seems we follow -updates within 24 hours in general, so we should get that "soon@ | 13:48 |
| apw | seb128, we are just waiting on some test results for the carried fixies i assume | 13:48 |
| seb128 | apw, great, thanks for checking/letting me know | 13:49 |
| apw | seb128, np | 13:49 |
| leitao | when compiling a new kernel on 16.04 I got the following error "needs unknown symbol .TOC. ". I remember there was an workaround for it, but I can't remember what was it. Any idea? | 19:09 |
| leitao | apw, sforshee: Do you remember about this issue? | 19:10 |
| sforshee | leitao: we have this patch for it - http://paste.ubuntu.com/25127546/ | 19:13 |
| apw | leitao, look for a revert revert revert patchon the hwe branch | 19:13 |
| leitao | sforshee: apw: Is it at Zesty tree? | 19:13 |
| sforshee | not on zesty, but on the hwe tree which is based on zesty yes | 19:14 |
| leitao | sforshee: interesting. the hwe branch is based on zesty remote? | 19:15 |
| sforshee | leitao: it's zesty + some extra patches, those patches get rebased on top of each new zesty release | 19:16 |
| leitao | sforshee: right. how do I get it? | 19:17 |
| leitao | I was using zesty-next at this moment, which seems clearly wrong. | 19:17 |
| sforshee | leitao: it's in the xenial tree, the hwe branch | 19:17 |
| leitao | ah ok, Thanks | 19:17 |
| sforshee | there is no -next branch | 19:17 |
| sforshee | leitao: and actually I gave you on old patch, the tree was out of date. This is the current one - http://paste.ubuntu.com/25127582/ | 19:18 |
| sforshee | you'll find it pretty close to the tip of the hwe branch | 19:19 |
| leitao | excellent. Thank you! | 19:19 |
| sforshee | np | 19:20 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!