Re: Ubuntustudio Natty GlobalJam tests
Hi Ronan, Sorry for long delay. 2011/4/3 Ronan Jouchet ro...@jouchet.fr: [...] 4. Installing abogani's lowlatency failed because of missing headers :-/ ; here is what I have: sudo apt-get install linux-lowlatency linux-headers-lowlatency linux-headers-2.6.38-8-lowlatency The following packages have unmet dependencies: linux-headers-2.6.38-8-lowlatency : Depends: linux-headers-2.6.38-8 but it is not installable Alessio, could you update your ppa? Could you install linux-headers-2.6.38-8 manualy and report result, please? Thanks a lot Ronan! Ciao, Alessio -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: Lowlatency kernel testing (Re: A feature for -lowlatency kernel?)
On 2011-04-01 21:49, ailo wrote: I'm not sure how to catch the output. I'm not getting any messages to the root shell. Am I supposed to? I'm not sure I understand your question, but if there is something in the /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace file that looks interesting you can always get it out by e g cat trace /tmp/trace.txt, then chmod 666 /tmp/trace.txt or something like that [1]. Or is your problem that the /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace file is empty? I'm testing the 2.6.38-7 -generic, and it is in fact working better than before. Almost as well as -lowlatency. Only almost? Anyway, that's kind of why I've losing faith in lowlatency personally - I have yet to see someone showing me that it actually performs better than the generic kernel. -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. http://launchpad.net/~diwic [1] I bet there are shell veterans who know how to do that more elegant :-) -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: Lowlatency kernel testing (Re: A feature for -lowlatency kernel?)
On 04/06/2011 02:36 AM, ailo wrote: The diff in my tests may be more related to me picking up problems during later tests, that I didn't pick up during my first tests. Or something in Ubuntu other than the kernel is affecting that in later tests. I forgot to mention, that after revisiting the results of my few tests, I don't see any diffs concerning -lowlatency. Must have thought I would have got a few audio dropouts with 2.6.38-1 -lowlatency, if I had just given it some more time.. -- ailo -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: Should PPAs be forced to specify a ~ppa1 or similar in the package version?
On 02/04/11 14:56, Scott Ritchie wrote: This has long been good practice for a variety of reasons 1) Independent PPA packages of new upstream versions can be automatically replaced when a proper distro update occurs. 2) If the PPA package itself gets promoted to the archive, it can be replaced by just dropping the ~ppa 3) It makes the version string more meaningful, as it prevents the possibility of an official and PPA package having the same version 4) If you are branching foo-0ubuntu1 and need multiple iterations you now have a proper number to increment without implying you've rebased off foo-0ubuntu2. Making such a change would have other value: 1) It makes it much easier to detect nonstandard packages on a system. This can be done with automated tools too without fear of false positives (in bug reports, with apport, with update manager, etc) 2) If all PPA packages were so branded, it would be much easier to implement a remove all PPA packages type of feature. Thoughts? No, please no, this would be incredibly annoying? I pretty much agree with all the points in your good practice list, but the strict string ~ppa(number) isn't the only way to satisfy them, and there are those of us out there who do understand Debian versioning and can pick reasonable strings ourselves. Whilst I think the widespread promotion of ~ppa1 has overall been a good thing, it has led to one negative effect - people who don't truly understand why it works seem to view ~ as a generic separator character rather than understanding its true meaning. In regards to your other value points, it really should not be that hard to implement those features in a more elegant and ultimately more useful way based on APT package lists and Origin metadata, rather than hacking it via substring matching on version strings. That said, I can totally see that it could be a good thing to implement a safety net in Launchpad which denies the ability to upload version strings that look like primary archive versions, unless the PPA owner clicks through an I know what I am doing questionnaire. Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: Please do not use syncpackage during hard-freeze periods
On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 03:08:18PM +0200, Artur Rona wrote: I appreciate your addition time spent. However, I was not a requester, just sponsor, so not me should be signed to uploaded package. Do not make bureaucracy and these cases will not be appear in future anymore. One person's bureaucracy is another person's important requirement. Why universe is hard-frozen as well? Launchpad doesn't give us the ability to be selective. -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: [Oneiric-Foundations-Topic] Switch to /run
On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 08:57:36AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: ]] Scott Kitterman | See http://lwn.net/Articles/436012/ and the current debian-devel thread on the | topic for details: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/04/msg00019.html We (meaning Michael Biebl, Roger Leigh and I) are pushing for this to be a release goal for wheezy as well, so any help from Ubuntu to help make it happen would be welcome. As I said on the Fedora development list, I'm entirely happy to work on this in Ubuntu. I'm not even sure it needs UDS discussion; a few obvious symlinks make it a non-intrusive change. The only reason it's even a little bit contentious is purely aesthetic, and frankly I rather like the aesthetics of this name. :-) -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: Please do not use syncpackage during hard-freeze periods
On 04/02/2011 08:08 AM, Artur Rona wrote: snip / Why universe is hard-frozen as well? There are quite a few universe packages that are seeded as well (xubuntu, mythbuntu, ubuntu-studio). Those shouldn't be touched during freezes either without the proper ACKs. Micah -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Ubuntu Kernel Team Meeting Minutes - 2011-04-05
= Meeting Minutes = [[http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2011/04/05/%23ubuntu-meeting.txt|IRC Log of the meeting.]] BR [[http://voices.canonical.com/kernelteam|Meeting minutes.]] == Agenda == [[https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Meeting#Tues, 05 Apr, 2011|20110405 Meeting Agenda]] === Release Metrics === Release Meeting Bugs (6 bugs, 8 Blueprints) Beta 2 Milestoned Bugs (64 across all packages (up 5)) * 2 linux kernel bugs (down 2) * 0 linux-ti-omap bugs (no change) * 0 linux-meta-ti-omap bug (no change) Release Targeted Bugs (272 across all packages (down 2)) * 27 linux kernel bugs (up 5) * 0 linux-ti-omap bugs (no change) * 0 linux-meta-ti-omap bug (no change) Milestoned Features * 6 blueprints (Including HWE Blueprints) Maverick Updates Bugs changed to only reflect linux package bugs * 6 Linux Bugs Lucid Updates Bugs changed to only reflect linux package bugs * 15 Linux Bugs Bugs with Patches Attached:87 (up 3) * [[https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bugs?field.has_patch=on | Bugs with Patches]] * [[http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/ogasawara/csv-stats/bugs-with-patches/linux/ | Breakdown by status]] === Blueprints: Natty Bug Handling === * My plan for these is to have this blueprint completed prior to the release of Beta 2. As such, it is a high priority for me and I will be focusing on those items that are still outstanding for this week. === Status: General Natty === Last week we uploaded the 2.6.38-8.40 kernel which is based on the latest upstream stable v2.6.38.2. As Kernel Freeze is April 14, I plan to do another upload today for the patches queued in master-next and then a final upload before kernel freeze on Mon April 11 so that our builds are complete by the 14th. After kernel freeze we will transition to our SRU policy when submitting and accepting patches. See: BR BR Any uploads beyond kernel freeze will likely have to resolve a critical issue, otherwise, it'll have to wait for the first round of SRU's. === Status: Stable Kernel Team === Last week we completed the Verification phase of the current cycle and entered the Testing Phase. When testing is completed, the packages can be published. BR BR This has the next upload to proposed and the start of the next cycle to be on 4/29. BR BR Since there are a lot of changes in the Maverick kernel from upstream stable patches, and because there are people interested in verifying specific fixes, we will soon produce a kernel and upload it to -proposed for Maverick. This is not on the schedule, and is not part of a normal kernel cycle. We will replce it with a kernel containing additional fixes for th enext official cycle. === Security bugfix kernels - Maverick/Lucid/Karmic/Hardy/Dapper === || Package|| Upd/Sec || Proposed || TiP || Verified || |||| || || || || || dapper linux-source-2.6.15 || 2.6.15-57.94 || 2.6.15-57.95 ||0 ||0 || |||| || || || || || karmic linux-ec2 || 2.6.31-308.28|| 2.6.31-308.29||1 ||1 || || --- linux || 2.6.31-23.74 || 2.6.31-23.75 ||1 ||1 || |||| || || || || || lucidlinux-ec2 || 2.6.32-314.27|| 2.6.32-315.28||5 ||5 || || --- linux-ports-meta || 2.6.32.30.23 || 2.6.32.31.23 ||0 ||0 || || --- linux-meta-lts-backport-maverick || 2.6.35.25.36 || 2.6.35.28.37 ||0 ||0 || || --- linux-lts-backport-maverick || 2.6.35-25.44~lucid1 || 2.6.35-28.50~lucid1 || 13 || 13 || || --- linux-backports-modules-2.6.32|| 2.6.32-30.29 || 2.6.32-31.31 ||0 ||0 || || --- linux-firmware|| 1.34.4 || 1.34.7 ||1 ||1 || || --- linux || 2.6.32-30.59 || 2.6.32-31.60 ||5 ||5 || || --- linux-meta|| 2.6.32.30.36 || 2.6.32.31.37 ||0 ||0 || || --- linux-meta-ec2|| 2.6.32.314.15|| 2.6.32.315.16||0 ||0 || |||| || || || || || maverick linux-backports-modules-2.6.35 === Incoming Bugs: Regressions === Incoming Bugs 574 Natty Bugs (up 121) 1252 Maverick Bugs (up 14) 1061 Lucid Bugs (up 8) Current regression
Patch Pilot report 2011-04-04
749755 empcommand - merge from upstream + sponsored upload fixed after cnd's review comments 660483 couchdb - drops obsolete symlink. + Reviewed, uploaded patch. + 1st time contributor, so gave some congrats tips on IRC 741338 lmsensors - use upstart instead of init-script + Packaged patch for lm-sensors-3, verified build, uploaded 668368 samba - Use %U instead of %S in config file. + Upstream thinks it is a non-issue + Requested additional review/clarification; unsub sponsors meanwhile 660089 nullmailer - Drop conflicts with lsb + Needs consensus with upstream first; unsubbed sponsors 698208 lirc - Update sysfs interface + Already included in packaging bzr branch, no more sponsoring work to do + Unsubbed sponsors; unmarked an obsolete patch, for clarification 310354 python-mode - Support python 3.0 + Patch needs to go upstream first; requested this, unsubbed sponsors 533985 bash_completion - disable whitelist when no matches available + Sponsored upload 722079 libgda4 - missing .so file + Already fixed in ubuntu; unsubbed sponsors so Debian task doesn't show in sponsor's list Went through all bugs tagged 'natty' with patches. Bumped a few to sponsors queue, bunch more I unmarked patches as solutions since they weren't valid for one reason or another. Some of those I sponsored (included above). -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
PatchPilot report 2011-04-05
== Patch Pilot 2011-04-05 == https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/util-linux/+bug/712614 - Checked against upstream's coding standards (kernel standards). Noted problems in bug comments - Confirmed smoser's original problems that -- logname is not passed anymore with this patch - unsubscribed ubuntu-sponsors until patch is fixed https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/puppet/+bug/700945 - Reviewed patch, commented on not using quilt (+1 for that since its an SRU we don't want to introduce patch systems) - Uploaded to lucid-proposed, unsubscribed ubuntu-sponsors https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mahara/+bug/676336 - Verified that patches for lucid/maverick map to commits upstream - Commented on patch Origin headers needing more explicit url for commit IDs. - Built and tested built packages in maverick/lucid chroots - Marked Lucid/Maverick Confirmed -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
