2009/01/20/#ubuntu-kernel.txt

[03:54] <clerum> is there anything futher I could do to help get https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/254622
[03:54] <ubot3> Malone bug 254622 in linux "TCP uses wrong MTU/MSS size for IPv6" [Medium,Triaged] 
[03:54] <clerum> moved along?
[03:54] <clerum> is there more information I could provide?
[03:56] <clerum> unfortunatly I have no clue where to start in fixing this...and java is my only language so I doubt I would be much help
[09:42] <apw> dtchen, hi there ... question about a quirk you are suggesting on a bug, about?
[12:45] <JesperHansen> This seems like the right channel to ask this
[12:45] <JesperHansen> Was wondering if there's an updated version of https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CustomRestrictedModules#Modify%20debian/rules somewhere. abi_version doesn't exist in the enlisted file debian/rules
[12:47] <JesperHansen> Compared against linux-restricted-modules-2.6.27
[13:43] <Kano> hi rtg ,did you read my mail about rt2860/2870?
[13:45] <Kano> rtg: the drivers are working, no patching needed, you can copy em over from 2.6.29
[13:46] <Kano> just dont forget to add the firmware as well
[13:46] <rtg> Kano: I'' get to it later today. I just got back from 3 days off and have a bunch of emails.
[13:46] <Kano> you will see the 2 firmware links for it in the mail
[14:24] <apw> sconklin, hi, i did another change for the apport stuff, to send the stress log as well as the flag file.  this is up for review now
[14:25] <sconklin> apw: I was just coming to those in my email for the morning
[14:26] <apw> matt's emails yes?
[14:30] <apw> sconklin, anyhow, just wanted you to know i had taken care of the strees.log part, so i think once all these changes hit the relevant packages we should be 'good'
[14:34] <JesperHansen> Was wondering if there's an updated version of https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CustomRestrictedModules#Modify%20debian/rules somewhere. abi_version doesn't exist in the enlisted file debian/rules compared howto against linux-restricted-modules-2.6.27
[14:36] <rtg> JesperHansen: Its in debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk
[14:37] <JesperHansen> rtg: thanks
[14:38] <JesperHansen> rtg: and abi_version has been renamed? Cant see its presence in there either
[14:39] <rtg> JesperHansen: Its called abinum. The LRM package structure changed quite a lot from Hardy to Intrepid.
[14:40] <JesperHansen> rtg: ye, I figured it was some old stuff I was trying to decipher 
[14:42] <sconklin> apw: ack'd your patches for suspend/resume
[14:43] <apw> ahh thanks
[14:49] <sconklin> apw: git question - during a rebase of one branch onto another, which contains dozens of commits delta - I see a number of them apply, a few apply with three-way merge, it stops for me to manually merge a couple, and then at one point after I manually merge one and try to "git rebase --continue", I get the following from git:
[14:49] <sconklin> Applying Remove lpiacompat
[14:49] <sconklin> No changes - did you forget to use 'git add'?
[14:50] <sconklin> and git is in a state where it thinks there is more to rebase yet can't seem to apply any changes
[14:50] <apw> that means that the result of the merge was that there was no actual changes
[14:50] <sconklin> oh well, then a rebase --skip should do it, right?
[14:51] <apw> so either you forgot to git add the files which were changed, or the result was an unchanged files completely
[14:51] <apw> at that point a git diff HEAD should be null, and then a git rebase --skip is appropriate
[14:52] <sconklin> no, I definitely did an add, and status shows no uncommitted changes, so I'll just skip it, thanks
[14:52] <apw> that sounds appropriate
[14:52] <apw> i seem to remember something similar actually when i was doing my quick and dirty run at uds
[14:53] <sconklin> I had forgotten that it's possibly to end up with no actual changes, ~especially~ when manually editing in a failed merge.
[14:53] <apw> particularly for a patch called 'remove something'
[14:54] <sconklin> haha
[14:54] <apw> if it wasn't there, then removing it is already done, and the merge is null
[14:55] <sconklin> right.
[14:55] <apw> i actually think i had the same merge in the lpia tree i did
=== smb_tp_ is now known as smb_tp
=== asac_ is now known as asac
[17:07] <smb_tp> kirkland, while we are waiting for the meeting. Do you happen to know issues with vol_id in the encrypted installation of Jaunty?
[17:08] <kirkland> smb_tp: hmm, you should probably ask cjwatson about that
[17:08] <kirkland> smb_tp: there were some blockers breaking lvm+crypt 
[17:08] <smb_tp> kirkland, Well ok. When I think of encryption, you come to my mind. ;-)
[17:09] <kirkland> smb_tp: :-)  woohoo
[17:09] <smb_tp> :)
[17:11] <smb_tp> kirkland, Generally, if I got a partition that contains the encrypted volume. Do you know whether it should get a special partition ID?
[17:12] <kirkland> smb_tp: not necessarily ... i'm using encrypted LVM on my Intrepid laptop now, and my mount is just "/dev/mapper/vg0-lv0 on / type ext3 (rw,relatime,errors=remount-ro)"
[17:12] <kirkland> smb_tp: which is what I named it when I installed
[17:14] <smb_tp> kirkland, Ok, what I have here is vol_id on the initramfs being more stupid than the one in the rescue system (so it seems)
[17:14] <kirkland> smb_tp: hmm
[17:15] <smb_tp> The one from the rescue system shows the uid of it while the one from initramfs is confused because it thinks it might be swap or ecryptfs_LUKE
[22:26] <HDAPS> Hi, just wondering if there is anyway to confirm that Disk Head Parking is enabled? "hdaps-gl" shows only a static image (kernel 2.6.28 on 9.04)
[23:49] <Kano> rtg: you did not add the rtxxx drivers yet? what else do you need? i tested it already
[23:49] <rtg> Kano: I'm just now looking at it.
[23:50] <Kano> ok