[00:33] <Adran> Not sure if this channel is for -social, but that guy seems to be jumping channels and being racist. :) Just figured I'd warn you guys if you didn't see elsewhere yet.
[02:58] <howie_> Γεια σε όλους, πώς είστε;
[03:14] <rww> !gr
[03:14] <rww> !el
[03:16] <rww> pretty sure that transliteration isn't great either
[03:16] <rww> let's go with no on that one
[03:19] <rww> yeah, the greeklish in !gr is fine
[04:03] <jpds> 04:02:18 [Freenode] [<EMAIL_ADDRESS>] show gratis (solo hooy) --> <LINK REMOVED>
[04:39] <IdleOne> that zsw is zack
[13:13] <howie_> !ops
[13:13] <howie_> !staff
[13:13] <ikonia> oh dear
[13:13] <ikonia> best move along
[13:13] <howie_> wait
[13:13] <howie_> one question
[13:13] <ikonia> no
[13:14] <howie_> كيف يمكنني أن أصبح المرجع أوبونتو
[13:14] <howie_> כיצד אני הופך לאופ אובונטו
[13:14] <howie_> noooo waaaa
[13:15] <ikonia> it's tedious
[13:15] <ikonia> do it somewhere else,
[13:15] <howie_> its hebrew
[13:15] <IdleOne> hfsplus, please give it a rest.
[13:15] <howie_> or greek
[13:15] <howie_> fine
[13:15] <knome> hmm.
[13:15] <knome> same pattern with zack_ karen_
[13:15] <knome> (name + underscore)
[13:16] <IdleOne> similar, but no.
[13:16] <knome> yeah, just pointing out
[13:29] <ikonia> bot ignoring now
[13:30] <DJones> Removed & muted in +1
[13:32] <ikonia> maybe worth removing him from #ubuntu-irc
[13:32] <ikonia> and motu
[13:33] <ikonia> just ranting his stuff in both
[14:31] <k1l_> mybe worth removing him from network
[14:31] <Pici> that k1l_ guy has an underscore too!
[14:32] <k1l_> oh well. should i start to be annoying now, too? ;)
[14:37] <IdleOne> start?
[14:37] <IdleOne> :)
[15:08] <phunyguy> lol ^
[16:02] <genii> Meh, netsplits
[16:26] <ROP_> yes i belive efly of ubutu forums banned me with out good resion and banned me from irc of ubuntu forums the chat over email is here http://pastebin.com/W3grzsrt
[16:27] <ikonia> ROP_: how can we, the ubuntu-irc team help you ?
[16:28] <ROP_> i would like you to speck to elfy of ubuntu forums and sort this out it is unfair and unjust
[16:28] <ikonia> ok, so talk to elfy,
[16:28] <ikonia> this isn't really something the IRC team needs to do
[16:28] <ROP_> yes please and could you unblock me on the ubuntu forums chat
[16:29] <ikonia> we have no control over the forums.
[16:29] <ROP_> is there anythink you can relly do in this situation
[16:29] <ikonia> we have no control over the forums.
[16:29] <bazhang> use askubuntu.com
[16:29] <ikonia> do you mean the #ubuntuforums IRC channel ?
[16:29] <ROP_> yes
[16:29] <ikonia> as I can see you ranting in there and making threats against elfy
[16:30] <ROP_> i never made a thret to him he was wrong and i disclosed the infomation publicly
[16:31] <ikonia> 15:19 < ROP_> You may rembemer me as Rappelz_On_Linux but thats not the point you coucil are rubbish and im make the info public to name a frame them EFLY IM LOOKING AT YOU
[16:32] <ikonia> you are saying you are going to name and frame a member of the ubuntu community
[16:32] <ikonia> and you then "demand satisfaction"
[16:32] <ikonia> after you'd been warned this was not the place for your ranting
[16:32] <ikonia> are you trying to get your forums account unbanned or the #ubuntuforums channel unbanned ?
[16:32] <ikonia> what is your goal here ?
[16:32] <ROP_> i sopose my anger got the better of me im sorry. both of them
[16:33] <ROP_> i want to be unbanned in both
[16:34] <ROP_> i got angry as i felt no one was paying any attention and what he did was unfair and unjust as discribed in http://pastebin.com/W3grzsrt
[16:36] <ROP_> by satifaction i mean to prove im right and that elfy should of did what was right first and unblock me but insted i got pushed around piller to post
[16:36] <ikonia> I can appreciate the frustration
[16:36] <ikonia> I'd suggest trying to resolve this with the forums team
[16:36] <ikonia> and once your account is unlocked, come back here to talk about your #ubuntuforum channel access
[16:36] <ROP_> thay wont take any of my emails
[16:36] <ikonia> but the root of your problem is the forums account and your attitude towards members of the team
[16:36] <ikonia> so I suggest resolving that
[16:37] <ROP_> my attitude came because they keep igoning me and not listen do you know how that felt being igonared.
[16:38] <ikonia> that doesn't really exuse.
[16:39] <ROP_> i belive they should apoligise first as they posted my piller to post
[16:39] <ROP_> i am not normal agrisive as shown by my account on winehq
[16:40] <ROP_> i normaly a kind persion wanting to help others
[16:41] <IdleOne> ROP_: best we can do is direct you to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and try to resolve the ban with them
[16:41] <ROP_> ive done that
[16:41] <IdleOne> nothing else we can do.
[16:41] <ROP_> ok thanks anyway
[16:41] <IdleOne> welcome, have a nice day.
[16:44] <ikonia> idiot, so as soon as he left this channel he joins #ubuntu and starts asking for the council to contact him
[16:44] <k1l_> well, that escalated quickly
[16:45] <k1l_> he seemed quite reasenable while he left in here without drama
 Am I existing in this world?
[16:58] <Pici> I think he wants to know if anyone can read his text?
[16:59] <bazhang> he's just stated the date, and asked if anyone uses LaTEx
[16:59] <bazhang> twice
[17:00] <Pici> because someone else asked for the output of `date`, I don't think siddhartha knew they weren't asking them.
[17:38] <genii> What the hell is .lb ... libya? liberia?
[17:38] <genii> Ah, Lebabnon
[17:38] <Pici> genii: lebanon
[17:38] <Pici> ya
[17:38] <bazhang> 60% of a kg?
[17:39] <Pici> :(
[17:39] <Pici> boo
[17:39] <bazhang> sowwy!
[17:39] <genii> bazhang: <insert groaning sound here>
[17:39] <bazhang> -pile on detected-
[18:48] <ROP> ok i send a email apolagising to the fourm coucil anythink else i should do to resolve this issue
[18:49] <hggdh> ROP: wait for the council to respond. There is nothing we can do here
[18:49] <ROP> cool thank you
[19:02] <genii> For some reason it occurred to me "Is there a user named just 'eg' ?"  ... because I sometimes give an example by going:  eg: Do this to the whatchamacallit
[19:11] <hggdh> genii: the correct (being pedantic, of course) is e.g., so -- still a purist -- eg is not "for example"
[19:12] <hggdh> but, of course, there might be an user 'eg' or 'e.g.'. I guess
[19:12] <genii> hggdh: < takes notes for future usage >
[19:14] <hggdh> there was an online text from an university about that, somewhere
[19:15] <hggdh> yeah. google is a saint: http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html#errors
[19:19] <hggdh> actaully, this one would be better: http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/index.html
[19:20] <genii> Heh
[20:28] <Pici> rww: I'm aware
[20:28] <rww> okies
[21:14] <k1l> wow, such Pici, much fast
[21:27] <IdleOne> ask debian
[21:55] <ikonia> not again
[21:56] <ROP> ive had no responce from ubuntu forum council are there other methord of geting elfy to unban my account
[21:56] <ikonia> no
[21:56] <ikonia> please stop pestering
[21:56] <k1l> ROP: be patient
[21:56] <knome> ROP, not much time has passed, i would advise you to wait patiently
[21:56] <ROP> ok
[21:57] <ikonia> I will mail the ubuntu forum council and suggest they leave you banned for pestering people if this continues
[21:57] <k1l> ROP: that is not a commercial support hotline. that are volunteers which offer their spare time to handle that


[09:30] <rmg51> Morning
[11:51] <icey> ahoy
[12:02] <teddy-dbear> Morning peoples, critters and everything else


[00:31] <ad-530> hiho
[02:51] <SiNiESTrO> hello guys
[02:51] <SiNiESTrO> is there any launchpad admin here?
[02:53] <SiNiESTrO> Launchpad rejects my debian package
[02:54] <SiNiESTrO> in my PPA
[02:54] <SiNiESTrO> I deleted the previous version and reuploaded the same version without success
[02:55] <SiNiESTrO> "File fritzing_0.3.19b.tar.gz already exists in Fritzing, but uploaded version has different contents."
[02:57] <wgrant> SiNiESTrO: The identity of the file is remembered forever.
[02:57] <wgrant> You need to change the version.
[02:57] <wgrant> But why are you creating a native package?
[02:58] <SiNiESTrO> wgrant: Can I delete my PPA and create it again with the same name?
[02:58] <wgrant> No.
[02:58] <wgrant> But you can fix this by not creating a native package.
[02:58] <SiNiESTrO> but i understand that it is a native package...
[02:59] <SiNiESTrO> my debian code will be part of the main repository of the project
[02:59] <wgrant> It's almost alaways a mistake.
[02:59] <wgrant> Even if the debian/ directory is in the main repository (which is generally regarded as a bad idea), it still shouldn't be a native package.
[03:00] <wgrant> Because the distribution may need to change things without making a new upstream release.
[03:00] <wgrant> Native packaging is for when a package exists solely for the package.
[03:00] <wgrant> Er.
[03:00] <wgrant> Rather when a *project* exists solely for the packaging, in a single distribution.
[03:01] <wgrant> If you think you want a native package, you very probably don't understand the purpose.
[03:01] <SiNiESTrO> if the distribution needs change things without making a new upstream release, the package will converts in a non-native package, I think..
[03:01] <wgrant> You can't just convert it to non-native.
[03:01] <wgrant> You need an upstream tarball for that.
[03:01] <wgrant> So you should make it non-native in the first place.
[03:03] <SiNiESTrO> uhm...
[03:04] <wgrant> The mere fact that you tried to upload the same version twice suggests that it shouldn't be native.
[03:04] <wgrant> Since you changed the packaging without changing the upstream version number.
[03:05] <SiNiESTrO> so... where can i place my debian code if it can't to be together with the project of upstream code in Launchpad?
[03:05] <wgrant> For my main project, I have a separate branch of trunk with debian/ in it.
[03:06] <wgrant> When I want to push out a release of the package, I produce an orig.tar.gz from trunk, merge trunk into the debian-packaging branch, add a new changelog entry, then build the source package.
[03:09] <wgrant> It means I can keep a nice distinction between the upstream stuff and the distribution stuff.
[03:10] <wgrant> And have sane version numbers.
[03:11] <SiNiESTrO> I don't know why we can't place the debian code with the upstream code if we can create our own branches to make a new upstream release.
[03:12] <SiNiESTrO> I think that everything can be together
[03:12] <wgrant> Upstream packaging is often broken, because upstream is an upstream developer, and not normally a distribution developer.
[03:12] <wgrant> So it's handy for distributions to be able to insert their own packaging, without having to reverse the brokenness of the upstream packaging.
[03:13] <wgrant> But even if you do choose to keep the packaging in trunk, that's still no rationale for creating a native package.
[03:13] <wgrant> Having packaging in trunk is a reasonable decision that you can make.
[03:13] <wgrant> Creating a native package is simple incorrect.
[03:13] <wgrant> Ahem. simply.
[03:15] <SiNiESTrO> ok, i understand...
[03:19] <SiNiESTrO> do I need necessarily a tarball?
[03:19] <wgrant> Do you have another distribution method?
[03:20] <SiNiESTrO> lintian complains that i'm trying to create a native package even i set non-native versions of package
[03:20] <wgrant> You need to create a tarball of an upstream release.
[03:20] <wgrant> And name if $PACKAGE_$VERSION.orig.tar.gz
[03:20] <SiNiESTrO> ok
[03:21] <SiNiESTrO> Is there a wat to automate that?
[03:21] <SiNiESTrO> I mean...
[03:21] <SiNiESTrO> automate the creation of new tarballs if there is a new upstream release
[03:22] <wgrant> Upstream should be publishing tarballs for their releases.
[03:22] <wgrant> Are they not?
[03:24] <SiNiESTrO> yes, but the tarballs has not a $PACKAGE_$VERSION.orig.tar.gz name
[03:25] <wgrant> Right, they'd normally be $PACKAGE-$VERSION.tar.gz.
[03:25] <SiNiESTrO> and I mean to automate wget's and rename's within dpkg-buildpackage
[03:25] <wgrant> But a simple rename or symlink fixes that.
[03:25] <wgrant> You could use 'uscan' to help with that.
[03:26] <wgrant> But the workflow combining that with bzr branches is probably not optimal.
[03:26] <wgrant> I normally rename it manually.
[03:27] <SiNiESTrO> ok, I seen uuscan but I was not sure of its usefulnes.
[03:28] <wgrant> In the watch file you normally specify an upstream URL and a URL pattern to look for. It will identify the latest tarball and its version, grab the tarball, and rename it appropriately.
[03:28] <wgrant> All from just running 'uscan'.
[03:31] <SiNiESTrO> great
[03:31] <SiNiESTrO> thanks for your help wgrant
[03:32] <wgrant> np
[03:33] <SiNiESTrO> erh... a last question, how should I name my branch in Launchpad?
[03:33] <SiNiESTrO> there is any conventions to create branchs for debian packages?
[03:34] <SiNiESTrO> *branches
[03:37] <SiNiESTrO> I think that ~ehbello/fritzing/debpackage is correct...
[11:20] <bartbes> as some of you may remember I used to have a problem with lp not importing my hg repo, since we switched to bitbucket this problem disappeared, however, I now get a KeyError, is there a way for me to tell what is wrong?
[12:45] <jml> bartbes, can you provide more information about the error?
[14:05] <bartbes> jml: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/50983132/love-devs-love-main.log
[14:06] <jml> bartbes, that looks like a bug in bzr-hg. I would recommend filing a bug at https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/bzr-hg
[14:06] <bartbes> that's the second time hg imports fail..
[14:06] <bartbes> I hate bzr-hg..
[17:01]  * abogani2 waves
[17:01] <abogani2> My PPA upload is stuck on the last bit...
[17:02] <abogani2> Anyone know what is the problem? Perhaphs because it is a big package (~85MB).
[17:02] <abogani2> Or there are other reasons?
[18:47] <lfaraone> I'm a member of ~motu, and I'm trying to upload to https://edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/maverick/memtest86+/maverick , but i don't seem to have the permissions. Shouldn't this branch be uploadable by MOTUs?
[18:48] <lfaraone> oops, it's in main.
[19:07] <Muscovy> What's the difference between a team and a project?
[19:07] <Muscovy> They seem to do the same thing.
[19:07] <tsimpson> what do you mean?
[19:08] <tsimpson> teams are groups of people, projects are things
[20:02] <SeySayux> Hi, I tried to upload a few packages to my PPA. dput showed no errors. So why doesn't launchpad show that there are packages in my repo? https://launchpad.net/~seysayux/+archive/libsylph (PS I think it's strange that it didn't ask me for a password while uploading)
[20:04] <geser> SeySayux: did you got a mail from LP that you upload got accepted or rejected?
[20:05] <SeySayux> geser: nope, no mail
[20:06] <geser> SeySayux: did you use the same for signing of the package that you added your LP profile?
[20:06] <geser> s/same/same gpg key/
[20:06] <SeySayux> geser: I didn't sign my package at all. Could that be a problem?
[20:06] <lifeless> yes
[20:07] <lifeless> it has to be signed
[20:07] <lifeless> and LP only sends mail to the key that signed the package [to avoid spamming folk]
[20:08] <SeySayux> okay, I seem to have a key on LaunchPad... However, i don't think I've got the private key anymore, and you probably can't recover it without brute forcing... Can I just use another key, and do I have to sign the CoC again?
[20:12] <geser> yes, brute force is the only option; yes, you can use an other key
[20:17] <SeySayux> Okay, I got my new key to launchpad...  But dput now starts complaining my package is unsigned! wtf?
[20:37] <SeySayux> Okay, it seems to work now, will check if it works, thanks guys
[21:03] <SeySayux> Hmm, my project failed to build on launchpad, while it works for me... What could be the problem?
[21:03] <SeySayux> Relevant part of the log: http://pastebin.com/vBbLeXnP
[21:08] <SeySayux> oh, 64 bits right... Hmm, I'll check this later... Strange...


[06:07] <srinuprasath> possible to port ubuntu 9.10 to the ARM926-arm v5 ?.....
[06:08] <Martyn> Not really
[06:08] <Martyn> you would have to recompile all the ports
[06:08] <Martyn> not exactly an easy task
[06:09] <Martyn> you may be better off using debian (although support for v5 will likely be dropped in the not too distant future)
[06:37] <lilstevie> wow there have been a lot of people asking that latelt
[06:37] <lilstevie> lately*
[06:37] <lilstevie> wonder where all these new armv5 devices have come from
[06:43] <Martyn> not new .. just Marvell
[06:44] <Martyn> they are stuck at v5 with the PJ5 and PJ6 architecture
[07:04] <ethics> hi all
[07:04] <ethics> can ubuntu be ported in arm9
[07:05] <Martyn> no
[07:05] <Martyn> well not a 'flat no'
[07:05] <Martyn> but a 'not without a hell of a lot of work'
[07:05] <Martyn> since ubuntu (current) has been optimized to work with arm v7
[07:05] <Martyn> so Cortex A8, Cortex A9, that sort of thing
[07:05] <Martyn> you can go back and just use debian, however
[07:06] <ethics> what work should be done to port ubuntu to arm9
[07:07] <ethics> i have an application that works only with ubuntu 10.04. it works well with x86, now i want to port it in arm 9, is it possible
[07:33] <ethics27> hi
[07:33] <Martyn> ethics : You'd have to recompile all the ports repository
[07:33] <Martyn> ethics: And many packages in 10.04/10.10/11.04 have been specifically tweaked to compile using ARM v7(a) and use thumb2 to compress the code
[07:34] <ethics> ok
[07:35] <ethics> how to recompile all the ports, sorry if it is silly
[07:41] <infinity> You almost certainly don't want to, to be honest.
[07:42] <infinity> Not unless you have a massive install base of ARMv5 hardware that you intend to support.
[07:42] <infinity> Cause rebuilding the entire archive "for fun" is decidedly not actually fun.
[07:44] <infinity> Wait, are we being trolled?
[07:44] <infinity> lilstevie: I checked scrollback, it's not a suddenly popular question at all, it's come from 4 different nicks all in the same subnet. :P
[07:53] <Martyn> Ah, well, there you go
[07:53] <Martyn> ethics, well played.
[08:50] <lilstevie> infinity: ah, someone is just not happy with the answer they are getting
[12:17] <Spider-Pork> Hi. Is there a way to get sound working (input and output) on pandaboard with 11.04 headless omap4 version?
[12:27] <srinuprasath> How to convert ubuntu 9.10 Instruction set version 7 to version 5 (ARM926)
[12:33] <fairuz> ubuntu instruction set?
[12:33] <fairuz> I think you mean ARMv7's instruction set?
[12:36] <srinuprasath> not like that , We need to convert ubuntu 9.10 ARM version 7 to 5
[12:44] <Spider-Pork> i get a loop error message from console
[12:44] <Spider-Pork> [  730.415527] omapdss DISPC error: SYNC_LOST_DIGIT, disabling TV
[12:44] <Spider-Pork> like while(1)
[13:10] <srinuprasath> How to convert ubuntu 9.10 Instruction set version 7 to version 5 (ARM926)
[13:31] <lilstevie> srinuprasath, ethics what ever name you are going for this time, there is no point in even trying
[13:32] <jeremiah1> c
[13:34] <lilstevie> jeremiah1: ?
[13:35] <jeremiah1> :)
[13:46] <srinuprasath> why ?
[13:47] <lilstevie> we have been over this
[15:35] <lilstevie> ogra_: I solved that fb issue I was having
[15:42] <Spider-Pork> is there a way to get arecord working on pandaboard and ubuntu headless 11.04?
[15:43] <Spider-Pork> I use arecord -Dplughw:0,1 recordtest00.wav . It records without errors but the sound is mute
[15:44] <Spider-Pork> i enabled with amixer cset the AMIC_UL PDM Switch
[15:44] <Spider-Pork> and moved MUX_UL11 to Mic0
[15:44] <Spider-Pork> MUX_UL10 too
[15:47] <ogra_> did you read the release notes ?
[15:47] <ogra_> there is a link to an audio bug ... in there it is explained how to get UCM set up for recording
[15:49] <Spider-Pork> ogra_: this link? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/alsa-lib/+bug/746023
[15:49] <ubot2> Ubuntu bug 746023 in alsa-utils "No sound on omap4" [High,In progress]
[15:50] <ogra_> yes
[15:50] <Spider-Pork> thank you ogra_
[15:51] <lilstevie> ogra_: it was some stupid bootloader thing, I was trying to avoid upgrading bootloaders cause it breaks my commandline param setter
[15:51] <ogra_> ah
[15:52] <lilstevie> updated the bootloader, and it works perfectly
[15:56] <Spider-Pork> ogra_: i applyed the command line workaround
[15:56] <Spider-Pork> but arecord still return no voice samples
[16:03] <Spider-Pork> ah lol i'ma donkey
[16:04] <Spider-Pork> This gets audio out working for me. Audio in is still not functional
[16:04] <Spider-Pork> nice


[00:25] <tsimonq2> Cas: You should probably email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>with what you need, those are the dedicated sysadmins that can also help.
[11:54] <cjwatson> tsimonq2: please don't give that incorrect advice again
[12:10] <cjwatson> Cas: sorry for the delay, responded in the ticket - let's keep it there, we'll try to keep delays shorter for this in future
[17:03] <nacc> for the git importer, I presumably need to have some sort of ssh auth configured for the importer itself to run independent of my user running. Is there precedence for this sort of thing? I would like to start doing test runs of the importer running automatically for a set of packages relevant to the server team.
[17:06] <cjwatson> You'd want a separate bot user.
[17:06] <nacc> cjwatson: ah sure, and then give them a key, add them to the appropriate team, etc.
[17:07] <nacc> cjwatson: do i have to request that user be created? or can I create a second user?
[17:09] <cjwatson> if it's going to be a devops thing, you should create it yourself; if you intend it ultimately to be an IS-maintained service, you should ask IS to create it and pass credentials to you
[17:09] <nacc> a fair question :)
[17:09] <nacc> rbasak: --^
[18:16] <rbasak> nacc: a question for jgrimm I think. We could always change the bot user though, if the only thing it's doing is uploading git repos?
[19:05] <nacc> rbasak: ack
[19:40] <nacc> cjwatson: if I setup a test user to do this, do i have to setup pgp keys (to sign the code of conduct) before I can add it to the appropriate team? Not getting an option to request being added as that user, and not able to search for that user as the admin of the team
[19:42] <nacc> cjwatson: nm! maybe was just a delay while the user got created, i was able to add it now


[20:33] <tumbleweed> LocutusOfBorg: I was wrong re bug 1006784, we should have that patch
[20:33] <tumbleweed> debian bug 1006784
[20:34] <tumbleweed> doko: ^ that would fix llvm-toolchain-*
[20:34] <LocutusOfBorg> why
[20:34] <LocutusOfBorg> we already fixed llvm-toolchain-*
[20:35] <tumbleweed> I missed that it was taking the autconf prefix into account
[20:35] <tumbleweed> therefore it would work with /usr/local or /usr, as appropriate
[20:35] <LocutusOfBorg> https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-llvm-team/llvm-toolchain/-/commit/4dbb8ad2aac32e6bd3f9f1456c10ba15aee782d7
[20:35] <tumbleweed> (unlike pybind11)
[20:35] <tumbleweed> yeah, I saw that patch
[20:35] <LocutusOfBorg> yes but it needs some changes
[20:35] <LocutusOfBorg> to be adapted with debian build system and custom build system
[20:36] <LocutusOfBorg> otherwise even custom built packages will go in /usr
[20:36] <LocutusOfBorg> feel free to do a better patch :)
[20:36] <tumbleweed> doesn't it DTRT if --prefix=/usr/local ?
[20:41] <LocutusOfBorg> I don't know sorry4
[20:41] <tumbleweed> I'l lcheck
[20:55] <LocutusOfBorg> well I think I fixed the testsuite tumbleweed
[20:56] <LocutusOfBorg> I found the test log in autopkgtests artifacts
[20:57] <LocutusOfBorg> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/RXkGCrPTZQ/
[20:57] <LocutusOfBorg> tumbleweed, if you update with a proper patch, please drop that patch
[20:58] <LocutusOfBorg> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/590331755/automake-1.16_1%3A1.16.5-1.1ubuntu2_1%3A1.16.5-1.1ubuntu3.diff.gz
[23:04] <tumbleweed> LocutusOfBorg: that test would pass against the python3.10 changes I proposed


[00:06] <Eickmeyer> !pro
[00:06] <Eickmeyer> ope
[00:06] <Eickmeyer> !ubuntu-pro
[00:06] <Eickmeyer> ok, I don't know the factoid.
[00:06] <Eickmeyer> It's part of Ubuntu Pro.
[00:07] <Eickmeyer> !ubuntupro
[00:10] <sarnold> hallyn: I think this will show you what's been installed from universe: apt list '?installed?section(^universe/)'
[00:21] <hallyn> hm, but if i'm on 20.04 that shouldn't apply, right?  standard lts should apply?
[00:21] <hallyn> guess i'll read those links, thanks :)
[00:21] <hallyn> i see, universe.
[00:24] <sarnold> hallyn: we support universe now! :)
[00:25] <hallyn> neat :)
[00:26] <hallyn> ok, got it - thanks Eickmeyer  and sarnold
[00:26] <sarnold> yeah :) all the little one-offs that we'd been asked to do over the years sort of added up to a "hey maybe we should just make this an offering and pool the work", etc
[14:26] <rbasak> ssh-keygen defaults to "-t rsa". Is that still the right thing to do?
[14:31] <sarnold> I've wondered that time and time again
[14:32] <sarnold> afaik it's not the wrong thing to do; I sort of expect upstream folks will change defaults if they think there's a Good Reason to do so (though I'll be honest I don't know that for sure, hopefully it's not generating 512 bit rsa by default? :)
[14:32] <rbasak> I wonder if we should separate recommended practice from what is default, since there are both legacy and "don't mismatch from upstream" reasons not to change the default.
[14:32] <rbasak> What should our recommendation be for new SSH key generation?
[14:48] <sdeziel> upstream defaults to RSA 3072 bits with the latest version. Personally, I always go with `-t ed25519`