20110208

Agenda

  • Review ACTION points from previous meeting
    • None
  • Natty Development
  • Ubuntu Server Team Events
  • Mysql 5.5 for Natty (zul)

  • Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)

  • Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb)

  • Weekly Updates & Questions for the Documentation Team (sommer)

  • Weekly Updates & Questions for the Ubuntu Community Team (kim0)

  • Open Discussion
  • Announce next meeting date and time
    • Tuesday, February 15 2011 16:00 UTC

Minutes

Meeting Actions

  • ALL: ISO testing (including as much real hardware as possible) to smooth the way to A3!
  • robbiew to ensure notifications of release candidates (and re-rolls) sent out.
  • zul - Email ubuntu-devel to gather consensus on whether MySQL 5.5 should be included for Natty.

  • hggdh & JamesPage to check sizing for minimal installation for QA purposes.

Natty Development

General discussion about communication prior to release of Alpha, Beta and RC ISO images and with regards to when people should be testing ISO images (aside from day-to-day use) and how visibility of re-rolls are achieve to ensure time is not wasted testing obsolete ISO images.

Everyone should now be testing ISO images as much as possible on both virtual and physical hardware to smooth the way to A3.

  • ALL: ISO testing (including as much real hardware as possible) to smooth the way to A3!

Participation in #ubuntu-release and subscription to http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com for relevant images should help; robbiew agreed to ensure that notifications to release candidates and re-rolls are sent out through other channels to ensure awareness.

  • robbiew to ensure notifications of release candidates (and re-rolls) sent out.

Ubuntu Server Team Events

MySQL 5.5 in Natty (zul)

General consensus that this would be a good thing todo; however needs wider circulation in ubuntu-devel for broader impact assessment.

  • zul - Email ubuntu-devel to gather consensus on whether MySQL 5.5 should be included for Natty.

Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team

Still behind on UEC testing.

Automated ISO testing now running well with concurrent jobs running on new hardware supporting the solution - http://hudson.qa.ubuntu-uk.org/. Minimal installs are exceeding current size objectives.

  • hggdh & JamesPage to check sizing for minimal installation for QA purposes.

Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team

General discussion about bug 708920 and bug 709392.

bug 710319 should now be fixed according to commit logs, but this isssue is still being reported. smb and smoser agreed to take this offline.

Agree on next meeting date and time

Next meeting will be on Tuesday, February 15th at 16:00 UTC in #ubuntu-meeting.

Log

Started logging meeting in #ubuntu-meeting
[10:01:56] <JamesPage> [TOPIC] Review ACTION points from previous meeting
[10:02:08] <JamesPage> So there where no actions from last weeks meeting....
[10:02:15] <SpamapS> \o/
[10:02:16] <Daviey> yuppie
[10:02:23] <JamesPage> [TOPIC] Natty Development
[10:02:31] <JamesPage> Hows Alpha 2?
[10:02:41] <SpamapS> should we be iso testing
[10:02:42] <SpamapS> ?
[10:02:52] <Daviey> not a good story for eucalyptus atm
[10:03:12] <JamesPage> still FTBFS?
[10:03:27] <Daviey> think i solved that
[10:03:37] <Daviey> but ftbfs in archive
[10:03:49] <Daviey> and some dhcpd issues
[10:04:06] <zul> sounds like fun
[10:04:12] <Daviey> :/
[10:04:43] <JamesPage> fixable?
[10:04:43] <Daviey> Regarding ISO testing... has everyone at least try installing A2?
[10:04:56] * robbiew needs to summarize A2 and put up the plan for A3 this week
[10:05:06] <Daviey> JamesPage, yeah.. will be fixed this week..
[10:05:29] <JamesPage> Not yet: the daily ISO testing looks OK at the moment (http://hudson.qa.ubuntu-uk.org/)
[10:05:33] <smoser> i somewhat plan on installing A2 today on netbook.
[10:05:34] * Daviey needs to talk to upstream
[10:06:51] <JamesPage> So back to SpamapS original question - should we be ISO testing or do we need todo that closer to A3?
[10:06:54] <Daviey> Generally A2 hasn't shown any kitten killers for me
[10:07:00] <Daviey> (except euca)
[10:07:01] <SpamapS> virt-manager is quite broken right now in natty.. so that makes iso testing a little more of a pain for me. :-P
[10:07:13] <zul> JamesPage: yes we should
[10:07:17] <RoAkSoAx> SpamapS: TestDrive?
[10:07:18] * SpamapS could do virtualbox I suppose
[10:07:24] <RoAkSoAx> :P
[10:07:44] <SpamapS> RoAkSoAx: I'll look into it
[10:07:58] <Daviey> Those with real hardware available... is pretty useful to use compared to pure virtualised
[10:08:18] <zul> *cough* vmware *cough* ;)
[10:08:26] <Daviey> i've seen some nasty kernel bugs on my desktop install... and waiting for some serverish ones to hurt.
[10:08:29] <JamesPage> Sounds like thats a specific action for this week
[10:08:39] <Daviey> +1
[10:08:41] * SpamapS 's only real hardware available is an old apple G5
[10:09:13] <smoser> you do know that A2 shipped, right ?
[10:09:21] <smoser> its kind of late to worry about dead kittens
[10:09:28] <robbiew> no kidding
[10:09:35] <robbiew> time to bury those and move on
[10:09:49] <JamesPage> [ACTION] ALL: ISO testing (including as much real hardware as possible) to smooth the way to A3!
[10:10:01] <SpamapS> in maverick we were getting hounded to do ISO tests.. this time I've heard nothing about iso testing. Just wondering if and when we should do iso tests. :-P
[10:10:04] <Daviey> yeah.. but we need to start hammering it to find the kittens... not save them :)
[10:10:19] <ttx> SpamapS: I wonder who did the hounding
[10:10:29] <RoAkSoAx> lol
[10:10:32] <robbiew> what does hggdh do?
[10:10:32] <SpamapS> ttx: some uppity frenchman
[10:10:40] <ttx> SpamapS: the worst kind
[10:10:47] <Daviey> ttx, you have been missed
[10:11:14] <JamesPage> Anything else for Natty dev at this point in time?
[10:11:15] <robbiew> seriously...if you are on the server team and you have to be hounded to test your own iso at milestone...that's a bit concerning
[10:11:22] <Daviey> i don't think hggdh has been able to test work loads... just installation.
[10:11:44] <zul> well installations was the only thing that was tested for the longest time
[10:11:46] <hggdh> on UEC? (sorry)
[10:11:46] <ttx> robbiew: +1. Even with a professional hounder, Hounding is no fun
[10:12:00] <Daviey> hggdh, generally.
[10:12:02] <robbiew> right
[10:12:19] <Daviey> hounding != co-ordination
[10:12:29] <hggdh> we are still prepping some automated tests -- based on LTP, and others
[10:12:48] <hggdh> and, on Hudson (or Jenkins) we are running pretty much all of trhe ISO tests
[10:12:57] <RoAkSoAx> hggdh: what about the powernap issue?
[10:13:07] <Daviey> hggdh, maybe not now... but could you and JamesPage give us some deeper insight at some point?
[10:13:15] <SpamapS> robbiew: well the cloud doesn't use iso's ;)
[10:13:22] <hggdh> Daviey: certainly
[10:13:34] <Daviey> rocking
[10:13:39] <hggdh> RoAkSoAx: I am starting to think the issue is not with powernap, but with euca itseld
[10:13:45] <zul> SpamapS: yeah but the cloud tests are pretty extensive compared to the installation/work load tests
[10:13:56] <RoAkSoAx> hggdh: ok ;)
[10:14:24] <hggdh> SpamapS: actually we usually start the cloud (read euca, right now) tests with a preseeded ISO install
[10:14:26] <soren> SpamapS: Yet..
[10:14:28] <robbiew> SpamapS: right, but it uses images...and it's ourproduct
[10:14:54] <robbiew> I'm saying, it should be a high priority the week of the milestone, to test the images we put out...iso or cloud
[10:15:06] <Daviey> soren, you are just trying to create more work for us! :)
[10:15:20] <soren> Daviey: Quite the contrary.
[10:15:46] <soren> Daviey: The biggest problem I had with automated iso testing was lack of resources.
[10:15:51] <soren> Computing resources, that is.
[10:15:57] <Daviey> ack
[10:16:03] <hggdh> double-ack
[10:16:20] <soren> If I could get a cloud to run the ISO for me, hooking up VNC to a screen scraping thing would be relatively easy.
[10:16:22] <SpamapS> Alright.. so the signal to iso test should be... the alpha freezes?
[10:16:45] <ttx> SpamapS: it's actually the candidate generation
[10:16:46] <hggdh> I do not agree
[10:16:56] <hggdh> we should run them daily
[10:17:05] <ttx> SpamapS: otherwise you don't have a page to record results on iso.qa.u.c
[10:17:09] <Daviey> hggdh, i think we are talking manual
[10:17:18] <SpamapS> yes, talking about manual testing
[10:17:29] <Daviey> in my mind.. automated complements manual
[10:17:35] <SpamapS> ttx: right, I don't get any emails when that happens.
[10:17:52] <Daviey> I imagine most people tried the candidate iso before release, right?
[10:17:59] <SpamapS> despite being subscribed to all the iso tests I usually do
[10:18:27] <robbiew> SpamapS: but you get the freeze notice right?
[10:18:38] <SpamapS> robbiew: yes
[10:18:45] <Daviey> SpamapS, that is a good point... the current way of tracking the candidates is via watching -release...and that is a process which is broken
[10:19:00] <robbiew> hmm
[10:19:03] <robbiew> skaet: around?
[10:19:52] * SpamapS gives in and just subscribes to every list on lists.ubuntu.com
[10:19:59] <robbiew> so I can see about getting an email notification sent out when the isos are ready to test
[10:20:06] <Daviey> SpamapS, that isn't enough :)
[10:20:29] <JamesPage> So what do we need in terms of notifications?
[10:20:47] <Daviey> Subject: Candidate posted
[10:21:00] <Daviey> Subject: Re-rolled... because XYZ.
[10:21:02] <smoser> I really dont think its that hard.
[10:21:07] <hggdh> where? which list?
[10:21:10] <smoser> The week of a release, you need to be testing
[10:21:18] <smoser> we need to get through all the tests on iso tracker
[10:21:32] <smoser> you really should not need a reminder for release week
[10:21:35] <Daviey> smoser, last cycle i wasted time testing a stale candidate..
[10:21:39] <robbiew> ack
[10:21:42] <SpamapS> well how do people know they've appeared now?
[10:21:43] <Daviey> this needs better co-ordination.
[10:21:51] <robbiew> #ubuntu-release
[10:21:56] <robbiew> it's a great channel
[10:22:02] <robbiew> I highly recommend it during the release
[10:22:03] <robbiew> lol
[10:22:10] <Daviey> heh
[10:22:25] <SpamapS> smoser: This is the first I've heard of this. The maverick cycle, a little man would pop up in my IRC window and say "test the isos now" ...
[10:22:30] <robbiew> I'll take a todo on getting a notification sent out
[10:22:30] <Daviey> reading scrollback seems to be a less clean process IMO.
[10:22:53] <JamesPage> [ACTION] robbiew to ensure notifications of release candidates (and re-rolls) sent out
[10:23:31] <JamesPage> OK so is the combination of watching #ubuntu-release and some extra notifications going todo the trick?
[10:23:38] <robbiew> it better
[10:23:43] <SpamapS> Apologies for being naive above it. I just want to know when I should start focusing on testing the iso vs. other things.
[10:23:47] <robbiew> we do have schedule
[10:23:59] <robbiew> it's not like the release should creep up on anyone by surprise ;)
[10:24:14] <robbiew> SpamapS understood, and I think you raise a good pointr
[10:24:15] <robbiew> point
[10:24:28] * JamesPage agrees with SpamapS
[10:24:32] <robbiew> the release team should at least fire off a notice when ISOs are good to test
[10:24:33] <zul> you should have it the back of your mind that we are releasing on this date and see what needs to be done
[10:25:00] * kirkland wonders if Ubuntu should have a desktop indicator for that sort of thing ;-)
[10:25:04] <ttx> what we did during maverick is have a "release contact" in the team (was me) whose job it was to remind people to switch to ISO testing (and talked about it in weekly meetings). A bit inefficient, but worked
[10:25:06] <SpamapS> zul: +1 for that.. I have just now added iso testing to my calendar in line with the release calendar.
[10:25:12] <kirkland> perhaps TestDrive could provide one
[10:25:24] <Daviey> kirkland, byobu indicator!
[10:25:29] <kirkland> if you have TestDrive installed, it puts a message in the indicator
[10:25:31] <hggdh> +1
[10:25:41] <RoAkSoAx> yeah we could do that
[10:25:52] <JamesPage> I think we are missing the point of this meeting - surely we should be discussing activity over the next week in the 'Natty development' section?
[10:25:54] <kirkland> A1/A2/A3/B1/RC/GA Candidate Available
[10:26:10] <SpamapS> Hah.. and of course.. the week before Alpha 3 is the ensemble sprint. :P
[10:26:23] <Daviey> ttx, I had an advantage of seeing what was going on by being on the same TZ as you... i think that helped me.
[10:26:42] <SpamapS> JamesPage: true.. I think zul had something he wanted to bring up regarding Natty development.
[10:27:05] <zul> i thought that was the next topic
[10:27:44] <zul> if we are done with natty release stuff
[10:27:46] <JamesPage> zul: as our rep in the release meeting can you highlight any key activities over the next week just in case its slipped someones mind?
[10:28:00] <SpamapS> Indeed.. though before that was "events" ..which seems to have been wiped away.
[10:28:02] <zul> JamesPage: i think i can do that
[10:28:19] <JamesPage> zul: excellent - I'll make is standing agenda
[10:28:25] <JamesPage> OK so moving on.
[10:28:29] <robbiew> kirkland: +1 on the testdrive idea
[10:28:37] <JamesPage> [TOPIC] Ubuntu Server Team Events
[10:29:13] <SpamapS> I added this last week..
[10:29:13] <Daviey> JamesPage and I had a good weekend at foSdem ... report to follow
[10:29:25] <SpamapS> just to highlight when and where Ubuntu Server interested people will be.
[10:29:52] <JamesPage> SpamapS: I'll copy in the forward plan from last weeks agenda - we can just update as and when.
[10:30:25] <ttx> I'll be at UKUUG Spring Conference in Leeds in March, talking OpenStack (and Ubuntu Server)
[10:30:34] <SpamapS> well its ok.. just wanted to mention that Dustin and I will be at SCALE9x Feb 25 .. and Dustin is speaking I think on Feb 26
[10:30:37] <JamesPage> Scale9x at the end of the month - ClintByrum (SpamapS) and DustinKirkland (kirkland) attending
[10:31:05] <kirkland> SpamapS: JamesPage: yup!
[10:31:07] <JamesPage> ttx: I'll add that to the list
[10:31:25] <ttx> JamesPage: cool!
[10:31:41] <JamesPage> Anything else for events?
[10:31:54] <SpamapS> kirkland: unfortunately I have to leave Fri night but I'll be there all day Friday.
[10:32:09] <JamesPage> [TOPIC] Mysql 5.5 for Natty (zul)
[10:32:15] <JamesPage> over to you zul
[10:32:17] <zul> hi yeah...
[10:32:18] <Daviey> :0
[10:32:38] <zul> i wanted to throw out the idea of pushing mysql 5.5 to natty
[10:32:43] <SpamapS> +1 from me
[10:32:45] <zul> as a replacement for mysql 5.1
[10:32:46] <SpamapS> its faster
[10:32:48] <SpamapS> and the GA release
[10:33:11] <SpamapS> and does not introduce any significant incompatible changes w/ 5.1
[10:33:14] <zul> amazon is using it for their images
[10:33:30] <JamesPage> How long has the GA been about?
[10:33:39] <zul> but there might be some changes with libmysqlclient we might have to worry about
[10:33:39] <SpamapS> since early December
[10:33:52] <SpamapS> zul: the license changes seem to have been accidental
[10:34:09] <SpamapS> zul: and actually happened in 5.1
[10:34:09] <JamesPage> any point releases since then?
[10:34:09] <Daviey> it makes sense for natty to have the latest
[10:34:12] <zul> SpamapS: im talking about rebulding things like php open office etc etc
[10:34:46] <SpamapS> JamesPage: no. I know what you're thinking.. in the past mysql's first GA was bad.. but 5.1 and 5.5's first GA's seem to have fixed that problem with wider testing.
[10:34:59] <SpamapS> zul: oh, AFAICT, libmysqlclient did not change ABI or API
[10:35:12] <zul> SpamapS: sure but we are going to have to test it first ;)
[10:35:36] <SpamapS> And IMO its ok to have the client libs coming from 5.1
[10:35:51] <zul> so thoughts?
[10:35:55] * Daviey suggests "do it"
[10:36:10] <Daviey> if there are serious concerns... PPA it and we can sniff test
[10:36:25] <zul> also ill mention that debian will probably be going to 5.5 as well (a feeling)
[10:36:29] <Daviey> post to ubuntu-devel suggesting people test from Desktop apps etc.
[10:36:47] <SpamapS> https://launchpad.net/~clint-fewbar/+archive/fixes has the initial packages
[10:36:48] <zul> Daviey: ack
[10:36:59] <JamesPage> Is this someone we can decide in this meeting or does it need discussion on ubuntu-devel?
[10:37:04] <zul> and they have been reviewed by the debian mysql maintainer
[10:37:26] <zul> i think it needs more discussion in ubuntu-devel because there is alot of packages that need libmysqlclient
[10:37:45] <SpamapS> right now, the mysql-5.5 packages I did don't even build libmysqlclient
[10:38:01] <JamesPage> OK so it feel like the consensus here is to go for it; but it needs broader discussion prior to committing in Natty
[10:38:09] <Daviey> yup.
[10:38:27] <JamesPage> We are only a few weeks off feature freeze so this needs to happen quite quickly
[10:38:39] <JamesPage> zul: you OK for an action to email ubuntu-devel asap?
[10:38:39] <SpamapS> yeah seems useful to just send to ubuntu-devel to get ack/nack's from interested parties
[10:38:46] <zul> JamesPage: yep
[10:39:01] <Daviey> once the version is in... we can ignore feature freeze, as it will be bug fixes :)
[10:39:18] <JamesPage> [ACTION] zul - Email ubuntu-devel to gather consensus on whether MySQL 5.5 should be included for Natty.
[10:39:33] <JamesPage> next....
[10:39:42] <JamesPage> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the QA Team (hggdh)
[10:39:53] <JamesPage> hggdh: all yours
[10:40:31] <hggdh> OK. We are behind on UEC (known, buyt anyway); ISO testing on Hudson seens to be OK now, wioth the two servers I dedicated to it
[10:40:59] <hggdh> and with James' change to run multiple jobs
[10:41:07] <Daviey> hggdh, ahh.. i still need to update my hudson cnode.
[10:41:22] <hggdh> but I felt sort of alone on this testing...
[10:41:34] <JamesPage> hggdh: is that why each test it taking longer to run now?
[10:42:21] <hggdh> JamesPage: probably, contention on I/O, I would say. Also, I am still to hadd a check for a critical error on d-i
[10:42:54] <hggdh> Sunday and Monday we spent 40 min waiting for the timeout to pop on a d-i error on the first 5 min
[10:42:54] <zul> hggdh: we you able to reproduce that samba bug you were telling me about?
[10:43:52] <hggdh> zul: on the Hudson test -- I figured it out, we need to manually logon the first time as an user for the smb userId to be generated
[10:44:06] <zul> hggdh: right
[10:44:15] <hggdh> so _this_ test will have to be changed
[10:44:30] <hggdh> also, I need a position on how large should be the minimal install
[10:44:42] <JamesPage> hggdh: its grown since the last release....
[10:44:59] <hggdh> yes. To what? ;-)
[10:45:08] <Daviey> hggdh, 4 GB sparse?
[10:45:33] <Daviey> heck 100GB sparse? :)
[10:45:34] <hggdh> Daviey: no, the JeOS install (f4 on d-i, minimal Ubuntu system
[10:46:06] <Daviey> oh
[10:46:08] <JamesPage> hggdh: I think the original test was 550MB - I allowed +25MB for the testing overlay and its over that as well at the moment.
[10:46:52] <hggdh> JamesPage: yes. But I remember seeing 500M, not 550M
[10:47:04] <hggdh> (not on the test, in the QA docs)
[10:47:11] <JamesPage> You might be right; lets take this offline and double check
[10:47:18] <hggdh> roj
[10:47:21] <hggdh> and I am done
[10:47:39] <JamesPage> [ACTION] hggdh JamesPage to check sizing for minimal installation for QA purposes
[10:47:55] <JamesPage> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Documentation Team (sommer)
[10:48:06] <JamesPage> sommer: here this week?
[10:48:12] <SpamapS> I emailed sommer..
[10:48:16] <SpamapS> he's super busy with the new job
[10:48:27] <SpamapS> and sent apologies if he wasn't able to make it
[10:48:46] <Daviey> yeah.. i don't think things will change,.... had the same experience a few weeks ago.
[10:48:57] <SpamapS> Promises to work on the server guide again soon... and said he would appreciate help with some of the bugs already reported on it.
[10:49:04] <Daviey> We might need to refine how we are tracking docs
[10:49:27] <Daviey> I've done no docs for natty yet.
[10:49:33] <Daviey> has anyone else?
[10:49:46] <SpamapS> Upstart docs has been a running theme for me.
[10:50:00] <robbiew> yeah...I think we need a hard push for updated docs at UDS
[10:50:03] <SpamapS> But they're not done in any official capacity yet.. I've saved a lot of that work for A3 and beta.
[10:50:04] <robbiew> at least by 12.04LTS
[10:50:27] * robbiew needs to get folks excited about it...if that's even possible :/
[10:50:30] <JamesPage> It's not a key focus for this cycle then?
[10:50:32] <robbiew> yay for docs!
[10:50:34] <robbiew> lol
[10:50:44] <robbiew> well...we should have it every cycle
[10:50:54] <robbiew> but given the LTS is where we see most of our use
[10:50:55] <RoAkSoAx> I'm gonna write Clustering docs post alpha3
[10:50:59] <hallyn> hm, i'd assumed they were 'taken care of', so i'll go ahead and take a look
[10:51:04] <SpamapS> sommer's been taking such good care of us we haven't had to do much.
[10:51:14] <hallyn> @sommer++ for babying us
[10:51:18] <robbiew> right...but we should be making sure it's correct
[10:51:25] <robbiew> as we change things...and he may not catch it
[10:51:39] <Daviey> yup
[10:51:47] * JamesPage realises that he's missed the kernel team out this week.
[10:52:00] <Daviey> poor kernel team
[10:52:01] * smb was already thinking he missed it
[10:52:20] <JamesPage> so moving on from docs for this week.
[10:52:23] <JamesPage> [TOPIC
[10:52:31] <JamesPage> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Kernel Team (smb)
[10:52:41] <JamesPage> smb: over to you
[10:52:46] <smb> Just wanted to bring up two things I am on
[10:52:48] <smb> * Continue to work through the SUSE Xen patchset and backport changes that
[10:52:48] <smb> came through upstream stable but missed Xen clones of files (Lucid-ec2).
[10:52:48] <smb> Done in the hope to get a fix for bug 708920 in the process. For the future
[10:52:48] <smb> I need to think of how to prevent that skew in the first place.
[10:52:48] <smb> * For bug 709414: check testcase with Natty client to see whether the result
[10:52:49] <smb> is still the same. Both Lucid and Natty do unstable writes followed
[10:52:51] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 708920 in linux-ec2 (Ubuntu) "Strange 'fork/clone' blocking behavior under high cpu usage on EC2" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/708920
[10:52:51] <smb> immediately with a commit request which syncs. So it seems to be sync but
[10:52:53] <ubottu> Bug 709414 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/709414 is private
[10:52:53] <smb> not very efficiently. Opened an upstream bug to see what those guys think.
[10:53:03] <smb> Otherwise open to questions.
[10:53:33] <robbiew> smb: so I thought it worked in Natty, but not in Lucid (regarding the NFS bug)
[10:53:58] <smb> robbiew, Well to me it looked identical
[10:54:24] <robbiew> smb: right, surbhi said the same thing, but I believe in actual testing, the behaviour is different....but I could be wrong
[10:54:24] <smb> At least when I looked at the output doing test with a lucid and natty client
[10:54:31] <robbiew> ah
[10:54:45] <robbiew> I'll yield to you for sure ;)
[10:54:57] <smoser> smb, mostly out of curiousity, i'd like to have you read bug 710319
[10:54:58] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 710319 in apache2 (Ubuntu) "CPU usage is incorrect on server-status page" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/710319
[10:55:00] <smb> I think Surbhi said something about a difference probably in the code but I am more practical there
[10:55:24] <smoser> it seems that an upstream bug that *should* be fixed (per commits reported to fix it) still exists in lucid.
[10:55:27] <smb> smoser, What release is that for
[10:55:34] <robbiew> for reference the public bug for 709414 is bug 709392
[10:55:37] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 709392 in nfs-utils (Ubuntu Lucid) "NFS client does not submit "nfs_file_sync" write requests when the file open call includes O_SYNC." [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/709392
[10:55:46] <smb> I think we may still need a second half for Maverik
[10:56:08] <smoser> i have not reproduced on natty but i'm not certain the test case is guaranteed reproduce.
[10:56:31] <smoser> there is an easy test case there though, that fails for me on lucid, does not fail on natty.
[10:56:42] <smoser> (but they're 2 different systems i'm testing on)
[10:57:08] <SpamapS> 3 minutes
[10:57:22] <smb> smoser, Actually Lucid may also yield wrong load output
[10:57:36] <smb> That would be fixed in Natty
[10:57:44] <JamesPage> SpamapS: noted
[10:58:25] <JamesPage> Anything else for smb?
[10:58:42] <smb> smoser, I think I have done either test kernels or at least prepared them for lucid but lacking a reporducer/reporter did not continue
[10:59:26] <JamesPage> [TOPIC] Weekly Updates & Questions for the Ubuntu Community Team (kim0)
[10:59:37] <smoser> we can talk offline, smb, but for me, on lucid, the test case pointed to fails. ie, time can go backwards for utime.
[10:59:44] <JamesPage> kim0: anything from the community team this week?
[10:59:46] <smoser> (and others verify that)
[10:59:59] <smb> smoser, Yep lets take this offline
[11:00:11] * Daviey wonders if kim0 has internet access this week
[11:00:21] <ttx> Question for community or team: on https://launchpad.net/sprints/uds-o UDS is marked as starting Monday afternoon and ending Friday noon. Is that the plan ?
[11:00:44] <Daviey> ttx, i suspect it's a TZ mistake
[11:00:56] <bjf> JamesPage, your running late
[11:01:06] <ttx> Daviey: it's more than a TZ mistake. It makes it 4 days total
[11:01:12] <Daviey> jcastro, ?
[11:01:30] <Daviey> ttx, 00:00 vs 12:00?
[11:01:42] <JamesPage> [TOPIC] Announce next meeting date and time
[11:01:46] <JamesPage> Tuesday, February 15 2011 16:00 UTC
[11:01:50] <jcastro> timezone problem, I'll fix it, sorry guys
[11:02:02] <Daviey> ttx, if jcastro doesn't respond.. i'll find out and get back to you.
[11:02:06] <ttx> jcastro: cool, thanks
[11:02:10] <maco> Daviey: he just did
[11:02:12] <JamesPage> bjf: all yours....
[11:02:13] <Daviey> heh
[11:02:19] <JamesPage> #endmeeting
Meeting ended.

MeetingLogs/Server/20110208 (last edited 2011-02-09 12:32:24 by host81-153-227-175)