| [02:10] <crond> Is it normal to have higher CPU temps in Unity than in XFCE? | |
| [02:29] <DarwinSurvivor> crond: yes, especially if you don't have proper video card support on your machine | |
| [02:30] <crond> DarwinSurvivor, I do | |
| [02:31] <crond> I have the same video support in either, bumblebee is working right | |
| [02:31] <crond> just I am on average 5c hotter in Unity | |
| [02:31] <crond> and I was curious as to why | |
| [02:32] <crond> I still havent passed 74c so I'm not worried. It's just weird (thats playing Wow on my nvidia card via bumblebee. Under just the Intel I am at 47-50c) | |
| [02:32] <DarwinSurvivor> oh, if it's only 5c I wouldn't worry about that. Just the additional services unity runs (messaging menu, compiz, etc) will do that | |
| [02:32] <crond> ahh okay | |
| [02:32] <crond> yeah its not a MAJOR difference, just enough to be noted and odd | |
| [02:32] <crond> and its not like I wasn't using compositing in XFCE | |
| [02:32] <crond> I had awn and whatnot running in that | |
| [02:35] <crond> I'm not minding Unity though | |
| [02:35] <crond> I am however skeptical about canonical giving in to Microsoft | |
| [02:35] <crond> on the UEFI thing | |
| [02:37] <DarwinSurvivor> gtg, back in an hour | |
| [02:42] <crond> cya | |
| [02:44] <james_w> giving in to microsoft? | |
| [02:45] <crond> james_w, they're using MS key to sign UEFI firmware instead of pressing for that crap not to be used in general on PCs. | |
| [02:47] <james_w> I work for canonical fwiw | |
| [02:47] <james_w> no involvement with the uefi stuff though | |
| [02:48] <james_w> by pressing for it not to be used, you mean not working on systems that have secure boot enabled with only Microsoft's key in the db? | |
| [02:48] <crond> james_w, I mean if everyone presses for UEFI to not be used in OEMs at all, that'd be better. | |
| [02:48] <james_w> uefi, or secure boot? | |
| [02:49] <crond> just seems... shortsighted to depend on MS in any way to be able to boot Linux | |
| [02:49] <crond> james_w, uh, I guess secure boot yes | |
| [02:49] <crond> my bad | |
| [02:49] <james_w> you think that canonical has the sway with OEMs to stop any of them using secure boot at all? | |
| [02:50] <james_w> when currently that would be asking them not to ship any machines with Windows 8? | |
| [02:50] <crond> james_w, I think that if large amounts of vendors/users/etc stood against it, that requirement would get removed | |
| [02:51] <crond> instead of people just going with it | |
| [02:51] <crond> perhaps I'm assuming too much as far as people caring, however | |
| [02:51] <james_w> I agree that if all OEMs said that it would get removed by Microsoft from their logo requirements, but I don't see them doing that | |
| [02:54] <crond> james_w, well, I'm hoping that HP's move in refusing to make win8 ARM tablets will be followed and maybe undermine microsoft (due to them marketing surface tablets against their OEMs products) | |
| [02:54] <crond> but thats probably wishful thinking | |
| [02:54] <james_w> yeah, ARM is certainly an area where they can't throw their weight around as much | |
| [02:55] <james_w> another part of this it that we'd actually like secure boot if implemented right | |
| [02:55] <james_w> if it improved security while preserving user freedom | |
| [02:56] <crond> well, how does secure boot affect people who, say, use LFS or something to roll their own Linux? Or do you mean, make end users able to turn it off/self-sign keys? | |
| [02:57] <james_w> yeah, I'd support allowing users to turn it off or insert their own keys if they want to do that sort of thing | |
| [02:57] <james_w> the issue is that secure boot has been reduced to a key management problem, and we haven't got good answers for that yet | |
| [02:58] <crond> hmm yeah. How long till devices using it start coming out? I saw the qemu supports it in software now apparently. | |
| [02:58] <james_w> I'm not exactly sure, but within months I expect | |
| [02:58] <james_w> Windows 8 is scheduled for the fall I think? | |
| [02:58] <crond> hm. Well, I'm sticking to BIOS systems until that gets figured. | |
| [02:58] <crond> yeah I think you're right. | |
| [03:04] <james_w> both Microsoft's and Canonical's requirements state that you should be able to disable secure boot and add your own keys IIRC | |
| [03:05] <james_w> so it's mainly a question of how to support the users who won't want to do that | |
| [03:05] <james_w> but I wouldn't wait until someone has cracked key management :-) | |
| [03:05] <james_w> it might take 50 years, it may even be impossible | |
| [03:06] <crond> well hopefully stuff with ship with the ability to disable it, but I'm not holding my breath. Cept maybe OEMs like System 76, PenguinComputing, or Zareason. | |
| [03:06] <james_w> http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/13713.html | |
| [03:07] <james_w> so anything certified ubuntu should be fine | |
| [03:07] <crond> Nice | |
| [03:08] <crond> I'd rather not pay the extra price of ordering from an ubuntu OEM (Unless Dell decides to sell ubuntu notebooks in Canada again), but I will if I have to | |
| [03:09] <james_w> I'm hoping they release project sputnik in Canada, it's a nice bit of kit | |
| [03:09] <crond> Hm so all Ubuntu certified HW has to have Microsoft's key too? That ONLY means that Ubuntu-certified HW can run Windows too, yeah? | |
| [03:09] <james_w> http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/9844.html | |
| [03:09] <james_w> found it | |
| [03:10] <james_w> so Windows specifies that users can disable secure boot | |
| [03:10] <crond> wait signed kernel? | |
| [03:10] <james_w> I'm not sure what all the consequences of it are, but yeah, you can likely boot Windows too | |
| [03:10] <crond> I could compilemy own kernel? | |
| [03:10] <crond> *couldnt | |
| [03:10] <james_w> not without disabling secure boot | |
| [03:10] <james_w> but Ubuntu's current plan is to not sign kernels | |
| [03:11] <crond> hm | |
| [03:11] <crond> okay... :S | |
| [03:11] <james_w> yeah, it's not great | |
| [03:12] <crond> I'm concerned, but I guess we'll see what happens | |
| [03:12] <james_w> but there's not really a viable way to have secure boot without having signing that prevents users building their own stuff | |
| [03:12] <crond> and the point of Linux is, in part, to be ABLE to build your own stuff | |
| [03:12] <james_w> you need a secret not on the user's machine, otherwise any malware could easily bypass secure boot, making it useless | |
| [03:12] <crond> not to mention FreeBSD/*BSD/etc users | |
| [03:13] <james_w> yeah, but I'm not sure the point is to keep everything working exactly the same if you build your own stuff | |
| [03:13] <james_w> I appreciate the desire, but I'm not sure it's feasible, even ignoring the security aspects | |
| [03:13] <james_w> but we'll have to see if the GPL3 leads to a legal challenge in this area | |
| [03:14] <james_w> no-one's sure where it draws the line on user modifiability | |
| [03:14] <james_w> (I'm going to claim that's a word) | |
| [03:14] <crond> I'm very unlikely to buy any hardware with that until its sorted, and I'm going to recommend to the people that ask me about computer purchases that they don't either. | |
| [03:15] <james_w> yeah, unfortunately it's likely to be tricky in a year or so | |
| [03:17] <crond> course, watch this get cracked just like prettymuch everything else due to some sort of implementation flaw/someone messing up with keys/etc | |
| [03:17] <crond> kind of like AACS, etc. | |
| [03:17] <crond> and be a really expensive, ultimately useless, pain in the butt | |
| [03:18] <james_w> http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/12897.html | |
| [03:18] <james_w> yeah, I realise I'm just linking to Matthew, but he's like the world's foremost expert on secure boot | |
| [03:19] <crond> james_w, yeah this is interesting reading. Thanks :) | |
| [03:20] <james_w> np | |
| [03:20] <james_w> he's got a whole series of posts that are worth reading | |
| [03:20] <james_w> and there are a couple of videos of presentations too | |
| [03:22] <crond> So, do you happen to know, what's the best way to get an Ubuntu OEM notebook in Canada? | |
| [03:22] <james_w> I don't know I'm afriad | |
| [03:23] <crond> okay np | |
| [03:23] <james_w> my last one was a windows laptop | |
| [03:23] <james_w> Dell is the best bet unless you are shipping from overseas | |
| [03:23] <james_w> but they aren't pushing much to Canada currently | |
| [03:23] <crond> mine was windows too, and I checked, but I havent actually found ANY Dell's I can buy with Ubuntu | |
| [03:24] <crond> a search pulls up a model or two but if I try and configure them, win7 is the only option | |
| [03:24] <james_w> hmm, that's odd | |
| [03:25] <crond> I currently have an Asus U31SD. Works decently, the only thing that doesn't work is Suspend (though Hibernate works) | |
| [03:35] <james_w> ok, the internet in this hotel is too crap to do any work, so I'm going to turn in | |
| [03:35] <james_w> night all | |
| [03:37] <crond> night! | |
| [14:27] <jlamothe> I've been running into an intermittent bug. Sometimes, when I save a gnucash file, my display scrambles on me, and the only thing I can do is reboot. The only thing that's changed recently is that this file is now stored in an ecryptfs system being synced with Ubuntu One. To whom should I submit this log: http://www.jlamothe.net/stuff/log_snippet.txt ? | |
| [14:42] <jlamothe> Crap... it seems I was right earlier when I said it looks like a failing drive. 71 bad sectors. D: | |
| [16:52] <DarwinSurvivor> jlamothe: run memtest on the machine. LOTS of people that think they have failling HDD's turn out to have failing RAM that corrupts the HDD. | |
| [17:02] <jlamothe> DarwinSurvivor: I'll have to do that when I get home. Thanks for the tip. | |
| [17:02] <jlamothe> Although, I've already purchased a new HDD from newegg. | |
| [17:02] <jlamothe> Worst-case scenario is that I now have 1.5TB of storage instead of 500GB. | |
| [17:03] <jlamothe> Although, I still suspect the drive. It was originally a RAID1 array, made of two identical drives purchased at the same time. Drive 2 failed about a year ago. | |
| [17:07] <jlamothe> Fortunately, I back-up frequently. You only have to lose all you stuff once to learn *that* lesson. | |