[09:25] tjaalton: I have completed the DKMS part for the nvidia driver (for our new package) [09:25] I'm uploading the source [09:25] to my webspace [09:29] tseliot: did you use my debdiff as a base? [09:31] tjaalton: yes, of course [09:31] cool [09:31] I'm working with you, not against you ;) [09:32] just to make sure ;) [09:32] I'm reuploading the original too, just to be sure [09:33] could you make a debdiff against my version? [09:33] sure [09:33] or any (unified) diff [09:34] your debdiff was nvidia-split.debdiff, right? [09:34] yes [09:43] tjaalton: here's the debdiff: http://www.albertomilone.com/ubuntu/newlrm/nvidia-dkms.debdiff [09:44] Here are the files: http://www.albertomilone.com/ubuntu/newlrm/nvidia-graphics-drivers_169.12.orig.tar.gz [09:45] http://www.albertomilone.com/ubuntu/newlrm/nvidia-graphics-drivers_169.12-4ubuntu2.diff.gz [09:45] http://www.albertomilone.com/ubuntu/newlrm/nvidia-graphics-drivers_169.12-4ubuntu2.dsc [09:45] http://www.albertomilone.com/ubuntu/newlrm/nvidia-graphics-drivers_169.12-4ubuntu2_source.changes [09:48] why have you removed files that doesn't matter being there (debian.binary)? it only makes the diff large [09:51] *don't [09:54] seems like the diff'ed target was unclean, since it had nvidia-kernel/ [09:54] ok, let me do it again [09:55] but there were a bunch of files you've removed by hand. it should be enough to comment stuff out from rules [09:55] makes it a lot easier to merge in the future [09:55] ok [09:56] see, I'm saving your time ;) [09:57] it looks like I did a debclean before doing the debdiff [09:57] can you get the source from my website? [09:58] hmm don't bump the version since no version has been uploaded [09:58] but yes, I'll get it [09:59] tjaalton: doing a debdiff with the same version is not possible ;) [09:59] diff -Naur is fine too [09:59] next time I'll just do a diff [10:00] umm, did you change the tarball? [10:01] at least the size differs, so it's not built with the tarball from debian [10:01] tjaalton: honestly, I don't remember the reason why I did it. I'm working on a lot of things and my memory sucks [10:02] tjaalton: I think I have just regenerated the orig, the code is the same [10:03] you can't touch the tarball :/ [10:03] i.e. Debian's + yours [10:05] I can't extract the package [10:05] I'll reupload the diff done with the original orig file [10:05] because the tarball is not the same as in debian [10:05] cool [10:06] try now. If it doesn't work I'll download the orig from debian again [10:07] the links to the files are the same in my webspace [10:08] yep, worked this time [10:08] ok, great [10:10] yeah, diff is much better [10:11] I had to recreate the orig for the lrm-envy, maybe this confused me a bit, I don't know... ;) [10:13] you modified the copyright? [10:13] the ftp url [10:13] in which file? [10:13] debian/copyright [10:14] no, I guess not [10:14] why should I have done such a thing? [10:14] -ftp://download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86_64/169.12/NVIDIA-Linux-x86_64-169.12-pkg2.run [10:14] +ftp://download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86/169.12/NVIDIA-Linux-x86-169.12-pkg0.run [10:14] you tell me :) [10:14] the same change (pkg2->pkg0) is in several other files [10:15] pkg2 is for 64bit while pkg0 is for 32bit [10:15] maybe that's generated [10:15] furthermore that file is generated from the .in [10:15] right, so no problem there [10:16] actually, lrm had pkg1 & pkg2.. wonder what's the difference between pkg0 & pkg1 [10:17] pkg0 doesn't contain the pre-built modules [10:17] for SUSE, Redhat, etc. [10:17] therefore it's smaller [10:17] ok, so it was a "bug" in lrm [10:18] yes, it wasted our bandwidth [10:20] pkg0 9.7MB, pkg1 16.8MB :-) [10:20] yep [10:21] you removed n-k-s.NEWS? although it's useless, it shouldn't matter being there and making the diff smaller [10:22] I guess I did it. You can put it back [10:23] ok, so I'll merge the rest, and then change the epoch etc. Then testing on hardy [10:24] the driver won't be loaded in hardy though. Maybe remove the lrm first [10:25] I know it won't be, but it should work there [10:31] does lrm-common conflict with the new package? [10:31] functionally [10:32] it should [10:32] and we should get rid of lrm-common anyway [10:32] it's not a problem with the new lrm that'll get in intrepid [10:32] probably won't exist there [10:33] but of course it will be a problem if we decide to backport the driver to hardy [10:34] nope [10:34] won't happen [10:35] which one won't happen? The problem or the backport? [10:35] backport [10:35] ok, then [10:36] and users will get the updated drivers through envyng therefore no backport will be needed ;) [10:37] right, I won't take the risk of updating lrm [10:38] ok, then === jcristau_ is now known as jcristau === jcristau_ is now known as jcristau [15:28] tseliot, tjaalton haven't talked to you for a bit, so i wanted to see where you were at w/ dkms support on the nvidia packages? [15:36] superm1: this morning I gave tjaalton the part about dkms. However we have yet to work on the control file and on the diversions [15:36] so likely this stuff won't be ready for intrepid alpha 1 :( [15:43] superm1: do you need the nvidia driver? [15:54] tseliot, i was going to do some initial testing on intrepid for some next generation laptops once the alpha came out [15:54] and some of them contain nvidia, so this seemed appropriate to test at the same time [16:00] superm1: ok, I'll see what I can do to speed up this process. What's the deadline for the 1st alpha of Intrepid? [16:18] tseliot: you can continue working on the version you gave me (including my comments). I didn't have time to merge it with my tree today, but maybe I can do some testing tomorrow [16:19] tjaalton: ok ;) [18:37] it should be possible to sync libx11 now [20:27] in what ubuntu package does the /usr/lib/dri/i965_dri.so file ship? [20:29] libgl1-mesa-dri [20:30] packages.ubuntu.com would have told you that i think [20:30] dpkg -S foo will tell, or dlocate [20:30] phew, my vdr box decided to overheat right in the middle of an upgrade [20:30] excellent thanks... give a man a fish, heh ;) [20:31] no keyboard/monitor.. the kernel booted fine though [20:35] gotta love the robustness of dpkg/apt.. [20:36] heya [20:37] hi [20:38] I added a notes field to http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Xorg/versions_current.html [20:39] it can be edited at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/PackageNotes [20:39] yep, I saw that, it's useful [20:40] libx11 could be synced, as jcristau pointed out [20:41] * bryce nods [20:41] I'll go ahead and put a request in for it; I was wondering about that [20:41] and, blech.. v4l needs an epoch to be able to sync it [20:42] oh? [20:42] should be the last one [20:42] sigh [20:44] yeah, it was there from the first release [20:45] which is a bit silly