| tseliot | tjaalton: now that I think about it we'll have to recreate the orig for the nvidia driver since we're going to update the driver to the latest release. I have already filed a SRU for Hardy for the lrm-envy. This is definitely something we want to have in Intrepid ASAP since it also adds "preliminary support for X.Org server 1.5". What do you think? | 10:57 |
|---|---|---|
| tjaalton | tseliot: sure, although 1.5 is not in intrepid yet | 10:58 |
| tjaalton | and it might take a few weeks | 10:58 |
| tseliot | the driver is future-proof ;) | 10:58 |
| tseliot | and we might also take the chance to remove those files which you wanted me to keep | 10:59 |
| tseliot | since compatibility with Debian will break anyway | 10:59 |
| tjaalton | why? | 10:59 |
| tseliot | a different orig tarball | 11:00 |
| tjaalton | if they are not installed, it's harmless to keep them | 11:00 |
| tjaalton | debian will update theirs sooner or later | 11:00 |
| tseliot | and their existence might make things a bit more confusing for any potential contributor | 11:00 |
| tseliot | not that I think that there will be any ;) | 11:01 |
| tjaalton | document it | 11:01 |
| tseliot | shall I write something like "the following files are useless"? | 11:02 |
| tjaalton | README.Ubuntu or something | 11:02 |
| tseliot | ok, I can do it as soon as I'm done with the rest of the package. | 11:04 |
| tseliot | I'm reviewing the diversions | 11:04 |
| tjaalton | ok | 11:08 |
| tseliot | tjaalton: shall I replace the list of the supported cards in the control.in with the new cards or just comment them out and add the new list? | 11:29 |
| tseliot | or maybe I should add it to the changelog | 11:30 |
| tseliot | also, shall I keep revision ubuntu1 instead of ubuntu2? | 11:34 |
| tjaalton | ubuntu1 | 11:41 |
| tseliot | ok, and about the control.in? | 11:41 |
| tjaalton | what do you mean by commenting out? | 11:42 |
| tjaalton | add the new cards to the list perhaps | 11:42 |
| tseliot | you told me not to remove lines but to comment them out (i.e. put a # before a line) | 11:43 |
| tjaalton | what lines are you talking about? | 11:44 |
| tjaalton | unless you comment out the whole package, I don't think it would work in control | 11:45 |
| tseliot | read where it says " The following GPU's are supported:" | 11:45 |
| tseliot | but yes, I can just add the new cards | 11:45 |
| tseliot | to the list | 11:46 |
| tjaalton | so, since nvidia-kernel-source is not needed you can either comment or delete it | 11:47 |
| tseliot | nvidia-kernel-source = DKMS | 11:49 |
| tjaalton | I believe the diff didn't have it | 11:49 |
| tseliot | we still need it | 11:49 |
| tjaalton | but you know better | 11:49 |
| tseliot | I didn't remove it | 11:49 |
| tjaalton | ok, maybe it was the broken diff | 11:49 |
| tseliot | I will give you the full source once I think it's complete | 11:50 |
| tseliot | this might happen today, so that we can test it together | 11:50 |
| tjaalton | ah, it was -ia32 | 11:50 |
| tseliot | right | 11:50 |
| tjaalton | n-g-ia32 | 11:50 |
| tseliot | of course | 11:51 |
| tjaalton | so hmm.. commenting out is better in the sense that then you know what has been "removed" | 11:52 |
| tseliot | aah, without having to read the diff, you mean | 11:53 |
| tjaalton | yes | 11:53 |
| tjaalton | well, merge diff against the debian version | 11:54 |
| tjaalton | diff.gz doesn't show that | 11:54 |
| tjaalton | nice, security updates for the xserver | 15:51 |
| jcristau | for some value of 'nice' :) | 15:56 |
| kees | url? | 15:57 |
| tjaalton | http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xorg/xserver.git;a=shortlog;h=server-1.4-branch | 15:58 |
| tjaalton | kees: ^ | 15:58 |
| jcristau | kees: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2008-June/036026.html | 15:58 |
| tjaalton | oh, that's much better :) | 15:58 |
| tjaalton | right, didn't notice the announce | 15:58 |
| tjaalton | -ment | 15:58 |
| jcristau | kees: it wasn't posted to vendor-sec? | 15:59 |
| kees | jcristau: yeah, found it now -- only 2 days lead time. whee | 16:00 |
| kees | (last time we had like a month, weird) | 16:00 |
| jcristau | kees: it was reported to xorg long ago... | 16:00 |
| jcristau | kees: i guess next time i can cc you when i send mail to team@security.d.o | 16:16 |
| kees | jcristau: security@ubuntu.com please, yes. and bryce, if he's not already on the security.d.o list | 16:18 |
| bryce | kees: the cve patches built fine for intrepid and hardy, shall I go ahead and upload both of those, or do you want to do some testing first? | 19:19 |
| kees | bryce: I'll leave it to you for intrepid, but for hardy (and the others) they need to go through the -security queue: | 19:20 |
| kees | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityUpdateProcedures | 19:20 |
| kees | mostly, if you can create debdiffs, I can start testing. getting reproducers for the problem, or ways to test the affect code paths would be cool too. :) | 19:21 |
| kees | it might be easiest to open a bug for it | 19:21 |
| bryce | yeah no clue on reproducers | 19:21 |
| jcristau | there are some on the upstream bug | 19:22 |
| jcristau | but it's still restricted | 19:22 |
| jcristau | i'll send it to you | 19:23 |
| bryce | kees, hardy debdiff: http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Testing/xorg-server_1.4.1~git20080131-1ubuntu9.2.debdiff | 19:23 |
| jcristau | {kees,bryce}@u.c? | 19:24 |
| bryce | that should work | 19:24 |
| kees | jcristau: security@ubuntu.com for security notices, but yeah | 19:25 |
| kees | jcristau: that way jdstrand gets them too | 19:25 |
| jcristau | ok | 19:25 |
| kees | thx :) | 19:25 |
| bryce | intrepid debdiff just for completeness - http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Testing/xorg-server_1.4.1~git20080131-1ubuntu12.debdiff | 19:25 |
| kees | bryce: why is it ubuntu9.2 for hardy? | 19:26 |
| bryce | ...uploading the intrepid fixes now... | 19:26 |
| bryce | kees, there is a 9.1 already in hardy-proposed | 19:26 |
| bryce | although I just spotted an error in it | 19:26 |
| bryce | feel free to renumber or whatever as appropriate | 19:28 |
| kees | bryce: ah, righto. The debdiff itself needs be applied to ubuntu9 (though 9.2 is the correct version). And the 9.1 needs to be respun to include the security updates and pushed back to -proposed. (i.e. -security updates only every build on top of things -updates, as -proposed packages haven't officially cleared QA) | 19:29 |
| kees | error spotting in which thing? | 19:29 |
| bryce | kees, the patch added in 9.1 for -geode was not actually listed in series (probably my fault) | 19:30 |
| bryce | erf, that sounds messy - would you be willing to sort those out while I do the patch backports? | 19:31 |
| jcristau | kees: sent | 19:34 |
| kees | bryce: sure, I can re-base the hardy debdiff. | 19:38 |
| kees | jcristau: thanks | 19:38 |
| bryce | kees: cool thanks. looks like the patches are applying fairly cleanly except for dapper | 19:41 |
| jcristau | the patches for dapper shouldn't be too different from etch | 19:42 |
| jcristau | and i don't think i had any issues with that, hmm | 19:43 |
| bryce | jcristau: there's just one patch that isn't applying - org-xserver-1.4-cve-2008-2360.diff | 19:45 |
| bryce | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file render/glyph.c.rej | 19:45 |
| jcristau | oh, ok | 19:46 |
| bryce | I'll take a look in a minute | 19:46 |
| jcristau | probably the #include <stdint.h> | 19:46 |
| bryce | kees, gutsy debdiff: http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Testing/xorg-server_1.3.0.0.dfsg-12ubuntu8.4.debdiff | 19:47 |
| bryce | for feisty (only), the debdiff is including a bunch of .gitignore deletion garbage | 19:47 |
| kees | cool | 19:48 |
| bryce | kees: do you care about these .gitignore bits? I'm not exactly certain how to exclude those changes... but they're obviously completely harmless, just messy | 19:55 |
| kees | bryce: while I like cleanliness, I can live with the mess. :) I suspect it's due to .devscript settings for the -I options during the build | 19:58 |
| jcristau | or dpkg-source behaviour change | 19:58 |
| bryce | ok, feisty debdiff: http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Testing/xorg-server_1.2.0-3ubuntu8.4.debdiff | 19:58 |
| bryce | more ~/.devscripts | 19:59 |
| bryce | # debuild | 19:59 |
| bryce | DEBUILD_PRESERVE_ENVVARS="DISPLAY,GNOME_KEYRING_SOCKET,XAUTHORITY" | 19:59 |
| bryce | DEBUILD_DPKG_BUILDPACKAGE_OPTS="-i -I.bzr -I.svn" | 19:59 |
| bryce | is there something there I could/should change to prevent this issue? | 19:59 |
| bryce | e.g. -I.gitignore ? | 19:59 |
| kees | see if removing -I.bzr for that debuild makes it go away. if not, no big deal. (the bug is that the original released builder didn't use -I.bzr I think) | 19:59 |
| kees | oh, .git | 19:59 |
| kees | er | 20:00 |
| kees | sure, give it a shot. :P | 20:00 |
| jcristau | newer dpkg-source filters out .git and .gitignore by default | 20:00 |
| bryce | ok, well I guess let's not worry about it... it's just feisty that's affected | 20:00 |
| tseliot | tjaalton: I've just sent an email with my PPA with the driver to superm1 and CCed you | 20:17 |
| bryce | hmm, dapper's xserver uses a different patch system | 20:20 |
| bryce | kees, ok here's dapper: http://people.ubuntu.com/~bryce/Testing/xorg-server_1.0.2-0ubuntu10.11.debdiff | 20:36 |
| bryce | kees, I think that should be it for the debdiffs. | 20:37 |
| kees | bryce: very cool, thanks. | 20:37 |
| bryce | the broken dapper patch was a pretty trivial conflict, I don't think it'll affect functionality | 20:38 |
| pwnguin | ah, its so hard to remember that the envy guy albert milone uses the screen name tseliot | 21:10 |
| tseliot | pwnguin: yes, it's me ;) | 21:11 |
| bryce | tseliot: so you a poetry fan or is the nick derived from some other source? | 21:14 |
| tseliot | bryce: yes, I like poetry and my first exam at the university was on T.S. Eliot | 21:15 |
| bryce | ah cool | 21:16 |
| tseliot | bryce: so, I received the notification from the spec | 21:16 |
| tseliot | cjwatson should approve it, right? | 21:17 |
| tseliot | let me rephrase it. We need his approval, right? | 21:18 |
| bryce | yes | 21:19 |
| tseliot | ok | 21:19 |
| bryce | to be honest the whole blueprint approval process is a tad fuzzy for me, but that's how I understand it | 21:19 |
| bryce | last time around I don't think my specs got set to Approved, but cj verbally ok'd them so I went ahead and did them. | 21:20 |
| bryce | since colin was in for the discussion on this and seemed cool with it, getting it set to approved may be more of just a formality but he often has useful comments | 21:21 |
| tseliot | great, this makes things a lot clearer | 21:21 |
| tseliot | I'll keep working on it | 21:23 |
| bryce | I'm also not sure if they need to be set to Review or Pending Approval... I'll find out and adjust | 21:23 |
| bryce | cool; I still owe you review comments. it's on my todo list but after a few other things | 21:23 |
| tseliot | ok, I wait for your comments then ;) | 21:24 |
| kees | jcristau: just as a note, in the ProcShmPutImage fix, should the errorValue be totalHeight instead of totalWidth? | 22:32 |
| bryce | tseliot: I've updated the X/OptionsEditor spec a bit with some thoughts based on the mockup. | 22:54 |
| tseliot | bryce: great, I'll have a look at the changes tomorrow since it's 00:03 AM here. Good night | 23:03 |
| bryce | great, 'night | 23:04 |
| jcristau | kees: hrm. probably, yes | 23:50 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!