[00:48] raevol, you'd need to specifically install it; nothing in the ppa has a direct depend on it so it won't get pulled in automatically [00:49] bryceh_: even though the note on the package says not to specifically install it? [00:54] raevol, I'm fairly sure, but sarvatt could tell us for certain [00:56] The package description is copied from the main archive one which, indeed, you don't want to install explicitly. [00:57] But in edgers you do, because we don't upload a new linux-meta that would pull it in. [00:57] the edgers docs could stand some freshening [03:50] tjaalton, I've pushed the xorg changes to migrate failsafex and the apport hook; would appreciate your review, I had to fight with git a bit to get it in === yofel_ is now known as yofel [07:05] bryceh_: the failsafex-extraction -branch? yeah new branches need force to push them to origin [07:27] hum no, I think the other branch was mistakenly pushed, and the ubuntu branch already has the changes? [07:28] looks like there are some changes in the extraction-branch that need to be merged with ubuntu [07:29] em, pulled to ubuntu [07:43] bryceh_: so the versioning at least is messed up :) [07:43] natty has 1:7.6+4ubuntu5, while the current git has u4 [07:44] and natty didn't get u4 at all [07:45] and sru's should use X.N [07:45] and be in their own branch, IMO, but that hasn't been discussed [07:45] that's the only way we'll be able to keep sanity when doing point-release updates [07:50] bryceh_: also, I think we should use name the patches as '.diff', so git will complain if you haven't added it [07:51] re: libxi missing a patch from git [07:51] and xorg-server upload not pushed :) [07:51] to git [09:37] bryceh_: sorry, now I saw the natty upload, and it has 4ubuntu3.1 which is correct [09:38] and indeed there is no xorg upload to oneiric yet, so ubuntu4 is the right version for it [09:38] just got confused about the other branch [09:39] bryceh_: so I'll just merge the failsafe-branch and delete it from origin, i believe you pushed it by mistake [11:25] what is a good tool to monitor/debug X window messages in a running session, seeing which window/app sent what and when [12:22] janimo: can't think of one, but iirc there was something similar that I accidentally bumped into recently.. [12:22] if only i could remember the name [12:44] tjaalton, I saw xmsgtrace but it is old and not packaged so I suspected there must be something better [12:49] janimo: well, if it does the job then use it :) [13:21] tjaalton, did not try it yet, hence my inquiry for one that can be apt-get installed first [17:58] bryceh_, thanks for uploading the xorg-server with the fix to oneiric [17:58] for natty, would you be able to upload an sru to proposed for me? [17:59] do you want me to generate the package, or is that simple enough for you to do? [17:59] should just be a changelog edit from 2:1.10.1-1ubuntu2 to 2:1.10.1-1ubuntu1.1 and oneiric to natty-proposed right? [18:10] yep, and preferably in another branch [18:11] *in a branch of its own [18:13] tjaalton, ahh yes, I'll make a new branch [18:13] note that the current branch doesn't have the commit closing the version [18:14] which isn't an issue in this case though [18:14] and, I have another patch to push there [18:14] for an sru [18:14] tjaalton, the current branch has been released [18:14] just fyi [18:15] released yes [18:16] wasn't sure if you knew that [18:16] oh wait, maybe I'm trusting debian-x@ commit logs too much [18:16] tjaalton, bryceh_: I just pushed a new branch ubuntu-natty [18:16] nope, the ubuntu branch is still UNRELEASED [19:31] why does natty have a 2 year old version of ia32-libs? [19:31] It doesn't. [19:32] it just has a silly version number [19:32] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ia32-libs/20090808ubuntu13 <-- Less than a month old. [19:33] it is not 20090808 at the present time, and it hasn't been for almost 2 years [19:33] and it's not likely to be 2009 again any time soon [19:34] debian packages that depend on 20101012 are uninstallable [19:47] bjsnider, the package itself is from 2009 but the contents have been updated with newer packages. So like jcristau says it's just a silly version number, not an indication of internal ancientness [19:55] bryceh_, i understand, but by not syncing the version number with debian, the debian packages built around the newest version there fail to install because of dependency issues [19:55] so don't install debian packages on ubuntu [19:55] it's hopefully going away this cycle [19:56] bryceh_: did you get my msgs from earlier today? you forgot to git push xorg-server [19:57] tjaalton, no missed that [19:58] tjaalton, there's no changes though, only a changelog bump [19:59] bryceh_: right, just wanted to let you know :) [19:59] i have pending patches [19:59] to push [19:59] pushed [19:59] thanks [19:59] well, patch === seb128_ is now known as seb128 [20:02] tjaalton, the package in question doesn't exist in ubuntu [20:03] bjsnider: i meant ia32-libs gets removed iff multiarch is finalized by 11.10 [20:04] tjaalton, i didn't even know multiarch was on the table for oneiric. [20:04] natty already has some of it completed [20:08] bryceh_: also, did you mean to push the ubuntu-failsafe-extraction -branch to alioth? [20:08] tjaalton, is that a problem? [20:08] tjaalton, it's no longer needed if you want to remove it [20:08] bryceh_: no, just wondering since there only is a few lines diff [20:09] the ubuntu proper is missing the removal of po-failsafe and dh_installinit failsafe-x [20:10] but that's all [20:10] tjaalton, if you were just wondering if yesterday I was finding git frustrating, well the answer would be an affirmative [20:11] well merging changes to the changelog surely will make you feel miserable :) [20:11] i bet no vcs would be different there [20:12] hmm, po-failsafe is not in my local copy [20:12] of the ubuntu-branch? [20:12] yeah [20:12] hang on, I'll pastebin the diff [20:13] well, the most frustrating bit was deleting debian/apport/source_xorg.py [20:13] http://paste.ubuntu.com/609677/ [20:14] maybe I'm reading the diff wrong :P [20:14] grah, yeah [20:14] damnit [20:14] so, no worries, I'll just purge the extraction-branch [20:15] (dammit is spelt without an n; go english consistency) [20:15] ok, so no other changes needed in the branch? [20:16] if it looks ok, should I go ahead and push it, or should I wait until xdiagnose is in main? [20:17] maybe I'll check it out properly tomorrow, this kinda held me back so I did other things [20:25] well, not maybe, but definitely :) [21:28] tjaalton, also review 7eda07c4dea6e6f2ae6e6892bf6f77af0834f231 on -intel [21:28] bryceh_: sure thing