[00:15] superm1: hmm, I wonder how it worked for them in the first place. the 0.25 mythweb package has never worked for me since installing vanilla Mythbuntu 11.04 [00:27] dekarl: yeah i dunno. i mean it looks like it should all be correct now [00:27] maybe everyone with the problems manually made changes to symlink into /var/www/html? [00:28] is that a default directory used for apache perhaps? [00:30] I'd love to have most of the issues fixed by 0.25-final but you can make an omelette without breaking eggs. [00:30] s/can/can't/ [06:11] yeah well this is why you do it before 0.25 is stable. people can't complain as loudly when stuff breaks along the way :) [06:59] morning, I'm updating to the latest nightly now and will see if I can just remove/reinstall or have to fix something myself [07:01] as in 20120216 build right? [07:15] hmm, a bit [07:16] some packages are still 20120215... mythtv-common, mythtv-transcode-util, mythtv-backend, mythtv-frontend, but others are 20120216 already [07:17] which means I can't install mythweb which requires 20120216 of mythtv-common, ohh the joy of transactional consistency in software repositories :D [07:24] the build log hints at our fixes having broken something so it failed http://paste.ubuntu.com/844055/ [07:24] [paste.ubuntu.com] Ubuntu Pastebin [07:29] superm1: seems like three "rm" without " || true" in debian/rules [07:29] dekarl: oh you're on amd64 [07:29] yeah it failed because arch all only happens on i386 [07:29] the fix is either || true or rm -rf (doesn't fail on non-exist file) [07:30] then its already fixed? (got rm -rf in the checkout but not in the log from 5 hours ago [07:31] it is fixed if you do a build yourself yeah [07:31] but it won't be fixed until next autobuild otherwise [07:31] ahh, then it has to wait at least 36 hours :( [07:33] i can try to kick off another build manually, but it has a tendency to be dependent upon the git hash incrementing [07:33] so it might not work [07:39] no worries, it has to wait due to me working and other appointments... nothing to do with the build or so [07:42] much more important, should not forget to wear a dispensable tie for work, due to Old Maids' Day :) === krups_v2 is now known as krups [09:17] Hi. I've just tried using the 11.04 mythbuntu livecd. I was given with the menu option to try/install. After selecting the `try' option, I'm now presented with an error: "Unable to load a failsafe session". Is there any way to rectify this? [09:23] -1s/11.04/11.10/ [15:46] Eclipse: sounds like you might have a graphics card that isn't working in standard or failsafe modes [15:46] is it a fairly new graphics card? [18:04] the 0.25 on ppa don't compile for amd64 [18:37] FabriceMG_: fixed in packaging, just waiting for next autobuild [18:41] tgm4883: could you try to push another autobuild manually? [18:55] thx superm1 [18:57] my slave is down ( 2 days ) and my wife factor increases ! :) [18:58] FabriceMG_: yeah it sounds like more people were already using 0.25 than any of us thought with how many are up in arms with the breakage the last few days :) === FabriceMG_ is now known as FabriceMG === kmcorbett_ is now known as kmcorbett === kmcorbett_ is now known as kmcorbett === kmcorbett_ is now known as kmcorbett [20:05] amejia: you there? [20:22] amejia: http://irc.mythtv.org/ircLog/channel/4/2012-02-16 you might want to read through the short discussion libav/ffmpeg. [20:22] [irc.mythtv.org] Beirdobot, irc.freenode.net :: #mythtv [21:01] superm1, building now [21:02] thx [21:03] superm1, would it be beneficial to add a way to just do a single version (eg. don't try to build 0.24 if we only want 0.25 built)? [21:03] tgm4883: i think we added that recently didn't we? [21:03] I haven't looked at the script, but I thought it built the latest version of the fixes branch anyway [21:03] and just didn't push it to LP [21:04] if we have that, I don't know how to do it [21:05] tgm4883: it's the FORCED_REBUILD functionality [21:05] eg FORCED_REBUILD=fixes/0.25 [21:05] you just set that environment variable before calling the build process [21:06] ah [21:06] i wonder if we should start including the packaging revno in the version string though [21:06] that would guarantee we could always do it [21:06] the GIT rev? [21:06] bzr rev [21:06] of packaging branch [21:06] ah [21:23] superm1: That was it. I appreciate your help. [21:33] Eclipse: cool, guess it's good you had an older one sitting around? :) [21:50] I did indeed.