[05:42] morning [05:54] mlankhorst: morning! [05:55] amazing work on the lts backports renaming btw, cant believe you got it working [05:55] all the stuff was already in place, I just refined it a little :) [05:57] but thanks :) [06:00] i cant believe you got nouveau working outside for cairo 1.12 too outside of the libdrm-nouveau2 change too, really awesome :) [06:00] and that wasnt english but yeah [06:00] debian needs some more fixes to kernel drm, i have them but untested [10:55] tiling's fun === ara is now known as Guest64238 [17:21] bryceh: awake yet? [17:53] mlankhorst, what's up? [17:57] oh the renamed stack thing. We can't support it because it's impossible to remove properly atm afterwards. [17:59] And the binary drivers will be uninstallable although that would be trivial to fix [17:59] wasn't the plan to offer a script a'la ppa-purge to allow downgrades [18:00] or what do you mean by "impossible to remove afterwards"? [18:00] tjaalton: Because of the Replaces: unrenamed if you install the older version it won't install right. [18:01] use the force [18:02] I'm going to try another version with Conflicts instead of Breaks [18:02] where there's a will there's a way :-) [18:02] or just don't support downgrades [18:02] no, conflicts is wrong [18:03] anyone know if we formally support downgrading from a .2 lts back to the .0? [18:03] no [18:03] also fun will be if you try to upgrade from renamed stack to quantal [18:03] nothing new : [18:03] :) [18:04] wasn't it decided as "unsupported"? [18:04] yeah but if we want to do an announcement we might want to emphasise those things.. [18:06] it's not coming before january.. [18:07] but yeah, of course [18:12] it wouldn't be that hard to allow upgrades though, if the version number would be less than in quantal (-XubuntuX~lbq) and the package replaced the renamed one [18:13] uh [18:14] the version of the renamed package was lower, and the proper quantal package had provides/replaces: renamed.. but it would be fun to script the build of the renamed package from that :) [18:14] so, just don't allow upgrades to non-lts releases.. [18:15] the stack on T will have butt-ugly control files.. [18:16] and then that stack will be the last backported one, so you get to do the above at least once [18:17] tjaalton: I think I'm just going to create a real metapackage by then that defines every possible renamed package from quantal onward.. [18:18] that won't help [18:18] it's using replaces? yeah that totally wont downgrade right, you would have to purge then reinstall the unrenamed packages :( [18:18] Yeah.. [18:19] tjaalton: Why not? [18:19] mlankhorst: the new real packages need to replace the old renamed ones [18:19] new unrenamed packages [18:20] let me stop my head spinning.. [18:20] tjaalton: I know, but I mean if it upgrades to that fake package first I could make those depend on the unrenamed package. [18:21] mlankhorst: it will update the metapackage but leave the old renamed packages installed [18:22] uh, maybe this is too abstract to handle [18:22] in my little brain anyway [18:23] tjaalton: Could we at least add a Conflicts: package >> currentversion to renamed stack? [18:23] or would that break too [18:24] what would that solve? [18:25] so upgrading to unrenamed will remove those renamed packages first.. [18:25] between lts releases [18:26] that's not how dpkg works [18:27] if you need details you can read the policy, the way the pre/postinst scripts are run etc, it's a nice diagram :) [18:27] debian policy that is [18:28] can you add a version to replaces: ? [18:29] yes [18:31] We definitely should add a version to our control files for replaces then, so in future upgrades we could bump version and do a replaces for all the possible renamed versions to upgrade back to next lts. :) [18:34] Fortunately it's automated enough now to simply add it, bump version number, upload it to launchpad and check next day. [18:41] added to which control file, the renamed or unrenamed package? [18:42] renamed [18:43] so 'renamed; Replaces: unrenamed (<< version) [18:43] '? [18:43] yes [18:44] ok, I don't understand the rest of the sentence then :) [18:44] and for r Replaces: unrenamed (<< lts), renamed1 [18:44] and for next lts the package will have: Replaces: all renamed versions [18:49] well, the releases can have real updates too, so versioned replaces need manual thinking [18:50] would be great if you could write these cases in a wiki or so, a lot easier to review than trying to read between the lines here :) [18:51] I'm still not entirely sure yet and experimenting [18:53] doesn't matter, wiki can be edited :) [19:07] fwiw I directed them not to mention X stack in the announce they're prepping. Don't think widespread usage right now is going to buy us anything (except support questions) [19:09] tjaalton, mlankhorst if someone adds the ppa and does just a regular dist-upgrade, it won't actually upgrade the X stack will it? they have to specifically install the metapackage right? [19:11] indeed [19:12] but it might be better to remove anyhow [19:19] no, I think leave it in the ppa. Removing it would sort of be defeating the purpose... === yofel_ is now known as yofel