[01:27] <fo0bar> if there is a package in universe which has a Ubuntu-specific patch which has been rolled up into the upstream debian version, is there anything that needs to happen manually?  or will the debian import figure this out?
[01:28] <fo0bar> specifically, the digitemp package.  I am now the debian maintainer for it, and a new upload is on its way to sid
[04:56] <ScottK> fo0bar: Something needs to happen.  It needs a sync request.  See syncpackage in ubuntu-dev-tools.
[05:27] <fo0bar> ScottK: ahh right, thank you
[13:53] <elky> freenode services will be upgraded soon, if you're around and have ops here, please op up incase a troll swarm hits.
[17:39] <RoboTux> paultag: welcome
[17:39] <RoboTux> Greetings MOTU people
[17:40] <RoboTux> I come to you because as the maintainer of tcc in Debian, I feel concerned about its state in Ubuntu
[17:41] <RoboTux> In particular, I see that Oneiric uses 0.9.25-10 which fails to build on armel
[17:41] <RoboTux> The current version in Debian (as well as any 0.9.26~foo IIRW) builds on armel
[17:42] <RoboTux> It also builds on armhf but it will generate armel code so I don't think it's interesting to build it on armhf
[17:42] <jtaylor_> I think no tcc on armel is acceptable for a short support term release
[17:42] <RoboTux> Hence I was thinking a stable upgrade of tcc might be worthwhile
[17:42] <jtaylor_> but if you have a patch, an sru can be done
[17:42] <paultag> RoboTux: hi :)
[17:43] <RoboTux> jtaylor_: oh, I thought Oneiric was a LTS
[17:43] <RoboTux> I must confuse with Precise
[17:43] <jtaylor_> precise is the lts which appears to ahve tcc on arm
[17:43] <RoboTux> Indeed
[17:43] <RoboTux> Ok then, sorry for the noise
[17:43] <paultag> RoboTux: an update for oneiric is still a good idea
[17:44] <paultag> it's still supported
[17:44] <jtaylor_> but its no regression
[17:44] <jtaylor_> earlier releases never had it on arm
[17:44] <RoboTux> paultag: I don't know if it's that worthwhile
[17:44] <paultag> there's LP: #823716 - safe to close/ignore?
[17:44] <RoboTux> It would if armhf was supported but as you know, it's not fully the case yet
[17:44] <paultag> jtaylor_: ^
[17:45] <RoboTux> paultag: I'm so sorry for disturbing you for nothing
[17:45] <paultag> RoboTux: it's quite alright, I'm happy to help.
[17:46] <RoboTux> By the way, it seems the fix for the kfreebsd problem is pending \o/
[17:46] <jtaylor_> paultag: it should be marked fix released, if someone prepares an sru I can nominate it
[17:46] <jtaylor_> but I agree with RoboTux that its probably not worth the effort
[17:46] <RoboTux> jtaylor_: I don't think there will be an sru
[17:47] <RoboTux> I tried to fix it by backporting patches in Debian but never succeeded
[17:47] <RoboTux> It seems several patches are needed, I don't know which ones and they are non trivial to backport
[17:47] <paultag> jtaylor_: I'm fine with closing it fixed release
[17:47] <RoboTux> the source tree was completely reorganized since 0.9.25
[17:47] <jtaylor_> then no update the risk of regression outweights the benefit
[17:47] <RoboTux> Definitely
[17:47] <paultag> yep.
[17:47] <paultag> alright, thanks jtaylor_, I'll close that out.
[17:48] <RoboTux> Thanks jtaylor_ and paultag
[17:48] <RoboTux> paultag: I don't know how many beers I owe you now :]
[17:48] <paultag> RoboTux: closed :)
[17:49] <RoboTux> Maybe it'll be cheaper to bring you some strong chinese alcohol the day we meet
[17:49] <RoboTux> Great
[17:49] <paultag> :)
[17:51] <RoboTux> See ya
[17:55] <siretart> micahg: I've now managed to testbuild the branch, and the result looks OK to me
[17:56] <siretart> micahg: I'm now having dinner, but unless I hear from you, I'm going to upload libav-extra afterwards