[03:27] <tjaalton> wonderful, mesa failed to build on md64
[03:38] <RAOF> Odd? Why?
[03:39] <Sarvatt> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mesa/9.0~git20120903.e1673d20-0ubuntu1/+build/3768452
[03:40] <Sarvatt> thats bad, screwed updates for amd64 people
[03:40] <tjaalton> built just fine on my sbuilder, dammit
[03:41] <tjaalton> and my ppa it seems
[03:44] <Sarvatt> new git checkout probably fixes it, only like 30 radeon/llvm commits since then
[03:45] <Sarvatt> ok most of those are radeonsi we dont enable :)
[03:45] <tjaalton> sure we do
[03:45] <tjaalton> on mesa at least
[03:46] <Sarvatt> oh i was thinking USE_R600_LLVM_COMPILER
[03:46] <ajmitch> so it should be relatively safe at the moment to install from the q-lts-backport ppa, I assume? 
[03:46]  * ajmitch can pick up pieces if things go wrong
[03:47] <Sarvatt> ajmitch: not sure, the guy updating that ppa has been on vacation for 2 weeks, it might not be ok
[03:47] <ajmitch> ah, he's still touring .au?
[03:47] <Sarvatt> lots of changes in quantal since then
[03:48] <Sarvatt> i've been on vacation too and havent kept up
[03:48]  * ajmitch mostly wanted the kernel, but new X on ivy bridge was tempting to try out
[03:48] <ajmitch> I'll wait for a bit before I update that part then
[03:48] <tjaalton> that is kept uptodate
[03:49] <tjaalton> by the kernel team, so go ahead and use the kernel
[03:49] <Sarvatt> tjaalton: it still has mesa 8.0.4, way out of date
[03:49] <tjaalton> just fine for ivy
[03:50] <Sarvatt> 3.6 kernel is the biggest boost for ivy at the moment
[03:50] <ajmitch> is that still likely to land for quantal?
[03:50] <tjaalton> who wants boost, stability is what I'm after :)
[03:51] <Sarvatt> nope 3.5
[03:51] <tjaalton> 3.4-> is what provides that
[03:51]  * ajmitch wants stability, this zareason laptop came with an odd 3.3.6 kernel from a PPA which is far from ideal
[03:52] <Sarvatt> zareason shipped a ppa with a 3.3 kernel?
[03:52] <Sarvatt> yeah 3.5 is way better off
[03:53] <Sarvatt> 3.2 had problems that is taking quite a long time to backport fixes to
[03:53] <ajmitch> yeah I suspect that's why they used what they did, but it has some serious issues, I prefer to recommend they use something tested
[03:56] <tjaalton> oh i'm not on ubuntu-announce, that's why didn't notice beta was released
[03:56] <ajmitch> you're missing out :)
[03:58] <tjaalton> before these were sent to u-d-a
[03:58] <Sarvatt> zareason is strange, they ship what works, theres lots of people paid to make 3.2 work for oems which we're doing for lenovo hp asus and dell but -proposed updates only come once every 3 weeks so it takes awhile, by now 3.2 in -proposed should be ok (aka 3.2.0-31) but 3.5.x aka quantal really is optimal for performance reasons
[03:58] <tjaalton> ah, didn't know we have mesa 9.0 in quantal..
[03:58] <Sarvatt> tjaalton: you uploaded it........
[03:58] <tjaalton> a snapshot, yes
[03:59] <tjaalton> oh well :)
[03:59] <ajmitch> Sarvatt: it is a bit strange, they're a small team & have set up a NZ shop recently, so I met them last weekend
[04:00] <tjaalton> just sent one more patch to backport to 3.2.x, no reply yet though
[04:02] <tjaalton> ben is probably on holiday, no activity since aug 19th
[04:02] <tjaalton> on the stable tree at least
[05:00] <tjaalton> triggered a mesa rebuild on amd64, went fine this time ..
[05:00] <tjaalton> bf ->
[05:01] <RAOF> --parallel issues?
[05:15] <tjaalton> most likely
[05:16] <Sarvatt> cool
[06:16] <RAOF> tjaalton: What was that -intel bug where compiz was hung with a black screen after resume, waiting for a swap that'll never complete?
[06:17] <RAOF> tjaalton: Nevermind; backscroll wins!
[06:17] <tjaalton> :)
[06:17] <tjaalton> 966744
[06:18] <tjaalton> so I've hit other bugs trying to reproduce that :/
[06:18] <tjaalton> +while
[06:23] <RAOF> tjaalton: Were you still reproducing that on Quantal? Jason Warner & Didier seem to be seeing it.
[06:24] <tjaalton> RAOF: yeah, but not that frequently
[06:24] <tjaalton> was it you or ickle who suggested to run compiz with xtrace
[06:25] <RAOF> ickle, I think.
[06:36] <tjaalton> uploaded intel-gpu-tools 1.3, forgot to close the bug on the changelog
[06:39] <RAOF> :)
[06:39] <tjaalton> "oops, no ffe"
[07:14] <tjaalton> RAOF: hey, could you accept gvfs for precise-proposed, fixes bug 819304
[09:14] <dileks> hi. are you planning mesa-9.0 backports in q-lts-backport ppa?
[09:20] <tjaalton> later
[09:20] <tjaalton> the whole stack will be copied
[09:20] <tjaalton> what gets in quantal
[09:22] <dileks> what means exactly later, one of the next betas or very later?
[09:22] <dileks> I can do packaging myself, thats not the problem.
[09:23] <tjaalton> it doesn't need packaging but running scripts
[09:23] <tjaalton> maybe next week once maarten is back from vacation
[09:23] <dileks> scripts sounds good
[09:23] <dileks> where are those "scripts"?
[09:24] <tjaalton> bzr somewhere, i was supposed to review them but.. :P
[09:24] <tjaalton> seem to be working fine
[09:25] <dileks> I was thinking of bumping to xserver-1.13 (final) and take sources for libdrm/intelgfx from quantal
[09:25] <dileks> hmm, v2.20.6 released of intelgfx ddx
[09:26] <tjaalton> can't wait until next week?
[09:27] <dileks> looks like I only need to rebuild quantal package
[09:28] <dileks> no. want to do some drm-intel-next testing.
[09:30] <tjaalton> then run quantal
[09:30] <dileks> maybe
[09:30] <dileks> just read today an article about q beta is released
[09:32] <dileks> anyway, got to go
[09:32] <dileks> thanks for the informations
[09:33] <tjaalton> yw
[10:36] <tjaalton> apw: did you have issues with the mesa in quantal? mind giving the newer snapshot a try if yes?
[10:36] <apw> tjaalton, is it in -proposed?
[10:36] <apw> tjaalton, or has it been in there a few days?
[10:36] <tjaalton> since after the beta, but hang on
[10:38] <apw> the machine which was very unwell has -proposed enabled and now seems ok
[10:38] <tjaalton> it went straight to quantal
[10:38] <tjaalton> but there are people saying that a compiz/unity update fixed it, probably papering over the actual bug
[10:38] <tjaalton> since compiz is using gles now
[10:38] <apw> tjaalton, yes then i think i see the same
[10:39] <apw> as the issue went away around monday
[10:39] <tjaalton> hmm
[10:40] <tjaalton> ok, well good to know that it's better, now to figure out how to find out if the old bug is still there
[10:40] <tjaalton> downgrading compiz isn't easy, I'm told