[03:38] <micahg> infinity: is there a reason why molybdenum is no longer lpia?
[03:54] <infinity> micahg: It's pretending to be PPC for a short while to fool the queues.
[03:55] <infinity> micahg: Or, rather, was.  It's served its purpose.
[03:55] <micahg> ah, right, mozilla stuff
[08:17] <diwic> Hi! I'm trying to get an SRU through for PulseAudio in time for the 12.04.2 release (where we need it for hwe issues mainly). However, two of the six bugs seem difficult to verify due to problems with finding the right hardware.
[08:18] <diwic> Any advice?
[10:31] <tseliot> cjwatson: do you know if bcmwl-kernel-source is on the cd? All binary drivers need to be updated to support the lts-quantal headers, this is why I'm asking
[10:32] <cjwatson> yes
[10:34] <tseliot> cjwatson: oh, then I guess I'll have to fix it before the .2 release
[10:34] <cjwatson> (you can look at the .list and .manifest files - it's on the precise amd64 dvd and amd64/amd64+mac/i386 daily-live)
[10:35] <tseliot> cjwatson: ok, it's just an optional dependency that I have to add, it won't take long
[10:35] <tseliot> thanks
[10:47] <tseliot> cjwatson: on a 2nd thought, I forgot I had already fixed this (on Wed, 12 Dec 2012). It just hasn't been approved yet in precise-proposed
[12:56]  * cjwatson catches up somewhat on removals
[14:01] <tjaalton> cjwatson: am I right to assume that the MRE for sssd got accepted? :)
[14:01] <cjwatson> I'll just follow up properly now
[14:01] <tjaalton> ok
[14:06] <tjaalton> thanks, I'll reupload the version for precise, with a slightly modified changelog entry
[14:55] <gema> slangasek: ping
[15:31] <stgraber> ^ and now with an all new and shiny cloak :)
[15:40] <rtg> why hasn't brittany automatically promoted eclib from -proposed ?
[15:42] <cjwatson> see update_output.txt.gz - it came up on #ubuntu+1-maint a few days ago
[15:42] <cjwatson> s/.gz//
[15:42] <cjwatson> "* i386: ecere-dev, ecere-sdk"
[15:42] <xnox> rtg: binary package name clash from two source packages.
[15:42] <cjwatson> i.e. promoting eclib would have rendered ecere-dev and ecere-sdk uninstallable - britney detected this and correctly refused to promote
[15:42] <xnox> rtg: both ecere-sdk & eclib build eclib.
[15:43] <xnox> I haven't resolved this in Debian yet.
[15:43] <rtg> since ecere is new in universe should we just drop it, or change the package name ?
[15:44] <xnox> rtg: we could drop ecere sdk out of the archive until the binary package name clash is resolved.
[15:44] <xnox> RM & blacklist: ecere-sdk  for now? cjwatson, infinity
[15:46] <cjwatson> ecere isn't new in universe - it was in quantal
[15:47] <cjwatson> blacklisting would be quite wrong
[15:47] <cjwatson> removal is possible; I'm not wild about it because I feel that it papers over a mistake that you need to get fixed in Debian anyway
[16:10] <jamespage> how is the list of packages for each area specified for http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-r-tracking-bug-tasks.html?
[16:10] <jamespage> I'd like to review the server set
[16:18] <xnox> bug 1097329
[16:18] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1097329 in eclib (Ubuntu) "ecere-sdk: binary package conflict with eclib" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1097329
[16:18] <xnox> with debian bug link references.
[17:10] <cjwatson> Riddell: you deleted sivp from raring-proposed saying "does not build, holding back other packages from migrating" - but they're just as held back without sivp
[17:11] <cjwatson> (due to it being required for the opencv transition)
[17:11] <cjwatson> Riddell: I think that was wrong and I'd like to undelete the package - any objections?
[17:11] <Riddell> mm, fooey
[17:11] <Riddell> cjwatson: yeah go ahead
[17:12] <cjwatson> I mean, we obviously still need to fix the build failure, but it'll save somebody else like me coming along and thinking "ooh, this just needs a rebuild, I'll upload that" :-)