[00:57] <darkxst> gnome-shell never got copied to quantal-updates from Bug 1128804\
[00:57] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1128804 in gnome-shell (Ubuntu Quantal) "Update mutter/gnome-shell to 3.6.3" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1128804
[02:38] <ScottK> darkxst: That's because Bug #1132308 is still not verified.
[02:38] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1132308 in gnome-shell (Ubuntu Quantal) "~50px pointer barrier in gnome shell at bottom of primary monitor" [Low,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1132308
[03:11] <darkxst> ScottK, right, well if the reporter hasnt verified it by now, I suppose they never will. I can't actually test it since barriers don't work in VM's
[03:26] <ScottK> darkxst: OK.
[03:27] <ScottK> Oh, hey, it's been released.  I wonder how that happend.
[03:27] <ScottK> ;-)
[04:45] <darkxst> ScottK, thanks ;)
[13:28] <FourDollars> 
[13:35]  * cjwatson hides in a cave and tries to implement autopkgtest/proposed-migration
[13:55] <cjwatson> I wonder how doomed http://paste.ubuntu.com/5754933/ will be
[13:57] <infinity> I fear for our Velocity(tm) when this spins up.
[13:57] <infinity> But I guess we'll see.
[14:02] <cjwatson> Note that this is subject to force hints
[14:02] <Laney> Would it be hard to add a force-tests hint type?
[14:02] <Laney> so we don't have to toss all of britney out
[14:05] <cjwatson> I'll look
[14:08] <cjwatson> http://paste.ubuntu.com/5754976/ then
[14:09] <cjwatson> ("force-autopkgtest")
[14:10] <Laney> great
[14:11] <cjwatson> Now if only I can figure out how to test this non-invasively ...
[14:12] <infinity> Run britney on dogfood?
[14:12] <infinity> Though, it probably can't talk to the adt machines.
[14:13] <infinity> Maybe run a second britney instance on lillypilly *against* dogfood?
[14:13] <cjwatson> I don't think dogfood will be helpful.
[14:14] <cjwatson> Argh!  Unity!  Stop segfaulting!
[14:14] <infinity> Have you upgraded lately?
[14:14] <infinity> Mine stopped segfaulting recently.
[14:15] <cjwatson> Yes, I have
[14:15] <infinity> 7.0.0daily13.06.07-0ubuntu1 seemed to have fixed it for me.
[14:15] <cjwatson> That's what I have
[14:15] <infinity> Might also have been the libnux around the same time.
[15:07] <seb128> infinity, cjwatson: there is still a bamf issue that Trevinho is working on, that might be your issue ... do you have a backtrace of the segfault?
[15:08] <Trevinho> seb128: FYI i've identified the issue, so it's just matter of cleaning up my code and submit the change
[15:08] <seb128> Trevinho, if that's the same one ... which is hard to say without a backtrace ;-)
[15:08] <seb128> Trevinho, good job in any case ;-)
[15:09] <Trevinho> seb128: it's likely that it is the problem...
[15:09] <Trevinho> :)
[15:09] <seb128> Trevinho, let's see
[15:10]  * infinity is still amazed that no one took issue to us naming a project "bamf".
[15:10] <Trevinho> :)
[15:11] <Trevinho> infinity: it's offically just BAMF, Application Matching Framework :)
[15:11] <infinity> I can only assume that none of the people who would normally care actually know what the acronym means. :P
[15:11] <Trevinho> infinity: that it is... ehm... officially :)
[15:20] <rtg_> infinity, did a library drop out of main ? '/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -liberty'
[15:24] <cjwatson> That should be in binutils-dev
[15:25] <rtg_> so, simply a new build dep. I'll give it a go.
[15:26] <infinity> New?  Didn't the kernel always build-dep on binutils-dev?
[15:26] <infinity> Sure does here.
[15:26] <rtg_> and indeed still does. wtf ?
[15:27] <rtg_> infinity, so this is perf that is failing to build because of demangle. I'm thinking I'll just disable demangle and see how it goes.
[15:27] <rtg_> infinity, buf it y'all think liberty _should_ still exists, then I'm a bit concerned.
[15:29] <infinity> Oh, hrm.  Newer binutils-dev seems to only have libiberty_pic.
[15:30] <rtg_> I wonder why my test build worked
[15:31] <infinity> I can't imagine that this is a recent change, mind you.
[15:32] <rtg_> infinity, 2 updates since the last kernel upload
[15:33] <infinity> doko: Was dropping libiberty.a from binutils-dev intentional?
[15:34] <tumbleweed> win 12
[15:34] <tumbleweed> err
[15:35] <infinity> Oh, I didn't notice there was a shiny new shapshot in -proposed.
[15:35] <infinity> rtg_: So, the one in the release pocket would work fine, the one in proposed, not so much.  Which would be likely why your testbuild went fine, if you don't build against proposed.
[15:36] <infinity> rtg_: Or if you started your build more than an hour ago. :P
[15:36] <infinity> rtg_: (So, yes, this is a very recent change)
[15:36] <rtg_> infinity, yeah, so I'm just gonna disable HAVE_CPLUS_DEMANGLE for now.
[15:37] <infinity> rtg_: Or you could use the _pic version.
[15:38] <rtg_> infinity, well, I'm trying to remember why we wanted demangling in the first place. there is no C++ in the kernel
[15:39] <infinity> I blame the raisins.
[15:40] <rtg_> It kind of looks like the perf Makefile has improved to the point that it figures out why libraries exist if you _don't_ force HAVE_CPLUS_DEMANGLE, so maybe that _is_ the right thing to do.
[15:40] <rtg_> s/why/which/
[15:51] <doko> infinity, hmm, I see. it's not installed by default anymore. will fix it
[16:47] <jbicha> oops, that EDS was meant for a PPA because of the removed symbol
[16:49] <infinity> jbicha: "That EDS"?
[16:49] <Laney> evolution-data-server
[16:49] <Laney> will block
[16:49] <infinity> I know what EDS is, I meant "which one?"
[16:49] <stgraber> [ubuntu/saucy-proposed] evolution-data-server 3.8.3-0ubuntu1~build1 (Accepted)
[16:49] <Laney> the one he just uploaded
[16:50] <jbicha> Laney: it's also blocked because it has new packages
[16:50]  * infinity gives up.
[16:50] <infinity> Laney: There are 5 distro series in active development, with multiple pockets, I assume "just uploaded", that didn't tell me anything.
[16:51] <infinity> If it's binary NEW, that'll be easy enough.
[16:51] <infinity> Though, you still get to upload something to revert that now.
[16:51] <Laney> Didn't mean to be facetious; I usually look at "latest upload".
[16:52] <jbicha> infinity: well I think we do want it, I just want to check that e-d-s's rdepends still build first
[16:52] <infinity> Laney: Which means nothing if it was aimed at a stable queue.
[16:52] <Laney> now it's my turn to give up
[16:52] <infinity> :P
[16:53] <infinity> jbicha: Well, if it's binary NEW, I'll just reject the binaries, and you can reupload with a more pleasant version number when you're sure it's what we want.
[16:53] <jbicha> ok that will work, thanks