[00:24] can someone help me figure out why unity-scope-click is stuck in proposed? [00:24] it's not on http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_output.txt [00:30] kenvandine: did you see http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html [00:30] no... grrr [00:30] can someone delete the ppc binary? [00:31] it deps on something that won't build on ppc [00:31] so we dropped ppc for the scope too [00:31] (it has to "pass" excuses before showing up on output) [00:32] humm, seb128 said it was on output earlier and told me to drop ppc [00:32] oh, i guess it was there before for a different reason [00:32] depwait [00:45] kenvandine: Done. [00:45] infinity, awesome, thanks! [00:46] kenvandine: I'm a bit irked by all the arch: specifying going on in these stacks. Having dep-waits forever would be more pleasant. [00:46] kenvandine: This will be a mess to undo when qt5 is fixed on ppc (or x32, or arm64, or...) [00:47] indeed [00:47] :/ === Nisstyre-laptop is now known as Nisstyre === _ffio_ is now known as ffio === Noskcaj10 is now known as Noskcaj [10:09] infinity: I think we are long overdue for the libav9 transition. and I think we already were for raring. The last time I asked the response was we do not want to have another libav transition ahead of debian, though. and I guess you already noticed the debian transition bug. [10:09] ari-tczew: ^^ [10:15] I also support updating libav9. It's current versioning is very confusing [10:54] seems like modprobe is broken somehow :( [11:02] siretart: Well, if we're fairly sure the Debian transition will start "soon", perhaps this week is a good time to start on Ubuntu. Would be nice to clear up the one or two packages that are still broken, though. [11:06] dupondje: kmod hasn't changed in months. Could be potentially some toolchain change between the -3 and -4 kernel builds that blew something up. Rebuilding the previous kernel on a current saucy might show this. [11:08] hmz [11:08] to hot for a rebuild today :P [11:08] daily kernels are build with same toolchain ? [11:09] cause current daily works fine [11:11] No idea how the dailies are built, to be honest. [11:12] And it could just be a cosmic ray one-time miscompilation too. A rebuild of the current kernel could be enlightening. [11:13] let me rebuild it :) [11:20] dupondje: It could also be something as simple/silly as depmod having failed to run, but I would expect much more spectacular failure then. :P [12:33] infinity: well, debian is in kind of a "transition jam" state, and it is very hard to predict when the transition starts. I could be tomorrow, or in 3 months [13:17] infinity: rebuild of -4 failed, still broken [13:17] dupondje: Kay. So, a rebuild of -3 to see if it breaks would be useful, perhaps. [13:18] doing no :) [13:18] now* === jtechidna is now known as JontheEchidna === Nisstyre-laptop is now known as Nisstyre === korn_ is now known as c_korn === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha === leboz is now known as zobel === balloons_ is now known as balloons === ircleuser is now known as SourcingMogul === TerminX_ is now known as TerminX [19:41] which way is better to do a merge? bzr or normal debdiff? === mhall119_ is now known as mhall119 [19:44] ari-tczew: generally I prefer to use packaging-only bzr branches as more or less described at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/Bzr [19:45] I had too many problems in the past running 'bzr mu' in the past with full bzr branches === Daviey_ is now known as Daviey === vanhoof_ is now known as vanhoof === dduffey_afk is now known as dduffey [19:56] jbicha: so for you better to sponsoring is debdiff than bzr branch? === Cimi_ is now known as Cimi [20:00] ari-tczew: well I can build a debdiff from a bzr merge but I find a diff of just the debian/ directory to be the easiest to read and review === rbelem_ is now known as rbelem [20:02] ok === thomi_ is now known as thomi === elmo__ is now known as elmo