[10:48] <darkxst> ricotz, hi
[10:48] <darkxst> any thoughts on fixing the mutter dependency mess with 3.10? (i.e for unity etc)
[10:49] <Guest74459> hi
[10:49] <darkxst> hi Guest74459
[10:50] <Guest74459> does anyone belong to test team?
[10:50] <darkxst> not sure if any testers are around atm
[10:50] <darkxst> whats you Q?
[10:50] <ricotz> darkxst, hi, could you be a bit more specific?
[10:51] <Guest74459> i would like be involved in test but i am not sure if i fulfil the requisits
[10:51] <darkxst> ricotz, the DisplayConfig stuff
[10:51] <darkxst> right now g-s-d crashes if there is no mutter
[10:51] <darkxst> (3.10)
[10:51] <ricotz> darkxst, btw, what were the rebuilds of g-s and mutter for?
[10:51] <darkxst> I believe gnome-desktop might also be affected
[10:52] <darkxst> ricotz, I copied them to gnome3-next
[10:52] <ricotz> darkxst, gnome-desktop relies on a running mutter for some functions
[10:52] <darkxst> which doesnt have gnome-desktop
[10:52] <Guest74459> i had been using linux for 15 years mostly gentoo
[10:52] <Guest74459> almost
[10:52] <Guest74459> and i know script like python
[10:53] <ricotz> darkxst, i see, try to avoid rebuilds when copying thing there
[10:53] <Guest74459> but i have no idea how long it could be necessary to do test
[10:54] <ricotz> darkxst, also cyphermox promised he will upload nm 0.9.8.4 saucy soon
[10:54] <darkxst> ricotz, we actually need nm 0.9.9 ;(
[10:54] <Guest74459> and 13.10 doesnt boot in my computer
[10:54] <darkxst> Guest74459, live cd?
[10:54] <ricotz> darkxst, i havent tried running lightdm/unity for quite some time ;)
[10:55] <Guest74459> no usb
[10:55] <ricotz> darkxst, yes, which isnt even available yet
[10:55] <darkxst> ricotz, its very broken with the 3.10 packages
[10:55] <Guest74459> i see
[10:55] <ricotz> darkxst, right, considering the missing gtk patch
[10:55] <ricotz> darkxst, did you hear anythhing from larsu about porting it?
[10:56] <darkxst> ricotz, way more broken that the gtk menu patch!
[10:56] <darkxst> and no I havent heard anything more about it being porting
[10:57] <ricotz> ok
[10:57] <darkxst> I suspose we could fork an older g-s-d xrandr plugin for unity
[10:58] <darkxst> but it will require patches all over the place to make things work again
[10:59] <darkxst> or Ubuntu should just for g-s-d/g-c-c and leave us be!
[11:00] <Guest74459> bye
[11:01] <darkxst> but that wont happen anytime soon
[11:03] <ricotz> darkxst, ok, for the sake of keeping things running adding the old xrandr functionality would be the cleanest way
[11:04] <ricotz> the g-s-d xrandr relied on the xrandr driven functions of gnome-desktop, right?
[11:05] <darkxst> yeh
[11:06] <ricotz> so trying to only patch gnome-desktop with the alternative information retrieval would be better instead of patching all dependencies
[11:06] <ricotz> but might not be that easy
[11:07] <darkxst> well g-s-d uses mutter displayconfig directly now
[11:07] <darkxst> so that needs to be patched also
[11:07] <ricotz> ah ok
[11:11] <ricotz> ok, the g-s-d changes for this doesnt seem to be that cluttered like the gnome-desktop ones
[11:32] <darkxst> yeh gnome-desktop changes are quite bad
[11:35] <darkxst> ricotz, gtg now, will try and beat it into shape over the weekend
[15:48] <carluccio> Hi all... I hope there's someone able to help me, I can't find a solution to my problem...
[15:50] <carluccio> I've got some pcs, with ubuntu-gnome installed, to play a loop video
[15:50] <carluccio> but every now and then a monitor goes grey
[15:51] <carluccio> it's not some kind of powersaving black, it's just a medium grey
[15:52] <carluccio> if I connect via vnc the video start playing as if it never stopped
[15:52] <carluccio> and I can't understand why this is happening
[15:53] <carluccio> could someone please give me some hint?
[17:23] <bjsnider> ricotz, so yesterday there was a guy in here who had a problem caused by two of your ppas in combination
[17:24] <bjsnider> the fact that there was a package with the same version string in both ppas is what caused it
[17:25] <ricotz> bjsnider, which ppas and which package?
[17:25] <bjsnider> ricotz, i don't really want to explain the whole thing in detail again, it caused me to submit a bug against apt, and the bug was immediately rejected by debian as invalid
[17:25] <bjsnider> you can read the bug report and the response
[17:26] <bjsnider> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=723691
[17:26] <bjsnider> i do not agree with the response, which is basically that apt is only for installing from approved debian repositories and if you're not dealing with that, then go jump in the lake
[17:27] <ricotz> bjsnider, i see, i actually feared about that one ;)
[17:28] <ricotz> i usally binary copy such package if i know i pushed them somewhere already
[17:28] <bjsnider> if you had named them after the ppa, lik ~libreofficeppa and whatnot, the issue might be different
[17:29] <bjsnider> but i'm not thinking clearly enough to know what would happen in t hat case
[17:29] <ricotz> but that isnt the fault of apt imo too
[17:29] <bjsnider> i'm not saying it's apt's fault
[17:29] <bjsnider> obviously it's your fault
[17:29] <bjsnider> i was saying apt can do better than failing and breaking the user's system
[17:30] <ricotz> i don't consider that fully my fault!
[17:31] <bjsnider> well, if you read the response to the bug, he does
[17:31] <ricotz> add all ppas which are out there you are calling for trouble
[17:31] <bjsnider> yeah, that's my point
[17:31] <bjsnider> can't apt do better given that being the case
[17:32] <ricotz> thanks for the pointer anyway
[17:33] <bjsnider> obviously there's a caveat emptor in effect with ppas
[17:35] <bjsnider> ricotz, what do you suppose would be the result given the same situation if the version number is the same but the back end of the string is different? would the pkg:amd64 be changed to match the pkg:i386 in that event?
[17:35] <ricotz> bjsnider, huh?
[17:36] <ricotz> if you change the suffix the versions *are* different
[17:36] <ricotz> the dependencies/conflicts are based on the full version string
[17:36] <bjsnider> and the user already has the lib from ppa 1
[17:36] <bjsnider> so when he adds ppa 2 the lib is changed
[17:37] <ricotz> apt will pick the greater version
[17:37] <bjsnider> so in the course of adding the gnome ppa he would have been "upgraded" to the gnome 3 version because g comes before l
[17:37] <bjsnider> i get it now
[17:37] <ricotz> yes
[17:39] <ricotz> bjsnider, btw someone requested 319.49 which i won't upload to edgers. in case you care to push it to x-updates
[17:40] <bjsnider> is it stable?
[17:40] <ricotz> it is the stable long term branch
[17:40] <ricotz> 325.x is the current unstable
[17:41] <bjsnider> wouldn't it be going in as nvidia-319?
[17:41] <ricotz> yes
[17:41] <ricotz> but i already place transition packages for it to 325 in edgers
[17:43] <bjsnider> yeah but i didn't think a ppa was necessary for stable updates anymore because they go right in
[17:46] <ricotz> they arent as they should unfortunately
[17:47] <bjsnider> i see
[21:42] <c_smith> hey, I have a question: is Ubuntu Gnome going to be switching to Xmir, or staying on X11 like Kubuntu and Xubuntu?
[21:42] <c_smith> couldn't find ANYTHING to confirm what the intentions were for 13.10
[21:47] <darkxst> c_smith, X11
[21:50] <c_smith> darkxst: cool
[23:00] <bjsnider> eventually it will be using wayland though