[00:02] <gg0> shouldn't it be backported to precise LTS too?
[00:02] <gg0> don't know how to add an Affects line
[00:04] <teward> gg0: as a normal user you can't, if you tell me what's affected I'll nominate it for those series' of Ubuntu, but you have to confirm that those versions are affected
[00:06] <gg0> ok
[00:23] <gg0> teward: ok i confirm that both #1266088 and #1266089 affect all releases since precise _included_ (all prerm and postinst scripts in question have same md5checksum)
[00:36] <teward> gg0: nominated both bugs for P, Q, R, S, and T.  it wouldn't hurt to mark that you tested the bugs and found that all those releases are affected by it
[00:40] <gg0> done
[00:48] <gg0> about bug #1253468, it's harder
[00:50] <teward> gg0: as i said you have to test each version of the software there to determine whether it's affected, Q, R, S, and T are listed as affected, but I suspect xnox did that, they may know something you and I don't.
[00:52] <gg0> i'm doing that from chroots. and it behaves a bit differently than debian ones
[00:55] <gg0> i mean that it seems affected on all included P but when i workaround it as described in bug description i can't see any video, everything black, though movie seems stating because progress bar moves
[00:56] <gg0> plus, on P seems even gstreamer handler is broken, would need further debug
[00:58] <gg0> btw easy to test and workaround if you take a look at bug description
[00:58] <gg0> i'd like to know how it behaves on your ubuntu machine
[01:01] <teward> well mine's 12.04 so probably the same :P
[01:02] <gg0> give it a try, it doesn't bite
[01:03] <teward> nah, too busy dealing with spambots in other channels
[01:03] <gg0> exactly what i meant, machine that hosts chroots
[01:07] <teward> gg0: this is why I like CLI output - http://paste.ubuntu.com/6806038/
[01:08] <teward> gg0: however, the workaround they propose does work in 12.04
[01:08] <teward> but this isn't a chroot test :P
[01:08]  * teward doesn't test bugs in chroots, he tests in VMs normally :P
[01:08] <teward> fortunately my computer is 12.04 so i don't need a VM :)
[01:09] <gg0> might be i had a temporary network problem
[01:10] <gg0> nice
[01:11] <gg0> but i don't think you also have a Q R S T machine :p
[01:11] <teward> that's what the VMs are for :P
[01:11]  * teward has a Q, R, S, and T VM
[01:11] <teward> s/a Q/Q/
[01:11] <teward> s/VM/VMs/
[01:11] <gg0> good. time to fire them up and test it again them :)
[01:12] <gg0> s/them/then/
[01:14] <teward> no need, Triaged usually means confirmed / ready for work on it :p
[01:14] <gg0> btw test in question worked great on debian chroots on a debian machine, just such black screen on ubuntu chroots
[01:15]  * teward shrugs
[01:15] <teward> I'll leave our comments for xnox, they'll probably see them when they unlurk and be able to provide additional comments
[01:16]  * teward tends to his sbuild chroots which're still failing
[01:19] <gg0> builds cannot fail, patch is tiny and all changes are ifdef'ed depending on libav versions
[01:20] <teward> well, "builds" can fail
[01:20] <teward> which is why part of SRUing is build testing
[01:20] <teward> either in a PPA or in sbuild or pbuilder
[01:20] <teward> but apparently I broke my sbuild chroots
[01:20] <teward> again
[01:20] <teward> s
[01:20] <teward> so i'm just gonna nuke em and rebuild them from scratch
[01:20] <teward> and NOT modify them :P
[01:20] <gg0> *builds with patch in question
[01:21] <teward> gg0: i'm too thorough a triager, i ALWAYS build-test :P
[01:21] <teward> downside is it takes almost an hour to build in sbuild on my system, but meh
[01:23] <teward> gg0: I'd rather not intrude on xnox's assigned bugs, though, outside of testing, so you can suggest things all you want, I'm still going to wait for xnox :)
[01:24] <gg0> i don't think it did anything else than what he wrote/we can see
[01:24] <gg0> s/it/he/
[01:25]  * teward shrugs, and goes back to rebuilding schroots
[01:25] <gg0> ok thanks for now
[01:26] <gg0> we'll see whemever he'll come back from vacation in a couple of months :p
[01:26] <gg0> *whenever
[01:33] <gg0> anyway #1266088 and #1266089 are not assigned, you wouldn't hijack anything
[01:33] <gg0> thanks for yout time
[01:33] <gg0> bbl
[08:03] <dholbach> good morning
[09:54] <xnox> teward: gg0: please fix bugs assigned to me =)
[09:54] <xnox> that would be lovely
[15:46] <Laney> he'll split his salary with you if you do
[17:35] <TheLordOfTime> xnox: ack.  i'll prep debdiffs.
[17:36] <TheLordOfTime> can someone approve the precise nomination on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnash/+bug/1253468 ?
[17:36] <TheLordOfTime> (since xnox said we can all fix his bugs)
[17:37] <xnox> TheLordOfTime: that's easy, nomination approved.
[17:37] <TheLordOfTime> xnox: thanks :)
[17:38] <TheLordOfTime> xnox: this is gonna be a long day for my sbuild chroots, though, I always test-build before putting debdiffs up :P
[17:38] <TheLordOfTime> and that took about an hour to build for saucy
[17:45] <TheLordOfTime> xnox: been a little bit since I did an SRU, I target it for RELEASE-proposed right?
[17:46] <TheLordOfTime> nevermind, question answered
[17:47] <xnox> TheLordOfTime: you can just target: RELEASE these days, it gets auto-redirected.
[17:50] <TheLordOfTime> xnox: ah, the SRU guidelines suggest to target RELEASE-proposed and i already did that on the changelogs for quantal, raring, and saucy
[17:51] <TheLordOfTime> xnox: i take it that even though it's autoredirected targeted debdiffs for RELEASE-proposed are still accepted?
[17:51] <xnox> yeah, either is fine.
[17:51] <TheLordOfTime> also, one question, should each of these get a .1 at the end of the version, or a whole number bump at the end?  I ask that because the procedures say:
[17:51] <TheLordOfTime> "he version number does not conflict with any later and future version in other Ubuntu releases (the security policy document has a well-working scheme which can be used for SRUs.)"
[17:51] <TheLordOfTime> s/he/the/
[17:52] <TheLordOfTime> and because a number bump in quantal will conflict with raring, and raring will conflict with saucy
[17:52] <cjwatson> if you follow the link to the security doc it has an algorithm you can follow
[17:52] <TheLordOfTime> or is that irrelevant in each individual release?
[17:52] <cjwatson> or at any rate a pretty comprehensive list of examples
[17:52] <TheLordOfTime> cjwatson: that suggests the .1 to the end of the version number (dch also does that, adds the .1)
[17:53] <TheLordOfTime> cjwatson: i've provided debdiffs with .1 at the end of version numbers as dch and that guide had said, and it's been changed to a full number bump, but I assume that'll be corrected before it's uploaded
[17:53] <TheLordOfTime> (if such corrections are needed)
[17:53] <cjwatson> .1 would be correct here, as you say a straight increment would conflict
[17:55] <TheLordOfTime> right
[17:55] <TheLordOfTime> cjwatson: a straight increment on precise wouldn't conflict, though, the base version is higher than precise in later releases
[17:56] <TheLordOfTime> but i'll just do whatever dch does :P
[17:56] <TheLordOfTime> sponsors can change it if necessary later :)
[18:05] <TheLordOfTime> xnox: cjwatson: can either of you assist me in figuring out why sbuild failed here?  I can see it says its because of a dependent package not going to be installed, but that's kinda an ambiguous error.  http://paste.ubuntu.com/6809646/
[18:09] <TheLordOfTime> (that failure looks to be in precise)
[18:19] <cjwatson> TheLordOfTime: sorry, buried in grub
[18:19] <TheLordOfTime> cjwatson: no problem.
[18:20] <cjwatson> one of these weeks I will actually nail down enough regressions to be able to put this in trusty with a clear conscience ...
[18:53] <Ampelbein> teward: You don't seem to have precise-updates enabled in your sbuild chroot
[18:54] <Ampelbein> teward: Maybe that screws up the dependencies
[19:06] <teward> Ampelbein: probably, i'll update the chrotos
[19:06] <teward> chroots*
[19:09] <teward> Ampelbein: um... question, how does one go enabling precise-updates in the sbuild chroot
[19:09]  * teward hasn't fussed with the chroots much yet
[19:10] <Ampelbein> teward: I always login to the source chroot and add to /etc/apt/sources.list
[19:10] <Ampelbein> I don't know if there is an easier way.
[19:11]  * teward shrugs
[19:11] <teward> Ampelbein: i'll do that for the source chroots then
[19:13] <teward> good news is the others all build without incident :P
[19:28] <teward> Ampelbein: looks like that resolved the apt failure, lets see if it builds
[19:42] <teward> Ampelbein: yeah, adding in precise-updates has resolved the initial issue I was having, the build's going now.  (it's a LONG build though >.>)
[20:04] <teward> well, now that that builds, all's good.  now i wait for a sponsor to see it.  :)
[22:08] <gg0> teward: thanks
[22:09] <gg0> what about bug #1266088 and bug #1266089?
[22:13]  * gg0 should then invent something otherwise he'd be out of bugs to nag about