[04:14] How can we make intel-vaapi-driver migrate to release? It seems to just be waiting for arches that it's not meant to build on [04:17] I'll take a look [04:18] usually that doesn't matter unless it built successfully on those architectures before [04:19] er, that seems like a bug with the excuses [04:20] It's a minor misfeature. It's not wrong about those packages being out of date. [04:20] But they also happen to be NBS. [04:20] It's hard to determine that because they were arch:all and then disappeared. [04:20] do they need to be removed? [04:21] Yeah, I'm going to do that. [04:21] that's what I figured [04:22] Should migrate after the next publisher cycle, but I'll keep an eye out. [04:22] any reason why it's not showing up in update_output.txt? [04:27] Logan_: Because it failed in the excuses stage. [04:27] Logan_: It's a 2-stage process, if it fails excuses, it's not tried in the output pass. [04:28] ah [04:28] I always thought the raw output included excuses as well [04:28] Nope. [04:28] escuses is checking up-to-date, RC bugginess, age (which we don't take into account in Ubuntu), autopkgtests... [04:29] Only when all of that passes do we do the costly installability checks that output represents. [04:30] gotcha [05:07] infinity: I feel like it's a hacky solution to use the system libtool (i.e. force the LIBTOOL variable in Makefile.in to libtool rather than @LIBTOOL@), but when I get a version mismatch after autoreconf, it seems to be the only way around it [05:07] is there a better way to avoid that? [05:23] How can i make lp:debian/hexchat up to date again? (a new bugfix release should be in it) [09:10] Can someone please mass sync the openarena packages? [11:28] Noskcaj: maybe but only given a complete list; I'm not going to search [18:12] desrt: i released 03.31 cgamager w prune. i cannot safely do kill-and-remove, but i wll do gettasksrecusive wbich will letyouge allpids at once, hup then ksiglill, then reget to verkfy no new forkd, then prune [18:13] * hallyn out [18:18] From the shell, how can I see which configure flags were used for building a particular package? (i.e not the debian/rules but the configure options that were derived from rules) [18:19] depends on the package [18:19] if you are lucky dpkg-buildflags [18:19] otherwise you have to read rules and the buildlog [18:21] jtaylor: mesa package. [18:23] jtaylor: I'm trying to follow the rules file but after two screens of config munging back and forth my brain hurts. :D [18:23] nadrimajstor: There's also pkgconfig entries; "/usr/share/pkgconfig/*" [18:24] those should only contain paths [18:25] very rarely abi stuff [18:25] anything else in there is a bug [18:27] dpkg-buildflags give me just generic options... pkconfig is mostly empty for me... (and it looks there is stuff that should not be there - will file a bug at ubuntu-mate) [18:27] So, go to LP, look for build logs? [18:27] yes [18:27] ok [18:27] what are you looking for? [18:28] Does --with-egl-platforms= contain framebuffer (among dri, x11 ...) [18:28] that can typically be found in the rules file [18:32] jtaylor: On the second look... There is no mention of fbdev anywhere in the rules file... Thanks jtaylor [18:33] * nadrimajstor off to recompile mesa [18:33] * nadrimajstor thinks that apt-get build-dep is a bless :) [18:34] then you'll love mk-build-deps -ir :) [18:35] * nadrimajstor off to RTFM on mk-build-deps [18:35] does the same but allows you to remove all again be removing a meta package it installs [18:39] jtaylor: Ahaaa.... I got it. :)