[07:27] <flocculant> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/seeds/xubuntu.yakkety/blacklist
[07:29] <flocculant> if that says "# Xubuntu doesn't need GNOME's user guide." why do we get it, if we get via some other thing - should it be blacklisted?
[08:18] <Unit193> Not how that blacklist works. :/
[11:37] <flocculant> Unit193: awesome :p
[11:37] <flocculant> a whitelisting blacklist :D
[11:42] <knome> flocculant, qa status going to be broken for a bit while i add the new functionality
[11:43] <flocculant> knome: is a bit hours, days, weeks ?
[11:43] <knome> minutes :P
[11:43] <flocculant> :D
[11:55] <flocculant> knome: well you understood exactly what I meant yesterday :p
[11:56] <flocculant> when you've finished sorting it can you leave Boot Status as both wins and 64 bit install as fail and 32 bit as unconfirmed :)
[12:00] <knome> k
[12:01] <flocculant> I'm off now - cya later
[12:02] <akxwi-dave> laters
[12:43] <knome> flocculant, ok, i've set the statuses you asked for and everything should work as expected; if not, poke
[13:17] <akxwi-dave> flocculant, knome, I can confirm the 32 bit version fails with same problems as the 64bit on ubi-console and installer crash
[13:17] <knome> akxwi-dave, didn't flocculant post you the qa admin pass?
[13:18] <akxwi-dave> not yet... unless I missed it.. :-)
[13:19] <knome> it was sent ages ago
[13:19] <akxwi-dave> in that case let me double check
[13:20] <knome> :)
[13:24] <akxwi-dave> ah ah..  yes he did.. and yes i forgot.. (my lappy remembers it) this pc doesn't
[13:24] <knome> :)
[13:24] <knome> it now has the added functionality to mark install status as you notice
[13:26] <akxwi-dave> excellent .. looking at it now.. 
[15:58] <flocculant> knome: thanks - exactly as I imagined it :)
[16:10] <ochosi> Unit193, bluesabre: would either of you be willing to package up the latest libxfce4ui (release should also come soon) so we can use that for development?
[16:10] <flocculant> o/ ochosi 
[20:29] <Unit193> ochosi: It's looking for libxfce4ui-2.xml.in which doesn't exist.
[20:32] <ochosi> Unit193: oh, hm, meh
[20:38] <Unit193> I'm going to presume this file: http://git.xfce.org/xfce/libxfce4ui/tree/glade/libxfce4ui.xml.in
[21:05] <sidi> Unit193, in the package or in the git tree?
[21:06] <sidi> Unit193, most Xfce packages on Debian/Xubuntu from what I gather are already xdt-autogen'd. So there's no configure.ac.in either.
[21:06] <Unit193> sidi: Yes usually pickup released tarballs, sometimes re-run autogen for newer arches, but point being libxfce4ui-2.xml.in <-> libxfce4ui.xml.in which I linked to.
[21:07] <sidi> so if you take an upstream patch and apply it to an Ubuntu package you need to replace changes in some .in's into the final changes, and/or you need to keep the Makefile.am's and .in files on top of your tree, apply the patch, quilt add the generated filed and run xdt-autogen 
[21:07] <sidi> Ah
[21:07] <sidi> Alright I'm offtopic and I'll shut up now :D
[21:19] <ochosi> Unit193: so it's working now?
[21:19] <Unit193> ochosi: After hacking it all up, it does build at least.  No idea if glade will work.
[21:20] <ochosi> eric_the_idiot: ^
[21:22] <eric_the_idiot> I probably forget to stage the file
[21:31] <Unit193> eric_the_idiot: That's what I figured, though it's missing from potfiles.in too.
[21:46] <Unit193> ochosi: ...Is there somewhere you wanted this (when he pushes the above), it's not exactly in ideal condition fwiw.