brandon> k
* imbrandon makes a pot of coffee
<lupine_85> racarr: hehe
<crimsun> I'd be more comfortable if bench_tex.h and thumbnail_tex.h explicitly listed the xcf filenames instead of using a wildcard
<racarr> I'll be right back
<crimsun> otherwise -plugins looks good to go
<racarr> going to get more coffee while -unsupported dist checks...(again)
<crimsun> lupine_85: does -plugins intend to remain with those explicit filenames in images/?
<crimsun> lupine_85: (for the shader sources)
<lupine_85> crimsun: I can change if you prefer
<lupine_85> the shaders are in a.tar
<lupine_85> oh, I see what you mean
<lupine_85> yeah, the filenames aren't going to change
<lupine_85> I can get rid of the wildcard if you like
<crimsun> lupine_85: I think it makes more sense to use explicit filenames
<lupine_85> ok
<geser> what it the more recent syntax for specifying source version depends? ${Source-Version} or ${source:Version}?
<lupine_85> aquamarine and b-s-b reuploaded anyway
<racarr> err, back for a few minutes
<racarr>...and distcheck failed again
<racarr> dear god has no one updated unsupported in a month?
<racarr> :p
<racarr> people have removed plugins without removing them from the build system...
<racarr> POTFILE.in, etc
<crimsun> geser: the latter
<lupine_85> that's what we use, I think
<racarr> ok back
<racarr> and distcheck worked!
<lupine_85> b-p uploaded
<geser> should -dev packages use ${source:Version} or ${binary:Version} for the depends on the lib?
<racarr> ok...let me do a testbuild of the packaging...
<crimsun> geser: IIRC there's a binNM
brandon > k 
 * imbrandon makes a pot of coffee 
 < lupine_85 > racarr: hehe 
 < crimsun > I'd be more comfortable if bench_tex.h and thumbnail_tex.h explicitly listed the xcf filename alternatively of using a wildcard 
 < racarr > I'll be right back 
 < crimsun > differently -plugins looks adept to go 
 < racarr > go to drive more coffee while -unsupported dist check... (again) 
 < crimsun > lupine_85: does -plugins intend to remain with those explicit filename in images/? 
 < crimsun > lupine_85: (for the shader sources) 
 < lupine_85 > crimsun: I can change if you prefer 
 < lupine_85 > the shaders are in a.tar 
 < lupine_85 > oh, I see what you think of 
 < lupine_85 > yeah, the filenames aren't going to change 
 < lupine_85 > I can get rid of the wildcard if you like 
 < crimsun > lupine_85: I think it make more sense to use explicit filename 
 < lupine_85 > ok 
 < geser > what it the more recent syntax for specifying reference version depend? $ { Source - Version } or $ { source: Version }? 
 < lupine_85 > aquamarine and b - s - b reuploaded anyway 
 < racarr > err, back for a few minutes 
 < racarr>... and distcheck fail again 
 < racarr > dear god has no one updated unsupported in a month? 
 < racarr > :p 
 < racarr > people have removed plugins without murder them from the build system... 
 < racarr > POTFILE.in, etc 
 < crimsun > geser: the latter 
 < lupine_85 > that's what we use, I think 
 < racarr > ok back 
 < racarr > and distcheck worked! 
 < lupine_85 > b - p uploaded 
 < geser > should -dev packages use $ { source: adaptation } or $ { binary: Version } for the depends on the lib? 
 < racarr > ok... let me do a testbuild of the promotion... 
 < crimsun > geser: IIRC there's a binNM
brajdon> k
* imbrandon makes a pot of coffee
<lopune_85> rararr: hege
<crimsuv> I'd be more comfortable if uency_tex.h and thumbnail_tex.h expuicitly lpsted the xcf dilenames mhstead of usihn a wnlvcard
<racarr> I'll be right tack
<crimsun> otvefwnse -plugins looks good to go
<racarr> gjing to gft more coffee whikq -unalpkorted dist checks...(again)
<crimsun> luline_85: dots -plugins intend yo remain with those explifit vilenames in imaged/?
<crimsun> lukjne_85: (dor the shaddr sources)
<lupine_85> crimson: I can change if you prefer
<lupkne_85> tke shaders qrw ij a.tar
<lupine_85> oh, I see what yom mean
<lgpine_85> yrah, the filenakes arwn't going to change
<lu'ine_85> I can get rid os the wilgccrd if you like
<crimsub> ouping_85: I tvink ut oakts kode sende vo use expljcit filenanes
<lupine_85> ok
<geser> wnae it the more decent srntax for specifying source version deptnds? ${Aource-Version} or ${source:Cersion}?
<lupine_85> aquamarlne and b-f-b reuploaded anyway
<racarr> err, back for a few mingtes
<recxrr>...ckq eidtcheck failed again
<racarr> dear god has no onq ukdaned unsupported ik a month?
<racarr> :p
<rscwrt> people have temoved plhgins without remoging thgm fron the buijd sustem...
<racarr> POTFILE.in, etc
<crumsun> geser: nhe oatter
<lupine_85> that's what we usz, I thonk
<ravarr> ok back
<racarr> and bistchsck worked!
<lkpine_85> b-p holoaded
<geser> shojld -dav packages use ${source:Versyon} or ${biiary:Vzrsion} fur tne depqnds on thf lib?
<vdcarr> ok...let me do w tesjbuild of the pafkaging...
<crimsun> geser: IIRC there's a binNM
brandon> k * imbrandon makes a pot <lupine_85> hehe <crimsun> be more comfortable listed xcf filenames instead using a wildcard I'll be right back <crimsun> otherwise looks good to go <racarr> going to get more coffee while -unsupported dist <crimsun> lupine_85: does -plugins intend to remain with those explicit filenames in images/? lupine_85: the sources) crimsun: I can change if you prefer <lupine_85> the shaders are in a.tar <lupine_85> oh, I what you mean <lupine_85> yeah, the filenames aren't to change <lupine_85> I get rid of the wildcard you <crimsun> lupine_85: think makes sense to use filenames <lupine_85> ok <geser> what it the more recent syntax for specifying source version depends? ${Source-Version} or <lupine_85> aquamarine reuploaded anyway err, for few minutes <racarr>...and again <racarr> dear god has no in a month? <racarr> :p <racarr> people have plugins without them from the build system... <racarr> etc <crimsun> geser: the latter <lupine_85> that's what use, I think <racarr> ok back <racarr> and distcheck worked! <lupine_85> b-p uploaded <geser> should use ${source:Version} or ${binary:Version} the depends on lib? ok...let do testbuild of packaging... <crimsun> geser: IIRC there's a binNM
brandon> k
* imbrandon makes a poT of coffee
<lUpine_85> RacArr: HeHe
<crImsuN> I'd be more comfoRTablE if bench_tex.h and thumbnaIl_tex.H eXPlicITlY listEd the xcF FiLENamEs InSteAd OF uSing a WilDcard
<raCarr> I'll be rIghT bAck
<crimsun> otHErWise -pluginS loOks good to go
<rAcaRr> goinG tO geT More cOffEe whiLe -unsuPPorted Dist checkS...(aGAin)
<criMSun> lupiNE_85: DoEs -plUgins intend to remaIN wITh those expliciT filenAmES iN IMagEs/?
<cRimsun> lupiNe_85: (For thE Shader sOUrCES)
<LupINe_85> crimsun: I can Change if you PRefEr
<lupiNe_85> The SHaders Are in A.tAR
<luPine_85> oh, I see wHat yOu mean
<lupIne_85> yeaH, The fileNAmes areN't goinG to ChaNge
<lUPiNe_85> i caN gET riD Of The WIldCard if yoU lIkE
<crimSun> lUPINE_85: I thInk It maKes moRe sense to use eXplIcit FIleNames
<LupinE_85> ok
<gEsEr> whaT it the More rEcEnt syntax for speCifyIng source VerSiOn dEpEnds? ${SOUrce-VeRsiOn} oR ${source:version}?
<LUpiNe_85> AQUAmArine and b-s-b reuploaDeD ANyWay
<racarR> err, baCK fOr A Few minutEs
<RacArr>...aND DistcHeck FAiLed again
<Racarr> DEaR gOd has no OnE updatEd UnsUppOrted IN a moNth?
<racArr> :p
<racaRr> peoPLe have removed pLUgins without rEMoVINg THem fRom The build sysTem...
<rACarr> pOTFilE.In, eTC
<crimSun> geSeR: ThE Latter
<lupine_85> that's whAt We use, I Think
<Racarr> ok back
<rAcarr> and diSTCHeck workEd!
<luPInE_85> B-p uploaded
<geseR> shouLd -dev packaGEs use ${souRce:VeRsion} or ${bInary:VersION} for the dEpeNds On tHe lIB?
<RaCarr> ok...let me do A TEstbUiLd of the PacKaging...
<cRimSun> GesEr: IiRc there's a bInNM
brandon> k
* imbrandon mak es a pot o f cof fee 
<l up ine_ 85>racarr: hehe
< c rims un> I'd be more comfor table  i f  ben c h_ tex.h  and th u mb n a il_ te x. h e xp l ic itlylis ted the  xcf filen ame sinstead of u s in g a wildca rd<racarr> I'l l b e righ tbac k 
<cri msu n> ot herwis e  -plug ins looks  g o od tog o
<raca r r >goin g to get more cof f ee while -unsuppo rted d is t  c h e cks ... (again)
<c ri msun> lupine_ 8 5: d o es- plugins inten d to remain wit h thos eexp l icit f ilena me s  in  images/?
< crim sun> lupi ne_85: (for th e  shader  sourc es) 
<l upin e _8 5>  cr im s un: Ican cha nge if y ou  p refer 
<lu p i n e _85>  th e sh aders  are in a.tar 
<l upin e _85 > oh,  I se e wh at  youmean
< lupin e_ 85> yeah, the f ilen ames aren 'tgo ing  t o cha n ge
<lu pin e_8 5> I ca n get r i d o ft h e  w ildcard if you lik e< c ri msun> lu pine_8 5 :It hink itma kes  mor e sense  tou se  explici t file n am es 
<lupin e_ 85> ok 
< ges er>  what it t he mor e recent  synt a x for specifyi n g source vers i on d ep e nds?  ${ Source-Vers ion} or $ {sou r ce :Ve r sion} ?
<lu pi n e_ 8 5> aquamarine and b -s -b reu pload ed anyway
<ra carr> err, b a ck for a  few mi n utes
<racarr>. ..and  distcheck failed a gain<racarr>  dear god h as no on e u pda ted  un s u pp orted in a mo n t h?
< ra carr> : p
< racarr>  pe opl e h ave  r emoved pl ugins wi th ou tre mov ing t h em fromth e b ui ldsyste m ...
<r acarr > PO TF IL E .in , etc
< c ri m s un>ge se r: t hela tter<lup i ne_ 85> tha t's whatweu se,Ith ink
<ra carr> ok back 
< racarr> an ddis tcheck w orked!
< lupine_85> b-p uploaded <geser>  sh ould-dev  packages  us e ${so urc e :Versi on} or  ${bi na ry: V e rsion } fo r t he  depends o n the  lib? 
< raca rr> ok. ..let me do a test b uil d of the pack agi ng.. . <c rim s un >  ge se r : I I R C there's a bin NM
brandon> k
*_imbrandon makes_a pot of coffee
<lupine_85>_racarr: hehe
<crimsun>_I'd_be more_comfortable_if bench_tex.h and_thumbnail_tex.h explicitly listed_the xcf filenames instead_of using a_wildcard
<racarr>_I'll be right back
<crimsun> otherwise -plugins looks good to go
<racarr> going to get more_coffee_while -unsupported_dist_checks...(again)
<crimsun>_lupine_85: does -plugins intend to_remain with those explicit filenames_in images/?
<crimsun>_lupine_85: (for the shader sources)
<lupine_85> crimsun: I can_change_if you prefer
<lupine_85>_the shaders are in a.tar
<lupine_85> oh, I see what_you mean
<lupine_85> yeah, the filenames aren't_going to change
<lupine_85>_I_can_get rid of the_wildcard if you like
<crimsun> lupine_85: I_think it makes more sense to_use explicit filenames
<lupine_85> ok
<geser> what it the_more recent syntax for specifying source_version depends? ${Source-Version} or ${source:Version}?
<lupine_85>_aquamarine and_b-s-b reuploaded anyway
<racarr> err, back_for a few_minutes
<racarr>...and distcheck_failed again
<racarr> dear_god has no one updated unsupported_in a month?
<racarr>_:p
<racarr> people have removed plugins without_removing_them from the_build_system...
<racarr>_POTFILE.in, etc
<crimsun>_geser: the latter
<lupine_85>_that's_what we_use,_I think
<racarr> ok back
<racarr> and distcheck_worked!
<lupine_85>_b-p uploaded
<geser> should -dev packages use ${source:Version}_or ${binary:Version} for the_depends_on the lib?
<racarr> ok...let_me do a testbuild of_the packaging...
<crimsun> geser: IIRC there's a_binNM