00:11:49 Stable (0.29) branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.29.1-0-g2c5f6ef291 00:25:52 Flugkiller (L16 MuAE) Crash caused by signal #11: Segmentation fault (Elf:3) 00:51:59 Stable (0.29) branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.29.1-0-g2c5f6ef291 01:09:17 Fork (bcrawl) on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.23-a0-4778-g1c48639af6 01:33:52 Fork (bcadrencrawl) on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.03-1056-g8a52a2b019 03:21:48 Experimental (bcrawl) branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.23-a0-4778-g1c48639af6 05:30:07 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.30-a0-112-gc3f1650 (34) 05:49:21 <06advil> looks like the deb stuff almost works, but it created a new tag on trunk 05:49:31 <06advil> so I guess I might manually relocate all that stuff 06:03:22 <06advil> ok, moved the tag, and manually re-uploaded everything 06:03:49 <06advil> annoyingly shows as "latest" release because the tag is timestamped later, but I don't know if there's much to be done about this 06:11:26 <06advil> @gammafunk debs here: https://github.com/crawl/crawl/releases/tag/0.29.1-debian 06:11:57 <06advil> I guess one thing I haven't checked is what version of debian they need, that's always been an issue when building them manually 06:13:11 <06advil> from the script it looks like it should be oldstable? 06:13:57 <12ebering> %git 06:13:57 <04Cerebot> PleasingFungus * 0.30-a0-112-gc3f1650bb9: Fix: don't place zombies without attacks (9 hours ago, 1 file, 11+ 9-) https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/c3f1650bb9e0 06:27:22 <06advil> that tag was messing with trunk's version for a bit, but it should be deleted now 06:27:35 <06advil> %git stone_soup-0.29 06:27:36 <04Cerebot> advil * 0.29.1: docs: update the debian changelog (12 hours ago, 1 file, 7+ 2-) https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/2c5f6ef29197 06:27:49 <06advil> wonder if it also messes with the branch version 06:29:13 <06advil> apparently not? 06:30:04 <06advil> aha, because the real tag is annotated 06:30:21 yes 06:31:04 I actually had to patch my copy of chei to use un-annotated tags because most of our release tags aren't 06:31:43 <06advil> in the crawl repo? or is "our" something else 06:31:49 (signing counts as annotation) 06:31:53 <06advil> they are supposed to be by the release guide but I always forget 06:32:01 <06advil> anyways, release builds here https://github.com/crawl/crawl/releases/tag/0.29.1 06:32:38 https://github.com/geekosaur/cheibriados/tree/xmonadtrack 06:32:51 <06advil> if someone is doing a tournament post within the next day or so, could you also announce this release? Otherwise I could do a quick release post sometime today 06:32:55 <06advil> ah, I see 07:03:27 03advil02 07* 0.30-a0-113-g5625c4ed77: Revert "task: add a trunk reminder for the 0.29 tournament" 10(74 seconds ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/5625c4ed77b4 07:08:42 03advil02 07* 0.30-a0-114-g744e84de5b: feat: `tile_display_mode` for local tiles 10(5 weeks ago, 22 files, 252+ 70-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/744e84de5b3e 07:23:32 advil: I just spoke to Simon (putty/ipbt) Tatham about the ttyrec problems 07:27:02 <08nicolae> light cyan unrands lookin good 07:28:43 <09gammafunk> Yeah I saw in the workflow that it was oldstable 07:33:16 what are the ttyrec problems? 07:33:22 Or I guess I should say, which ttyrec problems? 07:40:28 I thought it was you asking - that 16-colour ttyrecs don't work well in ipbt 07:41:07 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.30-a0-114-g744e84de5b (34) 07:41:17 (oh maybe it was amalloy?) 07:42:49 probably not me though there may have been a general discussion 07:43:23 I'll summarise the discussion with SGT as a github issue and hope it gets to whoever wanted it 07:43:23 I'm more of the "ttyrecs should die in a fire" camp than the "ooh this neat ttyrec feature doesn't work" camp 07:51:23 <12ebering> I think it was gammafunk and me 09:26:49 <09gammafunk> Did you end up disabling cao ttyrecs 09:29:45 <09gammafunk> Web tiles playback that’s not a hack would rule, and presumably if done right stuff like glyph mode could be a substitute for console folks, but designing a version independent client and representation of the json protocol is probably pretty nontrivial 09:30:10 <09gammafunk> And then I guess it had same storage issue as ttyrecs 09:41:06 only worse because all the json would be much larger 09:43:00 <09gammafunk> Yeah 09:45:10 <10PleasingFungus> https://www.reddit.com/r/dcss/comments/xc7rnc/top_25_of_the_029_release_tournament_with_some/ good reference for whoever makes the tournament post 10:57:26 -!- ssm__ is now known as ssm_ 11:39:21 <06advil> no, I was worried that something major would break 13:14:03 03PleasingFungus02 07* 0.30-a0-115-g95531337e3: Fix blastsparks + hop (Bardcore) 10(2 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/95531337e3c5 13:18:21 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.30-a0-115-g95531337e3 (34) 13:47:34 <06advil> hm, I hope it isn't the case that servers will need to manually delete this accidental trunk tag 14:04:18 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.30-a0-115-g95531337e3 (34) 14:05:37 <06advil> lol I think it might be 14:05:42 <06advil> that is ... unfortunate 14:06:05 <06advil> I wonder if it would make sense to tag something like 0.30-a1 14:06:23 <06advil> I dread the thought of trying to get all servers to individually sort this out 14:07:27 <06advil> the specific issue for those who haven't been following, is that the CI debian script uses a git action that has a bug that creates any new tags in trunk, and now that tag, even though it's deleted, is showing up as part of the game version 14:08:16 <06advil> like so 14:08:17 <06advil> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/747522859361894521/1018991459124379648/Screen_Shot_2022-09-12_at_5.07.36_PM.png 14:08:43 <06advil> does not seem like any regular pull or fetch command will delete stale tags that are no longer present on origin 14:13:32 <06advil> omg 14:13:39 <06advil> v=0.29.1:vlong=0.29.1-debian-1-gc3f1650:lv=0.1:vsavrv=Git::0.30-a0-55-g90e3122:vsav=34.249: [...] 14:16:35 <06advil> ok, this was all a mistake 14:17:37 <06advil> why did I merge without testing 14:19:39 <06advil> my current instinct is now to tag 0.30-a1 asap just to get milestone/logfile version fields fixed sooner rather than later 14:20:36 <06advil> are there consequences of doing that though 14:21:01 <10PleasingFungus> wish i knew more about git & also wasn’t in the middle of a day job crisis 14:21:05 <06advil> lol 14:21:17 <06advil> sorry, don't mean to laugh at crises 14:22:21 <10PleasingFungus> no worries 14:22:36 <10PleasingFungus> crisis a week keeps the doctor away (??) 14:22:45 <06advil> possibly the opposite of that 14:22:48 <10PleasingFungus> mm 14:23:29 <06advil> although with a crisis a week maybe you have no time to go to the doctor 14:25:06 Stable (0.29) branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.29.1-0-g2c5f6ef291 14:26:05 <06advil> huh, I wonder if this will mess up stable versions too, because the tags are in the wrong order 14:26:33 <06advil> might have to have another commit on the stable branch to really see 14:29:01 <10PleasingFungus> last week's crises were on saturday and wednesday, so i had plenty of time to go to the doc on friday. 14:29:08 <10PleasingFungus> anyway, back to it 14:29:24 <06advil> oh, maybe I checked this and its ok on the same commit because only one is annotated 14:30:30 <09gammafunk> Non annotated tags have no affect on repo history because they aren’t a ref on their own, right? 14:30:52 <09gammafunk> That was my simplistic understanding 14:30:54 right, unless you pass specific options to commands that care 14:30:54 Stable (0.29) branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.29.1-0-g2c5f6ef291 14:31:14 <06advil> however, because we use git describe --tags they do impact version numbering 14:31:26 <06advil> or can, at least 14:31:50 <09gammafunk> Ah, that considers non-annotated too? Shame 14:31:53 will, yes 14:32:13 git describe without --tags considers only annotated tags 14:32:26 <09gammafunk> Ic 14:32:31 which is why this didn't show in chei, which uses git describe without --tags 14:33:02 <06advil> I don't actually know why we use --tags 14:33:14 <09gammafunk> Was just going to ask! 14:34:12 <06advil> if I changed the Makefile to remove that it would fix the immediate problem 14:34:29 <06advil> and gen_ver.pl 14:35:07 <06advil> I feel like this is the kind of bug where someone such as me usually does something slightly panicked and then that has even more consequences 14:35:17 <09gammafunk> I don’t recall us making lightweight tags at any part of release process 14:35:21 <06advil> yeah 14:35:29 <06advil> except literally every time by accident 14:35:34 <09gammafunk> Lol 14:35:38 <06advil> but that always gets fixed up 14:36:15 <09gammafunk> I have never done that but I’m always paranoid at each step of release 14:36:35 <09gammafunk> Well haven’t pushed one afaik 14:37:21 <06advil> it seems like it would actually be better if lightweight tags didn't have Significance 14:38:25 <09gammafunk> I support your proposed change if I’m immune to legal action from any resulting bugs 14:41:48 <06advil> I guess if this is merged only in trunk it could even just be reverted later if needed for some reason 14:47:06 <06advil> "Annotated tags are meant for release while lightweight tags are meant for private or temporary object labels." 14:47:28 <06advil> ofc, github seems perfectly happy to use a lightweight tag for a release, though that inconsistency works in our favor here 15:01:59 03advil02 07* 0.30-a0-116-g3b1a8e4ee4: fix: use only annotated tags for version info 10(9 minutes ago, 3 files, 7+ 7-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/3b1a8e4ee43b 15:02:28 <06advil> I think this is one of those things where neunon did it ~13 years ago and it has been the same ever since because no one wants to mess with it 15:02:46 <06advil> %git 2f656a0430f31656 15:02:47 <04Cerebot> neunon * 0.6.0-a0-1301-g2f656a0430: versioning: remove SVN-specific revision data, add Git versioning (13 years ago, 113 files, 149+ 203-) https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/2f656a0430f3 15:02:48 <06advil> appears to come from there 15:07:52 Unstable branch on crawl.akrasiac.org updated to: 0.30-a0-116-g3b1a8e4ee4 (34) 15:10:20 <06advil> I think the weird milestones/loglines are probably ignorable 15:10:31 <06advil> as long as they are fixed soon 15:10:59 <06advil> any games won in the intervening period will appear to be a stable version in cao, and maybe in sequell 15:11:07 <06advil> but that seems like a minor blip 15:18:06 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.30-a0-116-g3b1a8e4ee4 (34) 15:22:21 -!- SKull_ is now known as SKull 15:23:47 Unstable branch on underhound.eu updated to: 0.30-a0-115-g95531337e3 (34) 15:24:09 <06advil> oops, sad for cue 15:37:54 <06advil> man, cbr2 rebuilds are very very slow right now 15:37:56 <06advil> wonder why 15:41:38 Unstable branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.30-a0-116-g3b1a8e4ee4 (34) 15:54:17 Ranger33 (L6 MiBe) ASSERT(you.inv[invidx].defined()) in 'invent.cc' at line 435 failed. (D:3) 16:26:58 <09gammafunk> @advil I had to use a somewhat elaborate approach to actually get those files onto CDO, let me know if there's an easier way: wget -r -A .deb -A .dsc -A .changes -A .tar.xz -A .buildinfo -nd -I crawl/crawl/releases/download/0.29.1-debian https://github.com/crawl/crawl/releases/tag/0.29.1-debian 16:27:57 <09gammafunk> I guess we'll need to update the release guide anyhow and can include this invocation 17:22:58 <06advil> hm when I relocated the tag I cut and pasted all the names, which is worse 17:23:09 <06advil> I wonder if we should just have the CI tar all that stuff up 17:23:22 <06advil> then it could be attached to the regular tag too 17:23:52 <06advil> !crashlog 17:23:54 <04Cerebot> 24648. Wizard1ke, XL19 SpBe, T:60165 (milestone): https://crawl.project357.org/morgue/Wizard1ke/crash-Wizard1ke-20220913-001114.txt 17:24:00 <06advil> !crashlog Ranger33 17:24:01 <04Cerebot> 1. Ranger33, XL6 MiBe, T:3095 (milestone): http://crawl.akrasiac.org/rawdata/Ranger33/crash-Ranger33-20220912-225416.txt 17:24:27 <06advil> huh is cpo still having that manual crash bug 17:27:17 <09gammafunk> yeah, and there's a tar.xz named after debian that I was pleased to see at first, since I was thinking it was exactly this, but I was disappointed to see that it was a tar.xz of the debian directory used to build the debs :yogidaFeels: 17:27:39 <06advil> that tar.xz is actually just a renamed version of nodeps btw 17:27:55 <09gammafunk> well, the one I'm talking about is just the debian dir only 17:27:58 <09gammafunk> it's a very small file 17:27:59 <06advil> oh ok 17:28:12 <06advil> somewhere in there is a tar.xz that is renamed nodeps 😄 17:28:41 <09gammafunk> yep, the orig.tar.xz file? that's needed for the pbuilder process 17:28:48 <09gammafunk> file I was mentioning is https://github.com/crawl/crawl/releases/download/0.29.1-debian/crawl_0.29.1-1.debian.tar.xz 17:29:44 <09gammafunk> truthfully I don't even know which all of these files reprepro needs aside from the .dsc and the .deb files, but I recall that it failed if I didn't have certain ones, so in the past I just copied the whole results files over to CDO 17:30:35 <09gammafunk> one of these days I'm going to get motivated and fix all these (probably) gcc-only warnings 17:30:52 <06advil> yeah they are accruing, I do see them in CI 17:32:14 <06advil> there's a new deprecation warning, not exactly sure what's up with that 17:32:19 <06advil> for some FixedArray stuff 17:33:51 <09gammafunk> > initfile.cc: In member function ‘void game_options::read_option_line(const string&, bool)’: > initfile.cc:2952:24: warning: ‘key’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] > 2952 | bind_command_to_key(cmd, key); > | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~ > initfile.cc:2907:9: note: ‘key’ was declared here > 2907 | int key; 17:34:01 <09gammafunk> another I get 17:34:05 <06advil> I have checked that one, I think it's wrong 17:34:08 <06advil> it's at least easy to fix though 17:39:20 03advil02 07* 0.30-a0-117-g66a3b8458b: fix: maybe quiet a gcc warning 10(2 minutes ago, 1 file, 5+ 5-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/66a3b8458ba8 17:40:08 should have been "maybe quiet a maybe warning: 😛 17:47:44 03advil02 07* 0.30-a0-118-ga018f8e90f: fix: maybe quiet another gcc warning 10(2 minutes ago, 1 file, 10+ 8-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/a018f8e90fb9 17:48:12 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.30-a0-117-g66a3b8458b (34) 18:03:14 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.30-a0-118-ga018f8e90f (34) 18:05:34 03advil02 {gammafunk} 07[miranda-warning] * 0.30-a0-122-g3b88a30afb: Revert "task: add a trunk reminder for the 0.29 tournament" 10(11 hours ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/3b88a30afbf5 18:05:34 Branch pull/2721 updated to be equal with miranda-warning: 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/2721 18:07:41 03hellmonk02 07[sourgrapes] * 0.30-a0-64-ga61e1dc80c: adjust Dith wrath 10(79 minutes ago, 1 file, 3+ 30-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/a61e1dc80cac 18:07:41 03hellmonk02 07[sourgrapes] * 0.30-a0-65-ga304507e4a: adjust Qazlal wrath 10(68 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 5-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/a304507e4a88 18:07:41 03hellmonk02 07[sourgrapes] * 0.30-a0-66-g8bd411a4f1: adjust Fedhas wrath 10(63 minutes ago, 1 file, 3+ 9-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/8bd411a4f15f 18:07:41 03hellmonk02 07[sourgrapes] * 0.30-a0-67-gf548e4de8c: adjust Jiyva wrath 10(23 minutes ago, 1 file, 51+ 29-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/f548e4de8c32 18:07:41 03hellmonk02 07[sourgrapes] * 0.30-a0-68-g61c4b05fd8: adjust Uskayaw wrath 10(17 minutes ago, 1 file, 2+ 2-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/61c4b05fd8dc 18:07:41 03hellmonk02 07[sourgrapes] * 0.30-a0-69-g6f6339516d: adjust "overwhelming" wrath 10(5 minutes ago, 1 file, 4+ 15-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/6f6339516db8 19:07:16 04Build failed for 08sourgrapes @ 6f633951 06https://github.com/crawl/crawl/actions/runs/3041661864 23:14:19 Unstable branch on cbro.berotato.org updated to: 0.30-a0-118-ga018f8e90f (34)