concerning llibva backport

[Nicholas D Steeves]

On 5 August 2016 at 09:43, Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher at debian.org> wrote:
> On 2016-07-29 06:40:07, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>> On 29 July 2016 at 06:28,  <sten-guest at users.alioth.debian.org> wrote:
>> > The branch, jessie-backports has been created
>> >         at  b40f4e34eed7e6e9f3225aa28f8ac9963d509747 (commit)
>> >
>> > - Shortlog ------------------------------------------------------------
>> > commit b40f4e34eed7e6e9f3225aa28f8ac9963d509747
>> > Author: Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves at gmail.com>
>> > Date:   Fri Jul 29 06:25:56 2016 -0400
>> >
>> >     Backport 1.7.1-1 to Jessie.
>> >
>>
>> I figured out a way to a hack to work around the gbp build failure
>> that is fixed in 1.7.1-2 UNRELEASED.  Briefly, in ~/.gbp.conf:  change
>> the cleaner line under [DEFAULT] to "cleaner = true" ;-)  Please
>> upload the libva bpo and this one simultaneously.
>
> I'm not in the backports ACL. You'll need another DD to sponsor the upload.
>
> Cheers
> --
> Sebastian Ramacher

Hi Sebastian,

I did a fresh build of libva-1.7.1-1~bpo+1 today, and noticed that it
was building against mesa-10.3.2-1+deb8u1 from Jessie.  I've been
testing it on a Jessie+backported mesa-11.1.3-1~bpo8+1, and the
packages I've been testing have also been built against mesa-10.3.x.
Do you think it's ok to build against mesa 10.3.2, or should we bump
the build deps of libva to pull in mesa from jessie-backports.  I'm in
favour of bumping the deps asap.  Additionally, I think it would also
be wise to bump the intel-vaapi-driver build-depend on libdrm-dev to
prevent it from being built against libdrm-2.4.58-2.

Also, my upload sponsor requires no-change backports so packages
implementing these proposed changes will need to be uploaded to sid.

Kind regards,
Nicholas