[12:14] <plugwash> afaict some funding agencies wan't stuff that they fund to be freeer than GPL, that seems perfectly reasonable to me
[12:15] <LaserJock> yeah
[12:15] <plugwash> or the agency doing the funding wants to use it in thier own propietry stuff
[12:16] <Simon80> Laserjock, LGPL
[12:16] <LaserJock> I guess my main complaint with the GPL is that on one hand it's so free, but on the other hand is so restrictive
[12:16] <Simon80> for that very reason
[12:16] <LaserJock> mhm
[12:16] <Simon80> but the restrictiveness is what makes it so good
[12:17] <LaserJock> I'm not so sure
[12:17] <Simon80> the so called copyleft
[12:17] <LaserJock> yeah, I can see in the beginning where copyleft was important
[12:17] <Simon80> without it, people would be more apt to flip flop and release closed code
[12:17] <LaserJock> I just think it's hampering a lot of growth
[12:17] <Simon80> where is growth being hampered, huh?
[12:18] <LaserJock> because everybody hoped on the GPL bandwagon and now places where it could grow it can't because of copyleft
[12:18] <LaserJock> in this case chemical software
[12:18] <Simon80> lol
[12:18] <Simon80> I think your demand is unreasonable though
[12:19] <Simon80> it's not growth in that area if you can't GPL it
[12:19] <LaserJock> nah, I just think something like LGPL might be better
[12:19] <LaserJock> why?
[12:19] <Simon80> well, unless you just mean open source growth or something
[12:19] <LaserJock> open source yes
[12:19] <Simon80> well then
[12:19] <Simon80> you could always write open source code that still falls within the funding requirements then
[12:20] <LaserJock> right
[12:20] <LaserJock> but this is what I'm saying
[12:20] <Simon80> what ARE you saying?
[12:20] <LaserJock> in my field we have a GPL'd library that is supposed to be the standard for chemical information transfer
[12:20] <LaserJock> but many projects don't use it because it's GPL'd
[12:21] <LaserJock> so the only way for it to be the standard is for *everything* else to be GPL'd
[12:21] <plugwash> have you tried talking to its developers about getting it placed under a freer license?
[12:21] <Simon80> mmhmm
[12:21] <LaserJock> which has caused people to reject the standard and write something else that they *can* use
[12:21] <Simon80> personally, I think that it's totally up to the developers whether they want more users or more GPLed software
[12:22] <LaserJock> this is what I'm talking about with the GPL "bandwagon"
[12:22] <LaserJock> I just think many people just GPL stuff because it's obvious
[12:22] <LaserJock> but it can cause problems for other's in the future
[12:22] <plugwash> yep, have you told the libraries devs this?
[12:23] <plugwash> and if so how did they respond?
[12:23] <Simon80> I dunno, by the time you've written some code, you've thought about the ramifications of the license
[12:23] <Simon80> I definitely have.. and I would use the GPL by choice
[12:23] <LaserJock> I suppose, but these are scientists we're talking about
[12:23] <Simon80> indeed, who else should be more supportive of the GPL than scientists?
[12:23] <LaserJock> plugwash: well, this is the debate going on right now, hence why I'm thinking about it  :-)
[12:23] <LaserJock> well, they aren't
[12:24] <LaserJock> scientists have some of the worst licenses I've ever seen
[12:24] <Simon80> indeed
[12:24] <plugwash> the GPL has its place, but libraries that are supposed to be the reference implementation of a standard are not that place
[12:24] <Simon80> and they should freaking wise up, they're on the forefront of expanding human knowledge, and they should act like it, lol
[12:25] <LaserJock> Simon80: yes, but it's very difficult
[12:25] <Simon80> plugwash: I suppose that's a valid point, but it depends how pervasive the standard is
[12:25] <Simon80> what is very difficult?
[12:25] <LaserJock> I'm part of an open standards, open source, open data chemistry group
[12:25] <plugwash> Simon80 if you wan't the standard to be pervasive then GPLing the standard is not the way to achive that
[12:25] <Simon80> no, clearly not
[12:25] <plugwash> and generally gaining wide acceptance is the whole point of standards
[12:26] <Simon80> indeed
[12:26] <LaserJock> well, for instance, I am relying on somebody else not publishing my research before I do
[12:26] <Simon80> I have to go eat
[12:26] <LaserJock> it would be difficult for me to take an "Open Chemistry" stnace
[12:26] <LaserJock> *stance
[12:27] <LaserJock> many scientist believe in academic-only or non-commercial licenses
[12:27] <LaserJock> it's just tough
[12:27] <Simon80> yeah
[12:27] <LaserJock> and you are talking about their career
[12:27] <Simon80> well, this is why I like the GPL, cause without it, nobody would be thinking about this
[12:28] <LaserJock> I've spent 9 years in uni and I'd be pretty darn upset if somebody "stole" my work
[12:28] <Simon80> I mean, i know my attitude is a bit imposing... but there are so many cases where companies GPL something cause they have to
[12:28] <Simon80> Laserjock: wouldn't there be repercussions of them doing that?
[12:28] <LaserJock> no
[12:28] <Simon80> I mean, it would be obvious they did it
[12:29] <LaserJock> not if they published it before I did
[12:29] <LaserJock> it's just a race to who publishes first, the only weapon I have is ignorance on their part ;-)
[12:29] <Simon80> err.. but you would have public source code history that would act as proof that it was your work
[12:29] <LaserJock> wouldn't matter
[12:29] <Simon80> how do you know that?
[12:30] <Simon80> I don't think academics like plagiarism much
[12:30] <LaserJock> because it's the paper that matters :-)
[12:30] <LaserJock> well, it's not "stole" as in came into my lab and grabbed my notes
[12:30] <Simon80> no, it's plagiarism
[12:30] <LaserJock> but as in "I share my ongoing research with others in the field"
[12:31] <LaserJock> which is equivalent to FLOSS I think
[12:31] <Simon80> yeah, that's what the GPL does
[12:31] <LaserJock> that would kill me
[12:31] <LaserJock> I couldn't do my research if I acted that way
[12:31] <LaserJock> at this point
[12:31] <Simon80> well what you could do is develop in private, but publish under the GPL when you're done
[12:32] <Simon80> it's only the distribution part that the license covers
[12:32] <Simon80> you can do what you like with it in private
[12:32] <LaserJock> sure, that's more or less what Chemistry is now
[12:32] <sistpoty> hi folks
[12:32] <Simon80> well then how does that sound?
[12:32] <Simon80> along with this paper is some GPL code, enjoy folks
[12:32] <LaserJock> well, it doesn't sound very open
[12:32] <Simon80> it's better than the alternative you suggest
[12:33] <Simon80> which is to not use the GPL, and reinvent the wheel
[12:33] <LaserJock> well, it's the current situation
[12:33] <Simon80> it's not the current situation, not how you explained it
[12:33] <LaserJock> sorry, I'm sort of mixing things about
[12:33] <LaserJock> for me personally I don't do anything with software
[12:33] <Simon80> ah
[12:33] <Simon80> .............I still have to go eat, lol
[12:33] <LaserJock> I was equating FLOSS to "Open Chemistry" where scientists work as the FLOSS word does
[12:33] <Simon80> oh
[12:34] <Simon80> well, they do now
[12:34] <Simon80> sort of
[12:34] <LaserJock> in an interesting way
[12:34] <Simon80> they like to charge money for papers, but otherwise, it's kind of like that
[12:34] <Simon80> it SHOULD be like that
[12:34] <LaserJock> anyway, you better go eat
[12:34] <LaserJock> :-)
[12:34] <Simon80> I mean, nothing wrong with using a bit of communism where it applies.. as in when it doesn't involve property redistribution
[12:35] <Simon80> basically, information wants to be free.. it's cliche, but it's how we should view this
[12:35] <LaserJock> well, if I was truly open in my research I'd never be able to graduate :-)
[12:35] <Simon80> imo
[12:35] <Simon80> laser, what if, like I said, you were open upon publishing it
[12:35] <Simon80> but not before
[12:35] <Simon80> doesn't that fix it?
[12:36] <LaserJock> well, that's fine. that's really the scientific model for the most part
[12:36] <Simon80> I feel very strongly about not restricting the flow of information
[12:36] <LaserJock> but that doesn't bring the power of FLOSS to science
[12:36] <Simon80> yes it does
[12:36] <Simon80> part of it
[12:36] <Simon80> there's not the same collaboration, but there is some
[12:36] <LaserJock> the power would be to share ideas and develop before it gets published
[12:36] <Simon80> you build on other papers
[12:37] <Simon80> before of after they get published, there's still sharing going on, man
[12:37] <LaserJock> yeah, some
[12:37] <LaserJock> but I want it all :-)
[12:37] <Simon80> so I don't care if you wait till it gets published, the issue that I care about is whether people publsih freely, that sort of thing
[12:37] <LaserJock> yeah, that makes sense
[12:37] <LaserJock> anyway, that was really OT
[12:37] <Simon80> and I don't see yet why that couldn't include GPLed code at publish-time
[12:38] <Simon80> lol
[12:38] <LaserJock> well, I don't publish code so that would be a problem :-)
[12:38] <LaserJock> but for people who do there are at times (apparently) when there are restrictions set by the funding agencies
[12:39] <LaserJock> and while the push might need to be made to make the funding agency accept a GPL license
[12:39] <LaserJock> I'm not really convinced that all code in this world needs to be GPL'd
[12:39] <LaserJock> if you're out for world domination then copyleft is the way to go I guess
[12:40] <LaserJock> if you're trying to be useful and let people do what they want with it then I think there are better choices
[01:01] <LaserJock> wb
[01:02] <ajmitch> mm, lunch :)
[01:02] <ajmitch> what's up?
[01:02] <LaserJock> lunch
[01:02] <ajmitch> where I get to sit in the office
[01:02] <LaserJock> do you have a window?
[01:03] <jelmer> So, I've got a package in universe that I need to update. What's the proper process for that (while I'm not a MOTU)?
[01:03] <LaserJock> jelmer: file a bug, attach a debdiff, subscribe ubuntu-universe-sponsors
[01:03] <jelmer> LaserJock: roger, thanks
[01:03] <ajmitch> LaserJock: sure, the window runs the length of the office, is about 2m by 6m :)
[01:04] <ajmitch> jelmer: bzr-svn?
[01:04] <jelmer> ajmitch: yep
[01:04] <ajmitch> jelmer: is it in debian right now?
[01:04] <Lathiat> my eyes usually kill me everytime i walk outside ;p
[01:04] <LaserJock> they don't let us have *any* windows with all the lasers flying about ;-)
[01:05] <LaserJock> although we do get to occasionally drill holes through walls to get from one room to another
[01:05] <jelmer> ajmitch: Not yet. The required Python-Subversion changes have been integrated into the Debian package as well now.
[01:06] <jelmer> So it should be possible, if somebody can sponsor (my AM seems to've gone MIA)
[01:07] <ajmitch> sure, I can 
[01:07] <ajmitch> I offered awhile back, I can't remember what the hold up was then
[01:07] <jelmer> Probably the fact that python-subversion needed patching
[01:07] <ajmitch> I think so
[01:08] <ajmitch> if you can give me a url to a source package, it'd be great
[01:09] <ajmitch> makes things more consistent if I use the same tarball as you have
[01:09] <jelmer> ajmitch: Packages are up at http://samba.org/~jelmer/bzr/
[01:09] <ajmitch> I don't know how NEW processing is going in debian at the moment with etch frozen
[01:10] <LaserJock> I thought it was dead
[01:10] <jelmer> ajmitch: It looks quite short at the moment
[01:11] <ajmitch> http://samba.org/~jelmer/bzr/bzr-svn_0.2-0ubuntu1.dsc is the ubuntu update?
[01:11] <sistpoty> ajmitch: is there a way to grab a package sitting in debian's new?
[01:11] <jelmer> ajmitch: Oops, yes, that's right. 
[01:11] <ajmitch> sistpoty: no, due to various arcane restrictions
[01:12] <ajmitch> like US export laws, iirc
[01:12] <sistpoty> ah, k... because bddebian wants to bring a package in that's also sitting in new :)
[01:12] <jelmer> ajmitch: Working on a Debian entry..
[01:12] <ajmitch> since it's not verified by ftpmasters whether debian can distribute the package yet
[01:13] <LaserJock> ajmitch: they just need an offshore account ;-)
[01:13] <sistpoty> oh, seems like it's no longer in new *g*
[01:13] <jelmer> ajmitch: Is it a problem if there are -ubuntuX entries in debian/changelog for a debian package?
[01:13] <LaserJock> sistpoty: is it in or is it just not there?
[01:13] <jelmer> or do I just need to make sure the last entry is 0.2-0 ?
[01:14] <sistpoty> LaserJock: I'm just checking... *g*
[01:14] <ajmitch> jelmer: last entry should be 0.2-1, I don't think they care if there are -0ubuntu1 entries
[01:14] <ajmitch> I'm sure I've put packages through debian NEW with ubuntu changelog entries
[01:16] <sistpoty> LaserJock: it's at least not yet on p.d.o, maybe it got rejected
[01:16] <LaserJock> I thought there was something about a NEW flush in November
[01:17] <ajmitch> sistpoty: package name?
[01:17] <sistpoty> libparagui1.1
[01:17] <ajmitch> sistpoty: was that actually uploaded to debian?
[01:18] <sistpoty> ajmitch: I'd swear that I've seen it in new yesterday... and there is a bug marked as pending on the older one
[01:18] <sistpoty> (wishlist bug regarding new upstream version=
[01:18] <sistpoty> -=+)
[01:19] <sistpoty> debian bug #316335
[01:19] <Ubugtu> Debian bug 316335 in libparagui1.0-dev "libparagui1.0: new version available" [Wishlist,Open]  http://bugs.debian.org/316335
[01:20] <ajmitch> it'd probably get rejected for wonky shlibs :)
[01:20] <superm1> is there a way to make a package use an interactive debconf frontend even if the system has debconf generally set to noninteractive?
[01:20] <sistpoty> hehe, probably...
[01:22] <sistpoty> ajmitch: seems very much like it... I found it in pkg-sdl svn (with wrong shlibs *g*)
[01:22] <ajmitch> yay
[01:23] <jelmer> ajmitch: I've uploaded 0.2-1
[01:23] <sistpoty> no, rejected for debian/copyright reasons: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-sdl-maintainers/2006-December/000280.html
[01:24] <LaserJock> doh
[01:24] <LaserJock> and people look at me funny when I say you need to account for the licenses of *all* files
[01:25] <sistpoty> hehe, I guess I'm a get debian/copyright right diehard as well
[01:27] <ajmitch> you have to be
[01:30] <jelmer> (-:
[01:31] <ajmitch> jelmer: might be good to depend on a version of python-version that has the appropriate patches
[01:34] <jelmer> ajmitch: Right, I hadn't thought of that. Rebuilding...
[01:35] <ajmitch> apart from that it looks fine
[01:47] <jelmer> ajmitch: Fixed now, I've uploaded a new version.
[01:53] <ajmitch> ok
[01:54] <zul> do do do
[01:57] <imbrandon> re
[01:57] <sistpoty> wb imbrandon
[01:57] <imbrandon> heya sistpoty 
[01:58] <sistpoty> oh, nice... gborzi is now also (co)-maintaining keytouch in debian :)
[02:00] <ajmitch> hey imbrandon 
[02:08] <superm1> ping crimsun_ 
[02:16] <superm1> imbrandon you around?
[02:21] <joejaxx> what other screen video capture applications are there other than istanbul and xvidcap?
[02:25] <sistpoty> ok, /me needs to go to bed now. otherwise I'll be late for lunch with siretart *g*
[02:25] <sistpoty> gn8 everyone
[02:25] <joejaxx> Goodnight sistpoty 
[02:50] <mruiz> ping slomo
[02:51] <ajmitch> mruiz: probably the wrong time of day for that
[02:51] <mruiz> hello ajmitch 
[02:52] <ajmitch> hello
[02:52] <superm1> hey ajmitch, can i possibly steal a few minutes from you to get a revu?
[02:53] <ajmitch> it may take a bit more than a minute, so I'd have to wait until later
[02:53] <superm1> oh okay
[02:53] <superm1> figured i'd try :)
[02:54] <jdong> so it appears like Wednesday the 13th also carries some bad luck
[02:54] <superm1> jdong, why is that?
[02:54] <jdong> people are rarely yet many people are, getting grub error 17's with the kernel updates
[02:54] <jdong> reporting that kopt's root=/dev/??? line got bumped up by 1
[02:54] <jdong> i.e. sda1 -> sda2
[02:55] <jdong> (Dapper users)
[02:55] <jdong> and Edgy users randomly report various X failures
[02:55] <jdong> both official and unofficial drivers
[02:55] <jdong> including modprobe searching wrong paths, corrected with depmod -ae
[02:55] <ajmitch> superm1: try again in a few hours, it's friday afternoon here
[02:55] <jdong> nvidia xorg drivers totally disappearing, fixed by reinstalling nvidia-glx
[02:55] <superm1> ajmitch, aye okay thanks
[02:55] <theCore> anyone would like to review the patch that fix bug 57951?
[02:55] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 57951 in xchat "xchat crashes frequently on quit" [Undecided,In progress]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/57951
[02:55] <jdong> monitor out of sync, fixed with reconfiguring xorg
[02:55] <superm1> jdong, why all the breakage though?
[02:55] <jdong> you name it\
[02:56] <superm1> this seems like very weird stuff
[02:56] <jdong> superm1: I'm totally confused
[02:56] <superm1> to break from a kernel update
[02:56] <jdong> superm1: I've tried to track it down
[02:56] <jdong> superm1: spent about 3 hours yesterday with 5 different people
[02:56] <jdong> superm1: we'd figure out what happened, but have no idea why it happened
[02:56] <superm1> i've done the updates on 3 of my boxes, and they went smoother then most kernel updates (no needing to redo module-assistant or anything)
[02:56] <jdong> superm1: and all attempts to roll back the update, redo it and reproduce it fails
[02:56] <jdong> superm1: me too
[02:56] <jdong> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1887116
[02:57] <jdong> but look at that thread (the replies)
[02:57] <jdong> there's an unignorable number of users experiencing some sort of problem
[02:57] <jdong> and they can't all be blamed on unofficial nvidia repos
[02:57] <jdong> it's left me utterly confused and completely out of ideas
[02:57] <jdong> and not being able to consistently reproduce any of the symptoms is leaving me extremely frustrated
[02:58] <bddebian> Heya gang
[02:58] <superm1> very crazy stuff
[02:59] <superm1> Hello bddebian 
[02:59] <bddebian> Hi superm1
[02:59] <superm1> bddebian, would you have a few moments for a revu?
[03:00] <bddebian> Yeah, why not
[03:00] <superm1> great: http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?upid=3780
[03:01] <superm1> just settled all the licensing mess today :)
[03:04] <bddebian> superm1: I would add a -0ubuntu1 revision
[03:04] <superm1> it was going to always be ubuntu native
[03:04] <bddebian> Hmm
[03:04] <superm1> the license allows for ubuntu and derivatives
[03:06] <bddebian> Can it really carry a GPL license?
[03:06] <superm1> the packaging
[03:06] <superm1> not the firmware
[03:07] <bddebian> Hrm..
[03:08] <superm1> crimsun_, was fairly iffy about it to, and said as long as I got this license and approval for hosting on ubuntu servers + mirrors, then it would fall on ubuntu-archive admins final decision
[03:12] <danielmarsom> have you guys considered putting webmin in the repos?
[03:15] <joejaxx> danielmarsom: it was in the repos
[03:15] <joejaxx> they took it out
[03:15] <danielmarsom> any idea why?
[03:15] <joejaxx> security concerns if i remember correctly
[03:17] <danielmarsom> ok. thanks man.
[03:17] <joejaxx> danielmarsom: you are most welcome
[03:18] <ash211> if anyone's looking for a bug to fix, 
[03:18] <ash211> bug 24981 could use an added dependency
[03:18] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 24981 in anjuta "Anjuta: unfulfilled glib dependency" [Medium,Needs info]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/24981
[03:18] <bddebian> Ugh, anjuta
[03:18] <superm1> bddebian, couple of questions about revu though - there is a Multimedia section when I look in Synaptic/Sections.  What do I set to get it placed in that?
[03:19] <superm1> oh. nvm, looks like 'sound'.  a bit counter-intuitive eh? :)
[03:19] <superm1> thanks for the revu bddebian 
[03:21] <bddebian> I don't see one listed here: http://packages.debian.org/unstable/
[03:21] <bddebian> Ohh nm :-)
[03:26] <bddebian> Holy crap there are a lot of packages on REVU
[03:26] <crimsun_> we should tag team them.
[03:26] <bddebian> I'm looking now
[03:26] <crimsun_> we'll have a revu day soonish
[03:26] <bddebian> Hmm
[03:26] <bddebian> I think I have all my merges done that I can do for now..
[03:28] <ajmitch> bddebian: coming to the motu meeting?
[03:28] <bddebian> Did we ever pick a date?
[03:29] <ajmitch> yes
[03:29] <ajmitch> friday
[03:29] <ajmitch> (tomorrow)
[03:29] <bddebian> time?
[03:29] <ajmitch> 20:00UTC
[03:30] <bddebian> Hmm yeah I can probably make that
[03:30] <ajmitch> 9am saturday for me
[03:30] <bddebian> crimsun_: So I shouldn't review until revu day?
[03:31] <crimsun_> I'm going to do a few now
[03:31] <ajmitch> you should review constantly
[03:31] <crimsun_> well, after I get some more coffee :)
[03:31] <ajmitch> revu day is just a special day where dholbach hugs everyone
[03:31] <bddebian> ajmitch: So should you! ;-P
[03:31] <superm1> bddebian, about that error about too long of an extended description, is that anything to really worry about?
[03:31] <ajmitch> bddebian: so I should
[03:31] <ajmitch> doesn't mean I will
[03:31] <superm1> because its a license
[03:32] <bddebian> superm1: I wouldn't worry about it too much but I'm not as anal as ajmitch :-)
[03:32] <superm1> okay i'll reupload with the others fixed then.  Thanks :)
[03:32] <bddebian> NP
[04:02] <jmantha> hi guys
[04:02] <bddebian> Heya jmantha
[04:02] <bddebian> New nick? :-)
[04:02] <jmantha> yeah, it's the latest craze
[04:02] <bddebian> So I've noticed :)
[04:03] <jmantha> cjwatson, bhale, tfheen
[04:03] <bddebian> Don't make me go all bdefreese on your asses :)
[04:03] <jmantha> please don't
[04:03] <ajmitch> am I going to have to change as well?
[04:03] <bddebian> ajmitch: Nah, you're close enough :-)
[04:04] <ajmitch> too long to type
[04:05] <ajmitch> nah, you're far beyond mere cool
[04:06] <bddebian> Yeah right
[04:06] <jmantha> mhm
[04:06] <bddebian> Tell that to my wife ;-P
[04:06] <jmantha> ajmitch: +1
[04:07] <ajmitch> with jmantha as deputy
[04:08] <jmantha> hmm, not sure about that
[04:11] <bddebian> ajmitch: Oh no, jmantha would make a much better ruler
[04:12] <jmantha> bah, I don't rule anything
[04:12] <bddebian> You just plain RULE d00d :)
[04:16] <jmantha> bddebian: I think if you look the my number of uploads you'd beg to differ
[04:18] <bddebian> Bah uploads, schmuploads :-)
[04:19] <ajmitch> stop arguing & get back to fixing
[04:26] <jmantha> xchat-gnome just isn't quite there
[04:27] <bddebian> ajmitch: I can't fix anything :-)
[04:29] <crimsun_> it looks like a lot of people are getting bitten by the kernel updates
[04:29] <crimsun_> of course, precisely none of them are Ubuntu's fault.
[04:30] <crimsun_> -and- they're filing bugs that we have to reject.
[04:31] <crimsun_> at least two alsa bug reports in LP today due to the edgy-security linux-image-foo update
[04:31] <crimsun_> both of them turned out to be caused by pebkac
[04:31] <bddebian> heh
[04:31] <ajmitch> users...
[04:31] <ajmitch> our lives would be so much better without them
[04:32] <bddebian> What's with the freakin' 3 changelog entries for a single merge?
[04:32] <ajmitch> I'm sorry?
[04:32] <ajmitch> please explain
[04:33] <bddebian> istanbul on REVU
[04:35] <bddebian> there's a MoM entry + two uploader entries just for the merge
[04:35] <ajmitch> right, stating that you saw this on a specific package would have helped when you asked your question
[04:35] <bddebian> It was a rhetorical question :-)
[04:35] <ajmitch> like many of your questions prefixed with WTF!?!
[04:36] <bddebian> YEP :)
[04:37] <bddebian> So is this some new "policy" before I complain about more packages with Merge-o-Matic changelog entries?
[04:37] <bddebian> ajmitch: You can always just ignore me
[04:37] <ajmitch> tempting..
[04:38] <bddebian> Go for it man
[04:38] <ajmitch> the new policy is to include the remaining ubuntu changes 
[04:38] <bddebian> That's not new is it?
[04:39] <ajmitch> not really
[04:39] <ajmitch> having multiple changelog entries like that is just wrong
[04:40] <bddebian> Just making sure :-)
[04:40] <ajmitch> sure, there's no way it could be uploaded as-is
[04:54] <superm1> crimsun_, while on your revuing madness can you look at ivtv-firmware again?
[04:55] <crimsun_> I'm in a meeting.
[04:55] <superm1> ah okay
[05:07] <bddebian> What is a ~git20061213 revision? (compiz on REVU)
[05:09] <ajmitch> a git revision, from 20061213
[05:10] <bddebian> I got that. What is git?
[05:11] <ajmitch> a revision control system
[05:11] <ajmitch> one that's quite popular
[05:11] <jmantha> bddebian: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_%28software%29
[05:14] <bddebian> Heh, what do I know? :-)
[05:14] <somerville32> Nothing?
[05:14] <bddebian> somerville32: Correct
[05:22] <jmantha> ok, so I've got an SRU interpretation question
[05:23] <jmantha> do I need to include the previous changelog in the .changes?
[05:23] <jmantha> or just the one I'm adding
[05:24] <jmantha> the Main SRU page has "Make sure to generate the .changes file against the base version in the relevant distribution and not against the version in -proposed or a previous version in -updates, using the -v option to dpkg-buildpackage or debuild."
[05:27] <jdong> ahhhh ew ew ew stay away from me
[05:27] <jdong> no, I can't help you use your "dapper-backports suppositories"
[05:27] <jdong> :-/
[05:28] <crimsun_> jmantha: for -proposed or -updates?
[05:28] <jdong> why am I always the butt-end of all these random jokes
[05:28] <crimsun_> jmantha: the statement above means you shouldn't include changelog entries from -proposed
[05:28] <crimsun_> jmantha: ...a policy that doesn't seem to be enforced very strictly but policy nonetheless.
[05:29] <jmantha> ah, ok. I see
[05:29] <jmantha> I was a little confused
[05:29] <bddebian> Should debhelper/compat be 5 before an upload?  I think so but I don't know if we "force" that now?
[05:30] <crimsun_> bddebian: we haven't enforced any compat version, really.
[05:30] <bddebian> Hmm
[05:34] <jmantha> crimsun_: hmm, and the version has to be different between -proposed and -updates ?
[05:35] <ajmitch> jmantha: for it to be accepted by soyuz, it does
[05:36] <jmantha> ajmitch: so what have people been using, .1 ?
[05:36] <ajmitch> yep
[05:37] <ajmitch> & then .2
[05:37] <ajmitch> eg wlassistant 0.5.5-0ubuntu3.2
[05:37] <ajmitch> went into -updates
[05:38] <ajmitch> there doesn't appear to be a consistent numbering used
[05:38] <jmantha> well I was going to upload ubuntu1 to -proposed
[05:38] <jmantha> but should I do ubuntu2 or ubuntu1.1 to -updates?
[05:38] <ajmitch> pitti used  gnome-netstatus 2.12.0-5ubuntu7~prop1
[05:38] <ajmitch> for -proposed
[05:39] <crimsun_> right, we should probably adopt ~ usage
[05:39] <jmantha> ok, so is ubuntu1~prop1 lower then ubuntu1 ?
[05:39] <ajmitch> yes
[05:40] <jmantha> geeze, versioning gets so ridiculous
[05:40] <ajmitch> yes :)
[05:40] <jmantha> he is forbidden from doing so
[05:40] <ajmitch> surely not?
[05:40] <jmantha> oh yeah
[05:41] <crimsun_> I guess not. The trinity has spoken.
[05:41] <AnAnt> bddebian: ping
[05:41] <jmantha> hehe
[05:41] <bddebian> AnAnt: I'm not here ;-P
[05:42] <AnAnt> bddebian: ok, I was wondering are you an electronic engineer ?
[05:43] <bddebian> Heh, not hardly :-)
[05:43] <bddebian> I'm just a monkey
[05:44] <AnAnt> ?
[05:44] <bddebian> I'm not smart enough to be an EE :-)
[05:44] <ajmitch> a deity like bddebian has no need of mere classifications like 'EE"
[05:44] <ajmitch> you cannot put him in a box like that
[05:45] <AnAnt> oh
[05:45] <AnAnt> bddebian: what made you interested in tkgate?
[05:45] <AnAnt> deity?
[05:46] <bddebian> AnAnt: I'm just here to upload stuff. :-)
[05:46] <AnAnt> ok
[05:46] <bddebian> I'm in it for the money ;-P
[05:47] <ajmitch> and the abuse
[05:47] <ajmitch> we're all in it for the abuse
[05:47] <AnAnt> bddebian: Ubuntu pays money for MOTU work ?
[05:47] <ajmitch> I wish :)
[05:48] <ajmitch> unless bddebian isn't telling us something?
[05:48] <crimsun_> we get to bask in the glory of the trinity; that's payment enough.
[05:48] <somerville32> Huzzah
[05:48] <AnAnt> trinity ?
[05:49] <bddebian> AnAnt: That was sarcasm (about the money) :_)
[05:51] <AnAnt> btw, the best way to get a package into Ubuntu is getting it into Debian , right ?
[05:53] <bddebian> AnAnt: That is ideal yes.
[05:53] <AnAnt> how to do so ?
[05:54] <AnAnt> btw, I see that pbuilder only takes from main repo, how can I add restricted,universe repos to pbuilder ?
[05:54] <bddebian> Add them to pbuilderrc
[05:57] <AnAnt> k
[05:57] <bddebian> #COMPONENTS="main restricted universe multiverse"
[05:59] <AnAnt> I did that yesterday
[06:00] <AnAnt> but still can't see universe packages
[06:00] <AnAnt> I even ran sudo pbuilder update after that
[06:03] <danielmarsom> have you guys considered putting frozen-buuble 2.10 in the repos?
[06:04] <crimsun_> isn't that an sk merge?
[06:05] <AnAnt> bddebian: I should remove that # before COMPONENTS, right ?
[06:05] <bddebian> AnAnt: Did you update sources.list in /etc/pbuilder/... ?
[06:05] <bddebian> AnAnt: No, leave the #
[06:05] <AnAnt> bddebian: oh, I did remove the #
[06:06] <AnAnt> bddebian: there isn't a sources.list in /etc/pbuilder/
[06:06] <bddebian> AnAnt: Did you update sources.list in /etc/pbuilder/apt-config/
[06:06] <bddebian> Sorry, cut/paste :)
[06:06] <AnAnt> bddebian: I only got 2 files in /etc/pbuilder/
[06:07] <bddebian> Do you have a ~/.pbuilderrc?
[06:07] <AnAnt> bddebian: buildd-config.sh  & pbuilderrc, pbuilderrc is a symlink to /etc/pbuilderrc
[06:07] <AnAnt> bddebian: no, there isn't a ~/.pbuilderrc
[06:07] <bddebian> Hmm
[06:10] <bddebian> What the heck is going on with versioning these days?? xmms2: 0.2DrGonzo-4 :-)
[06:38] <superm1> hey bddebian, after those two changes to ivtv-firmware, could you mark it as advocating?
[06:39] <bddebian> superm1: Sure
[06:39] <superm1> great thanks
[06:48] <bddebian> Gnight gang
[06:48] <crimsun_> 'night.
[07:04] <jmantha> anybody running vmware player or server on edgy?
[07:33] <jmantha> wow, crazy busy in here tonight
[07:33] <jmantha> :-)
[07:56] <SlimG2> games installed from .deb packages should go in /usr/share/games and not /usr/local/games, is this correct?
[07:59] <somerville32> /usr/local/ is for like manually installed stuff
[08:33] <ssam> i had a package revu, but now it has gone into debian. should i now file a bug in launchpad to have it imported? what package should i file against? 
[08:33] <Hobbsee> ssam: which package?
[08:34] <ssam> lybniz
[08:34] <Hobbsee> !schedule
[08:34] <ubotu> Ubuntu uses a strict timetable for releases, which means that sometimes newly released programs miss the timetable. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TimeBasedReleases for more. Feisty Schedule: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FeistyReleaseSchedule
[08:35] <ssam> it is not currently in ubuntu
[08:35] <Hobbsee> yes, so it will need to be synced from debian to ubuntu
[08:35] <Hobbsee> apparently it is
[08:36] <Hobbsee> ssam: how long was it since it hit debian?
[08:36] <ssam> yesterday
[08:36] <Hobbsee> right, so it should automatically sync over to feisty in the next couple of days
[08:37] <Hobbsee> if it's not in feisty in a week or so, you probably want to file a bug asking for the sync from debian sid, and subscribe ubuntu-archive, and get a MOTU to ack it
[08:37] <ssam> cool thanks
[08:37] <Hobbsee> not a problem
[10:43] <Ash-Fox> Would anyone happen to know the best method for detecting in a makefile if the target platform is i386 or not (at least some documentation on this?)? (Currently I'm using a script in the middle of this to determine and execute the appropriate commands, and I don't believe that's the 'right' way todo it)
[10:46] <dholbach> good morning
[10:47] <Ash-Fox> Morning
[10:47] <dholbach> hey Ash-Fox
[10:48] <MidMark> hi
[10:48] <Ash-Fox> Greetings
[10:48] <MidMark> is there a way to see packages for this stupid bug that has ONE line diff and has 3 long months life?
[10:48] <MidMark> https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/wxwidgets2.6/+bug/59138
[10:49] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 59138 in wxwidgets "amule crashes when I close a tab" [Unknown,Unknown]  
[10:49] <dholbach> MidMark: what is your question exactly?
[10:49] <dholbach> how to get a fix included in ubuntu?
[10:49] <dholbach> http://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/FAQ
[10:50] <MidMark> my question is: why it wasn't fixed? It's a stupid fix based in one line, so few to test, few time to revision, few time to recompile...why 3 months and still here?
[10:50] <dholbach> we have procedures, if you don't stick to them and point the right people to things they will go unnoticed
[10:51] <dholbach> maybe most of the developers don't use amule
[10:51] <MidMark> dholbach: the bug is in the wxwidgets not amule
[10:52] <MidMark> so all programs based on them have this bug including amule
[10:52] <dholbach> ?
[10:52] <dholbach> sorry
[10:53] <dholbach> all I can say is: stick to the procedure for inclusion of patches and all will be good
[10:53] <jsgotangco> ah
[10:55] <MidMark> which procedure? We have a bug report, we have a package, we have a fix... next step will be build our packages by our own, but  at this point I can be the mainteiner :(
[10:55] <dholbach> http://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/FAQ
[10:57] <MidMark> dholbach: this a FAQ for a motu people, I'm not
[10:57] <dholbach> no it's not
[10:58] <dholbach> the first point says is a link to the procedure for getting patches included in ubuntu
[11:01] <MidMark> dholbach: it's just subscribed also to sponsored bug
[11:01] <MidMark> :(
[11:02] <dholbach> MidMark: I don't understand what you're saying
[11:02] <dholbach> LP is offline atm
[11:04] <MidMark> anyway I think if a mainteiner doesn't fix this bug after a BR so detailed and a diff so short and a time so long... then your procedures have for sure something wrong...
[11:05] <dholbach> thje problem is, that we don't have package maintainers
[11:05] <dholbach> we maintain everything as a team
[11:05] <dholbach> and there are a LOT of bugs
[11:05] <dholbach> if you don't subscribe ubuntu-universe-sponsors to a fix it will go unnoticed
[11:06] <StevenK> And if you'd prefer for us to look at things, tell us, or subscribe ubuntu-universe-sponsors.
[11:06] <dholbach> it's unfortunate, I can see that
[11:06] <dholbach> but it's really that simple
[11:06] <MidMark> dholbach: 
[11:06] <MidMark> [11:03]  <MidMark> dholbach: it's just subscribed also to sponsored bug
[11:06] <MidMark> [11:03]  <MidMark> :(
[11:06] <MidMark> [11:04]  <dholbach> MidMark: I don't understand what you're saying
[11:07] <dholbach> I don't understand "it's just subscribed also to sponsored bug"
[11:07] <dholbach> do you mean that 'ubuntu-universe-sponsors' is subscribed to the bug?
[11:07] <MidMark> here https://launchpad.net/people/ubuntu-universe-sponsors/+subscribedbugs is just present the bug
[11:07] <MidMark> search for 59138
[11:08] <StevenK> They are, and the bug has 13 dupes.
[11:08] <Ash-Fox> In debian/rules, is it possible to get execute a different set of commands depending on if the architecture is i386 or not? (If so, please tell me how :)
[11:08] <StevenK> Ash-Fox: It is. But why?
[11:08] <MidMark> exaclty
[11:09] <MidMark> so I think we just do all the stuff in the procedure isn't?
[11:09] <dholbach> MidMark: "13 Dec 06 22:15" - that's when the sponsors were subscribed
[11:09] <dholbach> so give them some time to figure it out
[11:09] <Ash-Fox> StevenK, because the program I'm packaging can produce much better x86 binaries, that just a 'generic' binary that's used for the other platforms.
[11:10] <MidMark> I think the bug is already known because for Feisty someone has fixed it...
[11:10] <Ash-Fox> (It's complicated -- but the program in question actually has m68k assembler transcoded either into x86 directly or into portable C code -- the latter being a lot slower.)
[11:10] <MidMark> so now you are telling that was unknown before 13?
[11:11] <StevenK> Ash-Fox: So different commands, or different CFLAGS, or what?
[11:12] <Ash-Fox> StevenK, different commands to execute for building
[11:12] <StevenK> (Converting m68k ASM on the fly?? Ouch.)
[11:12] <MidMark> ok sorry fix for feisty was on 13
[11:12] <MidMark> so I expect it veeeeery soon
[11:13] <MidMark> anyway this story about sponsored bugs it's something painful...
[11:14] <StevenK> Ash-Fox: It's do-able using make conditionals
[11:15] <Ash-Fox> StevenK, hmm, okay. I'm going to look that up
[11:16] <StevenK> Ash-Fox: The make construct you want to look up is 'ifeq'
[11:16] <StevenK> Ash-Fox: Utilising $(DEB_HOST_ARCH)
[11:16] <StevenK> Ash-Fox: That's enough of a hint, no? :-P
[11:17] <Ash-Fox> StevenK, yep, thanks =)
[11:18] <dholbach> congratulations siretart!
[11:18] <siretart> thanks, dholbach :)
[11:18] <dholbach> well done! :-)
[11:19] <Ash-Fox> ifeq ($(DEB_HOST_ARCH),i386) <- heh, that was easy =)
[11:19] <MidMark> also someone asked for set higest importance for this bug... if someone can do this...
[11:20] <Hobbsee> which bug?
[11:20] <StevenK> Awww, but mother....
[11:21] <Hobbsee> but nothing.  go on
[11:21] <Hobbsee> MidMark: that's fixed in feisty, but needed in edgy, right?
[11:22] <MidMark> yes
[11:22] <MidMark> 59138
[11:22] <StevenK> Then it isn't just me.
[11:23] <MidMark> the bug talk about itself, no need to argue anymore
[11:23] <Hobbsee> StevenK: sorry?  that's a SRU, it looks like
[11:23] <StevenK> Exactly, so it isn't just me that needs to be involved.
[11:24] <StevenK> Besides, I'm not invoking the magical motu-sru superpowers until there is a debdiff for edgy-proposed.
[11:24] <Hobbsee> !sru > MidMark 
[11:24] <Hobbsee> !sru | MidMark 
[11:24] <ubotu> MidMark: sru is http://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
[11:25] <MidMark> > Bugs which represent severe regressions from the previous release of Ubuntu
[11:25] <Hobbsee> MidMark: you'll need to follow the SRU process now, as it's after edgy's release
[11:25] <Hobbsee> yes, so it qualifies
[11:26] <Hobbsee> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/SRU
[11:26] <Hobbsee> !sru is <reply> Stable Release Update informationn is at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates for main and restricted, while https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/SRU is for universe and multiverse.
[11:26] <ubotu> sru is already known
[11:27] <Hobbsee> !no sru is <reply> Stable Release Update informationn is at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates for main and restricted, while https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/SRU is for universe and multiverse.
[11:27] <ubotu> I'll remember that, Hobbsee
[11:27] <Hobbsee> !no sru is <reply> Stable Release Update information is at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates for main and restricted, while https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/SRU is for universe and multiverse.
[11:27] <ubotu> I'll remember that, Hobbsee
[11:27] <MidMark> so I've to subscribe ubuntu-sru
[11:27] <StevenK> No
[11:27] <StevenK> First thing is prepare a debdiff for edgy-proposed
[11:28] <StevenK> And after that is in the bug, subscribe motu-sru
[11:28] <MidMark> guys if I do all these stuff I have just my packages ready and fixed
[11:28] <MidMark> I'm not in motu team
[11:29] <StevenK> You can get sponsored.
[11:29] <MidMark> sponsored?
[11:30] <StevenK> You do the work, and someone else uploads with their key
[11:30] <MidMark> sponsored means money?
[11:30] <StevenK> It does not
[11:30] <Ash-Fox> StevenK, thankyou very much for the help. Working perfectly =)
[11:30] <StevenK> Ash-Fox: No problem. :-)
[11:30] <Hobbsee> wow, that's been open since november, and it's taken this long for someone to put it in the right place.
[11:31] <MidMark> Hobbsee: none know all that burocracy
[11:31] <Hobbsee> bah.  mlind only has 2 days ago.
[11:32] <StevenK> Or beg mlind to do the SRU dance.
[11:32] <MidMark> yes but normal people like me, just know launchpad, I repeat, if I have to know all that procedure I can fix for me and stop to waste time in launchpad
[11:32] <StevenK> I'm so not doing an SRU request.
[11:33] <Hobbsee> MidMark: then you need to look somewhere and say "i've got a fix, what can i do?" - until you do that, or give it a tag of patch attached, or something that makes it distinct from all other malone bugs (how many is there again?) it likely wont be found.
[11:34] <MidMark> just to know: how many people counts motu?
[11:34] <dholbach> http://launchpad.net/people/ubuntu-dev
[11:34] <StevenK> 4,000 bugs for universe and multiverse
[11:35] <MidMark> yes they are a lot
[11:35] <StevenK> And 59 people
[11:35] <StevenK> Do the math.
[11:35] <MidMark> but hey... none of 59 uses wxwidgets in Edgy :)
[11:35] <dholbach> some of the are busier with their other lives as others too
[11:35] <StevenK> And we don't spend all of our time on bugs, or indeed on Ubuntu
[11:36] <StevenK> Most of us spend it on IRC.
[11:36] <MidMark> hey so stop wasting time here :)
[11:36] <MidMark> [joking] 
[11:37] <Hobbsee> dholbach: heh.  yes...  it's our saturday morning
[11:37] <StevenK> Oh damn, what time?
[11:37] <dholbach> 20 utc iirc
[11:37] <MidMark> so I've to propose a debdiff for that bug or someone else will do?
[11:38] <StevenK> 7am, I think
[11:40] <Hobbsee> yeah, 7am
[11:40] <Hobbsee> MidMark: you or mlind, or someone else who wants to
[11:42] <Hobbsee> MidMark: FYI.  this is why it's hard to find bugs.  https://bugs.launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+bugs?field.searchtext=patch&orderby=-importance&search=Search&field.status%3Alist=Unconfirmed&field.status%3Alist=Confirmed&field.status%3Alist=In+Progress&field.status%3Alist=Needs+Info&field.status%3Alist=Fix+Committed&field.assignee=&field.owner=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.has_patch=&field.has_no_package=
[11:42] <Hobbsee> any of them could be like your bug.
[11:43] <Hobbsee> MidMark: for ones with patches attached: 
[11:43] <Hobbsee> https://bugs.launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+bugs?field.searchtext=&orderby=-importance&field.status%3Alist=Unconfirmed&field.status%3Alist=Needs+Info&field.status%3Alist=Confirmed&field.status%3Alist=In+Progress&field.status%3Alist=Fix+Committed&assignee_option=any&field.assignee=&field.owner=&field.component-empty-marker=1&field.status_upstream=&field.status_upstream-empty-marker=1&field.omit_dupes.used=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.has_patch.use
[11:44] <Hobbsee> d=&field.has_patch=on&field.tag=&field.has_no_package.used=&search=Search  899
[11:45] <Hobbsee> heh
[11:50] <MidMark> Hobbsee: I have understood, wxwidgets 2.8 were planned for feisty inclusion?
[11:51] <Hobbsee> no idea
[11:51] <Hobbsee> depends if anyone's merged it / packaged whatever new upstream versoin there is
[11:52] <MidMark> so you are all/none maintainer of all universe/multiverse packages?
[11:53] <Hobbsee> MidMark: there are no maintainers of universe/multiverse packages as such.
[11:53] <MidMark> yes I mean: all motu can do all and nothing... there is no guarantee of nothing...
[11:54] <Hobbsee> MidMark: yes, we can all modify anything in universe.  non-MOTU's can fix packages, give debdiffs, and subscribe ubuntu-universe-sponsors for stuff in universe, so that a MOTU can look at their debdiff, and upload it
[11:55] <StevenK> MidMark: And to give you some idea, there are 9,236 source packages in Edgy in universe.
[11:55] <MidMark> so 1/2 bug for every package :D
[11:55] <StevenK> Which build into 15,131 binary packages
[11:56] <Hobbsee> StevenK: where'd you find those numbers?
[11:56] <StevenK> zgrep
[11:56] <StevenK> zgrep -c Package on Sources.gz and Packages.gz for i386
[11:56] <Hobbsee> ahh
[11:58] <MidMark> Hobbsee: anyway debdiff is very similar (say identical) to feisty fix...
[11:58] <MidMark> still one line...
[11:58] <Hobbsee> MidMark: it doesnt matter, they still require SRU's.
[12:00] <StevenK> KDE has people *vote* on bugs?
[12:00] <StevenK> Oh geez
[12:01] <astharot> hello
[12:01] <Hobbsee> StevenK: yes, but they do nothing.
[12:01] <StevenK> Heh heh
[12:01] <StevenK> KDE, the votes, or the people? 
[12:01] <Hobbsee> StevenK: well, if the dev doesnt see them, or doesnt like them, then they do nothing
[12:01] <StevenK> Ow!
[12:01] <Hobbsee> of course, they have proper maintainers there
[12:03] <MidMark> anyway guys I understood all yours argue, I've listen all and took very seriously, but I don't like argue like: "I don't see the bug or I don't use this program then I don't want to fix it"
[12:03] <MidMark> I think you have to understand that some programs are largely used by people... and wxwidgets (with amule) it is
[12:04] <Hobbsee> MidMark: no one said that.
[12:04] <Hobbsee> MidMark: it's not a case of no one wanting to - it's a case of no one who could upload actually *knowing* about the bug prior to 2 days ago.
[12:04] <Hobbsee> StevenK: the votes do nothing.  duh
[12:05] <MidMark> [10:53]  <dholbach> maybe most of the developers don't use amule
[12:05] <Hobbsee> so you've interpolated that to say "so no one cares about it"
[12:05] <Hobbsee> what dholbach meant was "maybe msot of hte devs dont use amule on edgy, so therefore havent seen the bug, nor been looking at the bugs for amule"
[12:05] <MidMark> it can be
[12:07] <MidMark> feisty has the bug too... anyway ok I'm satisfied, hope that someone produce debdiff
[12:07] <MidMark> s/has/had
[12:07] <Hobbsee> MidMark: you said that it didnt
[12:07] <Hobbsee> and you'd better be that someone
[12:07] <MidMark> I don't know even how to produce it
[12:08] <Hobbsee> didnt it tell you how to, in that SRU link?
[12:08] <MidMark> yes I have to read also... :)
[12:08] <MidMark> understand, try, test...
[12:10] <MidMark> debdiff is a cumulative patch for a source package?
[12:12] <MidMark> can I write me in the changelog?
[12:32] <aa_> hi, our debian maintainer was wondering how and when you sync with debian, since debian is in some kind of freeze and we were wondering if we could push a deb directly to you guys in time for feisty
[12:32] <aa_> bug 42882 is the backdrop for this
[12:32] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 42882 in pida "PIDA version in dapper is very old" [Medium,Rejected]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/42882
[12:33] <aa_> edgy version is pretty recent, but I want to keep up to date for feisty
[12:37] <Hobbsee> aa_: everything's still autosyncing, as far as i'm aware
[12:38] <Hobbsee> aa_: there are some ubuntu changes - it will need to be looked at ,it wont be automatic
[12:41] <Hobbsee> aa_: http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/universe/p/pida/pida_0.3.1-2ubuntu2/changelog
[12:41] <Hobbsee> aa_: where's the debian source for that?  
[12:41] <aa_> Hobbsee: source for what, sorry I am not clever with debian stuff
[12:42] <Hobbsee> aa_: source for pida.  ubuntu takes sources, not debs
[12:43] <aa_> Hobbsee: oh I see
[12:44] <aa_> http://download.berlios.de/pida/pida-0.4.1.tar.gz
[12:47] <Hobbsee> aa_: and when will that go into debian?
[12:47] <aa_> Hobbsee: but we have the same maintainer for ubuntu and debian, if that makes a difference
[12:47] <aa_> Hobbsee: well debian is in freeze
[12:48] <Hobbsee> when does it unfreeze?
[12:48] <aa_> Shoragan: help me out here :)
[12:48] <Hobbsee> heh
[12:48] <aa_> Hobbsee: shorogan is our Debian maintainer
[12:48] <Hobbsee> cool :)
[12:48] <aa_> he was unclear on the ubuntu rules/process so we decided to join here and ask you
[12:49] <Hobbsee> sounds good to me :)
[12:49] <aa_> it's Friday, real work can wait til monday! Long live open source!
[12:49] <Hobbsee> hehe
[12:50] <Hobbsee> exactly!
[12:51] <Shoragan> Hobbsee, if i prepare a new package, can that go into ubuntu without going through debian first?
[12:51] <Hobbsee> Shoragan: sure, if you want to.  of course, it's easier if it goes thru debian
[12:52] <Shoragan> Hobbsee, debian is currently in freeze for the etch release, so no new upstream version right now :)
[12:52] <Hobbsee> Shoragan: we've got a couple of changes in ubuntu from the debian package - seen at http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/universe/p/pida/pida_0.3.1-2ubuntu2/changelog - if you could/want to incorporate them into your package, that would be great
[12:52] <Hobbsee> Shoragan: yeah, i figured as much.
[12:53] <Shoragan> Hobbsee, sure, i'll do that
[12:54] <Shoragan> are there some diffs available already?
[12:54] <Hobbsee> Shoragan: if you prepare a source, and put it somewhere for uploading, we can upload it to ubuntu.  we could probably stick a debian version number on it as well, so the autosyncer will just keep syncing it, if hte package is exactly the same.  *puts down the evil crackpipe*.  
[12:54] <Hobbsee> as in, the patches from ubuntu?
[12:54] <Shoragan> yes
[12:55] <Hobbsee> Shoragan: yep.  there are for all our packages (i think)  http://patches.ubuntu.com/p/pida/
[12:55] <Shoragan> ok, thanks
[12:55] <Hobbsee> not a problem
[12:55] <Hobbsee> Shoragan: would you be about to push that into experimental, btw?
[12:56] <Hobbsee> (seeing as sid is frozen)
[12:56] <Shoragan> Hobbsee, that would be a possibility, i'll try to get that sponsored
[12:56] <Hobbsee> your choice of course.  but we can sync from there too.  :P
[12:57] <Hobbsee> if we dont have to look, then it will stay more or less at the debian version, without needing to be looked over, as long as the autosyncer is on - that's what i'm t rying for
[12:58] <Shoragan> when will the autosyncer be switched off before the release?
[12:58] <Hobbsee> !release
[12:58] <ubotu> Ubuntu releases a new version every 6 months. Each version is supported for 18 months to 5 years. More info at http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/releases & http://wiki.ubuntu.com/TimeBasedReleases
[12:58] <Hobbsee> upstream version freeze, which is...
[12:58] <Hobbsee> !schedule
[12:58] <ubotu> Ubuntu uses a strict timetable for releases, which means that sometimes newly released programs miss the timetable. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TimeBasedReleases for more. Feisty Schedule: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FeistyReleaseSchedule
[12:58] <Hobbsee> feb 8
[12:59] <Shoragan> not December 21st?
[12:59] <Hobbsee> oops
[12:59] <Hobbsee> you're right, i cant read
[12:59] <Shoragan> :)
[12:59] <Hobbsee> bah.  well, we can request syncs after that
[01:00] <Shoragan> ok, so i'll push it to experimental, and you can pull from there
[01:00] <Hobbsee> yep
[01:00] <Shoragan> good
[01:00] <Hobbsee> as long as i actually remember to request it
[01:00] <aa_> excellent work chaps, my 7 users will be happy about that
[01:00] <Hobbsee> hehe :)
[01:00] <aa_> oh wait, 7 including me, so that's 6
[01:00] <Hobbsee> Shoragan: unless it's easier to upload the same source that you're about to put in debian
[01:01] <Shoragan> i'll have to look at the needed changes first
[01:02] <Hobbsee> yep
[01:16] <sistpoty|uni> hi folks
[01:17] <siretart> could some motu please look/sponsor the patch in bug #74133? (I'd do it myself, but I don't have a feisty chroot at hand)
[01:17] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 74133 in gtetrinet "[SRU]  gtetrinet crashes on first startup" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/74133
[01:17] <siretart> heyho sistpoty|uni :)
[01:17] <sistpoty|uni> hi siretart :)
[01:19] <siretart> palski: thank you for work on the sru requests. in general, could you please try to find a sponsor while the motu sru team processes your request? please don't expect the sru team members to sponsor you
[01:20] <Hobbsee> hey sistpoty|uni 
[01:20] <sistpoty|uni> hi Hobbsee 
[01:20] <StevenK> siretart: That was my rule! :-P
[01:21] <siretart> StevenK: ;)
[01:21] <sistpoty|uni> hi StevenK 
[01:21] <sistpoty|uni> hey \sh 
[01:22] <\sh> moins
[01:23] <Hobbsee> siretart: ie, you want someone to upload that debdiff to edgy proposed?
[01:25] <siretart> Hobbsee: right
[01:27] <ajmitch> so that I can get up for some meeting
[01:28] <Hobbsee> yes, that would be useful...
[01:30] <Hobbsee> er...i'm an idiot
[01:30] <Hobbsee> siretart: where's the duncecap?
[01:31] <Hobbsee> hey ubuntu_demon 
[01:33] <Hobbsee> siretart: the idiot-hat :P
[01:35] <Hobbsee> siretart: tried to apply patch from package 1 to package 2.  it failed.
[01:35] <Hobbsee> siretart: uploaded
[01:36] <siretart> Hobbsee: thanks
[01:36] <Hobbsee> siretart: not a problem
[01:41] <Hobbsee> !bzr
[01:41] <ubotu> bzr is Bazaar-NG, a decentralized revision control system designed to be easy for developers and end users alike. Decentralized revision control systems give people the ability to work over the internet using the bazaar development model.
[02:11] <StevenK> siretart: I agree with you, in regards to your comment at the end of bug 68467.
[02:11] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 68467 in update-manager "restricted component lost from sources.list during upgrade" [Medium,Confirmed]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/68467
[02:11] <palski> siretart, Hobbsee: thank you!
[02:12] <StevenK> siretart: http://wedontsleep.org/~steven/dist-u.html
[02:15] <siretart> StevenK: thats a cute idea :)
[02:15] <StevenK> Isn't it just. :-)
[02:16] <StevenK> Means I downloaded pretty much all of Edgy in about 3 minutes.
[02:17] <siretart> In the end, there should be some gui to configure your 'preferred' mirror. where 'preferred' is the fastest one, which is likely to be a custom/private one
[02:17] <siretart> that gui is ideally accessible from update-manager. but I think mvo plans something like that anyway. I remember some spec about that
[02:26] <zul> morning
[02:27] <\sh> guys....who is doing the backports nowadays?
[02:28] <Hobbsee> \sh: jdong, imbrandon, mez
[02:28] <siretart> \sh: https://bugs.launchpad.net/people/ubuntu-backporters
[02:29] <siretart> \sh: the ppl of that group can authorize backport requests
[02:34] <palski> SRU Bug #73780 needs sponsors too, it already has three ACKs from motu-sru team
[02:34] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 73780 in kdbus "[SRU]  kdbus (edgy)" [Low,Needs info]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/73780
[02:36] <Hobbsee> palski: i'll do it
[02:38] <Hobbsee> palski: done
[02:38] <palski> Hobbsee: thank you :)
[02:39] <Hobbsee> not a problem
[02:44] <geser> Hobbsee: regarding bug #75871 please look at bug #75294
[02:44] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 75871 in genpower "Please sync genpower (universe) from unstable (main)" [Undecided,Confirmed]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/75871
[02:44] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 75294 in genpower "Please sync genpower from Debian unstable (main)" [Wishlist,Rejected]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/75294
[02:46] <Hobbsee> geser: wah.  dupe it then, i must have checked the rest.
[02:47] <Hobbsee> oh blergh
[02:48] <geser> it looks like it needs a build-depend on sysvinit but I don't know if it's the right thing
[02:51] <Hobbsee> it cant
[02:52] <siretart> sistpoty|uni: for easier SRU bugmail filtering, I just changed all bugs from https://bugs.launchpad.net/people/motu-sru/+subscribedbugs to have a description starting with [SRU] , so that we can filter those mail easier with procmail
[02:54] <sistpoty|uni> siretart: yay! thx
[03:18] <\sh> I wonder why courier is appearing on the universe merges list...*hmm*
[03:43] <bddebian> Heya gang
[03:49] <sistpoty|uni> hi bddebian 
[03:49] <bddebian> Heya sistpoty|uni
[04:17] <imbrandon> heya bddebian 
[04:17] <bddebian> Hi imbrandon
[04:24] <giskard> motu meeting today at 20UTC right?
[04:25] <bddebian> Afaik
[04:32] <sistpoty|uni> giskard: yep
[04:33] <bddebian> sistpoty|uni: Did you happen to get a chance to try libparagui again?
[04:33] <sistpoty|uni> bddebian: yep, saw my comments?
[04:33] <bddebian> Oh no, I'll check, thanks
[04:34] <sistpoty|uni> bddebian: it was rejected for unstable, due to missing debian/copyright information
[04:35] <bddebian> Yeah I was just reading that, thanks.  Hmm
[04:35] <bddebian> I hate dealing with licensing crap :-)
[04:36] <sistpoty|uni> hehe
[04:36] <sistpoty|uni> bddebian: watch out for zip file content as well ;)
[04:37] <bddebian> grmbl
[04:46] <jdong> Ash-Fox: I think debconf is responsible for popping that up?
[04:48] <bddebian> How do I do that?  Name each specific file which carries the different license?
[04:48] <Ash-Fox> jdong, well, I do have access to the preinst script. It's just that I can't figure out where the license file is actually stored in the .deb file, as I'd like to use a similar popup agreement for specific package I'm packing that's full of legal issues :P
[04:49] <kallewoof> control.tar.gz/templates file
[04:50] <Ash-Fox> Woh.. what the heck..
[04:50] <Czessi> Hi, a MOTU has time for a 2nd review? http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?upid=3765
[04:50] <Ash-Fox> kallewoof, thankyou very much
[04:50] <kallewoof> NP. :)
[04:51] <Toadstool> good morning !
[04:51] <bddebian> Toadstool!!
[04:51] <Toadstool> hey bddebian 
[04:52] <sistpoty|uni> bddebian: yep, just name each file with a different license (and the license as well)
[04:52] <sistpoty|uni> hi Toadstool 
[04:52] <Toadstool> there's a motu meeting today, right?
[04:52] <Toadstool> hi sistpoty|uni 
[04:52] <sistpoty|uni> Toadstool: right
[04:53] <Toadstool> ok, i'm at work but i'll try to take a look at what's going from time to time then :)
[04:53] <Toadstool> +on
[04:54] <sistpoty|uni> :)
[04:56] <bddebian> sistpoty|uni: Should I even do this since I have different package naming?
[04:58] <sistpoty|uni> bddebian: hm?
[04:59] <sistpoty|uni> bddebian: in what way is the package name related to debian/copyright?
[04:59] <cbx33> bddebian: not still the same pacakge?
[05:00] <bddebian> sistpoty|uni: It's not, I mean my package name will be different that Debians
[05:01] <nixternal> hrmm..for a sync request, ubuntu sponsors for universe correct? why is Hobbsee's email address listed in there? 
[05:01] <Toadstool> bddebian: you're packaging something which is already in Debian?
[05:01] <bddebian> Toadstool: It's in the Debian NEW queue apparently
[05:02] <sistpoty|uni> bddebian: maybe you should use the same source-package name as debian does (but the binary package name should stay that way)
[05:02] <bddebian> sistpoty|uni: Hmm, OK
[05:02] <sistpoty|uni> bddebian: I guess this could've been another point (wrong shlibs name), why it was rejected from debian g
[05:03] <nixternal> bug 75909
[05:03] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 75909 in comix "[Sync Request]  Sync comix (3.6-1) from Debian unstable (main)" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/75909
[05:06] <geser> nixternal: comix 3.6-1 is already in feisty
[05:07] <nixternal> hrmm
[05:07] <nixternal> i am a retard
[05:08] <Admiral_Chicago> i'll mark that down nixternal
[05:08] <geser> nixternal: I assume u-u-s has hobbsee's e-mail because there is no ML for u-u-s yet and the e-mails need to go somewhere
[05:10] <nixternal> ahh, just never noticed it before i guess
[05:11] <geser> me neither. I just looked because you mentioned it
[05:12] <nixternal> i should have known, i mean i seen that it was in edgy already (backported) and even seen the 3.6.1 changelog in changelog.ubuntu.com
[05:13] <nixternal> 1 of 2 things, either not enough caffeine this morning, or possibly to much already
[05:35] <nixternal> bug 75910
[05:35] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 75910 in knemo "[Feisty MoM]  Merge knemo (0.4.6-1)" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/75910
[05:38] <bddebian> nixternal: What about it? :-)
[05:41] <bddebian> nixternal: Can you please check your qucs on REVU also.  I think it's still got Edgy in there?
[05:41] <\sh> ok time to stop business and travel home
[05:42] <bddebian> Later \sh
[05:42] <\sh> will be home around 20 utc
[05:51] <nixternal> bddebian: you can toss out the qucs on revu is you would like
[05:51] <nixternal> that is quite old
[05:53] <bddebian> nixternal: What about schafkopf or whatever the heck that is? :-)
[05:54] <nixternal> toss it..all them old ones can get thrown out
[05:55] <sistpoty|uni> siretart: still at uni?
[05:55] <nixternal> if there are new ones, i will work on them later...that schafkopf is some sort of favorite card game..never heard of it myself
[05:57] <sistpoty|uni> i can play schafkopf :)
[06:03] <nixternal> hehe
[06:03] <nixternal> i could probably learn it quicker than finding this "thomas the train" lego kit for my nephew
[06:03] <bddebian> heh
[06:04] <sistpoty|uni> g
[06:12] <nixternal> amazon is holding the toy hostage. $100 on amazon, and when it is in stock at local stores, $30
[06:12] <nixternal> argh
[06:12] <elmargol> is there a way so see every package who depends on a specific package?
[06:12] <imbrandon> rdepends
[06:12] <nixternal> wasabi imbrandon 
[06:12] <imbrandon> heya
[06:12] <nixternal> hows work?
[06:13] <imbrandon> busy as hell today
[06:13] <nixternal> seems you have been busy as hell..i haven't seen a dew run in a while ;p
[06:13] <imbrandon> heh
[06:19] <elmargol> thx
[06:20] <palski> crimsun_: ping
[06:21] <bddebian> nixternal: koverartist, kxstitch? :-)
[06:22] <nixternal> rm -rf um
[06:22] <nixternal> those were all edgy packages i believe...or they can stay and i can put some newones up for feisty, unless they can go through a sync or merge
[06:27] <siretart> sistpoty|uni: I just returned home, and left a few minutes before you pinged me :)
[06:28] <sistpoty|uni> siretart: ah... was just needing a short break, that's why I asked
[06:33] <zorglu_> q. in the debian/control file, there is a line called "section:", what are the possible value of this field ? is there some keyword i could use to get the possible alternatives ?
[06:35] <Adri2000> I'm updating a package to the last upstream version (grisbi), because it seems a bit abandoned in debian... there are some minor bugs (such as typo in the description) reported in the debian bts, can I fix them while updating the package to the last upstream version?
[06:35] <Adri2000> zorglu_: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-subsections
[06:36] <zorglu_> thanks
[06:47] <zorglu_> a package name is not allowed to contains a '_' ?
[06:47] <zorglu_> like foo_bar.deb ?
[06:50] <Adri2000> zorglu_: I don't think so, never seen such a package name
[06:50] <zorglu_> ok, what is the standard procedure in this case ? to replace it by a '-' ?
[06:50] <siretart> zorglu_: no. it is not allowed. the '_' is reserved for separating package name, revision and architecture
[06:50] <siretart> zorglu_: wpa_supplicant e.g. is named 'wpasupplicant'
[06:51] <zorglu_> ok thanks 
[06:51] <siretart> using '-' and '+' is fine, however. consider this: dvd+rw-tools
[06:52] <zorglu_> ok so '-' will do :)
[06:55] <dholbach> mruiz: after you installed pbuilder you can change its configuration to use universe also - that's in /etc/pbuilderrc, then you run sudo pbuilder create
[06:55] <dholbach> mruiz: that should basically be it
[06:56] <dholbach> mruiz: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/PbuilderHowto has more information about that
[06:56] <mruiz> great dholbach 
[06:56] <dholbach> mruiz: but of course, feel free to ask whenever you need anything
[06:56] <dholbach> mruiz: you don't have to use it always - it's just great if you use it if you package something new, because it will help you to determine if the package builds in a minimal environment
[07:05] <mruiz> dholbach: you told me about Merge & Sync... I'm reading MOTU school tutorial about M&S  -> "You'll also find it useful to go ahead and create a scratch directory (like /tmp/merges/) and install the 'build-essential', 'devscripts', 'cdbs', 'dpatch', and 'fakeroot' packages using apt-get/aptitude/dselect/synaptic/adept." No problem with Ubuntu version that I use?
[07:06] <dholbach> it's of course better to use feisty and be able to test merges in a real life example
[07:06] <dholbach> but you can in some cases do that in a chroot also
[07:06] <dholbach> and in the beginning your uploads will get reviewed, so there wouldn't be much harm
[07:06] <dholbach> still it's better to work with the development version - but that's a decision I leave up to you
[07:07] <Zic_> sistpoty|uni: hi :) Apparently, you are in your university so you can't help me with menareants :p If you can take a look on its when you can, beacause I'm not always here when you are in your home :>
[07:07] <zul>  meeting in 2 hours isnt it?
[07:09] <dholbach> zul: yes
[07:10] <Gloubiboulga> I won't be able to make it finally :(
[07:10] <siretart> do we have a channel for desktop effects? /me just tries out compiz on his fresh feisty workstation :)
[07:10] <jdong> #ubuntu-xgl
[07:10] <jdong> though it's not really official
[07:11] <jdong> it's mostly the beryl guys hanging out there
[07:11] <jdong> though quite helpful nontheless
[07:13] <crimsun_> palski: contentless pong
[07:15] <palski> crimsun_: Hi, I just wanted to make sure that did you mean 0.8.3-0ubuntu3.1~proposed1 or 0.8.3-0ubuntu3~proposed1
[07:15] <palski> talking about the SRU
[07:15] <crimsun_> palski: what's the current version?
[07:16] <crimsun_> (in the release pocket)
[07:16] <palski> 0.8.3-0ubuntu3
[07:16] <crimsun_> then 0.8.3-0ubuntu3.1~proposed1
[07:16] <palski> ok, thanks
[07:16] <crimsun_> 0.8.3-0ubuntu3~proposed1 would be less than 0.8.3-0ubuntu3, which is in the repos.
[07:17] <palski> i see
[07:18] <crimsun_> you can always use dpkg --compare-versions and check the return value
[07:20] <kallewoof> crimsun_: *waves* I think I've fixed the things you mentioned yesterday. I was unsure if I should wait around for you or if I should ask just anyone to re-check the REVU submission. 
[07:21] <crimsun_> kallewoof: any other MOTU can
[07:22] <kallewoof> crimsun_: Cool.
[07:24] <zorglu_> q. for a non official tool, what is the proper /bin directory ? /usr/bin ? /usr/local/bin ?
[07:25] <sistpoty|uni> arg! it's somewhere in between 30000 lines of code
[07:25] <mruiz> dholbach: are you using Feisty?
[07:25] <superm1> crimsun_, would you have a moment to ack the ivtv-firmware on Revu?
[07:25] <imbrandon> sistpoty|uni: actualy its probably inbetween 2 lines of code but you just havent narrowed it down that far yet
[07:26] <dholbach> mruiz: yes
[07:26] <dholbach> mruiz: i think most of the people use it here
[07:26] <sistpoty|uni> imbrandon: properly it's even only 1 line, but I haven't found that one yet :(
[07:26] <imbrandon> sistpoty|uni: :)
[07:28] <mruiz> dholbach: what is the best way to upgrade my Edgy?
[07:30] <crimsun_> zorglu_: anywhere you'd like. In terms of debs, it shouldn't touch /usr/local.
[07:30] <zorglu_> crimsun_: ok thanks
[07:35] <crimsun_> superm1: I'd look at the last lintian warning, but otherwise it looks ok
[07:36] <jdong> crimsun_: you know if there's a reason the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=risky for ffmpeg doesn't --enable-x264?
[07:36] <superm1> crimsun_, that warning is because the license is so lengthy
[07:36] <superm1> from what i gather
[07:36] <superm1> i dont really know how to get around it
[07:38] <dholbach> mruiz: probably   "gksu update-manager -c -d"  if mvo enabled it already
[07:40] <crimsun_> superm1: the b-d-i one?
[07:41] <crimsun_> jdong: note the source component.
[07:42] <superm1> b-d?
[07:43] <crimsun_> jdong: it would be madness to ship x264 support in ffmpeg -and- in x264. The former lies in universe, the latter, in multiverse. What would the point of the latter be?
[07:43] <jdong> crimsun_: DBO=risky turns on several multiverse flags anyway
[07:43] <jdong> crimsun_: like lame encoding, xvid, etc
[07:43] <jdong> just not x264
[07:43] <crimsun_> right, if you want it, please submit that bug 
[07:43] <jdong> crimsun_: ffmpeg can transcode a divx AVI to a h264+AAC mp4 in one fell swoop
[07:43] <jdong> that's the main difference for me
[07:43] <crimsun_> it won't make any difference anyway, since we don't enable it
[07:44] <jdong> crimsun_: it makes it easier for those who rebuild their ffmpeg in that way :)
[07:44] <superm1> crimsun_, the one i knew about was : W: ivtv-firmware: too-long-extended-description-in-templates ivtv/present-hauppauge-eu-v1
[07:44] <jdong> crimsun_: also, would it be possible to have a ffmpeg-multiverse variant too?
[07:44] <crimsun_> superm1: no, "W: ivtv-firmware source: build-depends-without-arch-dep"
[07:44] <jdong> have the two mutually conflict each other
[07:45] <crimsun_> jdong: oh god.
[07:45] <jdong> :(
[07:45] <jdong> the ability for ffmpeg to deal with multiverse codecs is indispensible to video player owners
[07:46] <jdong> crimsun_: for example, https://help.ubuntu.com/community/iPodVideoEncoding
[07:46] <crimsun_> and it would completely skew what slomo and siretart worked so hard to do in breezy.
[07:46] <jdong> I'd like that to go away
[07:46] <jdong> namely the "sudo checkinstall -D make install" part :D
[07:46] <crimsun_> having multiple copies of the same source is -insane-
[07:46] <jdong> I'm sorry to hear that
[07:47] <crimsun_> ffmpeg will likely see another CVE
[07:47] <jdong> why are we so insistent on ffmpeg in universe though?
[07:47] <superm1> crimsun_, oh i didn't notice that... i'll get that fixed
[07:47] <siretart> jdong: I'm working on getting ffmpeg in main. 
[07:47] <crimsun_> jdong: because a fair number of apps are useless without it.
[07:47] <jdong> Novell/Redhat seem to believe all the mpeg2+ codecs are under patent lockdown anyway :(
[07:48] <jdong> so does ffmpeg with its ability to decode mpeg4 belong in universe/main?
[07:48] <crimsun_> if it does, likely no.
[07:48] <siretart> jdong: what do you want to do with an multiverse-ffmpeg anyway? link it to existing applications? or link it to other multiverse applications? or 'just' use the command line utilities?
[07:49] <jdong> siretart: to use the commandline
[07:49] <jdong> siretart: for encoding video to the media player I'm getting soon
[07:49] <jdong> it's either a single ffmpeg command or a series of 5-6 other commands with an alternate method
[07:49] <jdong> I'd rather have the former
[07:50] <jdong> and not by our official howto which recommends checkinstallling a package
[07:51] <siretart> I could imagine a source package in multiverse, which downloads the 'main' source package, applies some patches to it, and install the ffmpeg binaries in a debian binary package
[07:52] <jdong> that'd be cool
[07:52] <siretart> obviously, this won't work if you want to enable existing applications to use the new codecs. for the commandline utilities, this would/could work.
[07:52] <jdong> btw, http://en.opensuse.org/Restricted_Formats
[07:52] <jdong> for your viewing pleasure....
[07:52] <jdong> "DVDs are encoded in mpeg2-video, for which there is no support in the current SUSE Linux OSS release, due to the mpeg2 format being patent-encumbered by its owners, Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG).The patent holder is unwilling to offer an unrestricted patent grant, as required by the GPL. "
[07:52] <jdong> they seem to strongly believe all the mpeg* video codecs are patent-protected
[07:53] <jdong> SUSE's xine that ships with the OS is stripped of all decoding abilities except raw AVI's, vorbis, and theora
[07:53] <jdong> not even their non-OSS component opens that up
[07:53] <jdong> it only adds MP3 support via realplayer
[07:54] <siretart> jdong: hm. ubuntu does not seem to have problems with shipping mpeg2 DECODERS. up to now, only encoders of the mpeg variant codecs are denied
[07:54] <jdong> siretart: right, that's what we've been doing at least... though Novell camp seems to think very differently?
[07:54] <jdong> perhaps it's a USA-specific thing?
[07:55] <crimsun_> fwiw, novell is likely correct in the usa.
[07:55] <siretart> jdong: I think that there is big confusion in the workd
[07:55] <siretart> world
[07:55] <jdong> crimsun_: I agree with that
[07:55] <siretart> consider the patents.txt in ffmpeg. there have been some codecs already disabled
[07:55] <siretart> in the ffmpeg source package, that is
[07:55] <jdong> hmm
[08:08] <sistpoty|uni> later
[08:08] <crimsun_> cya sistpoty|uni 
[08:08] <plugwash> redhat and suse are more paranoid than most
[08:09] <plugwash> probablly understandable given thier corporate nature
[08:09] <jdong> plugwash: that's because they do serious linux business in the US?
[08:09] <plugwash> probablly
[08:09] <jdong> plugwash: and they'd be most likely targeted by legal action...
[08:10] <jdong> plugwash: in contrast MEPIS in the US just blatantly ships every restricted thing possible
[08:10] <jdong> including w32codecs
[08:10] <jdong> they just simply added PLF repos to their product
[08:10] <plugwash> yep
[08:13] <AnAnt> anyone knows what libieee.a is for ?
[08:14] <crimsun_> presuming it's from libieee1284-3-dev ...
[08:15] <Adri2000> I'm updating a package, should I update the version of debhelper (in depends) ?
[08:15] <Adri2000> currently it's debhelper (>> 3.0.0)
[08:15] <crimsun_> if you have a reason to, sure
[08:15] <zorglu_> jdong: just reading the page, i never though about the kernel module with propriatary license. but it is clearly against gpl :) aka illegal
[08:15] <crimsun_> if it's a merge from Debian, it'll be kinda pointless
[08:15] <zorglu_> fun that i never realized that
[08:16] <crimsun_> if it's your own package, then making it standards-compliant to the latest policy is a Good Thing
[08:16] <jdong> zorglu_: that's still pretty under debate right now :)
[08:16] <Adri2000> crimsun_: the package is grisbi, and it seems abandoned in debian, so I'm updating it to the last upstream version
[08:16] <jdong> zorglu_: but yeah, they tend to set the standards on legal strictness
[08:17] <zorglu_> jdong: well i really dont see what kind of debate could happen. gpl is 'if you link against code in gpl, the linked code become gpl' so if you either it is illegal to link or the propriatary driver should be gpled.
[08:17] <ajmitch> morning
[08:18] <crimsun_> 'morning ajmitch 
[08:18] <zorglu_> jdong: i dont say we should stop doing it :) but this is clearly illegal :) exactly like the mp3 thing :)
[08:18] <gnomefreak> morning ajmitch 
[08:18] <jdong> zorglu_: linus posted something about it... how he doesn't believe non-GPL module == derived_work
[08:18] <ctrlsoft> 'morning ajmitch
[08:18] <Adri2000> crimsun_: what should I do with that? I already updated standards-version (was 3.5.x), is it right?
[08:19] <zorglu_> jdong: if so, there is no difference between gpl and lgpl ?
[08:19] <crimsun_> Adri2000: to >= 3.7.2 ?
[08:19] <jdong> zorglu_: IANAL, IANAKD
[08:19] <Adri2000> crimsun_: yep 3.7.2
[08:19] <crimsun_> Adri2000: just check Policy and make sure it's compliant
[08:20] <Adri2000> ok
[08:21] <Adri2000> hmm, there is no debian/compat
[08:21] <Adri2000> and W: grisbi source: package-uses-deprecated-debhelper-compat-version 3
[08:23] <crimsun_> 'debhelper (>> 3.0.0)' would do that, yes
[08:23] <crimsun_> (also check debian/rules)
[08:25] <Adri2000> export DH_COMPAT=3 <-- I have to replace that with debian/compat right?
[08:25] <crimsun_> either make sure it matches what's in debian/co{mpat,ntrol}, or remove it 
[08:26] <Adri2000> there is no debian/compat and debian/control says debhelper >> 3.0.0
[08:27] <superm1> crimsun_, I re-uploaded with that lintian warning resolved
[08:27] <crimsun_> if you're going to update it to 5, then just remove it completely, adjust debian/control, and echo 5>>debian/compat
[08:28] <Adri2000> ok
[08:28] <crimsun_> > , rather. Having trouble typing.
[08:30] <zorglu_> jdong: http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/rgooch/linux/docs/licensing.txt <- linus on the gpl and linking. he is clearly no lawer :)
[08:31] <jdong> zorglu_:  :)
[08:34] <crimsun_> superm1: 
[08:34] <crimsun_>   ivtv-firmware_0.20061007_source.changes: done.
[08:34] <crimsun_> Successfully uploaded packages.
[08:34] <crimsun_> superm1: thanks for your work!
[08:34] <bddebian> w00t, crimsun_ is DA MAN
[08:34] <crimsun_> bddebian: not nearly a fourth of what you are!
[08:34] <siretart> jdong: crimsun_: slomo: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MainInclusionFFmpeg <- please read and comment on it
[08:35] <superm1> thanks crimsun_ awesome.  Now just cross my fingers that archive admins like the licensing :)
[08:36] <minghua> meeting in half an hour, right?
[08:36] <crimsun_> minghua: yes
[08:37] <minghua> crimsun_: thanks and hello :-)
[08:39] <bddebian> crimsun_: Oh BS :)
[08:39] <crimsun_> minghua: &hi; 
[08:40] <jdong> siretart: ok, I've submitted my "concern"... IANAL by any means
[08:40] <jdong> also I'm not sure if I was supposed to use the Reviewers section
[08:40] <jdong> on second thought that looks like it's for the deities
[08:40] <jdong> sorry :)
[08:42] <crimsun_> superm1: (he's on vacation until jan)
[08:42] <superm1> crimsun_, is there anyone acking stuff sitting in binary new for dapper's backports then while he is away?
[08:43] <crimsun_> sure, I suspect tollef/colin/scott
[08:43] <crimsun_> it would be a bad idea to ping 'em, though
[08:43] <superm1> k. 
[08:45] <zorglu_> jdong: http://uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0312.1/0697.html <- if you are interested by the subject, this emails makes it point a lot clearer than the previous one
[08:46] <jdong> superm1: the archive deities do that
[08:46] <jdong> superm1: apparently now they'll get cranky if I poke them, so I haven't dared
[08:46] <superm1> jdong, i see...
[08:47] <superm1> jdong, libiec has been sitting for like 10 days, so i wasnt really sure if i should poke around about it
[08:47] <crimsun_> (it's poor manners to poke them to process queues, since they have to do it anyway)
[08:47] <jdong> superm1: I understand; I'm assuming they're busy with other stuff
[08:48] <jdong> superm1: (the approved backports queue hasn't been processed for that long either)
[08:48] <superm1> jdong, yea. well it will get in eventually, thats all that matters :)
[08:48] <jdong> superm1: I hope so :)
[08:48] <jdong> superm1: it's better than the 5-month wait in breezy/dapper-cycle :D
[08:48] <jdong> so I ain't complainin
[08:48] <superm1> hehe yup
[08:53] <proppy> damn, the macbook keymap makes me mad
[08:56] <sistpoty> re
[08:58] <bddebian> Oh shit, the meeting..
[08:59] <nixternal> meeting time
[08:59] <nixternal> hahaha
[08:59] <ajmitch> meeting?
[09:01] <sistpoty> damn, no cigarette (too late), but at least a coffee :)
[09:11] <nixternal> is it possible to sync/merge from debian experimental? or is that a bad idea? kvpnc has a new upstream that closes every bug on malone (5 of them)
[09:12] <bddebian> I've done it in the past
[09:12] <nixternal> ok, it can't hurt to request it i guess
[09:13] <nixternal> what's the worse that could happen, reject the bug? hell i had to reject one of my own earlier :)
[09:14] <bddebian> heh
[09:19] <siretart> does anyone have the link to the motu council spec?
[09:19] <bddebian> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MotuProcessesSpec
[09:21] <siretart> thnx
[09:21] <imbrandon> hrm when is the meeting ?
[09:21] <imbrandon> ~30 minutes ?
[09:21] <sistpoty> it's now
[09:21] <imbrandon> sh*t
[09:21] <ajmitch> imbrandon: yes, right now
[09:22] <imbrandon> can you give me a qick run down on what topic we're on and whats been said ?
[09:22] <imbrandon> justa  little summery
[09:23] <ajmitch> motu council, nothing beyond what was said at UDS
[09:23] <ajmitch> apart from the term limits coming up
[09:24] <zorglu_> q. is there any doc on all the abreviation used in #ubuntu-meeting ? (just trying to understand what is being said)
[09:24] <nixternal> TB == tech board
[09:24] <nixternal> UDS == ubuntu developer summit (speaking of mt. view this round)
[09:24] <nixternal> CC == community council of course
[09:25] <zorglu_> ok thanks
[09:25] <nixternal> i think those are the main ones that have been slung around in the past 10 or so minutes
[09:25] <zorglu_> btw you guys may learn to type faster and avoid those abreviation :)
[09:27] <nixternal> heh
[09:45] <LaserJock> hmm, is the meeting over?
[09:45] <nixternal> nope
[09:45] <nixternal> just in time (45 minutes late, but still in time)
[09:47] <ajmitch> LaserJock: we're on item 2 of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Meetings
[09:49] <LaserJock> ajmitch: thanks
[09:49] <LaserJock> how did the first item go?
[09:50] <ajmitch> it went
[09:50] <ajmitch> it wasn't really something to agree on, more just clarifying what is there
[09:52] <nixternal> i must admit, as it stands for someone really new to this whole ordeal we call MOTU, revu is probably easier than bazaar
[09:52] <nixternal> but i like the bazaar idea though..it allows more involvement (means i can break it and make you mad at me)
[09:55] <superm1> nixternal, with the way bzr would work, i think there would still be an area of LP for revuing - you'd upload your branch into a common directory -  so you cant break it all and make everyone mad :)
[09:56] <LaserJock> you can break other people's packages though
[09:56] <nixternal> oh darn ;p
[09:56] <nixternal> oh good
[09:56] <nixternal> :)
[09:56] <joejaxx> lol
[09:56] <nixternal> if you can break other peoples packages, that would be pretty scary
[09:56] <LaserJock> but they are likely to be already broken so you have like a 50/50 chance of actually fixing instead
[09:56] <siretart> do we have a sobby server somewhere so that we can share the minutes?
[09:57] <nixternal> siretart: share them on the ml?
[09:57] <nixternal> or the wiki
[09:57] <siretart> nixternal: way too synchronous
[09:57] <siretart> I'd specifically asked for gobby
[10:00] <nixternal> there were some open canonical sobby servers at one time
[10:00] <nixternal> for uds, don't know if they stayed open, but i think they did because they use them i believe for the weekly newsletter
[10:02] <ajmitch> don't let the minutes block on 1 person :)
[10:03] <sistpoty> hehe
[10:04] <nixternal> bug 75930 - can someone look at this sync request - im sure i messed up something
[10:04] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 75930 in kvpnc "[Sync Request]  Please sync kvpnc (0.8.7) from Debian experimental (main)" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/75930
[10:07] <LaserJock> so merges got blown over?
[10:07] <ajmitch> LaserJock: yep
[10:07] <LaserJock> :/
[10:08] <Toadstool> re
[10:10] <Adri2000> what's wrong with the idea of a box for each package in MoM to let a note saying "I'm working on it" / "this merge can't be done yet due to a problem with..." ?
[10:11] <ajmitch> Adri2000: there needs to be some way of getting that data onto the merge page
[10:11] <LaserJock> because Scott hasn't written that in :-)
[10:11] <ajmitch> see LaserJock's reply ^^ :)
[10:11] <LaserJock> I don't see why it would be so hard to do for us
[10:11] <LaserJock> we really should set up something like a MOTU Package Page
[10:12] <LaserJock> where there is a page/ package that has notes, tasks, etc.
[10:12] <LaserJock> then we could data mine that for lists
[10:12] <Toadstool> like an enhanced packages.qa.debian.org?
[10:12] <LaserJock> but then I feel like LP should be able to do this
[10:12] <LaserJock> yeah
[10:14] <ajmitch> LaserJock: sure, someone just has to do it :)
[10:14] <LaserJock> exactly
[10:34] <bddebian> Damn I feel so disconnected anymore :'-(
[10:35] <ajmitch> why?
[10:35] <siretart> I'm currently preparing minutes of the meeting. I'll paste my draft to paste.debian.net soon. could please some native speaker look over it, correct some spelling and post it to the mailing list?
[10:35] <bddebian> ajmitch: Just having a hard time keeping up with everything with my work schedule :-(
[10:36] <siretart> anyone?
[10:37] <ajmitch> siretart: sure
[10:37] <siretart> thanks
[10:39] <crimsun_> oh geez, nick highlights all over irssi
[10:39] <crimsun_> siretart: seconded.
[10:41] <minghua> bddebian: are you doing merge for svk?  if not I want to do it
[10:41] <bddebian> minghua: Can't be done waiting on libsvn-perl afair
[10:41] <siretart> ajmitch: crimsun_: http://paste.debian.net/18465
[10:41] <minghua> I see
[10:41] <siretart> beware, I really suck at english spelling
[10:42] <minghua> use a spellchecker? ;-)
[10:42] <ajmitch> siretart: from irc, I wouldn't know that you're not a native speaker :)
[10:45] <crimsun_> siretart: looks good, http://paste.debian.net/18466
[10:46] <LaserJock> ok, I'm off guys. I'll read the logs and follow up on ML
[10:46] <bddebian> Later LaserJock
[10:46] <crimsun_> siretart: (just a minor correction (removal of CC from MC decision per Colin's clarification)
[10:47] <bddebian> minghua: You are certainly free to do it though
[10:48] <crimsun_> joejaxx: if you meant langpacks instead, follow the Dep/Rec chain
[10:48] <joejaxx> crimsun_: yeah
[10:48] <minghua> bddebian: I trust you, I just thought you didn't have time
[10:49] <minghua> see, that's the reason we need a comment system for merges
[10:49] <joejaxx> crimsun_: too bad i am not going to be able to use the ubuntu langpack metapackages
[10:49] <pirast> hi, i want to fix klogic.. in the documentation of it, pictures are missing.. do you have any starting point?
[10:49] <pirast> where to start fixing it?
[10:49] <ajmitch> siretart: made a couple of other corrections
[10:49] <pirast> or where to have alook?
[10:49] <ajmitch> http://paste.debian.net/18468
[10:50] <crimsun_> joejaxx: e.g., language-pack-en-base Recommends language-support-en, which pulls in the OO.o bits
[10:50] <joejaxx> crimsun_: yeah
[10:50] <siretart> ajmitch: since you seem to have incorporated crimsun_'s change, I think we can post your version. shall you or I post it?
[10:50] <joejaxx> crimsun_: which means i am not going to be able to use the ubuntu language pack/support meta packages
[10:51] <ajmitch> siretart: you can post it
[10:51] <joejaxx> crimsun_: this should be interesting
[10:52] <bddebian> minghua: Trusting me if your first mistake ;-P
[10:53] <joejaxx> crimsun_: kind of ridiculous thought
[10:53] <joejaxx> crimsun_: they pull openoffice-writer
[10:54] <joejaxx> crimsun_: which explains why i had that on my xubuntu install
[10:55] <joejaxx> though*
[10:55] <siretart> ajmitch: sent
[10:55] <ajmitch> thanks
[10:55] <siretart> ajmitch: crimsun_: thanks for proof reading
[10:55] <ajmitch> my pleasure :)
[10:55] <ajmitch> hello Amaranth 
[10:56] <Amaranth> hey
[11:00] <crimsun_> siretart: yw :)
[11:05] <minghua> bddebian: s/if/is/ ?  I'll check it later when I have more time :-)
[11:07] <sistpoty> siretart: eeek, now we have FF on february 8th?
[11:08] <siretart> sistpoty: eeh? did I get something wrong?
[11:08] <sistpoty> siretart: actually I thought we'd align everything except FF (new packages) to main... or did I miss that?
[11:09] <bddebian> Later gators
[11:09] <siretart> sistpoty: oh. I must have missed that. please clarify as followup. sorry for the confusion
[11:09] <sistpoty> siretart: let me read backlog again, I guess I just missed that
[11:10] <pirast> okay, found it..
[11:11] <pirast> another question, the dhelper and so on add "martin@localhost" in fields where my e-mail adress is required. where can i change it?
[11:13] <sistpoty> siretart: well... the decision (at least as I read it) was to discuss the dates on u-d-discuss... 
[11:13] <Toadstool> pirast: with DEBEMAIL and DEBFULLNAME environment variables I guess
[11:14] <pirast> Toadstool, thanks
[11:15] <siretart> sistpoty: okay. my bad. could you please clarify as followup?
[11:15] <sistpoty> siretart: ok, will do
[11:22] <sistpoty> StevenK: around? I still need a vote for #72951 :)
[11:24] <dholbach> good night fellas
[11:26] <crimsun_> night Daniel
[11:26] <dholbach> night Daniel
[11:31] <Fujitsu> Is it just me, or are Debian tasks in Malone now stuffed?
[11:36] <Adri2000> Fujitsu: stuffed?
[11:36] <Fujitsu> Yeah, have a look at https://launchpad.net/bugs/46456 for example.
[11:36] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 46456 in x10-automate "Upstream | x10 ships no .desktop file" [Unknown,Unconfirmed]  
[11:37] <Fujitsu> Status: Status tracked in
[11:37] <Adri2000> oh yeah, it's new
[11:37] <crimsun_> result of new LP build, perhaps?
[11:38] <Fujitsu> Don't they only release on Tuesdays? I'm sure I've checked since then....
[11:38] <Adri2000> Fujitsu: but what "stuffed" mean?
[11:38] <Fujitsu> Adri2000: Stuffed, as in it provides no useful information at all.
[11:38] <crimsun_> fscked, broken, cracked, etc.
[11:38] <Fujitsu> What crimsun_ said.
[11:38] <Toadstool> :)
[11:42] <Adri2000> ah yeah, all debian bugs are "Status tracked in" and they shouldn't
[11:42] <Adri2000> I thought it was only because the bug watch was added recently
[11:47] <pirast> could anyone please merge the debdiff in bug 75937?
[11:47] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 75937 in klogic "klogic's help images are not being shown" [Undecided,Confirmed]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/75937
[11:49] <TheMuso> Why does LP have to have a constant change in bug reporting interface?
[11:49] <crimsun_> keeps us on our toes.
[11:49] <TheMuso> Damn right
[11:49] <pirast> TheMuso, maybe because it is not perfect yet ;-)
[11:51] <TheMuso> So am I right in understanding that eventually, instead of putting new packages on revu for inclusion, bzr branches will be used instead? Or have I interpreted incorrectly?
[11:51] <sistpoty> TheMuso: correct
[11:52] <TheMuso> Makes sense.
[11:53] <TheMuso> Although I do wonder about any new MOTU hopefuls as to whether they like that idea or not, and thus may not contribute.
[11:53] <crimsun_> revu won't be deprecated immediately from what I understand.
[11:53] <TheMuso> Right.
[11:54] <crimsun_> pirast: done.
[11:55] <pirast> crimsun_, thanks..
[11:55] <pirast> night
[12:06] <joejaxx> crimsun_: the first images just built lol the boot :)
[12:06] <joejaxx> they boot*
[12:06] <crimsun_> nice
[12:07] <joejaxx> everything works
[12:07] <joejaxx> you login and up comes the environment
[12:07] <joejaxx> crimsun_: i still have to build the powerpc images
[12:07] <joejaxx> i am waiting for those machines to upgrade to edgy first though
[12:10] <joejaxx> crimsun_: for some reason the edgy/feisty fluxbuntu images are 60mb bigger than the dapper ones that will have to be fixed
[12:10] <joejaxx> or 50mb rather