[12:38] <proppy> crimsun: nice one
[12:38] <proppy> crimsun: thanks a lot
[12:38] <proppy> crimsun: that was exactly what I was looking for
[12:39] <blueyed> crimsun: build-deps are satisfied in this case. It's not the same bug.. (I've just built the new packages before). apt-get build-dep should not upgrade any pending packages, should it?
[12:41] <proppy> I forgot to include dhelper.ml
[12:41] <proppy> mk
[12:41] <proppy> thanks a lot
[12:45] <crimsun> blueyed: yes, it should.
[12:46] <blueyed> why?
[12:47] <blueyed> Night, norsetto.
[12:47] <crimsun> blueyed: it does what's necessary to satisfy having the build-dependencies present.
[12:48] <blueyed> but, postfix does not depend on apache at all. Also the dependencies would be fulfilled then with the currently installed packages.
[12:48] <blueyed> the new version is just "$VERSION+aptbuild".
[12:58] <blueyed> crimsun: do you still consider this a non-bug?
[12:59] <crimsun> blueyed: no, I don't
[01:27] <blueyed> crimsun: hmm. that appears to happen on Feisty only. I cannot confirm it on my Gutsy system..
[02:39] <jalvesaq> hi
[02:41] <jalvesaq> I'm following the instructions from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/REVU, and uploaded two packages to revu, but I don't know what to do now.
[02:42] <jalvesaq> Can anyone help me?
[02:46] <minghua> jalvesaq: Not much to do next, basically just wait until someone reviews you packages.
[02:49] <jalvesaq> minghua: Thanks for the answer! One package is interesting only for Brazilian people. Is there any way of making Brazilian Motus knowing about the package?
[02:51] <minghua> jalvesaq: Not sure.  You can always send them private emails if you know who they are.
[02:53] <jalvesaq> I don't know them. So, I'll just wait. Thanks again. Theses were my questions, so, good by!
[03:14] <bddebian> Heya gang
[03:14] <RAOF> hey bddebian
[03:15] <bddebian> Hello RAOF
[03:15] <RAOF> Stupid frikkin nvidia screenflashing with opengl crap mutter mutter grumble...
[03:38] <Amaranth> RAOF: wow, the iwl3945 driver causes a lot less wakeups
[03:38] <slavi1> who would be the proper party to notify regarding package dependency breakage in gutsy?
[03:38] <Amaranth> (i finally got it working)
[03:40] <pwnguin> maybe not so much
[03:43] <imbrandon> hrm
[03:49] <ajmitch> yes?
[03:53] <imbrandon> ajmitch: just getting fed up with licenses, considering using *bsd, was just looking at Debian GNU/kFreeBSD
[03:53] <imbrandon> tis all
[03:53] <ajmitch> I see
[03:53] <imbrandon> but that still is the gnu toolchain
[03:53] <ajmitch> and you want to avoid anything GNU now
[03:53] <imbrandon> bah, probably just the mood i'm in after some blog posts etc
[03:53] <bddebian> imbrandon: Debian GNU/Hurd baby :-)
[03:53] <bddebian> Oh, NM :-)
[03:54] <imbrandon> heh
[03:54] <bddebian> There's always Windows :-)
[03:54] <imbrandon> LOL
[03:55] <ajmitch> from the sound of things, that's what he wants, except free in $
[03:55] <imbrandon> well honestly here is my delima ( and has been for a while but its been bugging me more this release cycle ) I absolutely hate GPLv3 and and some other licenses etc but i love the tools Debian offers
[03:55] <imbrandon> but BSD is almost as bad because it can just be stolen
[03:55] <imbrandon> heh
[03:56] <ajmitch> and why do you absolutely hate gplv3?
[03:56] <bddebian> Plan9? :)
[03:56] <imbrandon> actualy i just am agrovated at the invaraint thang in gdfl and gplv3
[03:56] <bddebian> Minix?
[03:57] <imbrandon> ajmitch: mostly because of things that RMS tried to free us from like tvoization etc i think is un needed burdens
[03:57] <minghua> If you don't like the GNU toolchain in Debian GNU/kFreeBSD, why not just use the real FreeBSD?
[03:58] <minghua> Is there a invariant section in GPLv3?
[03:58] <imbrandon> minghua: well thats the thing its not that i dont like GNU infact i LOVE Debian/Ubuntu
[03:58] <imbrandon> i guess i would be happy with freebsd + apt + dpkg + debs etc etc etc
[03:58] <imbrandon> but thats tons of work
[03:59] <imbrandon> i dunno actualy i havent made a decision in months over this because i dont see a clear awnser
[03:59] <imbrandon> just grumbling
[03:59] <imbrandon> and no there is no invaraint section in gplv3 iirc
[04:00] <minghua> Well, debian/rules requires GNU Make to work, so it's probably a long short to port Debian to anything without GNU toolchain.
[04:00] <imbrandon> yup
[04:00] <minghua> ... and who told you that APT or dpkg won't adopt GPLv3? ;-)
[04:01] <imbrandon> i can only hope they wont
[04:01] <minghua> Let me check...
[04:01] <imbrandon> as i said i dont have a clear plan but the deeper i get the more unhappy i have become, just grumbling at this point i'm sure i'll be arround ubuntu for alot longer
[04:01] <imbrandon> just clearing some thoughts
[04:02] <minghua> Both APT and dpkg are licensed under GPLv2+, so v3 is a real probability.
[04:02] <imbrandon> freebsd is too gentooish for me ( yes i know thats where ports came from , atleaste the idea )
[04:04] <imbrandon> actualy you know linux ( kernel ) + bsd userland + apt (gplv2fork) + dpkg (gplv2fork) + deb would rock but highly highly unlikely
[04:04] <imbrandon> hehe
[04:05] <imbrandon> wonder if anyone has done any work on getting linux to compile with bsd tools
[04:10] <pwnguin> i could have sworn nv can push 1440x900
[04:11] <minghua> You need a non-GCC compiler first.
[04:11] <minghua> And IMHO a non-GCC compiler that can compile Linux is not gonna happen.
[04:12] <bddebian> imbrandon: Why not just write your whole own OS? ;-P
[04:12] <imbrandon> bddebian: hehe
[04:12] <slavi1> minghua: ICC
[04:12] <slavi1> add a ? to that
[04:12] <pwnguin> does ICC compile the kernel yet?
[04:13] <imbrandon> intel's compiler?
[04:13] <pwnguin> yea
[04:13] <pwnguin> look on the bright side
[04:13] <pwnguin> nobody can steal their source
[04:13] <imbrandon> heh
[04:14] <slavi1> dunno, don't see why I couldn't
[04:14] <slavi1> why IT couldn't
[04:15] <pwnguin> imbrandon: just switch to openSolaris
[04:15] <pwnguin> imbrandon: Ian Murdock did
[04:15] <imbrandon> pwnguin: hehe i already package for gnusolaris.org
[04:15] <imbrandon> lol
[04:15] <imbrandon> but not a bad idea
[04:15] <imbrandon> ;)
[04:16] <pwnguin> its a horrible idea
[04:16] <pwnguin> none of my hardware works with their CDs
[04:17] <imbrandon> i havent tried a ton of hardware but the important things work
[04:17] <imbrandon> for me
[04:18] <minghua> slavi1: Good point, but I think I'll stick with GCC. :-)
[04:19] <slavi1> minghua: was just a suggestion
[04:19] <slavi1> also, anyone know how to get ut2k4 to work with alsa sound?
[04:23] <imbrandon> slavi1: http://www.linux-gamers.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=363
[04:23] <slavi1> hmm, I think the problem is because ut2k4 is 32bit
[04:24] <slavi1> I get an error with aoss that libaoss.so cannot be preloaded
[04:30] <RAOF> slavi1: Yeah, that'll be your problem (if you're running x86-64).  It needs to load a 32bit aoss, and we don't ship one.
[04:32] <slavi1> RAOF: I read that there is a 64bit ut2k4, any idea where to get it?
[04:32] <slavi1> I found a demo version for amd64 ...
[04:33] <RAOF> slavi1: No.  Google might.
[04:33] <slavi1> :(
[04:35] <slavi1> RAOF: are you part of motu?
[04:36] <RAOF> slavi1: Yes, although the plaque still hasn't lost it's shine.
[04:36] <slavi1> because java packages are sort of messed up (6.0.3 java6 jre needs to be uploaded since other java6 packages depend on it)
[04:36] <slavi1> also, may I request anjuta 2.2.1 with all plugins for amd64? ^^
[04:37] <slavi1> grr
[04:37] <slavi1> anjuta then?
[04:37] <slavi1> ^^
[04:37] <RAOF> slavi1: Bug number?  Is it a bug with the current packages, or a request for a new upstream version?
[04:38] <slavi1> new upstream version :)
[04:39] <TheMuso> Upstream version freeze is in effect.
[04:39] <slavi1> oh ... ok
[04:39] <RAOF> Colour the archives frozen solid.  Blowtorches exist, but there needs to be a good reason to crack them out.
[04:39] <slavi1> anjuta 2.x is still in dev and 2.2.1 is a bugfix release AFAIK
[04:40] <slavi1> Anjuta 2.2.1 is follow up bugfix release to stable 2.2.x (Hurricane) series. It fixes several important crash bugs and improves stability.
[04:40] <RAOF> slavi1: So, find a *whole bunch* of bugs open in launchpad that the new release fixes, check that the new release doesn't break anything, and follow the procedures for a UVFe.
[04:41] <slavi1> http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=733330
[04:41] <RAOF> Please, not sourceforge!  NOOOOOOO!
[04:41] <slavi1> what if the bugfixes were submitted to anjuta? (not on launchpad)
[04:41] <slavi1> oh, come on ...
[04:41] <slavi1> as in "people went to the dev and he fixed them"
[04:42] <RAOF> slavi1: Well, they should have filed bugs on the Ubuntu packages, but I *suppose* the UVFe team may accept "it fixes bugs in Ubuntu that haven't been reported".  Maybe.
[04:42] <minghua> slavi1: Somebody need to audit the code changes in the new upstream version.  If you care about anjuta, that "somebody" means you. :-)
[04:43] <slavi1> where is the howto for UVFe (what it is and such)
[04:43] <slavi1> minghua: what do you mean by audit?
[04:43] <RAOF> It just seems to me that "hosted on sourceforge" correlates well with "is essentially unmanaged, and is a bugger to package".
[04:43] <minghua> slavi1: Let me find the procedure page for you.
[04:43] <slavi1> RAOF: how come?
[04:44] <slavi1> RAOF: don't you compile the stuff from source anyway?
[04:44] <minghua> ! info anjuta
[04:44] <ubotu> anjuta: A GNOME development IDE for C/C++. In component universe, is optional. Version 1:1.2.4a-5build1 (feisty), package size 913 kB, installed size 2144 kB
[04:44] <slavi1> !info anjuta gutsy
[04:44] <ubotu> anjuta: A GNOME development IDE, for C/C++. In component universe, is optional. Version 2:2.2.0-1ubuntu2 (gutsy), package size 1782 kB, installed size 4324 kB
[04:44] <minghua> Hmm, it surprises me that anjuta is not in main.
[04:44] <RAOF> slavi1: Yeah, but there's source, and there's source.  It's very possible for code to work, but be difficult to package/maintain.
[04:46] <slavi1> RAOF: I tried to compile anjuta, but for some reason it told me that it couldn't find libapr, libapr-utils, subversion and neon ... also, libapr is named "libapr0", is the zero necessary?
[04:46] <minghua> slavi1: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess#head-1d28045481b8803d4815989e93edc4206f4848c4
[04:46] <slavi1> thank you
[04:46] <RAOF> slavi1: Yes, see the debian library packaging guide.
[04:47] <slavi1> err
[04:47] <slavi1> maybe I should wait for the backports team if there is one?
[04:47] <slavi1> or until there is a debian package for it? :P
[04:48] <pwnguin> there isnt one?
[04:48] <minghua> There is.
[04:48] <minghua> anjuta |  2:2.2.1-1 |      unstable | source, amd64, i386
[04:49] <slavi1> ^^
[04:49] <jdong> the mythical backports team
[04:49] <slavi1> is it safe to use debian packages?
[04:50] <pwnguin> source packages yes
[04:50] <minghua> (if it builds)
[04:50] <jdong> slavi1: it is safe to build debian source packages on Ubuntu, then use them
[04:50] <jdong> slavi1: it is NOT safe to take a .deb file from Debian and install it onto Ubuntu
[04:51] <slavi1> :(
[04:53] <slavi1> I shouldn't have a problem building from the source package right?
[04:54] <slavi1> should I get anjuta-common and anjuta source packages?
[04:56] <slavi1> hmm, I remember seeing these original.tar.gz and stuff I just forget where the packaging guide is :(
[04:57] <RAOF> !packagingguide
[04:57] <ubotu> The packaging guide is at http://doc.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/packagingguide/C/index.html - See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/New for information on getting a package integrated into Ubuntu - Other developer resources are at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DeveloperResources - See also !backports
[04:58] <slavi1> ty
[05:08] <RAOF> Amaranth: How do people handle the screen-flashes with nvidia & compiz???
[05:08] <Amaranth> RAOF: What screen flashes?
[05:08] <StevenK> Amaranth: So, does compiz talk yet? :-)
[05:08] <RAOF> Amaranth: Where, every now and then, there's a black flash for a frame or so.
[05:09] <Amaranth> RAOF: I get that maybe once a day
[05:09] <RAOF> I've only just noticed this because I spent a little time with Xgl disabled.
[05:09] <ajmitch> RAOF: never seen that problem, but I haven't used compiz for quite awhile on my desktop
[05:09] <RAOF> Happens multiple times a minute for me.
[05:09] <bddebian> StevenK: No but it burps :-)
[05:09] <Amaranth> RAOF: your refresh rate is set wrong in compiz?
[05:09] <Amaranth> and/or vsync is disable
[05:09] <bddebian> StevenK: Oh, btw, I hope you don't mind, I asked for libapache-asp-perl to be removed
[05:09] <Amaranth> disabled*
[05:09] <RAOF> Amaranth: No?  Set to 60, which is the LCD rate.
[05:10] <Amaranth> RAOF: weird
[05:10] <Amaranth> RAOF: restart X
[05:10] <Amaranth> and/or the system
[05:10] <RAOF> Amaranth: Oh, is *that* the cause?  nvidia-settings suggests that the refresh rate is *actually* 59.9something Hz?
[05:10] <RAOF> Amaranth: Or use Xgl, which I am again.
[05:11] <RAOF> No, if only wine wasn't totally broken...
[05:19] <ajmitch> RAOF: how is it broken this week?
[05:20] <RAOF> ajmitch: It doesn't work when it can't get a direct rendering context (ie: under Xgl).
[05:20] <RAOF> Even though it's perfectly possible for it to work.
[05:20] <StevenK> bddebian: Meh, file one for libapache-filter-perl too, saying that libapache2-mod-perl2 provides the same functionality for apache 2
[05:21] <StevenK> I need to sit down and figure out why WoW hangs on exit with wine 0.9.45
[05:22] <RAOF> StevenK: Because it's not a new wine release if it doesn't break something that was previously working.
[05:23] <Amaranth> Yeah, like freelancer
[05:23] <Amaranth> been playing it in vmware, it actually runs too fast
[05:25] <RAOF> When you import a CD, please use the profile that I've told you to.
[05:25] <RAOF> Also, when I say "remove from disc", I expect files to be deleted.
[05:25] <StevenK> RAOF: Yes, well.
[05:26] <StevenK> If I could find a 0.9.44 .deb, I'd see if it was broken with that
[05:27] <bddebian> StevenK: I was thinking that too but I was starting to feel like an idiot when talking to Thom :'-(  What about libapache-ssi-perl?  I think perl2 has that too, no?
[05:27] <RAOF> StevenK: It wasn't, that I remember.
[05:27] <ajmitch> StevenK: that's not hard
[05:27] <StevenK> bddebian: I've not looked at libapache-ssi-perl
[05:28] <StevenK> ajmitch: Meh, I haven't looked that much
[05:28] <bddebian> Well get on it man.. ;-)
[05:28] <ajmitch> 0.9.41 is the last one that works well for me :)
[05:28] <StevenK> bddebian: Bite me, I have paid work to do
[05:28] <StevenK> bddebian: :-)
[05:28] <bddebian> I don't even know how it's different than mod_include to be honest
[05:28] <ajmitch> Hobbsee!
[05:28] <bddebian> mod_include in apache2 uses perl from what I understood
[05:29] <bddebian> Do we really need a freakin' manpage for a gui-only package?
[05:29] <RAOF> bddebian: Yes, so I can go apropos foo
[05:30] <bddebian> pfft
[05:30] <Amaranth> bddebian: Apparently everything needs a man page
[05:30] <Hobbsee> ajmitch!
[05:30] <bddebian> I know, I've been told that, it just seems so dumb
[05:30] <Amaranth> alacarte has a man page, which is really stupid
[05:30] <Amaranth> It doesn't even have any documentation but it does have a boiler plate man page
[05:31] <Amaranth> Last touched in 2005 :)
[05:34] <bddebian> Hrm, do I try to get this in Debian first... Hmm
[05:34] <ajmitch> yes
[05:36] <TheMuso> Afternoonfolks
[05:36] <TheMuso> Or should I say, good $Time_Of_Day
[05:37] <ajmitch> hi TheMuso
[05:40] <Hobbsee> hi TheMuso
[05:47] <bddebian> Hello TheMuso
[06:21] <bddebian> Holy crap does classpath take a while to build
[06:24] <StevenK> It only took ten minutes to fail on the buildds.
[06:24] <bddebian> Ah, well maybe I have "fixed" it then :)
[06:26] <bddebian> If I stick the stupid man pages in debian/ will dh_installman pick them up or do I need to pass the files to dh_installman?
[06:26] <StevenK> The latter, or in debian/manpages or debian/<package>.manpages
[06:26] <bddebian> Duh, no shit, thanks StevenK