[15:57] is right /etc/ca-certificates.conf deactive all entries by default? === tritium_ is now known as tritium [19:03] ruffleS: Then you are on your own unfortunately, we can't help you. Sorry. [19:03] rufleS: well, any reason not to use the feisty package you have? [19:04] norsetto, 'cuz it doesn't work on gutsy, the kernel module won't load [19:04] Hobbsee: thanks for the hint [19:04] bddebian, thanks anyway [19:04] i'll try to figure out something [19:05] ruffleS: Did you ask around in #ubuntu? [19:05] not yet [19:06] ruffleS: http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/488 [19:07] norsetto, yeah i've seen that already === norsetto is now known as norsetto_limbo === Schnitz_ is now known as Schnitz === cprov is now known as cprov-out === norsetto_limbo is now known as norsetto === nuu is now known as nu === nu is now known as nuu [20:29] SRUs are the "updates" repository right? [20:30] YokoZar: yes [20:31] YokoZar: Yes. How's Wine looking? [20:31] ScottK: I found I'm missing a lib compiled in on 64 bit :( [20:32] So the 64 bit package is built without libxml support [20:32] I'm testing a rebuild with hand-linking it on my machine now. [20:34] hi folks [20:34] YokoZar: We can push stuff to gutsy-proposed now so it gets out in gutsy-updates as quickly as possible. [20:34] hi sistpoty [20:35] hi ScottK [20:42] sistpoty: hi there [20:42] keescook: just stumbled over LP bug #64373. revu already contains code for this problem ;) [20:42] Launchpad bug 64373 in launchpad "[wishlist] download gpg keyring for a team" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/64373 [20:43] hi norsetto [20:44] how is it scottk? [20:46] ScottK: can I move it up to Wine 0.9.47 then? [20:47] ScottK: or should I keep it at 0.9.46 and save the later versions for backports? [20:48] Keep it at 0.9.46 and keep 0.9.47 for backports (We'll upload it to Hardy as soon as the repos open and then backport it). [20:48] YokoZar: I don't know if wine has a special rule but new versions don't get included in -updates [20:49] hey norsetto. Trying to squash bugs in something I'm upstream for. [20:49] The good news is I got a new user who's very "detail oriented". The bad news is I got work to do. [20:49] scottk: hehe [20:53] sistpoty: heh, cool. :) [20:53] keescook: well, revu needs the keyring of ubuntu-universe-contributors to check if a source package should get accepted. I'm not sure how messy the code is though :P [20:54] yeah, I figure it just does a fetch from the keyserver. [20:55] keescook: iirc, yes... the revu-key script called with update is the entry point to follow what the current hacked up revu does ;) === cprov-out is now known as cprov [21:14] good morning [21:14] Heya ajmitch [21:14] Hi ajmitch [21:15] hi ajmitch, bddebian and geser [21:15] hi ajmitch, bddebian, geser ans sistpoty :) [21:15] Heya sistpoty [21:15] and pochu [21:15] hi pochu [21:15] Hi pochu [21:18] * ajmitch should not start off an avalanche of greetings [21:24] hey ajmitch [21:28] yay, light bulb burned, fuse went out :( [21:39] sistpoty: does that mean ntfs-3g stopped working? [21:39] * jdong ducks [21:40] heh [21:40] jdong: ntfs-3g? no... it meant rather that my gf's laptop was still on, while my box was off... the usual "damn, I did s.th. wrong when studying computer science" kind of feeling ;) [21:41] bddebian: I am the king of bad puns :) [21:52] lucas: seems like mdt is broken, or am I using the wrong url (your people.debian.org adress)? [22:03] how can i specify if a package is in multiverse or universe when i create it? [22:04] i've searched with google and the wiki and tried grep -ir universe/multiverse but couldn't find anything [22:05] Schnitz: usually it get's set by the archive admins based on the details specified in debian/copyright. but I guess you can give hints by setting the section field of control to multiverse/$section. [22:05] (though I'm only guessing here as this field can definitely be overrided by an archive admin [22:05] +) [22:06] okay i've packaged something and uploaded it to my ppa and now it doesn't build there because it requires a package from multiverse [22:06] i thought i could specify that somewhere when creating the source package...thanks for your hint [22:08] Schnitz: for ppa, I believe the control file I mentioned is responsible, though I'm not too sure there [22:09] Schnitz: you could ask in #launchpad though, or try searching the launchpad-user mailing list, as I'm sure this was discussed before [22:09] Schnitz: when you need build-depends from universe add "universe/" to your section [22:10] this should also work for multiverse but I don't know if ppa supports multiverse (see the ppa terms) [22:14] I think it does not [22:14] lamego: I think it does :) [22:15] From a discussion in #launchpad some days ago. [22:15] is gutsy-proposed already available? [22:16] I am based on the welcome to launchpad doc, but, I did a quick reading at that time [22:16] welcome to PPA, I mean [22:16] pochu: but it would be a license violation to upload anything to the multiverse section to ppa then? seems like easy sueable targets for me :P [22:18] sistpoty: well, you can have a package which is GPL, but needs something from multiverse to build? Your package will still be GPL, just deppending on a library from multiverse? [22:19] if it the resulting binaries installation requires multiverse packages, I guess that could be a legal issue [22:20] pochu: I guess that's a corner case though... and actually I was kidding a little bit ;) [22:21] lamego: why? you are still able to distribute it, aren't you? [22:21] We do have packages like that in the repository. zekr for one if FOSS, but depends on stuff in multiverse, so is doomed to live there too. [22:22] pochu, if it drives an user to do something illegal, without warning him, I am doing something illegal, I guess [22:22] but well, I am not a lawyer :) [22:22] lamego: sorry, what's illegal there? [22:22] lamego: neither am I ;) [22:23] hansin: If not, python-flup is probably the answer to your prayers. [22:23] multiverse stuff is legally distributable, just has other restrictions on it. [22:23] there are multiverse packages, which do violate patents in some countries, correct ? [22:23] What the.. [22:23] lamego: well, I just said the use of multiverse/ is supported. Nothing else :) [22:23] lamego: and not always. Those are special cases, afaik. [22:25] pochu, right, but distributing those binaries depending on universe packages, without a proper warning may not be supported, for legal reasons [22:25] ops, multiverse [22:26] Dunno. But since you aren't shipping that package... [22:26] pochu, not always, but some, do, on some countries, at least they are tagged on the software sources as "Restricted by copyright or legal issues" ;) [22:28] "You agree to indemnify and hold Canonical Ltd, and its subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, agents, partners, and employees, harmless from any alleged claim or" [22:28] I am not going to use PPAs :) [22:29] heh [22:30] lamego: That's one thing we agree on. [22:30] lamego: See Bug 137447 [22:30] Launchpad bug 137447 in soyuz "PPA Terms of Service one sided" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/137447 [22:32] damn, I didn't want to start a holy war :P ... but anyways I'm off to bed now, gn8 everyone [22:34] I will go a bit further, I think Canonical should provide legal advice for those which may need to upload a software for which the legal status is unclear [22:55] night all [23:41] I prepared two bugfixes in gnome-schedule. Both bugs are reported. Can I upload them as a single diff, or do I have to separte them? [23:43] Jazzva: Are they for the same package? [23:45] TheMuso: Yep. It's just that they're two distinct bugs. I suppose I could add two lines in changelogs with both LP bug numbers. I'm just not sure if that's the right way... [23:50] Jazzva: Yes, one diff with both bug fixes mentioned in the changelog is fine. [23:50] TheMuso: Thanks :)... [23:51] np [23:51] Another question: One of them has been fixed upstream, but the new version is still not in the repositories. Can I provide the bugfix that will fix the version in the repositories? [23:52] Yes I guess you could, but since its a gnome package, you may want to consult the desktop team about that. [23:52] TheMuso: Ok... thanks again :). [23:52] np [23:53] When is eclipse goin gto be updated to 3.3? [23:54] knix: when hardy is being developed, it won't happen for gutsy [23:54] there may be a slim chance of it getting into gutsy-backports [23:54] Yea I didn't expect it to happen in a day :P