[00:03] geser: Not quite. Hammer & tongs backport to python2.4 [00:04] ScottK: backport to gutsy should work fine. feisty maybe, but I think it requires too new a version of python-nose. Might be suitable for a 2.4-forcing gutsy SRU, but that's getting more invasive than I like. [00:05] Any backport for Edgy or Dapper should definitely be based on the 0.9 tree, which package I never had working to anyone's satisfaction (including mine). Given the time, and that it didn't work on release day, I doubt it's worth it. === Ibalon is now known as zakame [01:34] heh. Anyone else see the Amazon.com sponsored result for searching for 'jono bacon' (no quotes)? [01:36] on google [01:36] * Solarion wants to see the "Low prices on jono bacon" [01:38] evening === rzr is now known as rZr [02:15] Heya gang [02:21] Welcome NCommander :) [02:24] * NCommander feels people [02:24] * LaserJock runs [02:24] Well this can be a fairly quiet time :-) [02:24] Heya LaserJock [02:25] * NCommander tries to figure out what he can do [02:27] hiya bddebian [02:27] NCommander: Fix bugs! :-) [02:28] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/TODO [02:35] * NCommander reads the paperwork first [02:37] * NCommander finishs signing things [03:01] * Hobbsee reads hte MOTU ML. [03:01] bah. [03:02] I read that as "Hobbsee reads the MOTU hate mail" [03:02] lmao [03:02] hehe [03:03] You're not happy with Kmos deciding to leave? :S [03:03] he does? [03:04] So, Kmos is still very impatient, still hasn't learned anything, still says he'll won't do something, then does it. They recommend more close supervision, as apparently this lot was close enough, and he was shown to violate his sponsorship conditions anyway. [03:04] all because he does sometimes get work right. [03:04] Hobbsee, You didn't read kmos' response? [03:04] He has decided to leave [03:04] somerville32: he's decided to leave before. [03:04] Ah [03:04] somerville32: he said he'd never file another sync request, months ago, too. [03:05] somerville32: he said he wouldn't touch MOTU sync bugs, yet does that as well. [03:05] "Hobbsee: I WON'T TOUCH AGAIN MOTU BUGS! :-) I'll remember you when I click on the mouse and try to do it." [03:05] You don't believe him this time Hobbsee? :P [03:05] Hobbsee: I don't want to get into it again, but I thought the email was fairly clear, though I think we need an official MC vote [03:05] * Hobbsee has little confidence in anything he says actually holding. [03:05] * minghua just noticed today that he filed a bunch of Ubuntu-specific FTFBS bugs against Debian. [03:05] LaserJock: what do you read it as saying? [03:05] Hobbsee: dholbach's email was fairly clear [03:05] minghua: ...yay. [03:06] LaserJock: it's made recommendations, pretty much the same as were already done. [03:06] Hobbsee: no, it said he failed the "exam" [03:06] that was my reading [03:06] LaserJock: right, so the recommendations != what they'll do as a result? [03:07] there wasn't a recommendation of what to do, it was a summary of the situation [03:07] Recommendation: [03:07] [03:07] that's still a summary? [03:08] * Hobbsee thought the summary was the first part, as "recommendation" is at the same position on the screen as "summary" [03:08] hmm, I was thinking so, but there's really no recommendation there [03:08] there is a recommendation there - it's just not what most of us wanted. [03:09] I wouldn't say that [03:09] I don't see a recommendation for or against him leaving [03:09] well, perhaps not. there seem to be recommendations through it, and the stuff titled "recommendation" really is a summary of hte summary. [03:10] okay, granted. [03:10] Hobbsee: dholbach clarified on IRC that summary would have been better than recommendation. [03:10] Good evening all. [03:10] ScottK: right, OK [03:11] the original proposal had:"If the evaluation doesn't go well, we must ask him to no longer work on Ubuntu." [03:11] And I think we should follow through on that. [03:11] for sure [03:11] so I guess we just need a formal MC vote to confirm [03:12] Heya ScottK [03:12] When is the next MC meeting? [03:12] somerville32: they don't do meeting, they do calls. [03:12] well, all they need to do is vote via email [03:12] is there anywhere i can get a full list of all the FTBFS bugs for a certain arch? [03:12] :P [03:12] lol [03:12] sorry to interrupt [03:13] :) [03:13] joejaxx: thanks [03:13] have you tried qa.ubuntuwire.com ? [03:13] http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ [03:14] yeah but that shows all of them [03:14] all the arches that is [03:14] i guess i can write a script to spider the page [03:14] thanks :) [03:15] Heya bddebian [03:16] heya laser [03:20] hi Solarion === dmb is now known as dmb` === dmb` is now known as dmb [04:11] Anyone from motu-sru around? I'd appreciate a look at: Bug 183661 [04:11] Launchpad bug 183661 in libmail-box-perl "FTBFS in Gutsy/Feisty" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/183661 [04:11] LaserJock: Are you still here? [04:12] yep [04:13] Making a package build that's currently FTBFS is pretty straight forward for an SRU, right? [04:14] pretty much, please attach a debdiff [04:15] For a rebuild? [04:16] well, hmm, I'm assuming it'll take a build1 [04:16] Yeah. [04:16] I was hoping you'd ack it and trust me to write build1 correctly. [04:17] I just filled out all the required bits on the bug (TEST CASE, etc.) [04:17] But if you want a debdiff, I'll provide them. [04:18] well, I know what you mean [04:18] Your call. [04:19] ScottK: has a rebuild be done in Hardy? [04:19] LaserJock: Yes. It worked. [04:20] same version [04:20] ? [04:20] No. [04:20] k [04:20] But FTBFS for the same reason. [04:21] sbuild attempting to satisfy versioned depends with a virtual package of insufficient version when a non-virtual package would have worked. [04:23] ScottK: right, SRU ack'd [04:23] LaserJock: Thanks. [04:24] ScottK: np, thanks for doing the leg work [04:24] LaserJock: Thanks for the mail too. [04:24] np [04:45] is there a convention for package numbering on ppas at this point? [04:46] slangasek: try not to make Adam Williamsons prediction come true? [04:46] Burgundavia: What was that? [04:46] who? [04:48] slangasek: I think something along the lines of 0ubuntu0ppa1 or similar [04:48] http://www.happyassassin.net/2007/10/24/mistakes/ [04:48] I got stuck on 0ubuntu0.7.10~ppaX [04:48] for gutsy [04:48] etc. [04:49] why not 0ubuntu0~7.10~ppaX? [04:49] https://help.launchpad.net/PPAQuickStart gives suggestions [04:49] that way you don't potentially interfere with any SRU versions [04:50] slangasek: While you're thinking about that, would you mind accepting libmail-box-perl into gutsy-proposed and feisty-proposed? [04:50] slangasek: and looking at mpeg4ip in NEW if it has not been handled yet? :) [04:50] jdong: that wouldn't interfere with an SRU would it? [04:51] LaserJock: It might have a higher version number than an SRU [04:51] LaserJock: Hmm you're right, 0ubuntu1 is the lowest with ubuntu in it [04:51] I guess that's possible [04:51] Actually not always for SRU. [04:51] jdong: well, security often uses ubuntu0.1 [04:51] -1ubuntu0.1 is possible for SRU/security to -1 [04:52] Yep [04:52] but -0 implies -0ubuntu1 [04:52] except maybe the firefox stuff? [04:52] where we introduce a new upstream version as a security fix [04:52] 2.0.0.11+2nobinonly-0ubuntu0.7.10 [04:53] yeah, Firefox uses -0ubuntu0.* [04:53] so I guess 0ubuntu0~something is safer [04:53] Hi all. Is there an abbreviated instruction somewhere for packaging a python script? === boomer` is now known as boomer [04:55] ScottK2, jdong: [04:55] beerfan: does it use distutils? [04:55] sorry, I'm off-duty right now [04:55] slangasek: just make a version scheme up [04:56] LaserJock: right :) [04:56] slangasek: No problem. [04:56] slangasek: fine :) [04:56] pochu: the script? I don't think so [04:56] slangasek: just think *you* can provide the convention [04:56] ;-) [04:56] haha [04:56] slangasek: where is the distro sprint? [04:56] Speaking of PPAs, how do I make it upload for Gutsy? [04:57] don't you just target gutsy as the distro? [04:57] ScottK: changelog [04:57] Dunno. Never uploaded to a PPA before. [04:57] beerfan: take a look at http://wiki.debian.org/DebianPython/NewPolicy. You have examples there. [04:57] ScottK2: yeah the distro field in the changelog [04:57] I've only done gutsy PPA uploads [04:57] * ScottK2 finally decides to take advantage of it now that the TOS are changed. [04:58] I'm still backporting stuff [04:58] ScottK2: Yeah, target gutsy in the changelog [04:59] ScottK2: I can give you a .dput.cf snippet if you wish [04:59] ScottK2: either put gutsy in debian/changelog, or in your dput entry put something like "incoming = ~siretart/ubuntu/gutsy" [05:00] StevenK: I got the dput.cf snippet from the PPA quickstart. It looked sane enough. [05:00] pochu: why ping siretart for that? :D [05:00] jdong: just to annoy him ;) [05:00] jdong: Why ping him because pochu did? ;-) [05:00] ScottK: it's probably easier to do it in the changelog [05:01] :) [05:01] ScottK: why didn't you ping him too? :) [05:01] * Hobbsee pings jdong [05:01] you need a unique version / release anyway [05:01] * jdong thinks nick completion needs to do globbing! [05:01] ping * :) [05:01] lol [05:01] heh [05:01] Burgundavia: Londinium Anticum [05:01] * pochu continues studying [05:02] slangasek: thought as much, in Canonical Tower One [05:07] * slangasek wonders if that's supposed to be like One Microsoft Way [05:10] I've not heard it called Canonical Tower One before [05:11] and now it is and shall be forever [05:11] I doubt that. [05:12] Do PPA uploads get accepted mails sent out? [05:12] StevenK: silence [05:12] ScottK2: Yes. [05:13] RAOF: Thanks. [05:17] * Hobbsee thought it was called The Evil Canonical Empire Headquarters. [05:19] Hi there Hobbsee. [05:19] hi ScottK [05:20] * minghua renews his membership. [05:21] JFTR, I pretty much agree with what the Mandriva guy said about PPAs. [05:21] what was that? [05:21] ScottK: What did he say? [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsDec1007.gpx [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsDec1107.gpx [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsDec2107.gpx [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsDec2107-2.gpx [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsDec2307.gpx [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsDec2607.gpx [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsDec2607-2.gpx [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsDec2907.gpx [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsDec3107.gpx [05:21] /home/corey/trackpointsJan0108.gpx [05:21] ugh, wrong paste, sorry [05:21] http://www.happyassassin.net/2007/10/24/mistakes/ [05:21] that one [05:21] Yeah. That one. [05:25] ah yes [05:26] hehe, "Basically, Ubuntu has institutionalised the third-party repository." gotta love it [05:26] That isn't amusing, though. [05:28] PPAs won't have a ubuntu.com address, will they? [05:28] no [05:28] they fixed that bug, finally [05:29] I think he is exaggerating the problem. [05:29] So do I. [05:29] i assume if they use non-official PPA's, it'll just bail out, as it does for third party repos. [05:29] The facts he said are true, but I don't agree with the predictions. [05:29] well, I think the idea is right [05:30] like what happens when somebody uploads a new gtk or qt that breaks stuff [05:30] how do we debug that [05:30] LaserJock: It would have a different version number, and should show in the bug reports. [05:31] we don't even know what the version of the "official" packages are in bug reports [05:31] (The good ones anyway) [05:31] there's absolutely no way to know a priori [05:31] Apport reports the version for a crash, for example [05:31] we do if there is apport info [05:31] right, what steven said [05:31] yes, that's true [05:32] but apport isn't used for all that many bugs [05:34] I'm guessing upgrade problems will be mitigated to some degree by update-manager [05:34] Certainly more than they were in Mandriva. [05:35] What prevents uploads to PPAs with the exact same version number as in the archive? [05:36] I don't think anything does [05:37] So even that's no guarantee. [05:37] it's just like a regular repo in that respect [05:37] although it does look for .orig.tar.gz's from Ubuntu [05:38] laserjock: If someone uploads a new Gtk or Qt to her PPA, it’s not as if Ubuntu users get that by default. Only the ones who have explicitly decided to trust the repo and use it. [05:38] hehe [05:38] Right. [05:38] And unlike stuff like automatix, it's downloaded from a Canonical sponsored source. [05:38] You probably can't upgrade to a version the same as your current one, but I know it doesn't matter for newly installed packages. [05:38] "my new gtk fixes bugs X, Y, Z and is needed for my new version of Q" [05:39] RAOF: exactly, need to test the new stuff for intel (and the rest too if possible) [05:39] In the same domain as one can get actual Ubuntu .debs from if you want. [05:39] and soon enough the repos will be signed [05:39] I wasn't aware ppa.ubuntu.com resolved ... [05:39] (It doesn't) [05:40] ScottK: But most users don't know that they can get official packages from LP. [05:40] StevenK: You can pull .debs off of Launchpad. [05:40] Agreed. [05:40] minghua: no, but LP is official [05:40] ScottK: Right, but you can't point your sources.list at it [05:40] True. [05:40] tjaalton: So, presumably the various non-nouveau DDXs won't care about the new dri modules, but how about mesa? Is this also going to require a git mesa snapshot to do anything interesting? [05:41] LaserJock: I've also seen people claiming ubuntuforums.org "official". So as long as the domain names differ, I don't worry too much. [05:41] RAOF: I'm working on it :) === _czessi is now known as Czessi [05:41] minghua: worry about what? [05:41] tjaalton: Oooh, awesome. In that case, hell yes! [05:42] RAOF: do you have your auto-git scripts somewhere? [05:42] LaserJock: Worry about PPAs breaking systems and upgrades (more then third-party packages already do, anyway). [05:42] hmm, I do to some degree [05:43] tjaalton: Do you mean my "upload new snapshot to PPA" script, or "get new source" script (which is in debian/rules) [05:43] we are free-hosting and building 3rd party repos [05:43] Just look at the popularity of getdeb.net, and you'll know that users have enough ways to screw up their system already anyway. [05:43] It's hard to argue 3rd party repos are a bad idea when the sponsor of Ubuntu hosts them. [05:43] and there's not much of a way for users to differentiate good repos from not-so-good [05:43] RAOF: oh, right.. it is, I did notice it but didn't look too closely [05:43] tjaalton: get-orig-source is actually quite nice :) [05:43] ScottK: Conceptually, they're a great idea. [05:44] RAOF: I think I'll upload the merge to git.d.o on debian-experimental branch, and then start working on that [05:44] I think PPAs are great, I just think we also need a good way of deal with the "cons" involved [05:44] tjaalton: You can have my "do everything & upload to PPA" script, but it's unlikely to be very useful for you. [05:44] tjaalton: Cool. I suppose I might want to ask for git access, then :) [05:45] RAOF: sure, it's easy.. just pop in on #debian-x and ask :) [05:46] RAOF: different irc server though [05:46] Of course, OFTC [05:46] and set up an account on alioth.d.o [05:46] if not already [05:46] I've wanted to do that before... not sure if I ended up doing it though. [05:46] I guess #d-o is pretty silent right now [05:47] uh #d-x [05:48] StevenK: They're a great idea, but also have risks. [05:48] ScottK: Right [05:48] I expect most of the people that'll use them well would have managed without them. [05:48] I think they may be good for upstreams [05:48] kind of a staging area [05:49] Exactly. A way to get more testing without people having to build it themselves. [05:49] For me they're good for backports testing. [05:49] I can backport a bunch of stuff and build against the backports. [05:50] RAOF: the mesa HEAD has autotool support too, so it would be a good time to make it use that [05:50] So I just uploaded the current clamav package to the ubuntu-clamav PPA for Dapper/Edgy/Feisty/Gutsy. [05:50] Tomorrow, after they're built, I'll take a whack at uploading the redpends. [05:53] tjaalton: I'm somewhat ambivalent about that. Autotools is not my idea of a good time. [05:59] * ScottK2 would appreciate suggestions on what to do about checking for gcc bug PR28045... configure: error: your compiler has gcc PR28045 bug, use a different compiler, see http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28045 [05:59] gcc bug 28045 in middle-end "[4.0/4.1 Regression] Bitfield, &&, and optimization => bad code generation" [Normal,Resolved: fixed] [06:01] Huh? What software is that! [06:01] Current clamav trying to be built on Dapper [06:02] hello all [06:02] Immediately followed by make: *** [config.status] Error 1 and the build died. [06:02] hello doluu [06:02] I've just build some packages from debian on Ubuntu [06:03] and made change in debian/control to reflect original maintainer [06:03] ScottK: Nothing besides a gcc SRU, as far as I can see. [06:03] how I can get sponsorship? [06:03] ScottK: Or maybe using gcc-3.[34]. [06:03] doluu: Have you checked to make sure these packages aren't already in Hardy? [06:03] hardy have older version [06:03] it's vzctl [06:04] and vzquota [06:04] !info vzctl hardy [06:04] vzctl: server virtualization solution - control tools. In component universe, is optional. Version 3.0.18-1 (hardy), package size 184 kB, installed size 1000 kB (Only available for i386 ia64 amd64 powerpc sparc) [06:04] doluu: What version does Debian have? [06:04] 3.0.22 [06:04] How come we have a version lower than etch? [06:05] openvz's latest version is also 3.0.22 [06:05] Oh sorry, etch has 3.0.11. I misread as 3.0.21. [06:05] RAOF: right, but at least some changes must be done to the old build system since the build failed when it got to i915tex [06:05] tjaalton: Ok. [06:07] doluu: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SyncRequestProcess is what you want. [06:08] doluu: And come back and ask again once you properly filed a sync request. [06:11] !info gcc3.4 dapper [06:11] Package gcc3.4 does not exist in dapper [06:12] !info gcc-3.4 dapper [06:12] gcc-3.4: The GNU C compiler. In component main, is optional. Version 3.4.6-1ubuntu2 (dapper), package size 482 kB, installed size 4532 kB [06:12] ScottK: :-) [06:15] Thanks [06:27] * ScottK tries to build clamav again. [06:32] jdong: Can I backport a C compiler? [06:34] People might hate you. [06:35] StevenK: GCC 4.2 doesn't exist at all in Dapper right now, so if it suddenly pops up, nothing should use it? [06:35] Keep in mind gcc takes over 12 hours to build. [06:36] I'm gonna do some local testing here first. [06:36] Backports have the lowest priority anyway, so it's not like it would block much. [06:44] Nope. That's not going to work. [06:45] I guess I need to figure out how to make clamav use gcc 3.4 [06:45] But after I sleep. [06:45] Good night all. [06:45] CC=gcc-3.4 in the rules file, and Build-Depend on it? [06:46] Tried that (or close to that [06:46] * ScottK gives it one more try. [06:48] You'll probably have to feed CC=gcc-3.4 to the configure call [06:50] That's where I was doing it, but I fed it the path, not just the compiler name. [06:52] Got through config that time, so that's progress. [06:52] StevenK: Thanks for the hint. [06:52] ScottK: No problem [06:54] And it built in the pbuilder. Yeah. [06:56] hmm, where did Fujitsu go? [06:58] He rode off on a golden pony [06:58] heh [07:00] he's on a holiday with his parents. [07:00] for 2 weeks, iirc [07:00] Poor guy [07:00] :-P [07:01] hehe [07:03] ewww, stuck with parents ;-p [07:05] Could be worse. He could be stuck on holiday for two weeks with my children. [07:06] ;-) [07:06] Actually my kids are great, but we drove over 3,000 miles (4,800 km) over Christmas vacation. [07:07] Ahh. "Don't make me turn this vacation around!" [07:07] StevenK, 3 in the morning wouldn't be the same without you [07:08] Parents are good (tm) [07:08] somerville32: I see. [07:09] hmm, I wish we had a FTBFS list that didn't include hppa [07:09] LaserJock: Why? [07:09] Because LaserJock doesn't care about it, I'm guessing. [07:09] cause hppa is quite a bit of a majority of them [07:10] and we're not really going to be fixing them in general [07:10] lynx -dump | grep -v hppa ? [07:10] they should definitely show up, but it'd be nice to have a view without them [07:10] StevenK: yes, there's always good workarounds :-) [07:11] good morning [07:11] just thinking for qa.ubuntuwire.com v2 [07:11] dholbach! [07:11] Hey dholbach. [07:12] hey LaserJock, hey TheMuso [07:17] Good morning dholbach. [07:17] Good night everyone. [07:17] do debian maintainers scan ubuntu packages for changes that aren't in debian? meaning: if i make a patch to ubuntu package are there any chanses of it getting to debian without me filing a debian bug about it? [07:17] vemon, doubt it [07:17] hey scottK [07:17] vemon: Depends a lot on the Debian maintainer [07:19] any automagic tricks in launchpad for getting a bug to debian BTS also? [07:19] somerville32: PTS? [07:19] Hobbsee, Plumbing.... Trade... Supplies? [07:19] lol [07:20] somerville32: package tracking system. debian. [07:20] vemon: reportbug, but make sure the issue actually applies to Debian. [07:20] LaserJock: well, feel free to install the grub package from deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/vorlon/ubuntu hardy main and let me know if it eats your system for lunch, instead of just partially implementing a hardy spec like it's supposed to ;) [07:21] scottk, sure. that's the first thing i check anyways since it's always easier to just sync the package from debian [07:22] Oh cool :) [07:22] vemon: OK. Just saying. Not everyone does that. [07:22] Good night (really). [07:22] scottk, i don't doubt that :) [07:22] Me too [07:22] I need sleep :) [07:22] * somerville32 waves. [07:22] * slangasek waves to ScottK, somerville32 [07:22] night somerville32, night scottK [07:31] hmm. doesn't reportbug just send a message to the ubuntu ubuntu-user@lists.ubuntu.com? [07:31] referring to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/reportbug/+bug/36186 [07:31] Launchpad bug 36186 in reportbug "Trivial and non-trivial enhancements for bugreport" [Wishlist,Confirmed] [07:31] not if you tell it to send to debian [07:32] LaserJock, ok. thanks :) i'm at work now and unable to test it yet so i only have the inter-web to seek info from [07:33] (sound like a bad excuse..) [07:34] vemon: if you run reportbug --bts help you get a lits of bug trackers you can use [07:35] so reportbug --bts debian should submit to debian I think [07:38] ok, anybody know what email address system mail would be sent to if you use a smart host for smtp? [07:39] I'd like to be able to use apps that send mail (reportbug for instance) but I don't want my system mail going into some unknown cyberspace === Sp4rKy_ is now known as Sp4rKY [10:24] somerville32: Thanks for the continuing review of notecase. it's very pleasant to see such evidence of collaboration. [10:25] am I the only one with timeout problems with launchpadlibrarian.net? I am not able to access build logs, bug attachments :-( [10:26] * persia tries something [10:27] is there any sane way to build a package from a folder that has a .bzr/ in it, without using bzr-buildpackage? [10:27] slytherin: I get things near instantaneously [10:27] :-( [10:27] Ng: debuild -i might be what you seek, but I've heard it's not always perfect. [10:27] hmm, I'll probably just move the thing out of the way then [10:27] thanks [10:33] Ng: Build the source package yourself using -I.bzr and then point pbuilder build at the .dsc? [10:38] StevenK: You mean -i, probably. [10:53]