[00:00] the rest seemed to have nuked fine [00:00] * sistpoty looks [00:02] nixternal: no idea actually, but I removed it manually from the db [00:07] thanks === lutin is now known as Lutin [00:19] .orig.tar.gz is supposed to be the original tarball from upstream, right? [00:19] TomJaeger: yes [00:19] why is this not the case for wacom-tools? [00:20] * sistpoty looks [00:22] TomJaeger: not too sure, I guess for convencience (debian/README.Debian makes me think that). Generally, this should be avoided w.o. a very good reason [00:24] okay, I guess I'll fix that too, while I'm at it [00:25] TomJaeger: at what? [00:25] TomJaeger: oh, are you considering to update wacom-tools? [00:25] nobody else is doing it, are they? [00:26] TomJaeger: the please head the rule of thumg: do minimal changes to the current package (unless you maintain it) [00:26] then [00:26] and rule of thumb... bah, I'm no typing expert today [00:27] it's in main isn't it? [00:28] bug #195953 [00:28] Launchpad bug 195953 in wacom-tools "Tablet input resolution tied to display resolution" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/195953 [00:28] this is the reason [00:29] TomJaeger: go for it [00:30] TomJaeger: so your update is a new upstream version? [00:30] yeah, but it needs some fixes to even compile [00:30] i am trying to create my own meta-packages ... [00:30] TomJaeger: still, try to do minimal changes in packaging, I gues the release team will appreciate this [00:30] with debuild i get the message [00:30] bad-distribution-in-changes-file gutsy [00:31] i have gutsy in my changelog, is this wrong? [00:31] aquo: do you have "ubuntu" in the version number? [00:31] aquo: last entry in debian/changelog: change "gutsy" to "hardy" [00:31] sistpoty, I'm still moving that autoconf-garbage out of the diff [00:31] aquo: are you compiling for gutsy? [00:31] james_w: no, i think i will put ppa in [00:31] james_w: yes [00:32] james_w: i dont have ubuntu in the version number [00:33] sistpoty: but i don't want to make the metapackage for hardy, i want i to be for gutsy. [00:33] aquo: are you sure? (once hardy gets out, I doubt that too many gutsy systems will remain)... but if so, ignore the warning ;) [00:34] sistpoty: it is not a warning, is is marked E: [00:34] I think this is just for personal use isn't it? [00:34] aquo: by what? [00:34] by debuild [00:34] E: aquo-packaging_0.1_i386.changes: bad-distribution-in-changes-file gutsy [00:34] aquo: are you using a debuild from before gutsy? [00:34] aquo: instead of 0.1-1 have 0.1-0ubuntu1 [00:35] no [00:35] hm... [00:35] aquo: from debian? [00:35] no, just from scratch. [00:35] I think there's a safety catch added in Ubuntu to stop you uploading packages to Ubuntu with "Debian" version numbers. [00:35] it is just an README with some created debian/ directory ... [00:35] as it -1 etc. [00:35] aquo: hm... do you have some triggers in debuild that require a clean lintian run? [00:36] no, but i want to do it the right way ... [00:36] if i create a metapackage from scratch, which version number do i need to give? [00:36] aquo: i suggest 1 [00:36] should it be 0.1-1? [00:36] or is 0.1 ok? [00:37] or maybe it has to be 1ubuntu1 [00:37] or 0.1-0ubuntu1 [00:37] or 0.1ubuntu1 [00:37] james_w: right, now I recall some completely and utter stupid changes back then, which derive the distribution from the version number [00:37] It only gets the ubuntuX wart if its modified from virgin source [00:38] so it would be 1ubuntu1 (for a metapackage, which I guess should be native) [00:38] james_w: i don't want to have it ubuntu in the version, i am just going for ppa [00:38] so 1ppa1 ... [00:38] sistpoty: -1ubuntu1 implies theres been one debian modification, and then one ubuntu modification ontop of that [00:38] aquo: The metapackage is for the 0.1 version of the software, right? [00:39] aquo: I'm trying to tell you that I think it's the fact that you don't have ubuntu in the version number that is giving you the error [00:39] james_w: I think thats wrong [00:39] Flannel: it doesn't really matter for a metapackage... either 0ubuntu1 or 1ubuntu1 (as debian probably won't sync that one) [00:39] Flannel: i just created a metapackage (just a README-file) f [00:39] Not that I'm an expert, but I would've given it the 0.1 version, and been done with it. [00:39] for the dependencys ... [00:39] there is no real source ... [00:39] (oh, and sorry for my wording about the changes... of course I should have written "not so prudent" or s.th. like that) [00:40] Flannel: to be correct, 0.1 would (iirc) be a nmu of a debian native package in debian [00:40] it is a native package, but it is native to ubuntu [00:41] sistpoty: No, it's the 0.1 version from upstream, 0.1-1 would be one debian change [00:41] Flannel: not for a *native* package [00:41] aquo: http://packages.ubuntu.com/gutsy/ocaml-libs is an example of a metapacakge with no warts, so it's definately not a requirement [00:42] Flannel: rule of thumb: no dash in the version number -> native package [00:42] sistpoty: Have an example? [00:42] sistpoty: the one I just gave, actually, has no dash [00:42] Flannel: exactly ;) [00:43] sistpoty: http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=ocaml-libs&searchon=names&suite=testing§ion=all [00:43] sistpoty: Its not native [00:43] er, ok, so its the etch version, but still, not native [00:43] Flannel: why would it be not native? [00:44] sistpoty: What are you defining native as? [00:44] Flannel: native == "no orig.tar.gz" [00:44] So, all metapackages are native then, by definition? [00:44] ubuntu-meta has "ubuntu-meta (1.79) gutsy; urgency=low" [00:44] Flannel: yes [00:46] sistpoty: I took native to be Ubuntu created. If a metapackage has a change from debian's, is it -0ubuntu1? [00:47] -Xubuntu1 [00:47] sistpoty, so I think the reason they repacked it is because the debian/ubuntu package is called wacom-tools and upstream calls it linuxwacom [00:47] Flannel: there is no real policy... the right thing imho would be to create a non-native package from it, but that also has its problems. So I usually go for Xubuntu1 (being X the debian version) [00:48] sistpoty: ubuntu-meta is also a "native"-package in my eyes. [00:48] aquo: yes, it is [00:48] so, how do i get rid of the E: aquo-packaging_0.1_i386.changes: bad-distribution-in-changes-file gutsy message? [00:49] sistpoty, so I'll do the same thing [00:49] aquo: have you tried adding "ubuntu1" to the (last) version in debian/changelog? [00:50] TomJaeger: have you checked, if there was actually just a rename of the original version, or if it has been otherwise fiddled with as well? [00:51] brb [00:51] sistpoty: i tried ppa1 [00:51] E: aquo-packaging_0.1ppa1_i386.changes: bad-distribution-in-changes-file gutsy [00:52] sistpoty, everything has been moved to a linuxwacom and there's a strange doc dir [00:52] *linuxwacom subdir* [00:53] aquo: I doubt ppa will make any difference if the issue is what I think it is, as ppas weren't around then. [00:53] how are renames usually handled? [00:54] just in the packaging usually [00:54] james_w: ok, with ubuntu1 the Error-Message is gone [00:54] it doesn't really matter what's going on in the source package as long as the binary packages come out ok [01:02] james_w: *cough*.. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Basic#ChangingOrigTarball (though if it's screwed once, you'll have a hard time for a new upstream version) [01:02] (that was actually written by me, in case you wonder) [01:04] heh, preaching to the choir :-) [01:04] :) [01:09] soren: can you attach the usual information for bug #208161 please? thanks! [01:09] Launchpad bug 208161 in ubuntu-vm-builder "FFe: Update ubuntu-vm-builder" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/208161 [01:11] is there a way to make dpkg-buildpackage show the current directory? [01:12] what do you mean? [01:26] sistpoty: thanks for the ack on the bzr* FFe [01:27] james_w: you'll still need to get the ack from main (until mine gets valid) [01:27] james_w: as I understand it, there is a tight correlation between bzr and bzr-tools, right? [01:28] yeah, they all need to go in together [01:28] so, the basic for my metapackage seems to work ... [01:28] I realise it's not complete yet, but it's good to have that but done [01:28] it is nice to have those metapackages for software installation ;) [01:28] james_w: yes, that's what I thought... so basically my opinion is: if one goes into main, the others should follow ;) [01:29] but: if i change anything inside my metapackage: do i change the native version or the ubuntu one? [01:29] if i use dch -i ubuntu counts up .... [01:29] hmmm [01:30] aquo: for native packages, the complete version is the version of the package [01:30] sistpoty: grmpf [01:30] james_w: I started a wiki page about the packaging jam: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/PackagingJamJune2008 - feel free to edit :) [01:30] thanks Laney [01:30] aquo: because there's no .orig.tar.gz, every new version is put in a (native) .tar.gz again [01:31] sistpoty: but i had to introduce the ubuntu1 to get the error message away ... [01:31] aquo: hence changing either the version number, or the X after ubuntuX will result in the same thing packaging wise [01:31] Laney: looks good, do you want to email the list to tell everyone about it. [01:32] Laney: also, there's no mention of the possible Bug Jam. [01:32] james_w: I'll add that. You can email the list if you'd like or I'll try and get round to it tomorrow [01:32] aquo: the usual thing for debian imported native packages is to increase X though (as in ubuntuX becomes ubuntuX+1) [01:33] (X+1 as expression *g*) [01:33] ok, but i didn't import anything from debian [01:33] Laney: we're in to the time where I won't let myself send email for fear of saying something stupid due to tiredness, so it would be tomorrow anyway [01:33] i created a native metapackage for ubuntu [01:33] Laney: so if you don't do it tomorrow I can [01:33] aquo: but since you have an ubuntu version number, just increase X ;() [01:33] james_w: That's fine [01:33] -( [01:34] if i mv aquo-packaging-0.1/ aquo-packaging-0.2 and run dch -i inside it, it prompts me with 0.1ubuntu2 ... [01:35] aquo: yes, that's correct... for native packages, the source package == upstream package === danielm_ is now known as danielm [01:35] aquo: so usually you don't move the debian dir around, but just add to the existing package [01:35] (s/usually/always) [01:36] sistpoty: there is no debian-dir, i just created this for myself from scratch, understand? [01:36] it is a native metapackage for ubuntu. [01:37] aquo: w.o. debian dir, you cannot build a package? [01:37] aquo: I guess we're misunderstaning here === zachy is now known as zakame [01:39] sistpoty: ok, i have a ubuntu native metapackage directory named aquo-packaging-0.1 with some debian-directory inside it with all the control stuff ... [01:40] because of some freaky error-message i had to intruduce the ubuntu1 version in changelog. [01:40] if i run dch -i inside the directory ubuntuX counts up ... [01:40] aquo: yes, that's correct [01:40] but this is a native package, so i want the native version number to count up ... [01:41] a can hand-edit this, but why use dch -i if i need to hand-edit stuff? [01:42] aquo: try dch -U [01:42] aquo: the native version == what is in debian/changelog [01:42] that should get rid of this "ubuntu" check [01:42] (I think) [01:42] aquo: if you put 1.2ubuntu3 there, the native version is exactly this [01:43] no it isn't [01:43] aquo: if you want to increase 1.2ubuntu3 to 1.3ubuntu1, you'll need to hand edit the file [01:43] i am the "upstream"-maintainer and the packager in one person. [01:43] aquo: yes, that's what "native package" is all about ;) [01:45] ok, it seems that nobody seems to understand my question. [01:46] aquo: at least, I don't... maybe you could rephrase it again= [01:47] ? [01:47] aquo: dch -v will allow you to specify the version that you want [02:25] Heya gang [02:25] hey bddebian [02:25] bddebian: heya [02:25] Hi protonchris, mneptok [02:28] hi bddebian [02:29] Heya sistpoty [02:37] alright, I've updated the wacom-tools package now, who do we get this uploaded? [02:38] TomJaeger: you need a core-dev sponsor [02:39] how would I find a core-dev sponsor? [02:41] Hmmm. Something has caused several duplicates of a rather old soundconverter bug to be filed in the past few days. There were no duplicates for 30k bugs, then 7 in just a couple of thousand. [02:41] you should subscribe ubuntu-main-sponsors, but I'm afraid that I don't know the format that they wnat new upstream versions in [02:41] TomJaeger: also have you applied for a Freeze exception? [02:41] no [02:42] I think you'll need to do that. I'm not very familiar with main, sorry [02:42] you can see if anyone is around on #ubuntu-devel [02:42] so I'm wrong here? [02:43] no, not exactly, but motu only look after universe [02:43] there's more likely to be core-dev on that channel than this [02:44] alright, thanks [02:46] * sistpoty is off to bed now.. gn8 [02:47] night sistpoty [02:47] gn8 james_w [02:47] TomJaeger: you should probably explain that you are trying to make an upload and you want details on whether you need a freeze exception, and how to get sponsorship of a new upstream version. [03:17] Fujitsu, Can we get the logbot back in #xubuntu-devel? I dunno why it disappeared. [03:18] cody-somerville: You gotta do 5 u-u-s uploads in the next day now that you're MOTU. Congratulations. [03:18] cody-somerville: I've no idea. [03:18] cody-somerville: Nothing to do with me. [03:18] Thanks ScottK2 :) [03:18] Fujitsu, I thought you were the one that maintained it. My mistake. [03:19] * Fujitsu feels like he's doing 5-(non-)FFes-a-day [03:19] cody-somerville: fabbione, perhaps. [03:19] Right right [03:19] :) [03:19] * ScottK2 feels like he's d0ko's release assistant chasing after python-xml removal and python-central build-dep fixes. [03:23] ScottK2: And then there's LDFLAGS... [03:24] Was that his too? [03:24] Of course. [03:24] And there was something else too. [03:24] I forget. [03:25] Ah, yes, starting the gfortran transition. [03:25] Ah. Well the last act for python-xml is assigned to him, so I'm done on that one. [03:26] Very good. [03:26] It's milestoned against the release too. [03:27] ;-) [03:30] Anybody up for looking at a FFE (Bug 204039)? [03:30] Launchpad bug 204039 in glom "Hardy: Please update to glom 1.6.10" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/204039 [03:32] protonchris: Looking [03:33] heh, glom still isn't done? any time we could clear libgdamm off of http://people.ubuntu.com/~ubuntu-archive/NBS/ would be just peachy :) [03:34] slangasek: Hopefully glom will be done with the next release. Sorry. [03:35] protonchris: The current version is FTBFS or dep wait on several archs. Will this one be any better? [03:38] protonchris: I don't see any features in that release. It looks like just bugfixes to me, so no FFe needed. [03:40] ScottK2: Looks like hppa is hung up on python-gnome2-extras and python-gtk2 [03:40] ScottK2: sparc stuck on python-gnome2-extras [03:40] hppa is often stuck on stuff. Would a giveback on sparc work at this point? [03:44] ScottK2: not sure. I am new to this. What does a giveback mean? [03:45] Try to build it again. [03:45] Is the python-gnome2-extras problem sorted out already? [03:48] It is not clear to me why it didn't work on sparc before since it looks like sparc has python-gnome2-extras [03:48] protonchris: Maybe it didn't then [03:48] Or it's not in sufficient version [03:48] slangasek: what causes a package show up on that webpage? [03:50] protonchris: it's no longer built from any current source package, but still in the archive [03:51] ScottK2: yeah, strange. Lets try a giveback on sparc if it isn't too much trouble. [03:51] * cody-somerville just made his first upload :) [03:51] cody-somerville: Congratulations again. [03:51] :) [03:52] protonchris: Since we're contemplating a new upload, that'd take care of it. [03:52] protonchris: What about the dep wait on ia64? [03:54] protonchris: What do we have to do for libgda3-dev 3.0.2 or better to be available on that arch? [03:56] ScottK2: it is waiting on libgda3-dev which segfaults during building. segfault problem also exists in debian. [03:57] Hello! I setup my own repo (dpkg-scanpackages, apt-ftparchive) and with a proper sources.list file. However, if I create a Release.gpg, apt-get complains on the clients: Failed to fetch http:///Release What did I do wrong? [03:57] Guess I didn't finish my first thought.... [03:58] protonchris: So I'd try and look into that one. [03:58] ScottK2: ok, I'll ask the debian maintainer about it. [03:58] OK. [03:58] libgda-3.0-scan.c:18: warning: implicit declaration of function 'gda_blob_op_get_type' [03:58] protonchris, ScottK2: how about setting a proper prototype? :) [03:59] Fair enough. [03:59] I bet that returns a pointer and ia64 goes waaaaa [03:59] Better stated: Without the Release.gpg all is ok, except the security warning when Installing packages. With the Release.gpg file in my repository, 'apt-get update' chokes. Yes, I've imported the gpg key using apt-key. [04:00] * ScottK2 is trying to help point protonchris is a useful direction without getting his hand's to sticky with the goo from this one. [04:00] heh [04:00] slangasek: :) [04:01] Actually that was meant for ScottK2 [04:02] ./libgda/gda-blob-op.h:GType gda_blob_op_get_type (void); [04:02] I win [04:03] unfortunately, I also lose, because I can never remember where the source for those scanners is supposed to come from. :P [04:05] ScottK2: thanks for looking at the glom bug [04:06] protonchris: You're welcome. I think you've got enough of a hint that you can go to the Debian maintainer and he can figure a patch if you aren't up to it yourself. [04:06] what is an FFe? [04:06] Feature Freeze Exception (replace UVFe since we don't have UVF anymore). [04:07] oh ok [04:07] Hello joejaxx [04:07] hi [04:07] joejaxx: It was suggested to me that I hunt you down to help out with unforking our SE Linux stuff. [04:08] oh ok [04:08] joejaxx: I'm expecting Manoj to upload a new setools to Debian in the next ~36 hours. [04:09] ok [04:09] Personally I'd rather break SE Linux than fork, so it'd be good to have someone involved that actually cares how well it works. [04:09] :) [04:10] joejaxx: See Bug 204428 for my perspective. [04:10] Launchpad bug 204428 in setools "Package contains gratuitous divergence from Debian" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/204428 [04:11] * joejaxx looks [04:13] ScottK2: is this for hardy? [04:13] i am guessing [04:13] Yes [04:14] joejaxx: If we release with our renamed packages we'll have to carry transitional packages all the way to the next LTS release. It'd be good not to have to maintain that diff. [04:15] yeah [04:15] hmm [04:18] ok [04:18] i will try and take a look at the diff when Manoj uploads [04:18] as well :) [04:19] * joejaxx wish he was not having bzr problems still :\ [04:20] well i am going to retire for the evening [04:20] Goodnight All :) === zachy is now known as zakame [04:23] protonchris: http://people.ubuntu.com/~vorlon/libgda3-ia64-segv.diff is the fix for libgda3's build failure on ia64 [04:24] slangasek: should I submit a new package or pass that along to the debian maintainers. [04:24] protonchris: Make us a debdiff and send it to Debian. [04:25] ScottK: ok. I'll tackle this tomorrow. Thanks. [04:27] slangasek: I hope to get libgdamm of your bad list soon. :) [04:27] of -> off [04:28] appreciated :-) [04:32] Thanks ScottK. [04:36] I am going to go to bed. Thanks for your help. [04:40] StevenK, Can you add me to u-u-s? [04:50] * persia comes late to the party, and notes that an NMU of debian-native 0.1 is 0.1-0.1 [04:50] cody-somerville: I'll do that. Thanks for helping. [04:50] persia, Thanks. [04:50] So, whats the command to sign the .changes file correctly? [04:50] debuild -S [04:51] Right but if I'm sponsoring someone else's upload [04:51] Don't I have to do something extra since I can't actually sign as them? [04:52] -k [04:52] Ah. If you're sponsoring someone else's upload, use `debuild -S -k`. That gives them Changed-By: credit, with your signature. [04:52] cody-somerville: https://launchpad.net/%7Ecody-somerville/+participation [04:53] :) [05:12] * Fujitsu takes a deep breath, and tries a Dapper->Hardy upgrade. [05:12] Three cheers for Fujitsu [05:13] Anybody else who's tried it? Anything I need to know? [05:13] * ScottK2 tried Dapper -> Gutsy once. [05:13] It didn't end well. [05:13] My memory is that upstart can bite, but that may have been fixed. [05:14] I presume it works a bit by this point in the cycle. [05:14] Actually it turns out it was largely OK (eventually), but by the time I realized I was having problems unrelated to the upgrade I'd alread nuked it. [05:14] Fujitsu: I've heard someone else here with 3 of 3 failures [05:14] Fujitsu: though from what I've heard, none of the failures were irrecoverable. [05:15] more like they weren't spotless out of the box.... [05:15] which admittedly sounds like doublespeak for failure ;-) [05:15] I've done a few stupid multi-release upgrades, but have always managed to recover from the breakage. [05:16] I don't think it's anything we can't recover from [05:17] * jdong wonders how many hours is 600,000 centisecs.... [05:18] 1.67 [05:18] I wonder if that's too greedy a pdflush writeback time :D === elkbuntu_ is now known as elkbuntu [06:38] Good morning === danielm_ is now known as danielm === asac_ is now known as asac === doko_ is now known as doko === \sh_away is now known as \sh [09:34] <\sh> moins [09:38] <\sh> mah I does not like people who are touching my bugs which I'm assigned to [09:39] Hi \sh [09:39] touching? How? While I tend to agree, I never complain if someone milestones it, or someone leaves a comment with insight. [09:42] <\sh> persia: I mean changing status to something else....I'm assigned to the bug becasue I'm working on it. Problem is...this bug can't be confirmed, because it's just an good will of upstream to inform us that they compiled a patch list where at least 10 crashers (two of them were reported from ubuntu)..anyways...there is nothing to be confirmed to...because it deals with known bugs...and I don't like people who are just passing by to deal with those bugs [09:42] <\sh> bah,.../me needs coffee and some roles from the bakery [09:42] <\sh> brb [09:42] \sh: Yeah. I tend to agree with that. When you wake up, might say something in #ubuntu-bugs... [09:51] <\sh> re [09:57] <\sh> hah..-.breakfast is doing good to my system [10:29] When can I start uploading packages for hardy+1? [10:33] DRebellion: when the toolchain is uploaded [10:33] iirc as soon as hardy gets into final freeze [10:33] im wrong :P [10:34] jpatrick, any rough date set for that? [10:34] DRebellion: https://wiki.kubuntu.org/IntrepidReleaseSchedule [10:34] Perhaps mid-May. [10:34] DRebellion: May 1st [10:35] jpatrick, thanks [10:36] G'morning [10:37] moin Iulian [10:37] Hey jpatrick [10:38] brb - TZ update [10:40] <\sh> well, you can test already your packages with a hardy package of the toolchain stuff from ubuntu-toolchain team... === elkbuntu_ is now known as elkbuntu [10:58] <\sh> phew claws-mail fixed and uploaded [11:05] Is there any reason we have kfreebsd-5 in the archive, other than automatically importing it from Debian? [11:06] It's probably pretty useless, and appears to have some open security issues. [11:06] <\sh> hmm... [11:06] <\sh> UbuntuBSD ... that would rock ,-> [11:07] <\sh> pushing upstart and friends to bsd...merging ports system to .deb oh man...our bsd friends will love us ;) [11:29] Hi [11:29] <\sh> moins RainCT [11:31] could someone of motu-sru have a look at bug 156432 ? [11:31] Launchpad bug 156432 in zim "Zim freeze when create a link" [Undecided,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/156432 [11:31] please :) === evalles is now known as effie_jayx [11:35] <\sh> jeromeg: can you follow https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates and prepare some more infos? [11:36] \sh: what is missing ? [11:37] impact: crash [11:37] how it has been adressed: with a new version [11:37] patch: attached [11:39] sorry got to go to have lunch [11:39] will come back later [11:40] <\sh> jeromeg: so you just need someone who is uploading it to gutsy-proposed... [11:40] \sh: ok [11:40] thank you for your help [11:40] see you [11:51] RainCT; i jumped in and did a fix for bug #184084 in diggler, is that ok? [11:51] Launchpad bug 184084 in tabextensions "Extension description mentions Iceweasel/Icedove/Iceape" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/184084 [11:52] bobbo: sure, thx for working on it :) [11:53] bobbo: the short description says " utilities for Seamonkey and Firefox's location bar [11:53] utilities for Seamonkey and Firefox's location bar [11:53] (oops) [11:54] * bobbo: the short description says " utilities for Seamonkey and Firefox's location bar [11:54] argh damn irssi xDD [11:54] ah crap i left in an extra space? [11:54] bobbo: the short description mentions both Seamonkey and Firefox, but it has no alternative dependency on seamonkey [11:54] q. before i found a channel with the ubuntu people which take care about all the server/mirror to store the .deb of ubuntu. i dont remember the name tho... anybody got suggestion? [11:55] <\sh> zorglu_: ?? you have a mirror or want to setup one? [11:56] \sh: i want to talk to the people who handle this. i got no mirror to propose. i just want information [11:56] RainCT; ah, i just search & replaced it and Iceweasel and Iceape must have both been mentioned [11:56] \sh: i talked to somebody sometime ago on this channel i dont remember the name :) [11:57] <\sh> zorglu_: hmm...depends on the question it could be #ubuntu-devel (most likely you'll have a better chance on monday) or #canonical-sysadmin (also more likely on monday) [11:58] <\sh> but you can ask here too...eventually we know the answer [11:58] \sh: ok i remember the personn was from canonical. but not on those channel. i will retry on monday then [11:58] bobbo: well, just add seamonkey as an alternative dependency and it should be ok [11:58] RainCT, ok, thanks [11:58] <\sh> zorglu_: what's your problem anyways? [11:58] * seamonkey-browser rather [11:59] \sh: well this is a long discussion :) not a yes/no question, so i think i will not trouble people here with irrelevant talks :) [11:59] <\sh> zorglu_: ok then :)= [11:59] zorglu_: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/InternetRelayChat - has a list of ubuntu channels [11:59] zorglu_: porbably #ubuntu-mirrors [11:59] jpatrick: ahhhh that's the one :) [12:00] * \sh steps out for a while.... [12:00] jpatrick: \sh: thanks for your help [12:02] RainCT; if im adding seamonkey to the diggler depends, do we still need mozilla-browser? [12:03] bobbo: ahh right, mozilla-browser = seahorse-browser [12:03] bobbo: no, delete mozilla-browser then (replacing it for seahorse-browser) [12:04] *seamonkey-browser [12:04] * RainCT thinks he should go sleep some longer lol [12:04] RainCT; seahorse is the gnome GPG frontend :/ [12:04] hehe :) [12:12] RainCT; i stuck a new debdiff up, if your not asleep [12:15] bobbo: diggler (0.9-14ubuntu2) feisty; urgency=low [12:16] RainCT; http://bobbo.mooo.com/~bobbo/diggler_0.9-14ubuntu2.debdiff [12:19] asac: could you have a fast look at the debdiff above to be sure that I'm not overlooking anyting please? :P [12:25] RainCT: if it works then its fine :) [12:25] the debdiff looks rather trivial [12:25] is that an extension? [12:26] asac: yes [12:26] * RainCT is just doing stupid stuff today so I better ask before uploading anything :) [12:26] hehe [12:30] bobbo: *gettingsourcechecking&uploading* :) [12:30] thanks :) === \sh is now known as \sh_away [12:35] bobbo: Uploaded. Thanks for contributing to Ubuntu === davi_ is now known as davi === \sh_away is now known as \sh [14:03] Can anyone point me to a package with an arch specific patch? [14:05] protonchris: does the package you are working on use a patch system? [14:05] also, why does it need to be arch specific? [14:07]