[02:12] <imbrandon> ugh
[02:16] <imbrandon> ok i'm pulling my hair out here , this ( http://imbrandon.pastebin.com/d7d1bdc64 ) fires if its null or "" but not "num" , am i just an idiot or what , seems always to reach the else if its "num"
[02:19] <Flannel> imbrandon: this is Java?
[02:19] <ajmitch> imbrandon: getPage.equals('num')
[02:20] <ajmitch> java does string comparisons in a funny way
[02:20] <Flannel> isnull might also be more robust (and maybe isempty?  I don't remember)
[02:21] <ajmitch> it's been a long time (probably not long enough) since I touched java
[02:25] <imbrandon> yea java ( JSP ) on tomcat
[02:26] <jdong> ajmitch: java does comparisons in a funny way in general :)
[02:26] <jdong> == is pointer (reference) equality, Object.equals() is the equality most people think of...
[02:26] <jdong> unfortunately Java does allow two unique strings with same contents to be constructed even though strings are immutable types
[02:27] <imbrandon> ahh cool , thnaks guys
[02:28]  * imbrandon tries it
[02:28]  * imbrandon is converting some old old old php+mysql to java+mysql
[02:29] <jdong> imbrandon: your construction on line 6 also seems to beg SQL injection
[02:29] <sladen> I suspect it's that string comparison...
[02:29] <imbrandon> yea it will get cleaned up, i simplified it for pastebin
[02:29] <jdong> ok, just makin sure :)
[02:30] <sladen> try  "" == ""   and  "num" == "num"  and see what you get
[02:30] <ajmitch> imbrandon: I have to ask, why java for this?
[02:30] <jdong> haha, why not? (tm)
[02:31] <sladen> then try again with   "".compareTo("")  and  "num".compareTo("num")
[02:31] <ajmitch> jdong: I'd expect that from you :)
[02:32] <sladen> or if you just want plain equality  "".equals("")  and  "num".equals("num")
[02:33] <imbrandon> ajmitch: because we use java and c# mostly at work, so i picked the one i could run reliably on linux ( yes yes i know apache + libmono )
[02:33] <jdong> yeah if those were your options I'd trust Java more at this point....
[02:34] <imbrandon> most of our "old" stuff is php and its getting converted to java/jsp + WebSphere™ ( ugh, did i mention i hate WebSphere )
[02:34] <sladen> think C here;  and what happens if you do  if("" == "")  and  if("num" == "num") ... you're doing pointer evaluation and the same is happening in Java
[02:34] <imbrandon> sladen: ahh
[02:35] <imbrandon> so should my "" and null also be .equals("") / .equals(null) ?
[02:35] <jdong> sladen: only thing confusing is most other high-level languages with an immutable string type automatically intern strings such that in this case pointer equality <==> content equality
[02:35] <imbrandon> hrm
[02:35] <jdong> imbrandon: comparing to another string should be with .equals
[02:35] <jdong> imbrandon: comparing to null can be either
[02:36] <imbrandon> ahh ok
[02:38] <imbrandon> one other strange thing i noticed too, maybe someoen can explain WHY , if ( getPage.equals("") || getPage == null )  <--- bombs on null , but reversed if ( getPage == null || getPage.equals("") ) works on both
[02:38] <sladen> however, in C, it'd have to be  ==
[02:38] <jdong> imbrandon: short circuit evaluation
[02:39] <imbrandon> huh?
[02:39] <jdong> imbrandon: in an or statement, the 2nd term is only evaluated if the first is false
[02:39] <jdong> imbrandon: so the 2nd version implies getpage != null when the getpage.equals is evaluated
[02:39] <imbrandon> but if its null .equals("") is false
[02:39] <jdong> imbrandon: null has no .equals
[02:39] <imbrandon> arg, ok
[02:39] <jdong> imbrandon: . dereferences null which is an exception
[02:41] <sladen> so you want:  if (getPage == null || getPage.equals("") || getPage.equals("num"))
[02:42] <imbrandon> yup yup
[02:43] <imbrandon> killer thanks guys , i spent an hour on google pulling my hair out
[02:43] <imbrandon> lol
[02:43]  * ajmitch just looked up 'java string equality' to find it :)
[02:43] <imbrandon> null  / "" / 0 , is so diffrent in diffrent langs
[02:43] <imbrandon> :)
[02:43] <ajmitch> but that's because I knew what to look for
[02:44]  * ajmitch is having *so* much fun trying to track down why a certain php page causes apache's memory usage to explode
[02:44] <imbrandon> heh
[02:46] <imbrandon> the last major conversion we did at work ( finished last week ) was ASP 3.x pages + MSSQL to JAVA/JSP + WebSphere + IBM Httpd + Oracle  ( http://www.ford.ca ) now, THAT was fun fun fun
[02:47] <sladen> that query could be simplified if you have RLIKE "[0-9]*"
[02:47] <imbrandon> hrm not sure, its com.mysql.jdbc
[02:47]  * imbrandon looks
[02:49] <sladen> but you *so* want to validate/escape getPage before inserting it
[02:49] <imbrandon> hahah definately
[02:49] <imbrandon> actualy its on a read only copy of the db , but still good to validate
[02:50] <imbrandon> :)
[02:50] <ajmitch> s/good/necessary/
[02:51] <sladen>   ....something.php?getPage=;DROP+ALL;%23
[02:51] <sladen>   ....something.php?getPage=";DROP+ALL;%23
[02:52] <sladen>   ....something.php?getPage=";DROP+ALL;--
[02:52] <imbrandon> ...something.jsp?.... :)
[02:52] <sladen> yer gotcha me there
[02:52] <imbrandon> readonly makes it much faster anyhow in production
[02:52] <ajmitch> just because it's on a read-only DB now, doesn't mean that it will be in the future, or that code won't be reusued by someone
[02:52] <imbrandon> true
[03:02] <bddebian> Heya gang
[03:07] <imbrandon> hrm rlike seems WAY slow sladen
[03:12] <sladen> what about  '^[0-9]'
[03:12] <sladen> otherwise, you're stuck with your faster, but less maintainable ten comparisions
[03:14] <sladen> no
[03:14] <sladen> oops (scrollback was on)
[03:31] <imbrandon> yea rlike '^[0-9] is much better
[07:05] <emgent`UDS> heya
[07:11] <\sh> moins
[07:11] <geser> Hi \sh
[07:14] <emgent> heya \sh geser
[07:15] <geser> Hi emgent
[07:24] <\sh> btw...happy UDS starting day....I think the time is still 9am SHARP? ,-)
[07:24] <\sh> emgent, you are in praque now?
[07:25] <emgent> yep
[07:25] <emgent> conference will be start at 9 am
[07:25] <\sh> emgent, great :) and you met already some of the crazy people there?
[07:25] <emgent> now we are to wireless lan space :P
[07:25] <emgent> \sh: yes but my english sux
[07:25] <emgent> :)
[07:26] <\sh> emgent, that will get better every day...try to speak german with ogra ;)
[07:26] <\sh> emgent, and give ogra a hug from me :)
[07:27] <emgent> hahah ok :)
[07:27] <emgent> \sh: #ubuntu-devel-summit :)
[07:30] <\sh> emgent, anyways...have a great time :) enjoy your stay and enjoy your "working holiday" ;)
[07:31] <geser> emgent: you have now a occasion to improve your English :)
[07:33] <\sh> geser, with all the germans there? I wonder, he'll improve his DEnglish ;)
[07:34] <emgent> geser: Engrish
[07:34] <emgent> :P
[07:35] <geser> lol
[07:38] <\sh> dear vmware developers, please make vmware esx virtual infrastructure client linux compatible...eventually only running via wine...but this situation now is doomed...and not usable
[08:17] <\sh> emgent, subscribe to the "ubuntu mobile, security for packages not in main" bof (16:15-17:10) if you haven't done already
[08:43] <wgrant> \sh: Do we actually subscribe to them somewhere? I can't see them anywhere on LP.
[08:44] <\sh> wgrant, I thought via blueprint?
[08:45] <wgrant> \sh: I can't see the blueprints anywhere.
[08:45] <\sh> how nice
[08:45] <\sh> how do they know now who is attending to those bofs
[08:45] <persia> I'm not sure there's a close mapping between mooted blueprints and entries on LP.
[08:46] <wgrant> \sh: Magic.
[08:46] <\sh> looks like...Need a voip account now
[08:46] <wgrant> So they look like blueprints with subscribers like they have been for every other recent UDS, but aren't?
[08:48] <wgrant> Why are all the interesting sessions in the very early morning?
[08:48] <persia> wgrant: Precisely.  I've yet to encounter any rationale for name mappings (despite having my name somewhere)
[08:48] <wgrant> They must always do that deliberately.
[08:49] <wgrant> persia: I was thinking they might have polled Canonical people, but then I saw your name there which discounted that...
[08:49] <emgent> \sh: yes i saw :)
[08:49] <wgrant> (very early morning local time, that is)
[08:49] <\sh> wgrant, so everybody is concentrated..mostly after lunch people are getting tired ;)
[08:49] <wgrant> \sh: That's after lunch Prague time.
[08:49] <emgent> wgrant: o/
[08:50] <ScottK-uds> I got picked for a few too.  Not sure how that worked.
[08:50] <wgrant> Security, universe QA, bug stuff... All after lunch.
[08:50] <\sh> wgrant, yeah...seeing it now
[09:23] <norsetto> scottk: where are you?
[09:23] <ScottK-uds> Server Team
[09:23] <ScottK-uds> norsetto:
[09:24] <norsetto> Scottk-uds: ok
[12:04] <slomo> siretart: ffmpeg in debian is build with --enable-gpl, right?
[12:31] <mok0> siretart, are you going to write this new grab-merge program?
[13:04] <Iulian> Hi
[13:07] <mok0> Hi Iulian
[13:07] <Iulian> Hey mok0
[13:11] <siretart> slomo: right. with a note in README.Debian about contacting the maintainers if this is a problem for you
[13:11] <siretart> mok0: depends on how the design ends up. I still have only rough sketches
[13:12] <mok0> siretart: cool!
[13:12] <mok0> siretart: If you need help, pls say
[13:13] <siretart> mok0: if you want to go ahead, get cracking!
[13:13] <mok0> siretart: you have it on bzr?
[13:14] <mok0> perhaps in ubuntu-dev-tools?
[13:16] <slomo> siretart: well, it's a potential problem with gst-ffmpeg... as it's a plugin and people might use it in the same process as gpl-incompatible plugins ;)  (not that this isn't a problem with mad already...)
[13:18] <siretart> mok0: I'm not sure where to put it. ubuntu-dev-tools might be a good option
[13:18] <mok0> siretart: It's a mixed bag of stuff anyway
[13:19] <siretart> slomo: well, I don't think this is a potential, but rather a real problem. we probably should talk to ftpmaster about that
[13:19] <mok0> siretart: so, do you have any code, or just loose ideas?
[13:19] <mok0> siretart: I know, nasty question ;-)
[13:20] <slomo> siretart: iirc this depends on your GPL interpretation (breaks when linking or when loading in the same process?)
[13:21] <siretart> mok0: no code, as said, only rough sketches in my head
[13:21] <slomo> siretart: also, one could say it's the user's problem... because it's more or less his choice to use it or not and there are many scenarios where it can be used legally
[13:22] <siretart> slomo: not on my interpretation, but rather on ftpmaster's interpretation
[13:23] <slomo> siretart: well, the packages themselves are fine... it's the combination of several packages that causes problems and this combination is the user's choice (afaik there's no package that forces a combination of plugins whose licenses are invalid)
[13:25] <slomo> siretart: currently the only possible problem that comes to my mind is using gst-fluendo-mpegdemux and gst-ffmpeg in the same problem (MPL vs. GPL) and of course when users buy the fluendo codecs and use them
[13:27] <directhex> why is that a problem? surely the GPL is a distribution license, and you're free to "break" it if you're not distributing the result?
[13:28] <slomo> directhex: because different people have different interpretations... IMHO distributing the stuff is just fine because it's all seperate, problem appears when the user combines several parts
[13:29] <mok0> directhex: no
[13:33] <mok0> directhex: from article 5: " Therefore, by
[13:33] <mok0> modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the
[13:33] <mok0> Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and
[13:33] <mok0> all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying
[13:33] <mok0> the Program or works based on it."
[13:34] <directhex> mok0, installing and executing the program is neither modifying nor distributing, though. that's precisely my point. the gpl covers distribution
[13:34] <mok0> directhex: and modifying, even if you don't distribute
[13:35] <mok0> directhex: in other words, if you modify, you must distribute
[13:36] <\sh> mok0, if you modify, you need to make the source available...in what way, it's not mentioned or settled...you can also send the source on a cd for money
[13:37] <broonie> Only if you distribute binaries (or source). You can do whatever you like locally providing you don't give anyone else a copy of it.
[13:37] <directhex> broonie, that's what i'm arguing, but mok0 disagrees
[13:37] <mok0> \sh: so, if I make an ingenious modification to gcc that makes it run 100 times faster, I can distribute the source for a price of $1,000,000,000,000 ??? I don't think so
[13:37] <directhex> (/me is currently fighting a major unequivocal gpl violation, as it happens)
[13:38] <broonie> mok0: Of course - you can charge what you like for the source; you just can't stop anyone else exercising their GPL rights with the results.
[13:38] <\sh> mok0, nope...but if you send out a cd in platin and gold and the production cost is 1Billion dollar, you could ;)
[13:38] <directhex> mok0, you can distribute the binaries for $1,000,000,000,000 as long as you include source, and that source can be redistributed by others for free
[13:38] <directhex> see also: RHEL
[13:39] <broonie> mok0: (assuming you really mean sell the source, and don't mean "fulfil GPL obligations for the binary")
[13:39] <mok0> broonie: I am arguing that you must provide the same right over the software that you yourself have
[13:40] <\sh> the problem in general: "What is locally providing?" giving out binaries from one company to another, even if the companies are directly connected, you need to make the source public
[13:40] <\sh> but inside one single company, you can do any source changes you want without publishing
[13:40] <siretart> slomo: btw, ffmpeg-free just built successfully in unstable
[13:40] <siretart> on powerpc, that is
[13:41] <broonie> mok0: Right, but this only takes effect when you distribute.
[13:41] <mok0> If you modify the source, you _must_ distribute your changes
[13:41] <\sh> mok0, nope
[13:41] <mok0> Otherwise you can't let anyone use the binary
[13:41] <\sh> mok0, if I change the source of a GPL licensed source, and never make it public...no need to publish
[13:41] <slomo> siretart: great, i'll upload new gst-ffmpeg to unstable soonish then
[13:42] <\sh> mok0, who wants that?
[13:42] <broonie> mok0: Giving someone the binary to run is distribution.
[13:42] <\sh> mok0, I change a server daemon source which is licensed GPL...it's only running on my server...no need to publish...
[13:42] <mok0> \sh: you can't install it for others to use
[13:42] <\sh> mok0, I don't want that in special cases
[13:43] <\sh> mok0, only when I make it available to other people (where other people == undefined and really difficult to decide)...I need to publish the source.
[13:44] <mok0> ... GPL-3 was introduced exactly to close the loopholes that imaginative companies have tried to rip-off the software authors
[13:44] <directhex> one of the specific targets of gpl v3 was to target systems where you can have "worthless source"
[13:45] <directhex> e.g. tivo - "here, have our source. it won't execute if you compile it, though, due to lack of crypto keys"
[13:45] <directhex> that's not the same thing as working on something yourself, and never sharing it. if i make a change to some libarry to test a theory, should i be publishing source, even if i never plan on using that personally-compiled binary ever again?
[13:47] <mok0> directhex: of course not, unless it is useful, and you let other people use it
[13:47] <mok0> directhex: you can also rip part of the library out and put it in your own code using the same license
[13:51] <siretart> slomo: yes, that would be great
[13:54] <directhex> mok0, which only becomes an issue of any description once you want to distribute said code. and now we're back to square 1
[13:55] <directhex> mok0, the only room for doubt here is whether 2 libraries being loaded by the same app constitute a "derivative work", if their licenses aren't compatible
[13:55] <mok0> directhex: no, because you acquire a copy of the program, and the act of modifying the program means you accept the license
[13:56] <mok0> directhex: if the library is not LGPL'ed, you're in trouble. For example. readline is GPL, which means that any program using readline must be distributed under the same license.
[13:57] <sebner> huhu dholbach
[13:57] <dholbach> hi sebner
[13:59] <directhex> mok0, and we're back onto this curious definition of "must". is the only way to develop in the presence of gpl software to point apache at your $HOME, just in case someone wants access to your source, because you "must distribute"?
[14:00] <mok0> directhex: don't be silly
[14:00] <directhex> mok0, and this STILL doesn't answer the question "is the ability for a gst app, using two libraries at the same time, with incompatible licenses, a distributor problem?"
[14:01] <mok0> directhex: Well, IANAL. If you really want to discuss this, go to gnu.misc.discuss
[14:02] <mok0> directhex: you may get an answer from RMS himself
[14:04] <directhex> mok0, slomo or siretart might want to, but they got bored of the discussion half an hour ago. i'm just explaining why i disagree with your view of the gst-ffmpeg situation
[14:04] <mok0> directhex: Sounds like you are looking for holes in the GPL and I can tell you with almost 100% certainty that there aren't any. Nobody forces you to use GPL'ed software
[14:05] <directhex> christ on a bike,  where did THAT come from?
[14:05] <directhex> disagreeing with you does not mean i want a glorious new world order without freedom, it means i disagree with you
[14:05] <mok0> directhex: did I misunderstand?
[14:06] <mok0> directhex: no offense intended
[14:07] <directhex> i disagree with your assertion that "private", non-distributed apps must have the source published, even if you don't plan on sharing binaries. mostly because it says as much on http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic
[14:08] <mok0> directhex: I agree, it's just a question whether "private, non-distributed apps" make sense
[14:08] <directhex> "You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization."
[14:08] <directhex> i think that's reasonably clear
[14:08] <mok0> directhex: If you are the only person with access to the computer, then yes, but if you install the app on a multiuser system, then no
[14:09] <mok0> directhex: that quote is very surprising to me
[14:09] <directhex> mok0, ah, but there's one of the non-existent issues with gpl v2 - that's NOT how things are right now, and is being "abused" as a result - e.g. web services built on top of GPL code (but you're not 'distributing' any binaries, so it's 'okay')
[14:10] <fargiolas> hey, any sru member there?
[14:10] <directhex> mok0, now, if you disagree with gnu.org, that IS something to take up with gnu.misc.discuss ;)
[14:10] <mok0> directhex:  :-)
[14:10] <directhex> mok0, see also: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#UnreleasedMods
[14:11] <mok0> directhex: so what if I, a member of that organization, would _REALLY_ like to get my hands on the mods and install them at home??
[14:11] <fargiolas> I'd like to know what's wrong with https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/222580... everything seemed ok but I never got a reply after submitting the debdiff
[14:11] <fargiolas> jdong: ping?
[14:12] <directhex> mok0, if you're distributing it from your company to you (as a private individual) then that's distribution, as per the license
[14:12] <directhex> mok0, i think. IANAL.
[14:12] <directhex> mok0, for an easier, clear-cut example of gpl violation, try http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/5/16/472
[14:15]  * mok0 looks
[14:16] <mok0> directhex: yeah
[14:16] <directhex> STILL no reply from compro.
[14:18] <mok0> directhex: they will probably try to stall... Skype just gave in on their attempt to circumvent the GPL
[14:18] <mok0> Nobody has yet overturned the GPL
[14:18] <mok0> in a court of law
[14:25] <directhex> mok0, all the naysayers insist that it's not been "tested" in a court of law.
[14:25] <mok0> directhex: heh
[14:26] <directhex> mok0, the bit in brackets being (in the US, anyway, and only if you define 'tested' as 'ruled on by a judge, rather than dealt with by a settlement before ruling')
[14:26] <mok0> directhex: it's never been overturned
[14:26] <directhex> things would be MUCH worse for companies violating the GPL if it were overturned
[14:26] <mok0> directhex: Legally it's a no-brainer, I think.
[14:27] <directhex> since it goes from license violation to copyright violation, and the RIAA have taught us that every infraction is worth eleventy billion dollars
[14:28] <mok0> directhex: the license clearly says, nothing else than the license gives you the right to distribute
[14:28] <directhex> indeed.
[14:28] <mok0> so the mere _act_ of distributing shows you accept the license
[14:28] <ScottK-uds> I think if you look at SCO versus Novell decision, it pretty clearly establishes the validity of GPL.
[14:28] <directhex> also indeed
[14:29] <directhex> and further indeed
[14:30] <mok0> In my opinion, the GPL is extremely clever, and it gives the "little guy" the best protection of their copyright
[14:31] <mok0> Companies are only concerned if _their_ copyright is violated. They gladly violate others'
[14:31] <directhex> i'm still curious as to whether gpl violation can be tackled in the US via the DMCA. IANAL, but i get the feeling you can at least get any violatory stuff taken offline
[14:31] <mok0> DMCA?
[14:32] <ScottK-uds> Digital Millenum Copyright Act.
[14:32] <mok0> sounds evil
[14:32] <ScottK-uds> It is.
[14:32] <directhex> digital millennium copyright act. the overbearing copyright law people use to get things pulled offline (e.g. all the cool stuff removed from youtube). it's primarily used for dealing with "copyright violation"
[14:32] <mok0> like it's meant for the next 1000 years
[14:33] <mok0> Well, they have RIAA etc. we have the GPL
[14:36] <directhex> that's the thing. on the basis that rejecting the gpl means you have no right to distribute, then you're violating copyright by distributing outside the boundaries of the gpl. and on THAT basis, the company infringing on the copyright of the developer(s) of the gpl code can be attacked using the same anti-consumer laws as are used to attack people passing mp3s on bittorrent. as is my understanding of us law, anyway
[14:41] <mok0> directhex: So violating the GPL is like aiming a machinegun at your feet and pulling the trigger...
[14:42] <mok0> ... except no ordinary person can afford to sue for copyright infringement...
[14:42] <slytherin> mok0: No. It is dropping granade on your feet and still hoping it won't blow your face
[14:42] <mok0> ha
[14:42] <directhex> mok0, if it goes to court, and the side which has been "damaged" has the money for legal representation. sure.
[14:43] <mok0> directhex: ... and most likely you'll run out of money while they're pulling all the legal tricks
[14:43] <directhex> or they just won't give a crap, e.g. uif they're somewhere like china
[14:43] <mok0> is there such thing as a "free trial" in the US?
[14:43] <directhex> ... or taiwan...
[14:44] <mok0> That will enable a poor person to carry on a trial against a wealthy corporation (or person)??
[14:46] <ScottK-uds> mok0: For civil cases (like copyright violation) you can usually get a lawyer to take the case for a percentage of any eventual recovery.
[14:47] <directhex> s/usually/occasionally/
[14:47] <mok0> ScottK, that means it is up to the lawyers?
[14:47] <directhex> if it's not an open and shut case, good luck
[14:47] <ScottK-uds> There is almost always a lawyer that'll do it.
[14:48] <mok0> Here you can apply for a "free process" either if you're empoverished, or if the case has a principal interest
[14:48] <ScottK-uds> Many lawyers make their entire careers on contigency cases.
[14:48] <ScottK-uds> There are some limited resources for that, but they are very limited.
[14:49] <mok0> I am guessing copyright violation would not qualify
[14:49] <ScottK-uds> Probably not (but contingency fees would work).
[14:50] <mok0> "If you're dumb enough to GIVE your code away, then you DESERVE to get screwed" :-)
[14:52] <mok0> OK, gotta go. See you guys later...
[15:00] <gnomefreak> jdong: can you please look at bug 212468 asac and myself would prefer a backport of latest FF3 in Gutsy if you can let me know and ill do what i can to get it out
[15:01] <sebner> gnomefreak: firefox beta5 is in hardy!?
[15:01] <gnomefreak> sebner: yes
[15:01] <sebner> gnomefreak: ah to gutsy
[15:01] <gnomefreak> sebner: i didnt say hardy
[15:01] <sebner> gnomefreak: sry. missunderstood
[15:01] <gnomefreak> its ok i figured you did :)
[15:25] <bddebian> Heya gang
[15:27] <sebner> huhu bddebian
[15:27] <bddebian> Hello sebner
[15:31] <Iulian> 'ey bddebian
[15:31] <bddebian> Hello Iulian
[16:30] <geser> Hi bddebian
[16:30] <bddebian> Heya geser
[16:37] <pochu> sebner: nice work with sync requests :)
[16:37] <sebner> pochu: why?
[16:38] <pochu> sebner: because I'm ack'ing all of them ;)
[16:38] <sebner> pochu: I don't have that many. you just ACKed gmsh ;)
[16:39] <pochu> I think I acked more. look again at your mail :)
[16:39] <devfil> pochu: if you are ACKing I've reported some syncs :)
[16:39] <pochu> devfil: bugs?
[16:39] <sebner> pochu: haha. run run run
[16:39] <pochu> ah, wapiti
[16:40] <devfil> pochu: wapiti, vips and libgtk2-ex-podviewer-perl
[16:40] <devfil> wapiti is to ACK
[16:41] <sebner> pochu: just normal sync bugs, nothing special. or are you so nice to me because you know that today is my birthday ;)
[16:41] <devfil> pochu: but if you have time I've also 3 merges
[16:41] <sebner> devfil: na na na. there is a queue ;P
[16:41] <devfil> sebner: lol ok ok
[16:42] <pochu> sebner: oh, really? happy birthday! :)
[16:42] <sebner> pochu: thx :) now you have to review all my merges and syncs :P
[16:43] <persia> sebner: Happy Birthday
[16:43] <pochu> heh
[16:43] <sebner> persia: thx ^^
[16:43] <devfil> sebner: is your birthday?
[16:43] <sebner> devfil: yes
[16:43] <sebner> I should leave ^^
[16:43] <sebner> huhu mok0
[16:43] <sebner> -.-
[16:44] <devfil> sebner: then happy birthday!
[16:44] <sebner> devfil: also thanks to you :)
[16:45] <sebner> As of today I have legal access to pr0n, \o/
[16:45] <devfil> sebner: loool
[16:45] <sebner> ^^
[16:45] <devfil> sebner: you don't need to post an invalid born date
[16:46] <sebner> devfil: ^^
[16:47] <pochu> sebner: you can go to prison too :P
[16:47] <sebner> pochu: damn! xD
[16:48] <devfil> pochu: lol
[16:49] <pochu> I want a scripts which automatically subscribes ubuntu-archive and unsubscribes u-u-s :)
[16:49] <sebner> pochu: bah, don't be lazy :P
[16:49] <pochu> that way I can increase my ACKs/minute :P
[16:49] <devfil> pochu: I am looking at this bug #196834. Maybe a simple command in rules should fix the bug. Do you think this is right?
[16:49] <pochu> +rate
[16:49] <persia> pochu: And subscribes yourself, and adds ACK :)
[16:49] <pochu> right :)
[16:50] <sebner> persia: how is it in prague?
[16:50] <highvoltage> howdy!
[16:50] <devfil> pochu: ok, then I will try to fix it
[16:51] <pochu> devfil: what? I didn't say anything :)
[16:51] <pochu> looking at it
[16:51] <stgraber> pochu: btw, isn't that the second time we don't manage to meet at UDS ? last time you didn't make it and this time I leave before you arrive :)
[16:51] <devfil> pochu: lol
[16:51] <pochu> stgraber: yeah :/ "A la tercera va la vencida" :)
[16:52] <pochu> If you know Spanish proverbs ;)
[16:52] <sebner> pochu: I heard that the sponsors queue is > 250. so go and increase your ACKs count :P
[16:52] <stgraber> pochu: I don't :)
[16:52] <stgraber> pochu: when did you arrive in Prague ?
[16:53] <pochu> stgraber: yesterday night
[16:53] <pochu> stgraber: did you leave yesterday?
[16:53] <stgraber> pochu: I left Prague yesterday at 16:30 :)
[16:53] <pochu> sebner: and my karma :)
[16:53] <pochu> bah :(
[16:53] <sebner> pochu: karma hunter :P bah?
[16:53] <pochu> I was in the airport at 13h and arrive here at 22h or so...
[16:54] <sebner> pochu: why are you doing ubuntu work. go and walk around in prague or attend sessions :P
[16:55] <stgraber> too bad I couldn't stay, I liked the hotel and conference rooms. Only problem is the price of food/drink in the area, you need to go to the city and find a local bar/restaurant to get something cheap
[16:55] <pochu> or go to McDonalds ;)
[16:56] <sebner> pochu: that's what the youth normally does ^^
[16:56] <stgraber> I didn't see a McDonalds around the hotel, the only one I saw was in the city (Muzeum metro station)
[16:56] <pochu> devfil: I think that's ok, could you attach a debdiff?
[16:56] <pochu> devfil: or maybe use dh_compress -X...
[16:56] <stgraber> but then, just buy some local food :)
[16:56] <pochu> devfil: I haven't looked at the source though, just read the bug
[16:56] <persia> stgraber: There's one about 1km away, but not closer.  There are cheaper places coser.
[16:57] <pochu> persia: want a hamburger? :)
[16:57] <devfil> pochu: I too. Now I'm looking the source to try to fix it. I think debian/unpack_examples.sh should be dropped because it doesn't working at my fix will replace it
[16:58] <persia> pochu: I don't eat that much meat all at once :)
[16:59] <Hobbsee> pochu: i had one of them.
[16:59] <Hobbsee> pochu: a sent email, and just kept changing the to field.
[16:59] <Hobbsee> (or adding multiple to's)
[17:00] <pochu> Hobbsee: ah, indeed
[17:00] <pochu> Hobbsee: thanks for the tip :)
[17:01] <pochu> persia: there's fish hamburgers AFAIK :-)
[17:03] <pochu> persia: why are you listed on some sessions at http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/uds-intrepid/2008-05-20/index.html?
[17:03] <persia> pochu: Because they can't happen without me?
[17:03] <pochu> heh
[17:04] <pochu> but I mean, I thought that was tracked at blueprints.lp.net, but I haven't found blueprints for most sessions I've searched for
[17:04] <pochu> and for the one I found it, it didn't have any subscribers...
[17:05] <persia> pochu: The mapping is broken for this session
[17:05]  * bluefoxicy stabs rhythmbox repeatedly for constantly deciding it should play any ipod plugged in, rather than whatever it was playing before
[17:06] <sebner> off. /me ---> birthdaydinner :)
[17:15] <pochu_> so last sync is a merge :) https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-universe-sponsors?field.searchtext=sync
[17:20] <devfil> pochu: maybe I find an error: find $DESTDIR -name "*.gz" -exec gunzip {} \; GUNZIP???
[17:21] <jdong> devfil: gunzip is valid
[17:21] <jdong> it's the opposite of gzip...
[17:22] <devfil> jdong: ok
[17:22] <devfil> jdong: I remembered gnuzip
[17:23] <jdong> gnuzip hasn't been a valid command for ages...
[17:23] <jdong> gunzip is gzip's unzip command
[17:23] <jdong> it's essentially gzip -d, as far as I know
[17:24] <devfil> jdong: ok, thanks for this infos :)
[17:31] <RainCT> bluefoxicy: yeh, that's annoying :(
[17:56] <pochu_> all syncs done! there's too many merges though, but that will have to wait :)
[17:57] <dpm> could anyone tell me in which ubuntu package can I find the manual pages for kernel development (i.e. those in section 9 of the man pages). In Debian they are in the linux-manual-(kernel-version) package, but there is no such equivalent package in Ubuntu
[17:59] <Pici> manpages-dev ?
[17:59] <jdong> Pici: for kernel development.
[17:59] <jdong> I think the wiki's got the best info on that
[17:59] <Pici> jdong: twas a guess
[18:01] <dpm> jdong: any section in particular in the wiki, or should I just search for it?
[18:02] <pwnguin> I never should have said that clint adam's blog was random. now it's just random numbers =(
[18:02] <jdong> dpm: I wish I knew off the top of my head, sorry.
[18:03] <dpm> ok, I'll search for it. Thanks for the pointer
[18:10] <slytherin> geser: Do you have some time to review a package?
[18:10] <geser> not right now, but perhaps later
[18:13] <slytherin> geser: Ok. FYI ... bug 177158
[18:16] <geser> I guess you are better at packaging java apps than me :), but I can still look at it
[18:19] <slytherin> geser: It is first attempt at packaging from scratch. :-)
[20:10] <leif> ? is the maintainer of blender here
[20:25] <leif> lf blender deb maintainer
[20:26] <laga> leif: Maintainer: Ubuntu MOTU Developers <ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com>
[20:26] <laga> Original-Maintainer: Debian Blender Maintainers <pkg-blender-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org>
[20:26] <laga> you probably want to contact these mailing lists
[20:26] <leif> ok is new to linux sorry
[20:27] <laga> if you've got a real question, you can also ask it ;)
[20:27] <leif> well better wait for those guys to test the new code for the new to get tested
[20:31] <leif> sounds like you guys is kind of hard core programer :)
[20:52] <LaserJock> quick question, do we still only take gzipped upstream tarballs?
[20:53] <sebner> LaserJock: bye bye :(
[20:53] <LaserJock> hello to you to ;-)
[20:53] <geser> LaserJock: afaik .orig.tar.gz is still the only accepted format
[20:54] <sebner> LaserJock: good luck with your studies
[20:54] <geser> afaik only the data.tar in the debs can be bzip2
[20:54] <leif> what is a good ide to learn c++ in
[20:54] <LaserJock> it seems so odd
[20:54] <LaserJock> leif: vim?
[20:54] <leif> ok thanx
[20:54] <LaserJock> sebner: thank you
[21:05] <Adri2000> is it possible to disable langpack.mk for a package using gnome.mk?
[21:55] <bbyever> could someone please review merge #226988
[21:55] <bbyever> ?
[21:55] <bbyever> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/226988