[00:04] <et3> is anyone here?
[00:25] <mthaddon> et3, what's up?
[00:25] <et3> mthaddon: how can I change my Account name?
[00:26] <mthaddon> et3, go to https://launchpad.net/people/+me and either "edit details" or "administer"
[00:27] <mthaddon> sorry, change details
[00:27] <et3> mthaddon: thank you very much
[00:27] <mthaddon> sure
[00:28] <et3> do you think "codeshiftster" sounds cheesy?
[00:28] <et3> I'm changing it because it's a tongue-twister anyway, but I think it sounds a bit cheesy
[00:30] <et3> Is it possible to make packages for other distro series than jaunty?
[00:31] <mthaddon> not sure about that I'm afraid
[00:32] <et3> mthaddon: my package for ibex was rejected
[00:32] <mthaddon> et3, sorry, I don't know too much about the packaging side of things
[00:32] <et3> mthaddon: alright
[00:33] <Hobbsee> et3: yes.
[00:33] <Hobbsee> et3: but not if you called it 'ibex'.  You need to use 'intrepid'
[00:33] <et3> Hobbsee: ahhh, thank you
[00:33] <Hobbsee> in debian/changelog
[00:33] <Hobbsee> et3: you're welcome.  same for gutsy, hardy, etc
[00:33] <Hobbsee> it's always the first name
[00:34] <et3> the PPA says it's for jaunty.  How do I change that?
[00:34] <wgrant> That just changes the sources.list entries it shows. It doesn't mean anything.
[00:34] <Hobbsee> the ppa is for many things.  it just defaults to jaunty, as the jaunty stuff is the only stuff there at the moment
[00:36] <et3> so I could use the PPA for any of the series?
[00:36] <Hobbsee> yes
[00:36] <Hobbsee> for any supported ubuntu release
[00:36] <Hobbsee> (ie, not breezy or edgy or something)
[00:39] <et3> what is the A_V.sources.upload file for?
[00:40] <Hobbsee> to say you've uploaded it
[00:40] <Hobbsee> (which will stop you inadvertantly uploading it agian, unless you force it, or remove the file)
[00:41] <et3> Hobbsee: what's in the file?
[00:42] <Hobbsee> et3: open it in a text editor, and have a look :)
[00:42] <Hobbsee> where you uploaded itto, iirc
[00:42] <et3> Hobbsee: from what I can tell. It's a log
[00:42] <et3> alright.
[00:43] <et3> I'm new at packaging and I don't know the flow
[00:43] <et3> for instance: I haven't changed the change-log for the past 3 revisions.
[00:44] <hggdh> folks, rutadeevacuacion is back
[00:44] <wgrant> Gah.
[00:44] <wgrant> No spm!
[00:44] <wgrant> SPM!!!!!
[00:45] <wgrant> mwhudson: ^^
[00:45] <wgrant> mthaddon: Can you kill the user?
[00:45] <Hobbsee> or change his email?
[00:45] <hggdh> hum. perhaps not really -- the bugs were opened ~19 hours ago
[00:45] <Hobbsee> then kill him?
[00:45] <hggdh> and stomp over
[00:46] <et3> rutadee...?
[00:46] <Hobbsee> if you change his email addresses, and lock his account, he can't come back
[00:46] <wgrant> maurizio-live needs to be rekilled.
[00:46] <wgrant> ruteadeevacuacion is still dead.
[00:47] <Hobbsee> wgrant: what's the point? It can be reactivated in minutes
[00:47] <Hobbsee> if it's going to be killed, kill it properly with the workaround, until the LP bug is fixed.
[00:47] <wgrant> Hobbsee: screen + while loop == win
[00:47] <mthaddon> user suspended
[00:47]  * wgrant wonders why the relevant bugs are private.
[00:47] <wgrant> mthaddon: Thanks.
[00:48] <Hobbsee> wgrant: I did find the answer out to that one
[00:48] <et3> soo...  what's this "build status" business about in the PPA?
[00:48] <mthaddon> but until the bug that prevents him re-applying is fixed, he'll probably be back soon enough
[00:48]  * hggdh also wonders. Additionally the list of subscribers seem to be constant
[00:48] <Hobbsee> mthaddon: why can't you change his email addresses?
[00:48] <et3> it has a throbber and "i386" by it
[00:48] <mthaddon> Hobbsee, he can then just sign up with any other username
[00:48] <wgrant> et3: You can get more details on the build status by expanding the soruce package item.
[00:49] <et3> wgrant: it didn't tell me much
[00:49] <wgrant> et3: Hover over the icons.
[00:49] <wgrant> hggdh: You can see the subscriber list?
[00:49] <et3> "currently building"
[00:49] <Hobbsee> mthaddon: in which case, which bug are you attempting to fix?  That you can't blacklist someone from getting an account at LP?
[00:49] <wgrant> Right. That probably means it's currently building.
[00:49] <et3> is launchpad building the package or do they want me to upload a binary?
[00:50] <hggdh> wgrant, yes
[00:50] <wgrant> et3: The former. You can't upload binaries.
[00:50] <wgrant> hggdh: Ah, so it's not private for a good reason.
[00:50] <et3> wgrant: strange
[00:50] <wgrant> et3: Why?
[00:50] <et3> wgrant: why does launchpad do this?
[00:50] <et3> wgrant: to see if it compiles... or... to save me hassle or what?
[00:51] <wgrant> et3: So you don't have to build it on all of the archs, and can't upload malicious binaries.
[00:51] <hggdh> wgrant, he (or LP) subscribed ubuntu-bugs
[00:51] <et3> Very nice.
[00:51] <wgrant> hggdh: Which bug are we talking about?
[00:52] <hggdh> bug 302690
[00:52] <hggdh> now that is weird
[00:53] <hggdh> and bug 302691
[00:53] <et3> it only built i386
[00:53] <hggdh> and (finally) bug 302692
[00:54] <wgrant> et3: That's correct, if it's arch: all.
[00:54] <et3> wgrant: how do I change this to build for amd64 too?
[00:54] <wgrant> hggdh: Ah, I meant the LP bugs on the utter failure that is account deactivation.
[00:54] <wgrant> et3: Why does it need to?
[00:54] <hggdh> heh
[00:55] <wgrant> et3: Does it have arch-specific components?
[00:55] <et3> so my friend can use the package on his laptop.
[00:56] <wgrant> et3: Does it actually need rebuilding to run on the other architecture?
[00:56] <et3> wgrant: no... but supposing I were to implement a package with arch-specific code, wouldn't I need to have it build for amd64 for it to run properly?
[00:56] <et3> how do I make it build for other archetectures
[00:57] <wgrant> et3: If it needed rebuilding for all architectures, you would have something other than Architecture: all in debian/control.
[00:57] <wgrant> s/all architectures/each architecture/
[00:58] <et3> wgrant: mine says "Architecture: all"
[00:58] <et3> and yet it built specifically for i386
[00:58] <wgrant> et3: And that's correct, if it is Python or something else that doesn't need compilation.
[00:58] <wgrant> That's because arch: all stuff builds on i386.
[00:58] <wgrant> But it's published to all architectures.
[00:58] <et3> just because?
[00:59] <wgrant> Because that's how it is, yes.
[00:59] <wgrant> Bug #40096
[00:59] <et3> alright then.  lol
[00:59] <et3> lol... it's a BUG?
[01:00] <wgrant> Not really. I'd call it a differing design opinion.
[01:01] <et3> well, I think it should be changed to be more general.  Now it's impossible to tell if the package is truly ONLY for i386 or if it fits any arch.
[01:02] <wgrant> True.
[01:02] <wgrant> Actually, not true.
[01:02] <et3> why so?
[01:02] <wgrant> I think, with PPAs, builds for all three archs will appear, and those that aren't supported by the package will just fail.
[01:03] <wgrant> As PPAs don't respect Packages-arch-specific, IIRC.
[01:03] <et3> what did the last thing you just sent me mean?
[01:03] <et3> launchpad doesn't build arch-specific code?
[01:04] <wgrant> That file is used in Debian and Ubuntu to exclude architectures from being built for some packages.
[01:04] <wgrant> But as PPAs don't use that, builds for all architectures will be attempted.
[01:05] <et3> well that's fair.
[01:05] <et3> so in conclusion:  any package in a PPA that states only "i386" really means "any arch"
[01:06] <wgrant> I believe so.
[01:07] <et3> thank you for explaining that it's not a bug then.  I think it's a misleading arch title and should be changed to "any" or "all" so this conversation doesn't occur again between two other launchpad users.
[01:08] <wgrant> 'any' doesn't make sense there. 'all' does.
[01:09] <et3> wgrant: true
[01:13] <et3> wgrant: I looked at your profile.  You do whitehat hacking?
[01:14] <et3> wgrant: how do I request security audits from ubuntu whitehat hackers?
[01:14] <wgrant> The team sort of doesn't really exist much any more.
[01:14] <et3> wgrant: *sigh*
[01:14] <et3> wgrant: then how do I get a security audit?
[01:15] <wgrant> No idea.
[01:15] <et3> alright
[01:15] <et3> do you like ipv6?
[01:15] <et3> many people aren't fond of it
[01:16] <wgrant> I do.
[01:16] <wgrant> One doesn't have the option of not being fond of it now.
[01:16] <et3> lol.
[01:16] <et3> but it's slower
[01:16] <wgrant> It is the future, and everybody must embrace it soon.
[01:17] <wgrant> What gives you this idea?
[01:17] <wgrant> Apart from the tiny extra overhead of processing the longer packet headers.
[01:18] <et3> it's what I've heard.  Configuring ssh ojr apache for ip4 only is said to make certain timeout errors go away
[01:18] <et3> s/orj/or
[01:19] <spiv> et3: misconfigured networks aren't the same as "it's slower"
[01:20]  * et3 shrugs
[01:58] <et3> #comment
[11:36] <tjaalton> hey, is it possible to change my @ubuntu.com email uid?
[11:38] <wgrant> tjaalton: It's bound to your Launchpad username.
[11:39] <tjaalton> wgrant: and it's tjaalton, but my email is still tepsipakki@ubuntu.com
[11:39] <wgrant> tjaalton: Ask #canonical-sysadmin, I suppose.
[11:39] <wgrant> How long ago did you change it?
[11:39] <tjaalton> hum, ok
[11:39] <tjaalton> a year ago I think
[11:39] <wgrant> Um, wow...
[11:40] <wgrant> #canonical-sysadmin is the place, anyway.
[11:40] <tjaalton> I guess the lp uid has always been the same, can't remember
[11:40] <tjaalton> right
[11:57]  * Hobbsee throws tomatoes
[11:57]  * Hobbsee wonders what on earth was the idea between this particular piece of UI development
[11:58] <Hobbsee> namely, where the 'overview' tab takes you for https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdebase-workspace/4:4.1.2-0ubuntu13/+build/751761
[11:58] <Hobbsee> beuno: any ideas?
[12:02] <bigjools> Hobbsee: perhaps you[d care to be a bit more constructively critical?
[12:02] <beuno> Hobbsee, what's the issue with it?
[12:02] <beuno> repetition?  scattered info?
[12:02] <spiv> Hobbsee: you expect https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdebase-workspace/4:4.1.2-0ubuntu13 to be target, not https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdebase-workspace ?
[12:03]  * Hobbsee scratches head
[12:03] <Hobbsee> okay, heisenbug, it appears.
[12:03] <Hobbsee> it was taking me back to https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/ a minute ago
[12:04] <Hobbsee> spiv: no, that's where I expected it to go.
[12:04] <Hobbsee> sorry for the noise and tomatoes
[12:04]  * beuno lowers emergency level back to green
[12:04]  * Hobbsee had that happen a few times, that it went back to /ubuntu/, so doesn't know why it's now working...
[12:04] <bigjools> Hobbsee: so, if you clickly slightly above "Overview" that's precisely where it will take you ;)
[12:05] <spiv> Hobbsee: well, I see the breadcrumb labelled '“kdebase-workspace” package' takes you to /ubuntu/+source
[12:05] <Hobbsee> spiv: that's true.  I wasn't hitting that.
[12:05] <spiv> Hobbsee: mysterious!
[12:06] <Hobbsee> spiv: very!!
[12:08] <bigjools> the breadcrumb thing is a bug, targeted to 2.1.12
[12:08] <Hobbsee> bigjools: that may have been what I hit - although I can't seem to hit it again now
[12:09] <bigjools> Hobbsee: you said you went to "https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/" which is the link directly above "Overview"
[12:09] <bigjools> I'll wager your scroll wheel moved the page down just as you clicked
[12:09]  * Hobbsee has a touchpad.  this is relatively unlikely?
[12:10] <bigjools> does it have the scroll wotsit thing on it
[12:10] <bigjools> fwiw my wife does that all the time on the touchpad
[12:11] <Hobbsee> on the side, yes
[12:12] <Hobbsee> hmm.  kdebase-workspace for jaunty completely blew up on sparc.
[12:12] <bigjools> Hobbsee: are you involved with KDE4 packaging for Ubuntu?
[12:12] <Hobbsee> bigjools: I used to be, and i'm currently debugging it
[12:12] <Hobbsee> (as in, some of the packaging)
[12:13] <bigjools> don't suppose you know if 4.2 will get backported to Intrepid?
[12:13] <Hobbsee> I would expect that's the plan, but i'm not sure what the SRU guys will say
[12:14] <bigjools> I hope so
[12:14] <bigjools> 4.1.2 is driving me nuts, I even briefly loaded up a Gnome desktop yesterday :)
[12:15] <Hobbsee> heh
[14:13] <kiko> who's the CHR?
[14:14] <kiko> SteveA needs a favor
[15:10] <nalioth> how do you turn off "Contact this user" in launchpad?
[15:36] <PriceChild> ~ubuntu-irc-cloaks has an email assigned which I would like to assign to ~ubuntu-irc-council. I have changed the contact option in the first team to "mail users individually", but when adding the address to the latter, it complains "irc-council@lists.ubuntu.com is already registered in Launchpad and is associated with Ubuntu cloaked people on freenode"
[15:36] <PriceChild> Adding the address again to ~ubuntu-irc-cloaks works again without having to verify the address, changing that first option should remove all association to the address imo
[16:32] <pkern> Any soyuz people in here?
[16:32] <cprov> pkern: yes
[16:32] <pkern> cprov: Oh you're here.  Fine. :D
[16:51] <Ursinha> @login
[16:51] <Ursinha> oh
[17:50] <vadi2> Hi, just a question - is it possible to make it so you get notified of when a new blueprint is filed in your project?
[17:56] <intellectronica> vadi2: no, it's not possible yet. only with bugs
[17:56] <vadi2> Alright, thank you
[18:41] <awmcclain> I'm the debian maintainer for a bunch of packages where the source is an external SVN repo. I've just started using autoppa (to great success), and I'm wondering what the best way to set up branches in launchpad would be?
[18:43] <awmcclain> I've tried setting up a project and using vcs-import to get the svn into LP, but I got an email saying it was rejected.
[21:22] <jelmer> is there some easy way to remove backup.bzr on a lp branch?
[21:24] <awilkins> Using SFTP?
[21:26] <jelmer> yeah, but sftp doesn't have a rmtree command
[21:26] <jelmer> and moving it out of the way doesn't work either, since launchpad only allows certain directory names
[21:27] <awilkins> I just used FileZilla to delete a lock folder from a branch
[21:27] <awilkins> Maybe it handles the sub-file details for you?
[21:28] <awilkins> Hmm, it has SOME problems though
[21:28] <awilkins> As long as it can list the parent folder of the folder you are deleting, it seems to work well
[21:29] <awilkins> I just totally trashed a branch....
[21:30] <awilkins> Old one though
[21:37] <awilkins> You can completely scour the inside of a branch it would seem - scorched earth apart from the parent folder which permissions won't let you delete
[21:38] <awilkins> ANd I can't get LP to delete it because someone is still subscribed to it (although it's a very old subscription and I know that all the relevant revisions are merged into the project concerned)
[22:28] <doko> buildds not accepting new builds
[22:43] <Robb_M> Hi, i keep getting "oops" errors when i try deleting branches, it doesnt matter if anybody is subscribed to them or not.
[22:44] <Robb_M> Error ID: OOPS-1063E2498
[22:47] <Robb_M> I believe its the same error every time....
[22:48] <beuno> Robb_M1, give me a few minutes to look into it
[22:49] <Robb_M1> sure thing beuno, my internet died, sorry.
[22:53] <Robb_M> im sorry beuno, my internet keeps dying on me....
[22:54] <james_w> Robb_M: looks like bug 301595 to me
[22:55] <Robb_M> yeah...thats what it is.
[22:55] <Robb_M> ok, so you guys are aware of it. Thats all I had for you. Have a great day!
[22:57] <Robb_M> yep, that bug is exactly whats happening to me.
[23:00] <beuno> james_w, it is. Thanks   :)
[23:00] <james_w> hi beuno
[23:00] <beuno> hiya james_w