[00:11] <anakron> HI all
[00:11] <anakron> hi persia
[00:12] <anakron> i have one question
[00:12] <anakron> if a package is not assigned to ubuntu motu developers
[00:13] <anakron> and it doesnt have any ubuntu version and it make that update-maintainer got useless
[00:13] <anakron> what i can do?
[00:18] <anakron> if a package is a 'Git' version
[00:20] <Hobbsee> get it fixed in debian?
[00:22] <anakron> if a package is a 'Git' version, what it means?
[00:24] <azeem> anakron: it's not a made from a release tarball, but from a git snapshot
[00:24] <anakron> so
[00:24] <anakron> how i can make a patch for it
[00:24] <anakron> it doesnt have any ubuntu version
[00:24] <azeem> what kind of patch?
[00:25] <azeem> what is the version?
[00:25] <anakron> change in .desktop file
[00:25] <anakron> 1-9.1
[00:25] <azeem> 9.1 would be the ubuntu version then, no?
[00:25] <azeem> what's the package name?
[00:25] <anakron> qtpfsgui
[00:26] <azeem> looks like "1.9.1-1build1" is the version, rather?
[00:26] <anakron> jeje si
[00:26] <anakron> yes
[00:26] <azeem> so why do you think there is no Ubuntu version?
[00:27] <anakron> nono
[00:27] <anakron> i must add it into control file?
[00:27] <azeem> add what?
[00:27] <anakron> ubuntu version?
[00:27] <azeem> for which field in control?
[00:28] <anakron> ops
[00:28] <anakron> dont worry, i was reading bad
[00:28] <anakron> the problem was
[00:29] <anakron> that the source package that i've downloaded doesnt have the same info that the package that you can see with "apt-cache show qtpfsgui"
[00:30] <azeem> that is expected, the apt-cache show info is assembled from different sources
[00:30] <anakron> so, when i tried to make an update-maintainer it cannot be done because it doesnt have a ubuntu version
[00:31] <azeem> what is "it"?
[00:31] <azeem> well
[00:31] <azeem> I never used update-maintainer, so I guess I won't be able to help you anyway
[00:31] <Hobbsee> azeem: it complains if you try to use it to update the maintainer, when it's not an ubuntu version in debian/changelog
[00:32]  * Hobbsee has no idea why anakron doesn't forward the desktop patch to debian, rather than making it require merging all the time
[00:32] <anakron> yes
[01:00] <emgent> heya
[01:50] <cody-somerville> ScottK, hey
[01:50] <ScottK> cody-somerville: Hey.
[01:51] <cody-somerville> ScottK, do you want to give me a little bit of archive admin love? ;]
[01:51] <cody-somerville> ScottK, (more specifically, sion in the new queue)
[01:51]  * ScottK isn't an archive admin.
[01:51]  * ScottK thinks you're thinking of StevenK.
[01:52] <cody-somerville> I thought they made you one too
[01:52] <ScottK> Nope.
[01:52] <ScottK> Or if they did, they forgot to tell me.
[01:55] <cody-somerville> :]
[02:54] <pythonic> hi. i dput a package, but i did not get a confimation email, and it doesn't show on revu.ubuntuwire.com
[02:54] <pythonic> how long does that take usually?
[03:00] <vorian> not long
[03:00] <vorian> pythonic: when did you upload it?
[03:01] <pythonic> maybe 15 minutes ago
[03:02] <vorian> what package?
[03:02] <pythonic> bucardo
[03:02] <pythonic> an asynchronous replication system for PostgreSQL
[03:02] <pythonic> it has Maintainer: Ubuntu MOTU Developers <ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com>
[03:03] <vorian> hrm, i've uploaded to revu just now while we are chatting and it went through
[03:03] <vorian> do you have your keys synced etc...
[03:03] <vorian> ?
[03:04] <pythonic> i uploaded my key to launchpad, and logged in to revu
[03:05] <vorian> i think you need to be a member on the revu-uploader team on lp
[03:05] <vorian> maybe NCommander can comment on that :)
[03:05] <nhandler> vorian: That team is obsolete now
[03:05] <NCommander> what nhandler said
[03:05] <vorian> ah
[03:05] <nhandler> If your gpg key is in LP, and you sign into revu, it should work
[03:05] <vorian> twnhs?
[03:05] <nhandler> vorian: I'm making that a VoteBot factoid ;)
[03:05] <vorian> awesome!
[03:06] <NCommander> I don't see it in the rejection pool
[03:06] <NCommander> nor is it in incoming
[03:07] <vorian> since y'all are awake, mind looking at kwin-dekorator-kde4? (fresh on revu)
[03:07] <pythonic> i'm using the dput configuration from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/REVU
[03:07] <NCommander> pythonic, it never made it to REVU it seems
[03:07] <NCommander> I can't find a rejection log, or anything in REVU-incoming
[03:07] <pythonic> dput now says Already uploaded to revu.ubuntuwire.com
[03:07] <vorian> pythonic: did you do "dput revu pythonic_special.package ?
[03:08] <vorian> ah
[03:08] <NCommander> wait, found it
[03:08] <NCommander> You did a full upload
[03:08] <pythonic> dput revu foo-0ubuntu1_amd64.changes
[03:08] <pythonic> ok.. is that bad?
[03:08] <NCommander> You need to do a source only upload or REVU will REJECT
[03:08] <NCommander> Do debuild -S -sa
[03:08] <NCommander> then upload the _source.changes
[03:09] <NCommander> (you'll probably have to give dput the -f option to force it)
[03:09] <ScottK> or just rm the .upload file.
[03:10] <ScottK> vorian: Why kde4 in the package name?  It's all kde4 now.
[03:10] <vorian> ScottK: well, it seems there is a kwin-style-dekorator still in archives
[03:10] <vorian> and it's a completely different license
[03:11] <ScottK> vorian: Then maybe just shove the new package under the old name.  If it's kde3 it's not gonna work anyway.
[03:11] <ScottK> vorian: Same upstream or a different one?
[03:11] <vorian> different, it's a port to kde4
[03:12] <ScottK> I'd still replace it.
[03:12] <vorian> ScottK: it's by the same author who did nixternal's love "skulpture"
[03:12] <vorian> ScottK: okie dokie
[03:12] <ScottK> Hmmm.  OK.
[03:12] <vorian> ScottK: sorry for pinging you so much :P
[03:12] <ScottK> Yeah.  No point in keeping broken KDE3 stuff around.
[03:12] <ScottK> No problem.
[03:12] <vorian> :)
[03:12]  * ScottK will ignore you if it gets to be too much.
[03:12] <vorian> :o
[03:12] <vorian> how rude
[03:13] <ScottK> The pinging to much or the ignoring?
[03:13] <ScottK> ;-)
[03:13] <vorian> the pinging of course
[03:17] <nhandler> vorian: I thought closing a needs-packaging bug was a requirement
[03:18] <ScottK> nhandler: Not really.  Is it written down as required anywhere?
[03:18] <NCommander> ScottK, in Debian or Ubuntu?
[03:19] <ScottK> Ubuntu
[03:19] <NCommander> THen no, its not
[03:19] <NCommander> AFAIK
[03:19] <ScottK> If it was Debian it'd be an ITP, not a needs-packaging bug.
[03:19] <ScottK> Ohhh.  Very shiny.  New lintian check: latest-debian-changelog-entry-changed-to-native
[03:19]  * ScottK thinks he'll merge lintian.
[03:20] <nhandler> ScottK: I think it is mentioned in a few other locations, but https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/REVU/CheckList
[03:20] <nhandler> ScottK: There is also https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/NewPackages?action=show&redirect=MOTU%2FPackages%2FNew
[03:20] <nhandler> There it says "if there is no needs-packaging bug, file one"
[03:21] <vorian> NCommander: that little icon off to the right on a package line is the "archive" button?
[03:22] <NCommander> yeah
[03:22] <vorian> coolio
[03:26] <pythonic> NCommander: thanks, the package is uploaded now: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=bucardo
[03:27] <ScottK> NCommander or vorian: Got a Kubuntu Jaunty installation handy?
[03:27] <NCommander> I can install kubuntu desktop if that's what you mean
[03:27] <NCommander> Why do you ask?
[03:36] <vorian> ScottK: yep
[04:07] <ScottK> There's some discussion about if kdenlive should require ffmpeg as a hard depends, recommends, or suggests.
[04:08] <ScottK> NCommander and vorian^^ (had to go retrieve $MIDDLE_CHILD from the mall).
[04:08] <NCommander> Recommends is best
[04:08] <NCommander> IMHO
[04:08] <ScottK> There was some discussion it wouldn't work at all without it.
[04:08] <vorian> haha
[04:09] <vorian> hrm
[04:09] <ScottK> Someone else said it was just needed for capturing on firewire.
[04:09] <ScottK> So I was hoping one of you might fire it up and see if you can use it at all without ffmpeg.
[04:09] <vorian> sure thing
[04:10] <ScottK> Thanks.
[04:11] <vorian> ScottK: what bug has the fella's finished package?
[04:11] <ScottK> vorian: I'll look, but it's uploaded, so just test with what's in the archive now.
[04:12] <vorian> ok
[04:12] <vorian> i fogot how much fun dekorator is :)
[04:12] <vorian> and with a killer kwin, it's really nice
[04:13] <ScottK> vorian: It's  Bug #269191.  Please put a comment in there once you've tested.
[04:14] <vorian> starts fine..
[04:14]  * vorian needs to find a clip
[04:21] <vorian> ScottK: this build is w/out ffmpeg? if so, it works fine.  Looking at the site however, FFmpeg does appear to be a strong recommends
[04:24] <vorian> ScottK: if you would like, i can fix it (i pulled the source)
[04:24] <ScottK> Sure thing.
[04:33] <vorian> ScottK: MLT relies on FFmpeg compilation parameters. If your distribution ships with an outdated FFmpeg version, it may not be able to use the audio and video codecs like h264 or AVCHD. In this case, recompile FFmpeg with all needed options or ask FFmpeg packager to upgrade.
[04:33] <vorian> I would say that qualifies as a Depends
[04:34] <vorian> (I was just reading further into it)
[04:34] <ScottK> Were you able to edit video without it?
[04:34] <ScottK> vorian: ^^^
[04:35] <vorian> i havent gotten that far yet
[04:35] <ScottK> vorian: OK.  If you can edit video without it, then I go recommends.  If you can't then depends.
[04:37] <vorian> roger that
[04:43] <vorian> ScottK: yep, it's required as far as i can tell
[04:43] <vorian> without it, you can't even pull up the clip
[04:44] <ScottK> OK.  Debdiff me and I'll sponsor you.
[04:44] <ScottK> vorian: Thanks for testing.
[04:44] <vorian> ScottK: i can upload it :)
[04:44] <ScottK> vorian: Right.  Forgot.  Go for it.
[04:44] <ScottK> vorian: Thanks again for taking care of it.
[04:44] <vorian> no problem \o
[04:45] <vorian> /
[07:03] <RAOF_> crimsun: Are you still planning to review nouveau-kernel-source?
[07:08] <crimsun> RAOF: yep
[07:08] <crimsun> just running through a list of (unrelated) bugs first, then i'll pop over
[07:09] <RAOF> Ta
[10:46] <AnAnt> Hello, I am intending to package a python software, can someone give me an example of a simple package for python software ?
[10:49] <RainCT> AnAnt: does it have a setup.py file?
[10:49] <AnAnt> yup
[10:49] <AnAnt> RainCT: yup
[10:49] <RainCT> AnAnt: you could have a look at fusion-icon then
[10:50] <RainCT> AnAnt: it's pretty easy, you just have to use one of the methods described on http://wiki.debian.org/DebianPython/NewPolicy
[10:50] <AnAnt> problem is that I dont know python
[10:51] <pochu> AnAnt: that doesn't matter
[10:51] <pochu> AnAnt: have a look at emesene too
[10:51] <pochu> AnAnt: and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Python
[10:53] <AnAnt> emesene uses cdbs too ?
[10:55] <RainCT> AnAnt: yes - apt-cache showsrc emesene | grep Build-Dep
[10:57] <RainCT> nhandler: I've moved the perl Depends on ubuntu-dev-tools to Recommends as they are only being used by your script (and some of the other existing Depends should probably also moved there now that recommends are installed by default)
[11:01] <AnAnt> hmm, what if I just use debhelper ?
[11:02] <RainCT> AnAnt: then look at the debhelper example on the wiki. it's basically the same but you'll have to call setup.py and dh_pycentral/pysupport manually
[11:02] <pochu> I think debhelper 7 will do that for you
[11:03] <pochu> RainCT: ^
[11:04] <AnAnt> dh_pycentral ?
[11:04] <AnAnt> nevermind, that question
[14:21] <AnAnt> Hello, is there a command to convert svg to png ?
[14:22] <pochu> you can probably do that with imagemagick, but I don't know the exact command line
[14:23] <AnAnt> convert ?
[14:23] <pochu> possibly
[14:23] <AnAnt> didn't know that imagemagick supports svg
[14:39] <loic-m>  inkscape filename.svg --export-png=filename.png
[14:40] <loic-m> (if imagemagick doesn't work, or if the .svg has special inkscape properties. I'm not sure if imagemagick supports blur or transparency)
[15:08] <nhandler> RainCT: ping
[15:46] <bigon> ssmping is currentfy FTBFS (http://launchpadlibrarian.net/20535239/buildlog_ubuntu-jaunty-i386.ssmping_0.9.1-1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz) if I declare __USE_GNU it builds correctly, is it an acceptable solution?
[16:20] <pochu> ScottK: the work is almost done :-) http://www.emesene.org/trac/ticket/1955
[16:25] <CarlFK> dpkg-buildpackage: failure: fakeroot debian/rules binary gave error exit status 2  http://dpaste.com/101269/
[16:26] <handschuh> CarlFK: its your remove-rules
[16:27] <handschuh> CarlFK: the make file tries to delete something out of a non-existing directory
[16:28] <soot> Anybody know of a tool that will produce colorful diffs in PDF or PS format?
[16:29] <handschuh> CarlFK: so try to create these dirs (manually, at the beginning) and see if everything wokrs
[16:29] <CarlFK> soot: here is a list I made a few years ago http://fox.wikis.com/wc.dll?Wiki~DiffPrograms~SoftwareEng
[16:30] <pochu> You are not allowed to post to this mailing list, and your message has
[16:30] <pochu> been automatically rejected.
[16:30] <pochu> nice @ kubuntu-devel@l.u.c
[16:40] <CarlFK> ah, looks like export_divx4 is now ...5
[16:58] <CarlFK> rules has "-rm foo" which errors "rm: cannot remove `foo': No such file or directory" but "make: [install] Error 1 (ignored)".  is the - before the rm what ignores the error?
[17:01] <pochu> CarlFK: yes
[17:01] <pochu> CarlFK: you could also do `rm -f foo`
[17:01] <pochu> -f will ignore errors too
[17:01] <pochu> (in rm)
[17:02] <CarlFK> is the - prefix being recognized by dpkg-buildpackage ?
[17:02] <pochu> I think it should
[17:03] <pochu> that's from make
[17:03] <pochu> and dpkg-buildpackage should run "make debian/rules clean" or something like that
[17:03] <pochu> or that's what I think :)
[17:04] <CarlFK> oh yeah, it is make that says "(ignored) "
[17:35] <ScottK> pochu: Great.
[17:37] <sebner> ScottK: you christmas present arrived (kdenlive) \o/
[17:37] <sebner> *your
[17:42] <ScottK> Yep.
[17:42] <ScottK> I didn't even have to package it.  ;-)
[17:43] <CarlFK> why does the s/f in "aptitude -s -f build-dep" cause  "Would download/install/remove packages." instead of installing?  http://dpaste.com/101297/
[18:06] <nhandler> NCommander: Aren't you a REVU admin?
[18:06] <RainCT> nhandler: pong
[18:07] <nhandler> RainCT: Is there any reason you changed the name on the changelog entry for u-d-t?
[18:08] <RainCT> nhandler: no, dch does that automatically
[18:08] <nhandler> RainCT: Ok. I wanted to push a new change, and just wanted to make sure.
[18:09] <nhandler> Also, do you really think it is worth having listing "Add foo to Depends" and "Move foo from Depends to Recommends" in the chnagelog entry? I can understand having it in the bzr commit log, but is it really needed in the package changelog?
[18:09] <RainCT> nhandler: for ubuntu-dev-tools, usually when someone uploads a new version to the archives (s)he changes it to himself anyway
[18:09] <RainCT> nhandler: and no, feel free to remove that
[18:10] <nhandler> Ok, thanks.
[18:17] <serialorder> anyone want to sponsor a really easy merge for me? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/icedove-nostalgy/+bug/303702
[18:17] <nhandler> serialorder: I'll take a look at it
[18:19] <nhandler> serialorder: Your changelog entry has a few minor issues
[18:20] <nhandler> 1) You have an extra *
[18:20] <nhandler> 2) For the change to the description, move the "debian/control" line so it is either at the beginning of the previous line or before the previous line
[18:21] <nhandler> And is it even worth doing the merge? The Ubuntu->Ubuntu debdiff is pretty much empty
[18:22] <nhandler> The one change that they made in Debian was changing thunderbird to icedove in the description. Since we revert the change in the merge, I don't see any point in merging this version
[18:25] <serialorder> ok well just leave it for when the next version gets merged then
[18:29] <Turl> hello
[18:29] <Turl> do you package flashplugin-nonfree ?
[18:32] <Turl> if you do, may I ask why sbdy marked https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/flashplugin-nonfree/+bug/310031 as invalid?
[18:34] <pochu> crimsun: ^ you closed that bug without a comment
[18:35] <sebner> does there already exist a 64bit flashplugin?
[18:35]  * sebner winks pochu =)
[18:37] <pochu> sebner: yes :P http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html
[18:38] <sebner> pochu: well, alpha
[18:41] <pochu> sebner: your question was wether it existed or not; the answer is yes ;)
[18:42] <sebner> pochu: true so we also have the answer why this bug was marked as invalid ;) we don't ship alpha software
[18:42] <pochu> anyway, I think the bug should have been closed with a comment
[18:44] <ScottK> sebner: Sure we do.  People upload buggy crap all the time.  In the case of Flash that would be redundant though.
[18:48] <sebner> heh
[18:48] <sebner> pochu: sure
[19:02] <mrooney> if anyone wants to help me out and review a simple cdbs packaging of a python distutils app "wxbanker", I would greatly appreciate any comments or feedback :)
[19:02] <loic-m> flashplugin-nonfree already installs 64bits flash. Why was the bug submitted?
[20:33] <crimsun> pochu: i closed that bug because 1) the existing flashplugin-nonfree does precisely what the summary requests; 2) i spoke with bug reporter in #ubuntu+1 immediately
[20:34] <crimsun> pochu: while i agree that an explanation in the bug report would have been icing on the cake, i felt it was unnecessary to recap what has been wasted in not so many words over the past several days in several irc channels, forum posts, mailing lists, ad nauseum.
[20:35] <pochu> crimsun: ah, good :) sorry if I was picky
[21:18] <loic-m> I've updated the bug description. If the question comes back in the next few days, maybe we can edit the title too...
[21:26] <CarlFK> I need a gui to display a .diff so that I can see what really changed...
[21:27] <CarlFK> wish the guy that was looking for that was still around...
[21:33] <crimsun> wow, ucf's ncurses/dialog diff viewer is uh, pretty difficult to read
[21:34] <cody-somerville> ScottK, In your e-mail, did you mean ubuntu-motu and ubuntu-devel merge?
[21:35] <crimsun> loic-m: thanks
[21:39] <CarlFK> kompare has "open diff" - exactly what I need
[21:40] <ScottK> cody-somerville: For motu specific stuff (of which there isn't much any more) keep either MC or MOTU list and then all the development stuff would go to ubuntu-devel.
[21:40] <CarlFK> and it's flowy graphics stuff is pretty useful
[21:46] <CarlFK> http://packages.ubuntu.com/intrepid/i386/libavcodec-dev/filelist  /usr/include/ffmpeg/avcodec.h
[21:46] <CarlFK> what puts that file there?
[21:47] <CarlFK> libavcodec-dev comes from ffmpeg, and ffmpeg puts it in  /usr/local/include/libavcodec/avcodec.h
[21:50] <ScottK> If it's from the packaged ffmpeg, it better not put it in /usr/local.
[21:51] <CarlFK> ScottK  ffmpeg trunk defaults to  /usr/local/include/libavcodec/avcodec.h
[21:52] <CarlFK> something is changing that.  I want to point to that for why something else should follow
[21:53] <crimsun> your "that"s are ambiguous =)
[21:54] <crimsun> keep in mind that the pkgconfig file that ships with libavcodec-dev provides the preprocessor with the path
[21:54] <CarlFK> damm.. I am noramly pretty good about avoiding pronows
[21:54] <crimsun> so just look for libavcodec.pcs scattered across your FS
[21:55] <crimsun> e.g., do you have a /usr/local/lib/pkgconfig/libavcodec.pc ?
[21:56] <CarlFK> yup. looking ...
[21:57] <CarlFK> http://dpaste.com/101371/
[21:58] <crimsun> right, as expected. but, do you in fact want the ffmpeg in /usr/local to be used?
[22:01] <CarlFK> well, I want there to be only one.  http://packages.ubuntu.com/source/jaunty/ffmpeg2theora currently patches this include lines to look for it .. oh crap... I got confused.
[22:01] <CarlFK> the patch is +#include "ffmpeg/avformat.h"
[22:01] <CarlFK> let me rewind and track down avformat.h
[22:03] <crimsun> well, of use to you may be $PKG_CONFIG_PATH and --define-variable=prefix somepath
[22:03] <CarlFK> http://packages.ubuntu.com/intrepid/i386/libavformat-dev/filelist /usr/include/ffmpeg/avformat.h
[22:03] <CarlFK> I have gotten everything installed and working, but it took some futzing
[22:03] <crimsun> alternately, simply remove the system-wide packages generated from ffmpeg source
[22:04] <CarlFK> trying to figure out what should be updated so the next person (maybe me) doesn't have to futz
[22:05] <loic-m> I'm trying to package a really simple application (command line, only 2 binaries, one for compression the other for decompression)
[22:05] <loic-m> using dh_make
[22:06] <loic-m> However it comes with no makefile, no configure
[22:06] <loic-m> I'm at the stade where I edit debian/rules
[22:07] <loic-m> build-stamp: should I make a makefile, or can i just write a gcc name_of_the_source_file?
[22:08] <CarlFK> loic-m: i would make a make file.
[22:08] <CarlFK> I would rather have a simple makefile than have to figure out why there is no makefile
[22:09] <CarlFK> but that;s just me, and generally I don't know what the heck is going on :)
[22:13] <loic-m> Should i learn how to write one, or is there a generic one or a tool to generate one?
[22:15] <CarlFK> autotools will generate it, and maybe that would follow my "provide the expected files" approach...
[22:16] <crimsun> loic-m: it's really up to you (the maintainer) regarding what to put into debian/rules, but i, too, recommend creating a Makefile(s)
[22:16] <crimsun> loic-m: the syntax for Makefiles is pretty straightforward
[22:17] <crimsun> (of course there are people who argue that make and Makefiles, recursive or otherwise, are Bad)
[22:19] <loic-m> Is there a simple documentation on how to write makefiles? I'm trying using google, but the makefile I'm writing doesn't work when I type make
[22:20] <loic-m> Makefile:20: *** commands commence before first target. Stop.
[22:20] <directhex> what's the normal length of time between a sync ack and an archive admin making it happen?
[22:21] <crimsun> http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/make/Simple-Makefile.html
[22:21] <mgdm> loic-m: in an instance of extraordinary levels of "WTF", Makefiles differentiate between tabs and spaces
[22:21] <mgdm> it might be something to do with that
[22:21] <crimsun> yes, beware the tab requirement
[22:22] <CarlFK> that's pretty complex for simple-makefile
[22:22] <crimsun> directhex: probably on the order of a couple days
[22:22] <crimsun> really depends who's on holiday/asleep/building death ray machines
[22:30] <loic-m> thanks, the other pages explains it too
[22:31] <directhex> bloody death rays. always keepin' me down
[22:37] <loic-m> however when I use cc foo.c it produces the binary, but names it a.out
[22:38] <loic-m> how do I tell it to name it foo instead?
[22:38] <DRebellion> loic-m, cc foo.c -o foo
[22:38] <loic-m> thanks
[22:39] <loic-m> since it only produces the binaries, I don't need a clean target?
[22:41] <DRebellion> loic-m, in your makefile? make clean should return the tarball to the state before you called make. ie. it should delete the binaries
[22:43] <loic-m> ok, so no need for it in makefile
[23:14] <CarlFK> http://dpaste.com/101391/ /usr/include$ cd ffmpeg =  No such file or directory
[23:14] <CarlFK> "Setting up libavformat-dev" - shouldn't that have installed /usr/include/ffmpeg/avformat.h http://packages.ubuntu.com/intrepid/i386/libavformat-dev/filelist
[23:20] <nhandler> Anyone feel like reviewing plasmoid-spellcheck on REVU? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=plasmoid-spellcheck
[23:21] <loic-m> To install files, I use in debian/rules the command: install -m 755 -t /usr/bin ecm unecm
[23:22] <loic-m> However when I run pbuilder-intrepid (testing if it works) I get the error: install: cannot create regular file `/usr/bin/ecm': Permission denied
[23:39] <cody-somerville> Anyone here familiar with Valgrind?
[23:40] <cody-somerville> It doesn't appear to be able to build in Jaunty due to the new glibc version
[23:40] <cody-somerville> configure: error: Valgrind requires glibc version 2.2 - 2.7
[23:42] <ScottK> I know the existing one works on Jaunty.  I've used it.
[23:42] <cody-somerville> Weird, the news file says 3.3.1 adds support for glibc 2.8
[23:42] <ScottK> Did you look in Experimental for a newer one?
[23:43] <cody-somerville> ScottK, yes
[23:44] <cody-somerville> ScottK, I imagine valgrind would FTBFS in Debian too under experimental but not unstable since it still has 2.7
[23:47] <loic-m> I manage to build a package, but it contains no binaries :(
[23:47] <loic-m> in debian/rules for install: , after the lines generated by dh_make I've got
[23:47] <loic-m>         $(MAKE) prefix=$(CURDIR)/debian/$(package)/usr
[23:48] <loic-m> 	install -m 755 ecm $(CURDIR)/debian/$(package)/usr/bin
[23:48] <loic-m> (one of the two binaries is ecm, I'm trying with one first)
[23:49] <loic-m> if I just put install instead of install -m 755 ecm $(CURDIR)/debian/$(package)/usr/bin it's the same result
[23:53] <cody-somerville> ScottK, ah
[23:53] <cody-somerville> ScottK, it appears there is a debian patch that sets the version
[23:54]  * WelshDragon test
[23:54]  * WelshDragon asd
[23:58] <cody-somerville> ScottK, (or there was in the past, it doesn't get applied anymore)