[00:00] <savvas> POX: sorry about debian/rules, I forgot I changed the link to catfish.svg in that too :) good catch!
[00:04] <ScottK> maxb: The 0.1 thing is used for security uploads.
[00:05] <savvas> ScottK: can you remind me the channel for debian python?
[00:05] <ScottK> savvas: On OFTC it's #debian-python
[00:05] <savvas> ah oftc
[00:05] <savvas> ok thanks :)
[00:36] <Riddell> sommer: ping
[00:36] <Riddell> sommer: your ebox upload to intrepid-proposed has no bug number
[00:38] <cody-somerville> Riddell, I don't think they've been approved for motu-sru yet either
[00:39] <Riddell> doesn't seem so looking at the other two
[00:41] <sommer> Riddell: ya, the packages still need some work, should have new ones ready soon... waiting on upstream for some info
[00:42] <Riddell> sommer: so I should reject?
[00:43] <sommer> Riddell: ya, I'd like to fix the things cody-somerville mentioned in the bug
[00:44] <sommer> and get the jaunty packages working as well
[01:34] <stochastic> Hi, I'm having some troubles getting my new calf package to build in my PPA for hardy.  Everything was going fine until: dh_clean: Sorry, but 6 is the highest compatibility level supported by this debhelper.
[01:35] <stochastic> here's the full build log: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/21181806/buildlog_ubuntu-hardy-i386.calf_0.0.17-0ubuntu1~hardy~ppa2_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[01:36] <stochastic> and here's the PPA: https://launchpad.net/~stochastic/+archive/
[01:41] <stochastic> There seems to be a problem (probably in the rules file) with using debhelper 6, but I'm brand new to packaging and on an Intrepid system, so...
[01:43] <RAOF> stochastic: No, the problem there is that Hardy has debhelper 5.
[01:44] <RAOF> Or, apparently, debhelper 6?  That seems odd.  I was sure it was 5.
[01:44] <stochastic> RAOF, the package listing said 6
[01:44] <stochastic> I'm going to turn on verbose output to see if anything more can be explained
[01:48] <maxb> stochastic: The problem is that you have adjusted the Build-Depends, but you have not adjusted the debhelper level requested in debian/compat (I assume)
[01:48] <stochastic> ahhh
[01:48] <stochastic> I'll try that
[01:50] <maxb> stochastic: 'man debhelper' details the effect of the compatibility levels. If your package definitely does not benefit from using the absolutely latest level, it can be useful to require an older version, to ease backporting
[01:50] <RAOF> Or you could just build against hardy-backports, which IIRC contains debhelper 7
[01:50] <stochastic> ok, this is my first package, so I'm learning as I go
[01:51] <maxb> The command 'rmadison' displays the version of a package in all the ubuntu distribtions - this is very useful for this sort of thing - 'rmadison debhelper' tells you at a glance which version is available where
[01:51] <maxb> including that yes, hardy-backports has 7
[01:52] <maxb> though its possible that you might not want to reconfigure your entire PPA for that
[02:24] <ScottK> The reason we backported Debhepler 7 to Hardy is that a non-trivial number of packages are using Debhelper 7 functions and it saves a lot of debian/rules rewriting.
[02:24] <ScottK> If you're going to be trying to bring current packages back to hardy, I suggest building on backports.
[02:25] <ScottK> Also a lot of stuff is already there.
[05:48] <BullHorns> Hi, can I start helping with development on ubuntu If I run hardy 8.04 or do I need to upgrade?
[05:57] <BullHorns> I did a lot of reading the past week and it looks like I should start with motu
[05:57] <ScottK> BullHorns: You can.
[06:06] <BullHorns> what development tools do you use, Who can help me with the first few steps to start. It will help me alot to get to work soon
[06:11] <BullHorns> how do ajunta compare with kdevelop?
[06:33] <fabrice_sp> BullHorns, you can begin reading the info at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/GettingStarted
[06:39] <dholbach> good morning
[06:45] <iulian> Morning Daniel.
[06:47] <dholbach> hiya iulian
[07:29] <dholbach> nxvl: do you know if somebody contacted the spanish speaking ubuntu community about ubuntu developer week?
[08:38] <didrocks> morning o/
[08:43] <dholbach> didrocks, huats: good morning
[08:43] <dholbach> didrocks, huats: did you let the french community know about ubuntu developer week?
[08:44] <huats> hey dholbach
[08:44] <huats> it was supposed to be announced today or tomorrow
[08:45] <huats> but I'll take care of advertising it today
[08:45] <dholbach> huats: fantastique!
[08:45] <huats> :)
[08:47] <DktrKranz> dholbach: uh! thanks for the remainder, I'll blog about it for -it too! I won't be there... our CTO will come auditing us and I'll be busy for a couple of days :(
[08:47] <didrocks> dholbach: basically what huats means is that I will blog about it today :)
[08:47] <huats> LOL
[08:47] <huats> didrocks: no no
[08:47] <huats> I mean I will blog about it too :)
[08:47] <didrocks> huats: really ? :p
[08:48] <didrocks> (jut kidding)
[08:48]  * dholbach hugs DktrKranz
[08:48] <dholbach> thanks DktrKranz
[08:48] <didrocks> just*
[08:48] <huats> didrocks: I know that you wait for an email... ;)
[08:49] <didrocks> huats: I didn't like to repeat it, but... yes ;)
[08:49] <huats> :)
[08:49]  * DktrKranz hugs dholbach back
[08:49] <huats> didrocks: doing it right now
[08:49] <dholbach> :)
[08:50] <didrocks> huats: great \o/
[08:50]  * didrocks hugs huats 
[08:52]  * huats hugs didrocksa and dholbach ;)
[10:09] <mok0> raphink: ping
[10:10] <raphink> mok0: pong
[10:13] <james_w> we're falling back on the sponsor queue a bit, could everyone with upload rights please try and sponsor one or two things today?
[10:17] <mok0> raphink: PM
[10:19] <stefanlsd> james_w: put up another imview diff. not exactly where i wanted it to go, but i cant seem to get the autotools stuff working
[10:20] <james_w> stefanlsd: I was just looking at it :-)
[10:22] <dholbach> hiya quadrispro
[10:22] <dholbach> quadrispro: the imlib2 bug was fixed! :)
[10:22] <quadrispro> dholbach: i'm just working on it :)
[10:22] <dholbach> ... in Debian
[10:22] <dholbach> rock on!
[10:22] <james_w> stefanlsd: what happens if you call your acinclude.m4 aclocal.m4 and drop the call to aclocal?
[10:23] <dholbach> james_w: yay sponsoring! :)
[10:23] <james_w> stefanlsd: and your diff is missing the addition of the automake build-depends, but it would be easy for me to add that in while sponsoring
[10:23] <stefanlsd> james_w: mm. works.  also.  i think loic was wanting to move more to using the autotools...  but yeah, we're not really achieving anything by doing it (except planning for autotools)
[10:25] <stefanlsd> james_w: maybe we shouldnt do it for now and i'll work with the debian guys to seeing how we can improve it to use autotools
[10:25] <stefanlsd> we then rename acinclude.m4 to aclocal.m4, remove automake from build-deps and remove the aclocal call.
[10:25] <james_w> stefanlsd: yeah, if you go with an aclocal.m4 that m4_includes the files with the macros you need from an "m4" directory then moving to autotools is easy
[10:26] <james_w> I just learnt all this yesterday from Keybuk as it happens
[10:28] <quadrispro> dholbach: building in progress -> http://home.alessiotreglia.com/jaunty/result/imlib2_1.4.2-4ubuntu1/imlib2_1.4.2-4ubuntu1_amd64.build
[10:31] <stefanlsd> james_w: let me test quick.
[10:31] <dholbach> quadrispro: got it
[10:32] <quadrispro> dholbach: bug #317053
[10:32] <dholbach> quadrispro: will play with it a bit, then upload it - no need for a bug
[10:32] <dholbach> ah ok
[10:32] <dholbach> :)
[10:32] <gaspa> boshhead:
[10:32] <gaspa> uops. I meant... where's bobbo?
[10:33] <gaspa> I just have a couple of thing about ssherminator...
[10:36] <quadrispro> anyone on bug 315767?
[10:37] <quadrispro> dholbach: imlib2 has been build in my ppa
[10:37] <quadrispro> s/build/built
[10:38] <dholbach> quadrispro: just played with it over here and I'm going to upload it in a bit
[10:38] <dholbach> thanks a lot
[10:38] <quadrispro> you're welcome
[10:38] <dholbach> you rock!
[10:39] <quadrispro> yes, I'm learning to rock sometime :D
[10:41] <dholbach> quadrispro: you're being modest :)
[10:41] <stefanlsd> james_w: do you know whats the normal practice for m4/ when its a .m4 shipped by another system lib?  so we need pkg.m4 - do i include /usr/share/aclocal/pkg.m4 or cp that to the imview  m4/ directory and call it there?
[10:41] <james_w> stefanlsd: cp it I believe
[10:42] <stefanlsd> james_w: i presume i do that in the rules then?  or before build?
[10:42] <james_w> stefanlsd: in the source package
[10:42] <james_w> if you were using aclocal then you wouldn't have to bother
[10:42] <stefanlsd> james_w: kk. thanks
[10:42] <james_w> you could m4_include() it, but I think it's preferred to have it in the packaqge
[10:49] <stefanlsd> james_w: http://paste.ubuntu.com/104788/           (that kinda idea?)
[10:50] <james_w> stefanlsd: yeah, I think that's right
[10:50] <james_w> stefanlsd: does it work? :-)
[10:50] <emgent> adobe removed old flash player 9 tar.gz, and flashplugin-nonfree in hardy is broken.
[10:50] <emgent> now is avail only fp10
[10:53] <stefanlsd> james_w: yeah, builds. i also tested with --without-magick and  have_magick=no and it doesnt include the libs and includes. so that seems to work also.
[10:53] <james_w> stefanlsd: cool
[10:54] <stefanlsd> james_w:  should i upload this diff to the bug rather?
[10:54] <james_w> stefanlsd: yes please
[10:55] <james_w> it's inconvenient to extract it from the pastebin
[10:57] <stefanlsd> james_w: np. done.
[10:59] <james_w> thanks
[11:24] <quadrispro> mr_pouit: hi!
[12:17] <stefanlsd> james_w: has anyone looked at jspwiki?
[12:17] <james_w> stefanlsd: not sure
[12:17] <stefanlsd> james_w: kk. will look at it
[12:18] <james_w> actually, someone was looking at it, I thought it was you
[12:18] <directhex> woo, jsp?
[12:18] <stefanlsd> james_w: umm. not that i am aware of. hehe
[12:19] <james_w> we can sync
[12:19] <james_w> *unless* the patches that the maintainer disabled in the new version are needed
[12:20] <stefanlsd> james_w: kk. checking. mm. i need to install ant for the debuild to work.
[12:45] <directhex> stefanlsd, which is reasonable enough if it uses an ant clean target inside the debian/rules clean rule
[12:46] <stefanlsd> directhex: yeah sure. runs an ant clean.   just contaminating my nice installation with this java stuff :P
[12:46] <directhex> stefanlsd, i know that feeling :|
[12:47] <directhex> stefanlsd, i wonder if nant would work for the sake of the clean rule, though ;)
[13:10] <nxvl> dholbach: i pinged some LoCos
[13:12] <dholbach> nxvl: excellent - thanks!
[13:26] <primes2h> hello to all.
[13:26] <primes2h> I need an ack for a SRU in Hardy and Gutsy for this bug #294502, please.
[13:28] <primes2h> could someone help me, please? :-)
[13:54] <quadrispro> anyone on Bug 317095?
[13:58] <james_w> stefanlsd: uploaded, thanks for your hard work
[14:02] <stefanlsd> james_w: thx. np. jspwiki. i see they dont ever pull in the patches, you added the dpatch to do that, but im not sure its needed as I cant see where they were ever introduced. the debian dsc builds fine thou.
[14:03] <james_w> stefanlsd: yeah, dpatch was missing, but in the last-but-one upload to debian they disabled the calls to dpatch in debian/rules, so we can sync
[14:04] <james_w> my only concern is that it all just looked a bit weird, so I would appreciate you checking that the patches in debian/patches aren't needed
[14:05] <stefanlsd> james_w: k. i had a look at the patches. not a java expert thou as to what they were actually used for. i'll ping one of the java guys to have a look for us.
[14:07] <mok0> Huh?? Newest version on remote site is 1.03, local version is 0.147
[14:07] <mok0> cadabra: Newer version (1.03) available on remote site
[14:08] <mok0> ah
[14:08] <mok0> stupid me
[14:12] <stefanlsd> james_w: looks like the first one is to do with json and jabsorb.  looks like jabsorb is a alternative compatible lib for json.  it looks like jspwiki still uses json (/lib/jsonrpc-1.0.jar)  http://jabsorb.org/UpgradeGuide
[14:23] <james_w> stefanlsd: yeah, "* Removed XML-RPC capability for now." suggests that the patch is not needed
[14:24] <james_w> I'm a bit concerned by the second though, as with that it will be building against .jars shipped in the package, but presumably won't be running against those ones
[14:26]  * slytherin stares at the mention of jars shipped with the source package. >:o
[14:28] <slytherin> james_w: stefanlsd: which package are you discussing by the way?
[14:29] <james_w> slytherin: jspwiki
[14:30] <slytherin> james_w: should have guessed it. I am not sure why does Debian package contain jar files in .orig.tar.gz. I am tempted to file a bug in Debian. :-)
[14:31] <mok0> I see lots of packages with missing license clauses in the source files. How serious it that? It is more the exception that the rule that upstream authors have included it
[14:43] <ScottK> mok0: Not serious enough to prevent inclusion in the archive if there's a full copy of $LICENSE in the tarball.
[14:44] <mok0> ScottK, I've been following that policy.
[14:44] <ScottK> It's good to edcuate upstream.
[14:45] <ScottK> educate even
[14:45] <mok0> ScottK, yeah, but I've also seen upstream bitch about the "rabid debian developers"
[14:45] <ScottK> Good thing this is Ubuntu then.
[14:45] <mok0> heh
[14:45] <ScottK> There was a time when FSF suggested a full copy of the GPL in every file.
[14:46] <ScottK> License headers aren't so bad.
[14:46] <mok0> ScottK, I agree, the short clause is ok
[14:46] <mok0> ScottK: the full GPL in every file is perhaps a bit over the top
[14:47] <ScottK> "If someone grabs a copy of a file from your project and reuses it elsewhere, wouldn't you want people to know where it came from." seems to work OKish.
[14:47] <liw> scottK, FSF suggested full GPL in each source? when? I haven't ever seen that, but I admit I've only followed GNU stuff since 1989
[14:48] <ScottK> liw: It may just be an urban legend.  That's what I recall being told.
[14:48] <liw> ok
[14:48] <pochu> 1989 -> that's when I was 1!
[14:48]  * ScottK lived most of that year in Keflavik, Iceland.
[14:49] <dholbach> pochu: don't you make liw feel old!
[14:49] <dholbach> ScottK: what did you do there?
[14:49] <pochu> haha
[14:49] <mok0> pochu: kiddie
[14:49] <pochu> ScottK: you can buy Iceland now ;-)
[14:49] <ScottK> dholbach: I was in the US Navy (there used to be a base there).
[14:49] <dholbach> ScottK: ah ok
[14:49] <dholbach> ScottK: did you get to see a bit of the country? :)
[14:50] <ScottK> dholbach: Yes.  Saw quite a bit of it.
[14:50] <dholbach> cool
[14:50] <ScottK> Almost fell off a glacier once.
[14:52] <mok0> RainCT: There are 2 packages in "Updated packages" on REVU, but neither of them are in Ubuntu (anymore). What gives?
[14:52] <mok0> RainCT: Can
[14:52] <mok0> RainCT: Can't we do away with that section?
[14:55] <ScottK-desktop> mok0: There are times when that's helpful.
[14:55] <mok0> ScottK, hm, ok
[14:56] <mok0> ScottK, not when the uploads are in the wrong category, though
[14:56] <ScottK> True, but there are times when I've worked with someone on an updated package and it's convenient to have them throw it on REVU even if it's not the official way.
[14:57] <mok0> ScottK, Wasn't that before the PPA days?
[14:58] <mok0> Of course you can make use of the REVU  comment system
[14:58] <ScottK> mok0: No.  I don't consider PPAs very good for that.
[15:08] <bddebian> Heya gang
[15:08] <ScottK> heya bddebian.
[15:09] <bddebian> Hi ScottK
[15:09] <mok0> Do we have a drop-in replacement for jackd? I am not very knowledgeable about multimedia systems
[15:09] <ScottK> mok0: I'd suggest ask in #ubuntu-studio.  They know all that stuff.
[15:10] <mok0> ScottK, thanks I'll try that
[15:27] <dholbach> RainCT: ubuntu-dev-tools is not installable right now (sb-release vs lsb-release) - is it OK if I upload your latest change now?
[15:35] <dholbach> RainCT: done
[15:38] <RizR> hello everyone. just going through ubuntu packaging process and bug fix process
[15:38] <RizR> cant really get my head around harvest. it lists bugs - yes. but why is it this way?
[15:38] <RizR> anyone got couple of secs spare? :-)
[15:38] <anakron> Hi all
[15:39] <anakron> if i make a build of a package, a warning but be considered?
[15:39] <gaspa> RizR: what's the question, in particular? (what do you mean by  "this way"?)
[15:39] <anakron> warning, `debian/python-milter/DEBIAN/control' contains user-defined field `Python-Version'
[15:40] <anakron> or i can say that was built whitout problems
[15:43] <RizR> hello everyone. just going through ubuntu packaging process and bug fix process
[15:43] <RizR> cant really get my head around harvest. it lists bugs - yes. but why is it this way
[15:43] <RizR> anyone got couple of secs spare? :-)
[15:44] <gaspa> RizR: (i already answered) what do you mean by  "this way"?
[15:44] <RizR> sorry if someone spoke earlier. i had added whole freenode in ignore list by mistake.
[15:44] <RizR> sorry.
[15:44] <RizR> gaspa: ok, I'm not clear or the purpose of harvest if bugs are tracked in launchpad
[15:45] <RizR> of the purpose...
[15:45] <james_w> RizR: it highlights "low hanging fruit"
[15:45] <savvas> it tries to show all the bugs that are probably easy to fix (I think)
[15:46] <james_w> RizR: there are lots of lists of bugs of a certain class, e.g. maintainer script problems, or patches attached, and harvest aggregates them
[15:47] <RizR> james_w: can we filter out the number of bugs displayed? lets say just display from last week or just from certain module or upstream code base? or may be from ubuntu only?
[15:47] <gaspa> RizR: and have them all grouped by package is an helpful thing as well
[15:48] <james_w> RizR: if you go to the index there is a latest items display
[15:48] <james_w> RizR: there are plans to improve the interface of harvest soon
[15:48] <spitfire> Does anyone know how to use custom CFLAGS in pbuilder? Globally, WITHOUT modifying rules for every package.
[15:49] <RizR> james_w: ok :-) I get the idea. its just the the size of the thing makes my firefox go bonkers
[15:50] <savvas> spitfire: I don't think you can
[15:51] <spitfire> savvas: you're sure?
[15:51] <spitfire> apt-build can do that?
[15:51] <spitfire> Why wouldn't pbuilder be able?
[15:51] <spitfire> *apt-build can do that.
[15:54] <savvas> I'm not sure, I said I think :)
[15:56] <ScottK> spitfire: --debbuildopts will pass arguments to dpkg-buildpackage inside the pbuilder chroot, so if you know what to tell dpkg-buildpackage, then you might do it.
[15:56] <savvas> spitfire: maybe with --debuildopts and -R argument?
[15:56] <spitfire> ScottK do you have idea what to pass?
[15:57] <stefanlsd> james_w: i spoke with deb maintainer of jspwiki. yeah, they dont use the patches.  they use the includes jars. for 2.8.1 he has made seperate packages that will use /usr/share/java and the debian jars
[15:58] <james_w> stefanlsd: cool
[15:58] <ScottK> spitfire: Depending on the package, you might use -Rrules-file
[15:58] <james_w> stefanlsd: should we merge the current version then?
[15:58] <ScottK> spitfire: See man dpkg-buildpackage for details.
[15:58] <spitfire> ScottK depending on the package.
[15:58] <stefanlsd> james_w: yeah, sync should be ok
[15:58] <spitfire> ok
[15:59] <james_w> stefanlsd: er, yeah, sync
[15:59] <stefanlsd> james_w: nodnod :)
[15:59] <savvas> spitfire: wait, there are some environment variables
[15:59] <james_w> stefanlsd: want to request it?
[15:59] <stefanlsd> james_w: sure
[15:59] <spitfire> savvas: where?
[16:00] <savvas> spitfire: http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/jaunty/en/man1/dpkg-buildpackage.1.html#toptoc4 go to the "Environment" topic
[16:00] <spitfire> ScottK: haven't found anything that looks usable,
[16:00] <spitfire> savvas: thx!
[16:00]  * ScottK doesn't have additional ideas on the topic.
[16:01] <DktrKranz> spitfire: IIRC they're managed with some environment variables, I don't remember if pbuilder inherits them from current session or not, anyway man dpkg-buildpackage has a full list of such variables
[16:01] <savvas> spitfire: it doesn't say how to use them, and it mentions that not all packages honour it. but I suppose it's: CFLAGS="blah" pbuilder command
[16:02] <spitfire> savvas: or CFLAGS="blah" in .pbuilderrc
[16:02] <spitfire> thanks
[16:02] <savvas> well I don't know, perhaps :)
[16:03] <RizR> one more q. in harvest i see different status for bugs (resolved-upstream, patches, bitesize etc). They're pretty obvious and I think most of those require re-package the module after including the patch provided. Am I right in thinking that?
[16:04] <james_w> RizR: often yes
[16:05] <RizR> james_w: can I find a list of all statuses somewhere on wiki/launchpad plz?
[16:05] <stefanlsd> james_w: https://launchpad.net/bugs/317147
[16:05] <james_w> stefanlsd: cool, thank you
[16:05] <stefanlsd> james_w: np!
[16:06] <stefanlsd> cya guys, heading home :)
[16:06] <james_w> RizR: you mean bug statuses?
[16:06] <RizR> james_w: yes
[16:06] <james_w> https://help.launchpad.net/Bugs/Statuses
[16:07] <savvas> or https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Tags :)
[16:08] <savvas> (talking about the "bitesize" mentioned before)
[16:09] <anakron> hi all
[16:09] <anakron> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nautilus/+bug/315156
[16:09] <cody-somerville> nxvl, why did you ack an SRU after I asked questions about it?
[16:09] <anakron> what do you think about this
[16:09] <anakron> its right to take it out or not
[16:10] <cody-somerville> ...
[16:10] <cody-somerville> You did it to three of the SRUs I was taking care of!
[16:11] <RizR> james_w: thanks.
[16:11] <nxvl> cody-somerville: yup, i worked on the updates, so i knew those questions
[16:11] <nxvl> :D
[16:12] <anakron> ...
[16:12] <cody-somerville> nxvl, Some of them were things *wrong* with the debdiff
[16:13] <anakron> someone can answer me?
[16:13] <savvas> what does SRU stand for?
[16:13] <ScottK> anakron: #ubuntu-desktop might be a better place to ask.
[16:13] <ScottK> savvas: Stable Release Update.
[16:13] <cody-somerville> anakron, yes
[16:14] <anakron> ok thanks
[16:14] <savvas> ScottK: and ACK means acknowledged?
[16:14] <ScottK> Yes.
[16:14] <savvas> cool, thanks
[16:14] <cody-somerville> nxvl, Not to mention I feel it was rude. The applicant acknowledged my points and said he was going to work on them
[16:14] <cody-somerville> and then you went ahead and acked the SRUs
[16:14] <nxvl> cody-somerville: you are right, i apologise for that
[16:15] <nxvl> cody-somerville: i was thinking on pinging you, but you weren't here still and i forgot about that
[16:15] <nxvl> my fault
[16:15] <cody-somerville> I appreciate the apology
[16:15] <nxvl> but yes, on the server team we already test that
[16:15] <nxvl> and we needed that sru's
[16:15] <nxvl> also the fix was worked closely with upstream
[16:16] <nxvl> and zul sponsored those
[16:16] <nxvl> so they have been well checked and testes
[16:16] <nxvl> tested
[16:16] <cody-somerville> I don't care. It needs to follow the SRU policy like every other SRU.
[16:16] <nxvl> but yes, it was rude and that was my fault
[16:16] <nxvl> yes, that i know
[16:17] <nxvl> and it's following, the only issue here was that i was rude on what i did
[16:17] <cody-somerville> And I had questions/concerns about the SRU
[16:17] <nxvl> right
[16:17] <nxvl> you can de-ack them if you feel it will be better
[16:18] <nxvl> so we avoid problems/discussions
[16:18] <nxvl> i will try to ping you before doing so next time, i promise
[16:18] <cody-somerville> nxvl, Please send an e-mail to the archive admins alerting them to your mistake.
[16:18] <nxvl> cody-somerville: well, it haven't go trought sru-verification still
[16:19] <nxvl> cody-somerville: so archive admins aren't still involved, right?
[16:20] <cody-somerville> nxvl, sommers did upload already
[16:20] <nxvl> zul did
[16:20] <cody-somerville> Right, his sponsor
[16:20] <nxvl> sommer has no upload rights
[16:20] <nxvl> ok i will ping them
[16:21] <nxvl> is there a ML for arc admins
[16:21] <nxvl> ?
[16:21] <joaopinto> from an archive admin perspective what would be the difference if nxvl acked and cody-somerville had no participation on the verification ?
[16:21] <cody-somerville> joaopinto, Because nxvl is retracting his ack
[16:22] <joaopinto> cody-somerville, that is not my question, what would be the difference from the procedure perspective if nxvl acked before you looked into the sru ?
[16:23] <james_w> nxvl, cody-somerville: I believe there were rejected last night
[16:23] <james_w> they were, sorry
[16:23] <nxvl> i'm de-acking to avoind issues with cody-somerville since what i did was rude
[16:23] <joaopinto> cody-somerville, he is not retracting because it feels is ACK was wrong per si, but just because it is wrong relating to your previous action
[16:23] <nxvl> james_w: so i don't need to ping the arch admins
[16:24] <nxvl> so i'm removing my vote until cody-somerville has all his concerns resulved
[16:24] <nxvl> resolved
[16:24] <james_w> nxvl: I don't think so, check the unapproved queue
[16:24] <nxvl> joaopinto: exactly, but there is any difference?
[16:25] <nxvl> joaopinto: i think keeping good relationships and respecting the community and procedures is as important as the technical quality
[16:26] <cody-somerville> joaopinto, I imagine the archive admins would have caught some of the same mistakes I did resulting in the SRU getting thrown back and so I would have gotten involved regardless.
[16:26] <joaopinto> nxvl, right, but you don't need to roll backup a process which was properly followed to fix "relations", relations are resolved on a 1 to 1 basis, and that's what you are doing by acknowledging the fault
[16:26] <nxvl> yes, but it doesn't resolve/answer cody-somerville's concerns
[16:27] <joaopinto> ok
[16:41] <RainCT> dholbach: now it's too late, but yes, it's OK :)
[16:43] <phaidros> hi, still on packages.ubuntu.com search servers are listed which do not mirror anymore.
[16:43] <phaidros> http://packages.ubuntu.com/jaunty/all/calendarserver/download
[16:43] <phaidros> look for debian.charite.de
[16:43] <phaidros> this is since ages, where to report this?
[16:43] <phaidros> if not here?
[17:13] <Ahmuck> good morning
[17:54] <afflux> Hi! I'm unable to rebuild matplotlib, because it build-depends on python-enthought-traits (src:enthought-traits) has been removed from debian in favor of python-traits (which has a transitional python-enthought-traits package). python-traits, however, is not in Ubuntu. What is the procedure for this? Should I request a sync for it?
[17:55] <spitfire> how to disable tests when bulding package?
[17:55] <pochu> afflux: likely
[17:55] <pochu> spitfire: check if they are run in debian/rules, and if so, disable them there :)
[17:56] <spitfire> pochu: I use pbuilder, is there a way to handle it internally?
[17:56] <pochu> don't think so
[17:56] <spitfire> Or do I have to edit rules manually?
[17:56] <pochu> the latter
[17:56] <spitfire> the latter?
[17:57] <spitfire> ok
[18:02] <james_w> the package should repect DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=notest
[18:02] <james_w> or nocheck, I always forget
[18:04] <Laney> evening guvnors
[18:07] <spitfire> james_w: i found this: ifeq ($(with_check),yes)
[18:07] <DaSkreech> Hallo
[18:08] <spitfire> so WITH_CHECK=0 ?
[18:08] <DaSkreech>  how would I find out if Mars Land Of No Mercy is being packaged ?
[18:08] <james_w> spitfire: with_check will be set somewhere else in the file probably
[18:08] <james_w> hey Laney
[18:08] <spitfire> packages.debian.org?
[18:08] <spitfire> james_w: nope.
[18:08] <spitfire> didn't found it.
[18:08] <DaSkreech> spitfire: Me?
[18:09] <spitfire> DaSkreech: you.
[18:09] <DaSkreech> Thanks
[18:09] <spitfire> packages.debian.org?
[18:09] <james_w> spitfire: odd
[18:09] <spitfire> packages.ubuntu.com
[18:09] <james_w> spitfire: does the package use cdbs?
[18:09] <spitfire> james_w: I'll pastebin it.
[18:09] <spitfire> It's gcc
[18:09] <james_w> oh
[18:09] <spitfire> yes
[18:10] <james_w> afflux: yeah, request a sync if it's not in jaunty.
[18:10] <james_w> afflux: it's possible it's in the NEW queue though
[18:10] <afflux> james_w: where can I check that again? ;)
[18:11] <spitfire> james_w: how do I deal with that?
[18:11] <james_w> spitfire: no idea
[18:11] <james_w> afflux: I can never remember the url
[18:11] <spitfire> james_w: but it takes AGES:/
[18:12] <spitfire> http://pastebin.com/f2e816b73
[18:12] <afflux> james_w: ah, that one maybe? https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+queue
[18:12] <spitfire> ^^maybe you could find somehing actually useful in it..
[18:12] <spitfire> afflux: jaunty
[18:12] <spitfire> not intrepid
[18:12] <afflux> doh.
[18:13] <afflux> looks good
[18:13] <james_w> afflux: that's it
[18:13] <afflux> james_w: thanks then
[18:15] <james_w> spitfire: checkout #
[18:15] <james_w> #
[18:15] <james_w> include debian/rules.defs
[18:15] <james_w> #
[18:16] <james_w> include debian/rules.parameters
[18:16] <spitfire> ok
[18:16] <DaSkreech> spitfire: If it's not packaged by debian what is the liklihood that it will get packaged for Ubuntu ?
[18:16] <spitfire> so i should comment out these finctions? really?
[18:17] <spitfire> DaSkreech:
[18:17] <spitfire> yeah
[18:17] <spitfire> look for packages.ubuntu.com
[18:17] <spitfire> But it isn;t likely
[18:17] <DaSkreech> ok
[18:17] <DaSkreech> there was a bug filed for it in LP
[18:17] <spitfire> When it's not in debian it rpobably wont be in ubuntu.
[18:17] <spitfire> But try.
[18:18] <DaSkreech> ok thanks
[18:18] <spitfire> DaSkreech: it takes looong tim sometimes.
[18:18] <DaSkreech> I realise the bug was filed for 7.10
[18:18] <DaSkreech> might make it for 9.10 :)
[18:25] <karooga> hi, i'm trying package an app which doesn't have the licences in the original tar.gz.  Can't get hold of upstream... what options do I have?
[18:27] <maxb> karooga: Doesn't have the licence full text, or doesn't have any declaration of licence at all?
[18:28] <karooga> maxb: doesn't have full licence text.
[18:28] <maxb> Is the named licence a sufficiently common one that you can download it from another source and be confident it's the right licence?
[18:29] <karooga> maxb: it is -  LGPL
[18:29] <coppro> does it say what version?
[18:30] <karooga> max: but I understand that the orig tar gz has to include the actual licence for it to be distributable.  This is not the case for the deb package though.
[18:33] <karooga> coppro:   >= LGPL 2
[18:41]  * RainCT rofl because of xkcd
[18:41] <ScottK> If the desired license is documented, but just a full copy isn't provided, you can repack the tarball and add it.
[18:41]  * ScottK has done that before.
[18:43] <nhandler> RainCT: The xkcd comic for today gave me a great idea
[18:45] <RainCT> nhandler: which one?
[18:46] <nhandler> RainCT: The voice synthesizer one. One day, I connected to my computer (which was connected to my iPod speakers at full volume) and started to play the Start Wars movie. It scared the crap out of my mom (who was working at home)
[18:46] <karooga> ScottK: presumably I'd upload (to launchpad or sourceforge etc) and then reference that site as the download tar.gz?
[18:47] <afflux> pochu: do I have to give some specific reason for syncing the new packages?
[18:48] <RainCT> lol
[18:51] <pochu> afflux: saying they are necessary for mpl should be enough
[18:51] <afflux> alright
[18:51] <afflux> thanks
[18:54] <nhandler> Does anyone here know why uscan would detect foo-current.tar.gz as being newer than foo-x.y.tar.gz? Does it check when the files were last modified?
[18:55] <mok0> nhandler: it's the natural sorting order
[18:56] <nhandler> mok0: Ok, so I guess I'll just update my watch file to require the version to begin with a number
[18:56] <mok0> nhandler: yeah do that
[19:19] <karooga> ScottK still there?
[19:19] <ScottK> Sort of
[19:20] <karooga> ScottK: dunno if you saw my last response? ;-)
[19:20] <ScottK> karooga: Just did.
[19:21] <ScottK> No, the repacked tarball is just used within Ubuntu then.  If it's a new package you use it in your upload to REVU.  You'll want to include a get-orig-source rule to recreate the tarball in the future.
[19:21] <karooga> ScottK: would uploading repackaged tarball make me upstream?
[19:32]  * jpds mind-boggles at http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/104943/ .
[19:33] <ScottK> karooga: No.
[19:35] <karooga> ScottK: Ok, so all references in the debian package directory refer to the original tarball (copyright, control etc).  Only in the get-orig-source in rules I do some magic packaging to create the 'good' tarball?
[19:36] <ScottK> Copyright is original.  All the rest is refer to repacked version.
[19:36]  * ScottK goes off for a while.
[19:36] <karooga> ScottK: I could just copy the relevant licence from /usr/share/apps/LICENSES and retarball?
[19:38] <ScottK> /usr/share/common-licenses or some authoritative source.
[19:39] <karooga> ScottK: great thanks for the help. :-)
[21:01] <jreinhardt> Hi everybody. Can someone please take a look on this package on REVU? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=pgfplots
[21:02] <jreinhardt> I (think I) fixed all comments from the first review
[21:03] <jreinhardt> But I am not sure whether i got the watch file and the tex install part right
[21:38] <vorian> is there any kind of refernce on installing .xpm icons?
[21:38] <RainCT> vorian: what problem do you have?
[21:39] <vorian> debhelper is not installing icons from debian/icons
[21:39] <vorian> i have the .install file set up correctly
[21:39] <vorian> i've never messed with .xpm before
[21:41] <RAOF> In what way is it not installing them?  They don't appear in the deb?
[21:41] <vorian> debhelper is not finding them
[21:43] <RAOF> Want to post the source pkg?
[21:44] <vorian> it's amarok
[21:44] <vorian> so, we use that kde4.mk voodoo
[21:44] <RainCT> vorian: it's like installing any other file
[21:44] <vorian> i'm trying something else atm
[21:49] <vorian> RainCT: yeah, it does install every other file, but fails on that line
[21:49] <vorian> let me see what happen with this build
[21:49] <RainCT> vorian: which line is it?
[21:50] <vorian> it's not in the current package
[21:50] <vorian> this will be new
[21:50] <RainCT> vorian: I mean, paste it here :P
[21:51] <vorian> http://paste.ubuntu.com/104980/
[21:53] <RainCT> weird, that should work (as long as it's allowed to mix both styles of lines in debian/install)
[21:54] <vorian> we shall see
[22:28] <cbhl> Hi, I'm wondering about bug 178895 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audacity/+bug/178895); someone has commented that audacity 1.3.6-2 from Debian should fix the issue, but I notice that we're past DebianImportFreeze. What can/needs to be done to see if we can get audacity 1.3.6-2 in Jaunty?
[22:32] <vorian> cbhl: the package can still be sync'd if you file a request
[22:32] <vorian> import freeze simply means that auto-syncs stop
[22:32] <cbhl> Do you have any tips as to how I can get started on filing a request? For example, do I need to open a bug report?
[22:33] <vorian> sure, hold on
[22:33] <nhandler> cbhl: Use requestsync from ubuntu-dev-tools
[22:33] <vorian> cbhl: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SyncRequestProcess
[22:33] <vorian> cbhl: the tool nhandler mentions makes it semi-automatic
[22:34] <vorian> the link i posted explains the reasoning
[22:34] <cbhl> vorian: okay, thank you -- I'll take a look at that right now
[22:34] <nhandler> cbhl: If this is your first sync request, you should try doing it by hand so you get the experience
[22:34] <nhandler> However, the tool does save a lot of time if you are filing a lot of requests
[22:36] <cbhl> Hm, it seems a request has already been filed.
[22:36] <cbhl> Okay, thanks for your time.
[23:04] <mrooney> If my application is compatible with Python 2.5 and 2.6, should my pycompat be just 2.5 or something else?
[23:14] <pochu> mrooney: >= 2.5, but you probably want XS-Python-Versions instead of pycompat
[23:16] <mrooney> pochu: I am using that in control, should I not have a pycompat then?
[23:20] <pochu> mrooney: it's not necessary, no
[23:20] <mrooney> pochu: okay thanks, I'll that file!
[23:21] <mrooney> I'll remove, that is
[23:33] <rexbron> any motu's interested in improving support for firewire-based sound cards? Please revu http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=libffado Thanks!
[23:44] <mrooney> I was told I needed to add the gpl header to my `copyright`, does http://pastebin.com/f1794b68a look right?
[23:48] <mrooney> actually, I think it was supposed to go in the License section, what about http://pastebin.com/f39e45710 ?
[23:49] <vorian> mrooney: that is better, you need a trailing line after that header that looks like
[23:49] <vorian> http://paste.ubuntu.com/105010/
[23:49] <vorian> on line 17 and 18
[23:51] <mrooney> vorian: oh okay, the link to it for the packaging itself isn't enough?
[23:52] <vorian> license header, then where to find the full text
[23:52] <vorian> think of it in those terms
[23:53] <vorian> you will also need the CC license header by the looks of your copyright page
[23:53] <mrooney> vorian: yeah, I think you reviewed my package (wxbanker), so I am going through and making all the changes now
[23:53] <vorian> ah, ok :)
[23:54] <mrooney> I have done everything except the CC license header since I am not sure where to find that, and updating the standards version to 3.8
[23:55] <asomething_> do you need the full CC license as there's no copy in /usr/share/common-licenses/ ?
[23:56] <pochu> yes
[23:56] <mrooney> asomething_: that's easier, I know where to find that :)
[23:58] <mrooney> pochu: so do I put http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/legalcode in the copyright file under license, and how do I separate that from the GPL above?