[00:27] <maxb> EagleScreen: Yes, 0.13 is newer than 0.4
[00:28] <maxb> EagleScreen: When you build a package, it builds in a minimal environment - you have to declare Build-Depends in the control file to get anything beyond that limited subset
[00:32] <EagleScreen> i will review Build-Depends
[00:33] <psycose> hi, using the LP PPA, the following Makefile command @echo -e $(GPR_PROD) >> gnatgpr.prod  executed via the debian/rules script displays "-e" in the file instead of undestanding the echo -e option !! when i build the package on my system i don't have this behaviour any tips ? thanks
[00:39] <RAOF> psycose: -e isn't POSIX shell; the PPA build environment has /bin/sh set to dash, which doesn't implement -e
[00:40] <psycose> RAOF: ok thanks fr the answer, i'm building again without it ... thanks
[00:40] <RAOF> You could call /usr/bin/printf, or somesuch, if you really need to use the escape characters.
[00:47] <EagleScreen> this is the debian/control file http://pastebin.ca/1326730
[00:49] <EagleScreen> i am only rebuilding a .deb the package to can install it in Ubuntu from ppa, it is a pacakage from Guadalinex v5, based on Ubuntu Hardy.
[00:58] <rdancer> which key server can i use to upload the PGP keys? keyserver.ubuntu.com gives an error
[01:46] <EagleScreen> is it possible to upload packages for Debian sid/unstable to a ppa?
[02:15] <vadi2> Is there a page that explains what PPAs are?
[02:15] <vadi2> Only found one that explains how to get started with one... hoping to have a resource to point to for users who haven't heard of them
[02:19] <EagleScreen> shouldn't ppa build system satisfy build-deps that are in Ubuntu repository automatically?
[02:35] <jamesh> EagleScreen: if your package lists the dependencies it should, yes.
[02:37] <EagleScreen> i have a package that fails and it has build-deps in debian/control
[02:38] <jamesh> what is the build URL?
[02:40] <EagleScreen> are you meaning the log?
[02:40] <EagleScreen> this is my ppa https://launchpad.net/~eaglescreen/+archive/ppa
[02:41] <EagleScreen> as you can see mount-systray - 0.4-1guada2ubuntu1~ppa1  failed to build
[02:41] <jamesh> was thinking of a page like https://launchpad.net/~eaglescreen/+archive/ppa/+build/857280
[02:43] <jamesh> the error in the log file says it couldn't find gnome-doc-utils
[02:44] <jamesh> does your package build depend on it?
[02:45] <EagleScreen> let me see
[02:47] <EagleScreen> jamesh look http://pastebin.ca/1326791
[02:47] <mrooney> Is there a good way to figure out which of my PPAs are failing to find public keys?
[02:48] <mrooney> For example if I have 10 and apt-get gives 4 errors (then suggests running apt-get to fix it :), I don't know which 4 those are
[02:48] <jamesh> EagleScreen: you don't have gnome-doc-utils in Build-Depends, and that is the error in your log file, so I'd try adding it.
[02:48] <EagleScreen> that package is not listed in build-deps, but that package is build in another distribution with this control file
[02:49] <EagleScreen> i am only porting it to Ubuntu from an distirbution based on Ubuntu hardy
[02:49] <EagleScreen> i havent done any change in the control file
[02:49] <jamesh> EagleScreen: perhaps gnome-doc-utils is a dependency of one of those other packages on Debian
[02:51] <EagleScreen> then now on intrepid one of these build-deps depends on gnome-doc-utils inst it?
[02:51] <jamesh> EagleScreen: Intrepid is based on a Debian unstable snapshot from more than six months ago, so it isn't too surprising if you find some changes.
[02:52] <EagleScreen> i used to think that dependences of dependences was resolved
[02:52] <EagleScreen> now i see that not for build-depends
[02:52] <jamesh> explicitly build-depending on gnome-doc-utils should solve your immediate problem.
[02:53] <EagleScreen> i will include it, thanks
[02:55] <jamesh> mrooney: are you talking about warnings from apt about unknown repo signing keys?
[02:57] <EagleScreen> i have the same problem of signing keys with my ppa
[02:57] <EagleScreen> and also with the ppa of packagekit team
[02:57] <mrooney> jamesh: yeah
[02:58] <mrooney> jamesh: I understand why (new signed PPAs) but I don't understand how I am easily supposed to figure out which ones and then easily get them
[02:58] <jamesh> mrooney: the launchpad page for the PPA should tell you.
[02:59] <jamesh> so for example, if you have http://ppa.launchpad.net/bzr/ubuntu in your sources.list, look at https://launchpad.net/~bzr/+archive
[02:59] <mrooney> jamesh: yeah, my question was "easily" :)
[02:59] <jamesh> you can see which keys you've installed with "sudo apt-key list"
[02:59] <mrooney> I have to translate that for 10 PPAs and manually review it
[03:01] <mrooney> do you know if there are any plans to make this process easier in the future? I am not worried about myself so much but this is already confusing tons of people online, and I worry it will hurt the number of people able to use my PPA
[03:01] <jamesh> mrooney: you could just import all the keys corresponding to "NO_PUBKEY" errors from "aptitude update"
[03:01] <jamesh> if you trust your network connection
[03:01] <mrooney> hmm
[03:02] <mrooney> ubuntu needs apt-ppa:// links or something :)
[03:03] <mrooney> Anyway it just feels like the number of steps to use a PPA doubled
[03:04] <EagleScreen> jamesh look http://pastebin.ca/1326812
[03:08] <jamesh> EagleScreen: looks like those warning lines have been truncated
[03:08] <jamesh> EagleScreen: they should continue to tell you which public key is missing
[03:09] <EagleScreen> NO_PUBKEY 9BFC84D3205358CF and NO_PUBKEY 01E3FE37B30386B1
[03:09] <jamesh> so load those keys into apt's keyring?
[03:11] <EagleScreen> it can be done with software-properties?
[03:12] <jamesh> https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA#Adding%20a%20PPA%20to%20your%20Ubuntu%20repositories has instructions (and is linked from each PPA page)
[04:56] <kriyas1> how to checkout in bzr
[04:57] <spiv> bzr checkout URL
[04:57] <RAOF> kriyas1: This depends; generally you want to do something like "bzr branch <something>", where something is either a url, an existing local branch (directory), or some other spec, like "lp:do-plugins"
[04:58] <RAOF> If you know the difference between checkout and branch, and know you want checkout, then spiv's answer is more correct ;)
[05:00] <spiv> kriyas1: http://doc.bazaar-vcs.org/latest/ might help you
[05:35] <error404notfound> hi!
[05:35] <error404notfound> can someone tell me how can I create a private bzr team branch?
[05:35] <spiv> jml: ^
[05:36] <jml> error404notfound: you need to chat with bac, who can sort you out.
[05:36] <jml> error404notfound: at this time of day, it's best to email him.
[05:37] <error404notfound> any idea around what time he comes online?
[05:37] <thumper> US eastern time
[05:37] <error404notfound> yes, but what time, 10am? 3pm? :P
[05:38] <thumper> error404notfound: day time
[05:39] <error404notfound> hmm, okay, lemme do some calculation, in a mean while can someone pm me him email adress? coz I can't find it in his /whois
[05:39] <thumper> https://launchpad.net/~bac (at a guess)
[05:40] <error404notfound> aahhhh, its still 10 hours for him to wake up, I guess I'll email him. Thanks guys..
[06:02] <error404notfound> https://staging.launchpad.net/ is getting a cleanup or its down?
[06:07] <jml> spm: ^^
[09:39] <maxb> Some recent hppa builds have failed to upload with a "Duplicated ancestry" assertion failure. What does that mean?
[10:03] <IntuitiveNipple> Is there any way to upload apport bug reports using HTTP (not HTTPS) so as to analyse a problem during the upload that causes it to fail?
[10:34] <NCommander> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~michael-owens/phoronix-test-suite/motu/files - anyone know why I can't access this?
[10:49] <TeTeT> when using launchpadlib, how do I use edge instead of staging?
[10:51] <TeTeT> hmm, it's in the doc, silly me
[10:51] <TeTeT> STAGING_SERVICE_ROOT with EDGE_SERVICE_ROOT
[10:55] <jpds> NCommander: Hmm, I can.
[12:36] <kiko-afk> NCommander, what happens when you load it?
[13:56] <snikker> i've a problem with wron package signature (gpg) in ppa, can you help me?
[13:57] <snikker> *wrong
[13:58] <AlexC_> snikker, you're best off actually asking your question
[14:02] <snikker> AlexC_:  i'm tring to install digikam package from ppa, i've add the gpg key to my keyring, but the package manager say thet it's ot authenticated....
[14:02] <snikker> *it's not authenticated
[14:03] <AlexC_> snikker, I can't help unfortunately, was just helping to get better help =)
[14:03] <snikker> AlexC_:  oh, ok... i hope that someone can help me :)
[14:09] <maxb> AlexC_: You need to re-run 'apt-get update' after adding a key, I think
[14:09] <maxb> oops
[14:09] <maxb> snikker: ^
[14:09] <AlexC_> =)
[14:15] <snikker> maxb: i'e update the list with the refresh button in synaptic... it should be the same thing...
[14:17] <error404notfound> bac: there?
[14:17] <bac> error404notfound: hi
[14:17] <error404notfound> bac: hi! how are you?
[14:18] <bac> error404notfound: fine thanks.
[14:19] <error404notfound> bac: in the morning, infact mid-night according to your time, I ask here that is it possible to create a private team branch, and people told me to contact you, I emailed you from launchpadm wondering if you have something new for me...
[14:19] <bac> error404notfound: i was just replying to your email, in fact
[14:19] <error404notfound> bac: hmmm, guess I willw ait for the reply :D
[14:19] <error404notfound> bac: thanks..
[14:22] <bac> snikker: are you still having trouble?
[14:23] <bac> snikker: adding the key to *your* keyring is not enough.  you have to use 'apt-key' to add it to the keyring apt uses
[14:23] <snikker> bac: yes i've do it...
[14:24] <snikker> bac: i've used this command:   gpg --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com --recv-keys BF860D3661FBBBA575BE617F0BF0F083E353B3E9 && gpg --export -a BF860D3661FBBBA575BE617F0BF0F083E353B3E9 | sudo apt-key add -
[14:24] <bac> snikker: that looks right, assuming the key is the correct one.  if you do 'sudo apt-key list' do you see it?
[14:26] <snikker> bak: the key is taken from ppa digikam page....  after "sudo apt-key list", i can see the digikam key
[14:26] <snikker> bac: ^
[14:28] <bac> snikker: if the key is properly added to apt-key, you
[14:28] <bac> and you've run 'sudo apt-get update', then it *should* work.
[14:29] <snikker> bac: i've tried also with 'sudo apt-get update', but with no result
[14:29] <snikker> bac: i don't understand why it doesn't work...
[14:30] <bac> cprov: perhaps you can help snikker?
[14:31] <cprov> snikker: which ubuntu series are you using ?
[14:31] <snikker> cprov: 8.10 (intrepid)
[14:35] <cprov> snikker: digikam PPA hasn't changed since we generated signing-keys, so their repo is not signed.
[14:35] <snikker> cprov: oh, i understand... thank you
[14:36] <kiko> cprov, oh? we only sign repos that have changed?
[14:36] <kiko> oh, I see
[14:36] <kiko> the keys are generated but we didn't republish?
[14:36] <cprov> kiko: yes
[14:36] <kiko> cprov, can we republish or too much work?
[14:37] <cprov> kiko: not too much work on our side, but it would trigger updates on all users
[14:38] <snikker> cprov: but here http://keyserver.ubuntu.com:11371/pks/lookup?search=0xBF860D3661FBBBA575BE617F0BF0F083E353B3E9&op=index  say that the key was publushed the same day of the pakage, i'm wrong?
[14:40] <cprov> snikker: publication happens around 20:00 UTC that day
[14:42] <snikker> cprov: and the key was generated before...
[14:44] <cprov> snikker: let me trigger the PPA updates, so we can check if the key is really working
[14:44] <snikker> cprov: ok, thanks
[14:48] <cprov> snikker: how to you see the exact timestamp for key generation
[14:49] <snikker> cprov: i can't see the exact timespamp, only the date
[14:51] <cprov> snikker: yeah, me too, annoying.
[14:52] <cprov> snikker: the PPA will be republished in 8 minutes.
[14:54] <bac> cprov: thanks for your help.  i learned a lot...
[14:54] <snikker> cprov: great, thank you! :)
[14:54] <cprov> snikker: np, you're welcome. Let's see if it will work
[14:54] <snikker> cprov: ok
[15:08] <sinzui> me
[15:11] <snikker> cprov: now it work! thank again :)
[15:38] <pkt> mrevell: ping
[15:38] <mrevell> hi pkt
[15:38] <pkt> hi
[15:38] <pkt> I just received a mail from you about my ppa size
[15:39] <pkt> I 'd like to ask: how do I know the total size?
[15:39] <pkt> (without expanding every package separately and adding the sizes manually if possible :-)
[15:40] <RainCT> Hi
[15:40] <RainCT> How can I delete a team?
[15:41] <mrevell> pkt it should say it on the PPA overview page
[15:41] <mrevell> RainCT: You need to make a request at https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad
[15:41] <RainCT> mrevell: urg :P. Thanks
[15:42] <mrevell> np
[15:42] <pkt> mrevell: it says: "Package counters and estimated archive size temporarily unavailable"
[15:42] <mrevell> pkt: Let me ask cprov about that ^^^^^^
[15:43] <pkt> Btw, my ppa is a "semi-service" to the community to be honest
[15:44] <pkt> Many of the packages there cannot be found anywhere else (to my knowledge), like eclipse, mysql-workbench and gdb-python
[15:44] <pkt> But I cannot make any guarantees that everything will be working at all times
[15:48] <mrevell> pkt: Cool, sounds great. You're not at the limit right now. AFAICS you're at 962 MB, so you're close. Do you plan to add more soon?
[15:49] <pkt> Not sure yet
[15:49] <pkt> But it is quite possible
[15:50] <pkt> I might add some kernel/virtualization stuff
[15:51] <pkt> and/or some eclipse plugins or eclipse dependencies when I find some time
[15:56] <pkt> mrevell: I deleted the superseeded version of mysql-workbench (about 200M total) so that should solve the problem for now
[15:56] <mrevell> pkt:  Cool :)
[15:57] <rzr_> pkt: let me thank you in person for eclipse-3.4 : I credited you on http://www.newlc.com/en/deb-packages-android-sdk-bleeding-edge-cupcake-images
[15:57] <rzr_> mrevell: thx for notifying me , I am doing some effort in cleaning obsolete stuff
[15:58] <pkt> rzr_: you are most welcome :-)
[15:58] <rzr_> pkt: btw about ppa's size it's writen in upload mail alert IICR
[15:59] <rzr_> mrevell: PPA is in thanks part too on the same url :)
[15:59] <pkt> It was indeed written in a rejection mail I got a while ago, but not in the mail I got a while ago
[15:59] <pkt> oops
[16:00] <pkt> 'but not in the mail I got a few minutes ago'
[16:00] <pkt> anyway, have to leave now (busy afternoon). Nice talking to you guys :-)
[16:01] <rzr_> pkt: while you're here
[16:01] <rzr_> would you like to set up a eclipse team ?
[16:01] <rzr_> I have some subclipse plugin to giveaway
[16:01] <rzr_> the eclipse team already exists i think
[16:02] <pkt> yes, it already exists
[16:02] <pkt> I think it is open too
[16:03] <pkt> If I remember correctly it was started by nathan (aka rockwalrus)
[16:03] <pkt> There is another team as well (eclipsers?) but it seemingly never actually produced anything
[16:03] <rzr_> there is one guy who package some plugins too
[16:04] <pkt> yes, I saw his comment in the bug
[16:04] <rzr_> what do you think about merging it all in a ppa ?
[16:04] <pkt> for now, the biggest problem for eclipse is to get the dependencies in
[16:04] <rzr_> yea i know
[16:04] <pkt> that wouldn't be such a bad idea :-)
[16:05] <pkt> I 've been just too busy to bother
[16:05] <pkt> anyway, anybody can copy packages between the ppas I think
[16:06] <rzr_> we'll talk about this later elsewhere ok :)
[16:06] <pkt> cool, bye for now :-)
[16:06] <rzr_> bye
[16:07] <rzr_> mrevell: keep his ppa it worths it :)
[16:07] <mrevell> We're not removing PPAs :) I'm just checking to see if people need more space
[16:08] <maxb> ooi, what became of primero?
[16:09] <rzr_> mrevell: well any more space would be welcomen but i can understand everything is limited
[16:09] <mrevell> rzr_: I'm happy to increase people's limits if they're making good community use of it :)
[16:10] <rzr_> well it's not up to us to decide if we're doing good or evil :)
[16:10] <rzr_> BTW, you should have stats of downloaded packages ?
[16:45] <sidelil> excuse me is stagin.launchpad down at the moment?
[16:45] <Goundy> sidelil no it's working for me
[16:47] <sidelil> Goundy, oh, I cannot connect now. I could 1 hour ago. :( I hope i did not do anything wrong, im trying to learn how to use it
[16:48] <Goundy> sidelil you can't crash launchpad dude you're not the only person who's using it
[16:48] <mrevell> sidelil: It's offline at the moment. Should be back shortly.
[16:48] <sidelil> mrevell, ok thanks.
[16:49] <Goundy> mrevell huh? what's offline? it works here
[16:49] <mrevell> Goundy: https://staging.launchpad.net/
[16:50] <Goundy> mrevell https://launchpad.net/~auresdev ... it works
[16:50] <Goundy> weird
[16:50] <mrevell> Goundy: Yeah, that's not on staging :) Our staging server is temporarily offline.
[16:50] <Goundy> staging... oh... I ignored that word in his question I thought he made a mistake >_<
[16:50] <Goundy> sorry !
[16:52] <sidelil> excuse me, what can NOT be done in a project register on staging.launchpad that could be possible on a proper launchpad project? Basically, has it got restricted functionalities or is exactly the same? Does the staging project get deleted ater a while?
[16:53] <Goundy> whats the difference between staging.lp.net and lp.net ? I don't really get it
[16:53] <sidelil> Basically, can I just use normally staging for a few days, while i get used to launchpad?
[16:53] <sidelil> yes
[16:54] <sidelil> Goundy, im just asking whats the difference, eg if i would not be able to do some particular things on staging that i could do on normal lp
[16:54] <Goundy> sidelil well I asked about the difference I have no idea on what staging.lp is
[16:54] <Goundy> ^^
[16:55] <sidelil> Goundy, ah ok sorry! Staging is to try out lp as far as i know
[16:55] <Goundy> Ah..
[16:55] <Goundy> I started using lp directly it's not so hard imho
[16:55] <bac> sidelil: changes made on staging get wiped out once a day (as a rule)
[16:56] <Goundy> I got to go now
[16:56] <Goundy> see you
[16:56] <sidelil> see you
[16:56] <sidelil> bac, ok thanks that's exactly what i was looking for! Thanks!
[16:56] <bac> sidelil: any *real* work you want to do needs to be done on launchpad.net.  as mentioned earlier staging is for trying things out that won't be permanent.
[16:57] <sidelil> bac, yeah i got it! Thanks
[17:50] <maxb> Yay, hppa's back to two buildds :-)
[19:55] <lamalex> hey guys, has anyone had time to look at lp 270031
[20:08] <bac> lamalex: i'm checking to see if any progress has been made.
[20:08] <attilacyilmazlar> is there anyone here from Ubuntu Netbook Remix Team??
[20:09] <lamalex> bac: thank you
[20:09] <bac> lamalex: that bug has been marked invalid.  are you still seeing the problem?
[20:09] <lamalex> when was it marked invalid?
[20:09] <lamalex> on the bug, it's marked confirmed
[20:10] <lamalex> oh
[20:10] <lamalex> wtf
[20:10] <lamalex> it was confirmed 10 minutes ago
[20:10] <lamalex> who marked it invalid
[20:10] <bac> lamalex: 5 minutes ago, in response to my query
[20:10] <lamalex> heh
[20:10] <lamalex> the 64bit packages build fine elsewhere
[20:10] <bac> lamalex: read the final comment.  it seems to be a problem with mono, not the build environment
[20:10] <lamalex> including ubuntu main repos
[20:14] <lamalex> bac: our packager isn't around right now, I'm sure he'll have more to say about it than I do
[20:16] <bac> lamalex: great, i can only suggest you and he add more information to the existing bug
[20:16] <maxb> lamalex, bac: There is a different bug which identifies Xen as the cause
[20:17] <maxb> LP 237724
[20:17] <maxb> LP 237724
[20:21] <lamalex> maxb: ahha, thank you
[20:21] <lamalex> should LP 270031 be marked a dupe of LP 237724
[20:22]  * maxb was just trying to do that but Malone is being awkward
[20:22] <bac> thanks maxb
[20:23] <maxb> Apparently you can't mark a bug as a duplicate if it itself has duplicates :-/
[20:26]  * maxb has retargeted all the dupes at bug 237724 now
[20:31] <lamalex> maxb: yeah, I was going to file a bug on that duplicate thing
[20:32] <lamalex> it should automagically redirect the bugs
[23:14] <Demosthenes> can i have launchpad generate a release tar.gz from the tagged branch it already has? it seems redundant to create that locally and upload.
[23:20] <spiv> Demosthenes: not yet, but it would be nice if it could
[23:20] <spiv> Demosthenes: file a bug for it