=== abentley1 is now known as abentley === abentley1 is now known as abentley [05:38] hi [05:38] meoblast001: hello [05:39] i filed this bug a few days ago https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/363217 [05:39] Ubuntu bug 363217 in launchpad "Banned From My Mailing List" [Undecided,New] [05:39] can i just be unbanned from my mailing list [05:39] i don't think i can remain banned until the bug is fixed [05:39] i'd just have to ditch launchpad mailing lists and find someone new if that happens [05:41] not by me [05:41] meoblast001: can you ask a question at answers.launchpad.net/launchpad ? [05:41] mwhudson: wouldn't that be comparable to filing 2 bugs though? [05:42] meoblast001: not really [05:42] we use answers more for actions and bugs for defects [05:43] meoblast001: the last mesage on that list was sent by you on the 15th of April. Have you tried sending any more since? even a test one? far as I can see, you're still active and working. [05:43] spm: i could try [05:45] spm: oh.. nice.. it worked [05:46] spm: is there a limit on how many emails i can send? [05:46] meoblast001: what do you mean? to a list? as fast as you can type I'd suggest. [05:46] spm: oh.. it told me i was banned because i sent too many emails [05:47] that was the reason when it banned me [05:47] actually no it doesn't say that. it suggests you would be disabled for excessive bouces. different problem. [05:47] ahh.. ic [05:47] what are bounces? [05:49] basically mailman thought it sent you mail that got rejected by your mail server [05:49] mwhudson: ic [05:50] i'm so happy i filed that feature request on Ubuntu's Idea Pool (back when it was called that) to add screenlets.... so much easier to install now [05:51] * meoblast001 thinks there should be a #launchpad-offtopic === Andre_Gondim is now known as Andre_Gondim-afk [09:07] Hm. Is it possible to build a kernel flavour in the PPA build system? It seems to die with make error 2, which IIRC is "you've run out of disc space". [09:07] http://launchpadlibrarian.net/25777812/buildlog_ubuntu-jaunty-amd64.linux_2.6.28-11.43~ppa2_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz [09:08] RAOF: let me check. [09:11] RAOF: I don't remember if error 2 is disk space, but 'Build needed 00:34:08, 3071656k disk space ' indicates it might be. [09:12] 3GB? Neat. [09:12] Does this mean I can't build that in the PPA system? [09:13] RAOF: other people have been building kernels in PPA, let me check for something different. [09:13] Thanks. [09:16] RAOF: what about https://edge.launchpad.net/~next-kernel/+archive/ppa/+build/847711 ? [09:16] RAOF: it uses 11GB [09:16] Wow. So, why doesn't mine build then :) [09:17] RAOF: the builder itself, I guess [09:17] Error 2 is ENOENT, IIRC. [09:17] Oh. *make* error. I fail. [09:27] RAOF: I've retried your build, this time it went to a 'older' virtual build, let's see how it goes. [09:27] cprov: Thanks. [09:29] RAOF: what's was the name of the builder where it was previously built ? (lost the browser tab by mistake) [09:29] RAOF: it is in the build-failure-notification. [09:39] cprov: platinum. Sorry for the delay. [09:39] RAOF: np, thanks. === mkorn is now known as thekorn === noodles775 changed the topic of #launchpad to: https://launchpad.net/ | Help contact: noodles775 | Join https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-users | Channel logs: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com | karma count change: http://blog.launchpad.net/general/karma-where-did-mine-go [10:39] gmb: thanks :) [10:39] Hobbsee: Welcome. Now we need to find some time to include it a cycle... [10:39] gmb: how long would it realistically take? [10:40] Hobbsee: < 1 day, including tests, based on the last time I added a header to emails. [10:40] Hobbsee: Trouble is that we're all working on really complex stuff at the minute. [10:40] So we're pretty pressed for time. [10:40] gmb: heh. Like always :) [10:40] Hobbsee: Yeah. UI is hard :/ [10:40] yeah, i yearn for the days when i got to work on really easy stuff! [10:40] although is looking much nicer :) [10:58] RAOF: almost forgot of our test build, https://edge.launchpad.net/~raof/+archive/ppa/+build/954694, it failed again. Apparently in the same place. [10:59] RAOF: so, it's probably something in the source itself. Can you please seek assistance with the kernel-team ? [11:03] cprov: Hi, is this bug fixed on the live launchpad system? -> https://bugs.launchpad.net/soyuz/+bug/357034 [11:03] Launchpad bug 357034 in soyuz "Binary packages rejected based on debian/control Section" [High,Fix committed] [11:03] cprov: Urgh. Sorry. I thought it had built locally. [11:05] Whoopie: no, it will be fixed in the next rollout (2.2.4) [11:05] cprov: ok, thanks [11:05] just wanted to be sure as I try to build a custom kernel ;) [11:05] Whoopie: is it affecting your workflow badly ? [11:06] cprov: no, I know the workaround. [11:06] Whoopie: okay. [11:08] RAOF: maybe it does, someone from the kernel-team would know for sure what's going on with our virtual buildds. [11:11] cprov: Why have I(D)SPR not been exposed through the API? And how are builds internally associated with source packages - by archive and SPR? I'd ideally like to be able to get more complete data. [11:16] wgrant: right, I'm about to confirm your branch. [11:16] cprov: s/branch/bug/? [11:16] wgrant: ISPPH.getBuilds & getPublishedBinaries will be exposed [11:17] wgrant: yes, *bug* ;) [11:19] cprov: Ah, ISPPH.getBuilds is already there. I missed that. [11:19] wgrant: cool, but SPPH.getPublishedBinaries -> IBPPHs isn't [11:20] Right. [11:20] wgrant: also, the root problem is not been about to access SPR/BPR attributes (build-deps, deps, etc) [11:21] cprov: Doesn't a Build only know about its BPRs, not any BPPHs? [11:21] Given that a build is somewhat publishing-agnostic. [11:21] wgrant: yes, builds are publishing-agnostic [11:22] but SPPH should expose SPR attributes, same for BPPH (BPR) [11:22] Why not expose the real [BS]PR? [11:23] maybe ... but they would need a new traversal, because they are also pub-agnostic ;) [11:23] Although I suppose my main use for them will be fulfilled by methods that deal in publishings instead. They're just not all there yet. [11:23] Mmmm, true. [11:23] Forgot that. [11:24] wgrant: anyway, baby-steps, let's expose SPPH.getPublishedBinaries first, it's simple [11:24] cprov: That sounds good. [11:25] wgrant: confirmed, will be in edge tonight [11:25] cprov: Is (archive, name, version) for an [SB]PR really a unique key? I thought I saw a bug somewhere about duplicate binary versions causing problems, which would indicate it was ambiguous. [11:26] wgrant: (archive, name, version, Published) is unique [11:26] (that key is the only one we have to distinguish the actual package referred to by a publishing) [11:26] cprov: Right, but we don't have that last bit. [11:27] I guess it's a tiny corner case that I can live with. [11:27] wgrant: that 4-elem key defines the publishing record, then SPPH.spr [11:27] cprov: SPPH.spr doesn't exist to normal people. [11:27] wgrant: exactly :) [11:28] wgrant: that's why we can either export SPR as /+source/$ID or incorporate its attributes in SPPH [11:28] wgrant: I will investigate what's the best approach when I come back from lunch. [11:29] cprov: Thanks! [11:29] * cprov goes === stub1 is now known as stub === noodles775 is now known as noodles775-afk === noodles775-afk is now known as noodles === noodles is now known as noodles775 === jelmer_ is now known as Guest60279 [15:08] bug #175782 appears in my own personal bugs but I get a "lost something" page when trying to reach it [15:08] Launchpad bug 175782 in checkbox-desktop "include field in configuration file should support more than one file" [Critical,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/175782 [15:15] just https://launchpad.net/checkbox-desktop exhibits the problem as well (OOPS-1206ED125 for the same on edge) [15:16] james_w: strange... wfm? [15:16] james_w: the project has been made inactive [15:17] that'll probably be why then :-) [15:17] yup! [15:18] cr3: all good then? [15:22] IIRC there is a bug filed that bugs filed only in an inactive project should be hidden. [15:28] noodles775: I wouldn't qualify "lost something" as "all good", no [15:29] james_w: the project was deleted but it seems the bugs were left dangling [15:29] Sorry cr3: I meant to communicate: "did you see the reason discussed here causing your problem" but did so poorly. [15:30] mthaddon: could all the related bugs be deleted or reassigned then? leaving them dangling is not optimal :) [15:31] this sounds like the equivalent to leaving the database in an inconsistent state, isn't there somekind of foreign key constraint which should kick in here? [15:31] cr3: The project isn't deleted. [15:31] Projects are only ever deactivated, which is sometimes called deletion. [15:31] So it's not *really* gone. [15:31] wgrant: aha! inactive, so inaccessible, so constraint wouldn't kick in [15:31] yeah, what he said [15:31] Right. [15:32] So, the bug should not be shown in listings, nor should the redirect at /bugs/123456 work. Those are bugs. [15:32] ok, so I need to report a bug against launchpad then :) [15:33] I know there's one already for the latter, but I'm not sure about the former. [15:33] wgrant: I was going to report a but against the former but I will mention the latter side effect [15:35] err, s/but/bug/ === thunderstruck is now known as gnomefreak [15:52] hi all [15:53] Hi kwah [15:53] is reactivation feature for maillists broken in launchpad? [15:53] barry ^^^ [15:54] this morning I finally wanted to activate again mailing list for ~ubuntu-ru-users group [15:54] and since then I see message: This team's mailing list will be available within a few minutes. [15:54] since then == approx 05:30 UTC tosay [15:54] *today [15:54] any comments on this? [16:10] kwah: it should be working but there may be a problem with your list. please file a question and we'll look into it [16:18] barry, will do. May you give an indication how long it might take? [16:19] kwah: if you add a question, it'll generally be assigned and answered within a 24hr period. [16:19] ok === matsubara is now known as matsubara-lunch [16:27] noodles775, barry https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/68038 [16:28] Thanks kwah, I'll assign it... [16:28] thanks === thekorn_ is now known as thekorn [16:52] Strange, a package has building in the gmpc-trunk for 7 hours. It takes about 10 minutes to build normally. https://edge.launchpad.net/~gmpc-trunk/+archive/ppa [16:59] ripps: the builder that was building it was disabled, I will fix it for you in a minute. [17:07] cprov: Thanks === noodles775 changed the topic of #launchpad to: https://launchpad.net/ | Help contact: | Join https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-users | Channel logs: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com | karma count change: http://blog.launchpad.net/general/karma-where-did-mine-go [17:15] ripps: it will be dispatched in a bit, the problem will be fixed by bug #343683 [17:15] Launchpad bug 343683 in soyuz "PPA buildds can be reclaimed mid-build, master needs to recover more gracefully when they do" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/343683 [17:49] kwah: it should take at most 5-10 minutes to reactivate your list, so the fact that it hasn't yet is a problem [17:52] barry, yep, I kinda noticed ;) [17:52] kwah: i'm try to get a losa's attention and have them help me look into it [17:53] barry, thanks === matsubara-lunch is now known as matsubara === thunderstruck is now known as gnomefreak [20:39] Hi. I have recently created a new repository (ppa) in launchpad. http://ppa.launchpad.net/adrian15/fai/ . Now an user asks me how it can be build amd64 versions of the packages from my repository. So after checking my repository I see that all the packages architecture is "all". I thought that "all" was only for images (i.e. themes) packages. Did I do something wrong? Is it ok? How do I answer the amd64 question? Thank you. [20:40] adrian15b: all is for platform independent, images qualify, or say pure python packages. [20:40] adrian15b: that's part of your packaging though [20:40] LarstiQ: I already know that. So I made a mistake when I build my packages? [20:41] adrian15b: specifically with debian/control, yes [20:42] adrian15b: I'm assuming it isn't actually an Architecture: all package? [20:46] adrian15b: No, it is not. [20:46] LarstiQ: :) [20:47] adrian15b: well then, change it to 'any' instead :) Or a relevant list of architectures if that may be the case. [20:48] LarstiQ: I am going to check the control contents from the repository and copy it into a pastebin.com like site. [20:49] adrian15b: k [20:49] * LarstiQ goes search for mail from his bank he displaced [20:51] LarstiQ: Well the package is all. [20:51] LarstiQ: Because it is main script made. I had not realised it till now. [20:51] LarstiQ: So I tell the guy that it is platform indepedent and that's it. [20:53] adrian15b: well yes, in that case nothing wrong with it [20:53] LarstiQ: Althoug I do no know if live-initramfs and initramfs-tools are platform independent. [20:53] adrian15b: you could check what Debian/Ubuntu do? [20:54] LarstiQ: Yes, they are. [20:54] hi, I have an upload problem on launchpad ppa, it fails at the end v4l-dvb-dkms_1.20090413-ppa3.tar.gz: 4226k/4227k [20:54] LarstiQ: Ok. It was easier than I thought. Thank you for your help. [20:54] adrian15b: np, I didn't do much :) [20:54] I mean it's stuck just before the last bites are sent [20:55] this happens to last packages I tried to sent [20:55] with no error message, they are of course not on the ppa at all [20:55] karim: does this happen with other hosts too? [20:55] LarstiQ: what other host ? [20:55] (ie, isolate where the problems lie) [20:56] karim: random other ftp server? [20:56] ??? [20:56] what other ftp server [20:56] karim: you're uploading with dput, right? [20:56] fqdn = ppa.launchpad.net [20:56] method = ftp [20:57] I only ave this [20:57] karim: no incoming defined? [20:57] where else can I upload ? [20:57] incoming = ~mirak-mirak/ubuntu [20:57] login = anonymous [20:57] plus [mirak] for the section [20:57] karim: mentors.debian.net for dput [20:58] karim: but the main point is trying to find out where the problem lies [20:58] I can't upload there I guess [20:58] it was a hassel already to upload on launchpad ^^ [20:59] karim: you could also employ strace and tcpdump for more diagnostics [21:00] karim: have you waited a while to see if it would complete? [21:00] karim: I've seen it happen with other big files like that [21:01] karim: let me check what the log files says in the server. [21:01] cprov: thanks [21:01] I also tried to upload nvidia drivers 2 times [21:01] it failed at the end also [21:01] LarstiQ: yes [21:01] karim: try now, please [21:02] the upload ? [21:02] ok [21:02] karim: yup [21:02] karim: is your uplink *fast* enough ? === thunderstruck is now known as gnomefreak [21:03] 1Mbit [21:04] cprov: it's sending [21:04] I had a checksum issue, I needed to rebuild the sources [21:04] karim: it already failed on the server side, apparently. [21:04] what version ? [21:04] cprov: it's still uploading on my side [21:05] 2717k/4227k [21:06] karim: you upload is long dead, you can try it again, [21:07] it started [21:08] cprov: is it working ? [21:08] cprov: maybe I should use passive or active ftp ? [21:09] karim: there are few simultaneous sessions in progress [21:09] stuck again [21:13] karim: it should be stuck on your side ? server side it's fine and will be processed in 2 min [21:13] the server got the full archive ? [21:14] karim: yes [21:16] karim: no, I lied ;/ [21:16] cprov: any idea what's going on? [21:17] karim: the tarball is there, MD5 and size matches, the upload is missing the .changes (which makes it pretty much useless) [21:18] LarstiQ: not exactly, but is likely to be something client-side. [21:21] karim: I've download your source and re-uploaded with dput and it was fine. [21:26] that's weird [21:27] cprov: I don't see them on my ppa though [21:27] cprov: are you sure you got the whole archive ? [21:27] karim: yes, I vaguely remember of cisco/linksys routers doing something bad for long ftp sessions [21:28] it's a buffalo [21:28] there is no other method to upload ? [21:28] karim: https://edge.launchpad.net/~cprov/+archive/ppa?field.name_filter=v4l&field.status_filter=published&field.series_filter=any [21:28] cprov: what is the md5sum on it ? [21:30] cprov: it doesn't show up on my ppa [21:30] karim: I can't upload to your ppa, so I've uploaded to mine [21:31] cprov: yes, but if you got my file entirely, why isn't it proceced ? [21:31] karim: because the .changes was never uploaded. [21:32] cprov: so the .changes might be the problem ? [21:32] I have a strange issue here [21:32] karim: dsc and tar.gz were fine and the md5 matched, but apparently your dput never found out that the tarball had finished [21:32] I create a deb from source, and build it, however sometime it says the checksum isn't correct [21:32] karim: no, you files a probably correct, the problem is something in the connection [21:53] how can i cross compile a debian package on ubuntu to x86_64/amd64 from an x86/i386 machine? [21:53] before i upload to ppa [21:54] jcole: you don't need to build the binaries, upload the source and the PPA will build the binaries for you. [21:56] cprov: understood, but i have some packages im not "allowed" to upload to ppa :/ [21:56] jcole: oh, I see [21:58] jcole: `debuild -b -aamd64` (works for i386, I'm on amd64) [22:00] cprov: did you dpkg -x the .deb file and do a "file" on a .so file? the bits still compile to local arch even though the package says the specified arch [22:01] jcole: no, I didn't [22:01] cprov: your .so files in that created .deb are probably 64 bit [22:01] jcole: build for amd64 on i386 won't work (at least not that easy) as the i386-kernel can't run amd64-binaries (like e.g. gcc) [22:02] jcole: which would obviously go boing in a 32bit system [22:02] geser: understood, but ive seen people cross compile on debian to strange arches like hppa on an i386 box [22:03] they probably use qemu [22:03] geser: no, its something with a gcc cross compile toolchan [22:03] jcole: you better use qemu [22:04] jcole: cross compilation is really not easy, and if you want to do packages it will be hell certainly [22:04] jcole: but you also need an upstream source that builds correctly with a cross-compiler (good luck with that) [22:04] geser: yes ^^ [22:05] can I upload a .deb on ppa ? [22:05] karim: no, it's not allowed. [22:06] cprov: I use dput locally [22:06] I found a way to upload to a local repository [22:06] * jcole finds http://www.emdebian.org/tools/crossdev.html [22:06] I do that to upload to my own repository [22:07] that says how to cross compile to arm without qemu [22:07] jcole: I tried once to do a cross compiler for gentoo, to build for ppc on x86 it was very hard, even on gentoo [22:07] I managed to do distcc on a different arch though [22:08] karim: there is some "debian" way of doing this [22:08] maybe i should pop over to deb dev [22:08] my upload still fail on ppa :( [22:09] I don't know what to do [22:09] I will try without the router [22:09] karim: its a basic ftp upload [22:10] karim: first validate the ftp connection and an "ls" [22:10] karim: could be something with ftp active/passive [22:10] I am in [22:11] jcole: I tryed active [22:11] passive_ftp = 0 [22:11] ls gives nothing [22:12] karim: set the DMZ ip in your router to point to your upload machine [22:13] karim: `ls` will return nothing until will upload something, each upload session is isolated from the rest of the system [22:16] cprov: I am tryng to put the files manually [22:16] seems stuck also [22:16] on the big one [22:16] karim: did you try DMZ setting? [22:16] jcole: don't know how to do that [22:16] I use a buffalo with ddwrt [22:18] karim: do you have a shell account somewhere where you could try to copy the files there first and dput/ftp from there? [22:19] I found it [22:19] geser: no [22:19] a remote computer maybe, but it's probably powered off [22:23] jcole: dmz stuff worked [22:23] jcole: so I maybe need to find what port allowed that [22:24] I even uploaded .debs ... ^^ [22:25] karim: its a dynamic set of ports that connect "back" to you... dmz basically lets all prots in [22:25] ports* [22:26] there is a setting caalled spi firewall, maybe this is dissrupting [22:27] or port trigering maybe === Andre_Gondim is now known as Andre_Gondim-afk [22:35] jcole: I found a page where it says it the fault of a too short tcp timeout === karim is now known as mirak === Nafallo_ is now known as Nafallo [23:25] hi [23:25] hi [23:25] I noticed a bug introduced in the diffs for pmccave-2.5 [23:25] pmccabe, rather [23:25] http://launchpadlibrarian.net/19404556/pmccabe_2.4%2Bnmu1_2.5.diff.gz [23:25] -echo "\nAnalyzing $newdir ...\c" >&2 [23:25] +prnitf "\nAnalyzing %s ..." "$newdir" >&2 [23:26] the second line should be "printf" [23:27] are there any contributos who can check in a fix? [23:50] What the hell is up with the Launchpad builder? It telling me it's going to take 16 hours until it starts building? [23:54] ripps: 235 builds waiting in the queue? I'd assume that it'll take a while to get through all that first.