[00:00] <ub3rst4r> does anyone know how to remove a release?
[00:05] <mwhudson> ub3rst4r: there is a little trashcan icon up near the top of the page
[00:06] <ub3rst4r> thanks
[00:06] <ub3rst4r> it doesnt have it
[00:09] <wgrant> ub3rst4r: I see it on my release pages at the end of the 'Released' row in the table at the top of the release page.
[00:09] <wgrant> Make sure you're on the actual release page, not on the lists of releases.
[00:10] <wgrant> Oh, it's also at the top of that page.
[00:10] <wgrant> Ah, no, that deletes the milestone.
[00:10] <wgrant> That is confusing.
[00:10] <wgrant> beuno: If you're around, what do you think of that?
[00:29] <ub3rst4r> and milestones...
[00:30] <ub3rst4r> im trying to attach a bug report to one but its not listed
[00:32] <wgrant> ub3rst4r: A milestone won't show up in the list on a bug report if it's inactive. It will be inactive if you've created a release from it.
[00:32] <wgrant> You can reactivate it, if you wish.
[00:33] <ub3rst4r> ahh duh
[00:54] <poolie> hello all
[00:57] <wgrant> Not even 10am, and I've reported 8 bugs against Launchpad already :(
[00:57] <lifeless> wgrant: score
[00:58] <cody-somerville> wgrant, Are there any bugs re: karma at the moment?
[00:58] <wgrant> cody-somerville: What about it?
[00:58] <cody-somerville> My karma is degrading faster than I can gain it now
[00:58] <wgrant> I haven't seen any bugs about that.
[00:59] <wgrant> Things are probably still out of balance after Soyuz karma appeared, but that shouldn't affect depreciation AFAICT.
[00:59] <cody-somerville> I find my bzr commits give me almost nothing it seems
[01:00] <thumper> cody-somerville: the karma score isn't calculated until a daily script runs
[01:00] <cody-somerville> thumper, I know
[01:00] <cody-somerville> but my karma has been going down and not up anymore :P
[01:00] <thumper> cody-somerville: then work harder :P
[01:00] <wgrant> Code karma is worth a lot less than a few months ago, because there's so much more of it now.
[01:01] <wgrant> Although it's still almost half of my total.
[01:01] <cody-somerville> Maybe I need to do some uploads
[01:03] <wgrant> Or just create a couple of blueprints. You'll never have to work again.
[01:04] <cody-somerville> indeed
[01:04] <spm> work on answers helps nicely for karma too. /me is currently the #6 launchpad contributor ;-)
[01:06] <wgrant> Does dogfood still accept PPA uploads? staging of course doesn't...
[01:44] <poolie> spm:is it just me or does https://lists.ubuntu.com/ not respond?
[01:44] <poolie> specifically https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/admindb/bazaar
[01:46] <lifeless> poolie: trying
[01:46] <spm> poolie: no not just you. chlorine is dead. time to ring james...
[01:46] <poolie> :/
[01:46] <poolie> spm: strangely enough actual mail still seems to be getting through at least until recently?
[01:47] <spm> poolie: it appears to have died about 25 mins ago. so...
[01:47] <poolie> i guess it's not the most awful possible time for london
[01:48] <lifeless> 2am
[01:48] <lifeless> I have to wonder you consider the most awful possible time ;)
[01:48] <mwhudson> 4am is pretty bad
[01:48] <spm> he knew and is working on it atm
[01:50] <poolie> ah i forgot they're +1 now
[01:50] <poolie> i think about 3-4 is the worst
[02:01] <poolie> i wonder if it would be any faster to serve the icing and css from the same vhost as the page you're looking at
[02:02] <poolie> thereby potentially avoiding some ssl connections
[02:02] <lifeless> yes, except you'd then download it per host
[02:02] <lifeless> swings & roundabouts I suspect
[02:24] <poolie> lifeless: if it's being kept in the memory cache?
[02:25] <poolie> i guess sprites would make that stronger
[02:47] <ninix> hi
[02:48] <ninix> i'm trying to upload the same package (taken from debian, with no modifications) in my ppa, for intrepid and jaunty
[02:48] <ninix> i've added the appropriate "/intrepid/" and "/jaunty/" to the incoming variable in the dput.cf
[02:48] <ninix> but .. the second has been rejected...
[02:49] <ninix> File ... .diff.gz  already exists.
[02:49] <lifeless> have you rebuilt it (dpkg-buildpackage -S)
[02:49] <ninix> i built it with it..... i dit a debuild -S -sd
[02:49] <ninix> *did*
[02:49] <lifeless> you need to do that and change the changelog too
[02:49] <lifeless> the target is in the changelog
[02:49] <lifeless> not indput
[02:50] <ninix> lifeless: i don't need to do any change to the package. so i don't change the changelog file
[02:50] <lifeless> ninix: unfortunately you are wrong :)
[02:51] <ninix> does the -sd could be the problem ?
[02:51] <ninix> lifeless: we can specify the different path in the dput
[02:52] <ninix> why should I add a ... fake entry in the changelog if i've made no change :/
[02:52] <lifeless> you don't need to add an entry
[02:52] <lifeless> you needto change the target
[02:53] <ninix> ha
[02:53] <ninix> i can do that ? just change the codename and that's it ?
[02:54] <lifeless> assuming it builds ok yes
[02:54] <ninix> emm ok
[02:54] <ninix> thx
[03:02] <ninix> no, that change nothing
[03:02] <ninix> we can't just change the codename
[03:04] <ninix> i'll need to change the version for each codename o_O
[03:23] <wgrant> ninix: Whatyou can do is upload to the oldest series, and copy to the new ones. But you'll need to check that it doesn't actually need rebuilding in the new ones.
[03:24] <wgrant> That's how we do it in Ubuntu - most of the binaries in each release were copied from the previous release.
[03:26] <mwhudson> wgrant: do you have numbers or an intuition for how many packages do/don't get rebuilt for each release?
[03:26] <wgrant> I do - I generate those lists myself, and they're available somewhere on qa.ubuntuwire.org... let me find them.
[03:28] <mwhudson> wgrant: btw, thanks for recommending evolution
[03:28] <mwhudson> seems less annoying so far than tbird
[03:29] <wgrant> mwhudson: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/multidistrotools/unchanged/
[03:30] <wgrant> mwhudson: Right, that's what I thought... I've been trying it periodically for years, and finally found it to be workable.
[03:31] <mwhudson> wgrant: ta
[06:16] <poolie> spm: have you seen the two recent posts about launchpad oopses?
[06:16] <poolie> to l-users
[06:17] <poolie> it seems to be working for me though
[06:17] <spm> poolie: nope. but looking now...
[06:23] <noshelter> hey, for the launchpad question/answer system, are the questions present on a newsgroup server?
[06:23] <noshelter> it would be easier to use than the web id assume...
[06:31] <spm> noshelter: 1. not that I'm aware of and would be highly surprised if it was. and 2. you can use email as well. having said that, I personally prefer the web ui (tho will deny having said so if beuno ever reads this). is just easier to get around - for me - to the various tasks the questions refer to. ymmv.
[06:32] <noshelter> thx spm, good to know :)
[06:39] <spm> poolie: we don't appear to be doing worse than usual (gee isn't that nicely phrased... :-) ) at the moment?
[06:40] <spm> the 2nd email appears to be referencing the issues we had until our sat
[06:40] <spm> ... well till hopefully our sat when tom pushed out the latest CP with fixes for it.
[07:26] <wgrant> spm: The 57000 of the one OOPS in a day issues?
[07:26] <wgrant> That's fixed now?
[07:27] <spm> wgrant: if we're talking the same "problem" (was 3 related ones aiui) - hopefully yes.
[07:28] <wgrant> spm: Good, good.
[07:28] <wgrant> Should it be removed from the topic?
[07:31] <spm> checking what actually went out on sat - and if it addresses that bug. certainly francis' discussion reflects the one I saw fri morning.
[07:31] <spm> wgrant: yes, I think it can. we are seeing some translation issues atm - but only on edge.
[07:51] <scuba-> Hi, anyone in here familiar with the build system? I get a an error with sed-expressions which I don't get in Ubuntu and wondering whats different?
[07:54] <wgrant> scuba-: You might want to post a link to your build log.
[08:07] <scuba-> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26534074/buildlog_ubuntu-jaunty-amd64.openttd_0.7.0~svn20090509~r16261~ppa1~jaunty4_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[09:46] <wgrant> staging's broken?
[10:03]  * apw notes he has just been warned that his membership of a group was about to expire.  and that he was given 6 days warning only.  if i had been on vacation ... i'd have been expired before i even saw the first of the daily warnings ??  is this expected behaviour or broken?
[10:05] <Nafallo> apw: don't go on vacation? ;-)
[10:05] <apw> heh
[10:34] <wgrant> apw: That's normal behaviour. File a bug asking for something more - maybe a one-month warning as well?
[10:34] <apw> wgrant, ack
[10:38] <MTecknology> I tried to add a new project using the link on the frontpage on  edge.lp.net and got OOPS-1227EA81
[10:39] <MTecknology> I tried going to just +new instead of +new-guided and it brought me to a login form
[10:44] <bigjools> MTecknology: can you file a bug about that please
[10:53] <MTecknology> bigjools: I'm going to take a nap, but I will when I wake up :)
[10:53] <bigjools> MTecknology: I'm jealous :)
[10:53] <MTecknology> no you're not...
[10:54] <MTecknology> It's 04:53 and I woke up for work 20:00. I have about 4hr nap after work
[10:55] <MTecknology> and the pads on the bottom of my laptop are worn out. I ordered a new battery for the thing a 5 months ago and I'm still fighting to get it...
[10:55] <MTecknology> g'night :)
[11:54] <joaopinto> hi
[11:54] <joaopinto> does a team renaming applies the change to the associated mailing list ?
[12:20] <bigjools> joaopinto: I'm not sure, but I can find out for you, one moment
[13:20] <barry> wgrant: just checked now, re bug 372165. it's possible it took a little while for the change to land on staging.
[13:28] <wgrant> barry: I still see the problematic error on staging now: "Select all licenses for this software or select Other/Proprietary or Other/Open Source."
[13:44] <wgrant> barry: To clarify, the subject of that bug is the error message, not the caption of the mass of checkboxes.
[13:50] <jblount> I'm getting consistent oopes when changing the branding of a lp project:  (Error ID: OOPS-1227EC134)  any insight? (2 projects worked, 1 didn't)
[13:58] <beuno> hrm
[13:58] <beuno> ShortListTooBigError: Hard limit of 1000 exceeded.
[13:58] <beuno> sinzui, flacoste, does that sound familiar?  ^
[13:58] <sinzui> no familiar
[13:58] <sinzui> oh
[13:59] <beuno> jblount, I'd say file a bug with that OOOPs ID
[13:59] <sinzui> beuno: jblount it may be the same error I get when I review the license of launchpad itself. we cannot make a snapshot to complete the transaction
[14:00] <sinzui> jblount: which project?
[14:00] <beuno> sinzui, "ubunet" apparently
[14:00] <jblount> beuno: yes
[14:04] <barry> wgrant: thanks, reopening
[14:16] <jblount> sinzui, beuno: #374867
[14:16] <beuno> jblount, thanks
[14:16] <sinzui> thannk
[14:16] <jblount> :D
[14:21] <flacoste> sinzu, beuno, jblount: that sounds like a call site that shouldn't use shortlist somehow
[14:22] <sinzui> flacoste: I suspect that is the case.
[16:16] <radix> I'm getting a "Not allowed here" when I visit code.launchpad.net or code.edge.launchpad.net (just the front page)
[16:17] <radix> it seems to only happen when I'm logged in
[16:18] <beuno> flacoste, ^
[16:18] <beuno> kiko, ^
[16:18] <kiko> radix, do you get an OOPS ID?
[16:18] <kiko> it's a problem in the code which is fetching private projects in the cloud
[16:19] <radix> no, it's just "Not allowed here" header
[16:19] <radix> and
[16:19] <radix>  Sorry, you don't have permission to access this page.
[16:19] <radix> You are logged in as Christopher Armstrong.
[16:19] <flacoste> kiko: we don't show OOPS id on unauthorized page
[16:19] <kiko> radix, hmmm
[16:19] <kiko> flacoste, we could though
[16:19] <kiko> anyway, matsubara, help me find that OOPS ID when it shows up?
[16:20] <matsubara> kiko: I think we don't log them anymore.
[16:21] <flacoste> matsubara: we do
[16:21] <flacoste> matsubara: when the user is logged in
[16:21] <matsubara> ah ok
[16:24] <radix> need me to do it again?
[16:25] <matsubara> radix: that's probably bug 342467. I'm waiting the oopses to sync to devpad
[16:28] <matsubara> https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=OOPS-1227EA183
[16:28] <matsubara> kiko: radix ^
[16:29] <kiko> thanks matsubara
[16:29]  * MTecknology tickles kiko
[16:30] <kiko> hey MTecknology
[16:30] <kiko> did you ever answer me about those projects the last time I asked you?
[16:30] <kiko> I certainly didn't do anything about them!
[16:30] <MTecknology> yup
[16:30] <MTecknology> go for it
[16:31] <kiko> thanks
[16:31] <MTecknology> :)
[16:34] <kiko> matsubara, the root cause is we are attempting to display a private branch on that page to a person who can't see it
[16:35] <kiko> yay for security wrappers
[16:35] <matsubara> kiko: yeah, I added that OOPS to the bug report and set it to high. I'll ask someone from Code to have a look
[16:36] <kiko> thanks matsubara and radix
[16:37] <radix> sure thing
[17:02] <MTecknology> bigjools: have a good day :)
[17:02] <bigjools> MTecknology: thanks :)  time for my medication
[17:10] <LaPingvino1> Hello
[17:11] <LaPingvino1> ping asac (refered by Joey Stanford)
[17:11] <LaPingvino1> I have a question about firefox translations in launchpad
[17:12] <LaPingvino1> anybody here?
[17:14] <asac> LaPingvino1: sure. anything secret? otherwise i prefer #ubuntu-mozillateam on irc.freenode.net for ffox discussions.
[17:14] <asac> oops
[17:14] <asac> ;)
[17:14] <asac> LaPingvino1: yeah. so #ubuntu-mozilateam would be better
[17:15] <LaPingvino1> sorry, new here in the ubuntu irc
[17:15] <asac> LaPingvino1: thats fine
[17:23] <ninix> How can i solve this error: (same version already has published binaries in the destination archive) when i try to copy a packages from intrepid to jaunty
[17:23] <ninix> i've deleted all packages in jaunty
[17:24] <beuno> ninix, bump the version
[17:24] <bigjools> ninix: it means that your source is already built in the same PPA, you need to copy binaries as well
[17:25] <ninix> ok, so i have to select copy existing binaries 6
[17:26] <bigjools> yep
[17:27] <bigjools> ninix: if copying binaries is not the right thing for you, then bump the version and upload a new source as beuno says
[17:27] <ninix> ok, that's worked. But why the source has been built for jaunty? if i explicitly uploaded it in /myppa/ubuntu/intrepid/
[17:28] <bigjools> ninix: it's an artifact of using a pool-based repository, you can't have the same binaries in there twice
[17:28] <ninix> copying binaries implies that everything built properly in jaunty also?
[17:28] <bigjools> it simply re-publishes the same source and binaries in jaunty
[17:30] <ninix> Hmm.. that doesn't sound safe
[17:30] <bigjools> ninix: well it's what happens when a new Ubuntu series opens :)
[17:30] <ninix> i would prefer that launchpad retry to build it in jaunty to be sure
[17:31] <bigjools> ninix: then you need to upload a new source with a higher version, targeted to jaunty
[17:32] <ninix> Ok, i thought i could do that, with the copy option. (I know that the source build properly in jaunty), but it needs to be rebuild
[17:33] <bigjools> ninix: it prevents the copy because it would generate the same binary package versions that were already in the pool, but likely with different contents, so would fail to upload the build,
[17:34] <ninix> k
[17:34] <bigjools> it's quite valid to build for an older series and promote the packages to newer ones
[17:35] <bigjools> as long as the binary works, of course
[17:36] <ninix> yeak
[18:38] <Jordan_U> How can I make my PPA a signed PPA?
[18:39] <beuno> Jordan_U, it will sign all packages as soon as you upload the first one
[18:41] <Jordan_U> beuno: Odd, a few days ago I didn't see the "This repository is signed with..." message on my PPA page a few days ago, I guess I just missed it because it's there now :)
[18:42] <beuno> Jordan_U, it triggers signing it after the first package is uploaded
[18:43] <Jordan_U> beuno: I had uploaded a package, I probably just missed the message somehow
[18:43] <LarstiQ> it also takes some time to generate the signing key.
[18:43] <LarstiQ> 4 minutes for the creation, and a 20 minute cronjob, iirc
[18:44] <Jordan_U> How can I remove a PPA?
[18:45] <apachelogger> cprov: ping
[18:47] <cprov> Jordan_U: ifw, you can't. What's your problem ?
[18:47] <cprov> Jordan_U: you can just leave it there ... and create a new one, the same signing key will be used for signing packages in the new PPA
[18:48] <Jordan_U> cprov: I created a PPA named "test" just for experimentation, I'd like to get rid of it though it's not really important
[18:48] <cprov> Jordan_U: obviously you can delete all packages yourself and 'start again'
[18:49] <cprov> Jordan_U: oh, right, leave it alone.
[18:49] <Jordan_U> cprov: Any reason why PPAs can't be removed?
[18:50] <apachelogger> cprov: the Packages* files of private PPAs are pretty broken ... take a glimps at kubuntu-ninjas/ppa/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/main/binary-amd64/ for example
[18:50] <cprov> Jordan_U: few, one of then is that it involved disk operations.
[18:51] <cprov> apachelogger: empty
[18:51] <apachelogger> exactly :)
[18:52] <apachelogger> works for normal ppas though http://ppa.launchpad.net/kubuntu-experimental/ppa/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/main/binary-amd64/
[18:52] <thekorn> mrevell, hi, I got my launchpad shirt today, thanks a lot
[18:52] <apachelogger> cprov: I suppose there is no quick fix?
[18:53] <cprov> apachelogger: fix for what ?
[18:53] <apachelogger> cprov: the files being empty
[18:53] <cprov> apachelogger: is there anything published in jaunty ?
[18:53] <apachelogger> cprov: yes, also in intrepid, neither of them is working
[18:54] <cprov> apachelogger: I can't view your P3A
[18:54] <apachelogger> ah
[18:54] <apachelogger> cprov: maybe I am wrong
[18:54] <apachelogger> apparently jontheechidna did nuke them all
[18:54] <apachelogger> cprov: sorry, for the noise :)
[18:54] <cprov> apachelogger: check the PPA page, it will tell you
[18:54] <cprov> apachelogger: cool, np.
[19:34] <beuno> so, for those of you on edge, you will probably be able to edit bug tags inline tomorrow
[19:34] <beuno> you can send chocolates to intellectronica and mars
[19:44] <intellectronica> can you please send lettuce instead? i'm on a diet
[19:45] <LarstiQ> intellectronica: whereto?
[19:45] <beuno> chocolate lettuce for intellectronica then
[19:45] <Nafallo> eeeew
[19:45] <intellectronica> LarstiQ: anywhere in the world, really. sooner or later there will be a sprint there and i'll pick it up
[19:45] <Nafallo> intellectronica: lol
[19:46] <LarstiQ> intellectronica: I'll bring it with me to EuroPython then
[19:47] <intellectronica> LarstiQ: is it in the uk this year? i might even go
[19:47] <LarstiQ> intellectronica: indeed it is.
[19:59] <mrooney> Anyone know if there is a problem with mailing list password reminders? I have tried a bunch of times over the past week to get a reminder for https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/options/ubuntu-art but it never comes
[19:59] <mrooney> So unfortunately I can't change my address to the correct one so I can respond
[20:00] <beuno> mthaddon, ^
[20:00] <beuno> barry, ^
[20:00] <mthaddon> beuno: those are ubuntu mailing lists, not LP mailing lists
[20:01] <beuno> ah
[20:01] <barry> mthaddon: that's what i was going to say :)
[20:01] <beuno> elmo, ^   :)
[20:01] <mrooney> oh ok
[20:01] <mrooney> there are too many types of mailing lists :)
[20:01] <mrooney> where might I go for support in that arena?
[20:02] <mthaddon> mrooney: your best bet would be to check in #canonical-sysadmin
[20:02] <mthaddon> mrooney: and/or file an RT ("please mail requests to rt@ubuntu.com")
[21:06] <soren> On the /+activereviews page, there's "Reviews I need to do" and "Reviews I can do". How are they defined (and thus: what's the difference)?
[21:08] <beuno> soren, when s review was explictely requested from you
[21:08] <intellectronica> soren: reviews you need to do were requested specifically from you. reviews you can do are ones you have the option to review, because you're a member of a team
[21:09] <soren> beuno, intellectronica: Ah, I see. Thanks.
[21:12] <pace_t_zulu> I have a question regarding PPA... how do you produce the P_V_source.changes file?
[21:13] <maxb> It should be produced by the same process which builds the .dsc, tar.gz and diff.gz
[21:13] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: with pbuilder?
[21:14] <LarstiQ> for me that is bzr-builddeb invoking debuild invoking dpkg-buildpackage invoking..
[21:14] <LarstiQ> pace_t_zulu: pdebuild would do that I think
[21:14] <pace_t_zulu> LarstiQ: thank you
[21:14] <maxb> Whatever your build environment, it eventually involves something running dpkg-buildpackage
[21:17] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: thank you
[21:18] <pace_t_zulu> pbuilder doesn't seem to do everything needed for launchpad
[21:18] <pace_t_zulu> nor does pdebuild
[21:19] <maxb> Are you really not getting a .changes file?
[21:20] <pace_t_zulu> i do but it is not signed
[21:20] <pace_t_zulu> and it has the old version number
[21:21] <maxb> um. You must have done something wrong then
[21:21] <LarstiQ> `debsign` is the tool used (under the hood) for signing .changes files
[21:21] <maxb> Anyway pbuilder is overkill for building a source package for upload, IMO
[21:21] <LarstiQ> the old version number though..
[21:21] <maxb> I would use just dpkg-buildpackage -S
[21:23] <pace_t_zulu> http://paste.ubuntu.com/169938/
[21:23] <pace_t_zulu> that's the error i guet
[21:23] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: will try dpkg-buildpackage -S
[21:25] <maxb> pace_t_zulu: As launchpad only accepts source uploads, you must have a _source.changes for it to accept it
[21:25] <maxb> practically that means building the source with and -S flag "source only build"
[21:25] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: thank you
[21:26] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: will do the 'dpkg-buildpackage -S' as soon as the build deps are installed
[21:26] <maxb> You may or may not also need -sa or -sd
[21:27] <maxb> These specify whether to include the .orig.tar.gz, or to omit it because it can already be found in your PPA or in Ubuntu itself
[21:37] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: i have a new problem
[21:37] <pace_t_zulu> will pastbin
[21:38] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: http://paste.ubuntu.com/169946/
[21:39] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: right at the end when gpg gets involved
[21:40] <maxb> This simply means that the username and email found in the changelog entry do not have a secret key available matching them
[21:40] <maxb> Change the changelog entry footer to match the identity of your key, or manually specify the keyid (-k)
[21:41] <maxb> You can use debsign to sign the produced package after the build, rather than rebuilding
[21:41] <Shock> hi I got this error: File linux_2.6.28-11.42.diff.gz already exists in PPA, but uploaded version has different content. How do I fix it?
[21:41] <LarstiQ> Shock: bump the version
[21:41] <Shock> cant
[21:42] <Shock> what else?
[21:42] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: so should I produce a new debdiff?
[21:42] <maxb> Shock: Once you have uploaded any versioned file to an archive, you can never change it
[21:42] <pace_t_zulu> :/
[21:42] <Shock> maxb: huh?\
[21:43] <Shock> that's kinda nasty
[21:43] <maxb> No it's not
[21:43] <Shock> why is it useful?
[21:43] <maxb> It's fundamental to having version numbers actually be reliable identifiers of packages
[21:44] <Shock> that's like saying people are morons and we don't trust them with version numbers :)
[21:44] <Shock> there's gotta be a way to fix this
[21:45] <LarstiQ> Shock: the normal thing to do is bump the version, why is that not an option?
[21:45] <Shock> LarstiQ: if I bump the version the build will fail (version ABI checks)
[21:46] <LarstiQ> it checks the version of the package? *blinks*
[21:47] <LarstiQ> Shock: I'm not suggesting you bump the upstream version, but the packaging version.
[21:47] <Shock> LarstiQ: it checks the changelog version
[21:47] <LarstiQ> oh wow
[21:47] <Shock> LarstiQ: is there another way to bump the version without involving the changelog?
[21:47] <maxb> Shock: But only the "11" bit of it, no?
[21:47] <Shock> maxb: unfortunately np
[21:48] <Shock> s/np/no/
[21:48] <LarstiQ> Shock: no
[21:50] <Shock> is it ok to paste 2 lines?
[21:51] <LarstiQ> Shock: 2 lines sounds sane
[21:52] <Shock> EE: Previous or current ABI file missing!
[21:52] <Shock>     prevabidir: /build/buildd/linux-2.6.28/debian/abi/2.6.28-11.42ubuntu1/amd64/generic
[21:52] <Shock> that's what happens when I bump the version
[21:53] <LarstiQ> that's a shame
[21:53]  * LarstiQ doesn't know about kernel build specifics
[21:53] <Shock> might be a kernel build system bug, but i'm too tired to look into that now
[21:53] <LarstiQ> and I'm falling asleep, so gnight
[21:53] <Shock> g'nite
[21:54] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: should the changelog have the key in it?
[21:54] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: or is it that i hadn't specified my GPGKEY in my ~/.bashrc?
[21:56] <maxb> Either the -- line at the end of the top changelog entry must exactly correspond to the user id printed by "gpg --list-secret-keys" or you must specify the hex keyid with a -k option when building or signing
[21:58] <bdmurray> I get a weird error on a bug package if I click on a hyperlink in the bug (like an attachment) if I don't let the subscriber portlet finish loading.
[21:58] <bdmurray> s/package/page/
[21:59] <intellectronica> bdmurray: whoa. what happens?
[22:01] <bdmurray> intellectronica: the attachment continues to load but I see a brief pop up regarding couldn't find you(?)
[22:02] <intellectronica> bdmurray: "couldn't find you"?
[22:02] <bdmurray> intellectronica: it's really brief
[22:03] <bdmurray> "Cound not find your account"
[22:03] <intellectronica> bdmurray: yup, i can reproduce
[22:04] <intellectronica> bdmurray: care to file a bug? deryck or myself will look at it tomorrow
[22:05] <bdmurray> intellectronica: doing so now, shall I subscribe you?
[22:06] <intellectronica> bdmurray: no need. i get all bug mail for malone anyway
[22:06] <intellectronica> bdmurray: and thanks a lot
[22:07] <intellectronica> all this dynamic ui is quite hard to get right, and the help we're getting with testing and reporting bugs is extremely valuable
[22:09] <pace_t_zulu> maxb: thank you for the -k switch for dpgk-buildpackage
[22:48] <pace_t_zulu> is it possible to have a private PPA?
[22:51] <intellectronica> pace_t_zulu: it is, for a fee. if interested, talk to bac
[23:04] <ninix> Is it possible to people to Report a bug directly associated to our PPA ?
[23:05] <beuno> ninix, not at the moment, no
[23:05] <ninix> :(
[23:05] <beuno> just against Ubuntu packages or Projects
[23:05] <beuno> it's something we want to do, but it will take a while (6-12 months maybe)
[23:05] <ninix> Ok, thx for the info
[23:06] <wgrant> intellectronica, bdmurray: I filed a bug on that subscriber portlet error yesterday.
[23:06] <wgrant> Ah, I see matsubara has already duped it.
[23:07] <intellectronica> wgrant: yeah, looks like i missed it, and by now matsubara duped it appropriately
[23:07] <intellectronica> on my way to bed, but will look at this tomorrow
[23:07] <matsubara> wgrant: yep, even though your was older, the newer one was already triaged and targeted to a milestone.
[23:07] <wgrant> intellectronica: I filed it against launchpad rather than malone, so you probably wouldn't have seen it.
[23:07] <wgrant> matsubara: Right.
[23:07] <matsubara> and had a easier way to reproduce
[23:07] <wgrant> Yep.
[23:07] <gilir> hi, can someone kill the build https://edge.launchpad.net/~gilir/+archive/unstable/+build/999312 ? I think it's in a loop
[23:08] <intellectronica> wgrant: right, that would explain why i didn't spot it
[23:14] <maxb> OOI, does anyone know why the amd64 buildds are so much slower than the lpia ones?
[23:44] <ninix> arf :|, i just realized that If i have a package X (no dependencies) for hardy,intrepid,jaunty in my PPA. and i have also a package Y(3 codenames also) that has the X packages as dependency. and also a package Z that has X,Y has dependencies...... and i have an update of the package X..... i'll need to reupload/rebuild all the package X, Y, Z for each codename :S
[23:44] <ninix> How do you deal with that ? Am I wrong ?
[23:45] <wgrant> ninix: Do the packages actually need rebuilding every time in each release?
[23:46] <ninix> and that's a small example... i'll probably have ~50 packages in the ppa
[23:46] <wgrant> And can you not copy most of the packages from older releases to newer ones?
[23:48] <ninix> Not necessary... but if i want that my package Z can benefit the change in the package X.... yes.
[23:48] <ninix> wgrant: i'm trying to maintain my packages up-to-date for 3 codenames at the time. (1 year of ubuntu release)
[23:48] <wgrant> ninix: You could script it.
[23:50] <ninix> the fake version change + upload you mean?
[23:50] <wgrant> ninix: Yes.
[23:51] <wgrant> But I'm really not sure that you need to build them in all three releases...
[23:51] <maxb> I'm also not sure why you need to rebuild Y and Z when you change X
[23:52] <wgrant> I was wondering that, but it is possible.
[23:53] <ninix> per example... my software Z try to detect if the package X has a few support (depending on version), if it has... it enable the code etc..
[23:55] <lifeless> 'win 72
[23:56] <ninix> wgrant: i suppose that i can do a copy if my package need no change in both release ?
[23:57] <wgrant> ninix: Exactly.
[23:57] <ninix> but what i don't understand is.....
[23:58] <ninix> if my package needs no change in both...... but there is a version of a dependency in the higher release that could add some support in my package (if rebuilded) ... a simple copy will not allow that, right?