[00:09] <bitplane> anyone around to answer my dumb questions?
[00:10] <bitplane> do packages generally do a "make install" to install something?
[00:10] <bitplane> and is there an equivalent of "make uninstall" or is that something I made up and is completely unconventional
[00:11] <maxb> < bitplane> do packages generally do a "make install" to install something?
[00:11] <maxb> Well that all depends on how you define "package"
[00:11] <azeem_> depends on the Makefile; automake e.g. ships an uninstall target by default
[00:11] <maxb> and how you define "install"
[00:12] <bitplane> well, currently I do "make" followed by a "make install" to compile, then copy my binaries into the system
[00:12] <maxb> Upstream source packages typically provide a "make install"
[00:12] <bitplane> it also calls a script which adds new mime types, installs icons and a desktop file
[00:13] <bitplane> registers my thumbnailer with gconf, etc
[00:13] <maxb> Debian/Ubuntu source packages wrap the upstream source and typically use the "make install" step to install files *into the binary package they are building*
[00:14] <maxb> Debian/Ubuntu binary packages go nowhere near "make install" in their installation through dpkg / apt
[00:14] <bitplane> hmm okay
[00:14] <bitplane> so packages generally contain binaries for the platform, rather than instructions on how to build them?
[00:15] <bitplane> which is what pbuilder does?
[00:16] <maxb> Well, be careful what you mean when you say "packages". There are source packages, which are the recipes for building binary packages.
[00:17] <maxb> And there are upstream source tarballs which could concievably be termed "packages" by upstreams
[00:17] <bitplane> ah okay, by package i mean whatever is downloaded (deb files?) when I type "apt-get install x"
[00:18] <directhex> a source package, typically, contains a "make install" call at one point where the prefix is not /usr or somesuch, but a temporary folder for the build process. these binaries are then copied into a deb archive, and when the deb is installed, they go into /usr
[00:18] <directhex> (very very potted summary)
[00:18] <bitplane> fantastic, that makes sense
[00:18] <bitplane> thanks
[01:28] <LLStarks> hi. do i request package updates here?
[01:28] <dtchen> no, on Launchpad.
[01:31] <dtchen> LLStarks: specifically, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/FAQ#Can%20%3Cpackage%3E%20be%20upgraded?
[02:51] <artfwo> hello! I wonder, are new packages still accepted to karmic through the revu?
[03:50] <artfwo> hello! I wonder, are new packages still accepted to karmic through the revu?
[03:54] <vorian> for a short while longer artfwo
[03:55] <vorian> you have until August 27th
[03:55] <artfwo> well, then I'd like to request a review for http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/scantailor - a Qt-based interactive post-processing tool for scanned books
[03:55] <vorian> hrm
[03:55] <vorian> the Qt part sound promising
[03:56] <artfwo> it has already been advocated earlier, but rejected from the archive
[03:56] <vorian> what was the reason?
[03:57] <artfwo> there was a CC-licensed icon packed into a GPL binary
[03:57] <vorian> yikes
[03:57] <artfwo> I have replaced the icon, and this change have been accepted upstream as well
[03:58] <dtchen> good work
[03:58] <vorian> that is really worth a look tonight :)
[03:58] <vorian> i'll see if i can get another motu to check it out as well
[03:59] <artfwo> I shall remain online then, in case something needs a quick fix
[04:01] <vorian> libqt-dev is at 4.5.1 right?
[04:01] <micahg> !info libqt-deb karmic | vorian
[04:01] <artfwo> it's 4.5.2 now
[04:03] <vorian> lex has been busy i see
[04:04] <vorian> grr
[04:05] <vorian> liboost-test
[04:05] <artfwo> yep, the package works with any libboost >= 1.35
[04:05] <artfwo> that's why I have put a dependency on the default version
[04:06] <vorian> it would be great if libboost1.38 had the test binary
[04:06] <artfwo> it does
[04:06] <artfwo> there is libboost-test1.38-dev
[04:07] <vorian> ah, so it does
[04:07] <vorian> artfwo: will it build with 1.38?
[04:08] <artfwo> yes, I have built a binary yesterday in my PPA
[04:08] <vorian> mind changing that in the control then?
[04:09] <artfwo> I don't mind, but what the purpose of having a "default" boost metapackage then?
[04:09] <artfwo> java package ought to build-depend on default-jdk, why boost cannot be the default?
[04:10] <vorian> most all KDE packages migrated away from the "default" boost during the last cycle
[04:10] <vorian> besides, 1.38 is in main
[04:10] <artfwo> okay, will do just now
[04:12] <vorian> everything else looks perfecto
[04:12] <artfwo> grr, I'm having the "425 Security: Bad IP connecting." error with REVU again
[04:13] <vorian> noooo
[04:14] <artfwo> I guess it's a problem with my ISP
[04:21] <artfwo> vorian, there
[04:21] <artfwo> uploaded with libboost-test1.38-dev
[04:32] <vorian> thanks artfwo
[04:34] <vorian> artfwo: ack'd
[04:34] <artfwo> vorian, thanks!
[04:34] <vorian> thank you artfwo :)
[06:24] <stochastic> is anyone in here familiar with the qmake system?
[08:57] <stochastic> If a copyright notice in a source file reads "Copyright (C) 2005, 2006 Sean Bolton and others" is this okay for inclusion? and if there's another sourcefile that reads simply "Copyright (C) 2005, 2006 Sean Bolton" do they both need to appear in the debian/copyright file?
[09:03] <artfwo> I'd include both of them separately
[10:46] <qiyong> i think the distro is buggy on this
[10:46] <qiyong> clamav-daemon (clamd) doesn't start up autoamatically
[10:47] <qiyong> no startup links
[10:47] <qiyong> there's K19clamav-daemon
[10:47] <qiyong> is that bug?
[10:47] <qiyong> the default installation should have get it right
[10:48] <qiyong> # find /etc/rc?.d | grep clamav-d
[10:48] <qiyong> /etc/rc0.d/K19clamav-daemon
[10:48] <qiyong> /etc/rc1.d/K19clamav-daemon
[10:48] <qiyong> /etc/rc2.d/K19clamav-daemon
[10:48] <qiyong> /etc/rc3.d/K19clamav-daemon
[10:48] <qiyong> /etc/rc4.d/K19clamav-daemon
[10:48] <qiyong> /etc/rc5.d/K19clamav-daemon
[10:49] <qiyong> /etc/rc6.d/K19clamav-daemon
[10:49] <qiyong> anyone confirm me this?
[10:50] <StevenK> qiyong: Don't do that!
[10:50] <StevenK> !pastebin
[10:52] <qiyong> StevenK: this chann is silent, paste doesn't hurt?
[10:52] <Hobbsee> qiyong: it still does.
[10:52] <Hobbsee> mainly because people read scrollback
[11:01] <Laney> ooh
[11:01] <Laney> is ff 3.5 happening?
[11:38] <daurnimator> evenin
[11:48] <slytherin> Laney: what do you mean?
[11:50] <Laney> slytherin: to karmic
[11:50] <Laney> as default
[11:51] <slytherin> ah that. yes it is.
[11:51] <Laney> exciting
[11:53] <slytherin> I am using 3.5 on jaunty and it looks to be faster than 3.0.x
[12:14] <blackmoon> whare i can fing a guide for packaging a kernel module? (i need use module-assistant)
[12:14] <blackmoon> *find
[12:14] <directhex> you need to use dkms, not m-a
[12:15] <slytherin> blackmoon: AFAIK, module-assistant is deprecated in favour of dkms.
[12:15] <blackmoon> ah, ok...
[12:16] <blackmoon> do you know a guide for packaging with dkms?
[12:17] <directhex> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Kernel/DkmsDriverPackage
[12:17] <blackmoon> directhex: thank you
[13:28] <tseng> Hi folk, I am currently worknig on bug #408825
[13:28] <tseng> Marc made some comments about my previous patch
[13:29] <tseng> I understand the first 2 comments made about version and changelog formats
[13:29] <tseng> but I am lost with the patch tagging
[13:29] <tseng> I have tried reading https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/PatchSystems and got more lost
[13:32] <geser> I guess he meant https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/PatchTaggingGuidelines
[13:34] <tseng> so do I just add a bunch of text manually to the finnished patch or is there an automated way?
[13:36] <geser> which patch system does this package use?
[13:36] <tseng> cdbs i think
[13:37] <tseng> when i type what-patch i get cdbs
[13:37] <tseng> though i have no idea how to use cdbs
[13:39] <azeem> tseng: cdbs patches are usually just diffs; so adding a comment on the top according to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/PatchTaggingGuidelines should be fine I guess
[13:40] <tseng> so - just want to get the order right here:
[13:40] <tseng> I applied the upstream patch
[13:40] <tseng> directly to the code in the tree,
[13:41] <geser> no, place the upstream patch in debian/patches
[13:41] <tseng> updated the changelog and debian/controle file
[13:41] <tseng> aahh
[13:41] <tseng> will try again
[13:41] <geser> (check that it applies: patch --dry-run < debian/patches/yourpatch)
[13:41] <mdeslaur> tseng: I use the cdbs-edit-patch tool
[13:43] <mdeslaur> tseng: you enter the tree, do something like "cdbs-edit-patch 05_security_xxx.diff, apply the patch, and type "exit"
[13:43] <mdeslaur> the patch should get automatically added to debian/patches
[13:43] <mdeslaur> and then, you edit debian/patches in a text editor and add the stuff described in the wiki to the top of the patch
[13:43] <tseng> thanks
[14:16] <loic-m> Is today REVU day?
[14:28] <loic-m> I'd appreciate if a MOTU could review (and hopefully advocate) gmameui, a Gnome front-end for MAME (arcade emulator) at http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/gmameui
[14:29] <loic-m> I'm packaging it within the Debian Games Team, but since the RFS is still on it won't make it in time for Karmic unless I go through REVU
[14:30] <loic-m> package should be in good shape, there was one review in DGT already
[14:48] <lemon> I'm learning to become the MOTU,so what's the first step?
[14:51] <loic-m> !MOTU
[14:52] <Laney> see topic
[14:52] <lemon> thanks for all
[17:11] <RoAkSoAx> DktrKranz, any luck with lekhonee :=)?
[17:29] <s0nix> can we upgrade a package with dpkg ? (without using -r, -i)
[17:31] <s0nix> ha, -i replace it automatically. nvm.
[18:10] <xnox> Heya! in which version of debhelper did override_dh_* target appeared?
[18:17] <mrooney> Whoa, 1.9.0-6-0ubuntu1 is newer than 1.9.0-7?
[18:17] <mrooney> Does apt prefer Ubuntu packages over Debian regardless of version?
[18:19] <pochu> no, and it's not
[18:21] <mrooney> pochu: oh, then what is going here: http://pastebin.com/m2715c2d5
[18:21] <mrooney> am I missing something?
[18:21] <pochu> err, it is
[18:21] <mrooney> hm do you understand why?
[18:21] <pochu> because the upstream version in 1.9.0-7 is 1.9.0 and 7 is the debian revision
[18:22] <pochu> and in 1.9.0-6-0ubuntu1, the upstream version is 1.9.0-6 and the debian revision is 0ubuntu1
[18:22] <mrooney> oh hm
[18:22] <pochu> and 1.9.0-6 is greater than 1.9.0
[18:22] <mrooney> I see
[18:22] <mrooney> so I named that PPA version incorrectly?
[18:22] <pochu> looks like :-)
[18:22] <mrooney> buggers.
[18:22] <mrooney> what should it have been?
[18:23] <pochu> 1.9.0-6ubuntu1~ppa1
[18:23] <mrooney> ahhhh
[18:23] <mrooney> thanks!
[18:23] <mrooney> I guess I should just delete the package from LP
[18:26] <cyphermox> mrooney: when you run lintian on your package, i think it would normally say something like native-package-with-dash-version as a warning
[18:26] <mrooney> ah, all those lines scroll by in like .5 seconds
[18:26] <cyphermox> that's one flag to spot that there could be something wrong
[18:27] <cyphermox> yep :)
[18:27] <jtimberman> mathiaz: ping?
[19:05] <slytherin> directhex: here by any chance?
[19:05] <directhex> yes
[19:05] <directhex> until the wife finishes changing
[19:06] <slytherin> directhex: remember we discussed about the resolution on my LCD TV?
[19:06] <slytherin> do you have time to guide me to fix it?
[19:07] <directhex> sorry, no - but i'd direct you towards http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/Working_with_Modelines and http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/Modeline_Database as a place to start
[19:08] <maxb> Hi, can anyone point me to simplish source package for something using qmake upstream?
[19:09] <slytherin> directhex: will take a look
[19:39] <quadrispro> hi guys
[22:26] <ximion> Hi everybody!
[22:27] <ximion> Could someone please review the smile package at revu? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/smile
[22:27] <ximion> The package should be fine now.