[00:55] <YokoZar> Riddell: I'll fix it today
[03:45] <kees> nhandler: oh, do you have control over the fridge calendar?  for some reason the monday security team meeting doesn't show up (though it's visible in the iCal feed)
[03:46] <nhandler> kees: Yeah, I'm not seeing that meeting. If you give me the information, I would be glad to try and add it for you
[03:46] <nhandler> kees: Oh wait, you mean the Security Team Catch-Up ?
[03:46] <kees> nhandler: yeah
[03:47] <nhandler> kees: That is showing up on the calendar for me. 5pm on the 21st on http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar
[03:47] <kees> I followed the directions on the fridge wiki page, and it showed up in the iCal just fine, but not here: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar
[03:48]  * kees scratches his head
[03:48] <nhandler> kees: Strange, I am seeing it there. Have you tried clearing your cache?
[03:48] <kees> shift-reload, yes, but let's try a full clear, one sec
[03:49] <kees> still not there.  hrmpf
[03:49] <kees> nhandler: is it possible you see it because you have rights to the calendar?
[03:49] <nhandler> kees: AFAIK, I don't have any more rights than you do
[03:50] <nhandler> kees: An edubuntu user had a similar issue a week or so ago. You might have more luck looking through the Google support information
[03:50] <kees> got another person here to load that URL, they don't see it.
[03:50] <ScottK> kees: I'm just syncing rails from Debian so we get the fix for DSA 1887-1 in Karmic.
[03:50] <kees> one thing I noticed about the iCal is that it's not "accepted" by the fridge yet.  (no "response")
[03:50] <kees> ScottK: perfect, thanks
[03:51] <kees> ScottK: after Alpha6, I was going to try to work my way down the list in the karmic column: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/universe.html
[03:51] <nhandler> kees: The fridge will always be listed under "Awaiting response"
[03:52] <kees> nhandler: ok.  weird.  dunno why you see it.  :)
[03:52] <ScottK> kees: Cool.  Well assuming the test build works you can knock one off your list.
[03:52] <ScottK> kees: While waiting for Alpha 6 is a good time for Universe stuff since the buildd's are typically not very busy ...
[03:53] <kees> ScottK: I'm always nervous I'll touch something that mythbuntu or something uses
[03:53] <ScottK> Right.  Reasonable fear.
[03:53] <ScottK> It'd by nice if LP had a view for that.
[03:54] <kees> yeah.  I've tried to extract the details before, but it's never been very successful.  I only think to bug slangasek or cjwatson about it during a freeze, which is not a good time to distract them.  ;)
[03:57] <ScottK> At a glance, it looks like it could be scripted with grep-dctrl.
[04:02] <slangasek> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/germinate-output/mythbuntu.karmic/all
[04:02] <slangasek> kees: ^^
[04:02] <slangasek> (no merged view available, I'm afraid, so you'd have to check mythbuntu && xubuntu)
[04:03] <ScottK> Is UNR all in Main now?
[04:03] <kees> slangasek: ah-ha, yes.  so *.karmic/all should catch all src packages
[04:03] <slangasek> ScottK: um... I think so
[05:37] <happyaron> kees: ping
[07:10] <dholbach> good morning
[07:51] <DktrKranz> ScottK: scipy sync request done.
[09:31] <AnAnt> why doesn't Ubuntu modify reportbug instead of making a new tool ubuntu-bug/apport ?
[09:32] <AnAnt> if a developer wants to add bug reporting scripts for a package that he is preparing, he will have to write both scripts for apport & for reportbug
[09:33] <slytherin> AnAnt: Not for both. reportbug is not used in Ubuntu at all.
[09:33] <AnAnt> slytherin: well, I meant that if I am preparing the same package for Debian too
[09:35] <slytherin> AnAnt: I don't know how either of them works. So can't really comment.
[10:07] <james_w> I'm going to be reviewing things for the next hour, so if anyone has any patches they want interactive review on please give me a shout
[10:08] <AnAnt> james_w: devscripts !
[10:24] <james_w> AnAnt: you need to redo the merge against the latest version in Ubuntu
[10:24] <james_w> I uploaded your previous work
[10:24] <james_w> and then uploaded a fix
[10:25] <AnAnt> james_w: huh ? didn't I do so ?
[10:25] <AnAnt> oh, you uploaded .53 already
[10:25] <AnAnt> ok
[10:26] <james_w> I forgot to check it mentioned to the bug in the changelog
[10:35] <AnAnt> james_w: why is XS- prefixed to Vcs-* fields ?
[10:36] <james_w> it's not
[10:36] <james_w> any more at least
[10:37] <AnAnt> ok
[10:38] <christoph_debian> XS-* are not removed by dpkg* if the fields are unknown so every field that is not implemented yet must have it
[10:38] <christoph_debian> ;)
[10:46] <AnAnt> james_w: done
[11:38] <ScottK> AnAnt: Internally reportbug and ubuntu-bug are very different programs that work very differently.
[11:39] <AnAnt> I see
[11:39] <AnAnt> well, I think it would be nice to patch dh_bugfiles to install apport scripts in the proper place
[14:55] <cortexhugo> Hi. I am new to the world of packaging. I am working through the packaging guide and the recipes (Brasero)  on the ubuntu wiki. When i give the command to debuild -S -sa I get a error: debuild: fatal error at line 1329: dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -d -us -uc -S -sa failed. Could someone please advice me here.
[14:56] <danbhfive> cortexhugo: I thought it was supposed to fail
[15:02] <sebner> cortexhugo: can you post the full error message somewhere?
[15:02] <sebner> danbhfive: why?
[15:03] <danbhfive> sebner: well, I'm trying to learn myself, but basically, the package is outdated
[15:03] <danbhfive> but I don't really know
[15:03] <sebner> danbhfive: sure but no reason to fail
[15:04] <danbhfive> sebner: according to the guide, you are incorrect
[15:04] <danbhfive> sebner: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Recipes/PackageUpdate
[15:05] <sebner> danbhfive: ??
[15:15] <slytherin> cortexhugo: It is probably because the email address in latest changelog entry (debian/changelog) is not yours.
[15:16] <sistpoty|work> -us -uc takes care of that
[15:17] <slytherin> sistpoty|work: I wasn't sure he used those options.
[15:18] <slytherin> sistpoty|work: By the way, do I have to chase motu-release team members for jav-gnome FFe or will it get reviewed eventually?
[15:18] <slytherin> sistpoty|work: The reason I ask is because I am blocked in Debian for next upload. I want to make sure all the build problems are solved in one go.
[15:19] <ScottK> sistpoty|work: Would you please ack the clutter FFe, so that can get started.
[15:19] <ScottK> slytherin: What bug?
[15:19] <sistpoty|work> slytherin: it's on the worklist. of course pinging can speed the process up somewhat :P
[15:19] <sistpoty|work> ScottK: *looking*
[15:20] <slytherin> ScottK: bug #427463
[15:22] <sebner> sistpoty|work: bah, still no nexuiz :\
[15:22] <ScottK> slytherin: Approved.
[15:22] <slytherin> ScottK: Thanks.
[15:26] <slytherin> ScottK: should I subscribe archive team?
[15:26] <ScottK> Yes.
[15:29] <sistpoty|work> ScottK: approved
[15:29] <ScottK> Thanks.
[15:30] <ScottK> It seems like we're doing pretty well this cycle to get everything in a consistent state.
[15:32] <sistpoty|work> ftbfs worries me a bit though
[15:33] <slytherin> ScottK: done
[15:33] <ScottK> sistpoty|work: I agree.  It worries me too.
[15:33] <ScottK> sistpoty|work: Want to do another FTBFS session?
[15:33] <ScottK> This time actually announce it ....
[15:34] <sistpoty|work> ScottK: hm... sounds like a good idea, though I won't find time until this Friday
[15:39] <ScottK> Friday is probably good.
[15:40] <ScottK> You should announce it today and do it Friday
[15:41] <sistpoty|work> ok, will do
[15:53] <RainCT> OT: Before I buy it, anyone has an EeePC 1005HA?
[16:03] <adolfon5> hello
[16:03] <adolfon5> good morning
[16:03] <adolfon5> some help plz
[16:03] <adolfon5> anyone?
[16:03] <adolfon5> i have a problem with Ubuntu edition
[16:04] <adolfon5> Ubuntu Desktop 9.04
[16:04] <adolfon5> anyone here know something about linux softwares?
[16:04] <pochu> ask in #ubuntu
[16:04] <adolfon5> how can i do that?
[16:04] <pochu> go to the #ubuntu channel, and ask there
[16:05] <adolfon5> thanks
[16:13] <kees> happyaron: hello!  (i'm not the maintainer of kde-gettext, but perhaps I can help anyway?)
[16:15] <happyaron> kees: how can we have that da.po update upstream?
[16:15] <kees> happyaron: I would recommend opening an upstream bug report?
[16:16] <happyaron> kees: that would be fine, but I haven't found a upstream link, :(
[16:16] <ScottK> happyaron: dpm is the Ubuntu translations coordinator.  He may have an idea about that.
[16:17] <happyaron> scottK, hi, I am just on that team and find a problem for this file in the import queue, :)
[16:17] <kees> happyaron: debian/copyright shows a KDE ftp url, so probably via the KDE bug tracker.
[16:17] <kees> happyaron: I would start with an Ubuntu bug first, so we can get it fixed in Ubuntu's package, then try to get it upstreamed.
[16:17] <ScottK> happyaron: I'd ask in #kubuntu-devel then as some people there know a bit about this stuff.
[16:18] <happyaron> kees: I have uploaded a fixed one to the queue, that's fine
[16:18] <happyaron> kees: I'll go to find upstream tracker
[16:18] <kees> okay, cool
[16:19] <happyaron> ScottK thanks
[16:19] <dpm> happyaron: I'd also go for ScottK's suggestion: asking at #kubuntu-devel
[16:19] <happyaron> dpm: okay, will go now
[16:19] <dpm> happyaron: and thanks for your rocking work in helping with translations! :-)
[16:20] <happyaron> dpm: my pleasure
[16:25] <happyaron> kees: the template is not in KDE l10n repository, I think
[16:25] <ScottK> james_w: I'm working with someone who's using Debian Testing and the version of bzr-builddeb he has appears seriously ancient.  Would you have a recommendation what version would be best to use with bzr 1.17?
[16:26] <kees> happyaron: ah-ha, well, then, just an Ubuntu bug then.
[16:26] <james_w> ScottK: anything later should be fine
[16:26] <james_w> I should get an upload to Debian
[16:26] <ScottK> james_w: Thanks.
[16:31] <happyaron> kees: guys in kubuntu-devel said the package is not used anymore, and only for kde3
[16:32] <happyaron> kees: so I think only a ubuntu bug filed is acceptable perhaps
[16:32] <kees> happyaron: okay
[16:35] <superm1> kees, what were you trying to break in mythbuntu and xubuntu yesterday?
[16:38] <kees> superm1: oh, nothing at all.  I was just saying that when freezes happen, I don't upload even to universe for fear of hitting a package in one of the isos
[16:39] <superm1> kees, oh okay :P
[16:47] <adolfon> hello again
[16:55] <sistpoty|work> slangasek: would you be available this Fri at 19.00 UTC for another FTBFS session?
[16:56] <sebner> sistpoty|work: yeah, another session. /me is keen to follow :D
[16:57] <sistpoty|work> heh
[16:58] <ScottK> Note to sponsors, there are, IIRC, FTBFS fixes waiting for sponsorship.  Quick turnaround on these will motivate people to do more.
[16:58] <slangasek> sistpoty|work: I'm off work this Friday, family in town
[16:59] <sistpoty|work> ah, ok, thanks slangasek
[17:07] <quadrispro> hi guys
[17:09] <sistpoty|work> hi quadrispro
[17:09] <quadrispro> hi sistpoty|work
[17:24] <quadrispro> stgraber: I've released this https://launchpad.net/nautilus-pastebin, that extension and pastebinit does almost the same, I thought you might be interested in merging some code
[17:24] <RoAkSoAx> hey guys , I'm preparing a security update for nginx, and I have a question regarding the versioning. If the version is 0.6.34-2ubuntu1~hardy1, should the security update be: 0.6.34-2ubuntu1~hardy1.1 or 0.6.34-2ubuntu1.1~hardy1?
[17:25] <quadrispro> I think it should be ~hardy1.1
[17:26] <jdstrand> RoAkSoAx: please see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Packaging
[17:26] <RoAkSoAx> k thanks quadrispro :)
[17:26] <RoAkSoAx> jdstrand, yes I'm there but it does not say what to do with versioning when we have ~hardy, ~intrepid, etc
[17:27] <jdstrand> RoAkSoAx: ok. please use ~hardy1.1
[17:27] <RoAkSoAx> jdstrand, thanks ;)
[17:28] <jdstrand> RoAkSoAx: thank you! just make sure you mark the status as 'In Progress' so the debdiffs show up in our reporting
[17:28]  * sistpoty|work heads home... cya
[17:29] <RoAkSoAx> jdstrand,  bug #430064 :)
[17:31] <jdstrand> kees: fyi ^
[17:31] <kees> woo, yes, I'll snag that
[17:31] <jdstrand> (he's on community this week)
[17:33] <kees> RoAkSoAx: that version is for backports...
[17:33] <kees> RoAkSoAx: current stable releases show:
[17:33] <kees> nginx | 0.5.33-1        | hardy/universe
[17:33] <kees> nginx | 0.6.32-3ubuntu1 | intrepid/universe
[17:33] <kees> nginx | 0.6.35-0ubuntu1 | jaunty/universe
[17:34] <kees> but, for doing a backport patch, yes, append .1
[17:35] <RoAkSoAx> kees, so I should apply the security fix for both the stable release and the backport?
[17:37] <kees> RoAkSoAx: that would be ideal, yes :)
[17:37] <imexil> Hi,  I'm wondering about the package name "liblua5.1-0-dev" wich is simply the dev package of lua version 5.1 but what does the -0 bit tell me
[17:37] <RoAkSoAx> kees, ok, will do then :)
[17:38] <kees> RoAkSoAx: thanks!  let me know if I can help.
[17:39] <RoAkSoAx> kees, will do :) thanks!
[17:42] <ScottK> RoAkSoAx: Ideally for backports, we'd just do an updated backport of the fixed version rather than prepare a separate upload for backports.
[17:47] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, ok, so backport it is. :)
[17:47] <ScottK> RoAkSoAx: Feel free to ping me when you are ready to have the backport approved.
[17:51] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, ok will do thanks! In this case should I update the package to the new upstream version which has the security fix (i.e. from  0.6.34-2ubuntu1~intrepid1 to 0.6.39-0ubunut1 ?) or should I just apply the security fix?
[17:51] <ScottK> I'd rather update to the new upstream and rebackport, but it'll need a bit of testing first.
[17:55] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, ok, I'll try to find the best solution for this then.
[17:56] <ScottK> RoAkSoAx: The testing standard for backports is, "builds, installs, runs".  It's not very hard to achieve.
[17:57] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, yep, I'll update the packages and test them
[18:11] <ximion> geser: Hi! Are you there?
[18:15] <geser> ximion: yes
[18:16] <ximion> geser: Great! Do you remember my packaging of libqt4intf? ( http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/libqtintf4 )
[18:17] <geser> yes
[18:18] <ximion> The problem with this library was that is was not versioned, so I contacted upstream and asked if they could fix it. After a discussion how to name the new lib they released a new version which is now versioned and fixed some other small issues to make the packaging easier.
[18:19] <ximion> So, could you please take a short look on the modifications? (There are no more lintian errors now) If something else is needed, I submit it to upstream. (If you dont's have time, no problem.)
[18:20] <geser> not right now, perhaps later
[18:21] <ximion> geser: okay. :-)
[18:47] <desrt> hello.  does anyone know how to pass additional ./configure arguments when using debhelper with the 'tiny' rules file?
[18:49] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, Should I update only the version in karmic (from 0.6.35-0ubuntu1 to 0.6.39-0ubuntu1~jaunty) and then change the changelog entries for hardy and intrepid, or should I upgrade the versions in intrepid and hardy backports, which differ from jaunty (i.e. from 0.6.34-2ubuntu1~intrepid1 to 0.6.39), so that the we can keep the changelog entry from the previous backports?
[18:50] <ScottK> Don't worry about keeping the previous backports changelogs
[18:51] <RoAkSoAx> ok thanks :)
[18:55] <loic-m> Could anyone with backports rights have a look at Bug #333651 ? It's been marked confirmed and reported to work for a while, but still not gone through.
[19:02] <james_w> desrt: override_dh_auto_configure:\n\t./configure --what-not
[19:02] <desrt> fascinating.
[19:03] <james_w> there's no variables for "append this option" or anything
[19:03] <desrt> that's a shame
[19:03] <desrt> i guess i can look at the config.log to find out what the 'default' list is
[19:04] <desrt> ouch.  that's a big list.
[19:04] <james_w> oh, no, easier way
[19:04] <desrt> some build-in variable for the standard options?
[19:04] <ScottK> loic-m: Done.
[19:05] <james_w> override_dh_auto_configure:\n\tdh_auto_configure -- --what-not
[19:05] <james_w> see dh_auto_configure(1)
[19:05] <desrt> oh yes.  that's quite a lot better, i agree :)
[19:05] <loic-m> thanks a lot ScottK
[19:05] <desrt> james_w: thanks for the tip
[19:05] <james_w> np
[19:06] <desrt> ugh.  some evil unescaping is going down here.
[19:14] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, sorry to bother you again but I have one more doubt. nginx in Karmic is 0.7.61-1ubuntu1, and nginx in Jaunty is 0.6.35-0ubuntu1. According to the documentation we can only backport packages that are already on the repositories. So will this mean that I *cant* update package in nginx, and then backport it to hardy and intrepid right?
[19:15] <RoAkSoAx> I mean *cant* update package in Jaunty to 0.6.39-0ubuntu1, and then backport it to hardy and intrepid?
[19:15] <ScottK> Sure you can.
[19:15] <ScottK> The docs aren't very clear on that and you need to be clear in the backport bug what you want.
[19:16] <ScottK> The docs really mean to say it has to be a backport for the Ubuntu archive, not from some external place.
[19:17] <RoAkSoAx> Oh ok, they got me confused on it. Anyways, I already have the packages so I guess I;ll setup my test environments :)
[20:21] <desrt> does anyone know how to do separate libfoo/libfoo-dbg packages with dh rules.tiny?
[20:27]  * desrt tries the obvious thing
[20:31] <desrt> and it works.
[20:50] <pochu> desrt: what is it?
[20:55] <RoAkSoAx> Hey guys, I was wondering, do we still need to care about providing fixes for sparc (since Ubuntu no longer provides releases for it)?
[21:00] <soren> RoAkSoAx: "need" is such a strong word :)
[21:01] <RoAkSoAx> soren, haha well for exmaple, debian provides a fix for building a package on sparc, thus, in Ubuntu we don't longer provide a release for sparc, so that fix would not help us, right?
[21:02] <soren> We haven't dropped sparc.
[21:02] <RoAkSoAx> I'm asking this because I'f there's no need for that fix, I can just apply a patch in the Ubuntu package instead of merging it from debian
[21:02] <soren> It's just not a supported architecture anymore. Like powerpc, for instance.
[21:03] <desrt> pochu: http://pastebin.ca/1568757
[21:03] <desrt> pochu: override_dh_strip:
[21:05] <RoAkSoAx> soren, right, since it's not supported anymore, should I still need to care on fixing bugs related to that architecture?
[21:05] <soren> 20:00:22 < soren> RoAkSoAx: "need" is such a strong word :)
[21:06] <RoAkSoAx> soren, so we don't :), we could but we don't have to :)
[21:09] <zul_> its like a hobby arch
[21:10] <RoAkSoAx> zul_, ok :)
[21:46] <desrt> PPA builders have a bit of a backlog...
[21:49] <james_w> most of it is scored very low though
[21:49] <james_w> it's a test rebuild of the archive
[21:49] <james_w> but just about anything else jumps ahead of that in the queue
[21:49]  * desrt is waiting 2 hours
[21:49] <james_w> though there may be a bit of a backlog independent of that
[21:50] <james_w> and the estimated wait times are a little untrustworthy :-)
[21:51]  * desrt does a pbuilder
[21:56] <desrt> Release version:  	karmic-alpha-6
[21:56] <desrt> Release code name: 	
[21:56] <desrt> Expected: 	in 3 hours
[21:56] <desrt> oh.  i see.
[21:59] <zooko> Could I interest anyone in uploading Tahoe-LAFS into Karmic?
[21:59] <zooko> It is all reviewed and approved and all of its dependencies are in.
[22:00] <zooko> http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/tahoe-lafs
[22:03] <zooko> And Tahoe-LAFS was featured in Ubuntu Podcast, so it would be nice if people could actually test it out in Karmic. :-)
[22:12] <zooko> Here is the Feature Freeze exception showing why Tahoe-LAFS is sufficiently cool that it belongs in Karmic: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/421802
[22:24] <debfx_> siretart: could you please update the Debian keepassx package to 0.4.1, so it can be synced to karmic?
[23:03] <ahe> i just uploaded a package to my ppa that builds fine with debuild and pbuilder but the build server fails with this error message:
[23:03] <ahe> dpkg-genchanges: error: cannot read files list file: No such file or directory
[23:03] <ahe> dpkg-buildpackage: error: dpkg-genchanges gave error exit status 2
[23:04] <ahe> any ideas what the problem could be?
[23:09] <soren> Do you have a link to the build log?
[23:27] <ahe> soren: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/31923435/buildlog_ubuntu-karmic-amd64.libnotify-ruby_0.3.3-0ubuntu1~ppa1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[23:33] <mruiz> how should I modify debian/rules to adopt quilt as patch system ?
[23:40] <zooko> ScottK: I've already asked iulian, rainct, and kirkland about this, but none of them have been available to clue me in.
[23:40] <zooko> ScottK: is there anything I can do to push Tahoe-LAFS into Karmic sooner?
[23:40] <kirkland> zooko: i'm totally heads down on virt/cloud stuff, no time for anything else
[23:41] <zooko> As far as I know everything is lined up and ready to go -- we just need somebody to upload it.
[23:41] <kirkland> zooko: sorry, i know your fs is cloud-related too
[23:41] <zooko> kirkland: I appreciate that.  I'm glad Karmic is going to have good virt/cloud stuff.  :-)
[23:41] <kirkland> zooko: i mean on particular, assigned tasks;  i'm having trouble fitting anything else in
[23:41] <zooko> I don't want to be a pest, but if there's anything I can do to get Tahoe-LAFS into Karmic sooner, then I can ask folks to test it and make sure it is solid when Karmic goes gold.
[23:42] <zooko> kirkland: yes, I understood.  I'll leave you alone until further notice.  :-)
[23:43] <kirkland> zooko: i'm really, really sorry
[23:43] <kirkland> zooko: i like what i've seen so far, though, fwiw
[23:44] <zooko> Thanks for the encouragement!  Good luck with your cloud work!
[23:44] <ScottK> zooko: A lot of people are tied up with getting ready for Alpha 6.  Subscribe ubuntu-universe-sponsors and be patient.
[23:44] <ScottK> Did the python package (I don't recall the name) build this time?
[23:45] <zooko> ScottK: will do.  Tahoe-LAFS depends on three Python packages that are all three in Karmic now.
[23:45] <ScottK> The crytoppp one (or something like that) is the one I was thinking of
[23:46] <zooko> It is in Karmic now.
[23:46] <zooko> http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=pycryptopp&searchon=names&suite=karmic&section=all
[23:48] <ahe> soren: did you find something?
[23:48] <ahe> soren: strange thing is the build for i386 succeeded
[23:49] <ahe> soren: https://launchpad.net/~aheck/+archive/ppa
[23:49] <ahe> i tested it on amd64 and it fails on all but i386
[23:58] <zooko> Okay time to take my 5 year old boy to see "Up". :-)  If anybody has questions about Tahoe-LAFS, see channel #tahoe on freenode.