[02:38] <sproaty> Following this page https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/UploadErrors regarding my PPA errors - "File <UPLOADED_FILE> already exists in <LOCATION>, but uploaded version has different contents." - it says to extract the orig. tarball, run debuild -S on it, then re-upload, leaving out the .tar.gz file
[02:38] <sproaty> so I've moved my .tar.gz away from the directory I'm trying to "dput" with, but it's giving me an error - "can't open the .tar.gz"- so how can I omit it?
[02:43] <wgrant> sproaty: You can't just move it away. You have to convince debuild that it shouldn't include the .orig.tar.gz in the .changes file. What is the version number you're using?
[02:44] <nhandler> Just a heads up, https://help.launchpad.net/LaunchpadReleases is pretty out of date. It has not been updated since 2.2.7 (22nd July 2009)
[02:46] <sproaty> wgrant, pbuilder 0.138ubuntu1 // devscripts 2.10.48ubuntu1 (I search for debuilder in synaptic, that's what came up)
[02:46] <wgrant> soren: I mean the version of the package you're trying to build.
[02:46] <lifeless> s/soren/sproaty
[02:46] <lifeless> ?
[02:46] <sproaty> oh
[02:47] <sproaty> it's my own program, 0.38.1
[02:48] <wgrant> sproaty: So the version string in the changelog is '0.38.1', not '0.38.1-<SOMETHING>'?
[02:52] <sproaty> wgrant, yup - whyteboard (0.38.1) jaunty; urgency=low
[02:52] <sproaty> I previously uploaded it then I missed out a Build-Depends, so my build failed
[02:52] <wgrant> sproaty: OK, so that's probably not what you want to do.
[02:53] <sproaty> and I can't upload another in its place
[02:53] <wgrant> Right. You can never upload the same version twice.
[02:53] <sproaty> yeah, I'd like to just delete the whole PPA and start again, but they can't be deletedI heard
[02:54] <wgrant> So you need increase the version, but you probably want to also make the packege non-native (that is, add a '-<SOMETHING>' to the version)
[02:54] <sproaty> so should I just name this 0.38.1~1 ?
[02:54] <wgrant> 0.38.1~1 < 0.38.1, so no.
[02:55] <wgrant> See the first couple of paragraphs of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Complete#Changing%20the%20Original%20Tarball
[02:55] <sproaty> I don't want .2, so .11 it'll be. Bummer though since I want higher versions to indicate fixes/new stuff
[02:55] <wgrant> .11 > .2
[02:55] <sproaty> alright, thanks.
[02:56] <wgrant> No, we're not done yet.
[02:56] <wgrant> This is why we have non-native packages.
[02:56] <wgrant> The bit of the version after the '-' indicates the revision of the packaging.
[02:57] <wgrant> So you don't have to make a new upstream version (eg. 0.38.2) just to fix the packaging.
[02:57] <wgrant> You could initially have 0.38.1-0ppa1, find you forgot a build dependency, so just upload 0.38.1-0ppa2
[02:58] <wgrant> Now, in this case you should have a whyteboard_0.38.1.orig.tar.gz. That's the tarball of the 0.38.1 release, normally without the debian/ directory.
[02:58] <sproaty> ah yes, that sounds good - clearly states that this version is just revision changing
[02:58] <wgrant> That way you don't have to reupload all the code each time, just the diff with debian/* in it.
[02:59] <sproaty> I don't have an .orig file though. The .tar.gz created after I first ran debuild -S contained the debian/ dir
[03:00] <wgrant> The .orig.tar.gz isn't created by any Debian-related tools.
[03:00] <wgrant> It's just the plain upstream release.
[03:00] <sproaty> but the easiest fix now is to change the revision, rebuild and upload ?
[03:01] <wgrant> I would strongly recommend that you get the orig.tar.gz and switch to versioning similar to my suggestion.
[03:01] <wgrant> Make your build-depends fix, and upload -0ppa1
[03:01] <wgrant> Actually: make your build-depends fix, test your package in pbuilder to make sure you don't need any more, then upload.
[03:02] <sproaty> alright, I'll give it a shot
[03:05] <sproaty> I'll make my .orig.tar.gz by tarring my files and remove the debian/* ?
[03:06] <wgrant> Ah, you don't have a real release?
[03:07] <sproaty> This was my first PPA upload
[03:07] <wgrant> It's not PPA-related.
[03:08] <sproaty> well my release procedure thus far -- work on files, think "ok, release". tar them up -- host them online. I was using dpkg-builder to make a deb but that was specific to my CPU architecture
[03:08] <sproaty> so each new release was justall my files tarred up
[03:09] <wgrant> Ah.
[03:09] <sproaty> It;s only 90kb or so
[03:09] <wgrant> So, one would normally create a distribution-neutral gzipped release tarball.
[03:09] <wgrant> Then build the packages on top of that.
[03:09] <sproaty> I think that's what I've been doing
[03:10] <wgrant> I thought you said you didn't have such a tarball yet.
[03:10] <sproaty> It's all python, so my tarball is just all the python code
[03:11] <sproaty> seems pretty distribution netural to me :p
[03:11] <wgrant> If you have a distribution-neutral source tarball, it is probably your orig.tar.gz.
[03:12] <sproaty> ok
[03:13] <sproaty> I've uploaded the -0ppa1 rev, hopefully that'll build
[03:13] <wgrant> Did you test it in pbuilder locally?
[03:13] <sproaty> I should learn that pbuilder testing
[03:13] <sproaty> nah laziness took over
[03:14] <wgrant> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PbuilderHowto
[03:16] <sproaty> hence, laziness :D
[03:17] <sproaty> I'll give it a skim over
[03:20] <sproaty> wgrant,  any idea how much space does this image take?
[03:21] <sproaty> well, -0ppa1 was accepted, woo :)
[03:21] <wgrant> sproaty: Probably a couple of hundred megabytes.
[03:22] <sproaty> I'm pretty sure the build-depends I added should now help it pass the build. my install script does nothing fancy
[03:27] <sproaty> yup, it built with pdeb!
[03:29] <sproaty> built quicker on LP than on my local machine, I think...heh
[03:30] <sproaty> wgrant: thanks very much for your patience and support  :)
[03:36] <sproaty> woo! installed it via apt, too. Excellent, excellent!
[03:39] <wgrant> sproaty: Well done.
[03:42] <sproaty> side-question, if you don't mind since you're knowledgable about debbuild - does it always prompt for your GPG key's password twice?
[03:42] <sproaty> I think I changed keys because of it, kept thinking I was typing the wrong pass
[03:42] <lifeless> when you have two things to sign and no agent, yes.
[03:42] <wgrant> sproaty: Unless you have a gpg agent set up, yes. It has to sign two files.
[03:43] <sproaty> ahh I was wondering what that agent thingy was on about
[03:43] <wgrant> (the two files are the .dsc and the .changes)
[03:44] <sproaty> oh right, thanks
[04:18] <RenatoSilva> There really isn't a way to undo the "Target to release" in a bug?
[04:18] <wgrant> RenatoSilva: Set the status to Won't Fix. That is as close as it can get.
[04:19] <RenatoSilva> wgrant: but can I set it back to the normal status?
[04:20] <RenatoSilva> hum it won't go back to the previows way
[04:20] <RenatoSilva> I click Target to release, then Trunk appears there, it creates a new line below the yellow are
[04:20] <RenatoSilva> a
[04:21] <RenatoSilva> and mode all data from yellow box to there
[04:21] <RenatoSilva> I want to revert this
[04:22] <RenatoSilva> wgrant: I want to revert this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/moin-solenoid/+bug/433862
[04:22] <RenatoSilva> wgrant: to this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/moin-solenoid/+bug/448411
[04:27] <wgrant> RenatoSilva: If you set the trunk task to Won't Fix, the main task will open up again.
[04:28] <RenatoSilva> ok let me try
[04:28] <wgrant> (yes, I believe this is probably the most ridiculously obscure fact about Launchpad Bugs)
[04:30] <RenatoSilva> wgrant: but I want to remove the Trunk part
[04:30] <RenatoSilva> wgrant: it goes back to the yelllow box, but the box below doesn't disappear :(
[04:31] <wgrant> RenatoSilva: You cannot remove the trunk task. The best you can do is reactivate the main one.
[04:32] <RenatoSilva> wgrant: LP could have warn the user then. I thought I could undo that
[04:32] <RenatoSilva> Maybe it was a mistake
[04:32] <wgrant> RenatoSilva: It's just like "Also affects project"
[04:32] <RenatoSilva> In fact it is, because I don't use multiple series
[04:32] <wgrant> Both should be undoable, but are not at this time, and don't cause any big problems.
[04:35] <RenatoSilva> wgrant: using it makes the affects field point to trunk, like the bug is happening in trunk, which is not necessarily correct. Well, actually it means that the bug affects that series, whatever release right? but it sounds a bit weird there. Using the previous approach, the affects field just says the project name
[04:36] <wgrant> RenatoSilva: I mean the effects of mistaken use of "Target to release" and "Also affects project" are the same -- a single extra incorrect task which just needs to be closed.
[04:37] <RenatoSilva> ok
[04:37] <RenatoSilva> thanks
[04:52] <sproaty> if I'm uploading my PPA with dput, and specify a specific ubuntu version, does that overwrite the value in the changelog? I first had to change 'unstable' to 'jaunty' -- whyteboard (0.38.1-0ppa1) jaunty; urgency=low
[04:52] <sproaty> ...in order to be able to upload my files
[04:56] <wgrant> sproaty: The upload path does override the distroseries in the changelog, but I recommend against using that (you have to change the changelog anyway).
[04:56] <sproaty> ended up being rejected, guess I'll have to change the ppa rev to be distro-specific
[04:57] <sproaty> rejected due to already existing but with different contents
[04:57] <wgrant> Right, you can't upload the same version twice to the same PPA.
[04:57] <wgrant> -0ppa1~jaunty1, -0ppa1~hardy1, etc.
[04:57] <sproaty> I looked at intrepid/jaunty/hardy and they all have the same versions of the package I rely on :(
[04:58] <sproaty> shame you can't "do them all at once"
[04:58] <wgrant> sproaty: If you know the same binaries will work on all releases, you can copy them.
[04:59] <wgrant> sproaty: (see the 'Copy packages' link on your PPA page, and select a different target series)
[04:59] <sproaty> oh
[05:00] <sproaty> ah yes, it was cryptically hidden away :)
[05:01] <sproaty> probably won't even need a rebuild; yay, python.
[05:03] <wgrant> I wouldn't be so sure about that, but it's worth a try.
[05:03] <wgrant> (Python packaging changed significantly between Intrepid and Jaunty, although good newer packaging should also work on the older releases)
[05:04] <sproaty> ah
[05:04] <sproaty> I know the app runs on 2.5.4, which is what Intrepid uses
[05:19] <sproaty> Do programs leave out a translation from LP until the translation is fully completed? like, German has only been half-done for me, so I'm not sure if I should have it or not
[05:35] <wgrant> sproaty: Isn't a partial translation better than none at all?
[05:36] <sproaty> yes, plus I assume they can speak english in order to actually obtain my software...
[09:42] <Agafonov> Hi! Please take a look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/434060
[09:55] <Agafonov> 2LP authors - add non-ascii tests to your test suit!
[10:04] <Agafonov> We cannot update our bugs due to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-foundations/+bug/331990
[10:07] <wgrant> Agafonov: As you can see in that bug, the regression is known and being worked on.
[10:08] <kwah> wgrant, it is marked as Fix released already
[10:08] <Agafonov> 2009-10-08: Triaged → Fix Released
[10:08] <wgrant> kwah: In one of the libraries upon which Launchpad depends.
[10:09] <kwah> so, relevant subsystem is fixed
[10:09] <wgrant> But the fixed version is not in production at this point.
[10:09] <kwah> when we might expect it to be rolled out/deployed?
[10:09] <wgrant> I cannot say.
[10:09] <kwah> are there workarounds?
[10:09] <wgrant> For now, use the non-AJAX forms.
[10:10] <kwah> for the time being.
[10:10] <wgrant> eg. add /+edit or /+editstatus to the bug URL.
[10:11] <Agafonov> it took one week to find that way :)
[10:11] <kwah> ah, thanks for the tip
[10:11] <wgrant> Agafonov: Well, you could have always asked in here.
[10:12] <kwah> wgrant, well, so buggy functionality should not be really rolled out in the wild, don't you think?
[10:12] <kwah> ah, sorry for the rant. thanks again.
[10:15] <wgrant> kwah: Certainly not. But the tests didn't catch this one (the JS testing infrastructure is still not perfect).
[10:19] <Agafonov> wgrant: thanks for workaround.
[10:20] <kwah> +1
[13:20] <jimi_hendrix> how bad is the delay
[13:23] <mathepic> It should take less than a day for it to update your branch
[13:23] <mathepic> I'm not sure when it finally updated mine
[13:25] <jimi_hendrix> ok
[13:25] <jimi_hendrix> i pushed to a junk branch last night (lp:~jimi-hendrix/+junk/...) and it hasnt updated
[13:26] <jimi_hendrix> the branch exists, but nothing is in the folder made by a pull
[16:53] <ripps> I'm having trouble dputing to my team's ppa, it sits for a long time, then I get "[Errno 110] Connection timed out"
[17:37] <\u03b5> any idea of somewhere where I could host wiki & documentation for a project on launchpad?
[17:37] <mathepic> Hmm
[17:38] <mathepic> Documentation you could just do with HTML using texinfo
[17:38] <\u03b5> was mainly thinking about API docs
[17:39] <mathepic> No idea
[17:39] <\u03b5> hm
[17:40] <\u03b5> would have been sure this question had been brought up here
[17:40] <\u03b5> * before
[17:41] <mathepic> Do you have your own remote server?
[17:41] <mathepic> You could probably just install mediawiki
[17:41] <\u03b5> nope
[17:42] <\u03b5> rather small project
[17:42] <\u03b5> well ill google around
[17:42] <\u03b5> perhaps ill have luck
[17:44] <\u03b5> heh, I got wp's comparison of OSS hosting serices
[17:44] <\u03b5> which says lp offers a wifi Oo
[17:46] <\u03b5> wiki **
[19:57] <AskHL_> I uploaded a .deb to the PPA now, but it's for intrepid, and I should have chosen jaunty.  If I rebuild the package with jaunty, I can't upload again because the package already exists.  So how do you upload packages for more than one Ubuntu version?
[19:58] <bigjools> use the copy packages feature to copy to a different series
[19:59] <AskHL_> bigjools, thank you
[19:59] <bigjools> welcome
[21:06] <geser> bigjools: this will rebuild the source now? AskHL_ doesn't need a new upload (with a different version) anymore to get it build for another Ubuntu release?
[21:07] <RenatoSilva> when I target a bug to trunk series, the series show targeted bugs twice
[21:08] <RenatoSilva> I have 8 bugs target to the trunk, and 1 is not. So trunk is showing 17 bugs targeted, when actually it's 9
[21:08] <RenatoSilva> In my related bugs, those bugs also show twice
[21:08] <CarlFK> I entered my bug report, hit "create bug report" and it didn't create it
[21:10] <CarlFK> never mind.  now it worked.
[21:12] <CarlFK> ok, I am not sure what happened - result: https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/aptitude/+question/85509
[21:13] <CarlFK> I must have clikced "Ask a question"
[21:19] <AskHL_> geser, when copying the package, it complained that the package was still waiting to be built (which is true, although it'll take a few hours before that happens).  So I suppose I'll try again at that point, assuming the build succeeds.  It's rather long time to wait for 'compiling' a very small pure-python package, and then presumably it must build for jaunty too, but oh well.
[21:24] <geser> AskHL_: IIRC you can only copy source + binaries to an new release in your PPA (unlesse it was fixed already)
[21:25] <geser> AskHL_: you should only do this when you know that the package still will be installable in the target distribution (and still works there)
[21:33] <AskHL_> geser, that's a pretty safe assumption for programs with no dependencies except python, and written only in python, right?
[21:34] <geser> AskHL_: yes, for python programms that's pretty safe
[21:35] <AskHL_> geser, I'll have to make a new release in the PPA, and then copy the source + binaries to that source, changing the 'intrepid' to 'jaunty'.  Is there any more to it than this?  If it were more complicated, what should I do?  Recompile the package and upload to ppa again with [what] changed (to avoid the conflict)?
[21:35] <AskHL_> geser, was that even remotely understandable?
[21:37] <geser> AskHL_: if you copy the files from intrepid to jaunty, the the same files (same source package and same debs) will be available for jaunty and intrepid
[21:39] <geser> AskHL_: if you need to upload the same package (for what ever reasons, like e.g. renamed dependencies), you need to upload it with a different version (a slight modification like e.g. appending the release name to the revision is enough)
[21:39] <AskHL_> geser, ah, that was exactly what I wanted to know.  Thank you!
[21:40] <geser> e.g. upload 1.0-1intrepid to intrepid and upload the same package but as 1.0-1jaunty to jaunty
[21:50] <AskHL_> Ouch, the build failed rather miserably!
[21:50] <AskHL_> Err http://ftpmaster.internal intrepid Release.gpg
[21:50] <AskHL_>   Could not connect to ftpmaster.internal:80 (91.189.90.15), connection timed out
[21:52] <AskHL_> And then it went downhill from there.  Attempted to fetch dependencies, failed, ultimately didn't build anything.
[21:57] <AskHL_> I don't really get it.  Could this be a launchpad error?
[21:58] <geser> AskHL_: most likely. bigjools? ^^
[21:58] <AskHL_> (usually when doing something for the first time and it fails, it's my own fault)
[22:09] <wgrant> AskHL_: That's an internal Launchpad error. Retry the build.
[22:12] <AskHL_> wgrant, thank you.  It sais it'll build on iridium in a couple of minutes, should I just wait for that or should I attempt to cancel and go from scratch?
[22:12] <AskHL_> s/sais/says/
[22:13] <AskHL_> Ah, already started
[23:14] <CarlFK> https://edge.launchpad.net/+search?field.text=grub_machine_fini&field.actions.search=Search
[23:15] <CarlFK> that shows me: "                   Launchpad Bugs                                  #449083 grub_machine_fini ..."
[23:15] <CarlFK> but the only thing I can click on is a href= https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/bugs> Launchpad bug/a
[23:16] <CarlFK> no link to the item it found
[23:16] <wgrant> If you look closely, you'll see that the link is right.
[23:16] <wgrant> Google found that text on the listing of the latest bugs filed.
[23:16] <wgrant> And hasn't found the bug itself yet.
[23:16] <CarlFK> ah
[23:16] <wgrant> The search on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ would be more effective.
[23:33] <AskHL_> wgrant, you said previously that the build failure I had was an internal launchpad error.  It is continuing to build on various servers right now.  Should I completely cancel this (how?) or should I let it continue?  How do I rebuild on just one of them (and I don't remember which)
[23:34] <wgrant> AskHL_: Why would you want to rebuild on just one?
[23:34] <AskHL_> wgrant, it appeared to succeed on the subsequent one
[23:35] <wgrant> AskHL_: It looks like a transient error. I don't think it is likely to happen again.
[23:35] <AskHL_> wgrant, but will it be missing one platform then?  Or will it figure this out?
[23:36] <wgrant> AskHL_: You might need to retry the builds if they fail.
[23:37] <wgrant> AskHL_: (go on to the page for the build, and click the retry link)
[23:39] <AskHL_> wgrant, I can't find any retry links.  Is this because it is still building?
[23:40] <wgrant> AskHL_: Probably.
[23:40] <wgrant> AskHL_: Which is your PPA?
[23:41] <AskHL_> wgrant, https://launchpad.net/~pyg3t-dev-team/+archive/ppa
[23:42] <wgrant> It is currently waiting to build.
[23:42] <AskHL_> It was just being built a moment ago
[23:42] <AskHL_> And some minutes before that.  It has been built on various servers with intermittent waiting for the whole evening
[23:43] <wgrant> Hm.
[23:43] <wgrant> You're right.
[23:43] <wgrant> Something is broken.
[23:43] <wgrant> In a very strange way.
[23:44] <AskHL_> But the log which it links (where it can't fetch various things) doesn't match the output it shows when I update *during* each build.
[23:44] <AskHL_> That log, I think, corresponds to the first build.  But all the others (I'm assuming that's for different platforms) appeared to work, judging by the live output it was showing in between.  I just didn't get any of the logs entirely, because the log can't be accessed (or I can't find it) once it is done
[23:45] <wgrant> Which others?
[23:45] <wgrant> There was only one build - i386.
[23:46] <AskHL_> Let's see: iridium (twice), thallium (at least once, will be twice in 9 minutes)
[23:46] <AskHL_> seaborgium too
[23:47] <wgrant> It's all the same build.
[23:47] <wgrant> Just being very very broken.
[23:53] <AskHL_> wgrant, is there anything in particular I should do?  Such as deleting the damn thing?
[23:53] <wgrant> AskHL_: No, it's probably a networking problem somewhere. Nothing you can do.