=== porthose is now known as porthose|afk === ogra_ is now known as ogra [01:49] is it possible to package a python module? [01:51] yes === porthose|afk is now known as porthose === micahg1 is now known as micahg [06:53] geser: hi [06:53] geser: you there.. I was able to successfully build the 64bit version of nspr.. [06:54] geser lives in Germany, so he's probably asleep [06:55] ScottK: ok ... [06:56] ScottK: i have built the 64bit version of nspr... [06:56] but having some trivial issues in placing the libs... [06:56] could you help me resolve it pls [07:00] Sorry. It's 2AM here and I'm headed for bed myself. [07:01] ScottK: ok ... [07:01] anyone following our conversation can help me pls? [07:48] rhpot1991: did you manage to test my lame package? [08:02] ttx: ping [08:02] slytherin: pong [08:02] ttx: Can you please sponsor the debdiff attached to bug 457660 [08:02] Launchpad bug 457660 in libxstream-java "jmeter.gui.action.Load: Unexpected error java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: XPP3 pull parser library not present. Specify another driver. For example: new XStream(new DomDriver())" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/457660 [08:04] slytherin: can't do -- finalfreeze is on [08:04] slytherin: I don't want to get axed by RMs [08:06] ttx: But it is bug fix. [08:06] slytherin: yes, but not a release-critical one, unfortunately [08:07] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FinalFreeze [08:08] ttx: Ok. I will add workaround in jmeter. [08:08] slytherin: if that's possible, that's the best way of doing it [08:08] slytherin: we can fix xstream in lucid, if that's still necessary [08:09] ttx: By then I will get this fixed in Debian so that we can simply sync. [08:09] slytherin: sure. I should push to debian SVNs most of the fixes I did in libraries over the last months [08:10] hopefully I'll have some free time next week to do so, if nothing catches fire [08:10] slytherin: that should make merge/sync much easier. [08:11] yes, that would be nice [08:11] slytherin: I've been planning to do it for months [08:11] but reality prevented me from doing so [08:45] Anyone from motu-release team? [09:10] good morning [09:11] wrapster: what problem do you have? [09:21] geser: resolved it... [09:25] geser: the issue was by default all the *.so files that were (according to the 64 bit pkg) suppose to be in debian//usr/lib/amd64 were in /usr/lib/ and I tried looking and this damn thing was not the staging dir.. there was debian/tmp that was used for staging and then it was copied over to respective pkg dirs under debian/ ; so i tried look at the configure/ makefiles and see if i go set it.. too many intricacies so i manipulated the deb [09:25] geser: thank a lot for your help... [09:25] of course nspr is done now.. I should start with nss now. [09:25] :) [09:25] i'll again come to you.. :) [10:23] geser: even after nspr being built successfully i get error while building nss, and what im assuming to be the issue is the upstream name.... [10:23] I want to change it... how do i do it? [10:23] to something like libnspr-64 [10:24] wrapster: upstream name of the lib? [10:24] yeah [10:24] currently its called libnspr4-0d [10:25] the 64bit one is also called libnspr4-0dnexenta-64 [10:25] thats causing the issues.. [10:25] sorry, don't know as I didn't need to know it till now [10:26] geser: when i dpkg -i <64bit one> it replaces the already present libnspr4-0d [10:26] thats 32bit [10:26] geser: ok np [10:26] anyone who can let me know pls? [10:28] wrapster, not sure I understood your problem, libary package names are irrelevant for a building process [10:29] dpkg -i will replace the already present only if you have names/control rules which allow that [10:29] joaopinto: one moment.. ill do a pastie.. and expalin [10:34] joaopinto: http://pastie.org/666412 [10:35] i've explained everythign clearly there. [10:36] wrapster, what you are describing, you are installing a different version for a package, you can't have mutiple package versions installed [10:37] ops, i mean, is expected [10:37] if you have to have both libs versions installed you need different package names [10:38] joaopinto: so how do i create different pkg names? [10:39] joaopinto: thats what i want!! [10:39] the package name is defined in debian/control [10:39] wrapster, you just set the names on debian/control and change the debian/* according to your needs ? [10:39] wrapster: why do you need multi-arch nspr/nss anyway? [10:39] azeem: i changed it... [10:39] to? [10:40] azeem: i was in a debate with soren on the same issue yday [10:40] ok [10:40] azeem, don't try to understand him, he is attempting something very odd :P [10:41] azeem: im actually building pkgs for nexenta.. not ubuntu...(but since its pkg question im asking) [10:41] joaopinto: accepted :) [10:41] wrapster: I know that, it doesn't explain multi-arch nspr/nss though [10:41] wrapster, your "how to rename" a package is a bit odd, as renaming is equivalent to building a package with specific name [10:42] how did you build a package if you don't know how to name it :P ? [10:42] joaopinto: yeah sorry about that.. how do i build a pkg with specific name [10:42] no ... [10:42] 11:39 < azeem> the package name is defined in debian/control [10:42] its not like that. [10:42] yeah i know that.. and i did try it but it did not give me desired results.. [10:42] wrapster, the multiple binary packages names are defined on debian/control [10:42] well, that's not very specific [10:43] ok.. [10:43] will give it another shot and let you knw [10:43] pastebin your debian/control [10:43] wrapster, because you are not clear on your requirements [10:43] wrapster, the package name was not changed ? those are the expected results [10:43] it is not expected to fix something else that you are assuming to be related to package names :) [10:44] joaopinto: http://pastie.org/666417 [10:44] wrapster, if you want multi arch needs you need, different target locations and different package names [10:44] and I mean names, not versions [10:44] joaopinto: yeah got it.. looked at the control files carefully after azeem told me , think i got it [10:44] let me see [10:45] wrapster, libnspr4-0d <- this is the package name [10:45] joaopinto: yeah.. changed it. [10:47] joaopinto: ok that will cause more issues than required actually.. I need to almost change everything that i had done for libnspr4-0d [10:48] wrapster, since you are cross compiling, why don't build a single package which provides both versions ? [10:48] yeah thats what i'm trying to do now... [10:49] you need building rules for both arch cases and install them into the arch specific dirs [10:50] multiarch is hard [10:52] joaopinto: yeah by the looks of it and my expertise its going to be tough [10:52] can you help me? [10:52] if i paste the rules file? [10:52] why don't you wait till official multiarch lands? [10:53] azeem: cant.. have to get this up right away. [10:53] wrapster: is this for nexenta directly, or are you just trying to recompile your own firefox package? [10:53] for nexenta [10:54] wrapster, sorry, I have no interest for the specific problem you are trying to address, and I think you should be learning trivial packaging before diving in such complex issues [10:54] joaopinto: ok [10:54] also I am not familair with cross compiling [11:07] got it working. [11:07] changed it to libnspr-64 [11:24] geser: can i ask for a bit more help(this time with nss) or should i just go :( [11:27] Why does git-buildpackage change the md5sum of my orig.tar.gz? Useless... [11:42] Can somebody help me, I'm trying to make an updated uriparser-0.7.5 package, but for some reason, it keeps trying to generate api docs with doxygen, despite the fact that I don't have --enable-doc during configure, how can I stop it? [11:43] does it perhaps have a disable-docs option? to force no docs [11:43] geser: I didn't see that option in configure.ac, but I'll try it [11:45] geser: looks like it worked, thanks [11:45] it was just a guess, sometimes there is a disable option matching the enable option [11:46] should have been disabled by default though [11:47] amarillion: you should be using pristine-tar [11:48] if you're just building the orig from the upstream branch then that behaviour is no surprise [11:50] Laney: I imported the tar with pristine-tar [11:50] but when I do git-buildpackage, and check the md5sum of the orig.tar newly created, it is different from the original orig.tar [11:51] Which leads to ppa uploads getting rejected [11:53] why are you uploading the orig if the archive already has it? [11:53] I'm just doing dput my-ppa *source.dsc [11:54] you should build with -sd and upload the .changes [11:54] what does the -sd option do? [11:54] doesn't include the orig in the upload [11:54] you should also check your gbp output to see how it's making the orig tarball [11:58] Ok, I did gbp with the -sd option, then tried dput again and now I get "Checksum doesn't match for ../pathvisio_2.0.0-0ubuntu1~ppa3~nbx1.dsc" [11:58] Packaging work is so frustrating. It's layer upon layer upon layer of scripts. I have no idea what is going on anymore [12:45] I'm trying to build a libxspf package in pbuilder, now I've built a working uriparser library that I use a hook script to install, but during configure of libxspf, it says it can't find uriparser 0.7.5 or later, despite the fact that I know it installed the -dev and that the deb file contains everything necessary all pkconfigs, includes and *.la [13:36] ripps: look how it tries to find uriparser and check why it fails [13:37] geser: already figured it out, the package needed pkg-config === bram_ is now known as bmm [14:28] hi. regarding https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apache2/+bug/458274, or in general "unused library dependencies" of shared libraries/executables in ubuntu/debian, i had sent an email to ubuntu-users list a while back, and then someone had replied mentioning that they were taking care of this problem. i think the problem is actually buried deep in libtool. when i set LDFLAGS='-Wl,--as-needed' during ./configure of a package, that flag gets put [14:28] Launchpad bug 458274 in apache2 "unnecassary dependencies of apache2 modules" [Low,Incomplete] [14:29] that makes --as-needed just useless [14:29] so i have a patch for libtool :) http://www.pastebin.org/47506 [14:30] it is basically putting $linker_flags ahead of $libobjs and $deplibs [14:33] jfcgauss_: You might want to discuss that on #ubuntu-server. The server team developers hang out there. [14:34] it is not specific to servers [14:34] i have ubuntu 9.04 amd64 desktop [14:34] Apache is maintained by the server team. [14:35] ok but the libtool patch is for all the packages that use libtool basically.. [14:35] apache modules is just an example [14:36] there are (were) hundreds of shared libraries in ubuntu with unused dependencies [14:37] --as-needed is rarely used in packages though [14:37] jfcgauss_: have you proposed your patch to the libtool developers? [14:38] no i havent [14:38] i'll do that [14:39] jfcgauss_: http://www.mail-archive.com/libtool@gnu.org/msg10260.html [14:39] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=347650 [14:39] Debian bug 347650 in libtool "libtool: Incorrect argument reordering" [Important,Open] [14:40] james_w: it's not really all that rare. [14:40] http://www.mail-archive.com/libtool@gnu.org/msg05379.html [14:50] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libtool/+bug/459095 [14:50] Launchpad bug 459095 in libtool "incorrect argument reordering" [Undecided,New] [15:13] siretart: yep I tested it, appears to run better. I sent a test file off to someone else to test with itunes/iphone still waiting on word back from them [16:27] q. i got a .deb which has some not-yet installed-dependancies... how can i install those dependancies automatically ? like it is done by apt-get when it is coming from a repository [16:28] install the deb, then apt-get -f install. [16:29] use gdebi [16:30] which works for the degenerate case of one deb [16:31] jdong: excelent, it did the job thanks [16:31] azeem: ok will try [16:32] jetienne: for multiple debs, you can do a dpkg -i deb1 deb2 deb3 ; apt-get -f install [16:32] for a single deb, gdebi will do it for you in a more user-friendly manner [16:32] that is, it tells you beforehands if the operation can succeed... [16:32] while with apt-get -f install, if the dependencies cannot be satisfied it'll just force the removal of the partially-installed debs from the last step [16:32] gdebi is nice but no cool for batch [16:33] jdong: ok [17:36] how do I get launchpad to accept a new source copy that I'm working on... dput gives me "Already uploaded to stevecrozz on ppa.launchpad.net" [17:36] the last build failed so I need to try a new one [17:38] stevecrozz, either remove the .upload file on your working dir or force the upload with dput -f [17:39] stevecrozz, you'll need to bump up versioning on changelog as well [17:39] av`: I think that's the part I'm missing... how do I do that? [17:39] stevecrozz, which version did you use before? e.g which version did the failed to build package has [17:40] php5_5.2.11-0ubuntu1 [17:40] php5_5.2.11-0ubuntu2 will be the next one, I suggest you to happen a ~ppaX for PPA uploads [17:40] * append [17:40] i usually put my lp username intead of ppa [17:40] php5_5.2.11-0ubuntu1~ppa1 ? [17:41] maco, yes, that's fine as well [17:41] that way when a person looks at "apt-cache poiicy" they know which ppa a package came from [17:41] stevecrozz, php5_5.2.11-0ubuntu2~ppa1 [17:41] policy * :> [17:42] stevecrozz, there is an handy compare-versions tool if you wanna see if a certain version is lower than the one you are uploading [17:42] is the changelog something you edit by hand? or is there a tool for that [17:42] stevecrozz: try "dch -i" [17:42] stevecrozz, dch -i makes a new entry dch -a uses existing one (if someone edited it before you) [17:42] itll create a changelog entry with your name/email and the date all set up, and open it in your editor for you to fill in [17:43] ari-tczew: yes thanks you [17:43] Perfcect.. looks like that works great [17:43] stevecrozz, dch -a works fine if you need to make some changes to a revision already touched by someone else [17:43] av`: what is this handy comparison tool? [17:43] maco, dpkg one^^ [17:44] maco, dpkg --compare-versions [17:44] ah ok thanks [17:44] maco: dpkg --compare-versions "old" -lt "new" && echo true || echo false [17:44] stevecrozz, plus dch -a puts your changes under your name and the changes already made by someone else under his / her name [17:45] stevecrozz, but you need dch -i for what you need now :) [17:47] thanks a bunch, dput sent it up === dpm is now known as dpm-afk [17:52] stevecrozz, let's hope it will get accepted now :) [17:53] av`: actually it was rejected because I didn't notice that dch used a bad email address [17:53] stevecrozz@stevecrozz-desktop [17:53] stevecrozz, eheh [17:53] stevecrozz, set it with DEBEMAIL [17:53] environment variable? [17:54] motu-release: I have uploaded usplash-theme-ubuntu-color for the FFe in bug 450809, if you could give it a push, please. [17:54] Launchpad bug 450809 in Ubuntu Karmic "[FFe] usplash missing progress indicator, color" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/450809 [17:55] stevecrozz, yep, export DEBEMAIL='stevecrozz@stevecrozz.com' [17:56] stevecrozz, same with DEBFULLNAME [17:56] ok [17:56] might want to put that export line in your ~/.bashrc [17:57] i shall [17:58] php5 (5.2.11-0ubuntu2~ppa2) jaunty; urgency=low * added a valid email address [17:59] stevecrozz, yes, but why jaunty? [17:59] stevecrozz, is that on purpose or missed? [17:59] you mean why not karmic? [18:00] yes [18:00] Just because that's what I have right now.. I'll upgrade next week with the official launch [18:01] oh ok :) [18:05] av`: I'm getting frustrated now : Rejected: [18:05] Unable to find php5_5.2.11.orig.tar.gz in upload or distribution. [18:06] all the rejection~ [18:06] stevecrozz, paste me your changes file [18:06] stevecrozz: is the orig named wrong maybe? [18:07] propably you have wrong distro: e.g. unstable instead karmic if package getting from debian [18:07] in debian/changelog [18:07] ari-tczew, he has jaunty [18:07] ari-tczew, he pasted the changelog entry before [18:08] !pastebin | stevecrozz [18:08] stevecrozz: pastebin is a service to post multiple-lined texts so you don't flood the channel. Ubuntu pastebin is at http://paste.ubuntu.com | To post !screenshots use http://tinyurl.com/imagebin | !pastebinit to paste directly from command line | Make sure you give us the URL for your paste - see also the channel topic [18:08] av`: http://pastebin.com/d29cfce5a [18:08] ty [18:08] stevecrozz: how did you call debuild to build your source package? [18:08] stevecrozz, easy you didnt include the orig [18:08] debuild -S [18:08] stevecrozz, that means wrong debuild run [18:08] as even karmic has only php5 5.2.11 you need do pass -Sa for the first upload [18:09] how do i fix it? [18:09] stevecrozz, debuild -S -Sa [18:09] FYI: IMO debuild -S -sa is better because require .orig.tar.gz [18:09] once your have the .orig.tar.gz in your PPA -S will be enough [18:09] stevecrozz, run debuild -S -sa and you should see the orig included in your .changes file [18:10] stevecrozz, now you have only php5_5.2.11-0ubuntu2~ppa2.diff.gz and php5_5.2.11-0ubuntu2~ppa2.dsc :) [18:10] crap, i probably have to bump the version again huh [18:10] stevecrozz, no, if the package didnt get accepted you don't need to bump it [18:10] only for accepted uploads [18:11] Note to everyone: Universe is still open for business for fixes .... [18:11] Is there any way to see what PPA url in sources.list is broken (i.e. when doing an aptitude update)? [18:11] quidnunc, you should see a warning or something I guess (I use apt) [18:11] av`: I do, the problem is I only see the domain. [18:12] quidnunc, paste me some relevant lines [18:12] stevecrozz, 5.2.11-0ubuntu2~ppa1 should be usable [18:13] as far as you didnt get a package accepted yet [18:13] too late.. i skipped ppa1 :) [18:13] ^^ [18:13] this has been quite the learning experience [18:13] av`: http://dpaste.com/111141/ [18:13] be careful with versioning stuff [18:14] quidnunc, you didnt specify a PPA [18:14] av`: Pardon? [18:14] quidnunc, you just added http://ppa.launchpad.net karmic/main Packages to your sources.list [18:14] quidnunc, but you need to specify with PPA you want [18:15] * which [18:15] av`: No. I have the full path. The problem is that the url moved. [18:15] quidnunc, paste me your sources.list [18:15] and tell me which PPA you wanna enable [18:15] yes.. it was accepted... lets hope the build works now [18:16] stevecrozz, yay! [18:16] av`: I know where the problem is and have fixed it. But I have many PPAs and it was a lot of trouble trying to track down which one was problematic. [18:16] quidnunc, paste me your sources.list please [18:17] I can't see what's wrong if I have nothing to look at :) [18:17] av`: if I wanted to start with source code from another person's PPA instead of ubuntu's php source, is that just as easy? [18:18] stevecrozz, you would need to grab the sources manually or via apt-get source if you enabled that PPA in your sources.list [18:18] av`: There is nothing wrong anymore. My question is when you have 10 PPAs in your sources.list and one of the urls is bad it gives the error message in my paste. How am I supposed to figure out which of the 10 is bad? [18:18] i think that might be the next thing I try [18:18] quidnunc, actually the warning you see Err http://ppa.launchpad.net karmic/main Packages [18:18] 404 Not Found should say it [18:19] quidnunc, this is a wrong PPA url [18:19] av`: Yes but which of the 10? [18:19] quidnunc, plus I don't understand Ign http://192.168.2.1 karmic-backports/restricted Sources [18:19] you made a backport repo locally? [18:19] that's a LAN IP usually [18:19] av`: No it is my approx package caching [18:20] It is not relevant. [18:20] av`: or dget! [18:20] maco, yep :) [18:20] quidnunc, deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/xxxx/ppa/ubuntu karmic main [18:21] quidnunc, this is how your PPA link should look like in your sources.list [18:21] quidnunc, where xxxx is the guy / team who maintain that PPA [18:21] quidnunc, if you have http://ppa.launchpad.net karmic/main Packages in your sources.list, that's wrong [18:21] av`: I don't. [18:22] av`: I don't think you understand the problem [18:22] Let me go more slowly [18:23] quidnunc, 'How am I supposed to figure out which of the 10 is bad?' aptidude / apt reports what you have on sources.list [18:23] s/guy/person/ [18:23] av`: is there an easy way to make launchpad build packages for more than one version of ubuntu? [18:23] I have 10 PPA urls in my sources.list. They were all correct at some point. Then someone change the location of their PPA making the old url broken. So I started getting the error messages in my aptitude update. But the error messages seemingly don't have enough information to isolate which one is bad. What is the reasonable thing to do? [18:23] <-- not a guy, has ppa [18:23] stevecrozz: no, unfortunately [18:24] stevecrozz: have to upload (wtih new version number) for each [18:24] quidnunc, checking all PPAs? [18:24] quidnunc, one by one till you get the bad one [18:24] av`: That doesn't seem reasonable to me [18:24] binary search! [18:24] av`: Anyway I just wanted to confirm that there was no other way. Thanks. [18:24] comment out the last 5 and see if it works [18:24] stevecrozz, just change target on changelog [18:25] stevecrozz, from jaunty to any other target distro [18:25] if so, comment out the last 3 and see if it works. if not 6 or 7 is bad ;) if the first step didnt work, one of the first 5 is bad, so bisect them... [18:25] Thanks I know what binary search is. [18:25] quidnunc, again, aptitude / apt reports back what you have on your sources.list [18:25] sorry [18:26] lisp and haskell channels.....wow yep, im sure you would [18:26] scary functional languages... [18:26] quidnunc, so if a PPA not works here, I get a warning that a specific PPA not works anymore [18:26] av`: Did you see the error message I pasted? It doesn't provide *which* PPA is broken, only the domain. [18:26] (which are all ppa.launchpad.net) [18:27] quidnunc, let me test it [18:27] Sounds like a good topic for #ubuntu to me. [18:28] quidnunc, apt-get update will tell you [18:28] W: Impossible to fetch http://ppa.launchpad.net/test/ppa/ubuntu/dists/karmic/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found [18:28] so my build says Pending (2510) what does that mean? [18:29] stevecrozz, those are build points [18:29] stevecrozz, e.g priority [18:30] quidnunc, so in fact you know what's broken ;) [18:30] quidnunc, anyway that's more an #ubuntu thing yes [18:30] ScottK: Consider me gone. [18:31] ScottK, he took your comment the wrong way [18:31] eheh === rmcbride_ is now known as rmcbride [18:55] q. i need to write a init.d script for a package im making (a usual network daemon), any good example for me to copy ? [18:56] jetienne, apt-get source some_daemon :) ? [18:56] check apt-cacher-ng source for example [18:57] if the package targets karmic (or lucid), wouldn't it be better to write an upstart job? [18:57] ok thanks [18:58] is debian using upstart also ? [18:58] Debian [18:58] there was some discussion going on, but I don't know the state of it [18:58] if it's not, is not a good option :\ [19:00] one can provide both :) and modify later the Ubuntu package to use the upstart job instead the init script [19:04] joaopinto: Not until after Squeeze is out === sbasuita_ is now known as sbasuita [19:12] hey all [19:12] long time noe see [19:20] I have a question [19:21] I'm preparing debdiff security for jaunty [19:21] package first needs get to -proposed? [19:21] or directly to -security? [19:24] ari-tczew: security uploads go straight to -security [19:24] OK, thnx === thunderstruck is now known as gnomefreak [19:39] q. i have created my .postinst and .postrm files into debian/ , how do i ask dpkg to put them in the .deb ? [19:40] is there a magic dh_* to do ? [19:42] jetienne - no, just make sure the file names match the name of the binary package you want to insall them in to [19:43] (or just call them "postinst" and "postrm" if it is a single binary package) [19:44] hmm ok thanks. so i did another mistake. will look more :) [19:46] jetienne - it is dh_installdeb which copies the maintainer scripts in to the DEBIAN folder for the binary package, but I assume you're calling that else your package would not build at all anyway ;) [19:47] chrisccoulson: thanks. it was a typo :) postint instead of postinst [19:48] jetienne - excellent, glad it's sorted now:) [19:53] grumble the uninstall fails due to trailling .pyc === asac_ is now known as asac === Bodsda is now known as root === root is now known as Bodsda [20:35] hi folks [20:39] Heya sistpoty [20:39] hi bddebian [20:40] huhu bddebian sistpoty ;) [20:40] hi sebner [20:41] sistpoty: we made it in time, great hmm? thx for your acks ;) [20:41] sebner: yes, and thanks for your testing (fuddl told me he didn't test network playing :P) [20:42] sistpoty: heh, this was initial testing though (if it's useable for ubuntu), now I have to do proper/deep testing :P [20:43] Heya sebner [20:43] sebner: there was a -2 upload following shortly, does your sync request cover this one as well? (looked like cleanup mostly) [20:44] sistpoty: imho yes, or doesn anything speaks against it? It's really most of cleanup [20:44] sebner: no, but it needs a motu ack [20:44] sistpoty: really? because of final freeze? [20:45] sebner: no, because it's a different version to sync [20:45] (problem is that I doubt that -1 is still available in unstable) [20:45] sistpoty: archive admins sync newest versions anyways. [20:46] sistpoty: -2 is for me "further improvement of 2.5.2 upload" [20:46] sebner: but I believe you'll get asked if -2 is still ok to sync? [20:46] sistpoty: ok, I'll update the bug. Anything else needed? [20:46] sebner: thanks! not that I know of :) [20:47] fine [20:47] (of course a test-build, but iirc it's not the huge -data package that was -2... but I might be wrong on this one) [20:48] sistpoty: yeah it's the small package and I'll testbuild [20:48] :) [20:49] sistpoty: we need to sync quickly so you can't annoy me further :P [20:49] haha [20:49] sebner: did I mention testing? ;) [20:49] sistpoty: testing was done :P [20:49] not enough imho [20:49] :) [20:49] I need to correct that over weekend :P [20:49] haha [20:51] * ScottK is still hoping people will work this weekend on fixing broken stuff. [20:52] We still have almost two days before Universe final freeze even starts [20:52] yeah, no nexuiz testing but FTBFS fixing! [20:52] ScottK: can an application link against both libqt3 and libqt4? (looking at qtiplot atm)? [20:53]