[01:31] <LLStarks> hi.
[01:31] <LLStarks> i was wondering how i would best go about requesting a change in dev trees for onscripter?
[01:33] <dtchen> LLStarks: does it not appear in Debian testing's/unstable's 0.0.20091011-1 source package?
[01:33] <LLStarks> it is.
[01:33] <dtchen> meaning "it" does appear in that source package?
[01:33] <LLStarks> but onscripter should be dumped in favor of mion's onscripter-en
[01:34] <dtchen> has this proposal been discussed in Debian?
[01:43] <LLStarks> no.
[01:43] <LLStarks> how do i request a new package?
[01:44] <RoAkSoAx> LLStarks, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/NewPackages
[01:44] <LLStarks> for debian
[01:45] <jdong> quassel needs a much more violently strobing systray icon
[01:45] <jdong> but I fear I might be alone in this opinion
[01:47] <JontheEchidna> konversation's has a nice violent red blink.
[01:50] <micahg> LLStarks: this should get you started: http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
[02:33] <Buuntu> will someone mentor me?  I tried emailing the mentor-mailing list but I haven't gotten a response in over a week
[02:34] <RoAkSoAx> Buuntu, you might wanna ping nxvl or huats... prolly nobody answered because of the UDS
[02:35] <RoAkSoAx> but you can start reading the packaging guide... don't get discouraged... sometimes it is hard to provide mentors to all of those people who want one
[02:35] <Buuntu> RoAkSoAx, UDS? it doesn't seem like they're online
[02:35] <Buuntu> RoAkSoAx, I've read through it
[02:35] <RoAkSoAx> Buuntu, yes last week was the UDs
[02:35] <Buuntu> RoAkSoAx, found it really confusing though so I wanted to get a mentor - just to get started mostly
[02:35] <Buuntu> ubuntu development summit?
[02:41] <ScottK> developers/development, but you have the basic idea
[02:43] <RoAkSoAx> Buuntu, I started by myself then got a mentor :). Just start reading, if you read it is gonna help u get started when you get your mentor
[02:43] <RoAkSoAx> heya ScottK how's it going
[02:44] <Buuntu> RoAkSoAx, ehh, how can I contact nxvl or huats since they aren't online atm, just catch them at a later time or what?
[02:44] <ScottK> RoAkSoAx: OK.  Still tired from UDS.
[02:45] <RoAkSoAx> Buuntu, just try to find them online
[02:45] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, yeah same here... but now i have so much stuff to do i can't rest :(
[02:49] <Buuntu> nxvl, hey
[02:49] <nxvl> hi...
[02:50] <Buuntu> nxvl, RoAkSoAx said I should ping you because I'm interested in a mentor ^^
[02:50] <nxvl> oh
[02:50] <nxvl> yeah
[02:50] <Buuntu> nxvl, I already tried emailing the mailing list but I didn't get a reply
[02:50] <nxvl> send an e-mail to....
[02:50] <nxvl> mmm, let me find the link
[02:50] <nxvl> let me find your e-mail
[02:54] <nxvl_> Buuntu: what's you real name?
[02:55] <Buuntu> nxvl_, Gabriel Abud
[02:56] <nxvl_> Buuntu: i don't see your e-mail inthere
[02:56] <Buuntu> nxvl_, ubuntu-motu-mentors@something.com right?
[02:56] <nxvl_> Buuntu: motu-mentoring-reception@reponses.net
[02:56]  * Buuntu doesn't remember exactly
[02:57] <Buuntu> nxvl_, oh, I sent it to the wrong one then
[02:57] <Buuntu> nxvl_, I used ubuntu-motu-mentors@lists.ubuntu.com, do you want me to resend it to the correct adress?
[02:59] <nxvl_> Buuntu: let me check
[02:59] <nxvl_> Buuntu: i don't see it there either
[03:00] <Buuntu> nxvl_, lol, I'll resend it, which email should I send it to?
[03:02] <nxvl_> Buuntu: motu-mentoring-reception@reponses.net
[03:02] <Buuntu> nxvl_, sent
[03:09] <Buuntu> nxvl_, well?
[03:11] <nxvl_> Buuntu: my e-mail is slow
[03:11] <nxvl_> :D
[03:22] <Buuntu> nxvl, ?
[03:24] <nxvl> Buuntu: still don't see it
[03:24] <Buuntu> nxvl, T_T
[03:25] <Buuntu> nxvl, lol can I just copy and paste it to you?  I don't know why you're not getting it...
[03:32] <nxvl> Buuntu: so, you have no experience and you don't know anything about packaging or ubuntu?
[03:33] <Buuntu> nxvl, oh no, I know stuff about ubuntu
[03:33] <nxvl> Buuntu: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide
[03:33] <Buuntu> nxvl, not about packaging though
[03:33] <Buuntu> nxvl, yeah I read through some of that
[03:33] <nxvl> Buuntu: read that, start in that package
[03:33] <nxvl> ugh
[03:34] <nxvl> start packaging and playing with it
[03:34] <Buuntu> nxvl, got kind of confused though
[03:34] <nxvl> as here then
[03:34] <nxvl> ask*
[03:34] <nxvl> the mentoring program is basically for the last mile on the process, not for the first one
[03:34] <Buuntu> nxvl, ah
[03:35] <Buuntu> nxvl, well I mean I get how to do it, but that guide doesn't really explain how it works
[03:36] <nxvl> the guide is just that, a guide
[03:37] <nxvl> for more information you need to read the debian Policy
[03:37] <nxvl> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/
[03:37] <nxvl> you can find more documentation here aswell: http://www.debian.org/devel/
[03:41] <Buuntu> nxvl, how do you do this: "Apply the unzipped .diff.gz to the unpacked source directory. "
[03:41] <Buuntu> nxvl, what does apply mean?
[03:42] <nxvl> where is that?
[03:42] <RoAkSoAx> Buuntu, patch -p1 < *.diff.gz
[03:42] <RoAkSoAx> Buuntu, patch -p1 < name.diff.gz
[03:42] <Buuntu> nxvl, 3.1 Packaging from Scratch of the complete guide
[03:44] <Buuntu> nxvl, oh wait, I didn't read that - it was explaining what apt-get source does :P
[03:44] <Buuntu> nxvl, sorry
[03:50] <Buuntu> nxvl, what about this : dh_make -e your.maintainer@address, is that my email or what?
[03:51] <nxvl> yup
[04:16] <Buuntu> nxvl, what language do the files like rules use?  I wasn't aware that make was a programming language...
[04:19] <nxvl> Buuntu: dash
[04:20] <Buuntu> Buuntu, dash? hmm... never heard of it
[04:22] <Buuntu> nxvl, Enter passphrase: gpg: gpg-agent is not available in this session?
[04:22] <Buuntu> nxvl, I set up gpg with a passphrase though...
[04:41] <HFSPLUS> !ops
[04:41] <Hobbsee> sigh
[04:42] <lifeless> Hobbsee: you know you want to
[04:42] <Hobbsee> lifeless: which is why i just went to #freenode asking about a kline, yes
[04:42] <lifeless> \o/
[04:43] <Hobbsee> looks like someone was already onto it
[04:56] <micahg> anyone want to sponsor a package?
[04:58] <sladen> micahg: what is it, is it syncable from Debian?
[04:58] <micahg> no, it's a u-u-s debdiff
[04:59] <micahg> I wanted to get it into lucid, so I can get an SRU to karmic
[05:01] <micahg> sladen: ^^^
[05:03] <sladen> micahg: what's the diff/package?
[05:04] <micahg> sladen: bug 477513
[05:04] <micahg> sladen: I made the upload for lucid, and the patch is from upstream, but the user never tested it
[05:04] <micahg> should I have the user test the karmic version before I push the patch to lucid?
[05:05] <micahg> or is upstreams commit good enough?
[05:15] <sladen> gah, looking at this when I was about to go to bed was silly
[05:18] <micahg> yeah, that's why I was wondering if there was a night owl here :)
[05:20] <fabrice_sp> porthose__, about debian bug 557598: I think that the icons are the ones uuencoded in debian directory
[05:24] <fabrice_sp> WaVeR, waver_ got your email. What do you want exactly? :-)
[05:26] <RoAkSoAx> hey guys anyone know how's it possible to make dh7 rerun autotools?
[05:29] <fabrice_sp> mdbtools made it in override_dh_auto_configure
[05:32] <fabrice_sp> RoAkSoAx, this is also what has been done in gshare by Laney
[05:32] <fabrice_sp> you can have a look at those 2 pacakges
[05:32] <RoAkSoAx> fabrice_sp, ok cool, i'll take a look at those packages. thanks for the tip
[05:32] <fabrice_sp> yw ;-)
[05:34] <porthose__> fabrice_sp, Ok, but the copyright information is still missing, so the is bug still relevant correct?  :)
[05:35] <fabrice_sp> yes: it's only that in the Debian bug report, you mentioned other icons ;-)
[05:35] <fabrice_sp> porthose__, ^
[05:35] <porthose__> fabrice_sp, ok i will fix it :)
[05:35] <fabrice_sp> ;-)
[05:38] <porthose__> fabrice_sp, I am not a big emac user (just started playing with it) so no I am not sure that change is still needed, should I turn bug #485689 into a sync request?
[05:41] <fabrice_sp> porthose__, neither am I :-) it's only that I'm not been able to reproduce it, so I'm not sure the change is still required
[05:41] <fabrice_sp> don't know also what is the future of emacs21 and emacs22, as we already have emacs23
[05:42] <fabrice_sp> hhm: emacs21 is not packaged in lucid
[05:43] <fabrice_sp> if we can get rid of emacs22, this package can be deleted also
[05:43] <porthose__> IIRC nxml-mode is included in emacs23, hmm
[05:43] <fabrice_sp> don't know the impact :-D
[05:43] <fabrice_sp> yes
[05:43] <fabrice_sp> emcas package is provided by emacs23 in lucid, so upgrade path seems to be covered
[05:44] <fabrice_sp> "emacs package"
[05:45] <porthose__> fabrice_sp, how about we wait on this until the fate of emacs22 is known, sound good :)
[05:46] <fabrice_sp> porthose__, you can perhaps ping an archive admin, to have his opinion on removing emacs22. otherwise, emacs22 will still be in lucid :-)
[05:47] <sladen> micahg: how long has that bug been going on;  is it also http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=377808
[05:47] <sladen> micahg: is  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.5/+bug/440110  a dup aswell?
[05:48] <porthose__> fabrice_sp, ok I'll do that in the am, it's bed time for me night ;)
[05:48] <fabrice_sp> good night porthose__ :-)
[05:54]  * micahg is looking sladen
[05:54] <micahg> sladen: the first debian bug doesn't seem to be it as it's too old
[05:56] <micahg> that other LP bug does look like a dupe though
[06:00] <micahg> sladen: oh, you pushed it, thanks
[06:00] <micahg> should I prepare the SRU?
[06:05] <sladen> micahg: go ahead, but you'll need to get somebody else, the patch is pretty simple
[06:05] <micahg> ok, I'll follow the sru procedure, thanks for approving that
[06:10] <micahg> sladen: ugh
[06:10] <micahg> I thought I checked debian...seems they do have it
[06:10] <micahg> in unstable
[06:17] <micahg> slytherin: are you up for a question
[06:18] <slytherin> tell me
[06:18] <micahg> so, I thought I checked debian for a patch and ended up patching myself and geting the upload sponsered, but debian did have it in unstable
[06:18]  * micahg mistook 1.5.6-2 for 1.5.6-0ubuntu2
[06:18] <micahg> :)
[06:19] <micahg> should I request a sync now to fix it?
[06:19] <slytherin> Not a big deal. When Debian package gets migrated to testing, you can request a sync.
[06:19] <micahg> ok
[06:19] <micahg> I used the same patch number, just a different patch name
[06:21] <slytherin> when you request sync, your changes are all going away, so patch name doesn't matter
[06:21] <micahg> ok
[06:22] <micahg> do I have to watch for it, or will it happen automatically?
[06:22] <micahg> I jsut wanted to get an SRU to karmic
[06:23] <slytherin> karmic? I thought you were talking about package in lucid.
[06:23] <micahg> I already got the fix in Lucid, but only because that was on the SRU procedure
[06:23] <micahg> that was the one that debian has the fix for and got someone to sponsor
[06:23] <micahg> now I'm trying to finish getting the SRU into -proposed for karmic
[06:24] <slytherin> Ok.
[06:25] <micahg> I'm waiting for i386 and lpia to finish building in my ppa, then I'll upload the debdiff to the bug
[07:05] <LucidFox> http://kernelslacker.livejournal.com/39760.html
[07:56] <dholbach> good morning
[08:06] <siretart`> hi dholbach - morning folks!
[08:06] <dholbach> hi siretart`
[08:08] <\sh> moins
[10:08] <AndrewGee> Hi. Any MOTUs available to review my package with already one advocation? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/gpxviewer - Thanks :)
[10:18] <DktrKranz> AndrewGee: _o/
[10:18] <AndrewGee> DktrKranz: Thanks :)
[10:50] <Whoopie> jdong: Hi, why was the ticket assigned to me? -> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vlc/+bug/481448
[11:08] <DktrKranz> AndrewGee: commented
[11:08] <AndrewGee> DktrKranz: Thanks :)
[12:24] <waver_> Hi, any MOTUs available to review my package? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/hiawatha
[12:37] <akheron> mine too: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/jansson
[13:45] <lfaraone> Hey, when I run "pbuilder create" on my 9.10 system, I get "Unknown distribution: karmic"
[13:45] <lfaraone> Any idea why?
[13:48] <slytherin> lfaraone: surprising
[13:50] <cyphermox> lfaraone, are you in karmic?
[13:59] <lfaraone> cyphermox, slytherin, yes, I'm running karmic.
[14:01] <cyphermox> anything special in .pbuilderrc?
[14:02] <lfaraone> cyphermox: not afaict. let me check
[14:03] <lfaraone> cyphermox: nevermind, I was missing "karmic" in .pbuilderc
[14:04] <cyphermox> lfaraone, in, say, UBUNTU_SUITES?
[14:06] <cyphermox> lfaraone, because normally it doesn't need to be anywhere in .pbuilderrc -- that file could not exist and pbuilder still recognizes karmic as a valid distribution
[14:10] <slytherin> lfaraone: Do you have correct version of debootstrap package installed?
[15:01] <jldupont> I've got a small issue with a makefile: http://jldupont.pastebin.com/m395171f1
[15:01] <jldupont> could someone help me?  I believe it is really simple, I just know some guru out here will figure out!
[15:06] <azeem> jldupont: I think the clean rule in the upstream Makefile should not run "rm" unconditionally
[15:06] <azeem> i.e., it should run "rm -f"
[15:07] <jldupont> @azeem:  good point !  THANKS!
[15:08] <jldupont> cyphermox: thanks to you too! (private reply)
[15:08] <cyphermox> jldupont, you should post to the channel with all your stuff though, not just directly to me
[15:08] <cyphermox> so that others can potentially benefit from it
[15:11] <jldupont> cyphermox: you are totally right... my bad... I'll be more diligent next time!
[15:19] <ari-tczew> is anybody here?
[15:20] <slytherin> azeem: isn't 'rm -f' same as running rm unconditionally?
[15:20] <slytherin> ari-tczew: lots of people are here.
[15:20] <azeem> slytherin: it doesn't exit with failure if the file to remove does not exist AFAIK
[15:20] <azeem> unconditionally was maybe the wrong term...
[15:20] <ari-tczew> could someone review this bug 393923
[15:21] <ari-tczew> is it need fix?
[15:21] <azeem> ari-tczew: are you saying you attached a patch to the bug and want it reviewed?
[15:22] <ari-tczew> no, I'm looking for answer, that whether this need patch, if it needs a patch, then I'll do debdiff
[15:24] <lfaraone> cyphermox: yes, in UBUNTU_SUITES.
[15:24] <alex-weeej> the CERN ROOT packages don't seem to include the Python bindings... does anyone know how to get them?
[15:25] <alex-weeej> this is with root-system and libroot-python5.18...
[15:25] <alex-weeej> the manifest for libroot-python5.18 doesn't seem to suggest it includes any python libraries...
[15:27] <randomaction> what about libroot-python-dev?
[15:41] <tseliot> hi all
[15:41] <tseliot> the next meeting of the Motu council should take place on Friday, 26th November 2009, 17:00 UTC
[15:41] <tseliot> but November 26 is on Thursday
[15:41] <tseliot> what's the right date?
[15:42] <ari-tczew> tseliot, #ubuntu-metting
[15:42] <ari-tczew> now just someone is talking
[15:43] <Laney> huh?
[15:43] <Laney> he asked for the date
[15:44] <tseliot> ari-tczew: yes, I'm there, but that's a DMB meeting
[15:44] <tseliot> geser: ^^
[15:45] <bddebian> Heya gang
[15:47] <geser> tseliot: fixed, the 2nd meeting of a month is always on the 4th Thursday
[15:48] <tseliot> geser: ok, thanks a lot
[15:49] <ari-tczew> so 27th november?
[15:49] <tseliot> ari-tczew: 26
[15:49] <ari-tczew> ah thursday, right,
[15:49] <geser> according to my calender the 4th Thursday is on Nov 26
[15:49] <ari-tczew> I'm pretty tired today
[15:54] <ari-tczew> If I want to candidate to member of MOTU, can I request this 26th thursday?
[15:54] <maco> ari-tczew: you're supposed to put in a week in advance
[15:55] <ari-tczew> maco, thanks
[15:55] <ari-tczew> so I'll do another once
[15:55] <iulian> bddebian: Hello.
[15:58] <geser> ari-tczew: the MC could process you on Fri, Dec 11th if you apply till Dec 4th
[16:04] <ari-tczew> where can I apply this?
[16:04] <bddebian> Hi iulian
[16:07] <geser> ari-tczew: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers#Applying
[16:25] <al-maisan> Hello there! Quick question: are there any rules re. the age of files that comprise a package?
[16:25] <al-maisan> One of geser's packages was rejected by Soyuz because the files therein had "Thu Jan  1 10:13:08 1970" time stamps
[16:26] <al-maisan> just trying to figure out whether this is a Soyuz bug or an issue with his package
[16:27] <al-maisan> The package in question is upload php-auth_1.6.2-1, see also: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/36001574/upload_1361070_log.txt
[16:27] <ScottK> I can't imagine those time stamps being correct, so I'd be cursious how they got that way?
[16:28] <al-maisan> geser: can you elaborate please?
[16:28] <Laney> I can imagine it happening with tar -mtime in conjunction with a get-orig-source rule to make it deterministic
[16:29] <ScottK> al-maisan: 1970 being described as 'in the future' is clearly wrong in any case.
[16:29] <al-maisan> ScottK: yes, I acknowledged that as a bug already.
[16:29] <ScottK> OK.
[16:35] <RoAkSoAx> pkern, what are your feelings about changing the localization to US rather than UK (bug #485408)
[16:41] <jldupont> Anyone using the Bazaar plugin under Eclipse?  How can I "ignore" a file from a directory under revision control ?
[16:42] <geser> ScottK: one moment, I've to look at the package (php-auth; imported from Debian)
[16:45] <geser> ScottK: they are already in the upstream tarball: http://download.pear.php.net/package/Auth-1.6.2.tgz
[16:46] <geser> the interesting fact is, that the Debian deb has all timestamps current while I could reproduce this timestamps in my lucid pbuilder
[16:47] <ScottK> Weird
[16:47] <geser> as the package is arch:all I can't check the Debian buildd log :(
[16:53] <geser> rebuilding the package in a lenny pbuilder shows the same timestamps (from 1970)
[16:53] <ScottK> It might be worth a mail to the Debian maintainer to ask him how he builds the package.
[16:54] <ScottK> Some of them have 'unique' approaches for arch all packages.  My favorite being the one where the maintainer's home directory name was hard encoded in the maintainerscripts.
[16:55]  * geser hopes Debian starts rebuilding arch:all packages soon upon upload
[16:57] <EzraR> ScottK: are you familiar with the automake/python.my problem with dist-packages vs site-packages?
[16:57] <EzraR> python.m4 rather
[16:59] <ScottK> EzraR: Not really.  It's pretty easy to fix these things when distutils is used.  Possibly the easiest thing to do is just move everything in debian/rules.
[17:00] <EzraR> ScottK: yeah pycentral i believe does that automaticlly...the problem with this particular package is it uses the value with sed to change the source
[17:01] <EzraR> pycentral does not fix that
[17:01] <ScottK> I don't have an easy suggestion for you and no time to review it in depth now.  Sorry.
[17:02] <EzraR> ScottK: np, i thought i had seen your name when i was tracking down the automake stuff
[17:02] <ScottK> I've worked on packages like that before, it's just been awhile.
[17:04] <EzraR> right now the package is broken for python 2.6 but say if i changed the source after install it would break it for < 2.6
[17:05] <EzraR> or do i need to worry about people not having 2.6?
[17:05] <EzraR> i can put a condition to change if over 2.5
[17:05] <ScottK> In Lucid, we only have 2.6, so it's fine.
[17:06] <EzraR> karmic too?
[17:08] <ScottK> Karmic has 2.5 and 2.6.
[17:08] <ScottK> A more general solution is preferable.  It'd be useful for Debian if not for us.
[17:09] <EzraR> i believe that would take fixing automake which the bug is curently makred fixed
[17:17] <EzraR> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python2.6/+bug/350016
[17:27] <EzraR> ScottK: oh and btw the package ive been talking about isnt in debian
[17:27] <ScottK> OK, then that simplifies things.
[17:33] <EzraR> however if someone installed the package when they had python 2.5 then upgraded to 2.6 it would break
[18:06] <jldupont> How come that my PPA doesn't appear in Synaptic?  When I press the "origin" button, my PPA isn't listed?
[18:07] <micahg> jldupont: it just lists ppa.launchpad.net
[18:08] <jldupont> micahg: thanks for the reply.  ok then, why isn't my package listed when I search for it **but** I can install it using apt-get ?
[18:08] <micahg> do you have just the deb line or deb and deb-src?
[18:08] <jldupont> just the deb
[18:09] <jldupont> I need deb-src??
[18:09] <micahg> maybe that's it, but I'd say that's a bug if it is
[18:09] <jldupont> let me try... a sec.
[18:10] <jldupont> even with the deb-src it's still doesn't show in Synaptic **but** it is installed as per apt-get...
[18:11] <jldupont> what did I do wrong in the packaging ??
[18:11] <ScottK> Neither PPA nor Synaptic are particularly on topic for this channel.
[18:11] <jldupont> ScottK: I tried #launchpad but nobody responds...
[18:12] <ScottK> That doesn't magically change the topic of this channel.
[18:13] <micahg> jldupont: lets go to #ubuntu-bugs
[18:59] <mac_v> hi... will the fix for Bug #439077 , be available for Karmic?
[19:00] <mac_v> hmm , is this the right room for the question ? :)
[19:02] <m4rtin> mac_v: only has a lucid patch at the moment
[19:02] <m4rtin> maco: nice interview :)
[19:02] <ScottK> mac_v: It's on topic for the channel.  Not sure who can answer.
[19:02] <randomaction> mac_v: SRU was not requested
[19:03] <mac_v> randomaction: hmm , how do we do that?
[19:03] <randomaction> !sru
[19:03] <mac_v> the bug was actually filed for karmic , as mentioned in the title
[19:05] <fabrice_sp> mac_v, the fix is alwasys uploaded for the dev version, so Lucid in that case
[19:05] <fabrice_sp> after it's fixed in the dev version, a SRU has to be done, to 'backport' it
[19:06] <mac_v> hmm , reading the wiki , I'm not sure if this is SRU worthy , but seems more for the backports..
[19:06] <mac_v> ah ok
[19:07] <ari-tczew> devs, could someone check bug 393923, is it needs a fix?
[19:13] <fabrice_sp> ari-tczew, I don't think so: if the package works fine, I don't see the point of fixing something that we don't use. Check it with av`
[19:13] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, I would like yout opinion in the patch attached for bug #401048 fixes the issue?
[19:14] <ari-tczew> sure fabrice_sp
[19:14]  * ScottK looks
[19:16] <ScottK> RoAkSoAx: You can ask cemc what testing he's done on this.  I don't have a havp setup to test with, but I generally trust his work on clamav packages.
[19:17] <micahg1> anyone interested in pushing through an SRU?
[19:17] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, ok I'll ask him then :)
[19:20] <cemc> RoAkSoAx: well, I attached that patch... and I think it fixes the problem, but I have to look at it a bit more. I know it's still an issue in Karmic
[19:22] <RoAkSoAx> cemc, ok so if its still an issue in Karmic, it might be in lucid as well
[19:22] <cemc> RoAkSoAx: yes, Lucid has the same version as Karmic
[19:23] <RoAkSoAx> cemc, Yes, I was about to merge the new upstream version however I though to wait for the fix on that bug before uploading it to Lucid
[19:24] <cemc> RoAkSoAx: 0.91-1 from testing?
[19:24] <RoAkSoAx> cemc, yes
[19:26] <maco> m4rtin: thanks
[19:28] <cemc> RoAkSoAx: I dont' see any bugreports in Debian for this. I'll file one, maybe they'll fix it and then you can merge (and maybe do an SRU for Karmic). how does this sound?
[19:29] <RoAkSoAx> cemc, awesome! I'll hold the merge a few days then!! :)
[19:29] <fabrice_sp> is fakeroot broken in lucid?
[19:30] <fabrice_sp> I'm getting "ERROR: ld.so: object 'libfakeroot-sysv.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded: ignored"
[19:36] <fabrice_sp> hmm, it's not lucid fault
[19:36] <fabrice_sp> fcuk112, ^
[19:36] <fabrice_sp> this is when I try to generate the source pacakge
[19:36] <fabrice_sp> of libavg
[19:47] <lars_> Hello together! I've got some questions to the contribution process for people who are new to the whole thing (like me). I read many wiki articles, but I am still a little unsure about which things I need to do. I followed the tutorials, here you can see what I got so far: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lcdproc/+bug/218374. I am not sure about the correctness of all what I did there... and I don't know what I still have to do. Can
[19:47] <lars_>  you help me?
[19:52] <RoAkSoAx> hey guys has anyone else receiving a "E: Could not connect to fiordland.ubuntu.com:25: Connection timed out (110)" message while requesting a sync with requestsync ?
[19:54] <randomaction> lars_: you should subscribe ubuntu-universe-sponsors to the bug. And the sponsors will most likely ask you to add the changelog entry (to debian/changelog), so you might do that as well :)
[19:55] <lars_> ok, I will do that
[19:56] <fcuk112> fabrice_sp: thanks i got your update.
[19:57] <fcuk112> fabrice_sp: how do i add the export line?  i just added export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/libavg:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH on line 2 of the debian/rules file.
[19:59] <fabrice_sp> fcuk112, perhaps adding it when building the package? (in the buils target)
[19:59] <fabrice_sp> you don't have this error?
[20:00] <fcuk112> fabrice_sp: i do - but i saw some stuff on google that it could be ignored.  i guess it can't.
[20:00] <fabrice_sp> nop, as it don't let you build the source package :-D
[20:01] <fabrice_sp> ScottK, do you have opinion on removing emacs22 from archive for lucid?
[20:03] <ScottK> fabrice_sp: I think it should go, but I'd ask siretart` as he's a heavy emacs user and would know better.
[20:03] <fcuk112> fabrice_sp: humm, moving the export line below debian/stamp-build%:
[20:03] <fcuk112> didn't help
[20:03] <fabrice_sp> ScottK, ok :-)
[20:04] <fabrice_sp> porthose, ^
[20:04] <fabrice_sp> fcuk112, can you check if the source package can be built without this line?
[20:05] <fcuk112> fabrice_sp: then i get the old error again: libavg.so missing =P
[20:05] <fcuk112> fabrice_sp: it should build, but only when i have that export entry in my .pbuilderrc.
[20:05] <fabrice_sp> perhaps someone else can help you with the build error
[20:06] <fcuk112> fabrice_sp: ok - back to the drawing board :(
[20:06] <fabrice_sp> do you have the exact building error?
[20:07] <fabrice_sp> got it:
[20:07] <fabrice_sp> dpkg-shlibdeps: error: couldn't find library avg.so.0 needed by debian/python-libavg/usr/lib/libColorNode.so.0.0.0
[20:07] <fabrice_sp> anyone know how to fix that^ ?
[20:07] <siretart> fabrice_sp: why do you want emacs22 removed?
[20:08] <siretart> ScottK: in case this question turns up again: I think we should keep emacs22 in universe at least for lucid, probably until we get an emacs24 package (which might take some time..) - for now let's hope that emacs23 gets promoted soon
[20:09] <fabrice_sp> siretart, emacs is provided by emacs23, and this would allow to remove also another package (nxml-mode)
[20:09] <fabrice_sp> ok
[20:10] <ajmitch> is that still a good reason to remove it?
[20:10] <fabrice_sp> siretart, do you have an opinion on Bug #485689 ?
[20:10] <ajmitch> though it's nice to cut down on the number of versions to carry
[20:10] <fabrice_sp> ajmitch, 3 times the same pacakge seems a good reason to remove at least one :-)
[20:11] <fabrice_sp> (at least, it seems to be the same package to me :- )
[20:12] <ajmitch> I'm just wary of taking a package from default in main ine one release to removed in the next
[20:13] <ajmitch> but apart from that I don't know if there are good reasons to keep it around
[20:13] <ajmitch> or is emacs23 default in karmic? I can never remember :)
[20:14] <siretart> ajmitch: no, emacs23 was not ready in time for wide testing. it is shipped in universe
[20:14] <ajmitch> right
[20:14] <ajmitch> 'emacs --version' gives me emacs23 because I chose to install it, I guess
[20:15] <fabrice_sp> right: emacs is provided by emacs22 in karmic, and by emacs23 in lucid
[20:16] <siretart> fabrice_sp: err, nxml-mode got merged in emacs23, yes. so we need it for emacs22 only.
[20:16] <ScottK> siretart: Why do we need two emacs versions?
[20:16] <siretart> fabrice_sp: I don't understand what's unclear on this bug?
[20:16] <ajmitch> because emacs is more than just an editor :)
[20:16] <siretart> ScottK: for the same reason we ship multiple versions of python
[20:17] <ScottK> siretart: How many versions of Python in Lucid?
[20:17] <fabrice_sp> siretart, I think it could be a sync, because I've not been able to reproduce the problem that generated the diff i Ubuntu
[20:17] <ajmitch> still 5 at the moment, isn't it?
[20:18] <ajmitch> from 2.4 to 3.1
[20:18] <siretart> ScottK: sorry? I guess lucid will ship more than 2 versions.
[20:19] <ScottK> Lucid only has 2.6 as a supported version.
[20:19] <siretart> fabrice_sp: what bug is that?
[20:19] <ScottK> siretart: OK.  I guess when one recalls emacs is an operating system that happens to have an editor, it makes sense.
[20:19] <fabrice_sp> let me check
[20:19] <siretart> ScottK: I don't propose to ship more than one version of emacs in main. keeping the older version in universe is all I suggest
[20:20] <ScottK> OK.
[20:20] <siretart> ScottK: nah, operating systems need to do scheduling and optionally paging. emacs does neither
[20:20] <siretart> ScottK: rather think of emacs like an interpreter for a funky language (called elisp) that happens to have a graphical interface with an fancy editor :-)
[20:21] <ScottK> Fair enough
[20:21] <fabrice_sp> siretart, Bug #147904
[20:21] <fabrice_sp> you fixed it :-D
[20:22] <siretart> wow, that is an really old upload
[20:22] <siretart> I'd be surprised if it hadn't be fixed in debian in the mean time
[20:22] <siretart> so if you have verified upgrade still works, go ahead with the sync!
[20:23] <fabrice_sp> that's my point :-) I'll just make another check, but it was ok last time I checked (don't remember if it was an upgrade ar an install)
[21:33] <porthose> fabrice_sp, just read the scroll back, I'll switch the bug from a merge to a sync :)
[21:35] <fabrice_sp> perfect :-)
[21:36] <fabrice_sp> bed time: bye ;-)
[21:36] <porthose> nite