[00:00] <Laney> the hdf5 delta is really small
[00:02] <jgoppert> I'm really new. I have time but I probably need some help to work on a real package as of yet.
[00:04] <Laney> you have found a good little set of tasks here
[00:05] <Laney> we will help you
[00:06] <jgoppert> so if i'm reading this right we no longer need hdf4-alt-dev ?
[00:07] <jjlee> do I really have to create a repository with some other tool when using piuparts -a?
[00:07] <jjlee> I have a .deb, and want to test that its dependencies are sufficient
[00:07] <jjlee> I was hoping that a tool such as piuparts would do the repository creation for me
[00:07] <Laney> jgoppert: it's still around in Debian
[00:08] <jgoppert> jjlee: pbuilder build *.dsc
[00:08] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, ping
[00:08] <jjlee> ah, ok -- that puts a repo in some well-known location by default?  and piuparts will find it, like it did the base.tar.gz?
[00:09] <ScottK> RoAkSoAx: Pong
[00:09] <jgoppert> Laney:  * Upload to unstable, due to hdf4 -alt support transitioned from experimental.     (closes: #540403)
[00:10] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, while removing havp with --purge option, I get this warnings: dpkg: warning: while removing havp, directory '/var/log/havp' not empty so not removed. dpkg: warning: while removing havp, directory '/var/lib/havp' not empty so not removed.. Would it make any sense do: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/332019/
[00:10] <jgoppert> Does that mean we don't need it any longer in ubuntu?
[00:10] <Laney> no
[00:10] <Laney> I don't know what that transition was, but Debian hasn't removed the package so we probably don't want to either
[00:11] <jgoppert> Laney: Ok, so where do I start, pull hdf5 from sid and put in on my ppa?
[00:11] <ScottK> RoAkSoAx: Probably.  That's the kind of decisision I'd want to follow Debian on, so I'd talk with cemc and take the question to Debian.  I wouldn't want to maintain a permenant diff for this.
[00:12] <Laney> jgoppert: You need to "merge" it into Lucid (forget about your PPA for now). See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/Merging
[00:12] <RoAkSoAx> ScottK, ok awesome. Will file a bug in Debian. Thanks :)
[00:13] <jgoppert> oh boy, any cliff notes? can you walk me through it a bit
[00:14] <Laney> yep yep
[00:14] <Laney> download the Debian package, figure out if we still need the Ubuntu changes and apply them if so
[00:15] <jgoppert> ok so dget something, whats the quickest way to find the url, debian package search?
[00:15] <Laney> use pull-debian-source from the ubuntu-dev-tools package
[00:17] <jgoppert> yeah the little stuff like that helps, i've been doing stuff the hard way, takes forever
[00:17] <jgoppert> ok i got it
[00:18] <jgoppert> do i do a diff against the ubuntu, how does that work?
[00:18] <Laney> you can grab it from patches.ubuntu.com
[00:18] <Laney> http://patches.ubuntu.com/h/hdf5/hdf5_1.6.6-4ubuntu2.patch
[00:18] <Laney> also merges.ubuntu.com might have it
[00:19] <jgoppert> lol ok so there is one real diff?
[00:19] <jgoppert> i have no idea why we need this though         /* do compressed data write */
[00:19] <jgoppert> -        output = open(filename, O_RDWR | O_CREAT);
[00:19] <jgoppert> +        output = open(filename, O_RDWR | O_CREAT, S_IRWXU);
[00:21] <Laney> see the changelog
[00:21] <Laney> I reckon it was to fix a build failure
[00:21] <Laney> you can check that location in the new package to see if they took the patch
[00:21] <Laney> otherwise try a build and check if it works now
[00:21] <ajmitch> it's to set the permissions of files that get created
[00:22] <Laney> yeah
[00:22] <ajmitch> I'm sure there was a good reason for it at some point
[00:22] <Laney> the new compiler flags would FTBFS on it right?
[00:22] <jgoppert> ok checking theirs for the fix
[00:22] <ajmitch> according to the changelog, it's needed for -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE
[00:23] <Laney> right
[00:23] <Laney> i'm off to bed
[00:23] <jgoppert> wait my debian is at 1.6.2, did it pull from stable and I need unstable?
[00:24] <ajmitch> night
[00:24] <Laney> now that ajmitch has turned up :)
[00:24]  * ajmitch isn't really here
[00:24] <Laney> LIES
[00:24] <jgoppert> Laney: Thanks for the help
[00:24] <jgoppert> oh no.. abandoned, lol
[00:24] <Laney> no problem, feel free to bug ajmitch all you want!
[00:24] <ajmitch> *cough*
[00:24] <Laney> (it pulled from testing and not unstable)
[00:24] <Laney> ttyl!
[00:24] <jgoppert> see ya
[00:25] <ajmitch> even testing should have 1.8.3-2.1
[00:26] <jgoppert> looks like you can specify it with pull-debian-source gdal sid
[00:27] <ajmitch> ah, you're talking about gda1 again, not hdf5
[00:28] <jgoppert> yeah well we need to fix both i guess, hdf5-serial and hdf4-alt are dependencies
[00:28] <jgoppert> the automated merge failed due to them, i fixed it by backing up the library deps to earlier versions on my ppa but Laney yelled at me lol
[00:40] <jjlee> jgoppert: are you sure that pbuilder --build creates a repository?  seems it just builds a package
[00:40] <jjlee> jgoppert: what I wanted to do was test install dependencies, not build deps
[00:41] <jjlee> jgoppert: hence need for a repo to give to piuparts -a
[00:41] <jgoppert> jjlee: pbuilder create a chroot and installs all the dependencies, if your package fails to build then you know you are missing some
[00:41] <jjlee> jgoppert: sure -- but that wasn't what I was trying to do
[00:41] <jjlee> I already knew my build deps were ok
[00:42] <jjlee> it was my *install* deps I wanted to test
[00:42] <jjlee> I want to install my package using apt-get in a clean chroot, then run the packaged program
[00:43] <jgoppert> haven't done that before, i just have the same build and install deps most of the time except like autotools etc
[00:43] <jgoppert> if you are talking like the dev package
[00:43] <jjlee> fair enough
[00:43] <jgoppert> otherwise shlibs should do that for you, no need to check
[00:44] <jjlee> shlibs?
[00:44] <jgoppert> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
[00:44] <jgoppert> you've seen that line before right, well it finds all the symbols that require linking and does it automatically
[00:45] <jjlee> this is a Perl package
[00:45] <jgoppert> oh, well if its script no need to worry about binary packages right?
[00:45] <jjlee> but there is a need to worry about install dependencies
[00:46] <jjlee> for example, my install dependencies might be missing a package that provides a required CPAN module
[00:46] <jjlee> only way to find out is to install it in a clean environment and run the tests (if there are any)
[00:47] <jjlee> well, not the *only* way, of course -- but it's a good test
[00:47] <jgoppert> i see your problem, maybe use virtualbox and go for it? lol ouch
[00:47] <jjlee> somebody did it at work already, I'll see what we do there (just cobbled together multiple tools, including pbuilder, I think)
[00:48] <jgoppert> yeah you can do a pbuilder login and you get a shell in the chroot
[00:48] <jjlee> I was just hoping there was some tool that made it easy(ier)
[00:50] <jgoppert> well seems to me like you'd almost need a test suite, how is anything going to know what you call from your script
[00:51] <jjlee> right, the tool can't know that part (well, a tool could do static analysis, but that's a different thing)
[00:52] <jjlee> what I was hoping for was to write test-my-debian-package-install-dependencies my-debian-package.deb --components 'main universe' --run test-my-debian-package.sh
[00:53] <dtchen> jjlee: are you familiar with piuparts?
[00:53] <jjlee> dtchen: we just went around that loop ;-)
[00:53] <jgoppert> well i know nothing bout piuparts, so maybe someone else could help you
[00:53] <jjlee> I can see what I need to do
[00:54] <jgoppert> good luck
[00:55] <jjlee> just need to run some tool that creates a repo, then pbuilder to create chroot, then run piuparts (and/or manual apt-get + test)
[00:55] <dtchen> I don't see why you need pbuilder for that scenario
[00:56] <jjlee> dtchen: want a clean chroot
[00:56] <dtchen> piuparts will create the base install environment
[00:56] <dtchen> I did a short classroom on this last year
[00:56] <jjlee> dtchen: you're probably right, but it complained at me when I tried it just now.  Ran pbuilder --create and it stopped complaining.
[00:57] <dtchen> oh, I see what you're referring to
[00:57] <dtchen> for some reason I thought you wanted to login to the chroot
[00:58] <jjlee> I'm a little surprised that everybody doesn't do this
[00:58] <jgoppert> i'm really new to all of this, sure the pro's do
[01:02] <jjlee> thanks all, bye
[01:23] <bddebian> dtchen: Are you avoiding me? :)
[01:30] <dtchen> bddebian: hi
[01:30] <dtchen> bddebian: err, no, I've been on holiday for the past few days
[01:30] <bddebian> dtchen: I figured, I'm just kidding. :)
[01:31] <bddebian> dtchen: If you get time, libsdl1.2 1.2.14 is in experimental if you could do some testing..
[01:31] <dtchen> bddebian: yep, I'll work on that alongside the userspace alsa-{lib,plugins} debugging; thanks!
[01:32] <dtchen> now if only I had non-craptastic hw on which to test :/
[01:32] <dtchen> it's much easier to wave hands and say "but it works on Conexant HDA!"
[01:34] <bddebian> heh
[03:07] <nxvl_> slangasek: ping
[03:08] <nxvl_> slangasek: re vimperator> do i need to bump the version or re-upload with the same version?
[03:13] <slangasek> nxvl_: version needs bumped because the source is already in the archive
[03:14] <nxvl_> slangasek: ok
[03:14] <nxvl_> that's what i though
[03:15] <nxvl> thought
[03:23] <nigel_nb> maco: evening :)
[04:39] <fabrice_sp> jgoppert, bug 489882
[04:39] <fabrice_sp> someone already worked on the merge/sync
[04:40] <fabrice_sp> so you just have to wait for a nice archive admin to process the sync :-D
[04:41] <jgoppert> nice :-) thanks
[04:41] <fabrice_sp> yw :-) Hope you didn't spent a lot of time with this merge
[04:42] <jgoppert> lol no i gave up once laney left
[04:42] <fabrice_sp> lol
[04:42] <jgoppert> i've been packaging a bunch of other stuff on my ppa with the help of bddebian
[04:42] <fabrice_sp> ok :-)
[04:42] <fabrice_sp> cool
[04:42] <fabrice_sp> bdrung_, about bug 490387
[04:43] <fabrice_sp> I'm not able to build monkeystudio.. How did you do it?
[04:44] <fabrice_sp> jgoppert, are the pacakges already in Ubuntu?
[04:44] <fabrice_sp> just curious :-)
[04:45] <jgoppert> not for most of them, had to make my own gdal temporarily, new: boost-numeric-bindings, gnelib, hawknl, open-dis, premake, and uvsim my project from sf
[04:45] <jgoppert> trying to package delta3d right now
[04:49] <fabrice_sp> a lof of new packages, then !
[04:49] <fabrice_sp> good luck :-)
[04:50] <jgoppert> thanks, yeah its been a learning experience
[04:57] <fabrice_sp> just in case: debian/copyright is a very important file in the package and does not get, most of the time, the required attention ;-) So if you are looking for sponsorship to get the packages into Ubuntu or Debian, this file should be accurate
[05:12] <jgoppert> thanks fabrice, i'll be sure to look over mine before i ask someone
[05:31] <jgoppert> how do i do an itp, i've packaged all of these new packages but kind of skipped that part
[05:34] <stefanlsd> jgoppert: I would check if debian has an ITP first, and assist there. You can do it there (create on with their process), or do it on Ubuntu by filing a need packaging bug on launchpad
[05:35] <jgoppert> ok is there like an equivalent of ubuntu-motu over there?
[05:36] <lifeless> debian-mentors
[05:36] <jgoppert> thanks
[05:36] <lifeless> but ubuntu-motu can help you out regardless
[05:36] <jgoppert> thanks
[05:36] <stefanlsd> also see http://wiki.debian.org/Maintainers
[05:38] <jgoppert> how do i check if this program runs correctly in debian? Is there a way to get graphics windows inside a chroot from pbuilder?
[05:39] <jmarsden> jgoppert: Yes, but I forget the details... I tend to run Debian in a Virtualbox VM for that sort of testing instead...
[05:40] <jgoppert> ok, yeah i made one just in case :-/ my virtual box with sid on it has the internet cut out during downloads every couple minutes and i have to rerun the apt-get install or whatever, kind of annoying, does your's work correctly?
[05:42] <jmarsden> Yes, works fine for me here... or did last time I used it, let me check :)
[05:47] <jmarsden> jgoppert: Yes, seems fine here, I'm seeing my usual 1.1MBytes/sec download speed, no dropouts downloading a Debian CD1 .iso using wget...
[05:47] <jgoppert> that's good, are you using nat?
[05:48] <jmarsden> Host networking for virtualbox-ose... NAT in the router (Verizon FIOS connection to Internet, 10Mbps down/2Mbps up)
[05:53] <jgoppert> maybe thats my problem, i was on nat
[05:57] <jmarsden> jgoppert: I don't know, I always use host networking so I can ssh into my virtualbox VMs :)
[05:58] <jgoppert> that's pretty cool, lol would be useful
[06:00] <jgoppert> delta3d 24% done, crossing fingers.. have to love late night packaging.. no line for the build farm lol
[06:03] <jmarsden> jgoppert: :)  It's *really* better to build it locally first, so you don't need to cross any fingers, you know :)
[06:03] <jgoppert> yeah this is the first time i'm building it locally.. i'm just saying soon enough its off to the build farm, 41% now :-)
[06:04] <jgoppert> i had to get like 4 new libraries packaged, i feel very accomplished lol
[06:06] <jmarsden> Good for you!  I was looking at packaging something new over this last weekend but decided it was "too much work for right now" when I saw how many libs I'd have to package first :)
[06:20] <jgoppert> yeah its even more fun when they use cmake :/  got to 60% and crashed because their unit tests failed do to relative paths.. grrr... oh well just disabled the testing, no need to build it right now i guess
[06:22] <jmarsden> :) I've not learned cmake fully yet either... learned enough autotools to get by years ago, don't see why I should have to relearn now ... but at some point I probably will have to cave and learn cmake :) :)
[06:24] <jgoppert> i learned cmake first, attempted to use it and then realized i was an idiot for not just taking the plunge and learning autotools in the first place, but i guess not everyone thinks like me, cmake seems easy at first, its install mechanisms aren't that great though, and its kind of limited if you are using multiple languages
[06:32] <mannyv> I was looking at the package progaurd and the version in testing can be synced but the version in unstable has been updated to source format 3.0 (quilt) which I remember reading cannot be handled correctly yet. Does this mean I should hold off on requesting a sync?
[06:38] <jgoppert> i have a package trying to install is so's to /usr/lib64, should i switch it to /usr/lib ?
[06:38] <jgoppert> *it's
[07:09] <fabrice_sp> ScottK, do you have any opinion on bug 426614 ?
[07:10] <fabrice_sp> mannyv, no: the sync request will be on hold on archive admin part, but I still process them
[07:11] <fabrice_sp> but I may be wrong :-)
[07:13] <micahg> do I need the changelog entry to say LP: #XXXXXX or is LP: XXXXXX enough?
[07:14] <alkisg> If package A depends on package B, and the user purges package A, will the postinst from package B be called *after* the postinst from package A? Or no order is guaranteed there?
[07:16] <micahg> nevermind...I just fixed it
[07:16] <jmarsden> Do appropriate admins know that https://wiki.ubuntu.com is apparently down?
[07:17] <jmarsden> Is there something like http://status.ubuntu.com for outage status/info ?
[07:17] <maco> not that im aware
[07:18] <damagednoob> yeah i'm not getting to wiki.ubuntu.com
[07:18] <maco> admins are in #canonical-sysadmins i thin
[07:18] <maco> *think
[07:18] <jmarsden> OK, thanks, I'll ask there.
[07:18] <maco> or file an rt ticket rt.ubuntu.com user/pass ubuntu/ubuntu
[07:23] <jmarsden> #canonical-sysadmins was empty, so I filed a ticket.
[07:23] <maco> might be singular...
[07:23] <maco> *shrug*
[07:39] <dholbach> good morning
[07:54] <highvoltage> good morning everyone
[07:59] <siretart`> morning!
[08:08] <dholbach> fabrice_sp: do you know how to proceed with bug 474004?
[09:06] <ttx> dholbach: any reason why you didn't subscribe ubuntu-archive on bug 484912 ?
[09:26] <dholbach> ttx: oversight? :)
[09:26] <ttx> dholbach: that counts. I'll fix it :)
[09:27] <dholbach> thanks :)
[09:34] <DaveMorris> a quick easy question.  A fix was released for libmp3lame0 on Tue 24 Nov, and is in lucid.  I guess it is in karmic-proposed, how long till it's in karmic-updates?
[09:35] <DaveMorris> bug #469676 btw
[09:36] <randomaction> no it's not in karmic-proposed
[09:36] <DaveMorris> therefore it won't automatically move into karmic-updates I guess
[09:37] <randomaction> right
[09:37] <DaveMorris> I assume the fix __should__ get released on karmic though
[09:38] <randomaction> !sru
[09:39] <DaveMorris> thanks
[09:40] <randomaction> there is already a patch for lucid, it should be easy to modify it for karmic-proposed
[09:43] <DaveMorris> I assume I would need to poke someone with upload rights for karmic-proposed, I'm guessing that would be a MOTU?
[09:46] <randomaction> usually you do this by subscribing ubuntu-universe-sponsors to the bug
[09:47] <randomaction> and for a SRU you need an ack from motu-sru team
[09:47] <randomaction> the details are in the link above
[09:48] <DaveMorris> cheers, I'll do it now, before wifey kills me for mythtv not working
[12:10] <shankao> how can I ask for the removal of a package from the universe repository? should I follow any fixed procedure?
[12:22] <randomaction> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/PackageArchive#Removing%20Packages
[12:26] <shankao> thanks!
[13:08] <kecsap> hi all! I have a question: Ubuntu has the OpenCV 1.0 (libcv1 etc. packages) in the Ubuntu repositories. I would like to have an update for that because the OpenCV 2.0 was released on 1th of October and the 1.0 is more than two years old and simple things are just broken there. Debian has only 1.0 as well. How to push this forward? I would like to have an update at least hardy, jaunty and karmic. I am a OpenCV developer, but I was not involved with MO
[13:08] <kecsap> TU before. I have packaging/developer etc experience. I can do the work, but I do not know the best process for this situation. Please advise.
[13:11] <shriekout> humm...
[13:11] <shriekout> i'm a newbie...
[13:12] <shriekout> kecsap, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/REVU
[13:13] <jpds> kecsap: Update won't be able to go into pervious releases, just lucid.
[13:14] <jpds> kecsap: You should also try pushing the update into Debian.
[13:15] <jpds> kecsap: Fruthermore, the update already seems to be in Debian NEW: http://packages.qa.debian.org/o/opencv.html
[13:16] <kecsap> jpds: thanks, I used only the package source of the debian and I saw only 1.0.x.
[13:17] <kecsap> jpds: ok, then how can I push this debian version to ubuntu? can it be only in lucid, even if it is in the debian NEW already?
[13:19] <jpds> kecsap: You'll have to file a sync request and have it approved: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SyncRequestProcess
[13:20] <kecsap> jpds: thank you!
[13:20] <jpds> No problem.
[15:04] <bddebian> Heya gang
[15:15] <iulian> Hi bddebian.
[15:15] <bddebian> Hi iulian
[15:25] <sebner> hey bddebian  iulian
[15:25] <iulian> Hello sebner.
[15:29] <bddebian> Hu hu sebner
[15:59] <micahg> fabrice_sp: check out bug 490791
[16:09] <fabrice_sp_> Hi dholbach. I'm a bit lost with this bug report, bug 474004, as you seems to have a bug that makes the new version unusable
[16:11] <dholbach> fabrice_sp_: did you experience it too?
[16:11] <fabrice_sp_> dholbach, I will check when I come home, this afternoon
[16:12] <dholbach> alright, thanks :)
[16:12] <fabrice_sp_> If I can reproduce, I'll try also to backtrace the problem, to see if it's a problem in libavg
[16:12] <fabrice_sp_> yw :-)
[18:26] <LucidFox> "This repository is being created, it will be ready pretty soon…"
[18:27]  * LucidFox waits... and waits, and waits...