[00:01] dtchen: please go ahead - my change to libsdl1.2 was just a rebuild, and I don't really want to merge it [00:02] cjwatson: thanks [00:09] Amaranth: ya, idk how much === asac_ is now known as asac === dktrkranz is now known as Guest23053 === Guest23053 is now known as dktrkranz === dktrkranz is now known as Guest35967 === Guest35967 is now known as dktrkranz === DktrKranz is now known as Guest62390 === Guest62390 is now known as DktrKranz === MTecknology is now known as ALearing === ALearing is now known as ALearing_ === ALearing_ is now known as AdamLearing === AdamLearing is now known as MTecknology [03:20] hi [03:21] debuild -S -sd always give me error [03:21] see plEASE http://pastebin.com/d65b07399 [03:27] EagleScreen, I guess that you want to do: debuild -S -sa instead of debuild -S -sd [03:28] may be, but it gives the same error [03:28] i have tried with two completly different packages [03:29] do you have make installed? [03:29] or is ~/devel on a special filesystem? [03:29] yes [03:29] cheking it [03:29] ohhh [03:30] mounted noexec? [03:30] ~/devel is a link to a directory in a ntfs-3g partition [03:30] right, that could be problematic [03:31] I'm not sure of the state of NTFS stuff, whether it can be mounted exec (probably can), and if everything will work [03:32] ok, who has a softmodem on HDA? [03:33] i.e., has sl-modem-daemon or hsfmodem installed [03:33] hm [03:33] * dtchen squashes more PA bugs [03:34] not sure how my modem is hooked up in the laptop [03:35] looks to be HDA, though I don't have any dialup account to test with [03:38] ok, now the problem is this other one http://pastebin.com/d2d71b131 [03:40] ran sudo apt-get build-dep konversation? [03:43] just the same error [03:43] and is it really necessary to just build the source package? [03:44] when the source package needs certain packages to run its clean target in debian/rules, then yes [03:44] most often with things like quilt or dpatch [03:44] EagleScreen: You need a newer pkg-kde-tools [03:45] thanks ScottK, I was about to suggest #kubuntu-devel would know more :) [03:46] thanks ScottK, will check it === LucidFox_ is now known as LucidFox [03:46] EagleScreen: It's also a bug that the version require for pkg-kde-tools aren't specified properly in the package. [03:47] 0.4.11uubntu7 is mine [03:48] You need the one from lucid [03:50] also debhelper from lucid :\ [03:51] I don't think so, but maybe [03:53] yes it told me it [03:54] thanks you guys [03:54] see u tomorrow (may be) [04:37] What section would this fall under? https://edge.launchpad.net/ricoh-r5u87x [04:45] MTecknology: Having a look at http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-subsections suggests... video? It's for webcams, which are about the video. [04:46] RAOF: thanks [05:06] I'm trying to bui;d this package but it wants the authors pgp key. I'm only packaging it for them. Where does debuild pick the email it's going to look for the pgp key of? [05:06] MTecknology: $DEBEMAIL [05:06] and i would assume that's package author... [05:07] because its just for debian/changelog [05:07] also $DEBFULLNAME [05:09] maco: thanks.. and for this? Enter passphrase: gpg: gpg-agent is not available in this session [05:09] start gpg-agent [05:09] thanks :) [05:09] start: Unknown job: gpg-agent [05:09] seems to have signed fine anyway [05:10] MTecknology: You don't need the agent, it just avoids the need to repeatedly enter the passphrase for multiple signings [05:10] MTecknology: oh its not an upstart job. i meant the verb "start" not the command start [05:12] thanks :) [05:12] this packaging thing doesn't seem as scary as it did 30min ago [05:18] ^_^ [05:19] Any ideas why this hates me? http://paste.ubuntu.com/337038/ [05:21] debuild -S ran through w/o complaints [05:21] I'm using a very simple debian/rules to invoke cdbs/pycentral, where can I start debugging if "python setup.py install" ships my package correctly in dist-packages symlinked to pyshared, but installing the generated deb doesn't create the package in dist-packages? [05:22] MTecknology: Well, obvious question... did you do a pbuilder create to set up that chroot earlier? [05:22] nope [05:22] Then that's why the error message says you need to do so.... :) [05:22] jmarsden: I'm trying to follow https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Basic [05:23] And it doesn't tell you to set up your pbuilder chroot before you use it???? [05:23] jmarsden: this? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebootstrapChroot === asac_ is now known as asac [05:24] MTecknology: More like https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Complete#The%20Personal%20Builder:%20pbuilder [05:24] mrooney: Does your package declare with python versions the binary supports in X-B-Python-Version [05:25] You seem to be using a partial version of the Guide which lacks some info?? Not sure about that, I always use the Complete one :) [05:25] jmarsden: i liked the word Basic in the title... :P [05:26] For me that is more a reminder of 10 PRINT "HELLO" 20 GOTO 10 "BASIC" :) [05:26] :P [05:27] jmarsden: so that creates a very minimal virtual environment that's clean for building packages? [05:27] pbuilder! [05:28] maco: hurray!? [05:28] Yes. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PbuilderHowto [05:28] use it! [05:28] MTecknology: and after that see http://wiki.debian.org/PbuilderTricks [05:29] I wonder how long it'll take to setup the environment [05:29] MTecknology: It is a *very* helpful way to check that you have your dependency stuff correct before uploading packages to a PPA or to Ubuntu itself. [05:30] MTecknology: Minutes if you have a fast Internet connection. [05:30] we're throttled here [05:30] dakota state uni kinda sucks [05:30] I'm spoiled... 10Mbits/sec down from Verizon FIOS here :) [05:31] ScottK: Hm, I think? http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mrooney/wxbanker/packaging-0.6/annotate/head%3A/control [05:31] I think we're [05:31] I'm honestly not 100% what ${python:Versions} means [05:31] I think we're 'supposed' to get 2Mbit down but the reality is ~60Kb/s 80% of the time [05:32] Ewww. At 60kbits/sec creating a fresh chroot could take a while. [05:32] Ti's on I: Retrieving net-tools [05:32] It's* [05:33] I only notice that text if it fails to find something (usually a Debian sid one when that happens!). [05:35] Although right now Lucid is in a weird state (not for a base pbuilder, but X is all weird and broken if you update Lucid today). [05:37] mrooney: That should be correct. BTW, you don't need the <<3.0 in XS-Python-Versions. Thats assumed. [05:39] ScottK: oh okay, is that a generic major version assumption, or specific to python? [05:40] ok - so I got further - any idea what I screwed up on this time? [05:40] MTecknology: pastebin? [05:40] http://paste.ubuntu.com/337044/ [05:40] sorry [05:40] I'm good but not *that* good :) [05:41] :P [05:41] Your package needs debhelper version 7 but you did not include it in your Build-Depends: line in debian/control, most likely. [05:42] mrooney: specific to python [05:44] jmarsden: Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 7) [05:44] jmarsden: does my package actually need that or is it jsut an example? [05:45] If you have debian/compat containing the number 7, your package needs that (so they match). [05:45] ScottK: okay. My previous release works fine, I've made more changes since then to setup.py than debian/ so I guess I should look there, but since it setup.py --install's fine, it seems logical to suspect my packaging [05:45] I can't tell whether your package truly uses debhelper 7 features without reading all of your debian/rules file... [05:46] jmarsden: http://paste.ubuntu.com/337047/ [05:48] Doesn't look like it needs dh7 specifics to me, but if you are following the guide and it said you should create debian/compat with a 7 in it, then... you can stick with the guide. You need some sort of Build-Depends: dephelper obviously, the only question is whether you really need 7. [05:48] *debhelper [05:48] I'd just add it, for a first package. [05:48] actually the guide said 5 [05:49] dh_make just defaulted to 7 [05:49] Well, then you could make it 5 in both places if you want. [05:49] *debhelper ? [05:49] As opposed to dephelper which is what I typed earlier. [05:49] *foo usually means a type correction [05:50] *typo correction :) [05:50] if you see what I mean :) [05:50] ya [05:50] but I'm lost now.. [05:50] Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 7) [05:50] Sure, just do it. [05:50] that's what dh_make made by default [05:50] Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 5) [05:51] Unless you need the package to build on older versions of Debian and Ubuntu, 7 is fine. [05:51] That's what the wiki says - but it's not regularly updated [05:51] ok [05:51] Exactly. [05:51] so what was the fail? [05:52] Oh sorry my bad... wait a second... [05:53] I need to run off really soon but I'm hoping I can have this finished soon enough :) [05:53] Make it Build-Depends: debhelper (>=7), pkg-config [05:53] with the help of smart people [05:53] Fail was that it didn't have pkg-config around [05:54] still fails [05:55] !info debhelper [05:55] debhelper (source: debhelper): helper programs for debian/rules. In component main, is optional. Version 7.3.15ubuntu3 (karmic), package size 429 kB, installed size 1368 kB [05:56] MTecknology: pastebin the output again please, the output ffrom the latest attempt [05:57] http://paste.ubuntu.com/337050/ [05:57] I'm going to run - back in 1min [05:58] OK... looks like you need to recheck all your dependencies more carefully... [06:06] jmarsden: I have no idea what I'm doing here.... [06:07] Hi all, I'm just curious what the best method is to fix Bug #235696 it's an upgrade request and the latest version was just added to Debian Unstable. Should the universe uploaders be subscribed, or should a new request for a pull from debian be made? [06:07] Launchpad bug 235696 in patchage "[upgrade] upgrade to 0.4.2" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/235696 [06:08] MTecknology: You have to tell the system *all* the packages that your package depends on. Not just one or two. [06:08] Except the really basic ones already in the pbuilder chroot, that is. [06:08] jmarsden: how can I see what it depends on? [06:09] You wrote the code... or you read the INSTALL file and see what they tell you it needs when you compile it by hand? [06:09] I didn't write the code [06:09] MTecknology: by the way, regarding your download cap... maybe set up aptcacher-ng on a system on your lan so you only have to download packages once? [06:09] I'll check that though - thanks [06:10] maco: I don't have a spare system but thanks for the suggestion [06:11] jmarsden: I see it now - task for tomorrow [06:11] MTecknology: Then when you build it, it should have info on what libraries etc it needs around. We can do it one at a time as the builds fail, but it will take a while... [06:11] OK. [06:11] jmarsden: maco: Thanks very much :) [06:12] This doesn't seem like a hard process; just not easy for a very beginner to figure out - which isn't all bad [06:12] alrighty - g'night all [06:12] Goodnight. [06:14] stochastic, wait for the package to migrate to debian testing, then change the bug to a sync request :) [06:15] porthose, okay. Thanks. [06:17] Can I detect from my prerm script if the package is being purged or removed? http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-mscriptsinstact [06:58] win2 [07:50] ScottK: wow, I figured it out but that was OBSCURE [07:51] I created a trivial postinst, which apparently stopped pycentral from generating its own which was what was doing the linking [07:52] how it is remotely discoverable that creating a postinst breaks your package is beyond me though, wow, it took me three days haha. [07:55] Now I need to figure out how to have a postinst with pycentral, any tips? Is there some way to supply a script it runs after the autogenerated one? [07:58] hi [07:59] I'm already know bash scripting and VBA. Now I want to learn something else that help me to devel something for linux world. Some language that have the possibility to have GUI. Have you some suggestion? C? Java? [08:00] Ancalagon: C, C++ or python are a good start, you can use several cross-platform GUI toolkits with each of those [08:00] Ancalagon: Python is pretty friendly to beginners, and Ubuntu uses it a fair amount. [08:01] VBA is very similar to Gambas, but python would be better accepted by the community... C and Java are quite different from VBA [08:01] good morning [08:06] My sch-server package is installed on servers. On postinst, I want to expose some of the server's configuration files by using apache. So I'm creating an apache site and I'm making symlinks to some of the server's configuration files. My question is, where's a good place to put that site on the file system? /var/www/sch-server? [08:08] (For example, I create a symlink /var/www/sch-server/firefox/user.js there that shows to /usr/lib/firefox-3.5.5/defaults/preferences/user.js) [08:14] alkisg: yes /var/www, but why are you handling this in postinst? [08:14] slytherin: thanks, how should I do it? [08:15] E.g. /usr/lib/firefox-3.5.5/defaults/preferences/user.js could be in a different path depending on the firefox version [08:16] alkisg: Why does your server need to have access to user.js form firefox? [08:16] I want the sch-clients to be able to copy the settings from user.js that the server has (different package, installed on the clients) [08:17] The server announces itself on the network using avahi, and the clients copy over whatever settings the teacher needs [08:17] so I can choose between C, C++ or python.. hm.. ok. And those are all good for linux, isn't it? [08:17] slytherin: I.e. public ssh+italc keys, firefox settings etc [08:19] alkisg: hmm. I don't have better solution for this right now. But I still think postinst is not good idea. [08:20] slytherin: I could do that from a script that the user runs after the installation, e.g. "sch-server-setup", would that be a better idea? [08:20] Can't say. Haven't dealt with many server installations. [08:20] Thank you :) [08:49] alkisg: You might also just install the symlinks, rather than creating them at install time. dh_link might help. [08:53] * Yagisan waves [08:54] The problem is that some symlinks don't have fixed targets, e.g. I need code to find out where firefox keeps its user.js file :-/ [08:55] Thanks, need to go, bbl :) [08:59] * persia would have thought that most standard configuration file locations would be defined by the packaging that delivered them [09:06] persia: hey, how's it going? [09:07] mrooney: Alright. For you? [09:07] pretty good! [09:08] but I ran into an dh_pycentral issue that has stumped me, are you familiar with it? [09:08] No. The install-time special handling of python modules remains opaque to me. [09:08] alas. [09:09] know any pros to point me to? [09:11] There's usually some python folk around here: my recommendation would be to wait a bit for someone to catch the backscroll. [09:14] sounds good, good (time of day) to you, I'm headed to bed [09:15] I tried to look at your LP profile to see what time of day it actually is for you, but you seem to have played a humorous game with the map [09:16] The timezone is correct, although the latitude is deliberately skewed. [09:16] Have a good night. [09:30] mrooney: use dh_pysupport [09:30] /usr/share/doc/python-support/README.gz === ghostcube_ is now known as ghostcube [09:59] POX: Do I read that correctly that one just calls setup.py and adds dh_pysupport, and doesn't need to bother with python-specific files in debian or fields in debian/control? [10:04] persia: you have to add python:Depends and external modules package needs in Depends [10:05] (python:Depends will be replaced with interpreter / helpers dependencies only) [10:05] That doesn't seem very tricky. I just always got stuck on the special fields like XB-Python-Version and similar. [10:06] if module doesn't work with all supported Python versions, you can use XS-Python-Version [10:06] XB-P-V is used only in pycentral [10:08] RIght, which gets back to the bit that was confusing me. I'll just hope I mostly encounter the case where I don't have to worry about that :) [10:19] persia: I recommend rules.tiny - it does the right thing for python modules and extensions (even for -dbg packages) [10:19] POX: Really? I've used rules.tiny for all the new packaging I've done for most of the past year, and that makes me suddenly unafraid to package python. [10:38] Can anyone please translate the error in this bug - https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/493986 It appears to be Spanish. [10:38] Ubuntu bug 493986 in gst-plugins-ugly-multiverse0.10 "package gstreamer0.10-plugins-ugly-multiverse (not installed) failed to install/upgrade: intentando sobreescribir ?/usr/lib/gstreamer-0.10/libgstlame.so?, que est? tambi?n en el paquete gstreamer0...." [Undecided,New] [10:50] slytherin: loose gloss: unable to write the file because it's also in gstreamer0.10-lame (undeclared conflicts). One way to get the right error messages is to grep for the string in the appropriate .po file for the affected package. [10:51] persia: I guessed that meaning after reading the errors carefully. Anyway the bug is invalid because -lame package is not in repositories. So whether -ugly-multiverse overwrites file in that package is not our concern. [10:57] hi, [10:58] are there some easy ways, some helpers etc. to write manpages? [11:01] thekorn: help2man is my favorite [11:02] persia, wow, that's exactly what I was looking for, thanks [11:03] I believe there is also docbook2man but then you need to be familiar with docbook first. [11:04] it's event mentioned here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/SupplementaryFiles but I somehow skiped it [11:04] no LaTex to man ? :) [11:04] rest2man would be cool ;) [11:05] thekorn: That's tricky, but wsdl2man ought be easy enough to implement. [11:06] ok, rst2man already exists, not sure how good it works [11:07] my bad docbook2man expects file in SGML docbook format not XML docbook format. [11:33] is laserjock on this channel? If so what times are good for talking to him? [11:34] jaldhar: sometimes, but he's not on IRC so often these days. He's in UTC-5, if that helps. Email might be better, if only to schedule something. [11:38] persia: thanks. This is about a package maintained by MOTU but which he touched last. I'll email him [11:38] jaldhar: Just ask here. It might not be special. [11:38] (most packages don't have specific maintainers) [11:41] well ok. moodle is in pretty bad shape in Debian. It's somewhat better in ubuntu (and several versions newer) but has not been contributed back. The Debian moodle maintainers are totally unresponsive so I was wondering if laserjock or anyone here had any insight into what's going on. [11:42] i.e. have you tried contacting them and got stonewalled or is there some circumstance that prevents a Debian upload or what? [11:47] jaldhar: (i) I think none of the Debian moodle maintainers is a DD (or even a DM?) (ii) they (not sure whether that is Debian moodle or moodle upstream, which might overlap) are having a meeting apparently this week, see madduck's planet post about czech beer [11:48] Ah. That probably would benefit from direct discussion, but you might check the ML archives first (http://lists.debian.org/debian-edu/) or the Debian moodle bug reports. [11:52] I've a question about packaging new packages: I would like to create two new packages, one package is depending on the other one. Is there some 'best practice' in revu or in needs-packaging bugs to indicate this dependancy [11:53] to make sure they get attention in the correct order [11:53] azeem: oh ok I'll check that out. [11:53] I don't think anyone other than the packager pays attention to needs-packaging bugs, except to track things (avoid duplicates, etc.) [11:54] My recommendation would be to add a note in REVU on the depending package indicating which package it depends upon. [11:54] persia: I didn't think to check debian-edu but the bug reports paint a sorry picture [11:55] jaldhar: if you really want to help moodle in Debian, I suggest to talk to madduck, he might be the most accessible over IRC and can introduce you to Penny and Dan at least [11:56] azeem: my interest in moodle is solely to get it to stop blocking one of my packages from testing :-) I'll talk to madduck [12:05] hey all. I am a total packaging newbie. I want to distribute Ubuntu/Debian packages for a pure Python module [12:05] What would be a good starting point ? [12:06] cornucopic, find a package with similar scope, and use its debian/ folder as a base [12:06] directhex, hm. Ok! === yofel_ is now known as yofel [12:42] woo - I've now duplicated Bug #493575 on Ubuntu 8.04, Ubuntu 9.04 and Ubuntu 9.10 [12:42] Launchpad bug 493575 in buildbot "Buildbot master generates a setupBuild exception when attempting to run a builder" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/493575 === rgreening_ is now known as rgreening === _stink__ is now known as _stink_ [13:32] I'm trying to requestsync something, but on submit I get "E: Could not connect to fiordland.ubuntu.com:25: Connection refused (111)". Is it down for anybody else? [13:38] lfaraone: I can telnet on SMTP port on that server. So not sure why it is giving you connection refused error. [13:43] lfaraone: maybe a greylisted ip ? [13:43] or even in blacklist ? [13:43] so for libglib2.0-0; whould I do Build-Depends libglib (>= 2) ? [13:44] ghostcube: possibly. [13:44] or maybe (>= 2.0) ? [13:45] MTecknology: you need a real binary package name [13:45] libglib2.0-dev it'd probably be [13:46] thanks [13:53] MTecknology: in the most control files inside a debian package is listet how the dependencies are written i think so [13:53] i start this point mostly if i do a package [13:53] ghostcube: listet? [13:54] you see how to call them [13:54] :) [13:54] you lost me right now :) [13:54] maybe lol [13:55] I'm still trying to build my first package [13:55] oh i know this :) not so far away from mine first [13:55] :D [13:55] but only for my own use never released any [13:56] I'll be releasing this [13:57] oh ok then i will shut up and dont tell u anything :) maybe better [13:57] hehe [13:58] this doesn't seem to work right... [13:58] I'll make a pastebin and see what you guys think in a second here... [13:59] http://paste.ubuntu.com/337251/ [14:00] MTecknology: What is not working right? [14:00] I don't see any error there. [14:00] dpkg: error processing pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy (--install): [14:01] slytherin: what causes that message? [14:02] MTecknology: not an error even though the message looks that way. [14:02] oh.. i can ignore those? [14:02] MTecknology: pbuilder creates a dummy package to force the installation of the build dependencies you have specified. [14:02] oh [14:09] MTecknology: from your pastebin, it is clear that package was built properly. [14:09] slytherin: thanks [14:10] slytherin: I'm trying to figure out dput now and see if I will smile soon.. I'm getting this error though - No host ricoh found in config [14:10] I have [ricoh] in ~/.dput.fc [14:11] MTecknology: I never used personalized config file for dput so can't help there. [14:13] siretart, there is a script in the ffmpeg-extra debian directory called readme.upstream-upgrade [14:13] siretart, it contains the following command: git clone git://git.debian.org/git/pkg-multimedia/ffmpeg-debian.git [14:13] MTecknology: it's ~/.dput.cf , not fc [14:13] command doesn't work [14:14] wondered if it might need to be updated [14:14] alkisg: .. thanks :) [14:14] bjsnider: yes, the git repository has been renamed from 'ffmpeg-debian.git' to 'ffmpeg.git' [14:15] alkisg: that makes it work :D [14:15] bjsnider: I guess you want to upgrade to current trunk, yes? [14:15] yep [14:15] bjsnider: have you seen the recent thread on ffmpeg-devel with "upgrade problems" [14:15] i thoguht it ws something like that [14:16] is there a similar repository for x264? [14:16] MTecknology: nice, I hope it builds OK [14:16] there's no upgrade script [14:16] alkisg: me too, thanks :) [14:16] bjsnider: given that, upgrading the system ffmpeg right now will instantly break nearly everying using ffmpeg [14:16] alkisg: if this builds ok, how hard is it to get it in the universe? [14:16] i see [14:16] so spare your time, it currently doesn't make sense [14:16] well, that's inconvenient [14:17] MTecknology: I've no idea, I'm just one step ahead of you ==> pretty new as well :) [14:17] alrighty :) [14:18] hi all! I am new to contribute Ubuntu. I have a bug at launchpad with fix for a previous Ubuntu release and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates says to upload the fixed packages to the e.g. hardy-updates repository. How can I upload the new, fixed packages to this repo? I can not find any related wiki pages which describes the process. Can somebody point me to the right wiki page? [14:19] bjsnider: indeed, it is. [14:19] bjsnider: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.ffmpeg.devel/100196 [14:20] kecsap: you can't unless you are a Ubuntu developer. Use https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SponsorshipProcess [14:21] randomaction: thanks! [14:21] alkisg: how long does a build normally take? I'm guessing most time is spent in the queue [14:22] MTecknology: depends on the server load, I've seen from a few minutes up to many hours, when a new Ubuntu release is made... [14:22] alkisg: rejected [14:22] siretart, i'd be interested to know when that issue is resolved... [14:22] MTecknology: see the build log [14:22] Unable to find distroseries: unstable [14:23] that was in the email i got [14:23] Yeah you should have put "karmic" or something similar in the changelog, or upload to a specific series [14:23] oh... [14:24] I'll see if that helps :) [14:24] or lucid :) [14:25] how do I force it to upload again? [14:25] nvm.. [14:25] kecsap: You can attach appropriate debdiff to the bug and subscribe sponsors team [14:26] --force doesn't let me upload again [14:27] MTecknology: where are you trying to upload? [14:27] lp [14:27] bjsnider: yes, me as well. [14:27] MTecknology: you mean your PPA? [14:27] ~ricoh-r5u87x-devs/ppa/ubuntu/ [14:27] MTecknology: What do you mean it doesn't let you upload again? [14:28] MTecknology, remove the .upload file === ian_brasil is now known as ian_brasil_afk [14:28] michael@panther:~/ubuntu-build$ dput ricoh ricoh-r5u87x_1.0-1_source.changes --force [14:28] Already uploaded to ricoh on ppa.launchpad.net [14:28] Doing nothing for ricoh-r5u87x_1.0-1_source.changes [14:28] oh [14:28] dput --force ricoh ricoh-r5u87x_1.0-1_source.changes [14:28] (move the --force) [14:28] MTecknology: You can remove .upload file. But not sure if it will help. [14:28] Err.. [14:28] AFAIK, LP does not allow reupload of same version even with --force. You need to increment version. [14:28] Forget the "err..". [14:29] slytherin: Not if the source package wasn't accepted. [14:29] If my postinst fails, can I find the stderr output somewhere? [14:29] thanks :) - we'll see if it works this time [14:29] soren: if the source package was not accepted then why would it be 'reupload'? [14:30] MTecknology: If your upload got rejected due to an invalid distro series, you can just fix that and upload again with the same version number. [14:30] slytherin: Because dput doesn't know that it got rejected. [14:30] Oh. I now understand what you mean. [14:30] slytherin: dput uploads it. After while, soyuz looks at it and goes "what the heck is this?" and bounces it. [14:30] accepted :D [14:33] If my postinst fails, can I find the stderr output somewhere? [14:34] alkisg: How did you install the package? [14:35] dpkg -i *.deb [14:35] in that case the output should be right there on the console. [14:35] ...and I didn't see any errors on the terminal [14:35] Are you using debconf? [14:35] No [14:35] 15:35:27 < soren> in that case the output should be right there on the console. [14:35] :) [14:35] Thanks... Hmmm... [14:36] What makes you think anything is sent to stderr? [14:36] alkisg: see if you find any output in /var/log/dpkg.log [14:36] slytherin: nope, nothing of interest there. soren: the package is now in a "configured files" state (iF) [14:37] What's the correct way to retry to install it? dpkg-reconfigure doesn't cut it [14:37] dpkg --configure -a [14:37] Thanks [14:37] alkisg: if there is nothing in console and nothing in dpkg log then how can you say that it failed. [14:37] alkisg: wait, that will try o configure all the packages. [14:38] dpkg.log shows what dpkg has done. Package state changes and such. Output from maintainer scripts never land in dpkg.log. [14:38] slytherin: all packages that are not already configured. [14:38] On a sound system, it will not do anything. [14:38] so- can I delete the upload file, change karmic to lucid in the name and upload it to build on lucid? [14:38] I got this on the console: "the post-installation process returned 1" (or something like that) [14:38] soren: my experience suggests otherwise. [14:38] for lucid* [14:39] slytherin: so, is there another way to configure only that package? [14:39] MTecknology: No. Now that it was accepted you will need to change version string. [14:39] alkisg: dpkg-reconfigure is the way I usually do it. [14:39] slytherin: how should it change? [14:40] 1.0-2 instead of 1.0-1 ? [14:41] alkisg: dpkg --configure name_of_package [14:41] but -a really should be fine. [14:41] slytherin: with `dpkg-reconfigure package` I'm getting "Package is broken or not fully installed". Trying what soren said... :) [14:41] slytherin: or should I have the name lucid or karmic in the version string? [14:41] dpkg-reconfigure is used to repeat the configuration step for packages that are already configured. This package is not ocnfigured. [14:42] MTecknology: name of distro in string is better solution. [14:43]