[00:24] <dhillon-v10> hi all, I want to apply an ubuntu debdiff to a debian package, how would I got about doing so
[00:41] <shakaran2> hi, how can I put the my app on Ubuntu here? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/tivion
[00:52] <shakaran2> anybody can help me?
[02:22] <prefrontal>  before the release of karmic I packaged my software (emergent) and one of its prerequisites (libquarter). i even wrote scripts to automate the process. but our software can't be built in the standard motu test environment. we require real gl, and out software doesn't work with software level mesa gl
[02:22] <prefrontal>  this means i can't build our package in a ppa, and it doesn't pass the automatic package build process
[02:22] <prefrontal>  here is one of my scripts: http://grey.colorado.edu/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/emergent/trunk/bin/ubuntu-motu-emergent?view=markup
[02:22] <prefrontal>  its due to one of our prerequisites, Coin3d (packages in repo)
[02:23] <prefrontal> it just doesn't work with mesa
[02:23] <prefrontal> here is the software btw: emergent neural network simulator http://grey.colorado.edu/emergent
[02:23] <prefrontal> any motu want to help me get it into lucid? please.
[02:29] <prefrontal> how does one contact a motu? i have posted my plea multiple times to both the irc channels and the mailing list, and never gotten a reply
[02:29] <prefrontal> i already did almost all the hard work
[02:36] <ScottK> prefrontal: This is the right place, it's just that there are a lot of very busy people.
[02:41] <prefrontal> how can I be sure that the next time they do a package review someone looks at my package?
[02:41] <prefrontal> how come i haven't been contacted by anybody?
[02:41] <prefrontal> proactively?
[02:42] <prefrontal> i submitted my package to the void
[02:43] <ScottK> prefrontal: You might also work on getting your stuff into Debian.  There are many more Debian developers than Ubuntu developers and once it's in Debian, it will come into Ubuntu.  Details at mentors.debian.net.
[02:47] <prefrontal> thanks
[03:18] <prefrontal> i submitted my package to debian, thanks ScottK
[03:37] <wrapster> if a latest version of the pkg say(ver2) conflicts with an older version of the same pkg(ver1) how do i add it to the control file as conflicts?
[03:38] <wrapster> Conflicts: somepkg (<=ver2)
[03:38] <wrapster> is that the right way?
[03:38] <ScottK> wrapster: More like << as you don't want it to conflict with itself
[03:38] <wrapster> scottk: Conflicts: somepkg (<<ver2)
[03:38] <wrapster> right
[03:39] <ScottK> Yes, but I don't understand why you think you need this.
[03:41] <dtchen> prefrontal: what does it work with?
[03:42] <prefrontal> dtchen, what do you mean?
[03:43] <dtchen> prefrontal: you mention it doesn't build with mesa. What will it build with?
[03:43] <prefrontal> hardware gl
[03:43] <prefrontal> like you get from a video driver
[03:44] <dtchen> prefrontal: meaning *only* proprietary ones from e.g., Nvidia?
[03:44] <dtchen> if it doesn't build from a source package, that's pretty nasty
[03:44] <dtchen> (meaning if it doesn't build from Ubuntu packages)
[03:46] <prefrontal> dtchen, that's not true
[03:46] <prefrontal> there is an open source reverse engineering of nvidia's driver
[03:46] <prefrontal> anyway, the package that doesn't work with mesa gl is already in the universe repository. Coin3D
[03:46] <prefrontal> it's not our fault.
[03:47] <dtchen> prefrontal: I'm not interested in playing games, politics or blame otherwise
[03:47] <wgrant> prefrontal: Coin3D builds in an environment identical to the PPA environment.
[03:47] <wgrant> prefrontal: So why can yours not?
[03:48] <prefrontal> please try it in yours and tell me what's wrong
[03:48] <prefrontal> i can't get it to work.
[03:48] <prefrontal> i run my own repository, it works fine in practice
[03:49] <wgrant> What is the error?
[03:49] <prefrontal> can you remind me of the place where i submitted my packages to the motus
[03:49] <prefrontal> the error might be there
[03:50] <ScottK> !revu | prefrontal
[03:52] <prefrontal> here are my packages http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=6847 http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/libquarter
[03:52] <prefrontal> i can't get it to build in pbuilder
[03:53] <prefrontal> you guys can quickly make pbuilder envs right? can you try my package please, and advise me
[03:57] <james_w> prefrontal: if you pastebin the end of the output someone might be able to suggest things based on that
[08:00] <MTecknology> !info openbox lucid
[08:01] <MTecknology> !info openbox karmic
[08:13] <micahg> how do I ignore a maintainer address complaint in debuild?
[08:25] <fabrice_sp> micahg, what is the error?
[08:26] <micahg> dpkg-source: error: Version number suggests Ubuntu changes, but Maintainer: does not have Ubuntu address
[08:26] <micahg> it's for openjdk
[08:26] <fabrice_sp> what is the maintainer address?
[08:26] <micahg> OpenJDK Team <openjdk@lists.launchpad.net>
[08:26] <fabrice_sp> it should be an ubuntu one
[08:28] <fabrice_sp> strange: in p.u.c, it appears as Ubuntu core developer
[08:28] <fabrice_sp> run update-maintainer and the correct value will be put
[08:29] <micahg> fabrice_sp: it puts my address there
[08:29] <fabrice_sp> well: update it by hand, then :-D
[08:29] <fabrice_sp> it happens sometime
[08:29] <micahg> fabrice_sp: who is it supposed to be
[08:30] <micahg> somehow it got uploaded to -security like that
[08:31] <fabrice_sp> Ubuntu Developers <ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com>
[08:31] <fabrice_sp> debuild refuse to generate the source package is it's not correct
[08:31] <fabrice_sp> so either this one is correct and debuild should be patched or it's not correct
[08:31] <micahg> I'm not uploading to the archive anyways, just a PPA
[08:32] <ScottK> fabrice_sp: It just warns, it doesn't refuse to build the source package.
[08:32] <micahg> ScottK: I get an error
[08:32] <ScottK> micahg: What release are you using?
[08:33] <micahg> ScottK: karmic
[08:33] <ScottK> Dunno
[08:34] <fabrice_sp> it's an error: dpkg-source: error: Version number suggests Ubuntu changes, but Maintainer: does not have Ubuntu address
[08:34] <fabrice_sp> and then: debuild: fatal error at line 1334:
[08:35] <fabrice_sp> iirc, it only fails if you are using an ubuntu email address
[08:39] <micahg> any ideas?
[08:41] <_ruben> shouldnt a ppa have your own mail address in it? (just an uneducated guess)
[08:41] <micahg> ah, I updated it to u-d-d
[08:46] <fabrice_sp> _ruben, for a ppa, yes: that's the correct value
[08:46] <micahg> hmm...I guess I could've done that
[08:46] <fabrice_sp> (your own email, I mean)
[08:47] <_ruben> and since micahg's working on a package for a ppa.... ;)
[08:48] <micahg> _ruben: I'll keep that in mind for next time :)
[08:49] <_ruben> having debuild 'understand' more version-email mappings probably requires patching debuild itself right? say i want to build -company packages using @company.com addresses
[11:05] <didrocks> superm1: thanks for the change in mythbuntu-default-settings. Really quick :)
[14:25] <sbasuita> Hi, I'm having a bit of trouble building a karmic package with pbuilder-dist. I first created my chroot with 'pbuilder-dist karmic create', then downloaded the source package of fldigi in karmic (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fldigi/3.11.4-1). To build, I ran 'pbuilder-dist karmic build fldigi_3.11.4-1.dsc'. However, I get a compilation error in one of the upstream sources:  http://paste.ubuntu.com/340553/ (line 861). I'm wonderin
[14:25] <sbasuita> g what's wrong with my local setup that would cause this error here but not on the buildds? Thanks in advance for any help.
[14:39] <geser> sbasuita: nothing is wrong with your setup. I guess it got build on the buildds before the default g++ got updated to be 4.4. several other packages have the same problem now as g++ is more iso c++ compliant than the previous versions
[14:40] <sbasuita> geser, ok, thanks
[15:24] <lucas> any comments about http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu_nbs.cgi?
[15:24]  * c0p3rn1c bows to the MOTU :)
[15:25] <geser> lucas: looks interesting, how often does it get updated?
[15:26] <directhex> lucas, handy.
[15:26] <lucas> geser: the data is from full archive rebuilds, so it gets updated when I run a rebuild
[15:26] <lucas> however, if a package gets updated in ubuntu, it's moved to the bottom of the page ("outdated results")
[15:27] <lucas> geser: I plan to run full rebuilds every 2-4 weeks, like I do for Debian
[15:28] <c0p3rn1c> I've bin having problems with gnome-do for a while, and they released a fix but it's not yet in the repository, if I package gnome 0.8.3.1 for you guys, will you put it in the general repos?
[15:38] <randomaction> lucas: maybe it should be called FTBFS, because NBS usually refers to a different thing
[15:38] <randomaction> !nbs
[15:39] <randomaction> but really helpful with these additional bits of info
[15:40] <c0p3rn1c> I'm talking about this bug in gnome-do: https://bugs.launchpad.net/do/+bug/395190 ihmo the fix should be rolled out ASAP
[15:42] <lucas> randomaction: ok, also moved to http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu_ftbfs.cgi
[15:43]  * randomaction re-bookmarks
[15:44] <Laney> c0p3rn1c: you should update it in debian
[15:44] <randomaction> c0p3rn1c: if you want it fixed in Karmic, then the fix should be isolated and SRU done
[15:45] <randomaction> !sru
[15:45] <Laney> (has to be fixed in lucid first)
[15:45] <c0p3rn1c> ic
[15:48] <Laney> infact RAOF already prepared the update
[15:49] <c0p3rn1c> ok great
[15:50] <c0p3rn1c> how did you know this?
[15:51] <c0p3rn1c> Laney,
[15:51] <Laney> I looked in SVN
[15:51] <c0p3rn1c> svn history?
[15:52] <Laney> if you like
[15:53] <c0p3rn1c> Laney, is there already a package with the fix available then ? and where ?
[15:54] <c0p3rn1c> Laney, I don't understand, svn is for managing source code, what does this have to do with the packaging repository?
[15:55] <c0p3rn1c> the universe packages I mean
[16:03] <Laney> no there isn't, but it is ready
[16:09] <c0p3rn1c> Laney, yes that's why I said that they have released a fix
[17:26] <wolfrage> So if some one want to get involved in MOTU would this be the right place?
[17:27] <pochu> yes
[17:28] <etali> Wolfrage:  This is the right place to ask specific questions about MOTU.  For a general overview, check out some of the wiki links in the topic.
[17:29] <wolfrage> copy that thanks
[17:30] <etali> If you're unsure about any stuff in those links, people here will point you in the right direction (I'm just getting started on MOTU stuff, there's a lot to read, but the experienced peeps in here are helpful).
[17:34] <fabrice_sp__> I fixed a FTBFS of a package that I'd never been built in Ubuntu, and the binary has been 10 days in the NEW queue. Is it normal? It's maven-repository-builder
[18:10] <ScottK> fabrice_sp: Yes.  This cycle archive admins have spent a lot of time dealing with blacklisting v3 source pacakge format packages and so other stuff is behind.
[18:12] <fabrice_sp> ok. Do we have a date for V3 source package package support in Ubuntu?
[18:18] <ScottK> Next week is the current plan.
[18:20] <Laney> the code landed in launchpad
[18:20] <Laney> apparently buildds and scripts are a different matter
[18:29] <fabrice_sp> ok. Thanks!
[19:03] <fabrice_sp> I'm trying to review a merge request done using bazaar, and the revision contains the debian changes as well as the ubuntu ones. Is it normal?
[19:03] <fabrice_sp> this is for bug #495998
[19:38] <randomaction> I believe you are shown the ubuntu-to-ubuntu diff, so yes
[19:41] <fabrice_sp> randomaction, and how can I get the debian-to-ubuntu diff? This is the really interesting one :-/
[19:42] <randomaction> requires a lot of clicking
[19:42] <randomaction> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mathieu-tl/ubuntu/lucid/resolvconf/lucid/revision/17?remember=1.1.6&compare_revid=1.1.6
[19:45]  * fabrice_sp is not sure it's easier than a good debdiff! :-)
[19:45] <randomaction> like click revision number -> "Compare with another revision" -> click Debian parent -> "compare with revision ###" -> "reverse the comparison"
[19:46] <randomaction> I checked the docs at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistributedDevelopment/Documentation/UploadingAPackage and it looks like it's not making sponsor's life much easier
[19:48] <fabrice_sp> I will still request a debdiff :-)
[19:50] <randomaction> when I first heard about it I imagined something like sponsor clicking "Yes, I'm sponsoring this diff" in Launchpad, or maybe sending an equivalent gpg-signed email
[19:50] <fabrice_sp> So do I
[20:05] <Q-FUNK> I need help with bug #472468
[20:06] <Q-FUNK> the fix is already in Lucid and it's against the same upstream release as Karmic. I'm wondering whether it's possible to push that as an update to Karmic?
[20:11] <joaopinto> !sru
[20:11] <joaopinto> ops, he is out
[23:07] <jbicha> why does Help>Report a Problem not appear as Help>Report a Problem...