[00:50] <micahg> Odd-rationale: bughugger?, Adavanced search?
[07:52] <jetienne> q. i would like to setup a small repository, it will be like 3-4 deb in there. easyness to setup is important. where should i look ?
[07:55] <jmarsden> jetienne: http://wiki.debian.org/HowToSetupADebianRepository
[08:15] <jetienne> jmarsden: any suggestion on a easy way ?
[08:16] <jmarsden> jetienne: It all depends on what you mean by easy.  mini-dinstall, maybe?
[08:16] <jetienne> jmarsden: ok thanks will look
[08:16] <jmarsden> You're welcome.
[08:18] <jetienne> jmarsden: additionnaly i got this script doing a .deb which im trying to port, do you have a good link on the meaning of all the files in debian/* ?
[08:21] <jmarsden> The New Maintainers Guide, and man debhelper
[08:23] <jetienne> htx
[08:24] <jmarsden> You're welcome.
[08:25] <jmarsden> jetienne: For basic packaging info for Ubuntu, see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Complete   # but if you are here you probably already know this :)
[08:57] <hakaishi> Hello everyone! Anyone up to advocate/review qt-shutdown-p? - I corrected the desktop file, the copyright file and the docs file as jcfp asked. I think there shouldn't be any more issues. http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/qt-shutdown-p
[09:32] <gnomefreak> anyone wish ideas on what package i would file bug agsinst for my backspace not working correctly. You can no long hold down backspace you have to hit it one time pre letter/number
[09:36] <gnomefreak> s/wish/with
[10:14] <geser> gnomefreak: known bug, System -> Preferences -> Keyboard, re-enable "Repeat Keys" (and don't let the "Delay" slider on its minimum value if you don't want each key press twice)
[10:15] <gnomefreak> geser: thanks ill take a look at that
[10:19] <gnomefreak> geser under general  repeat keys with it enabled and slider about halfway it still doesnt let me use any key by holding it down am i in right place?
[10:20] <gnomefreak> ah i got it
[10:20] <gnomefreak> thanks geser
[11:48] <dupondje> http://packages.ubuntu.com/lucid/sabnzbdplus => any idea why it needs python less then 2.6 ?
[11:48] <dupondje> in control file there is nothing about that ...
[11:50] <geser> look at debian/pyversions
[11:53] <dupondje> hmz, there are the versions that are supported ?
[11:53] <geser> yes
[11:55] <fabrice_sp> dupondje, also look inside the .py files: sometime, some python2.5 is referenced
[11:56] <dupondje> yep saw that already :)
[11:56] <fabrice_sp> :-D
[11:56] <dupondje> but in pyversions you can put for example 2.5 and 2.6 ?
[12:03] <dupondje> but why does it conflicts 2.6, should it just allow existence of 2.6 ? and use 2.5 ?
[12:30] <om26er> I am getting this error while building http://pastebin.org/84545
[12:32] <randomaction> om26er: looks like your orig.tar.gz is broken
[12:32] <om26er> randomaction, I tried it twice
[12:34] <om26er> ahh I made a mistake.. randomaction thanx I found it
[12:37] <geser> slytherin: are you working on merging libpdfbox-java? it could get moved to universe after the merge
[12:38] <slytherin> geser: Not as of now. But I believe the Ubuntu changes should be merged in Debian.
[12:38] <geser> ok, will look later at it in detail and either merge or sync
[12:56] <shriekout> http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/happytimer
[12:56] <shriekout> please, advice...
[13:01] <om26er> sorry got disconnected. was I answered?
[13:02] <slytherin> om26er: no
[13:03] <om26er> slytherin, I don't have headers installed can that somehow be related?
[13:03] <slytherin> om26er: I was not part of previous conversation. So I don't know what you are talking about.
[13:04] <om26er> slytherin, http://pastebin.org/84550
[13:05] <slytherin> om26er: what are you trying to do exactly?
[13:06] <om26er> slytherin, I am building gparted from scratch and get the error
[13:06] <om26er> *following the packaging guide
[13:08] <slytherin> om26er: So did you create the source package form scratch?
[13:09] <om26er> slytherin, yes
[13:10] <slytherin> om26er: In that case looks like the build dependencies are not correct.
[13:11] <om26er> sudo apt-get build-dep gparted?
[13:12] <slytherin> om26er: You are using pbuilder. apt-get build-dep is for building package without pbuilder
[13:13] <slytherin> om26er: check the build dependencies specified in debian/control file of your package
[13:13] <om26er> slytherin, Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 7), autotools-dev
[13:14] <slytherin> om26er: that is certainly not sufficient
[13:14] <slytherin> take a look at current gparted source package.
[13:14] <om26er> slytherin, also Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
[13:15] <om26er> slytherin, the one from universe?
[13:16] <slytherin> I believe gparted is in main
[13:22] <om26er> slytherin, everything is installed already
[13:23] <slytherin> om26er: You are not getting. The build dependencies you have specified in debian/control file are not sufficient to build gparted. Compare it to the official package.
[13:24] <om26er> slytherin, yes. I downloaded the source through sudo apt-get source gparted and the control file in it has many other dependencies and I tried to install all of them and they are already installed
[13:25] <slytherin> and does the package you created have same build dependencies?
[13:25] <slytherin> I mean the one you are trying to build from scratch.
[13:28] <randomaction> om26er: the dependencies you installed don't matter, because you are using pbuilder
[13:29] <randomaction> pbuilder examines debian/control and installs exactly what's listed there in a chroot
[13:29] <randomaction> line 297 shows a missing dependency
[13:31] <om26er> what is that?
[13:37] <om26er> configure:21700: error: XML::Parser perl module is required for intltool
[14:15] <dupondje> geser fabrice_sp: why does sabnzbplus refuse to install when python2.6 is installed? Shouldn't it just use 2.5 and ignore install of 2.6 ?
[14:15] <geser> dupondje: because it depends on python << 2.6
[14:16] <geser> python being the package installing the default python version
[14:17] <dupondje> geser: in the depend list there is python >= 2.5
[14:18] <geser> Depends: python (<< 2.6), python (>= 2.5), [...]
[14:22] <dupondje> not in the control file ?!
[14:23] <geser> but in the resulting deb
[14:23] <dupondje> yep thats true, but what causes the python << 2.6 ?
[14:23] <geser> the value in debian/pyversions
[14:24] <geser> it tells that the package "works" only with python 2.5
[14:24] <geser> so the builds sets the depends that this is ensured
[14:49] <tim> hi, how can i used debuild to include the original source for a ppa upload?
[14:57] <geser> debuild -S -sa
[15:00] <tim> geser, thanks, that is, what i was looking for
[15:00] <dupondje> geser: so if the application doesn't work with python2.6, its unable to make a package that works for 2.5 only ?
[15:01] <om26er> is there any alternative to pbuilder?
[15:02] <geser> dupondje: do you know that it doesn't work with python2.6?
[15:02] <geser> om26er: there is also sbuild. what's wrong with pbuilder?
[15:03] <om26er> geser, it dont build for me
[15:03] <geser> then it's probably a bug in your package
[15:03] <randomaction> om26er: it's not pbuilder's fault
[15:04] <om26er> geser, two different packages
[15:04] <dupondje> geser: asked the developpers of sabnzbdplus, and they confirm it doesn't work on 2.6
[15:07] <monkeylibre> join ubuntu-devel
[15:07] <monkeylibre> sorry
[15:07] <geser> try asking in #debian-python on OFTC, as I'm not very uptodate on python packaging. Debian will have the same problem once they make python 2.6 default
[15:19] <dupondje> geser: http://packages.debian.org/nl/squeeze/sabnzbdplus doesn't seem to conflict with 2.6 here :s
[15:20] <geser> ah, right it has a dependency on python2.5
[15:21] <geser> so you need to find out which part of our delta causes this different dependencies compared to Debian and if needs to be undone
[15:22] <dupondje> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/38341487/sabnzbdplus_0.4.12-1_0.4.12-1ubuntu1.diff.gz
[15:22] <dupondje> this is the diff :)
[15:23] <dupondje> it should depend on python2.5 instead of python >= 2.5 ?
[15:24] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: ping bug 428860
[15:33] <bdrung> ari-tczew: do you take bug 428860?
[15:35] <monkeylibre> necesitas: Xine Plugin
[15:43] <dupondje> dh_pysupport -i -V2.5
[15:43] <dupondje> dh_pysupport: Unknown python version 2.5
[15:43] <dupondje> hmz :s
[15:50] <ari-tczew> bdrung, what do you mean "take bug"?
[15:55] <bdrung> ari-tczew: take for sponsoring
[15:56] <ari-tczew> I'm not sponsor :>
[16:04] <ari-tczew> bdrung, you can take bug 428860 if you want
[16:06] <dupondje> dh_pysupport: Unknown python version 2.5 => really no idea why :(
[16:07] <geser> I assume because pyversions doesn't list it anymore as supported
[16:10] <aboSamoor> how can I ask for packaging sagemath for the latest version 3.4.1, while the one available is 3.0.5dfsg-4ubuntu1
[16:14] <ari-tczew> aboSamoor, I think that the best way of new upstream release is request to Debian Maintainer
[16:18] <ari-tczew> aboSamoor, please look at bug 510521
[16:19] <ari-tczew> Debian Maintainer is working on new upstream release for Debian, but if he don't do this before final release of lucid, sagemath is going to /dev/null
[16:21] <directhex> you could help
[16:21] <directhex> afaik it's a tough packaging job
[16:22] <ari-tczew> directhex, who could help?
[16:23] <directhex> ari-tczew, aboSamoor
[16:24] <aboSamoor> directhex, I always wanter to help at least with smaller packages. I sent an email to motu mail list and none even replied
[16:38] <fabrice_sp> ari-tczew, pong
[16:40] <fabrice_sp> what do you want on bug 428860 ?
[16:55] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: I want to have ACK for sync.
[16:55] <fabrice_sp> ok. I'll check it
[16:58] <fabrice_sp> why are you so interested in syncing this package? (just curiousity :-D )
[17:01] <directhex> gnome-main-menu is "slab", right?
[17:03] <ari-tczew> caprice
[17:04] <fabrice_sp> ;-)
[17:04] <ari-tczew> I'm contributting to Ubuntu, just only that.
[17:04] <fabrice_sp> I thought it was becasue actual version is buggy
[17:05] <ari-tczew> so do you not ACK this?
[17:06] <fabrice_sp> no: I was trying ot understand your motivation
[17:06] <fabrice_sp> (I'm com,paring the debian directory, and the patches are different, so I have to check source code :-/ )
[17:06] <fabrice_sp> meaning: it will takes time
[17:07] <ari-tczew> not only me want to get new upsteram version in Ubuntu
[17:07] <ari-tczew> JAK too
[17:08] <ari-tczew> 0.9.12 is too old
[17:09] <ari-tczew> deprecated
[17:09] <fabrice_sp> libslab is packaged indepently now, right?
[17:10] <ari-tczew> right
[17:10] <fabrice_sp> ok
[17:10] <ari-tczew> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libslab
[17:26] <slytherin> any autotools experts here?
[17:27] <slytherin> I need help to find root cause of this error - checking for working iconv... no
[17:29] <ari-tczew> propably your package needs some depends in debian/control
[17:31] <slytherin> No. This has nothing to do with packaging. I am trying fix windows build for my own application.
[17:32] <DktrKranz> geser, ari-tczew: green light for gpsd sync (I commented on the bug to check rdeps too, as some could require some love)
[17:54] <segler> hi, I am searching for a second advocate for my rhythmbox plugin, please. http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/rhythmbox-radio-browser
[17:59] <segler> hi, I am searching for a second advocate for my rhythmbox plugin, please. http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/rhythmbox-radio-browser
[18:10] <dupondje> somebody has experience on packaging python things ? :)
[18:22] <fabrice_sp> dupondje, did you tried  #debian-python on OFTC ?
[18:22] <dupondje> fabrice_sp: but the thing is that its quite ubuntu specific, as only ubuntu has 2.5 as oldversion ...
[18:24] <fabrice_sp> dupondje, Debian is trying to make the transition to python 2.6, and a lot of people there are Ubuntu guys
[18:25] <randomaction> dupondje: they actively encourage Ubuntu people to participate
[18:25] <geser> dupondje: there are also ubuntu people in #debian-python and it would be good to have a solution that doesn't cause us problems later, so talk to them
[18:29] <dupondje> is python2.5 going to be removed ?
[18:29] <dupondje> or ?
[18:35] <slytherin> dupondje: yes in lucid
[18:38] <dupondje> oh ok :) then sabnzbdplus is broken in lucid :(
[18:38] <dupondje> damn :)
[18:39] <fabrice_sp> slytherin, removed from the archive? I thought it that packages will not be built, but python2.5 willstill be there
[18:40] <slytherin> I think we have already gone through one cycle in that situation. So I believe 2.5 will be dropped completely.
[18:40] <fabrice_sp> python2.4 is still there atm :-/
[18:43] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sabnzbdplus/+bug/515223
[19:23] <devfil> ascoltata?
[19:24] <devfil> sorry wrong chan :P
[20:18] <rbelem> hi everybody
[20:21] <rbelem> what is the procedure to get the most recent version of a software in the repos?
[20:26] <Quintasan> rbelem: for general support please go to #ubuntu -> as for your question
[20:26] <Quintasan> sudo apt-get update
[20:26] <Quintasan> sudo apt-get upgrade
[20:27] <rbelem> Quintasan, i want to upgrade one package that is outdated in the ubuntu repos
[20:27] <rbelem> :-)
[20:28] <Quintasan> oh
[20:28] <Quintasan> rbelem: you want source then
[20:28] <Quintasan> rbelem: apt-get source <packagename>
[20:28] <Quintasan> rbelem: https://wiki.kubuntu.org/PackagingGuide/Basic
[20:29] <Odd-rationale> I've been working on my first package. I'm not sure I did everything correctly. If I would like some feedback, should I post the REVU link here? Thanks!
[20:29] <Quintasan> rbelem: sorry, wrong link -> https://wiki.kubuntu.org/PackagingGuide/Complete#Updating%20an%20Ubuntu%20Package
[20:29] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: yes
[20:30] <Quintasan> I have some time to spare so I can look at it now
[20:30] <Odd-rationale> Here it is. http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/python-nltk thank you so much!
[20:30] <rbelem> Quintasan, but what is the procedure to get it reviewed and uploaded to the repos? revu is the right place for that? the package is already in the repos http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=usb-modeswitch
[20:30] <rbelem> and already in debian
[20:31] <Quintasan> rbelem: newer version is in debian?
[20:31] <rbelem> nope
[20:31] <Quintasan> rbelem: oh, did you contact the package maintainer in Debian?
[20:31] <Quintasan> rbelem: if he/she did release new package in Debain please file a sync
[20:31] <rbelem> Quintasan, cool
[20:31] <kklimonda> actually there is 1.1.0 in debian sid
[20:32] <Quintasan> if not you can ask if she/he wants help
[20:33] <rbelem> kklimonda, i think it is 1.0.7-1 in debian
[20:34] <Odd-rationale> brb
[20:35] <kklimonda> rbelem, depends on architecture - there is 1.1.0-2 for the popular ones
[20:35] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: did you test it with pbuilder?
[20:37] <rbelem> Quintasan, it would be nice to have in the motu wiki a procedure to ask for a package upgrade if it is already in ubuntu and debian and both are outdated
[20:37] <kklimonda> debian package isn't oudated though
[20:37] <Quintasan> rbelem: well you can file a bug REQUESTING that or you can update it yourself
[20:37] <kklimonda> rbelem, and you can always request a simple update
[20:39] <rbelem> kklimonda, i'm just getting 1.0.7-1 http://packages.debian.org/sid/usb-modeswitch
[20:39] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: ./nltk/stem/porter.py is under GPL-2+
[20:39] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: you need to mention it in copyright, overall good :)
[20:40] <kklimonda> rbelem, I get 1.1.0-2
[20:40] <randomaction> rbelem: http://packages.qa.debian.org/u/usb-modeswitch.html
[20:40] <rbelem> kklimonda, what do you mean by simple update?
[20:40] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: add the missing licesne entry, reupload and I will advocate your package
[20:41] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: You need at least two advocates to get it uploaded though
[20:41] <rbelem> randomaction, ah! cool!
[20:41] <kklimonda> rbelem, instead of merging or syncing with debian you can request a package update to the newer version.
[20:42] <rbelem> kklimonda, just file a bug in launchpad asking for an update then?
[20:43] <rbelem> thanks randomaction for the link
[20:43] <kklimonda> rbelem, yes - and even better you can prepare update yourself and ask for motu to sponsor it
[20:44] <rbelem> kklimonda, cool! and upload to revu?
[20:45] <kklimonda> rbelem, no - you prepare a debdiff and attach it to the bugreport
[20:46] <kklimonda> (a debdiff is just a diff of debian source package)
[20:46] <rbelem> kklimonda, cool!
[20:46] <rbelem> thanks kklimonda for the clarification :-)
[20:47] <kklimonda> rbelem, you can read more about the process here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SponsorshipProcess
[20:55] <Odd-rationale> Quintasan: Thanks! Do I add the other licence at the end of the copyright file?
[20:55] <randomaction> rbelem: in case of usb-modeswitch 1.1.0, it *may* get into lucid automatically: it will move into testing in 10 days at the earliest, and automatic sync from testing end on Feb 11th
[20:55] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: I belive you can do it like
[20:55] <Quintasan> ./nltk/stem/porter.py
[20:55] <Quintasan> argh
[20:55] <Quintasan> sorry
[20:56] <Quintasan> ./nltk/stem/porter.py: GPL v2 or later
[20:56] <Quintasan> under the main license
[20:56] <randomaction> rbelem: it's really close, so see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SyncRequestProcess for how to request a manual sync
[20:57] <Odd-rationale> Quintasan: something like this? http://paste.ubuntu.com/366421/
[20:57] <Odd-rationale> Quintasan: i added line 15 and 34
[20:59] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: http://paste.ubuntu.com/366422/
[20:59] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: that should do
[21:00] <Odd-rationale> Quintasan: ok. should I also remove the last two lines as well?
[21:00] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: yes
[21:01] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: and PROTIP from me: as you do new packages you should go to source dir and do - licensecheck -r .
[21:01] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: remember the dot at the end of command
[21:01] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: it recursively scans through the source dir and looks for licenses :)
[21:02] <Odd-rationale> OK. cool!
[21:03] <Odd-rationale> also, what is the difference between 'dpkg-buildpackage -S -sa' and 'debuild -S -sa' ?
[21:04] <Quintasan> can't really say, never used dpkg-buildpackage -S -sa
[21:04] <randomaction> Odd-rationale: man debuild :)
[21:04] <Odd-rationale> what do you use?
[21:05] <Odd-rationale> randomaction: ok. so debuild runs dpkg-buildpackage.
[21:05] <randomaction> and a couple of other things
[21:06] <Odd-rationale> hmm. funny thing is, if i use debuild, i get "bad-ubuntu-distribution-in-changes-file lucid". but it works fine with dpkg-buildpackage...
[21:07] <randomaction> because it's a message from lintian
[21:07] <randomaction> which is run by debuild
[21:07] <Odd-rationale> it is ok to ignore if i want to build for lucid?
[21:08] <randomaction> lintian in karmic is a bit outdated, that's why you get it
[21:11] <Odd-rationale> Quintasan: Alright. I reuploaded. Thanks for the help!
[21:12] <Odd-rationale> Another question. This package is not in debian. Do I have to work to get it into debian? or is that automatically taken care of?
[21:13] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: well, you should make changes according to debian standards (probably not many changes from your ubuntu package) and ask in debian development channel what to do nex
[21:13] <Quintasan> next*
[21:14] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: Debian channels are on irc.oftc.net
[21:14] <rbelem> randomaction, cool! so i don't need to bothered about this :-)
[21:17] <Odd-rationale> Quintasan: Is getting it into debian something that is required?
[21:18] <Quintasan> Odd-rationale: no, but if someone in debian does the same package it will probably overwrite your work so you'd be better becoming Debian/Ubuntu maintainer of that package :)
[21:18] <randomaction> Odd-rationale: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Debian/ForUbuntuDevelopers#Getting%20new%20software%20in%20Debian
[21:19] <Odd-rationale> ok. i'll work on that. thanks for help.
[21:21] <Odd-rationale> Sorry for asking so many questions, but what does it mean to "Create one symlink to pbuilder-dist-simple for  each  distribution"?
[21:25] <kklimonda> Odd-rationale, you can use pbuilder-dist without it
[21:26] <Odd-rationale> kklimonda: ok. but I don't even know what the above quote meant. I guess I don't need to? :)
[21:30] <kklimonda> Odd-rationale, well - you have to check if package you are trying to upload to debian actually builds on debian system. pbuilder is one of the tools you can use to do it. but you don't really have to understand this single quote :)
[21:31] <randomaction> it means create symlink "pbuilder-lucid" to "pbuilder-dist-simple", create symlink "pbuilder-karmic" to "pbuilder-dist-simple", and so on
[21:33] <Odd-rationale> what does creating a symlink do?
[21:35] <randomaction> you can use these symlinks to run pbuilder
[21:37] <Odd-rationale> but if pbuilder-lucid and pbuilder-kamic are both symlinked to pbuilder-dist-simple, then how does it know to build for lucid or karmic?
[21:38] <randomaction> I think it examines by which name you called it
[21:40] <randomaction> in fact I wonder why a collection of symlinks is not supplied with the package
[21:41] <Odd-rationale> so i just need to `ln -s /usr/bin/pbuilder-dist-simple /usr/bin/pbuilder-karmic` ?
[21:42] <randomaction> I guess so (I don't use this feature)
[21:42] <Odd-rationale> randomaction: oh, so how do you build for different ubuntu releases and debian?
[21:42] <randomaction> or maybe better create this symlink in /usr/local/bin
[21:43] <randomaction> pbuilder-dist lucid *.dsc; pbuilder-dist sid *.dsc
[21:43] <Odd-rationale> is there any changes i need to make to my ~/.pbuilderrc file to do that?
[21:44] <randomaction> I believe it's designed in such a way that you don't need to tune this config file
[21:45] <Odd-rationale> randomaction: do you mind if i see your ~/.pbuilderrc?
[21:46] <randomaction> I wouldn't recommend using mine, it's full of leftover stuff for jaunty and karmic
[21:46] <Odd-rationale> ok. i just have one line: COMPONENTS="main restricted universe multiverse"
[21:46] <Odd-rationale> is that ok?
[21:47] <randomaction> it's ok if it works :)
[21:48] <randomaction> in fact, I don't even know whether pbuilder-dist uses or overrides .pbuilderrc
[21:50] <Odd-rationale> so 'sudo pbuilder' builds for my current distribution (karmic) and builds in /var/cache/pbuilder. and 'pbuilder-dist karmic' builds for karmic in ~/pbuilder. is that correct?
[21:50] <randomaction> I believe that's their default behaviour
[21:53] <Odd-rationale> to test building on debian, i should build for sid?
[21:53] <randomaction> yes
[22:03] <Odd-rationale> randomaction: how do you manage the different control and changelog files for different builds?
[22:05] <randomaction> different branches in git-buildpackage
[22:56] <Odd-rationale> I'm getting this strange error with pbuilder-dist: http://paste.ubuntu.com/366473/ However, it works fine with lucid.
[22:58] <dupondje> I would recreate my pbuilder environment :)
[22:59] <Odd-rationale> dupondje: you mean rerun pbuilder-dist <dist> create?
[22:59] <dupondje> y
[22:59] <Odd-rationale> k
[22:59] <Quintasan> night
[23:11] <james_w> kamalmostafa: you set https://code.launchpad.net/~kamalmostafa/ubuntu/lucid/inteltool/fix-508633-ftbfs/+merge/17535 to work in progress, does that mean I shouldn't review it yet?
[23:12] <kamalmostafa> james_w: looking
[23:12] <james_w> ah, I see you did it with a few
[23:12] <james_w> hi btw
[23:13] <kamalmostafa> james_w: okay I did it because of fabrice_sp's comment: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/inteltool/+bug/508633/comments/2
[23:13] <james_w> oh
[23:13] <james_w> how did I miss that?
[23:14] <kamalmostafa> james_w: :-)  it still shows as FTBFS for the non x86 platforms I assume
[23:14] <james_w> yah
[23:14] <james_w> only a problem of filling up the ftbfs list really
[23:15] <james_w> if the problem is filed in Debian then I'm not sure we should change it in Ubuntu directly
[23:15] <kamalmostafa> james_w: well, you know me... always eager to clear some red boxes! ;-)
[23:15] <james_w> :-)
[23:17] <kamalmostafa> james_w: it has been filed in Debian for about 7 weeks (not long really) but that being said I don't know how actively the pkg is maintained upstream.  Whether you want to push my change just to clear the ftbfs's is up to you.
[23:18] <james_w> hmm
[23:18] <james_w> I'm not inclined to, though I haven't looked at the ftbfs list recently :-)
[23:20] <kamalmostafa> oh, and yes, for other merge proposals that I've since "reverted" to work-in-progress -- they are likely similar situations -- merges that have been "put on hold" by MOTU's to see if Debian will take action first.  In general, I don't know how long we're inclined to wait -- but I'm glad to at least have those issues bug-reported here in Ubuntu.  Too bad we can't mark them as "ignore this" in the FTBFS list somehow.