[00:06] <MTecknology> I still can't figure this out....
[00:25] <MTecknology> How can I grab a package that should be in lucid through apt-get source from a karmic machine?
[00:27] <Laney> stgraber: are you aware that pastebinit misses a dependency on python-configobj on lucid?
[00:27] <Laney> http://pastebin.com/m1144b071
[00:27] <stgraber> Laney: argh, I completely forgot about that one. Thanks, I'll be uploading a fixed one in a few minutes.
[00:27] <geser> MTecknology: add a deb-src line for lucid
[00:28] <Laney> no worries
[00:28] <AtomicSpark> Heh, the motd is cut off for me on irssi
[00:28] <MTecknology> geser: thanks; I also just realized lucid doesn't have what I want yet... not imported yet
[00:29] <stgraber> Laney: uploaded
[00:29] <Laney> wow, that was fast
[00:29] <crimsun> ninjas
[00:30] <stgraber> wasn't exactly a difficult one ;)
[00:30] <Laney> aren't those deps automatically calculated by the python packaging helpers?
[00:35] <lifeless> Laney: deps on other python modules? no
[00:36] <rhpot1991> jdstrand: you should have an email coming to you from silicondust, containing the source and md5sum
[00:36] <rhpot1991> of that specific version that was packaged
[00:36] <Laney> lifeless: ok then
[00:37] <MTecknology> ok.. I'm almost positive this error is because I'm missing a package I should have for building this - any ideas?http://paste.ubuntu.com/381903/
[00:57] <MTecknology> feels like the weekend in here :P
[00:57] <MTecknology> time to sign off while this builds
[02:12] <mhall119|work> jdstrand: are you available?
[02:40] <MTecknology> Any ideas how I can fix this? There's dependencies that aren't in 9.10; http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39577604/buildlog_ubuntu-karmic-amd64.php5_5.3.1-0ppa1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[02:50] <persia> MTecknology: Build against an archive that has the dependdencies you need.
[02:52] <persia> MTecknology: But something else is odd, because I *can* install apache2prefork-dev in my karmic chroot.
[02:56]  * persia is amused to see springlobby accepted in Ubuntu the same day it is removed from unstable.
[03:23] <MTecknology> persia: can you build php5 3.5.1?
[03:24] <persia> In karmic?
[03:24] <MTecknology> persia: sorry, had to run for a bit
[03:24] <MTecknology> ya
[03:24] <MTecknology> I'm trying to get php 3.5.1 built on karmic
[03:24] <persia> MTecknology: What's the package name?
[03:25]  * persia was fairly sure that php3 and php4 were long dead, but may misunderstand
[03:26] <MTecknology> !info php5 lucid
[03:26] <persia> OK.  What's the "3.5.1" mean?
[03:27] <MTecknology> persia: that's the karmic version; 3.5.1 is in debian I think; so there's a chance ludic will come out with it..
[03:27] <persia> lucid has php5 5.2.12.dfsg.1-2ubuntu2
[03:27] <persia> (rmadison is your friend)
[03:28] <MTecknology> php5-5.2.12
[03:28] <MTecknology> php5-5.3.1 is latest and greatest
[03:28] <persia> OK.  Do you know of an approved FeatureFreeze exception?
[03:29] <MTecknology> nope, are we past debian import freeze?
[03:29] <persia> !schedule
[03:29] <MTecknology> I really need to watch that better
[03:30]  * persia is unhappy with the factoid
[03:30] <MTecknology> I'm not really concerned with it being in lucid; I just want to figure out how to build this dang package for my ppa with the features enabled
[03:30] <persia> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LucidReleaseSchedule
[03:31] <MTecknology> ya, I found that, I have it bookmarked but I don't keep up on it well enough
[03:31] <persia> You might want to look at the Ubuntu patch, for the changelog entry "Fix FTBFS"
[03:32] <MTecknology> I tried looking at a lot of that stuff but there's more in there than I can comprehend; it's making my mind explode
[03:34] <MTecknology> I'm still very much a novice trying to do too many smart people things :P
[03:35] <MTecknology> from what I hear online too php is a massive beast to package
[03:35] <persia> Indeed, and it's not actually one of the packages we look after, either :)
[03:36] <MTecknology> hm?
[03:36] <persia> And you're working against a PPA for an older version of Ubuntu, which we also don't tend to do :)
[03:36] <MTecknology> karmic is an older version?
[03:36] <persia> MOTU cares for the packages that are unseeded: they do not have another team in Ubuntu that has volunteered to look after them.  We tend to focus on overall archive health, and on the small packages that need extra love.
[03:37] <persia> Yeah, it's not the current development version, which is the focus of development for all development teams.
[03:37] <MTecknology> oh
[03:37] <arand> does it matter if the *.dpatch is a+x, since dpatch-edit-patch seems to make it so by default ..?
[03:39] <persia> arand: Yes, it matters, but no, you don't usually have to worry about it.
[03:39] <MTecknology> persia: I went into this figuring it would be a pain; I REALLY want this though and I'd prefer not compiling from source to have it; I figure I'll learn some trying to do this too
[03:39] <arand> should i change it?
[03:39] <arand> to be non-executable as the rest of them?
[03:39] <persia> arand: Doesn't matter.
[03:41] <MTecknology> What I'm gathering is that karmic might not even have all the latest packages required to build this (maybe it does); karmic definitely doesn't
[03:41] <MTecknology> is there any way I can make this work?
[03:42] <MTecknology> or should I maybe bump my server up to lucid to try?
[03:43] <MTecknology> !info nginx lucid
[03:44] <MTecknology> lucid is only 2mo away and in my experience usually pretty stable by then.. I'm up for trying it if you think there's a chance of that working..
[03:46] <persia> I don't have an opinion.  I have to resolve package breakages on my lucid install daily.
[03:46] <persia> You might try asking in #ubuntu+1
[03:47] <persia> Generally I recommend against upgrading any system that is important for workflow until BetaFreeze, and anything critical until Release.  downgrading is very hard.
[03:47] <MTecknology> persia: any opinions about try to make it work in 9.10?
[03:47] <arand> I'm strugging a bit with dpatch here.. I'm using "dpatch-edit-patch u03-unbreak-acpi-with-newer-kernels.dpatch u02-lp-integration.dpatch" where u02 is the last patch in 00list. Adding two small ~5k svn diffs with "patch -p0 <svndiff" whilst in the dp shell, and then exiting... Problem is I end up with a humongous 256K patch as a result, what am I doing wrong?
[03:47] <persia> MTecknology: I think you'd end up backporting a lot.
[03:47] <MTecknology> if it'll make things work I'm ok with that actually :P
[03:48] <persia> arand: From analysis of the huge patch, can you determine which files are included that aren't included in your svn patches?
[03:49] <MTecknology> persia: I suppose the simplest option for me now is to just build this for lucid and try to build it..
[03:50] <persia> MTecknology: potentially.  No promises that works.
[03:52] <MTecknology> persia: My other option is to convert production systems to debian and use http://php53.dotdeb.org debs :P
[03:52] <MTecknology> that just sounds horribly icky :P
[03:52] <persia> MTecknology: There's lots of options, but I just don't think that we can provide good direction for you to use many of them.
[03:53] <MTecknology> persia: if it were a smart person like yourself that knows their way around things - what would you do?
[03:54] <persia> I'd not use any features from the newer php :)
[03:55] <MTecknology> regarless :P - which route would you take if you did need those features
[03:55] <persia> Finding someone else and convincing them it was required in lucid, and convincing my client that they could wait until May for delivery :)
[03:56] <persia> Because I've also heard that php is a monster to package.
[03:56] <persia> And backporting tends to get painful very quickly (and I avoid it whereever possible, personally)
[03:57] <MTecknology> it is a behemoth with a lot of apps in it
[03:57] <persia> But I'd start by looking at the packageset in which php5 appears, and contacting one of the teams that has access to that packageset.
[03:57] <MTecknology> I'm trying to remember who I saw in the changelog
[03:57] <MTecknology> marc delarious iirc
[03:58] <persia> And I'd probably start with http://people.canonical.com/~cjwatson/packagesets and the changelog to try to identify likely folk.
[03:58] <arand> persia: ok, so what dpatch apparently has done is to create a whole new PATM.cpp.orig of the file I patched, and make it a part of the patch as a new file.. ?*Compfused*?
[03:58] <arand> persia: PATM.cpp being the file I am patching
[03:58] <persia> arand: I'm certain dpatch didn't do that.  Maybe it's an artifact of the svndiff?
[03:59] <persia> arand: I'd suggest that after you apply the patches, inside dpatch-edit-patch, check for the existence of .orig files and delete them, and then close the patch editing session.
[04:00] <persia> arand: My suspicion is that the patches were applied as "fuzzy" or something else went funny, and so patch created the orig file (but I'm not sure)
[04:00] <arand> Ok, I'll try.
[04:04] <arand> Yea, it was apparently created when the patches were applied, shouldn't it give some sort of warning for that?
[04:04] <persia> Indeed it should.  I thnk it tends to be something like "hunk #4 applied fuzzy" but I haven't seen it in a while, so may be misremembering the string.
[04:07] <arand> persia: this is all I get: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/382016/
[04:07] <arand> Can it be that I'm patching the same thing twice?
[04:08] <persia> arand: Hrm.  I would have expected more useful output.  No idea, sorry.
[04:09] <MTecknology> persia: how can I upload something to launchpad and have it rebuild something that is the same version as something else that failed to build?
[04:09] <MTecknology> I don't have the resources on this system to try building it here :(
[04:09] <persia> MTecknology: I think you can't, but you can confirm in #launchpad.
[04:09] <persia> There's also usually a button that lets you retry builds that failed without reuploading.
[04:10] <MTecknology> thanks
[04:12] <MTecknology> persia: I'll try to whine to somebody and see if I can get them to help me with this :)
[04:12] <MTecknology> that is sounding like the easiest advice
[04:13] <lifeless> MTecknology: you can't
[04:13] <lifeless> either upload a new version, or you can retry if you think the failure was transient
[04:14] <arand> persia: well, deleting the .orig in the shell seemed to work, still rather weird behaviour though...
[04:22] <MTecknology> lifeless: error was my package - I just wanted to try the same thing for lucid instead of karmic to see if the build would succeed
[04:33] <stefanlsd> jdstrand: re the discussion re motu swat, can we sort out the membership, feels like i've been pending approval for at least 6 months...
[04:38] <persia> stefanlsd: The Monday weekly meetings tend to be a great forum to pin down the security team :)
[04:40] <stefanlsd> persia: hehe. i think they are mostly US time, so i tend to catch them in my evenings
[04:41] <persia> I understand.  They are in the middle of my Monday night :)
[04:42] <stefanlsd> persia: youre always around, im not convinced you have a night
[04:42]  * persia mutters about diurnal periods and social expectations
[05:00] <arand> How annoying, if you apt-get source virtualbox-ose and then do a no-changes rebuild, the two diff.gz files differ by more than 561k *sigh*
[07:39] <dholbach> good morning
[08:07] <kevwilde> (repost from #ubuntu) Hi, I maintain software which is available in the ubuntu repository. This is however a very old one (2.6) and we're currently not supporting that anymore. How do i get this package retracted from the repository?
[08:08] <slytherin> kevwilde: Why retract?
[08:08] <slytherin> Can't you update it?
[08:10] <kevwilde> slytherin: our "new" version is actually quite sucky and we're not possible to make it into a repository package. So we're holding out until we hit 4.0 this year. But this is government software and the 2.6 version of the software gives a lot of problems. We currently have an ubuntu package of the new version on our site
[08:10] <persia> kevwilde: Which package?
[08:10] <kevwilde> persia: beidgui
[08:11] <kevwilde> http://packages.ubuntu.com/nl/karmic/beidgui
[08:11] <kevwilde> We're currently at 3.5.3
[08:12] <kevwilde> and for 4.0 we'll be redesigning the architecture which will make it possible once again to push it into the ubuntu repository.
[08:17] <persia> kevwilde: Well, removal requires documentation that the package is old, buggy, and unmaintained.
[08:17] <persia> This may be true, but it's not obvious from https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/belpic and http://packages.qa.debian.org/b/belpic.html (although strongly hinted).
[08:19] <persia> I'd recommend contacting the maintainer in Debian, and getting it removed from there first, and then getting it removed from Ubuntu, because it adds a layer of complexity to readd it later if it's removed in Ubuntu and not in Debian.
[08:19] <kevwilde> Ok, many thanks for the advice
[08:20] <persia> Note that you may not need it *entirely* removed from Debian, but just removed from the release-in-preparation.
[08:20] <persia> For this Ubuntu cycle, that's considered sufficient that the tools won't complain.
[08:20] <persia> And we'll end up picking it up again next cycle, which gives you some time to organise a release.
[08:21] <persia> If you need more than 6 months, consider having it removed entirely from Debian (as some people will still be pulling 2.6 from Debian unstable), and restore it when it's updated.
[08:21] <persia> But most folk who use Debian unstable expect there to be tons of bugs, so aren't so likely to complain to you in great number.
[08:22] <kevwilde> i'm not sure if the developers can create a new version in 6 months
[08:23] <persia> Fair enough.  Doing so requires some sacrifices in features for each version.
[08:24] <persia> In that case, I'd really suggest getting it out of Debian.  That should trigger removals from Ubuntu, MEPIS, Mint, 64Studio, and a host of other places.
[08:24] <kevwilde> automatic removals?
[08:24] <persia> But it helps if you remind us to remove it after getting it out of Debian.
[08:25] <persia> Well, semi-automatic.  Most Debian derivatives will drop a package that has been removed from Debian.
[08:25] <kevwilde> ok, thanks, sending the Debian maintainer of "belpic" a mail
[08:25] <persia> Had that happened a couple weeks ago, we would have dropped it with a script that gets run.
[08:26] <persia> But now we're in Freeze, so not taking automated changes, hence why it would be helpful for you to remind us.
[08:26] <kevwilde> Ok, i'll stay idle here and give this channel a poke when it is removed
[08:27] <kevwilde> I have no idea who the maintainer is, but since it is our software, would it be possible to take over maintainership of a package?
[08:27] <persia> Sounds like a good plan.  If you don't want to keep the channel open, sending mail to ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com is also a good way to get in touch with us.
[08:28] <persia> It's possible, but often collaboration between upstream developers and distribution developers leads to cleaner packages.  If the maintainer has time to work on it with you, I'd suggest taking advantage of their experience in distribution development.
[08:29] <persia> We don't have maintainers in Ubuntu, a luxury we are afforded by the wonderful work done in Debian, so it's in Debian you'd want to have that conversation.
[08:30] <persia> With some history of work at a distribution level, it's potentially possible to be granted upload rights to the package, but only to be shared with others.
[08:30] <kevwilde> At the Debian level or at the Ubuntu level?
[08:30] <persia> Either, individually.
[08:31] <persia> The procedures are wildly different, and each depends on evidence of your work on the package in that distribution.
[08:31] <persia> But given the nature of this specific package, I would expect that just doing everything in Debian would be best.
[08:32] <persia> If done carefully, the work should feed all the derivatives (including Ubuntu) so that you only have to patch bugs in one place.
[08:32] <kevwilde> Actually I only do support for the software, the "contributions" are done by the programmers in our team, which commit to a google code repository
[08:33] <kevwilde> So I'm not really a contributor, but I do represent the support for the software to the community
[08:33] <persia> You're probably a really good contact for working with distributions then.
[08:34] <persia> Because you'll already know the set of bugs and user issues, and be able to address a lot of questions.
[08:34] <kevwilde> Indeed, I maintain our problem knowledge base
[08:34] <persia> Where you can't address them directly, you probably also know the right developers with which to connect folk working on specific issues.
[08:35] <kevwilde> I have sent the maintainer a mail, but it bounced back "unrouteable address"
[08:38] <persia> kevwilde: OK.  Send a mail to the Debian BTS about the package (http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting), which should notify the maintainer.
[08:39] <persia> If that doesn't work, we can escalate via some other paths to try to contact them.
[08:39] <kevwilde> Ok, thank you for your time :)
[08:44] <persia> kevwilde: Thanks for sharing the issue with us :)
[09:19] <c_korn> hello. how can I fix this warning ? http://pastebin.com/Sqn0VF4Y this is the debian/copyright file: http://pastebin.com/Ctr1DMYF
[09:20] <c_korn> the library is licenses under apache license 2.0. so why does it require the GPL license to be in the tarball ?
[09:22] <persia> c_korn: You have two choices: 1) override the lintian message (yes, it's wrong, but for good reasons), or 2) relicense your packaging under Apache 2.0.
[09:22] <randomaction> c_korn: if debian/ is licensed under GPL, you need to include the text of the license
[09:23] <persia> randomaction: Um, not in the original tarball.
[09:23] <randomaction> so you can drop a text of GPL somewhere to debian/
[09:23] <persia> I'm unsure if it needs to be in the diff.gz.
[09:23] <Laney> no
[09:23] <randomaction> not in the tarball, right
[09:23] <Laney> you can include the header and point to the full text in common-licenses
[09:24] <persia> That's what I thought, because it's a sensible assumption that one should receive the source within the context of the distribution.
[09:24] <randomaction> but the right thing to do is license packaging under the same license as the software
[09:24] <persia> (hence the language "You should have received a copy ..."
[09:24] <randomaction> imagine you include a patch
[09:24] <persia> randomaction: Well, except in the case where one borrows packaging already under a more restrictive license ...
[09:25] <Laney> grep your /usr/share/doc for "common-licenses" and see ;)
[09:26] <randomaction> ah, so one can't reasonably receive .diff.gz without /usr/share/common-licenses?
[09:27] <persia> Well, one can, but one isn't expected to do so.
[09:27] <randomaction> Makes sense.
[09:27] <persia> Same as one can construct a URL to pull a single source file out of a web view of a VCS, but one isn't expected to do so.
[09:29] <randomaction> Laney: why does ghc6 build so fast on i386 (1 hour) but so slow on amd64 (3 days and counting)? Sounds like Underhanded C Contest 2006 to me :)
[09:30] <persia> randomaction: You're looking at the wrong version of gh6 on amd64.  That was a timeout that was masked.
[09:31] <randomaction> A masked timeout? (I'm looking at -10.)
[09:33] <persia> http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-haskell/agda.git;a=blob;f=debian/watcher.sh;h=0de582d7162cd262e89a43dbd19c154d460ca294;hb=HEAD
[09:33] <Laney> that build has stalled
[09:33] <Laney> I asked for it to be killed but nobody has done it
[09:34] <Laney> it might be in order to case the watcher to only run on the slow arches
[09:35] <randomaction> ah, it stalled and watched isn't letting it die
[09:35] <persia> Laney: I was told it was killed.  Was it really not?
[09:35] <Laney> the armel one was, but not amd64
[09:46] <c_korn> I relicensed the packaging under apache 2.0. I thank you for your help.
[09:46] <persia> c_korn: That's what we do :)
[09:57] <directhex> that and fight crime
[10:00] <persia> Hrm?  I thought we carefully restricted ourselves to having non-binding opinions about tort, and no opinions about criminal implications of anyone's actions.
[11:56] <imbrandon> morn all
[11:57] <jpds> morning imbrandon.
[13:12] <MTecknology> Any ideas how I can fix this? http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39589708/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-amd64.php5_5.3.1-0ppa2_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[13:13] <MTecknology> I really really want to be able to build this and I'm pretty lost on it..
[13:18] <kklimonda> MTecknology: hmm.. the only supported release that don't have this package is dapper.. you have to either change php source package and tweak build dependencies or if libaprutil1 is mandatory you have to build it first in your PPA.
[13:18] <kklimonda> but it's lucid
[13:18] <kklimonda> that's weird..
[13:19] <MTecknology> this package is currently in debian only; and I don't think it's in the debian repos yet - but it does work there
[13:20] <persia> MTecknology: Really, this isn't the best place to ask for that.  Do consider finding a development team that works on php: you'll get much better answers.
[13:20] <MTecknology> persia: tips on finding them?
[13:20] <StevenK> persia: But the build failure is due to a failure installing build-deps?
[13:20] <persia> StevenK: It is, because we don't have those in lucid.  MTecknology and I went over that this morning.
[13:21] <MTecknology> you mean last night :P
[13:21] <persia> *But* I think that it makes sense to find people who worked on php previously to discuss who to backport something not yet in Debian to karmic.
[13:21] <persia> MTecknology: Only on that side of the world :p
[13:22] <MTecknology> persia: I've asked in #debian-mentors and ##php. No repsonse yet
[13:22] <persia> But, as I said before, looking at the Ubuntu changelog and checking http://people.canonical.com/~cjwatson/packagesets are good steps to finding the right team.
[13:25] <MTecknology> persia: so perhaps annoy Marc Deslauriers?
[13:26] <persia> Well, no :)  But That might be someone who can give you useful pointers, if kept not annoyed :)
[13:27] <MTecknology> :)
[13:27] <MTecknology> by nature of the package I think annoy will approach anyone who approaches it :P
[13:28] <mdeslaur> MTecknology: what are you trying to do exactly?
[13:29] <MTecknology> mdeslaur: package php5-5.3.1 for either karmic or lucid - prefer karmic because my servers are on that
[13:30] <MTecknology> mdeslaur: I've been trying to build an Ubuntu version from this - http://php53.dotdeb.org/
[13:31] <mdeslaur> MTecknology: https://launchpad.net/~tlbdk/+archive/php-5.3-karmic
[13:32] <mdeslaur> MTecknology: you should search the PPAs, almost certainly someone has done it before
[13:33] <mdeslaur> MTecknology: this is zul's PPA: https://launchpad.net/~zulcss/+archive/php5.3-lucid
[13:37] <MTecknology> mdeslaur: I love you :D - I feel dumb now
[13:38] <MTecknology> I'll try to look before I leep next time..
[13:39] <MTecknology> If somebody builds something for karmic and lucid; how should that be named so there's no conflicting package versions in the ppa?
[13:40] <persia> Just upload to karmic and pocket-copy to lucid.
[13:40] <persia> Then there's only one version.
[13:40] <persia> (or ask in #launchpad for naming strategies)
[13:40] <MTecknology> thanks
[13:42] <MTecknology> persia: sorry I'm such a pita
[13:43] <persia> MTecknology: I have great faith that one of these days you'll be an expert on all the people, processes, and procedures, and a great asset to Ubuntu.  I'm happy to help you get there, even if I might seem to be redirecting you firmly sometimes for certain classes of query.
[13:44] <MTecknology> persia: the next thing I want to package is all my ubuntu-drupal projects :P
[13:45] <persia> MTecknology: Let me know when you're working on that.  I want to refresh my "Packaging without Compilation" talk, and having someone going through it helps me get it right.
[13:45] <MTecknology> ok :)
[13:45] <persia> (but I hope that's not for at least another week or two)
[13:46] <persia> And I hope you won't mind messy instruction, or repeating things in exchange for all of my attention :)
[13:46] <MTecknology> no mind at all
[13:46] <MTecknology> probably 2 weeks
[13:47] <MTecknology> I also want to apply some patches to the lal source code and make a 2.0 release and repackage that so two binaries will come in one package
[13:47] <persia> That ought work well for me then.  Thanks.
[13:47] <persia> Right.
[13:47] <persia> For that, I'll recommend the new #ubuntu-app-devel as the best place to ask
[13:47] <MTecknology> nifty - I was always in #c
[13:48] <persia> It's the new shiny channel for people developing applications on (and maybe for) Ubuntu.
[13:48] <persia> #c is also good :)
[13:48] <MTecknology> thanks :)
[13:48] <MTecknology> 5min till class, I should get dressed - back soon
[15:23] <dholbach> james_w, nhandler, nxvl, RainCT: looks like we should schedule a few more packaging training sessions soon! :)
[15:24] <nxvl> dholbach: yes, i apologies because i've been busy lately and forgot about the topic
[15:24] <nxvl> but we surely need to
[15:24] <nxvl> i will like to see more distributed development ones, bzr is AWESOME
[15:24] <dholbach> nxvl: so who do we pester about giving some? do you want to? :)
[15:25] <arand> debfx: Would you be the one to turn to for packaging questions with vbox  on ubuntu? I've noticed a no-changes rebuild of the apt-got source  produces something which differs a bit ~540k from current diff.gz, is  this something I should try to correct before building?
[15:25] <nxvl> i've been working with it lately and even when there are no branches i maintain them localy because it makes thing SO much easier
[15:25] <dholbach> yeah
[15:26] <nxvl> dholbach: i can give one, yes, but i will like to discuss with james_w about what topics should be covered, i thing splitting it in several topics will be great (merging with bzr, bzrizing a backage, updating a package with bzr, etc...)
[15:26] <james_w> +1
[15:26] <dholbach> nxvl: you could have a look at the logs of UDW - it was discussed there too
[15:26] <dholbach> let me get the logs
[15:27] <dholbach> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/devweek1001/BzrAndPkgs
[15:27] <dholbach> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/devweek1001/MergingCode
[15:27] <dholbach> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistributedDevelopment/Documentation
[15:27] <dholbach> they should probably all be pretty good
[15:27] <debfx> arand: is it just a different compression level or do the diff.gz files actually differ?
[15:27] <dholbach> (and contain examples afaik)
[15:28] <nxvl> great, will take a look and try to came up with something
[15:28]  * dholbach hugs nxvl
[15:28] <dholbach> who else do we pester
[15:29] <dholbach> who'd be up for giving a session for https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Packaging/Training
[15:29] <arand> debfx: I get that kind of diff when doing a zdiff on the two .diff.gz yes
[15:29]  * nxvl looks at james_w 
[15:31] <james_w> yeah
[15:33] <debfx> arand: could you please post the zdiff output to the pastebin?
[15:34] <shadeslayer> dholbach: i can give something like a 15 min dirty PPA session :P
[15:34] <dholbach> shadeslayer: how dirty? :)
[15:35] <shadeslayer> dholbach: well... not alot
[15:35] <shadeslayer> dholbach: ive recently learned packaging,so i actually know what problems people face
[15:36] <dholbach> shadeslayer: maybe you could have a chat with the guys in #launchpad and ask if they'd be willing to work together with you on it?
[15:36] <shadeslayer> dholbach: hmm
[15:36] <shadeslayer> dholbach: work with me as in?
[15:36] <dholbach> noodles775, al-maisan, bigjools and jelmer should know a bit about it too
[15:36] <dholbach> shadeslayer: oh I meant that you don't necessarily need to give the session alone :)
[15:37] <shadeslayer> oh :D
[15:37] <dholbach> we've had some double-acts before :)
[15:37] <shadeslayer> dholbach: i think thatll be good
[15:37] <dholbach> awesome!
[15:37] <shadeslayer> since if the questions get too technical,the other guy/gal might be able to handle it better
[15:38] <noodles775> Sounds great :)
[15:38] <shadeslayer> dholbach: just lemme see the timings :P
[15:38] <dholbach> just let  packaging-training-coordinators at lists.launchpad.net  know when you have an idea when you want to speak :)
[15:39] <shadeslayer> sure no problem :D
[15:39] <dholbach> fantastico!
[15:39] <arand> debfx: I don't have the system accessible right now I'm afraid, I'll get back to you when I have it, but this is something I should worry about when I'm trying to patch it?
[15:42] <shadeslayer> dholbach: can we add sessions?
[15:42] <dholbach> shadeslayer: like request sessions or propose sessions that other could run?
[15:43] <shadeslayer> dholbach: i can do something on 27th and 28th
[15:43] <shadeslayer> dholbach: a session i can run :P
[15:43] <dholbach> shadeslayer: awesome, sure
[15:43] <shadeslayer> dholbach: ok just lemme confirm what time :)
[15:44] <shadeslayer> and then ill ask in #launchpad too :D
[15:45] <shadeslayer> and as a added reward ive learnt to backport too :P
[15:45] <dholbach> great :-)
[15:45] <dholbach> thanks!
[15:45] <shadeslayer> dholbach: just doing my bit :)
[15:46] <dholbach> :-)
[15:46] <shadeslayer> dholbach: is 1700 UTC 27 March fine?
[15:46] <dholbach> definitely
[15:46] <dholbach> let's do this one instead of the scheduled 25th March one
[15:47] <shadeslayer> dholbach: :D
[15:47] <dholbach> shadeslayer: does that work for the #launchpad guys too or will it just be you?
[15:47] <shadeslayer> dholbach: oh wait wrong month
[15:47] <shadeslayer> dholbach: 27 feb
[15:47] <shadeslayer> dholbach: ill ask them right now
[15:47] <dholbach> 25th Feb, yes
[15:47] <dholbach> great
[15:47] <dholbach> let me know when you agreed on something
[15:48] <debfx> arand: I don't know, maybe the clean function doesn't remove all files after a build
[15:50] <shadeslayer> dholbach: sure :)
[15:54] <arand> debfx: will you be around later on (~+2h), I should be able to look at it then.
[15:56] <debfx> arand: yes, sure
[15:56] <arand> Cheers
[15:57] <shadeslayer> dholbach: noodles775 says that he might be able to make it,not confirmed though
[15:58] <shadeslayer> im still looking :)
[15:58] <dholbach> shadeslayer: take it easy - just let anybody listening to that email address know as soon as you know :)
[15:59] <shadeslayer> sure sure :P
[16:03] <shadeslayer> dholbach: btw if a package checks for KDE availability,i should make it depend on kdebase or the whole kubuntu-desktop metapackage?
[16:04] <dholbach> shadeslayer: you could try asking in #kubuntu-devel - the folks there have much more experience with the topic than I do :=)
[16:04] <shadeslayer> :D
[16:28] <MTecknology> How do I unpack .orig.tar.gz ?
[16:34] <MTecknology> i got it..
[16:34] <kamalmostafa> MTecknology: tar tvf file.tar.gz   will show you the contents of a tar archive.   tar xvf file.tar.gz   will actually extract it.   But if you're trying to actually extract a .dsc package then what you really want is   dpkg-source -x package.dsc
[16:35] <MTecknology> kamalmostafa: thanks
[16:40] <hyperair> MTecknology, kamalmostafa: xzf.
[16:41] <hyperair> -x = extract, -z = gzip, -f = file
[16:41] <hyperair> and -t = list contents
[16:43] <kamalmostafa> hyperair: modern tar automatically detects that the archive is gzipped, so the -z is actually optional.   :-)
[16:43] <hyperair> kamalmostafa: eh? seriously? i haven't tried leaving it out.
[16:44] <Laney> I doubt that I could burn that out of my muscle memory now
[16:44] <Laney> it's been too long...
[16:44] <kamalmostafa> yup... it became optional at some point along the line -- i remember being surprised by it too, since back in my day, it was required.  Okay, I admit it... back in my day there was no gzip.  ;-)
[16:45] <MTecknology> I'm trying to upack with dpkg-source -x
[16:45] <MTecknology> dpkg-source: error: File ./php5_5.3.1-0.dotdeb.1.diff.gz has size 480578 instead of expected 481683
[16:45] <MTecknology> grr
[16:47] <kamalmostafa> MTecknology: what happens if you just try to unzip it manually?:   gunzip -c ./php5_5.3.1-0.dotdeb.1.diff.gz > /dev/null       works, or error?
[16:47] <MTecknology> kamalmostafa: works
[16:48] <hyperair> lol weird.
[16:48] <hyperair> MTecknology: are you sure the .dsc is the correct one?
[16:48] <abogani> Hi All, I would want request to sync three packages: requestsync apart What I can do for simply your work (if I can something obviously)? Could anyone pinpoint me on more appropriate wiki page?
[16:48] <kamalmostafa> It sounds like the that diff.gz doesn't match the .dsc
[16:48] <hyperair> MTecknology: could be an outdated .dsc
[16:48] <MTecknology> http://php53.dotdeb.org/dists/stable/php5/source/
[16:48] <hyperair> MTecknology: if you're sure you want that diff.gz, then modify the file sizes and hashes in the .dsc.
[16:49] <hyperair> MTecknology: that link doesn't mean anything to me. it could have been a stale .dsc. it would be good to reconfirm and notify the site maintainer if so
[16:50] <MTecknology> I'm trying to downlaod again - I only want a tiny little piece from their debian/
[16:50] <hyperair> Length: 481683
[16:50] <hyperair> that's what wget says
[16:50] <MTecknology> must have been a bad download
[16:50] <hyperair> your download is truncated
[16:50] <MTecknology> I just tried with wget too :P
[16:51] <MTecknology> I'll blame it on my university
[16:51] <kamalmostafa> MTecknology: I also get 480578 bytes from that download.
[16:51] <MTecknology> thanks :)
[16:53] <kamalmostafa> MTecknology: I think I have this sorted out...
[16:54] <hyperair> 2010-02-24 00:53:58 (41.3 KB/s) - `php5_5.3.1-0.dotdeb.1.diff.gz' saved [481683/481683]
[16:54] <hyperair> MTecknology: hang on, i'll just upload it somewhere.
[16:54] <MTecknology> hyperair: I got it after wget
[16:54] <kamalmostafa> If you manually uncompress that .gz, you'll end up with a file which doesn't have the .gz extension, but it a gzip compressed file and its  481683 bytes!
[16:55] <MTecknology> something funny happened with the download...
[16:55] <hyperair> hmm
[16:55] <hyperair> maybe apache double-gzipped it =p
[16:55] <hyperair> or $httpd
[16:55] <MTecknology> :P
[16:56] <kamalmostafa> I don't think so -- this looks like human error to me -- I think somebody accidentally gzipped it "twice" (after fiddling with the filenames manually).
[16:56] <hyperair> kamalmostafa: then why does wget get it right?
[16:57] <kamalmostafa> hyperair: for that, I have no explanation.
[16:58] <hyperair> kamalmostafa: =p
[17:55] <_Andrew> Anyone know why dput freezes on the last 1k everytime I upload to launchpad? This has been the 5th time in a row trying to upload now
[17:56] <_Andrew> It always stops on the last 1k
[18:00] <JontheEchidna> that usually happens to me for really large uploads
[18:01] <_Andrew> it's 60meg
[18:01] <JontheEchidna> for my connection, once it hits 20 MB the likelihood of it stopping at the last 1k goes up to "pretty high"
[18:01] <JontheEchidna> bug 193848
[18:02] <arand> debfx: Here's the diff, what has been done is simply "debuild -S -us -uc" on the apt-got source, and "zdiff -Nurp"-ed the new diff agains the diff which came with the download, result: http://paste.ubuntu.com/382421/
[18:07] <debfx> arand: could you please diff your virtualbox-ose-3.0.8 folder against a newly unpacked one?
[18:08] <jcastro> hyperair: directhex: either of you happen to know if pdfmod is on it's way to debian?
[18:09] <hyperair> jcastro: i have to work on the build-deps
[18:09] <jcastro> are you targetting lucid? It would be real nice to have
[18:09] <hyperair> it would be =(
[18:09] <hyperair> but poppler-sharp is on its way to being packaged
[18:09] <hyperair> and pdfsharp looks like hell to package
[18:10] <jcastro> :-/
[18:10] <hyperair> and FF is already on
[18:10] <jcastro> It would be nice to have in the "Featured Apps" thing in software-center
[18:10] <jcastro> yeah. bummer.
[18:10] <hyperair> lucid+1 perhaps.
[18:12] <_Andrew> Is there a way to upload via sftp using dput? Maybe that would help me
[18:12] <_Andrew> googling finds nothing
[18:13] <arand> debfx: ok
[18:20] <porthose> would a release team member please have a look at bug #526587 thx :)
[18:20] <stefanlsd> persia: do we know the reasons why people want to become developers / motu?
[18:21] <arand> debfx: That (I hope I've done it correctly) Instead gave me a 623k diff: http://paste.ubuntu.com/382426/
[18:26] <iulian> porthose: Commented.
[18:27] <porthose> iulian, thx :)
[18:28] <iulian> Don't mention it.
[18:30] <arand> debfx: hang on, no that's wrong of me, if I remove the dir dpkg-source and diff that dir agains the one I did the debuild -S -uc -us on they are exactly the same..
[18:34] <arand> debfx: Clarification: If I do a fresh dpkg-source, and then compare that directory to the directory I used debuild on before, I gett 0 diff.
[18:35] <arand> So it would seem like something non-standard has been done in producing the former virtualbox-ose_3.0.8-dfsg-1ubuntu1 build, as far as I can guess..
[18:39] <_Andrew> The bug about dput stalling forever was last updated 2 years ago. Does anything ever get fixed around here?
[19:18] <arand> debfx: Did you have any idea as to the cause of the inconsistency, and would I be ok just ignoring it when patching?
[20:25] <kamalmostafa> geser: thanks for the tip about 'openal-soft' -- that confirmed the fix.  Now am I supposed to remove the "verification-needed" tag, or leave it alone?  Anything else I'm supposed to do with bug 503111?
[20:43] <geser> I'm not sure, it's some time since I did my last SRU
[20:43]  * sebner hugs geser :)
[20:44] <jdong> geser / kamalmostafa: The archive admins will take care of that.
[20:44] <kamalmostafa> geser, jdong: thanks
[21:09] <MTecknology> whois zul
[21:10] <MTecknology> zul: you available to be annoyed?
[21:16]  * jpds notes that MTecknology likes to annoy people.
[21:17] <MTecknology> jpds: I don't like it, but I like them to be well aware that I will make them want to e-punch me
[21:18] <persia> stefanlsd: So far, most folk seem to have complete different reasons to become Developers, and the only reason that is cited often is "Join the sponsors team", which, given activity of these people after joining, seems to last an average of two weeks, so I don't tend to believe it much when it's claimed.
[21:19] <persia> stefanlsd: Some folk seem to want to fix unloved stuff, some folk want to fix their bugs, some folk want to work on specific packages, some folk want recognition that they've been doing good work through sponsors, etc.
[21:21] <persia> stefanlsd: But most folk seem to become active for those reasons, and being granted upload rights seems to just be something anyone already active does when it's pointless for them not to have them yet.  There's only been a few deferments, and in most cases the requested access was granted within a month or two of the deferment (as the person deferred addressed the concerns of the approvers).
[21:22] <MTecknology> persia: unless somebody like me asks right now :P
[21:23] <persia> MTecknology: Are you likely to do that?
[21:26] <MTecknology> persia: no, I figure I'll be that one that finally figures it out and gets that access because somebody thinks I have a clue
[21:27] <MTecknology> persia: I'm still fighting the php-fpm
[21:27] <persia> Most other people seem to also have fairly sensible understandings of when is a good time :)
[21:28] <MTecknology> the ppa mdeslaur found didn't have what I need enabled and I can't find a ppa that does
[21:42] <mdeslaur> MTecknology: what do you need enabled?
[21:46] <zul> MTecknology: no try again later
[21:53] <MTecknology> mdeslaur: fastcgi and fpm
[21:53] <kamalmostafa> persia: fyi, I just requested your review of bug 526694 (yet another in the libti set).  I'm not sure whether I'm supposed to subscribe u-u-s when I've asked for a specific person's review, so I did not do that.  i have to step out for a couple hours, but will be back later, if there are problems with it.  thanks!
[21:54] <kamalmostafa> persia: oh and I'm holding off on the removal bugs until I get all the dependent libs done (one more after this, tilp2, i think)
[21:56] <mdeslaur> MTecknology: well, I don't know how that works...it fpm a patch on top of php or what?
[21:56] <mdeslaur> MTecknology: doesn't fastcgi just use the php-cgi package?
[21:57] <MTecknology> mdeslaur: in 5.3.1 the fpm patch is in the package afaik
[21:58] <mdeslaur> MTecknology: the web site says it will ship in 5.3.3
[22:01] <MTecknology> I must have read wrong... too late  at night I guess....
[22:01] <MTecknology> mdeslaur: thanks - that helps how I'll go after this
[22:46] <persia> kamalmostafa: I firmly believe that it's best practice to subscribe u-u-s if one is confident of the work and seeking sponsorship, and to request review from a specific person if one isn't confident and believes that other person to have special expertise in this area.
[22:48] <persia> kamalmostafa: The libtifiles and libticalcs items came to my attention because I try to pay special attention to Failed-to-Upload cases, but the rest are just straightfoward rebuilds for which I don't have any special expertise (although I'm not against sponsoring).
[22:48] <persia> But my queue is moderate right now, so it might be a few days: if you're in a rush, please don't want on me.
[22:48] <persia> s/want/wait/
[23:11] <c_korn> can uscan somehow be executed on an entire repository to see what packages have to be updated ?
[23:11] <patx> can somebody please review http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/fastpatx ?
[23:12] <kamalmostafa> persia: excellent advice, as usual.  I've subscribed u-u-s and dropped your specific review request.  btw, I did merge the changelog entries for this latest one as you instructed (and felt fine about it ;-).  thanks for your help!
[23:13] <persia> c_korn Yes.  You might be interested in the DEHS and UEHS efforts.
[23:13] <persia> !uehs
[23:13] <persia> Fine :/
[23:13] <persia> http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/uehs
[23:13] <c_korn> also bots need to sleep :)
[23:14] <c_korn> thanks persia
[23:14] <persia> Bot's awake, just doesn't know anything about this.
[23:14] <patx> persia, did u ever get around to review http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/fastpatx ? YOU SAID IT WAS LIKE #2 ON YOUR LIST...
[23:15] <persia> patx: It's still #2 on my list.  I've been mostly yak-shaving, but I really hope to get to some REVU soon (as I've almost reached the point where I can do the thing I wanted to do)
[23:15] <patx> srt didnt me to do that in caps
[23:15] <patx> ok thanks :)
[23:26] <c_korn> persia: I see UEHS already uses the ubuntu repository (as the name suggests). can I also use this for an own repository ?
[23:26] <persia> c_korn: you probably have to branch the code and make some changes, but I don't know of any reason it couldn't work with any repository, given sufficient bandwidth and storage.
[23:27] <c_korn> persia: oh, so it has to extract all source tarballs ?
[23:27] <persia> Well, not all at the same time, but it needs to get the watchfiles, changelogs, and copyright files.
[23:28] <persia> I think it might use control as well, but I haven't looked in a long time.