| === jamalta-afk is now known as jamalta | ||
| Some_Person | How much space does a pbuilder thingy take? | 03:41 |
|---|---|---|
| nigelb | Some_Person: depends on what you do with it | 03:47 |
| Some_Person | the base image, i mean | 03:47 |
| Some_Person | This machine has limited HD space, so I need to knwo | 03:48 |
| Some_Person | s/knwo/know | 03:48 |
| nigelb | hold on, lemme check mine | 03:49 |
| keithy | hi, anyone here can talk about licencing of a project (again) | 03:49 |
| nigelb | Some_Person: mine seems to take around 100 MB | 03:49 |
| keithy | my emails to support have been ignored it seems | 03:49 |
| nigelb | keithy: want to talk to an LP admin? | 03:49 |
| keithy | that'll do | 03:49 |
| Some_Person | nigelb: It'll be a tight squeeze, but I think it'll fit | 03:50 |
| wgrant | keithy: The European or American working week is a much much better time. | 03:50 |
| nigelb | keithy: yeah, monday to friday EU time will have better luck | 03:50 |
| Some_Person | How can I screw the pbuilder stuff from my system when I'm done? | 03:50 |
| nigelb | Some_Person: donno what you mean + this is the wrong place for this discussion I think | 03:51 |
| Some_Person | nigelb: What is the right place? | 03:51 |
| nigelb | wgrant: #ubuntu-motu would be beter? | 03:51 |
| Some_Person | And what I mean is, how can I get rid of this 100MB image when I'm done? | 03:51 |
| Some_Person | What's #ubuntu-motu? | 03:52 |
| nigelb | Some_Person: I'm not sure how to remove the basefile other than to remove pbuilder. we generally dont need that feature | 03:52 |
| wgrant | #ubuntu-motu is probably better, yes. | 03:52 |
| nigelb | Some_Person: join #ubuntu-motu channel and ask there, a lot more experts will be around | 03:53 |
| Some_Person | What is "motu"? | 03:53 |
| nigelb | !motu | 03:53 |
| ubottu | motu is short for Masters of the Universe. The brave souls who maintain the packages in the Universe section of Ubuntu. See http://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU | 03:53 |
| === jamalta is now known as jamalta-afk | ||
| Some_Person | It said my package was building now, but a minute later it says it'll start building in an hour | 06:33 |
| wgrant | Some_Person: Are you sure you weren't looking at different architectures? | 06:34 |
| Some_Person | No, I just refreshed the page | 06:34 |
| Some_Person | Now it says it's building again, though on a different builder | 06:35 |
| Some_Person | It's a really fishy package, so I want to make sure it builds and works properly | 06:35 |
| wgrant | Some_Person: Link to the build? | 06:39 |
| Some_Person | it's finished building now | 06:40 |
| micahg | are we allowed to make our ubuntu.com addresses default on LP yet? | 07:11 |
| rww | micahg: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-foundations/+bug/5292 is still open, so I'd guess not | 07:12 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 5292 in launchpad-foundations "People setting preferred contact address to @ubuntu.com" [Medium,Triaged] | 07:12 |
| micahg | rww: so, is that the same as having bugmail coming from the ubuntu.com address? | 07:12 |
| * micahg subscribes to that bug | 07:12 | |
| rww | micahg: i think so | 07:14 |
| micahg | rww: so I'm wondering how people do it now | 07:14 |
| rww | micahg: example? | 07:14 |
| micahg | rww: PM? | 07:15 |
| persia | micahg: The reason it works for me is very old and historical, and predates that bug by a long time. | 07:15 |
| micahg | persia: you were going to be one of my examples :) | 07:15 |
| persia | (and happens to be different than the other reason it works for certain people) | 07:15 |
| micahg | k | 07:16 |
| persia | Basically, there are some folk who have @ubuntu.com not related to launchpad (for historical reasons), and there are some folk who have @ubuntu.com cowboyed in during early days of integration with launchpad, and it works for them, but it doesn't work for new folk since the improved launchpad integration. | 07:17 |
| persia | That's theoretically fixable, but hard, and making it work the way it works for either of the first two classes of people is just broken. | 07:17 |
| persia | (hence the bug) | 07:18 |
| micahg | rww: nm | 07:19 |
| persia | micahg: Sorry to disrupt your PM: I just don't think there's anything there which isn't public (the former case can be understood by reviewing MX records, and the latter case (mine) are a set of known exceptions and workarounds). | 07:24 |
| micahg | persia: I cancelled the PM request | 07:34 |
| persia | hence my apology :) | 07:35 |
| micahg | persia: I asked for a PM because I wasn't sure if people were doing stuff wrong and didn't want to "out" them in public :) | 07:39 |
| persia | I don't think any of the individuals did anything wrong. | 07:39 |
| micahg | persia: right, but I didn't know that when I started asking... | 07:40 |
| persia | The issue with namespace collision on the mailserver is long-standing, and awkward to address. | 07:40 |
| persia | The few of us who have hand-entered aliases from the beginning of the LP integration stuff are just acceidents of timing. | 07:40 |
| persia | A real fix to the bug is to be able to separate target address from preferred address in LP. | 07:41 |
| persia | And then to notify all the special cases that they need to set things properly. | 07:42 |
| persia | And then set up a new mailserver, have it pull from the new LP stuff, and then change MX records. | 07:42 |
| persia | That's hard, and it's questionable whether it's worth it. | 07:42 |
| persia | (especially because there are a few hundred special cases) | 07:43 |
| wgrant | persia: Are the special cases those Canonical employees with canonical.com aliases that happen to work on ubuntu.com too? | 07:44 |
| persia | wgrant: Not all of them. There are two classes of special case. | 07:45 |
| wgrant | Well, yes, I meant the big one. | 07:45 |
| persia | wgrant: So, there's the @canonical.com @ubuntu.com thing (some of which I believe was addressed about 18 months ago, but I'm not sure). | 07:45 |
| persia | Yeah, the majority are probably those. | 07:46 |
| persia | But also there are folk (like me) that ended up with hardcoded aliases to work around bugs with the LP integration back in the early days. | 07:46 |
| wgrant | Ah. | 07:46 |
| persia | So in the beginning there was a big aliases table, and new members got added there. | 07:47 |
| persia | Then we wanted to use LP more, and sometimes that worked, and sometimes it didn't. | 07:47 |
| wgrant | Anyway, it's not actually much to do with LP -- IS handles it. | 07:47 |
| persia | And now LP mostly just works, so nobody gets added to the aliases table anymore. | 07:47 |
| persia | Well, there's a few bugs in IS, but the bug in LP is that it doesn't differentiate "preferred address" from "alias target address", making the bugs in IS hard to fix. | 07:48 |
| wgrant | LP doesn't know about aliases. | 07:48 |
| persia | Right. | 07:49 |
| persia | It would have to grow that as an attribute to fix the IS stuff. | 07:49 |
| persia | Without that attribute, it requires additions to the aliases table, which are currently (partially) automated based on LP preferred address (as I understand it: I'm not privy to the code) | 07:49 |
| wgrant | Alternatively the IS thing could be replaced with a simple webapp authenticating against LP and checking ~ubuntumembers membership. | 07:50 |
| persia | Indeed. That's probably better than trying to force LP to do it. | 07:50 |
| wgrant | Now that authentication and membership verification against LP is easy, that is probably the way to do it. Plus it could be decoupled from the LP username, which is probably a good thing. | 07:51 |
| persia | So user@ubuntu.com wouldn't necessarily be lpnet/people/user ? | 07:51 |
| persia | I suppose it isn't always now do to how the mailserver works anyway. | 07:52 |
| wgrant | It could be implementable like that if so desired. | 07:52 |
| persia | s/do/due/ | 07:52 |
| persia | That sounds like an excellent suggestion, except that I'm unsure IS is likely to develop such a webapp. | 07:52 |
| persia | But I'm now convinced this isn't an LP bug. | 07:53 |
| * persia updates the bug based on this discussion | 07:57 | |
| persia | I've bumped into a bug: if a bug (e.g. bug #410028) has nominations for releases against multiple tasks, I don't seem to be able to approve one without leaving the other unapproved. Does anyone happen to know if this is already filed? | 08:09 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 410028 in openobject-client-kde "Add view buttons" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/410028 | 08:09 |
| persia | Err, that was supposed to be 401028, but I'm guessing nobody heard of this before anyway. | 08:15 |
| persia | Filing now. | 08:15 |
| * persia should trust the find-similar-bug algorithm more: it's bug #271697 | 08:22 | |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 271697 in malone "Javascript for approving / declining nominations is confusing " [Undecided,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/271697 | 08:22 |
| wgrant | persia: You mean that you can't accept nominations for different source packages separately? | 08:29 |
| persia | Yeah. | 08:30 |
| wgrant | Bug #11195 | 08:30 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 11195 in linux-source-2.6.15 "ripping from CD-ROM non-functional" [Medium,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/11195 | 08:30 |
| wgrant | Er. | 08:30 |
| wgrant | Bug #110195 | 08:30 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 110195 in malone "Nomination for a release on one source package shouldn't affect any others" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/110195 | 08:30 |
| wgrant | I filed it about 3 years ago. | 08:30 |
| persia | Is 271697 a dup, or just an expression of 110195 also in javascript? | 08:31 |
| wgrant | They are separate. | 08:31 |
| wgrant | Although fixing 110195 will probably fix 271697, since the nomination objects will be distinct. | 08:31 |
| wgrant | But 271697 could be fixed independently. | 08:32 |
| p_masho | anyone here who can help a newbie. I want to "upload" around 300+ debs. | 11:49 |
| p_masho | Its for the flightgear project. There are over 300+ aircraft, which are just a bunch of files (images/xml) in a directory. | 11:50 |
| persia | p_masho: Why do you need that in 300 different packages? | 12:10 |
| p_masho | each aircradt needs to have its own ppa, they average around 10meg each.. | 12:11 |
| p_masho | just realised I cant do this anyway.. after rtfm ing ;-( | 12:12 |
| persia | heh. | 12:12 |
| wgrant | Why can't you? | 12:12 |
| persia | Packages like that are trivial to do, but often need a lot of consideration. | 12:12 |
| p_masho | wats a pain in the ass is the updates | 12:14 |
| p_masho | ats them moment its (once in a blue moon ) >> "cvs co " (yes cvs).. >> scan dir for updates >> make tarball >> upload tarball.. to ftp site >> mirrored | 12:15 |
| === Ursinha is now known as Jorjao | ||
| askhl | Hi. I have a couple of different PPA packages which I would like to make available for different Ubuntu series. One package contains only data and is quite universal, but depends on less universal packages. Do I really have to make copies of this package for each series? | 15:08 |
| geser | askhl: is the data package build from its own source package? | 15:13 |
| askhl | geser: yes it is. Also I wrote something wrong: it doesn't depend on anything - other packages depend on *it*. Sorry | 15:14 |
| geser | depending on the packages you have (if they need a rebuild or not) it might be enough to copy them (through the web UI) to the other release | 15:14 |
| geser | for a data package copying should be enough | 15:15 |
| askhl | The data package is 20MB, so I would rather avoid that | 15:15 |
| geser | avoid the copying? | 15:17 |
| geser | without a copy it won't get published for the other release, I assume that this won't use any additional space in your PPA | 15:18 |
| askhl | So copying for different releases doesn't count against the PPA size limit? | 15:18 |
| askhl | Anyway, I'll just create copies if that's what it takes, whether or not it takes some space. | 15:19 |
| geser | I'm not sure, but as you re-use the same files and as they even stay in the same location I doubt it | 15:20 |
| askhl | Okay, that makes sense. If I need to update the data package, though, what is the procedure? Update the newest and then copy to other releases, or update each one individually? | 15:22 |
| askhl | I guess I should try to find these things in the Ubuntu or Debian packaging guides | 15:22 |
| askhl | I'll browse the documentation for further information. But I'll make copies to support different series in any case. Thanks a lot for the help, geser. | 15:28 |
| d34df00d | Hi! | 15:37 |
| d34df00d | Are there any plans for supporting TS (Qt Linguist) translation files in Launchpad? | 15:38 |
| d34df00d | I've googled a bit and only found recommendations to use translation-toolkit. | 15:38 |
| d34df00d | Also, there is an open wishlist bug on the tracker starting back from 2006, but it is quite inactive, and it is neither accepted nor rejected. | 15:39 |
| d34df00d | Converting to and from PO is a solution, but it is seems more like a workaround, and this way one would need to upload files manually. | 15:41 |
| d34df00d | Or keep the POs (which are, in fact, duplicates) in Bazaar repo. | 15:41 |
| rdz | hi all. i have a question regarding deb packaging for my PPA. is this the right channel to ask? | 17:23 |
| geser | yes | 17:34 |
| rdz | i try to build a binary package from the sources by doing: 'sudo pbuilder build ../gavl_1.2.0pre1-1.dsc'. it stops with this error: "make: dh_testdir: Command not found" . however, 'dh_testdir' exists (debhelper is installed). how comes that fakeroot does not seem to find the dh_testdir command? | 17:36 |
| geser | pbuilder uses a clean and bare chroot for building. if you need any special package during build (like debhelper) you need to specify it in Build-Depends | 17:37 |
| geser | in debian/control | 17:38 |
| rdz | geser, thanks | 17:38 |
| rdz | geser, am i right in thinking, that i should adapt <source-directory>/debian/control ? i added 'debhelper' there ('doxygen' was alreaday there), but when executing the 'pbuilder build' command, i see that it is still only installing 'doxygen', but not 'debhelper'. sorry for the noobish questions | 17:50 |
| rdz | that is the complete output: http://pastebin.ca/1827292 | 17:56 |
| geser | rdz: did you recreate the source package (debuild -S) after you changed debian/control? | 18:29 |
| rdz | geser, thanks.. yeah, i got it in the meantime | 18:30 |
| rdz | geser, now i am stuck at another issue: http://pastebin.ca/1827344. there seems some problem with the debian/rules file | 18:31 |
| rdz | this is the 'clean' section of debian/rules: http://pastebin.ca/1827345 | 18:33 |
| rdz | now, after i performed './autogen.sh' before doing 'debuild -S', it seems to work. does this mean i should add the './autogen.sh' command add to debian/rules? | 18:45 |
| rdz | or is the usual way to prepare a package to bring it into a state ready for doing ./configure ? | 18:46 |
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| rdz | I just uploaded my first source package to my PPA. Will I just have to wait until I see it appear? | 19:38 |
| mwhudson | rdz: you should get an accepted mail within 5 minutes | 19:42 |
| askhl | Say, if you 'import' a translation in Launchpad, what happens if the msgids are not the same? | 19:44 |
| askhl | Presumably it is strictly required when 'importing' as well as when 'uploading' that the po-file in question actually contains exactly the same msgids. | 19:45 |
| rdz | mwhuds ah.. i see.. it was not accepted .. thanks | 19:45 |
| rdz | "i386 - Pending publication": Am I required to publish this package? or do I simply need to wait? | 20:43 |
| rdz | If it requires me doing something, what shall i do? | 20:43 |
| rdz | ah.. i had simply to wait | 20:46 |
| rdz | :-) | 20:46 |
| blueyed | Is OOPS-1527L2262 because somebody changed the package while I was typing for minutes on a comment which appears to be lost now? | 21:01 |
| ubottu | https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=1527L2262 | 21:01 |
| lifeless | blueyed: huh, that oops itself oopses | 21:06 |
| blueyed | OOPS-1527L2276 also? | 21:06 |
| ubottu | https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=1527L2276 | 21:06 |
| thumper | morning | 21:07 |
| lifeless | blueyed: that one isn't replicated yet | 21:07 |
| blueyed | lifeless: then it's probably no error.. ;) - btw: another case of the comments/data being eaten. I really get to the habit of copying the most important fields to the clipboard before submitting something on LP. Chromium does not refill the form elements when going back. | 21:12 |
| lifeless | blueyed: file a bug ? | 21:13 |
| lifeless | [on chromium] | 21:13 |
| blueyed | I guess it's rather related to cache headers/ssl which prevents this. could be the case with FF, too. | 21:14 |
| lifeless | blueyed: filing a bug means it might get fixed. | 21:15 |
| blueyed | I would bet that there's a bug filed for both LP and Chrome already. and yes, it might get fixed. | 21:16 |
| lifeless | shrug | 21:22 |
| lifeless | up to you, I wouldn't bet anything on that bet | 21:22 |
| rdz | hi all. i added a package to my ppa which has version 1.2.0pre1-1. ubuntu repos have version 1.1.0-2. although i added my ppa to the sources, aptitude still wants to install ubuntu's version. how are versions compared? do i have to specify the package at a different location as well (beside debian/control)= | 22:20 |
| rdz | ? | 22:20 |
| geser | rdz: have you run "aptitude update" after you added your PPA? | 22:38 |
| rdz | geser, i did | 22:40 |
| geser | what's the package name? | 22:40 |
| rdz | libgavl1 | 22:41 |
| Some_Person | I have a 75MB package in my PPA. I need to get my debian folder out of the package but do not want to download 75MB because of my slow connection. Anything I can do? | 22:43 |
| geser | Some_Person: if it's a non-native package and the upstream tarball didn't contain the debian dir, then downloading the diff.gz is enough | 22:44 |
| Some_Person | Package has a completely different rules file than the one upstream due to changes since that version | 22:45 |
| geser | rdz: does "apt-cache policy" list your PPA? | 22:45 |
| Some_Person | Also, wouldn't the diff.gz only give me changes since the last version uploaded? | 22:45 |
| rdz | geser, no, it doesn't | 22:46 |
| geser | the diff.gz contains all differences compared to the upstream tarball (like e.g. a debian directory or patches) | 22:46 |
| Some_Person | There have been numerous changes since upstream | 22:46 |
| Some_Person | upstream package is 2 years old, lots of development since then | 22:47 |
| geser | rdz: then you probably didn't add your PPA correctly. how did you do it? | 22:47 |
| geser | then the .diff.gz will contain all those changes (if they aren't part of the .orig.tar.gz) | 22:47 |
| rdz | geser, sudo add-apt-repository ppa:reduzierer/rdz-pd-extra+deps | 22:48 |
| rdz | geser, when adding the ppa the traditional way (adding to /etc/apt/sources.list manually, adding the key manually) it works | 22:55 |
| rdz | although it did not work before, my ppa was listed by the software-properties-gtk gui program | 22:56 |
| rdz | geser, thanks for your help | 22:59 |
| rdz | i have troubles finding the information: how can i tell the ppa to compile for many supported distros? | 23:09 |
| geser | you need to re-upload for each release you want to support (and update the version and distribution field in the changelog) | 23:20 |
| rdz | geser, i see. why does the verion also need to be updated? | 23:21 |
| rdz | *version | 23:21 |
| geser | because you can upload a version only once (and because all files for a package are stored together and the version is part of the filename) | 23:22 |
| rdz | hm..how do you call the different versions then (that are actually the same)? | 23:23 |
| rdz | sorry for the noobish questions... | 23:23 |
| geser | you can just append e.g. ~karmic or ~jaunty to your version string. that's enough to make the different | 23:24 |
| rdz | geser, thanks | 23:25 |
| poolie | hi thumper - which bug has >1000 subscribers? | 23:39 |
| poolie | oh nm, i can find out | 23:41 |
| poolie | OOPS-1526ED777 | 23:41 |
| ubottu | https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=1526ED777 | 23:41 |
| poolie | bug 1 of course | 23:42 |
| ubottu | https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1 (Timeout) | 23:42 |
| poolie | jeez, why would someone want to subscribe to that? | 23:42 |
| idnar | I was just thinking the same thing | 23:42 |
| poolie | lifeless, btw https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/534066 broke hydrazine bugclient fairly completely :-/ | 23:50 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 534066 in malone "can't update bugtask importance via api" [Undecided,New] | 23:50 |
| lifeless | poolie: ugh | 23:59 |
| wgrant | I wonder if it's the heat bug. | 23:59 |
| wgrant | But it seems unlikely that that would fail every time. | 23:59 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!