[00:21] <kobrien> RoAkSoAx: doesn't it bind to localhost by default on ipv4?
[01:36] <amanda_> i need lots of help
[01:37] <kobrien> amanda_: state the issue
[01:38] <amanda_> i cant get sound
[01:39] <amanda_> i hear it faintly in the speakers but there is no way to turn it up all of the volume controols are all the way up and i know its not the speakers
[01:39] <amanda_> I know nothing about linux im very very new to it
[01:39] <kobrien> amanda_: the support channel is #ubuntu
[01:39] <amanda_> ok how do i get to that
[01:39] <kobrien> type /join #ubuntu
[01:40] <kobrien> you could also try the ubuntu forums
[01:40] <kobrien> here is the beginner forum: http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=326
[01:41] <kobrien> with the beginners guide. enjoy.
[02:32] <lfaraone> If two bzr branches (from Debian and Ubuntu) have no common ancestor, how can I merge them together? (I want to discard all ubuntu changes other than the changelog, ideally)
[02:33] <lfaraone> (since the ubuntu delta can be dropped)
[06:02] <wrapster>  in the postinst script i cannot execute how do i execute shell commands?coz one in particular called 'update-ca-certificates' fails if written inside the postinst script.
[06:02] <wrapster> but anywhere else if i write its working fine.
[06:02] <wrapster> http://pastie.org/900511;there is a part of the script.
[06:03] <wrapster> http://pastie.org/900511
[06:03] <wrapster> thats the link
[08:38] <geser> wrapster: you have to figure out why it fails. Try adding set -x near the top of the update-ca-certificates so see where (and perhaps why) it fails.
[10:11] <arand> I find myself apt-getting build-deps, copying the "will be installed" output from apt (and sedding it to get a nice pasteable package list) to be able to remove these again when the build is completed, is there a better way to do this?
[10:23] <_ruben> arand: when using for instance pbuilder, that'll be automated for you
[10:27] <arand> _ruben: Indeed, but outside it's worse, seems like there are no real good *simple* ways, if one is preemptive one can always do "apt-get --simulate build-dep xxx|grep "^Inst"|awk '{print $2}' | tr -s '\n' ' ' > deps_remove" but it's not properly convenient...
[10:28] <_ruben> arand: the more reason to use utils like pbuilder? :)
[10:29] <arand> _ruben: true...
[10:31] <_ruben> i either use a pbuilder machine, or scrap boxes where i dont care about any (build)packages being left behind
[13:05] <Annaa> http://tinypic.zapto.org/2kn4m8.png?t=1270382236 do my breasts look to big?
[13:30] <arand> stgraber: I've been poking a bit in getting your fix for pastebin.com into earlier pastebinit. Karmic and Jaunty seems ok, but Hardy's version is giving me troubles, anyways, what I've got so far is up on Bug #526849 .
[14:28] <ari-tczew> bdrung: ping
[14:29] <bdrung> ari-tczew: pong
[14:30] <ari-tczew> bdrung: you have done 2 SRUs for me, but these packages doesn't exist yet, what happens?
[14:31] <bdrung> ari-tczew: they have to be accepted. look at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/karmic/+queue?queue_state=1
[14:31] <bdrung> (or similar)
[14:32] <ari-tczew> bdrung: when these packages will be moved to release/updates?
[14:33] <bdrung> ari-tczew: first they have to be accepted, then they appear in -proposed, after verification (done in the bug report) they are copied to -updates after some time
[14:34] <ari-tczew> ok thanks
[14:41] <nigelb> can someone help me make sense of this? http://launchpadlibrarian.net/42069188/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-i386.vlc_1.0.5-2ubuntu2_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[14:41] <nigelb> I wanted to get it into ubuntu but it isn't building
[14:42] <nigelb> the only delta from current version is an extra translation to the .desktop file
[14:43] <james_w> nigelb: looks to be missing an #include in at least the the first .h file mentioned
[14:43] <nigelb> james_w, but, how did it build for the repos?
[14:47] <james_w> nigelb: it's possible the compiler version changed if it wasn't built recently
[14:48] <james_w> gcc gets stricter each release
[14:48] <nigelb> oooh.  lemme hunt for whats missing :)
[14:54] <hyperair> james_w: could you ack banshee 1.6.0-1 please?
[14:54] <james_w> not right now
[14:54] <hyperair> mm do we have some kind of freeze that prevents this?
[14:54] <nigelb> beta 2 freeze right?
[14:54]  * hyperair thought beta freezes only applied to main package
[14:54] <hyperair> s
[14:55] <nigelb> I have like 3 or 4 bugs waiting for thursday :)
[14:55] <james_w> hyperair: no, I was just about to leave :-)
[14:55] <hyperair> james_w: ah okay nevermind then =p
[14:56] <james_w> I can't see the bug, where is it?
[14:56] <hyperair> er i dputted using syncpackage.
[14:56] <hyperair> "[ubuntu/lucid] banshee 1.6.0-1 (Waiting for approval)"
[14:56] <james_w> then it's caught by the beta freeze
[14:57] <james_w> it will get waved through soon enough
[14:57] <hyperair> i see. okay, thanks.
[14:58] <nigelb> hyperair, "-queuebot/#ubuntu-release- New package: banshee (universe) [1.5.6-1 → 1.6.0-1]"
[15:01] <hyperair> nigelb: what's that?
[15:01]  * hyperair has never heard of this queuebot
[15:01] <nigelb> join #ubuntu-release
[15:01] <nigelb> its the bot that resides there
[15:02] <hyperair> aah
[15:02] <hyperair> so is it supposed to be acked by an ubuntu-release person or an archive admin now?
[15:03]  * nigelb looks to wiki
[15:04] <nigelb> I think yes for main https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess
[15:05] <hyperair> =\
[15:05] <hyperair> i really meant to ask which one =\
[15:06]  * nigelb is you clueless, you're the MOTU here :D
[15:08] <ScottK> hyperair: Is there an FFe for banshee?
[15:12] <sebner> ScottK: only bugfixes. from RC to final
[15:14] <ScottK> Oh, OK.
[15:15] <ScottK> 1.5.6-1 → 1.6.0-1 did not look like an RC from just the numbers.
[15:15] <hyperair> 1.5.1 upwards was beta
[15:15] <hyperair> 1.6.0 is the final number
[15:15] <sebner> ScottK: nvm, 1.5.x was everything from beta to RC :D
[15:15] <ScottK> It's in.
[15:15] <hyperair> final version*
[15:15] <hyperair> thanks
[15:15] <ScottK> Right, if one isn't familiar with Banshee development, that's not clear.
[15:16] <ScottK> hyperair: If it's a bug fix only release, it's helpful to mention that in debian/changelog.
[15:16] <hyperair> ScottK: ah okay, i'll do that next time.
[15:16] <ScottK> Thanks.
[15:22] <sebner> ScottK: \o/
[15:55] <mhall119> I need some MOTU help
[15:55] <mhall119> I have 3 new packages that I would like to get included in Lucid
[15:55] <nigelb> mhall119, a bit too late.  now you need FFE for them
[15:55] <mhall119> Packages are in REVU, bugs are in Launchpad, I attached the orginal upstream and .diff.gz
[15:55] <mhall119> nigelb: I know, that's what I'm working on
[15:55] <nhandler> mhall119: Why do you need them?
[15:56] <mhall119> nhandler: they are for Qimo, and the Edubuntu guys were wanting them for their release too
[15:56] <mhall119> it's mostly artwork
[15:56] <mhall119> but also an X session startup script
[15:57] <mhall119> so I have the packages, I have the bug, I subscribed ubuntu-release to the  bug
[15:57] <mhall119> I attached the diffs and original packages to the bug report
[15:57] <mhall119> and described each package in the comments
[15:57] <mhall119> is there anything else I need to do for FFE?
[15:57] <nigelb> build log and install log?
[15:58] <nigelb> oh wait, not needed :)
[15:58] <mhall119> nothing's being compiled
[15:58] <mhall119> the only non-artwork are shell scripts
[15:58] <mhall119> and config files
[15:58] <nigelb> mhall119, bribe nhandler :D
[15:59] <mhall119> I'll let him borrow cjohnston some more if he gets me an exception ;)
[15:59] <sistpoty> build log is needed, even if nothing is compiled (still a binary package from a source package is created, right?)
[15:59] <mhall119> highvoltage and stgraber were helping me with packaging
[16:00] <mhall119> sistpoty: no
[16:00] <nhandler> nigelb: He'll want to bribe an Archive Admin. They need to push it through NEW. Can you post some bug numbers mhall119 ?
[16:00] <mhall119> sistpoty: the only binaries are images
[16:00] <nigelb> mhall119, no.. what he meant is.. isn't a deb created?
[16:00] <sistpoty> mhall119: but they live in a binary package?
[16:00] <mhall119> bug 522720
[16:00] <mhall119> bug 522729
[16:00] <sistpoty> (otherwise I'd immediately reject the FFe :P)
[16:00] <mhall119> bug 522731
[16:00] <mhall119> sistpoty: I'm not sure what you mean
[16:01] <nhandler> mhall119: Why are they Fix Committed?
[16:01] <sistpoty> mhall119: you upload a source package to launchpad, and there a binary package (.deb) is created. otherwise noone can install your package ;)
[16:01] <mhall119> because I dput them in revu, should I not have done that?
[16:01] <mhall119> sistpoty: I uploaded the source package to revu
[16:01] <nhandler> mhall119: They still need to get reviewed and acked by developers in addition to the FFe
[16:02] <mhall119> nhandler: I know, I'm trying to find reviewers, like I said highvoltage and stgraber had been helping me
[16:02] <mhall119> but with it being Easter weekend and all....
[16:02] <nigelb> mhall119, can give me a revu link?  I'll try to get a build log
[16:02] <mhall119> http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/qimo-session
[16:03] <mhall119> http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/qimo-games
[16:03] <mhall119> http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/qimo-wallpaper
[16:03] <nigelb> nhandler, shouldn't the bugs be opened against ubuntu and not in qemo project?
[16:03] <mhall119> I didn't know, I just put them in my project
[16:03] <nhandler> nigelb: Yes. I missed that part.
[16:04] <mhall119> nhandler: should I add Ubuntu to "Also affects distribution"?
[16:04] <sistpoty> FFe bug should somehow show up in our worklist (that is bugs of state new, with ubuntu-release as subscriber) ;)
[16:04] <mhall119> sistpoty: ok, I'll set them back to new
[16:05] <sistpoty> mhall119: thanks
[16:05] <mhall119> okay, if it's "new" in ubuntu, can I leave it "fix committed" in qimo?
[16:05] <sistpoty> mhall119: sure
[16:07] <mhall119> ok, done
[16:07] <nigelb> mhall119, building
[16:08] <mhall119> thanks everyone for helping me
[16:08] <nigelb> it builds.. I'll attach a log to the bug
[16:12] <mhall119> thanks nigelb
[16:13] <mhall119> should I put a comment in the bugs stating why i think these packages should be included in a FFE?
[16:15] <nigelb> mhall119, I've added one build log.  will finish the others in a few minutes :)
[16:16] <mhall119> thanks
[16:23] <mhall119> is there anything I need to do to let ubuntu-release know I'm asking for a FFE?
[16:32] <nigelb> sistpoty, don't you generally ask for screenshots, etc?
[16:33] <sistpoty> nigelb: screenhots are a good way to demonstrate that you've tested the packages
[16:33] <nigelb> mhall119, ^
[16:35] <mhall119> screenshots of what?
[16:36] <nigelb> your package in lucid
[16:36] <mhall119> it's not a single program though
[16:36] <sebner> huhu sistpoty :)
[16:36] <mhall119> it's an X session + artwork + game dependencies
[16:36] <sistpoty> hi sebner
[16:37] <mhall119> I have screenshots of it running, build on one of the Lucid Alphas
[16:37] <mhall119> but it won't look like Lucid
[16:37] <mhall119> it'll look like Qimo
[16:37] <nigelb> isnt that the whole point of the package?
[16:38] <mhall119> yes, I'm just not sure what a screenshot of it is going to contribute to reviewers
[16:38] <nigelb> generally shows that it installs sucessfuly
[16:39] <mhall119> okay, you want just a screenshot of the desktop?
[16:39] <mhall119> like this http://qimo4kids.com/image.axd?picture=2010%2f2%2fAlpha2Screenshot.png
[16:39] <nigelb> mhall119, is this what happens when installing the session package?
[16:40] <mhall119> not immediately, no
[16:40] <mhall119> you have to pick "Qimo Session" from GDM
[16:40] <nigelb> yeah, well this is the package at work?
[16:40] <nigelb> if so, helps, put it in
[16:40] <mhall119> nigelb: yes, that's the package at work
[16:42] <mhall119> sistpoty: should I "Nominate for Release" to Lucid in the Ubuntu bug?
[16:42] <sistpoty> mhall119: no, we use FFe bugs instead of nominations to handle FFe's
[16:47] <mhall119> sistpoty: is there anything I need to do to label these as FFe bugs?
[16:47] <mhall119> also, I added a screenshot to bug 522720
[16:47] <sistpoty> mhall119: no, already showing up in the queue
[16:48] <mhall119> ok
[16:50] <mhall119> sistpoty: if there's anything I'm missing, just let me know and I'll get is ASAP
[16:51] <sistpoty> mhall119: you're missing someone with time to review the FFe ;) (sorry, gotta run myself now)
[16:52] <sistpoty> <- afk, cya
[16:52] <mhall119> I know, I just got my final artwork in a few days ago
[16:52] <mhall119> thanks for all the help sistpoty
[16:52] <sistpoty> yw
[16:52] <mhall119> and nigelb and nhandler
[16:52] <nigelb> np  :)
[17:33] <lfaraone> If two bzr branches (from Debian and Ubuntu) have no common ancestor, how can I merge them together? (I want to discard all ubuntu changes other than the changelog, ideally)
[17:33] <lfaraone> (since the ubuntu delta can be dropped)
[17:35] <geser> lfaraone: why merge if only the changelog remains? that sounds like a sync
[17:35] <lfaraone> geser: well, we also need to change the epoch.
[17:37] <lfaraone> (aside: would it be worthwhile to ask debian to increment the epoch as well so we can avoid this in the future? )
[17:37] <geser> you could at least try
[17:38] <geser> and I have no idea how to merge if both branches have no common ancestor
[17:50] <james_w> lfaraone: which package?
[17:50] <lfaraone> james_w: squeak-vm, which was just dropped from the archive for FTBFS
[17:50] <lfaraone> (I think I saw a ub-devel-announce email about it)
[17:51] <lfaraone> james_w: bug 552720
[17:53] <maxb> How much point is there in retaining the Ubuntu history at this point?
[17:53] <nigelb> wouldn't just sync-ing the debian package be enough?
[17:53] <nigelb> the changelog would be preserved anyway I think
[17:54] <maxb> 1) syncs don't preserve changelogs
[17:54] <maxb> 2) apparently there's an epoch change needed
[17:54] <nigelb> ah
[17:54] <lfaraone> maxb: yes, Ubuntu has an epoch of 1 whereas Debian has no epoch.
[17:54] <maxb> that sucks
[17:56] <maxb> Unfortunately there's no way to fix that
[17:57] <maxb> Unless the Debian maintainer is feeling very generous indeed and willing to accept a needless epoch in their package to work around Ubuntu's mistake
[18:02] <james_w> anyway, you can merge unrelated branches with "bzr merge -r0..-1 other-branch"
[18:03] <lfaraone> james_w: okay, thanks.
[18:24] <lfaraone> great, 148 conflicts.,
[19:08] <lfaraone> For some reason dput is not including the orig.tar.gz in my upload. How can I fix that?
[19:08] <lfaraone> (to a PPA)
[19:09] <ScottK> lfaraone: -S -sa
[19:41] <lfaraone> Implicit pointer conversion is fatal on PPA builds, is it the same way for the Ubuntu archive?
[19:41] <lfaraone> ( re https://edge.launchpad.net/~lfaraone/+archive/ppa/+build/1625819/+files/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-amd64.squeak-vm_1:3.11.3+svn2147-1ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz )
[19:41] <ScottK> Should be.
[19:42] <geser> yes, it's fatal on amd64
[19:46] <geser> lfaraone: the problem is "warning: implicit declaration of function" which can be fixed by including the missing header for the declaration
[19:48] <lfaraone> geser: okay. my apologies, I know absolutely no C.
[19:49] <ScottK> lfaraone: I don't either, but Google can usually help you figure out which one is missing.
[20:00] <geser> lfaraone: give me a minute and I might have a patch for this for you
[20:02] <nigelb> can someone with c foo help me with http://launchpadlibrarian.net/42069188/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-i386.vlc_1.0.5-2ubuntu2_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz ?
[20:02] <lfaraone> geser: thanks :)
[20:04] <ScottK> nigelb: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-814334-start-0.html
[20:05] <nigelb> ScottK, ouch.  nothing can be done?
[20:05] <ScottK> nigelb: https://trac.videolan.org/vlc/ticket/3185
[20:05] <ScottK> nigelb: BTW, I have no C foo, those are in the top few Google hits on that error.
[20:06] <geser> nigelb: give me a moment to find the right headers for you
[20:06] <nigelb> ScottK, ugh! I always forgot to look in google
[20:06] <mdeslaur> nigelb, ScottK: there seems to be a patch for newer xulrunner support in the following gentoo bug: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=290318
[20:06] <nigelb> geser, thank you :)
[20:06] <mdeslaur> nigelb: http://cvs.rpmfusion.org/viewvc/rpms/vlc/devel/vlc-1.0.4-xulrunner-192.patch?revision=1.1&root=free&view=markup
[20:07] <sebner> geser is tehh workhorse! :D
[20:10] <kobrien> I'm a C coder, can i be of assistance?
[20:10] <nigelb> geser, http://cvs.rpmfusion.org/viewvc/rpms/vlc/devel/vlc-1.0.4-xulrunner-192.patch?revision=1.1&root=free&view=markup looks sane?
[20:11] <nigelb> mdeslaur, that was a lot of reading material :)
[20:11] <nigelb> thanks
[20:12] <geser> nigelb: yes, from a quick look (at least it should fix some errors)
[20:12] <nigelb> geser, thanks, I'll try a build with that patch :)
[20:13] <ScottK> kobrien: We can always use help.
[20:15] <kobrien> ScottK: :) cool
[20:15] <ScottK> geser: Got any C stuff kobrien could help on?
[20:16] <ScottK> lucas: Since taktuk would build with the autotools-dev we have in Lucid (and it's way too late to update it), what's your plan to fix it?
[20:16] <nigelb> ScottK, kobrien: we could always use help with patch review :)
[20:16] <ScottK> nigelb: Could you help kobrien get started?
[20:17] <nigelb> ScottK, sure :)
[20:17] <nigelb> kobrien, here's the link to reviewers team wiki https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReviewersTeam
[20:18] <kobrien> nigelb: ok, lets see
[20:18] <nigelb> kobrien, and here's the reviewers queue.  if you feel you can understand a patch, pick it, test it, and review according to review guide https://bugs.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-reviewers/+subscribedbugs
[20:19] <kobrien> nigelb: cool
[20:19] <geser> kobrien: if you look for some C/C++ related problems to fix: search http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu_ftbfs.cgi for "invalid conversion"
[20:19] <geser> kobrien: e.g. http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~lucas/ubuntu-nbs/32/vdr-plugin-epgsearch_0.9.24-3_llucid32.buildlog or http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~lucas/ubuntu-nbs/32/vdr-plugin-extrecmenu_1.1-8build1_llucid32.buildlog
[20:19] <geser> there are some more
[20:19] <lucas> ScottK: it's probably quite easy to fix taktuk to build with an older autotools-dev
[20:20] <geser> I don't know how hard or easy they are to fix
[20:21] <kobrien> i've applied for membership of the reviewers team
[20:22] <ScottK> lucas: Could you take that on or find someone to manage it?
[20:22] <lucas> ScottK: yes, will do
[20:22] <ScottK> lucas: Thanks.
[20:22] <lucas> ScottK: you care about taktuk?
[20:22] <ScottK> lucas: No.  Autofoo and I don't get along.
[20:30] <lfaraone> geser: back, sorry, had to restart.
[21:05] <geser> lfaraone: http://paste.ubuntu.com/409193/ this should fix the FTBFS
[21:05] <geser> someone more familiar with the source might have a better fix for it
[21:06] <geser> and contact upstream that they should also fix the other implicit declarations
[21:31] <lfaraone> geser: thanks, building in PPA now.
[21:40] <lfaraone> what's the best way to detect at build-time if a package is being built for Ubuntu?
[21:41] <c_korn> lfaraone: if [ "$(lsb_release -is)" = "Ubuntu" ] ; then echo blub ; fi
[21:42] <lfaraone> c_korn: hm. I tried to use http://paste.ubuntu.com/409201/ in my rules file, but when I sent it off for PPA building it looks like the "else" code was executed.
[21:43] <c_korn> lfaraone: you need the quotes
[21:45] <lfaraone> c_korn: mk. would it be worth reuploading to Debian to fix that (I'm DM) so we can sync rather than merge,
[21:45] <lfaraone> ... or is that too trivial.
[21:46] <c_korn> lfaraone: I am not a MOTU actually. but syncing is always easier than merging.
[21:46] <c_korn> I already included that in the scilab package in Debian
[21:47] <c_korn> s/already/also/
[22:07] <lfaraone> geser: there's one error remaining: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/43108938/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-amd64.squeak-vm_1%3A3.11.3%2Bsvn2147-1ubuntu1.pp1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[22:39] <lfaraone> c_korn: very odd: unless I'm reading https://edge.launchpad.net/~lfaraone/+archive/ppa/+build/1625944 wrong, https://edge.launchpad.net/~lfaraone/+archive/ppa/+build/1625944/+files/autokey_0.61.7-2~preppa1_all.deb is depending on  "-qt", when it should be "-gtk" on Ubuntu. ( DSC: https://edge.launchpad.net/~lfaraone/+archive/ppa/+files/autokey_0.61.7-2~preppa1.dsc)
[22:39] <lfaraone> c_korn: (I changed to the test you provided)
[22:40] <c_korn> lfaraone: just add an echo command to see which branch it takes
[22:41] <lfaraone> c_korn: so I'd write at the end, "echo debian/autokey.substvars contains `cat debian/autokey.substvars`", right?
[22:42] <c_korn> echo akdefaulttype=gtk | tee debian/autokey.substvars;
[23:06] <lfaraone> c_korn: per http://launchpadlibrarian.net/43113334/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-i386.autokey_0.61.7-2~preppa3_FULLYBUILT.txt.gz , it's expanding the lsb_release command to ""
[23:08] <c_korn> try with: if [ "$$(lsb_release -is)" = "Ubuntu" ] ; then
[23:10] <c_korn> if [ "$$(lsb_release --id -s)" = "Ubuntu" ] ; then
[23:10] <c_korn> I use this successfully in the scilab package