| lightnin | Trying to upload a new package to my PPA, but dput keeps giving me this error: Checksum doesn't match for ...diff.gz | 00:06 |
|---|---|---|
| lightnin | I built the source package with PDE build, signed it with debsign... am I missing something? | 00:07 |
| maxb | PDE build? You mean pdebuild? That's not an acronym :-) | 00:11 |
| maxb | that checksum error implies the .diff.gz you've got isn't the one that was built at the time the .changes you are trying to upload was built | 00:12 |
| lightnin | maxb: Hmmm... thanks. Yeah, sorry -- pdebuild | 00:18 |
| lightnin | maxb: So would this be a good command to build a source package using pdebuild: DIST=jaunty pdebuild --buildresult ../ | 00:19 |
| maxb | uhm. I've never used --buildresult myself, which makes me wonder if it might be related to your problem | 00:20 |
| maxb | Typically I won't bother with pbuilder if I'm just building a source package for a PPA upload | 00:21 |
| lightnin | Oh, ok. | 00:21 |
| lightnin | So I should probably just use debuild, eh? | 00:21 |
| lightnin | maxb: Ok, debuild worked. I'm thinking of releasing this package as a download on our website too - so I figured I'd be as kosher as possible and use pdebuild. But I guess it doesn't matter as long as pdebuild is able to build it... | 00:24 |
| maxb | pdebuild is useful for ensuring the binary packages build in a clean environment | 00:25 |
| maxb | However for a PPA upload you want a source only build anyway | 00:25 |
| maxb | I suspect the --buildresult ../ as the root of your problems, because I can't imagine what else it could be | 00:26 |
| === mcurrington is now known as mrcurrington | ||
| lightnin | maxb: Many thanks for your help! | 00:34 |
| IntuitiveNipple | Do I need to subscribe ubuntu-release or ubuntu-sponsors for a Universe package (apt-cacher) bug fix ? | 01:11 |
| ajmitch | ~ubuntu-sponsors | 01:16 |
| IntuitiveNipple | thanks ajmitch | 01:19 |
| asac | jdong: i am trusted to do the right hting | 02:17 |
| asac | sometimes i add stuff before consulting them | 02:17 |
| asac | but i always consult them | 02:17 |
| asac | usually we should consult them first | 02:18 |
| jdong | asac: thanks for clarifying; I'd assume after some point there'd be a level of trust built where they trust that you will make decisions that are reasonable to them | 02:54 |
| asac | jdong: right. its officially not that way | 02:57 |
| asac | inofficially i might act that way if needed though ;) | 02:57 |
| jdong | right, understandably so :) | 02:57 |
| jdong | I guess the point is things that sound absurdly bureaucratic in legalese can work out in practice | 02:57 |
| jdong | (at least the point I was trying to bring up in that discussion) | 02:57 |
| asac | well. in practive we have this: | 02:58 |
| asac | we do stuff and have to discuss upstream by first beta | 02:58 |
| asac | in security updates i really try to avoid any changes so we are safe | 02:58 |
| jdong | ah | 03:00 |
| jdong | does that cover just the Mozilla source/codebase, or also things like our debian/ packaging changes? | 03:01 |
| jdong | (now I'm just asking out of pure curiousity) | 03:01 |
| === traveller_ is now known as traveller | ||
| Ciemon | Laney: when you've 5 mins, ping me please. | 06:34 |
| EzraR | there is a command to download a source package from debians repo is there not? anyone know? | 06:47 |
| persia | pull-debian-source might work. | 06:58 |
| persia | Alternately, dget from the .dsc URL (found in various places, but always at packages.qa.debian.org if nowhere else) | 06:58 |
| EzraR | seems pull-debian-source is broken, im pretty sure that is what i was looking for thnx | 07:06 |
| persia | Please fix :) | 07:06 |
| EzraR | hehe | 07:06 |
| EzraR | i was just going to look | 07:06 |
| EzraR | ok fixed | 07:21 |
| persia | Excellent. Do you use bzr? If so, please submit a merge proposal to lp:ubuntu-dev-tools. If not, please file a bug with the patch. | 07:22 |
| EzraR | yeah i will, i just was going through the bug reports to see if it was reproted already etc... | 07:25 |
| EzraR | i find it strange that it hasent been reported, maybe people dont really use it or it doesnt effect all packages | 07:26 |
| persia | most of the users of ubuntu-dev-tools are, unsuprisingly, developers, so bugs tend to get swatted on discovery (but not always). | 07:26 |
| EzraR | persia want to try it out on a random package for me? if you get the error i would feel a little better about it :) | 07:30 |
| persia | works for me, no error. | 07:31 |
| EzraR | hmm | 07:32 |
| EzraR | persia: are you using karmic? | 07:34 |
| persia | no. | 07:36 |
| EzraR | what package did you try it on? | 07:37 |
| persia | hello-debhelper | 07:37 |
| dholbach | good morning | 07:39 |
| ajmitch | hi | 07:39 |
| dholbach | hey ajmitch | 07:39 |
| Rhonda | wgrant, persia: Haven't heard about the sdl issue in some days and seen no mail to the bug neither - what's the plan? :) | 07:41 |
| ajmitch | dholbach: bug 559059 is committed if you want to check it out | 07:59 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 559059 in ubuntuwire-website "Please update rcbugs to always use the current development release" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/559059 | 07:59 |
| dholbach | ajmitch: WOW, that was quick | 07:59 |
| ajmitch | really didn't take long to do | 08:00 |
| persia | I don't agree with that bug though. | 08:00 |
| persia | I think we ought align with DIF. | 08:00 |
| dholbach | good work | 08:00 |
| persia | pre-DIF, we'd do better to concentrate on SRUs for RCbugs. | 08:00 |
| persia | Rhonda: I wasn't able to come to any useful conclusions regarding consumers of the regression: do you think we should just push the patch? | 08:01 |
| dholbach | persia: it had karmic a few minutes before | 08:01 |
| persia | I know. It had karmic too long, but I think the fix is too large a hammer. | 08:01 |
| dholbach | persia: maybe file a separate bug so that we can get a separate view for "sru stuff" | 08:01 |
| ajmitch | dholbach: that's because I made a mistake in what should still be default, it was meant to be karmic until DIF & then switched | 08:01 |
| ajmitch | though lucid was always available | 08:01 |
| ajmitch | persia: the simple way is for me to just disable the part of the cronjob that looks up the current relese from LP | 08:02 |
| ajmitch | which was as quick & hacky as http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ajmitch/%2Bjunk/ubuntu-scripts/annotate/head:/ubuntu_series.py | 08:02 |
| dholbach | thanks a bunch ajmitch | 08:02 |
| ajmitch | np | 08:03 |
| persia | dholbach: Every release is available, one just has to enter the right URL. | 08:03 |
| persia | ajmitch: heh, OK. If you happen to figure out how to make it work magically, that'd be cool too :) | 08:03 |
| ajmitch | persia: sure, I could hack something into there now to only run it a certain number of weeks after the current release is open | 08:04 |
| ajmitch | but that sounds like work | 08:04 |
| dholbach | I think it makes sense if it defaults to the current development release and has a "nav bar" to the supported releases | 08:04 |
| ajmitch | dholbach: right, I was going to add that, I should do that now | 08:05 |
| dholbach | where nav bar is really just "a bunch of links" :) | 08:05 |
| dholbach | ajmitch: you are a man of awesome | 08:05 |
| dholbach | rcbugs is such a brilliant tool | 08:05 |
| persia | Indeed. | 08:06 |
| ajmitch | it's a shame it's so ugly underneath :) | 08:07 |
| persia | shhh! | 08:08 |
| ajmitch | as long as noone looks at the code... | 08:08 |
| ajmitch | ok, looks ugly, but the links are there for each release | 08:13 |
| ajmitch | see if the bugs listed match reality | 08:13 |
| Rhonda | persia: Not sure wether people really complained about the fix that did stir this kind of regression, at least I never heard of any drag'n'drop issues. | 08:13 |
| persia | Rhonda: So, if you recommend it be applied, I'll apply it (or if you prepare a candidate, I'll upload it), but I'd like a firm recommendation as you've looked into this much more than I. | 08:15 |
| persia | (unless wgrant is already preparing an upload) | 08:15 |
| Rhonda | persia: Just in case, gentoo did pick up on that patch already. :) | 08:24 |
| persia | We should all really grant gentoo the appreciation they deserve: they apply patches faster than most of us, and get testing feedback quickly. | 08:27 |
| Rhonda | :) | 08:31 |
| ajmitch | what an amusing cross-post on ubuntu-devel-discuss | 09:01 |
| === traveller_ is now known as traveller | ||
| arand | I was planning on reporting https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/virtualbox-ose/+bug/562187 straigt to debian, without testing specifically on a debian install, since it's an upstream issue, is that an ok practice for this case? | 12:04 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 562187 in virtualbox-ose "BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 61s! [modprobe :66]" [Undecided,Confirmed] | 12:04 |
| persia | I generally prefer to see things tested in Debian if being reported to Debian. | 12:08 |
| persia | An example of what you haven't tested is whether this issue expresses itself with a Debian kernel. | 12:08 |
| persia | But there's no reason not to report directly upstream if it's an upstream issue. | 12:09 |
| === dholbach_ is now known as dholbach | ||
| arand | persia: True... well, I won't be able to test it, so that'll pretty much be leaving debian to find out for itself... | 12:12 |
| arand | persia: It's reported already to furthest upstream (vbox), and fixed in SVN there, figured it would apply to debian... but yea, that's just an assumption. | 12:13 |
| persia | arand: The trick is to send all the bugs we can to Debian without ever sending them a bug that doesn't affect Debian. | 12:15 |
| === rgreening_ is now known as rgreening | ||
| Laney | Ciemon: hiya | 13:00 |
| Ciemon | hiya, ok for a quick msg? | 13:01 |
| Laney | absolutely | 13:01 |
| Laney | I just noticed bug 496274 needs a SRU ack and has been sitting for months. Could someone on the team please poke it? | 13:22 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 496274 in haskell-src-exts "No-change source rebuild necessary to make installable" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/496274 | 13:22 |
| arand | If game for some more SRU, there's Bug #510571 that's a bit mouldy as well. | 13:31 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 510571 in virtualbox-ose "Lucid guest won't boot with acpi in virtualbox" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/510571 | 13:31 |
| MTecknology | I ran dput without speficying where it should go and I got this - Rejected: The signer of this package has no upload rights to this distribution's primary archive. Did you mean to upload to a PPA? | 15:08 |
| MTecknology | mr. error is right, but where the heck did I try to upload to :S | 15:08 |
| james_w | ubuntu | 15:09 |
| james_w | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/Uploading#Avoiding%20uploading%20to%20the%20wrong%20place | 15:10 |
| MTecknology | james_w: thanks | 15:13 |
| joaopinto | can someone help me getting libuser into a buildable state in the repository ? | 15:54 |
| joaopinto | the fix is trivial, I would spend too much time research all the required process to get it in :P | 15:54 |
| james_w | joaopinto: you have a patch? | 15:55 |
| joaopinto | james_w, kind off, the easier wayt to fix requires to run autoreconf, the patch would be huge | 15:56 |
| joaopinto | I have added AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR([m4]) to configure.in and ran autoreconf | 15:56 |
| joaopinto | it will build and install file with the updated autoconf* files | 15:56 |
| joaopinto | the AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR([m4]) was just to fix a warning with the newer autoconf | 15:57 |
| james_w | right | 15:57 |
| james_w | but what actually fixes the problem? | 15:57 |
| joaopinto | the problem is within aclocal.m4 | 15:58 |
| joaopinto | which uses: from distutils import sysconfig; print sysconfig.get_python_lib(0,0) | 15:59 |
| joaopinto | to detect the python install dir | 15:59 |
| joaopinto | regenerating aclocal will replace it with a function that detects the proper path | 16:01 |
| joaopinto | but regenerating aclocal will require to regenerate the automake/autoconf files | 16:02 |
| joaopinto | my goal is to make usermode installable, I have a requirement to use it :\ | 16:03 |
| james_w | so would a targeted patch to change that function be the best idea? | 16:05 |
| joaopinto | does it make sense such an effort for a package which does not currently build/install ? | 16:06 |
| james_w | well, it sounds like you need it? | 16:07 |
| joaopinto | is there a bug automatically generated because of FTBFS or should I file a new one ? | 16:07 |
| james_w | you can file a new one | 16:08 |
| james_w | we don't need one though | 16:08 |
| joaopinto | james_w, a smaller patch against configure would make the approval easier ? | 16:10 |
| james_w | yeah | 16:11 |
| joaopinto | ufff, ok | 16:11 |
| james_w | push up a bzr branch and I'll take a look | 16:11 |
| joaopinto | does any know the equivalent to from distutils import sysconfig; print sysconfig.get_python_lib(0,0) to get site-packages ? | 16:12 |
| joaopinto | I mean the site-packages path | 16:12 |
| james_w | the build log from the failure has some code | 16:13 |
| joaopinto | hum, a simpler fix would be to disable the python module building :P | 16:14 |
| james_w | no, that uses sysconfig.get_python_lib() | 16:14 |
| joaopinto | james_w, hum, ok so I need to figure why it is using site-packages instead of the sysconfig return | 16:21 |
| joaopinto | argh, it's the (0,0 on the get_python_lib() | 16:22 |
| james_w | no, it's not is it? | 16:22 |
| james_w | it may be different versions of python | 16:22 |
| joaopinto | yup | 16:22 |
| joaopinto | >>> sysconfig.get_python_lib(0,0,prefix='something') | 16:23 |
| joaopinto | 'something/lib/python2.6/site-packages' | 16:23 |
| joaopinto | >>> sysconfig.get_python_lib() | 16:23 |
| joaopinto | '/usr/lib/python2.6/dist-packages' | 16:23 |
| joaopinto | actually it's the "prefix" parameter | 16:23 |
| james_w | yes | 16:23 |
| joaopinto | there is a bug with get_python_lib(, assuming I am reading the docs properly | 16:25 |
| joaopinto | "If prefix is given, it is used as either the prefix instead of PREFIX, or as the exec-prefix instead of EXEC_PREFIX if plat_specific is true" | 16:26 |
| joaopinto | I am not setting plat_specific to try, but setting a prefix will do so | 16:26 |
| joaopinto | s/try/true | 16:26 |
| joaopinto | james_w, 4 lines fix: http://pastebin.org/149302 | 16:44 |
| james_w | hmm, please push it to a bzr branch so that I can review a whole fix | 16:45 |
| joaopinto | hum, I am not used with bzr for packaging, you just want me to import the entire source+debian dir to a bzr branch ? | 16:47 |
| james_w | bzr branch lp:ubuntu/libuser | 16:47 |
| james_w | make the changes, commit, push to lp:~joaopinto/ubuntu/lucid/libuser/fix-ftbs | 16:48 |
| james_w | then propose for merging | 16:48 |
| joaopinto | ok | 16:48 |
| joaopinto | james_w, how I do I propose for merging ? | 16:52 |
| james_w | joaopinto: bzr lp-open and then click the link in the page that opens in your browser | 16:52 |
| joaopinto | hum, I didn't take care of the changelog | 16:54 |
| joaopinto | hum, now that I look into the changelog | 16:56 |
| joaopinto | * debian/rules: | 16:56 |
| joaopinto | - Adapted python2.6, by changing site-package to $(call py_sitename_sh, $*) | 16:56 |
| joaopinto | it was supposed to be fixed on the previous change | 16:56 |
| joaopinto | james_w, I need to add a changelog entry and bumpt the version to ubuntu2 right ? | 16:58 |
| james_w | yes | 16:58 |
| joaopinto | grr, it uses dpath, is it a requirement to use the existing patch system for the configure patch ? | 16:59 |
| joaopinto | dpatch | 16:59 |
| james_w | yes | 16:59 |
| joaopinto | grr, grr, grr :P | 16:59 |
| === ttx_ is now known as ttx | ||
| joaopinto | james_w, propose to merge done | 17:40 |
| joaopinto | james_w, do I need to poke someone else now ? | 17:47 |
| james_w | joaopinto: so you have confirmed that the package will now build with your change? | 18:21 |
| james_w | joaopinto: patching just configure is usually bad as changes may be overwritten as it is a generated file. You have confirmed that if it is regenerated it will retain this change or an equivalent one? | 18:22 |
| joaopinto | james_w, yes, build & installed on lucid | 18:22 |
| joaopinto | james_w, regeneration should be done with recent tools wich will override aclocal with a correct function to detect the python paths | 18:23 |
| joaopinto | that was my initial approach | 18:24 |
| james_w | ok | 18:24 |
| james_w | where does the macro that is used come from? | 18:24 |
| joaopinto | from the local alocal.m4 | 18:25 |
| joaopinto | the patch could also be extended to aclocal.m4 but that is also a file expected to be re-gerated | 18:26 |
| joaopinto | ...generated.. | 18:26 |
| james_w | where does aclocal get that part from? | 18:27 |
| james_w | aclocal is like a cached copy of macros from elsewhere | 18:27 |
| joaopinto | hum, good question | 18:28 |
| james_w | another way to ask would be what statement in configure.ac expands to include the thing you are patching? | 18:28 |
| joaopinto | I assume it's AM_PATH_PYTHON | 18:30 |
| joaopinto | which probably uses /usr/share/aclocal-1.11/python.m4 (from alocal-1.10) | 18:31 |
| === dpm is now known as dpm-afk | ||
| james_w | joaopinto: that file still uses prefix= here | 18:59 |
| joaopinto | james_w, you mean configure ? | 18:59 |
| james_w | /usr/share/aclocal-1.11/python.m4 | 19:00 |
| joaopinto | ah, hum, I didn't check the alocal.m4 after the regeneration | 19:01 |
| joaopinto | james_w, aren't we spending too much time for such a simple fix ? | 19:01 |
| james_w | you wanted to get it fixed | 19:02 |
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| james_w | joaopinto: why don't we just change the packaging to not expect the upstream build system to have put the file in site-packages? | 19:11 |
| joaopinto | james_w, I want, as long it's a reasonable effort, I really don't see any risk with the current patch, and I can't see the advantage of further effort | 19:14 |
| joaopinto | there are plenty of other things which I would like to do and I will not be able by spending more time on this package | 19:15 |
| james_w | joaopinto: well, your patch could easily regress in the future | 19:15 |
| joaopinto | james_w, I really don't care at this time, a better patch maybe provided when someone else as the time/interest to do so | 19:17 |
| joaopinto | james_w, IMHO a future-concerned patch would regenerate the entire autoconf/automake/aclocal chain | 19:21 |
| joaopinto | I did the cherry picked patch to make the review/approval easier | 19:21 |
| james_w | well, you haven't convinced me that the regeneration would work, as it appears a regenerated file would produce the same code | 19:22 |
| * james_w has a packaging fix. I'll test and upload after dinner | 19:24 | |
| joaopinto | james_w, uff: bzr branch lp:ubuntu/libuser && cd libuser && autoreconf && ./configure | 19:26 |
| joaopinto | check the configure output for the detected python modules dir | 19:26 |
| joaopinto | james_w, will you approve my merge ? | 20:02 |
| james_w | no, I don't think so | 20:03 |
| joaopinto | ok, thanks for your effort, I will try to find someone else willing to help | 20:05 |
| joaopinto | what is the team/group that can approve an univer FTBFS patch ? | 20:08 |
| joaopinto | how can I file a bug for a package which is not installable ? | 20:10 |
| james_w | joaopinto: fix uploaded | 20:13 |
| james_w | http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/lucid/libuser/lucid/revision/11 | 20:13 |
| arand | joaopinto: Find the package in LP and report the bug there? | 20:15 |
| blueyed | Is there a convenient way to try applying all debian patches to a source package, before trying to build it? just to see if they fail? | 20:19 |
| blueyed | At best, something which incorporates info from what-patch and works with any patch system. | 20:19 |
| james_w | ./debian/rules patch should work for the majority | 20:20 |
| blueyed | ah. sure. thanks. | 20:21 |
| blueyed | next one: what's the most convenient way to build from the current dir using sbuild, like sdebuild for pbuilder? Currently I "bzr builddeb -S" then "sbuild -A -d lucid ../*.dsc" | 20:24 |
| james_w | dunno | 20:24 |
| james_w | that's the way I use | 20:24 |
| blueyed | ok. not too bad - but this could be one step IMHO. | 20:25 |
| blueyed | What apt-caching mechanism are you using? I'm using apt-cacher-ng since a while, and it's really great to get the packages a lot faster when the first sbuild failed! :) | 20:26 |
| joaopinto | james_w, will you be proposing your patch to fix the FTFBS package ? | 20:27 |
| joaopinto | james_w, ah, it's already uploaded, thanks | 20:30 |
| joaopinto | james_w, any idea on how long it takes to get built/available on the repository | 20:30 |
| joaopinto | ? | 20:30 |
| james_w | joaopinto: it's already built for some architectures: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libuser/1:0.56.9.dfsg.1-1ubuntu3 | 20:31 |
| james_w | it's in NEW though, so will need to be checked and allowed in | 20:31 |
| joaopinto | ok thanks | 20:32 |
| micahg | directhex: do you have a PPA for the latest moon/moonlight? | 21:20 |
| sebner | bdrung: don't forget to merge audacious-plugins or .. or ... or I'll file a bug! :P | 21:21 |
| bdrung | sebner: don't panic ;) i was away for three hours. this gave audacious enough time to build. | 21:21 |
| sebner | bdrung: right and br0ke on upgrade :P | 21:22 |
| bdrung | sebner: time will cure the wounds :P | 21:23 |
| directhex | micahg, nothing newer than in the archive. upstream's build system is painful enough without throwing svn snapshots into the mix | 21:23 |
| micahg | directhex: k, someone asked for a moon PPA, so I thought I'd ask | 21:23 |
| * sebner hugs bdrung :) | 21:23 | |
| micahg | directhex: did upstream have any idea what is causing xul192 to crash with gluezilla? | 21:24 |
| directhex | micahg, yeah, bad patch. i uploaded a fixed gluezilla earlier | 21:24 |
| micahg | directhex: really, awesome :) | 21:25 |
| * micahg will have to look | 21:25 | |
| bdrung | sebner: uploaded | 21:49 |
| * sebner ^5 bdrung :) | 21:51 | |
| * bdrung ^5 sebner. | 21:51 | |
| bdrung | sebner: are you audacious user? | 21:51 |
| sebner | bdrung: from time to time, yes | 21:52 |
| bdrung | me, too | 21:52 |
| sebner | bdrung: my main player is banshee but for quick audio stuff I use audacious :) | 21:52 |
| bdrung | my main player is xmms2 | 21:52 |
| sebner | heh | 21:52 |
| sebner | bdrung: any good? | 21:53 |
| bdrung | just look at my debian qa page ;) | 21:53 |
| bdrung | sebner: any good? what? | 21:53 |
| sebner | bdrung: xmms2 | 21:53 |
| sebner | bdrung: gui gui giu | 21:54 |
| bdrung | sebner: i control it mainly with my remote control and use xmms2-notify | 21:54 |
| bdrung | sebner: lxmusic is quite promising. gxmms2 works (but doesn't look nice). | 21:55 |
| sebner | bdrung: any difference to audacious? | 21:55 |
| bdrung | gapless playback was my reason to switch. | 21:56 |
| bdrung | IIRC | 21:56 |
| sebner | ah Ic | 21:56 |
| bdrung | and: cover support for flac files | 21:57 |
| bdrung | xmms2-notify shows the covers embedded into the flac files | 21:57 |
| bdrung | sebner: you remind me that i want to package xmms2-notify | 21:57 |
| bdrung | damn, eclipse is still fucked up | 21:58 |
| ajmitch | how badly broken? | 21:58 |
| bdrung | some user have problems with xulrunner (freezing, etc) | 21:58 |
| bdrung | and i cannot reproduce it | 21:59 |
| sebner | bdrung: haha, glad to hear | 21:59 |
| bdrung | sebner: glad? | 21:59 |
| kliango | is it still possible to synch a universe packages with the appropriate version from unstable? | 21:59 |
| sebner | bdrung: that I could remind you of something | 21:59 |
| ajmitch | kliango: possible, depending on what changes there are | 21:59 |
| bdrung | sebner: aha, that wasn't the response to eclipse | 22:00 |
| sebner | bdrung: of course now! I will give eclipse a deeper test tomorrow, let's see if I can reproduce anythin | 22:00 |
| bdrung | kliango: bug fix sync: yes | 22:00 |
| kliango | is a bug report enough or is there a standard way for a request? | 22:01 |
| kliango | bdrung^^^ | 22:01 |
| bdrung | kliango: a bug report is enough | 22:02 |
| bdrung | kliango: ping me and it will be fast processed | 22:03 |
| === joaopinto_ is now known as joaopinto | ||
| kliango | bdrung, thx, is this always possible or only until the release ? | 22:10 |
| bdrung | kliango: until some days before the release. after that point you have to follow the SRU process. then you will cherry-pick fixes instead of syncing a version. | 22:11 |
| kliango | bdrung, thx, i will do a rebuild to test everything works fine, then you will get an email | 22:13 |
| bdrung | kliango: email? | 22:14 |
| kliango | no? | 22:14 |
| bdrung | kliango: just paste the bug links here in irc | 22:15 |
| YokoZar | Is it still possible to do a sync request for a new version of a game? | 22:24 |
| simon-o | YokoZar, I don't think so. which game and version? | 22:26 |
| YokoZar | simon-o: Hedgewars made a new release and it's needed for online play (version 0.9.13) -- upstream says they were specifically targeting this release for Lucid too. | 22:27 |
| YokoZar | simon-o: I could make another upload myself but I'd prefer to just use the Debian package | 22:28 |
| bdrung | YokoZar: you need a FFe: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess | 22:28 |
| YokoZar | bdrung: right right of course but would syncing be a good idea or would a normal upload just be the right solution | 22:29 |
| bdrung | YokoZar: syncing/merging is preferred over a normal upload | 22:29 |
| simon-o | YokoZar, see bug 555082. There's a discussion | 22:30 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 555082 in hedgewars "new version 0.9.13 released ... ppp (pretty please package)" [Unknown,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/555082 | 22:30 |
| YokoZar | bdrung: Right, but at this point we've been frozen for a good enough period of time I'm worried we've diverged | 22:30 |
| bdrung | YokoZar: make a diff of the debian directories and compare the sync to the normal upload | 22:30 |
| YokoZar | bdrung: I'll make sure the debian version works right and put it in the bug report and then mark it as a FFE request | 22:31 |
| bdrung | yes | 22:32 |
| jpds | micahg: Ping. | 22:34 |
| micahg | jpds: pong | 22:34 |
| jpds | micahg: Hi, any idea why xul-ext-noscript has been removed from the archive? | 22:35 |
| micahg | jpds: too fast of a moving target as they do a release about twice a month | 22:35 |
| jpds | micahg: Hmm, OK. Shame. | 22:35 |
| micahg | jpds: usually security fixes, so it really should be updated through -security often which is too problematicv | 22:36 |
| micahg | jpds: I've been using the version frmo addons.mozilla.org without issue for quite a whil;e | 22:36 |
| jpds | Would be nice if https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/mozilla-noscript had such a message. | 22:36 |
| micahg | jpds: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mozilla-noscript/+changelog | 22:37 |
| jpds | micahg: Aha, hmm. | 22:38 |
| jpds | Thanks for the info. | 22:38 |
| micahg | jpds: we might do an extensions PPA at some point, that seems the only sane way to do it | 22:38 |
| joaopinto | is it acceptable for a package to generate/change an /etc file on it's postinst ? | 22:41 |
| Nafallo | micahg: do you know if adblock-plus will be dropped as a package as well? | 22:50 |
| bdrung | Nafallo: it will stay | 22:51 |
| Nafallo | interesting | 22:53 |
| sebp | hi, I tried to upload a package to my ppa, but if I run dput I get: Please select a .changes file to upload. Tried to upload: build | 23:03 |
| sebp | I provide the .changes file, though | 23:03 |
| === db is now known as Guest74167 | ||
| domibel | hi, it would be nice if a motu could take care of bug #562609 | 23:20 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 562609 in slicer "Missing modules" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/562609 | 23:20 |
| blizzkid | Hi ppl, when packaging, in a control/rules file is it possible to have another package removed? "Conflicts" only indicates it conflicts apparently? | 23:31 |
| micahg | blizzkid: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html | 23:32 |
| bdrung | blizzkid: you want remove a package in debian/rules? it's possible to conflict with an package on build time. | 23:32 |
| blizzkid | bdrung: let me clarify: if I install eg wicd, it'll remove network-manager. Now if I install my-own-package, it has to remove some-other-packge. Is that done through "control" or through "rules"? | 23:34 |
| bdrung | blizzkid: in debian/control | 23:34 |
| bdrung | conflicts | 23:34 |
| blizzkid | bdrung: I guess automatic removal only works with apt-get/aptitude? | 23:35 |
| domibel | bdrung, please fast process 562609 | 23:35 |
| bdrung | blizzkid: yes | 23:35 |
| blizzkid | ok, thx bdrung, will try adding it to my ppa then to test ;) | 23:36 |
| bdrung | blizzkid: already commented ;) | 23:36 |
| blizzkid | bdrung: what? *confused* | 23:37 |
| bdrung | domibel: already commented ;) | 23:37 |
| bdrung | blizzkid: the last message was for domibel | 23:38 |
| blizzkid | oh, ok :) | 23:38 |
| bdrung | it's too late -> my brain needs a rest | 23:38 |
| domibel | bdrung, thanks for taking care of this | 23:39 |
| bdrung | domibel: can you test a sync and tranform the bug in a sync request? | 23:42 |
| domibel | bdrung. a sync might break things, the provided patch is minimal and already included in unstable, i prefer the patch | 23:45 |
| bdrung | k | 23:45 |
| bdrung | domibel: but you have to add breaks & replaces, because you move a file from one package to another | 23:46 |
| quidnunc | Can someone confirm for me that ifhp doesn't show up in the repositories (e..g apt-cache search) | 23:47 |
| bdrung | quidnunc: confirmed | 23:49 |
| quidnunc | bdrung: Is that expected? | 23:50 |
| bdrung | quidnunc: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifhp | 23:50 |
| quidnunc | bdrung: What should I take away from that? | 23:51 |
| bdrung | quidnunc: you see that it should be in lucid and that it wasn't removed | 23:52 |
| bdrung | i am still confused | 23:52 |
| bdrung | quidnunc: you might ask this question in ubuntu-devel | 23:56 |
| quidnunc | bdrung: Will do, thanks. | 23:56 |
| bdrung | quidnunc: i have no explanation why it's missing | 23:57 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!