[00:08] <lvh> Hello!
[00:09] <lvh> Why do Blueprint names start with their project?
[00:09] <lvh> Why aren't blueprints project-local in the first place?
[00:10] <wgrant> lvh: They are project-local.
[00:11] <lvh> Huh. I must be misremembering behavior I thought I saw then :-)
[00:12] <wgrant> I just created two with the same name in different projects on staging.
[00:14] <lvh> I guess it was because I was looking for blueprints to link to a branch and the keyword was a common english word
[00:14] <lvh> then again, a branch being linked to someone elses blueprint could make sense
[00:26] <MTecknology> Is there any way to easily make a kernel in a PPA? only one version of the kernel, only one .config?
[00:28] <wgrant> MTecknology: You should probably ask the kernel maintainers.
[00:30] <bitmonk1> MTecknology: look at kernel-package in debian / ubuntu, provides make-kpkg command for creating kernel debs.
[00:31] <bitmonk1> then, you should be able to jam that into a ppa just as any other deb.  not sure if there is a more specialized tool for straight LP
[00:32] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: oh.. nifty - I'll have to try it :)
[00:33] <wgrant> You'd probably be better off using the normal kernel packaging in PPA mode.
[00:37] <MTecknology> wgrant: I was trying to find some idiot proof wiki for it
[01:08] <bitmonk1> MTecknology: ubuntu wiki should have something on building a deb in general
[01:10] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I'm trying with make-kpkg - removed some bloat - make clean && rm -R .git - then put it out to my dev system and ran make-kpkg clean and now I'm trying fakeroot make-kpkg--append-to-version=-foo kernel-image kernel-headers
[01:12] <bitmonk1> sounds like you're on the right track ..
[01:12] <bitmonk1> don't forget to hit /etc/kernel-package.conf and put your info in as maintainer
[01:13] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: thanks
[01:14] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: just realized I haven't run make oldconfig yet :P
[02:03] <bitmonk1> MTecknology: have you created a ppa yet?
[02:03] <bitmonk1> and, in general: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA/Uploading
[02:03] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: ya, I have one
[02:03] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I've used it for some apps - never a kernel though
[02:04] <bitmonk1> should be no different.
[02:04] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I suppose once make-kpkg runs it makes everything needed for debuild
[02:04] <bitmonk1> if it is then, i'm interested to know how.  i have been meaning to package some xen kernels for a while..
[02:04] <bitmonk1> make-kpkg should give you a .deb
[02:04] <bitmonk1> or three
[02:05] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: yup - but I can't just run dput on a .deb?
[02:06] <bitmonk1> what distro are you on?
[02:06] <doctormo_> [19:56] *** The topic was set by noodles775!~michael@canonical/launchpad/noodles775 on 20/05/2010 11:32.
[02:06] <doctormo_> [19:56] *** Channel URL: https://launchpad.net
[02:06] <doctormo_> [19:57] *** Channel modes: no colors allowed, no messages from outside
[02:06] <doctormo_> [19:57] *** This channel was created on 26/11/2006 01:42.
[02:07] <doctormo_> [20:08] <bitmonk1> MTecknology: ubuntu wiki should have something on building a deb in general
[02:07] <doctormo_> [20:10] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I'm trying with make-kpkg - removed some bloat - make clean && rm -R .git - then put it out to my dev system and ran make-kpkg clean and now I'm trying fakeroot make-kpkg--append-to-version=-foo kernel-image kernel-headers
[02:07] <doctormo_> [20:12] <bitmonk1> sounds like you're on the right track ..
[02:07] <doctormo_> [20:13] <bitmonk1> don't forget to hit /etc/kernel-package.conf and put your info in as maintainer
[02:07] <doctormo_> [20:13] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: thanks
[02:07] <doctormo_> [20:14] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: just realized I haven't run make oldconfig yet :P
[02:07] <doctormo_> [21:03] <bitmonk1> MTecknology: have you created a ppa yet?
[02:07] <doctormo_> [21:03] <bitmonk1> and, in general: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA/Uploading
[02:07] <doctormo_> [21:03] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: ya, I have one
[02:07] <doctormo_> [21:03] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I've used it for some apps - never a kernel though
[02:07] <bitmonk1> whee
[02:07] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: lucid
[02:07] <MTecknology> doctormo_: have a little accident?
[02:09] <bitmonk1> so, yah, i dunno why i thought you could send a deb.  anyway, i believe make-kpkg debianizes your source tree
[02:09] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: ya, thatt's what I meant with "everything needed for debuild" :)
[02:09] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: works for me :)
[02:10] <bitmonk1> give it a shot, let me know if it doesn't work and i'll throw something together in my local env
[02:10] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: alrighty - I'm fixing up changelog and control - I require another package in mine :P
[02:17] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: debuild -S -sa failed - and ./debian/ went away :(
[02:17] <bitmonk1> O.o
[02:18] <bitmonk1> read the kernel-package documentation, there are a number of ways it can be used.  the default is just to build the entire packages for you, but i suspect it can be used to prepare a package for debuild.
[02:19] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I guess I get to do that again - and then I won't touch anything except for the changlog sig line for signing
[02:19] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I have always been using make all modules_install install for my kernel :P
[02:20] <bitmonk1> sure, that's the quickest path usually, until you want reproducibility ;d
[02:21] <MTecknology> :P
[02:22] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: that's my goal eventually
[02:22] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: actually... I'd like to eventually add a patch to include vbox modules in the kernel and then have a completely monolithic kernel :P
[02:23] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: deletes the debian/ again
[02:27] <bitmonk1> i thought ubu was shipping vbox support in -generic, or at least an enabled kernel, since karmic or prior.  no?
[02:28] <bitmonk1> oh, okay, modules, sure.
[02:29] <bitmonk1> i haven't worried about having a fully monolithic kernel in ages, i forget what exactly the costs of modules are, except having to configure them to load properly.
[02:30] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: i don't think it's that high - but right now I only have my vbox kernels - everything else fits in a 3.9mb lzo image
[02:31] <bitmonk1> interesting, what are you netbooting?
[02:32] <bitmonk1> some kind of specialized system? sounds interesting .
[02:32] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: just my laptop :P
[02:33] <bitmonk1> why the focus on compactness?
[02:33] <MTecknology> i'm psychotic :P
[02:33] <bitmonk1> just, sort of curious.  it's always an interesting challenge to take on.
[02:33] <bitmonk1> hah
[02:33] <bitmonk1> fair enough
[02:33] <MTecknology> my whole system is like this
[02:33] <bitmonk1> masochistic ;d
[02:34] <MTecknology> :P
[02:34] <MTecknology> I've been called that a few times
[02:37] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I ran just 'make-kpkg debian' which builds debian/ but it gets deleted when running debuild -S -sa
[02:38]  * bitmonk1 is more familiar with make-kpkg than debuild, sadly
[02:38] <bitmonk1> something i need to strengthen
[02:38] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I have been using my own kernel al ong time - but now all I want is to put it into a ppa
[02:46] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: maybe I need to add the buildpackage target..
[02:52] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: yuppers... - that's what I needed - now we'll see about making my kernel publicly available :)
[02:53] <bitmonk1> so, what did you have to do?
[02:53] <bitmonk1> change, file-wise, that is?
[02:55] <bitmonk1> i'd just like to note it, as i said, i have been meaning to ppa some kernels myself.
[02:55] <bitmonk1> perhaps there is even a wiki somewhere we could contribute to..
[02:57] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I'd enjoy reading one about this :P
[02:57] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I'll grab the command when this finishes
[02:57] <bitmonk1> well, i'm just asking, what did you have to change to get it to work? could you give me a paste of the commands you ran or something? i may turn it into documentation.
[02:57] <bitmonk1> yah pls do :)
[02:57] <MTecknology> just one line actually
[02:58] <bitmonk1> sweet.
[03:12] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: apparenlty make-kpkg also compiles it on the system :P
[03:12] <MTecknology> make-kpkg buildpackage *
[03:12] <bitmonk1> i believe you may be able to pass it options that don't, however.
[03:12] <MTecknology> oh
[03:12] <bitmonk1> yeah it will for sure
[03:13] <bitmonk1> that's its' typical usage, outside of ppa-land, where you make some debs and put them in an apache folder or something..
[03:13] <MTecknology> i like ppa-land
[03:14] <bitmonk1> sure, just saying, make-kpkg far predates ppa-land.  i'm not 100% sure, but i suspect you can tell it not to build.
[03:14] <bitmonk1> another option is, you can apt-get source the kernel you want to modify, and just touch the .config and Changelog and such
[03:14] <bitmonk1> maybe rename it kernel-mteck-mono-vbox or something
[03:20] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: if this works you should take a peak :)
[03:26] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: so far it's built 2 .debs and a xxxx_source.build
[03:26] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: i'm assuming the other parts are coming that are needed for a ppa build :P
[03:57] <bitmonk1> MTecknology: url?
[03:57] <bitmonk1> oh i thought you meant the farm, your box
[03:57] <bitmonk1> absolutely i would like to take a look.
[04:00] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: farm? my farm is one box :P
[04:00] <bitmonk1> no i meant, i thought like, launchpad was building them..
[04:01] <MTecknology> oh
[04:01] <MTecknology> not yet :(
[04:08] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: :S - i keep seeming to find that make-kpkg isn't designed for making a package that can be uploaded to ppa
[04:09] <bitmonk1> perhaps, and if so, i apologize, but it should produce a source deb, and it seems that you should be able to modify a source deb for ppa upload.
[04:09] <bitmonk1> i'm not quite a ppa upload expert, to be fair.  just trying to help.
[04:10] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: I appreciate the help - and I hear make-kpkg used a lot - just haven't seen it used for this - I've been searching online for a while
[05:09] <MTecknology> bitmonk1: it seems only smart people that hate docs do this :P
[12:43] <FloSoft> hi, i've got following bug: i upgraded my repository from format 6 to 7, now i upgraded my bzr from 1.3 to 2.1 (from launchpad ubuntu ppa) and I've got a lock on the branch (now for 80 hours) i broke that lock now, otherwise i was not able to upload anymore
[12:43] <FloSoft> perhaps the upgrade process finished, but did not removed the lock?
[14:28] <magcius> Loggerhead is down?
[15:06] <thopiekar> hi
[15:06] <thopiekar> is it possible to change the projects "root name"? like of this one? https://launchpad.net/mopedix
[15:22] <beuno> thopiekar, you need to file a question in Launchpad
[15:23] <thopiekar> here, beuno ? https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad
[15:24] <nigelb> thopiekar: yes, there
[15:24] <thopiekar> thanks, nigelb, beuno
[22:56] <humphreybc> How can I unsubscribe our team's mailing list from our project bug mail?
[23:01] <thumper> humphreybc: the team is probably the bug contact
[23:01] <thumper> if it is, it
[23:02] <thumper> will get email
[23:02] <humphreybc> ah
[23:02] <humphreybc> where do I change that?
[23:02] <humphreybc> bug supervisor is set to none
[23:02] <thumper> is the team subscribed to the bugs of the project?
[23:02]  * thumper wonders where that is set
[23:03]  * thumper thinks
[23:03] <thumper> the email contact falls back to the project owner if there is no bug supervisor set
[23:03] <thumper> so the project owner will get the bug mail
[23:03] <thumper> there isn't a setting for turning this off right now
[23:03] <humphreybc> oh
[23:04] <thumper> one thing to do
[23:04] <thumper> is to set up a different bug contact
[23:04] <humphreybc> so project owner = maintainer?
[23:04] <thumper> mostly
[23:04] <humphreybc> so do I have to set up some special account or mailing list?
[23:05] <thumper> if you don't want the email, yes
[23:05] <humphreybc> right
[23:05] <thumper> humphreybc: for ubuntu-manual?
[23:05] <humphreybc> yep
[23:05] <thumper> set up a team called ubuntu-manual-bugs
[23:05] <thumper> get a mailing list
[23:06] <thumper> make it the contact address for the team (somehow)
[23:06] <humphreybc> lol
[23:06] <thumper> and don't subscribe to the mailing list
[23:06] <thumper> at least then
[23:06] <thumper> there are archives if you want to check
[23:06] <thumper> and those who do want the mail
[23:06] <humphreybc> ah ha
[23:06] <humphreybc> okay
[23:06] <thumper> can subscribe
[23:08] <humphreybc> who approves the mailing lists?
[23:09] <bitmonk1> it's up to you, i think, it can be approval based subscription or no.
[23:09] <humphreybc> I just "applied" for a mailing list and it says a Launchpad administrator will review and approve it
[23:09] <humphreybc> I was wondering who does that
[23:20] <humphreybc> thumper: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual-bugs
[23:20] <thumper> humphreybc: they used to be manually approved
[23:20] <thumper> but no longer
[23:20] <humphreybc> I've set it up correctly, and ubuntu-manual-bugs is set to the bug supervisor for our project, but we're still getting bug mail in the main list
[23:21]  * thumper pokes LP
[23:22] <humphreybc> Weird, the main list just got some bug mail from this bug, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual/+bug/584627
[23:22] <thumper> humphreybc: take a look at https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual/+subscribe
[23:22] <humphreybc> but then ubuntu-manual-bugs is apparently getting bug mail too, https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual-bugs/
[23:23] <thumper> humphreybc: are their any team checkboxes?
[23:23] <humphreybc> thumper: http://humphreybc.homeip.net/files/bugs.png
[23:23] <humphreybc> tis what I have
[23:24] <thumper> humphreybc: I'm out of suggestions
[23:24] <thumper> humphreybc: ask a question on the launchpad bugs project
[23:24] <humphreybc> blast! Well I guess we'll wait and see if it gets better
[23:24] <humphreybc> okay, i'll give it a couple of days
[23:25] <humphreybc> maybe it's something to do with old bugs that the main team was originally subscribed to
[23:25] <thumper> wait
[23:25] <thumper> humphreybc: for one of the bugs you didn't want on the main list
[23:25] <thumper> humphreybc: pastebin the raw email
[23:25] <thumper> there are a bunch of email headers that'll help
[23:26] <humphreybc> http://paste.ubuntu.com/438526/
[23:26] <thumper> humphreybc: that isn't all the email
[23:26] <thumper> humphreybc: I want to see all the headers
[23:27] <humphreybc> how can I do that in gmail?
[23:27] <humphreybc> ah
[23:27] <humphreybc> show original
[23:27] <humphreybc> http://paste.ubuntu.com/438527/
[23:29] <thumper> X-Launchpad-Message-Rationale: Registrant (Ubuntu Manual) @ubuntu-manual
[23:29] <thumper> that is the reason you got the mail
[23:30] <thumper> now the question is why it does that
[23:34] <wgrant> That really suggests that the bug supervisor was unset for a little while.
[23:34] <thumper> wgrant: it was
[23:34] <thumper> wgrant: but if the bug supervisor is now set, why is the team still getting emails?
[23:35] <wgrant> Is it?
[23:36] <wgrant> The last email on the list is from just around the time of the original discussion.
[23:36] <wgrant> # Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 22:05:35 -0000
[23:37] <wgrant> Which seems like 31 minutes ago.
[23:37] <wgrant> Note the notifications could take up to 5 minutes after the bug supervisor change to take effect.
[23:38] <humphreybc> they've stopped now... fingers crossed :)
[23:39] <wgrant> (and Launchpad will sometimes lie that emails have been sent an hour in the future, so that may be throwing things off slightly)
[23:44] <bitmonk1> heh.. it's always great when a log of email delivery is created sometime other than when the email is delivered ;d
[23:46] <poolie> hi wgrant
[23:47] <wgrant> Morning poolie.