[00:08] Hello! [00:09] Why do Blueprint names start with their project? [00:09] Why aren't blueprints project-local in the first place? [00:10] lvh: They are project-local. [00:11] Huh. I must be misremembering behavior I thought I saw then :-) [00:12] I just created two with the same name in different projects on staging. [00:14] 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] then again, a branch being linked to someone elses blueprint could make sense [00:26] Is there any way to easily make a kernel in a PPA? only one version of the kernel, only one .config? [00:28] MTecknology: You should probably ask the kernel maintainers. [00:30] MTecknology: look at kernel-package in debian / ubuntu, provides make-kpkg command for creating kernel debs. [00:31] 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] bitmonk1: oh.. nifty - I'll have to try it :) [00:33] You'd probably be better off using the normal kernel packaging in PPA mode. [00:37] wgrant: I was trying to find some idiot proof wiki for it [01:08] MTecknology: ubuntu wiki should have something on building a deb in general [01:10] 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] sounds like you're on the right track .. [01:12] don't forget to hit /etc/kernel-package.conf and put your info in as maintainer [01:13] bitmonk1: thanks [01:14] bitmonk1: just realized I haven't run make oldconfig yet :P [02:03] MTecknology: have you created a ppa yet? [02:03] and, in general: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA/Uploading [02:03] bitmonk1: ya, I have one [02:03] bitmonk1: I've used it for some apps - never a kernel though [02:04] should be no different. [02:04] bitmonk1: I suppose once make-kpkg runs it makes everything needed for debuild [02:04] if it is then, i'm interested to know how. i have been meaning to package some xen kernels for a while.. [02:04] make-kpkg should give you a .deb [02:04] or three [02:05] bitmonk1: yup - but I can't just run dput on a .deb? [02:06] what distro are you on? [02:06] [19:56] *** The topic was set by noodles775!~michael@canonical/launchpad/noodles775 on 20/05/2010 11:32. [02:06] [19:56] *** Channel URL: https://launchpad.net [02:06] [19:57] *** Channel modes: no colors allowed, no messages from outside [02:06] [19:57] *** This channel was created on 26/11/2006 01:42. [02:07] [20:08] MTecknology: ubuntu wiki should have something on building a deb in general [02:07] [20:10] 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] [20:12] sounds like you're on the right track .. [02:07] [20:13] don't forget to hit /etc/kernel-package.conf and put your info in as maintainer [02:07] [20:13] bitmonk1: thanks [02:07] [20:14] bitmonk1: just realized I haven't run make oldconfig yet :P [02:07] [21:03] MTecknology: have you created a ppa yet? [02:07] [21:03] and, in general: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA/Uploading [02:07] [21:03] bitmonk1: ya, I have one [02:07] [21:03] bitmonk1: I've used it for some apps - never a kernel though [02:07] whee [02:07] bitmonk1: lucid [02:07] doctormo_: have a little accident? [02:09] so, yah, i dunno why i thought you could send a deb. anyway, i believe make-kpkg debianizes your source tree [02:09] bitmonk1: ya, thatt's what I meant with "everything needed for debuild" :) [02:09] bitmonk1: works for me :) [02:10] give it a shot, let me know if it doesn't work and i'll throw something together in my local env [02:10] bitmonk1: alrighty - I'm fixing up changelog and control - I require another package in mine :P [02:17] bitmonk1: debuild -S -sa failed - and ./debian/ went away :( [02:17] O.o [02:18] 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] 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] bitmonk1: I have always been using make all modules_install install for my kernel :P [02:20] sure, that's the quickest path usually, until you want reproducibility ;d [02:21] :P [02:22] bitmonk1: that's my goal eventually [02:22] 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] bitmonk1: deletes the debian/ again [02:27] i thought ubu was shipping vbox support in -generic, or at least an enabled kernel, since karmic or prior. no? [02:28] oh, okay, modules, sure. [02:29] 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] 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] interesting, what are you netbooting? [02:32] some kind of specialized system? sounds interesting . [02:32] bitmonk1: just my laptop :P [02:33] why the focus on compactness? [02:33] i'm psychotic :P [02:33] just, sort of curious. it's always an interesting challenge to take on. [02:33] hah [02:33] fair enough [02:33] my whole system is like this [02:33] masochistic ;d [02:34] :P [02:34] I've been called that a few times [02:37] 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] something i need to strengthen [02:38] 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] bitmonk1: maybe I need to add the buildpackage target.. [02:52] bitmonk1: yuppers... - that's what I needed - now we'll see about making my kernel publicly available :) [02:53] so, what did you have to do? [02:53] change, file-wise, that is? [02:55] i'd just like to note it, as i said, i have been meaning to ppa some kernels myself. [02:55] perhaps there is even a wiki somewhere we could contribute to.. [02:57] bitmonk1: I'd enjoy reading one about this :P [02:57] bitmonk1: I'll grab the command when this finishes [02:57] 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] yah pls do :) [02:57] just one line actually [02:58] sweet. [03:12] bitmonk1: apparenlty make-kpkg also compiles it on the system :P [03:12] make-kpkg buildpackage * [03:12] i believe you may be able to pass it options that don't, however. [03:12] oh [03:12] yeah it will for sure [03:13] 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] i like ppa-land [03:14] 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] 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] maybe rename it kernel-mteck-mono-vbox or something [03:20] bitmonk1: if this works you should take a peak :) [03:26] bitmonk1: so far it's built 2 .debs and a xxxx_source.build [03:26] bitmonk1: i'm assuming the other parts are coming that are needed for a ppa build :P [03:57] MTecknology: url? [03:57] oh i thought you meant the farm, your box [03:57] absolutely i would like to take a look. [04:00] bitmonk1: farm? my farm is one box :P [04:00] no i meant, i thought like, launchpad was building them.. [04:01] oh [04:01] not yet :( [04:08] 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] 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] i'm not quite a ppa upload expert, to be fair. just trying to help. [04:10] 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] bitmonk1: it seems only smart people that hate docs do this :P [12:43] 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] perhaps the upgrade process finished, but did not removed the lock? [14:28] Loggerhead is down? [15:06] hi [15:06] is it possible to change the projects "root name"? like of this one? https://launchpad.net/mopedix [15:22] thopiekar, you need to file a question in Launchpad [15:23] here, beuno ? https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad [15:24] thopiekar: yes, there [15:24] thanks, nigelb, beuno [22:56] How can I unsubscribe our team's mailing list from our project bug mail? [23:01] humphreybc: the team is probably the bug contact [23:01] if it is, it [23:02] will get email [23:02] ah [23:02] where do I change that? [23:02] bug supervisor is set to none [23:02] is the team subscribed to the bugs of the project? [23:02] * thumper wonders where that is set [23:03] * thumper thinks [23:03] the email contact falls back to the project owner if there is no bug supervisor set [23:03] so the project owner will get the bug mail [23:03] there isn't a setting for turning this off right now [23:03] oh [23:04] one thing to do [23:04] is to set up a different bug contact [23:04] so project owner = maintainer? [23:04] mostly [23:04] so do I have to set up some special account or mailing list? [23:05] if you don't want the email, yes [23:05] right [23:05] humphreybc: for ubuntu-manual? [23:05] yep [23:05] set up a team called ubuntu-manual-bugs [23:05] get a mailing list [23:06] make it the contact address for the team (somehow) [23:06] lol [23:06] and don't subscribe to the mailing list [23:06] at least then [23:06] there are archives if you want to check [23:06] and those who do want the mail [23:06] ah ha [23:06] okay [23:06] can subscribe [23:08] who approves the mailing lists? [23:09] it's up to you, i think, it can be approval based subscription or no. [23:09] I just "applied" for a mailing list and it says a Launchpad administrator will review and approve it [23:09] I was wondering who does that [23:20] thumper: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual-bugs [23:20] humphreybc: they used to be manually approved [23:20] but no longer [23:20] 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] Weird, the main list just got some bug mail from this bug, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual/+bug/584627 [23:22] Launchpad bug 584627 in Ubuntu Manual "On page 9, a dash should not appear at the beginning of a line (affected: 1, heat: 6)" [Undecided,In progress] [23:22] humphreybc: take a look at https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual/+subscribe [23:22] but then ubuntu-manual-bugs is apparently getting bug mail too, https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual-bugs/ [23:23] humphreybc: are their any team checkboxes? [23:23] thumper: http://humphreybc.homeip.net/files/bugs.png [23:23] tis what I have [23:24] humphreybc: I'm out of suggestions [23:24] humphreybc: ask a question on the launchpad bugs project [23:24] blast! Well I guess we'll wait and see if it gets better [23:24] okay, i'll give it a couple of days [23:25] maybe it's something to do with old bugs that the main team was originally subscribed to [23:25] wait [23:25] humphreybc: for one of the bugs you didn't want on the main list [23:25] humphreybc: pastebin the raw email [23:25] there are a bunch of email headers that'll help [23:26] http://paste.ubuntu.com/438526/ [23:26] humphreybc: that isn't all the email [23:26] humphreybc: I want to see all the headers [23:27] how can I do that in gmail? [23:27] ah [23:27] show original [23:27] http://paste.ubuntu.com/438527/ [23:29] X-Launchpad-Message-Rationale: Registrant (Ubuntu Manual) @ubuntu-manual [23:29] that is the reason you got the mail [23:30] now the question is why it does that [23:34] That really suggests that the bug supervisor was unset for a little while. [23:34] wgrant: it was [23:34] wgrant: but if the bug supervisor is now set, why is the team still getting emails? [23:35] Is it? [23:36] The last email on the list is from just around the time of the original discussion. [23:36] # Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 22:05:35 -0000 [23:37] Which seems like 31 minutes ago. [23:37] Note the notifications could take up to 5 minutes after the bug supervisor change to take effect. [23:38] they've stopped now... fingers crossed :) [23:39] (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] heh.. it's always great when a log of email delivery is created sometime other than when the email is delivered ;d [23:46] hi wgrant [23:47] Morning poolie.