[01:34] <dotblank> how long does it take for a package to show up in the ppa when you upload it?
[01:35] <wgrant> dotblank: You should receive an email within five minutes, unless you've not properly signed the .changes file.
[01:35] <wgrant> If it's accepted, it will appear on the PPA page at that time.
[02:30] <dotblank> Rejected:
[02:30] <dotblank> groove_0.0.1-1.dsc: Unknown section 'Multimedia'
[02:31] <dotblank> launchpad keeps rejecting based on that
[02:37] <lifeless> perhaps you should use one of the official sections
[02:47] <dotblank> whoa
[02:47] <dotblank> this is too cool
[02:47] <dotblank> says it will build in 2 hours
[02:47] <dotblank> first time using launchpad
[02:47] <dotblank> but this is very cool
[02:48] <thumper> :)
[02:49] <dotblank> but im sad its building only for amd64 when I know it will build for lots of others
[02:51] <thumper> like?
[02:51] <dotblank> x86
[02:51] <dotblank> arm
[02:51] <dotblank> and others
[02:54] <thumper> hmm... I don't know why it wouldn't build for those that we have builers for
[02:54] <thumper> perhaps someone like wgrant would know
[02:54] <dotblank> I think I specified and a target in the control... I think its fixed now though
[02:54] <dotblank> a target*
[02:56] <dotblank> https://launchpad.net/~eliaswoods/+archive/groove
[02:56]  * thumper knows nothing about packaging
[03:27] <nigelb> I got an OOPS mail OOPS-1616MPJ1
[03:27] <nigelb> I was changed the owner of a branch before merging, now I can't merge :(
[03:27] <nigelb> *I changed
[03:43] <ripps> Okay... a bunch of i386 and amd64 builders are idle, so why is my gmpc package say it has to wait 6 hours before building?
[03:44] <nigelb> ppa?
[03:44] <ripps> In fact, it said it would take 4 hours a few hours ago
[03:44] <ripps> nigelb: yes
[03:44] <nigelb> I think there are few builders only for PPA, but I'm not sure
[03:45] <ripps> The build farm page says otherwise, 11 amd64 and 14 i386. Although, the PPA build status lists unknown for all queues
[03:45] <nigelb> wgrant: around? ^
[03:46] <mwhudson> i think the queue status thing is unknown because of a bug in the last rollout
[03:47] <chmac> This is out of date: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/bugtrackers/revelation-bugs
[03:47] <chmac> The bugs are now here: http://oss.codepoet.no/revelation/issues/
[03:47] <chmac> Which is a bitbucket site, don't think it's supported by launchpad.
[03:47] <chmac> I was going to edit the info, but seems like it would break the link. Not sure what the best course of action is. Any recommendations?
[03:48] <thumper> chmac: ask a question on the launchpad project would be best I think
[03:51] <chmac> thumper: Ok, will try to track down a url for that... :-)
[03:51] <thumper> chmac: https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad
[03:52] <chmac> thumper: Just got there, thanks :-)
[03:56] <KurtKraut> If Launchpad detects a package has a new upstream release, does it mean it will be packaged for the next Ubuntu release? Like mtr 0.77: https://launchpad.net/mtr/+download
[03:56] <chmac> thumper: Turns out there's already a question on there, so I added a little comment. Thanks for the tip. :-)
[03:56] <chmac> G'night all
[04:02] <wgrant> KurtKraut: No -- somebody needs to package the new release and get an Ubuntu developer to upload it.
[04:02] <KurtKraut> wgrant,T hat's what I though at the first moment. But why Launchpad tracks the upstream FTP server and detects the latest version as available?
[04:03] <wgrant> KurtKraut: Launchpad doesn't exist solely for Ubuntu.
[04:04] <KurtKraut> wgrant, I'm aware of that but I think this is not an explanation. Or at least, I didn't get your point.
[04:04] <wgrant> dotblank: Your .dsc says 'Architecture: amd64'. This is because the sole binary specified in debian/control is marked 'Architecture: amd64'.
[04:05] <wgrant> KurtKraut: I'm not sure why exactly it does it, but not all useful features have to be for Ubuntu's purposes.
[04:05] <wgrant> And automatically uploading them would be a very bad idea.
[04:06] <lifeless> I can has root?
[04:06] <lifeless> wgrant: not really different to daily builds
[04:07] <wgrant> lifeless: One is to a PPA, which you trust explicitly with your life.
[04:08] <wgrant> One is to the primary archive. In the primary archive case, you don't trust the upstream developer.
[04:09] <wgrant> Whereas if you enable a daily PPA for a particular upstream, you probably do.
[07:43] <bilalakhtar> Just out of curiosity: Why are the milestones 10.01-10.05 still open?
[08:12] <kalon33> hello all, it seems there is a problem with launchpad PPA buildd, only a small subset of them are taking building tasks
[08:15] <kalon33> everybody is sleeping it seems ;)
[08:19] <wgrant> kalon33: Do you have a particular build in mind that should have dispatched a while ago, but hasn't yet?
[08:20] <wgrant> Ah, I see.
[08:21] <kalon33> wgrant: no, I just launch a few ones now, but looking at edge.launchpad.net/builders/, just a few are processing, one which took 50min to unpack build-deps... and there is a long queue according to build delays
[08:21] <kalon33> *build time estimations
[08:21] <noodles775> Strange, looking at the build history of the idle ones the seem to have been active recently.
[08:22]  * noodles775 wishes we could re-enable the queue info on that page.
[08:22]  * kalon33 wishes it too
[08:23] <kalon33> wgrant, problems with the build dispatcher ?
[08:23] <wgrant> Oh. Hmm.
[08:23] <wgrant> So they are sort of working sometimes?
[08:26] <kalon33> if you look at rosehip, this buildd has not refreshed his log for a while (55min, or it is still unpacking)
[08:26] <kalon33> (44min for shipova)
[08:39] <fta2> wgrant, all my builds are waiting, but the queue appears empty
[08:39] <wgrant> fta2: Appears empty, or appears unknown?
[08:39] <wgrant> What is the estimated start time on the build page?
[08:39] <fta2> hours
[08:39] <fta2> 5, 8, ..
[08:40] <fta2> http://people.ubuntu.com/~fta/ppa-dashboard/chromium-daily.html   http://people.ubuntu.com/~fta/ppa-dashboard/ubuntu-mozilla-daily--ppa.html
[08:40] <wgrant> Right, so the queue isn't empty. Something is pretty wrong.
[08:41] <spm> fta2: unrelated aside; they are sweet dashboard pages! v nice!
[08:42] <fta2> spm, thanks. i'm still trying to improve it
[08:42] <fta2> btw, bug 589068 is still impacting me
[08:45] <kalon33> wgrant, official buildd are maybe affected: kubuntu-meta is building for 1hour... but it is a meta, no? This shouldn't took so long
[08:45] <wgrant> kalon33: Right, something is very wrong. The same master deals with the official and PPA buildds, so it's unsurprising that they're both broken.
[08:45] <wgrant> It is being investigated.
[08:46] <kalon33> wgrant, thanks :)
[08:53] <cos^> is is it possible to cancel rebuild of a package?
[08:54] <wgrant> cos^: It won't build if you delete the source package.
[08:54] <wgrant> But you can't cancel the builds any other way, at the moment.
[08:55] <cos^> ok. i just accidentally started build of an old package
[09:07] <oojah> I have a ppa package that has BuildDepends including "libsqlite3-dev (>= 3.6.14.1)". The Depends line doesn't explicitly include libsqlite3. If I upload to lucid, the dependency on libsqlite3 gets set to the version in lucid, not 3.6.14.1. Is this expected behaviour?
[09:10] <wgrant> oojah: The version in the build-depends line doesn't affect that.
[09:10] <wgrant> The shlibs file in libsqlite3-dev specifies the version of the dependency.
[09:11] <wgrant> This is so it depends on a version with the right symbols.
[09:11] <wgrant> (ABI handles some things, but not symbol addition, for example)
[09:13] <fta2> is there a limit to the number of source ids i can pass to getBuildSummariesForSourceIds()?
[09:14] <wgrant> fta2: Well, it'll start timing out eventually, so be nice.
[09:14] <wgrant> But no, not really.
[09:14] <fta2> ok
[09:15] <oojah> wgrant: Right, so that's a yes :)
[09:15] <fta2> i'm currently doing it one by one but this is inefficient (too many http requests)
[09:16] <wgrant> oojah: Right, it's expected.
[09:17] <fta2> speaking of unnecessary requests, source_package_publishing_history (as returned by getPublishedSources()) should have a 'dist' attribute.. as accessing srcpkg.distro_series.name just to get its dist makes an http request
[09:18] <wgrant> fta2: Well, it shouldn't really have such an attribute. launchpadlib should just be smarter, somehow.
[09:18] <wgrant> Or you should be able to tell launchpadlib to grab the distroseries too.
[09:22] <fta2> either way, it's the same for me. i suffer from too many moderately-slow requests so the less the better
[09:26] <fta2> i wonder why login_anonymously() usually returns in 100~300ms but very often spikes to 30, 50, 60sec
[09:48] <geser> fta2: to save some http requests you could "cache" the distro_series object. you could look at spph.distro_series_link (it's an attribute so no extra http request) and only fetch the distro_series if you didn't have it already (it's unlike that it will change during the runtime of your script)
[10:03] <fta2> geser, thanks. parsing distro_series_link is hackish but helps a bit
[10:04] <thekorn> fta2, did you publish the dashboard code somewhere?
[10:06] <fta2> thekorn, not yet
[10:10] <thekorn> fta2, ok, please ping me with an url once it's available, I'm interested to see how it works, and why it is so slow
[10:10] <geser> fta2: you don't necessarily need to parse it, just use it as a key for a dict with already fetched disto_series object
[10:13] <hrw> hi
[10:14] <fta2> geser, i need it for display
[10:14] <fta2> +too
[10:15] <hrw> I noticed one nasty thing: when I add new email to my LP account I got email with verify link. Going to that link gives me page with "Cancel|Continue" buttons but no message explaining what to do. I know that 'Continue' is proper one but what about other users? why there is no message on page?
[10:19] <YaManicKill> can i let another launchpad user upload to a ppa owned by me?
[10:22] <geser> fta2: instead of always accessing spph.distro_series.name try this: http://paste.ubuntu.com/444507/ this should save you some http requests while still giving you access to the distro_series.name attribute
[10:58] <shadeslayer> hi,any idea where i can find support for shop.canonical.com
[11:10] <ripps> y'know I thought the "starting X hours" on the build status page was supposed to decrease, instead of increase...
[11:10] <ripps> It started at 2 hours about 12 hours ago, and now it's 10 hours
[11:14] <shadeslayer> ripps: that depends on the stuff which has more priority :)
[11:20] <zachtib> hey, are the PPA build servers running behind? I uploaded something last night and it's still pending with a 2-hour start time.
[11:20] <bigjools> yes we have big delays, we're working on it
[11:21] <zachtib> ok, just wanted to make sure it was a known issue and it wasn't just me, thanks
[12:45] <derick212> Hi.  Having issues getting a file from the launchpad servers.  As requested joined channel.
[12:46] <derick212> URL is http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/mahara/master/download/head%3A/htdocs/js/paginator.js/paginator.js  Been trying on and off for the last hour
[13:36] <mok0> where can I learn about recipes?
[13:37] <mok0> ah found ut
[13:37] <mok0> it
[14:05]  * rowinggolfer_ reads topic..... and his question is answered, thanks
[14:17] <bigjools> rowinggolfer_: should be fixed soon
[14:19] <rowinggolfer_> bigjools, no worries.
[14:31] <apw> are we aware that the "Queue Status" is all unknown on the build farm?  i guess this could be fallout from slow builds
[14:32] <jpds> apw: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/soyuz/+bug/588684
[14:33] <bigjools> it's getting fixed as we speak
[14:33]  * apw bets you are getting beaten from all sides :)
[14:34] <bigjools> :/
[14:41] <apw> bigjools, ahh this would affect regular buildd's too wouldn't it, and would explain the odd case i had where a job started 5 hours later than its estimate
[14:42] <bigjools> yes, all build dispatching is delayed
[14:42] <bigjools> we're not sure why, but a database query that was previously taking 400ms is now taking 10 minutes sometimes
[14:44] <apw> bigjools, do we know why testing on edge on the live db didn't catch the regression?  oh i guess we don't connect any machines to edge scheduling wise
[14:44] <apw> but the main page not having data should have shown up before?  i use that on edge a lot
[14:45] <bigjools> edge doesn't have any builders
[14:45] <apw> no but it has the /builders page no ?
[14:45] <apw> and that was the first reported symptom ?
[14:45] <bigjools> that's a different issue to the one I'm talking about
[14:45] <apw> oh ok fair enough
[14:46] <bigjools> it wouldn't get caught on edge anyway
[14:50] <noodles775> apw: the change landed on db-devel (by necessity) so didn't hit edge, and staging (and dogfood where we also test things) only have a few builders compared with production. So that is a point that we could improve.
[14:52] <bigjools> it's generally a problem that we don't have a production-like build environment to test in and not one that's easy to fix either
[15:47] <Penguin_Guy> Is the bug email interface guide ( https://help.launchpad.net/Bugs/EmailInterface ) correct? I tried changing the status using the method in that guide and the text appeared in my post (https://bugs.launchpad.net/codemonkey/+bug/589177/comments/1).
[15:55] <bac> Penguin_Guy: were you careful to indent the message as required?
[15:56] <Penguin_Guy> bac: What's the indentation supposed to be? I thought it was just a single space.
[15:56] <bac> Penguin_Guy: it looks like you did
[15:56] <Penguin_Guy> bac: I copied the indentation exactly as it appeared on the help page.
[15:57] <bac> Penguin_Guy: yeah, i see that now.  unfortunately i rarely/never use the email interface.  but i know people who use it all of the time
[15:58] <Penguin_Guy> bac: Anyone on IRC now who might have the answer?
[15:58] <bac> Penguin_Guy: BjornT or gmb might.  ^^
[15:58] <Penguin_Guy> bac: Thanks.
[15:59] <Penguin_Guy> BjornT, gmb: Can either of you help me with setting bug status through email?
[16:01] <bac> Penguin_Guy: i wonder if the attachment was done improperly, confusing it?
[16:03] <Penguin_Guy> bac: I don't see what could have gone wrong with adding an attachment, the 'net seems to say just to attach it like any other attachment.
[16:03] <bac> Penguin_Guy: just grasping for straws...
[16:04] <bac> Penguin_Guy: the body of your email looked fine to me so that was the only other variable...
[16:05] <Penguin_Guy> bac: The only thing I could think of was if the guide was wrong or out of date. That's why I was looking for someone who uses the email interface regularly. I'll try some more Google searches and see what I can find. Thanks for the help.
[16:06] <bac> Penguin_Guy: ok.  if you would, follow up with me here if you figure it out and i'll update the doc if needed.
[16:07] <Penguin_Guy> bac: Sure.
[16:59] <lifeeth|sleep> nick lifeeth
[16:59] <lifeeth|sleep> oops
[16:59] <lifeeth> Hello all... can some one point me to a howto on tarring my repo?
[17:04] <maxb> lifeeth: It is not clear what you mean - please explain more.
[17:04] <lifeeth> github / bitbucket have an option to dowload the current revision via a web UI
[17:04] <lifeeth> akin to bzr export and tar
[17:04] <lifeeth> anything similar on launchpad?
[17:05] <maxb> No, there is no equivalent feature in the web UI
[17:05] <lifeeth> Thanks.. just wanted to know that bit
[17:07] <maxb> lifeeth: Perhaps you can use 'bzr export myproject.tar.gz lp:~somebody/myproject/branchname' instead
[17:07] <lifeeth> Got that
[17:14] <maxb> Is it a known issue that all the build queues on /builders are showing 'unknown' ?
[17:22] <geser> maxb: yes
[17:23] <geser> maxb: bug 588684
[17:23] <maxb> Thanks
[17:23]  * maxb subscribes
[17:29] <bigjools> noodles has a branch to fix it, it'll land soon
[17:34] <christophechauve> Hi
[17:35] <christophechauve> We bought a commercial projet, whom is private, but we cannot made the branch as private, anybody can check if there is no problem ?
[17:37] <pmjdebruijn> huh?
[17:37] <pmjdebruijn> christophechauve: you might want to explain further
[17:38] <pmjdebruijn> christophechauve: I could be wrong, but I don't think Launchpad is intended for commercial private hosting :)
[17:38] <pmjdebruijn> again, I could be wrong
[17:38] <christophechauve> pmjdebruijn: lol
[17:39] <christophechauve> you can use it as proprietary licence but you must pay for it
[17:39] <tsimpson> pmjdebruijn: you can purchase a commercial license with Launchpad, free hosting is reserved for open-source projects
[17:39] <pmjdebruijn> oh
[17:39] <pmjdebruijn> well, I said I could be wrong :)
[17:39] <christophechauve> pmjdebruijn: ;)
[17:54] <bac> hi christophechauve
[17:55] <bac> pmjdebruijn: yes, commercial/proprietary projects can use launchpad if they buy a "commercial-use" subscription.
[17:55] <bac> christophechauve: i will be happy to help you get your project set up properly
[17:56] <christophechauve> bac i just send an email to help@launchpad.net with URL for project and branch
[17:56]  * bac looks
[17:56] <christophechauve> bac: thanks
[17:56] <bac> haven't gotten it yet
[17:57] <christophechauve> ok
[17:58] <christophechauve> this is the url project https://launchpad.net/syleam.openerp
[17:59] <christophechauve> this project is private (it's ok) but the branch are public, we want to made it as private
[19:45] <Penguin_Guy> Does anyone here know how to use the email interface to change bug properties?
[19:48] <micahg> Penguin_Guy: https://help.launchpad.net/Bugs/EmailInterface
[19:54] <Penguin_Guy> micahg: I tried that but it doesn't seem to work
[19:56] <micahg> Penguin_Guy: sorry, that's all I know, maybe someone else can help
[20:43] <maxb> Penguin_Guy: I suspect it's probably mandatory to gpg-sign your emails to edit bugs that way
[20:44] <Penguin_Guy> maxb: Yeah, it was signed.
[20:45] <maxb> oh :-/
[20:45] <maxb> and you did put a leading space at the beginning of each command line?
[21:38] <Penguin_Guy> max: Yes