[00:08] <BlackZ> FullFlannelJacke: tell me the build's link
[02:44] <FullFlannelJacke> I am at a loss as to how to package a python script
[02:45] <FullFlannelJacke> can anyone help?
[02:45] <poolie> FullFlannelJacke, pick an existing python script that's similar and copy from that
[02:45] <FullFlannelJacke> I dont know of any
[02:50] <poolie> FullFlannelJacke, try using bzr then
[02:50] <poolie> as an example
[02:51] <micahg> FullFlannelJacke: #ubuntu-packaging is a good place to get help, don't know how many people are around right now
[02:51] <FullFlannelJacke> packaging for Ubtunu is frustratingly difficult..It is actually harder to package my script than to write it.
[02:52] <micahg> FullFlannelJacke: maybe that's why there's a channel dedicated to it?
[02:53] <FullFlannelJacke> Yeah.  I think Ubuntu needs to overhaul its packaging system.  other distros are so much easier
[03:03] <nigelb> I can't branch my code, does anyone have any clue why? bzr branch lp:~nigelbabu/ubuntu-review-overview/report-debian
[03:04] <spiv> nigelb: what error do you get?
[03:04] <nigelb> bzr: ERROR: Not a branch: "bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/~nigelbabu/ubuntu-review-overview/trunk/".
[03:04] <nigelb> I recently changed the owner of the trunk to the team instead of me,which started the whole problem
[03:05] <spiv> Hmm, sounds like the stacked-on information in your branch is out-of-date.
[03:05] <nigelb> er, how do I fix that?
[03:07] <spiv> Perhaps "bzr reconfigure lp:~nigelbabu/ubuntu-review-overview/report-debian --stacked-on=..."
[03:07] <spiv> Or edit sftp://bazaar.launchpad.net/~nigelbabu/ubuntu-review-overview/report-debian/.bzr/branch/branch.conf by hand :/
[03:07] <nigelb> spiv: copy paste from that? what does the last bit do?
[03:08] <spiv> Er, you'd need to replace the "..." with the new location of the trunk
[03:09] <spiv> /~ubuntu-reviewers/ubuntu-review-overview/trunk I think?
[03:09] <nigelb> yes, ah! That makes sense :)
[03:11] <nigelb> spiv: the bzr reconfigure failed :(
[03:11] <nigelb> same error
[03:11] <spiv> nigelb: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/launchpad-code/+bug/377519 is the relevant bug, btw
[03:12] <nigelb> spiv: so, is there a fix for me? delete and push aagain?
[03:13] <spiv> nigelb: that's a possibility, but the workaround in comment #1 on that bug should work
[03:13] <nigelb> I'll try, I don't understand parts of it, I'll ask when I get there
[03:15] <spiv> nigelb: sounds good.
[03:16] <nigelb> spiv: err, question 1, how do I connect to the thing? sftp sftp://bazaar.launchpad.net/~nigelbabu/ubuntu-review-overview/report-debian/.bzr/branch/ doesn't work
[03:18] <spiv> nigelb: try sftp://nigelbabu@bazaar.launchpad.net/...
[03:19] <nigelb> spiv: ssh: Could not resolve hostname bazaar.launchpad.net/~nigelbabu: Name or service not known
[03:19] <nigelb> ssh: Could not resolve hostname bazaar.launchpad.net/: Name or service not known
[03:20] <spiv> !
[03:20] <spiv> Oh, hmm, which program are you using?
[03:20] <spiv> I think that URL should work ok with lftp, and maybe even nautilus
[03:21] <nigelb> I'm just using terminal
[03:21] <spiv> If you're using the 'sftp' command, it's a bit less friendly.
[03:22] <spiv> You'd need to do something like "sftp nigelbabu@bazaar.launchpad.net" and then "get ~nigelbabu/ubuntu-review-overview/report-debian/.bzr/branch/branch.conf", I think.
[03:22] <nigelb> lemme try
[03:22] <spiv> If you install lftp, it's also a terminal command, but it's much easier.
[03:24] <nigelb> ok, so get-ing that file
[03:24] <spiv> I assume from the branch that you're using Ubuntu... are you using the GNOME desktop?
[03:25] <nigelb> yes
[03:25] <spiv> If so you should just be able to open a nautilus window, hit Ctrl+L to enter a location, and use sftp://bazaar.launchpad.net/~nigelbabu/ubuntu-review-overview/report-debian/.bzr/branch/
[03:25] <nigelb> err nautilius cannot handle such rquests :(
[03:25] <nigelb> "Nautilus cannot handle this kind of location." - to be exact
[03:25] <spiv> Oh :(
[03:25] <spiv> Oh, hmm,
[03:26] <spiv> Try adding the username as before (nigelbabu@)
[03:26]  * nigelb hugs spiv 
[03:26] <nigelb> that worked
[03:27] <spiv> nigelb: hooray :)
[03:28] <spiv> Now I think if you edit branch.conf to have /~ubuntu-reviewers/ubuntu-review-overview/trunk as the stacked-on value that should work.
[03:28] <nigelb> I did the editing
[03:29] <spiv> Ok, now to do the second part.
[03:29] <nigelb> maxb says something about going to python interpreter
[03:29] <nigelb> how do I do "open the branch, write-lock it, unlock it"
[03:29] <nigelb> I have no knowledge of bzrlib, is there documentation somwehre?
[03:30] <spiv> The simplest way would be to push to the branch.
[03:31] <nigelb> Yay!
[03:31] <nigelb> oh, wait, same problem
[03:31] <nigelb> no, something different
[03:31] <nigelb> http://paste.ubuntu.com/445856/
[03:34] <nigelb> spiv: can you help me do that python thing, looks like that needs to be done :(
[03:35] <spiv> That's very weird.
[03:35] <spiv> I don't think the Python think will help with that, but I'm looking now
[03:35] <nigelb> ok :)
[03:36] <nigelb> I shall run out and be back in 2 minutes
[03:37] <spiv> nigelb: http://paste.ubuntu.com/445857/ is a Python script to do that
[03:37] <spiv> (I'll add it to the bug now)
[03:43] <nigelb> spiv: yay, thank you!
[03:46] <nigelb> spiv: the argument must be the sftp url?
[03:47] <nigelb> oh, I figured it out eventually :)
[03:48] <spiv> nigelb: or the lp: URL
[03:49] <FullFlannelJacke> No one is in ubuntu-packaging.  Can someone here help me?
[03:49] <nigelb> FullFlannelJacke: what is it about?
[03:50] <FullFlannelJacke> need to package a python script I wrote and nothing i try works
[03:50] <FullFlannelJacke> have read all the guides
[03:50] <nigelb> well, #ubuntu-packaging is the place that does that.  #lauchpad is only about launchpad related stuff
[03:51] <FullFlannelJacke> well I plan on uoloading it to my PPA
[03:51] <FullFlannelJacke> and no one is ever in #ubuntu-packaging
[03:51] <nigelb> still, we can't help you here regarding that.  Remember its the weekend, lots of people might be away
[03:51] <nigelb> You might want to try tomorrow
[03:51] <nigelb> spiv: well, I did something exceedingly stupid
[03:52] <nigelb> spiv: on the first rename of the stacked-on, I made a mistake
[03:52] <nigelb> now, I correct it, but touch-branch.py throws out errorrs
[03:53] <spiv> nigelb: pastebin?
[03:54] <nigelb> http://paste.ubuntu.com/445860/
[03:56] <spiv> Wow
[03:56] <spiv> Ok, so the immediate issue is you have a typo in your branch.conf
[03:57] <spiv> Delete the second line
[03:58] <spiv> There's a secondary issue that the server really shouldn't be giving you a traceback like that!
[03:58] <spiv> I know what's going on with the secondary issue, I'll file a bug about that.
[04:07] <nigelb> spiv: you have another issue.  Its not me adding line 2 "trunk"
[04:07] <nigelb> its launchpad or bazaar or something else doing it
[04:08] <spiv> Oh wow, very exciting.
[04:08] <nigelb> every time I run the script, it fails, gives me the error and there is trunk in that file
[04:10] <spiv> I wonder if it is caused by a trailing newline? :/
[04:11] <spiv> nigelb: ok, how about this
[04:11] <nigelb> I removed the trailing newline every time :(
[04:12] <spiv> :(
[04:12] <nigelb> Can I just remove the stacked on location?
[04:12] <nigelb> or delete the branch and push again?
[04:13] <spiv> nigelb: actually
[04:13] <spiv> nigelb: rename the branch, rather than delete
[04:13] <spiv> nigelb: so we can diagnose it detail later
[04:14] <nigelb> spiv: just push to new location you mean?
[04:14] <spiv> nigelb: but yes, quickest fix at this point would be push again
[04:14] <nigelb> okay :)
[04:14] <spiv> nigelb: I mean, use the web UI to rename to branch to e.g. report-debian-broken
[04:14] <spiv> And then just "bzr push"
[04:14] <nigelb> AHH, ok
[04:15] <spiv> Ok, I need to go have lunch right now :)
[04:15] <spiv> Thanks for your patience!
[04:15] <nigelb> thanks for helping out :)
[05:57] <johnbrondum> hi guys
[05:58] <johnbrondum> wondering if anyone had time to help out with https://answers.launchpad.net/malone/+question/112064
[05:58] <johnbrondum> thank you
[06:01] <spm> johnbrondum: for a box of krispy kreme donuts delivered to canberra? hell yes! Need to do a school run, but post that, I'll run on the staging DB (only out of date by a few days max) and get back to you. Good enough?
[06:01] <spiv> nigelb: I've filed <https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/launchpad-code/+bug/590628> about your bug(s)
[06:19] <lifeless> spiv: thats a fun one
[08:59] <Mavrik-> Hi, is this the right place to ask questions about building packages in PPA?
[09:01] <tsimpson> Mavrik-: this would be the place to ask about the build system or using the PPA, for help with packaging #ubuntu-motu would be a better place
[09:02] <Mavrik-> tsimpson, thanks, will ask there
[09:29] <directhex> 80% of the i386 ppa builders are still down?
[09:29] <StevenK> directhex: It's being worked on
[09:36] <cos^> pretty slow indeed. my package is still waiting to built after 4 days :-/
[09:36] <cos^> luckily it doesn't have too many users
[09:41] <mvo> hello! I keep getting tmeouts from https://code.launchpad.net/software-center - is there a way to workaround this? I want to see what branches changed over the weekend basicly
[09:55] <hrw> I reported bug against gcc-4.5 and got (Error ID: OOPS-1619G619) - do I have to retype whole bug report?
[09:56] <hrw> and why simple "Back" does not work for it? Bugzilla, trac, redmine, mantis allow to return to filled form.
[10:03] <hrw> anyone/
[10:11] <james_w> mvo: it seems to be timing out due to lots of bug-branch links, or maybe just being slow getting the info about them.
[10:12] <james_w> mvo: not that knowing that helps you. I don't know of a way around that I'm afriad.
[10:13] <mvo> james_w: thanks. its a bit frustrating but I will try to find a way to get a overview of the branch changes in some other way
[10:13] <james_w> mvo: you could try the API
[10:15] <mwhudson> mvo: the page just loaded, slowly, for me
[10:15] <mwhudson> mvo: so maybe retrying will help
[10:15] <wgrant> It worked for me earlier. Doesn't any more.
[10:17] <james_w> mvo: http://paste.ubuntu.com/445983/
[10:20] <mvo> james_w: cool! do you have the code for this for me too? I will put it into my ~/bin
[10:21] <mvo> mwhudson: thanks, now I got it too, I did reload a couple of times before and it did not work. but I'm happy that its there now
[10:22] <james_w> mvo: http://paste.ubuntu.com/445985/
[10:22] <james_w> probably want to add a sort in there
[10:28] <mvo> thanks james_w
[10:40] <gnomefreak> Would OOPS-1619EA592 related to the OOPS above
[10:48] <gnomefreak> ok it worked that time no OOPS
[11:29] <hrw> btw - is there a way to grab oops contents? lp-oops site asks for login/pass
[11:30] <hrw> LP becames pain in the ass when oops happens as whole bug report needs to be written again
[11:53] <maxb> hrw: Canonical employees can fetch oops content for you. They are restricted in case they contain private information
[11:55] <hrw> maxb: I got access to my oops but it is really tool for LP devs not for normal people.
[11:55] <maxb> yes, indeed
[12:14] <bilalakhtar> Hi there, people. How do I delete a project?
[12:15] <maxb> It's not possible to outright delete a project, I don't think
[12:16] <maxb> An admin will consider hiding it from the UI if there is no community interaction with it
[12:17] <bilalakhtar> maxb: There is simply NO community interaction with the project. Then, what is the step? Whom should I contact?
[12:17] <maxb> https://launchpad.net/launchpad/+addquestion
[12:17] <bilalakhtar> maxb: On launchpad or launchpad-registry?
[12:17] <maxb> I don't think it matters much
[15:38] <jcastro> abentley: good morning! I have an import finished and I think I am ready to make my first lp recipe, does anything work yet?
[15:38] <abentley> jcastro, no
[15:40] <jcastro> foiled again!
[15:40] <jcastro> abentley: I just started to see the bits of UI on edge so I got excited
[15:40] <abentley> jcastro, they will be disabled again soon.
[15:41] <maco> what is a lp recipe?
[15:41] <jcastro> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DailyBuilds/GettingStarted
[15:41] <jcastro> maco: ^
[15:44] <maco> neat
[16:09] <maxb> nigelb: Did you get your branch stacking woes sorted in the end?
[16:09] <nigelb> maxb: I renamed the old branch as -broken and pushed again
[16:09] <maxb> that works, I guess :-)
[16:09] <nigelb> so the broken one is still there for figuring out what went wrong
[16:10] <nigelb> if you want me to help triage the problem or help further in anyway, feel free to let me know :)
[16:39] <micahg> \o/ PPA builders are fixed
[18:12] <asac> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/ times out :(
[19:42] <mtaylor> hey lovely folks - I have a borked branch on launchpad - looks like a stacking issue (base  branch got upgraded without the child or vice-versa)
[19:42] <mtaylor> lp:~maria-captains/maria/maria-5.1-optimizer-trace
[20:01] <jfalvarez> hello, question about a ppa for a java application
[20:01] <jfalvarez> this kind of packages always will fail when launchpad try to build it
[20:02] <jfalvarez> it's there a way to not tell launchpad to not build it?
[20:03] <soren> Don't upload it?
[20:03] <soren> If you don't want Launchpad to build it, why are you uploading it?
[20:06] <jfalvarez> soren: ?
[20:06] <soren> Can you be more specific?
[20:06] <jfalvarez> soren: because is a java application?
[20:07] <jfalvarez> because is a jar file?
[20:07] <geser> and from where does the jar file come from?
[20:08] <jfalvarez> geser: a scala application called sbt
[20:09] <soren> jfalvarez: If you don't want Launchpad to build it... Why do you upload it?
[20:09] <jfalvarez> soren: build java>
[20:09] <jfalvarez> ?
[20:09] <geser> jfalvarez: who builds the jar file?
[20:09] <soren> jfalvarez: I give up.
[20:10] <jfalvarez> geser: the people who made sbt
[20:11] <jfalvarez> geser: it's that relevant?
[20:11] <geser> jfalvarez: yes
[20:12] <geser> because your source package should contain the .java files and build the .jar file yourself. that way you know that the .jar file matches the code in the .java files and that you can build the .jar file if you need to patch the .java files (e.g. fix a bug)
[20:13] <jfalvarez> geser: hum, you are right
[20:13] <jfalvarez> so the orig file should have the source code instead of the jar
[20:13] <jfalvarez> already compiled
[20:13] <jfalvarez> right?
[20:14] <geser> yes
[20:16] <soren> jfalvarez: If the appliaction's license permits it, you could just ship the jars in a package without worrying about the source.
[20:16] <soren> The requirement to build from source in Ubuntu and Debian is a policy matter.
[20:17] <soren> ..and licensing, in many cases.
[20:19] <jfalvarez> soren: new bsd license, you mean I can create a deb package and upload it to launchpad?
[20:20] <soren> jfalvarez: I don't know if you can. It's possible to do it regardless of the license.
[20:54] <stefanlsd> hihi. does anyone know if its possible to get the attachments marked as patches on a bug. +patches seems to work on a project level. I see LP does seperate attachments from patches in the ui...
[20:56] <nailuj24> stefanlsd: i'm pretty sure there's a "This attachment is a patch" checkbox
[20:57] <micahg> stefanlsd: edit the attachment and you should be able to mark it as a patch
[20:58] <stefanlsd> sorry, was speaking about launchpadlib api specifically. i see bug_attachment type may be able to help
[22:04] <mtaylor> hey guys - anybody around who can help me fix a branch?
[22:08] <mtaylor> th
[22:10] <directhex> no progress on i386 ppa builders?
[22:10] <micahg> directhex: they were working before
[22:11] <directhex> micahg, i'm showing 10/14 as disabled
[22:11] <micahg> maybe it's the recipe based builds?
[22:11] <micahg> directhex: yes, they were working a while ago
[22:11] <directhex> makes a change for someone who isn't me to break things
[22:17] <mtaylor> thumper: sup d00d
[22:17] <thumper> mtaylor: chasing crashes, you?
[22:17] <mtaylor> thumper: same... actually chasing deadlocks - slightly more annoying
[22:25] <thumper> mtaylor: yeah, deadlocks are the bane of multithreaded programming
[22:51] <alf__> Hi all, I uploaded a package to a PPA and realized I had forgotten something so I deleted the package from the PPA
[22:52] <alf__> It seems that a build is still pending. When is it safe to reupload the package (with the same version number)?
[23:36] <directhex> what would explode if amd64 builders were able to run binary-indep too, not just i386 builders? given the amd64 builders tend to spend a lot more time idle, it might help the frequent backlog issues
[23:45] <micahg> directhex: bug 158004
[23:49] <directhex> micahg, so "probably nothing, but nobody's coded it"
[23:49] <micahg> directhex: sounds like it :)
[23:49] <jpds> directhex: No, there were some details.
[23:50] <directhex> jpds, not in that bug or its duplicates. are there further resources?