[03:55] <stevecrozz> i'm thinking about filing a 'needs packaging' issue for uwsgi (which I maintain in my ppa). I've never done this before, so what steps should I be taking now to get my package into both debian and ubuntu with the least pain?
[07:59] <dholbach> good morning
[11:16] <ari-tczew> RoAkSoAx: I sent an e-mail to you. Please check.
[11:50] <ari-tczew> dupondje: pong to me if you will be able to talk
[12:11] <lool> ari-tczew: I dont maintain libsmbios, I'm listed as an uploader because I sponsored it
[12:12] <lool> ari-tczew: who-uploads libsmbios > 2.0.3.dfsg-1 to unstable: Loïc Minier (lool) <lool@debian.org>
[12:12] <lool> ari-tczew: I dont even have hardware to test it AFAIK
[12:12] <ari-tczew> lool: so you can't pack a new upstream release?
[12:13] <lool> ari-tczew: package in Debian or Ubuntu?  I could if I get some testers
[12:13] <ari-tczew> lool: Debian. I've packed new upstream of libsmbios, but it's in queue for Ubuntu
[12:14] <ari-tczew> lool: hmm, so, would you like to sponsor my package, then forward to Debian?
[12:15] <lool> ari-tczew: I could review the packaging changes and tell you whether these look ok, I'd need some testing of the final source package in each distro before uploading it
[12:15] <lool> I dont care that you test binaries that I build, but I do care that we test binaries built in each environment
[15:44] <karyo> hello
[15:44] <karyo> can I get some advice?
[15:45] <funkyHat> !ask | probably applies here
[15:45] <karyo> thx. I'm new to all this IRC stuff :->
[15:46] <karyo> I'd like to contribute to Ubuntu. I have some experience with ubuntu, have been reading a lot about gnu/linux/distros, have a lot of general knowledge on computers and programming but little skill
[15:47] <karyo> I want to join a team. I think triagers/motu would be nice to start. what do you think?
[15:49] <funkyHat> karyo: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/GettingStarted would be a good place to start reading if you're interested in packaging
[15:50] <karyo> should I be? I found that packaging had a bit steep learning curve especially for debian/dpkg. I was starting to think that maybe I might not be able to contribute anything meaningful. Is it really hard as I think it is?
[15:51] <porthose> karyo, if you want to triage bugs #ubuntu-bugs is the place to be https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad
[15:52] <funkyHat> ugh. bzr merge-package just completely failed at even attempting to merge mpd's init script.
[15:52] <karyo> thx porthose. what I really want to know is which is easier? I really think I should get more experience, but I'm not sure what should be my first step.
[15:54] <porthose> karyo, bugs would be a good place to start, it really depends on what interests you :)
[15:56] <karyo> well, I'm mainly interested in localization. I'm already involved in translating ubuntu/related projects to my native language, and found that there are a lot of issues non-english ubuntu versions face. I'm not sure how or if i can effectively handle such issues.
[16:06] <funkyHat> I filed a bug about mpd crashing, and a debdiff to fix it, but I've noticed there's a newer version in squeeze so I'm merging that
[16:06] <funkyHat> I guess I should mark my initial bug as invalid?
[16:15] <lfaraone_> There is a problem ("GDM crashes after selecting the "Sugar" desktop")for which there is a well-known fix that I have tested myself, and have committed to the upstream Debian packaging repository. I'm waiting for an upload of the fix to unstable. Can I SRU the fix to Lucid before it's uploaded to Unstable without creating an Ubuntu delta in Maverick?
[16:15] <lfaraone_> (I have the upload privlages)
[16:17] <lfaraone_> jdong, slangasek, ^^
[16:33] <funkyHat> I've just done my first merge using bzr. woop. https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mpd/+bug/591307
[16:34] <slangasek> lfaraone_: SRUing to lucid doesn't automatically affect whether there's a delta in maverick.  We *can* copy SRUs from lucid to maverick after they've built, but can be asked not to.  What's the package?
[16:37] <funkyHat> oops... forgot to assign to myself before subscribing universe sponsors... I hope that doesn't create unnecessary noise
[17:41] <ari-tczew> requestsync has failed: /usr/bin/requestsync:31: DeprecationWarning: please use 'debian' instead of 'debian_bundle'
[17:49] <geser> on lucid or on maverick?
[17:49] <ari-tczew> maverick
[17:53] <geser> it doesn't work at all because of this warning?
[17:53] <dutchie> in the course of fiddling with Makefiles and things trying to make mit-scheme build on i386, i saw error messages popping up suggesting to transition 3.0 (quilt). Would this be a good idea?
[17:55] <ari-tczew> geser: it's only warning. I've completed the bug description, but requestsync fails at the end, during send packets to launchpad
[17:57] <geser> ari-tczew: did you get any error? it might be an LP API issue, as I've seen many timeouts (503 service unavailable) recently
[17:57] <ari-tczew> heh I didn't save
[17:58] <ari-tczew> now I requested sync manually, so requestsync should tell me about duplicate
[17:58] <ari-tczew> and I can't reproduce bug message
[17:58] <geser> I'm currently fixing the warning for trunk (thanks for the notice)
[17:58] <ari-tczew> geser: I'll look for any sync and try again to reproduce bug
[17:58] <geser> you might be lucky to get it through or trigger an timeout, it's not really predictable or repeatable
[17:59] <ari-tczew> geser: I think that it's could be a timeout
[17:59] <carstenh> dutchie: different patch systems in debian and ubuntu for the same package make syncing between these distributions harder
[18:00] <ari-tczew> geser: is it possible due to long description of bug?
[18:00] <dutchie> carstenh: there's no patch system at the moment
[18:00] <dutchie> carstenh: presumably, if I did, it would make more sense to submit it to debian and sync it?
[18:01] <geser> ari-tczew: I don't know the reasons for the many timeouts recently. I assume they are also the reason for the FTBFS page being out-of-date.
[18:02] <ari-tczew> geser: is it possible due to DDoS on launchpad?
[18:03] <carstenh> dutchie: I would just wait until debian switches. people don't like non-functional changes in "their" packages made by other people
[18:03] <dutchie> carstenh: fair enough
[18:10] <ari-tczew> geser: that looks bug requested manually, because requestsync has been crashed: bug 591349
[18:28] <dutchie> http://pastebin.com/T170RhPn :(
[18:29] <carstenh> debian's mit-scheme does not have this problem?
[18:30] <dutchie> don't know
[18:30] <dutchie> (this is after me fiddling with it)
[18:31] <dutchie> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48268732/buildlog_ubuntu-maverick-i386.mit-scheme_9.0.1-1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz is the build log from the buildds
[18:35] <geser> etc/create-makefiles.sh: 53: mit-scheme-i386: not found
[18:35] <dutchie> yes
[18:36] <dutchie> i fixed that (probably wrongly) by doing MIT_SCHEME_EXE="/usr/bin/mit-scheme-native" ./configure in debian/rules
[18:39] <geser> did it fix this problem?
[18:41] <dutchie> it fixed the mit-scheme-i386 not found problem
[18:41] <dutchie> but no I get the problem I pasted just now
[18:43] <geser> have you tried contacting the Debian maintainer for help?
[18:43] <ari-tczew> question to sponsors: who think that package doesn't need to be synced, because package seems to be the same?
[18:44] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: not a sponsor,but if version is same in ubuntu and debian,why sync it?
[18:44] <geser> ari-tczew: have you an example?
[18:44] <ari-tczew> geser: bug 591342
[18:45] <dutchie> no, not yet. should I?
[18:45] <shadeslayer> btw anyone know how to package java stuff? please join #ubuntu-packaging :)
[18:45] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: because if we'll sync package and Debian will release a new package revision (version), then package will get in Ubuntu automatically
[18:46] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: uh.. not true
[18:46] <geser> dutchie: you could at least try if you are out of ideas what is broken
[18:46] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: ?
[18:47] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: the package might need a merge or sync depending on the condition whether or not i works as in ubuntu as well
[18:47] <dutchie> geser: ok, thanks for the pointer
[18:48] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: first heard. us job is remove diff between Ubuntu and Debian. are you a sponsor?
[18:48] <geser> ari-tczew: fakesync because of different md5sum of the .orig.tar.gz?
[18:48] <ari-tczew> geser: yes
[18:48] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: no im not a sponsor :)
[18:48] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: I thought
[18:49] <shadeslayer> geser on the other hand probably is :P
[18:49] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: i mentioned it in my first chat ;)
[18:50] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: "not a sponsor" heh, not precisely, who "not sponsor"
[18:50] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: hehe :P
[18:50] <ari-tczew> you should write "I'm not a sponsor, but I think that..."
[18:51] <ari-tczew> geser: have you objections about sync package if packages seems to be almost the same or the same?
[18:51] <geser> no objections in general
[18:51] <ari-tczew> fine
[18:51] <geser> but because this is a fakesync, I'm not sure if it's really worth it
[18:52] <ari-tczew> geser: really
[18:52] <geser> I see the benefit of being able to auto-sync in future (when a new upstream version is uploaded). but till then fakesyncs are needed.
[18:53] <nperry> Hello MOTU, wondered if somone could have a look at xserver-xorg-video-nouveau for maverick, it seems to of failed its last build becuase its still depending on Xserver 1.7
[18:54] <ari-tczew> x-swat team should help us in xserver
[18:55] <geser> nperry: there is a Xorg transition in maverick going on right now but I don't know how far it's already done
[18:55] <nperry> I thought it has been completed
[18:56] <nperry> Hang on a second, I dont think it should be motu should be talking to shouldn't it be X swat?
[18:57] <arand> nperry: xserver is in main, so nope, motu are not the ones properly in charge no.
[18:57] <geser> yes, #ubuntu-x should know better about the Xorg state in maverick right now
[18:58] <nperry> Sorry my mistake!
[18:58] <ari-tczew> nperry: Timo Aaltonen is knowledge developer of X packages. you can find him on launchpad
[19:01] <solarion> what're the units on the disk utility's benchmarking tool's horizontal axis (percentage of what)?
[19:09] <shadeslayer> geser: btw are all your merges done?
[19:09] <shadeslayer> i checked yesterday and only 3-4 were left :P
[19:11] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: are you looking for work?
[19:12] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: hehe.. yes,but i can do it only from friday
[19:12] <geser> shadeslayer: didn't check recently
[19:12] <shadeslayer> geser: of the 26 there originally only 3-4 are left in universe :P
[19:13] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: basically i know some packaging and am looking at enhancing my knowledge
[19:13] <geser> there are also some in main
[19:13] <shadeslayer> geser: if theyre not gone till friday ill have a look :P
[19:14] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: maybe you want to get some knowledge in fixing security issues?
[19:15] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: hmm... how tough is it? ive been using kubuntu for the past 1.5 years and have packaged some kde apps and help out in packaging KDE, my lp page is : launchpad.net/~rohangarg
[19:16] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: so maybe you can guide me with how to proceed :P
[19:17] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: sure, but now I'm going to cycling
[19:17] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: please read yesterday's logs from this channel
[19:17] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: any specific time?
[19:17] <ari-tczew> I teached dupondje to prepare security fixes
[19:17] <shadeslayer> thanks :)
[19:18] <ari-tczew> similiar to now
[19:18] <ari-tczew> 18-20 UTC +2H
[19:18] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: ill just do a search for dupondje
[19:20] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: found them :)
[19:22] <ari-tczew> nice, I'm going on bike, see you
[19:36] <samliu> hi motu, I was wondering if someone could help me with packaging a java application
[19:36] <samliu> in particular, open-source liferay, src can be found at http://www.liferay.com/downloads/liferay-portal/additional-files
[19:37] <samliu> I read all of http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide but I can't seem to make it work -- I can edit the control file and run debuild, I've set up my gpg key but I get a 1.7kb empty deb package
[20:11] <RainCT> samliu: I'm not familiar with Java packaging, but do you have some particular problem?
[20:23] <samliu> oh hi Rain, yes I am not sure how to package my application
[20:23] <samliu> in particular, I'm confused about the whole ./configure make make install thing
[20:23] <DeeJay1> jono: hi, where I can find more info about https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/community-m-document-daily-builds ?
[20:24] <samliu> isnt' that only for C/C++ programs? how do I create an installer for my program, I guess that's my question
[20:29] <jono> DeeJay1, email dholbach - he can give you all the details
[20:30] <DeeJay1> jono: ok, will do as I'm really interested in it (as currently I run the daily builds for Emerillon manually )
[20:32] <jono> DeeJay1, it is really awesome - he can give you the details :-)
[20:36] <DeeJay1> jono: I've noticed that a few cool things are coming in Launchpad and some nice improvements for Rosetta also (the one thing I still miss in Rosetta is "add comment" function for reviewers)
[20:56] <RainCT> samliu: Yes, that's only for stuff using autotools.
[20:56] <RainCT> samliu: In your case it'll be different, depending on what build system your application uses.
[20:58] <RainCT> samliu: I can't find any info on packaging for Java, so I guess the best would be to look at some similar existing package as example.
[21:20] <samliu> thanks Rain, I will look into it
[21:27] <lfaraone_> slangasek: sugar-0.88, but I haven't uploaded it yet.
[21:29] <slangasek> lfaraone: ok - that package already has a newer version in maverick, so no risk of clobbering anything there anyway
[21:56] <lfaraone> slangasek: okay, just uploaded, re bug 542338. it'll show up in the queue in a few minutes.
[22:01] <funkyHat> Any chance someone could take a look at my merge of mpd? https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mpd/+bug/591307
[22:04]  * ajmitch really wishes that the diffs generated for merges were against debian
[22:04] <slangasek> ajmitch: bzr diff --old lp:debian/sid/$package
[22:05] <ajmitch> slangasek: right, it's just a bit harder to eyeball a 25k line diff on launchpad
[22:05] <dupondje> I have a control.in file with @PLUGINS_DESCRIPTION@, where is that fetched from ?
[22:05] <ajmitch> I'm fetching the branches now & will do that, it just takes more time to check it
[22:05] <slangasek> oh, on launchpad; I wouldn't attempt to review a bzr branch through the web gui
[22:05] <slangasek> especially when my very next step would be to download the branch anyway
[22:06] <ajmitch> I tend to look at the diff on LP to catch any obvious issues before grabbing the branch
[22:06] <ajmitch> saves time on my abysmally slow connection :)
[22:06] <slangasek> (need a good way to have local source mirrors of bzr branches though; hmm, maybe I should file a bug on udd about this)
[22:07]  * ajmitch fetches both ubuntu & debian branches into a shared repository before diffing
[22:11] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gedit-plugins/+bug/590831 => does the merge look good ? :)
[22:12] <dupondje> Riddell: nice going :)
[22:14] <ajmitch> funkyHat: you seem to have missed the changes to debian/control in the changelog
[22:16] <funkyHat> ajmitch: I didn't make any changes myself, are they not just a result of the merge?
[22:16] <lfaraone> slangasek: huh. LP had an older version of the package so it was rejected as being older than the current version in lucid. reuploaded.
[22:16]  * funkyHat looks
[22:16] <ajmitch> funkyHat: they are, but you need to list all remaining changes from debian
[22:17] <ajmitch> see the changelog entry for 0.15.4-1ubuntu1
[22:17] <funkyHat> ajmitch: oh... silly me
[22:18] <funkyHat> ajmitch: can I simply amend the changelog, commit and push again, or do I need to do something different?
[22:18] <ajmitch> apart from that it looks good at a glance, though listing previous changes that are dropped in this upload can be useful, like the patch from upstream
[22:18] <ajmitch> yes, you can just do that
[22:30] <funkyHat> done
[22:39] <ajmitch> funkyHat: given the speed of apt-get update in pbuilder, it may be a little while before I can upload it :)
[22:39] <funkyHat> ajmitch: ⢁)
[23:46] <Riddell> porthose: ping
[23:47] <Riddell> porthose: what gives you authority to ack bug 590202 ?
[23:49] <ari-tczew> Riddell: what is wrong in above bug ^^ ?
[23:50] <Riddell> it's been ACKed by porthose but he doesn't seem to be a member of ubuntu-dev
[23:50] <ajmitch> Riddell: he does upload rights to some packages, iirc
[23:50] <ajmitch> but I can't recall how that's checked
[23:51] <geser> Riddell: he is a MOTU (https://edge.launchpad.net/~cjsmo), 3rd badge from left
[23:52] <geser> and Latest memberships mentions even the date (MOTU since 2010-01-08)
[23:52] <ajmitch> I didn't think people were still getting added to ~motu, but to ~ubuntu-dev (which he's an indirect member of)
[23:53] <geser> ubuntu-dev = motu + core-dev + ppu
[23:53] <Riddell> so ~motu gives you upload rights?
[23:53] <ari-tczew> Riddell: of course
[23:53] <ari-tczew> :O
[23:54] <geser> ~motu gives uploads rights to universe and multiverse
[23:54] <Riddell> what's the one which is just a membership but doesn't give you upload rights?
[23:54] <kklimonda> universe contributors
[23:54] <geser> ~universe-contributors
[23:55] <Riddell> ah, that's my mistake then
[23:58] <ajmitch> Riddell: thanks for doing syncs anyway :)
[23:58] <ajmitch> now that heimdal is in, I can file one for krb5-auth-dialog
[23:59] <Riddell> but since I'm done with syncs for today it'll probably stay there until my next archive day next week :)
[23:59] <ajmitch> surely they'll be done more than once a week?