[00:05] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: I don't take it personally and I don't think you should do that either. Why do you think they require something *only* from you and not from others (and by others I mean people who are not part of motu/ubuntu-cure-dev)? When I get asked to fix something I've missed (like bug I haven't closed, some justification I haven't made) I just do it. The asking person isn't there to make my life
[00:05] <kklimonda> harder or to stop my efforts - he or she's helping me to learn from my mistakes and assure a degree of quality of all uploads I do. Are there developers who don't have to abide to some rules? Yes. For various reasons. Does it matter to me personally? Not really. Should it matter to you? I have no idea. If it does you can raise your opinion on the ubuntu-devel (or ubuntu-devel-discuss to get more
[00:05] <kklimonda> input from non-developers) whether do they see that as a problem. If it's a problem according to the majority of contributors I think it should be fixed. I'm not sure how.
[00:05] <kklimonda> bah, this discussion isn't best suited for IRC :)
[00:16] <maxb> Does anyone know of any cdbs-using package which does configure-make-make-install TWICE, against two different dependent-library versions in a single source?
[00:16] <maxb> I am trying to bludgeon slony1 into building against multiple postgres versions in a PPA
[00:37] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: ping. are you able to discuss? sorry for the delay
[00:39] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: sure. I still have some time :)
[00:43] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: heh nice, it's late. sorry again for the delay, I took the shower. Well, I don't like attitude of expierenced developers. They don't want to approve me to MOTU, because they don't like my behavior.
[00:43] <ari-tczew> apparently I can't integrate (and this same cooperate) with other contributors as team
[00:44] <ari-tczew> I guess that this is nonsense, because I only show/say my views.
[00:44] <ari-tczew> do I need to change my views, because someone don't like them? nonsense
[00:46] <ari-tczew> I don't offend anyone. If someone feels hurted by me, just tell me. We'll look for fix the problem.
[00:47] <ari-tczew> I see that my work and my time (time is money) is leaking by developers's fingers.
[00:48] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: we should probably move this to private chat (not that I want to hide something, it's just not going to be on the topic discussion). If you think it's more appropriate to discuss it here and others don't mind we can stay :).
[00:49] <ari-tczew> ScottK, I know that you're watching this or you'll see this: I thought about our problem and I have to say it: Ubuntu needs a contributors, not contributors needs Ubuntu
[00:50] <funkyHat> I notice that the new version of mpd is built for i386 but not amd64... is there often a long delay between the builds? (I checked the build status page and nothing's shown up there, it shouldn't, I built it for amd64 while testing ⢁))
[00:50] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: no, I want to show what are going here, because situation is not healthy
[00:51] <Laney> hi funkyHat, it appears to just be waiting to start
[00:51] <Laney> See https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mpd/0.15.9-2ubuntu1/+build/1784550
[00:51] <ajmitch> funkyHat: see the queue length at https://edge.launchpad.net/builders
[00:51] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: heh, fine. I'll assume then that others don't mind this discussion until proven otherwise.
[00:51] <funkyHat> Laney: ajmitch: thanks ⡈)
[00:51] <ajmitch> and yes, I built it on amd64 locally as well
[00:52] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: if someone want to undermine my views, let's talk.
[00:57] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: Okay. I can only base my view on comments (yours and those from other people) from your motu application, the two discussion with you I have seen, this discussion and our last private discussion I'm not willing to quote publicly. I can't comment from the technical standpoint as I don't work with you in any way.
[00:58] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: oooo! that's it! "base my view on comments"
[00:59] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: Ubuntu Developers team is created by a lot of people. We all have our differences, goals, worse and better days. We all share the same goal of making Ubuntu as good as it can be given the resources we all have.
[00:59] <ari-tczew> don't you have yours views? individually? I see that if someone wrote "he is not patient" then everybody wrote the same. sick!
[01:01] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: yes - I have my own view I'm presenting here. If you'd let me to write it first.It's based on all the comments from your application page - not only comments from other people but also your response.
[01:02] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: I believe you are making a mistake thinking that those who comment on your applications are following someone's lead.
[01:02] <ari-tczew> they wrote: more patience. ok, nice (btw. I think that this is character issue). I want to say: More gratitude and more understanding!
[01:03] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: ScottK and Laney have written their comments at different times, they are not related to the same issue.
[01:03] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: your lack of patience may be a character issue but it's something you have to work on. We all have our issues but at the end of the day we all have to work as a team.
[01:04] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: I see no problem with cooperate as a team and if someone tell me that I'm not ready for teamwork I'm going to say - nonsense! :|
[01:05] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: ScottK has, correctly, pointed your mistake out. Your reaction has been asking him to basically fix it or shut up.
[01:05] <ari-tczew> with Laney we have a clear question.
[01:06] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: we all make mistakes. Hell, I've done one myself just another day uploading SRU and forgetting to write a justification (I've discussed it with other developer and assumed incorrectly he'd be the one to process it). The problem is how do we deal with other people pointing them out.
[01:06] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: and ScottK exaggerates that I'm damaging bug tracker - sorry, but lol for it.
[01:07] <Laney> I once uploaded a PPA package to the distribution
[01:07] <Laney> which kicked off a transition far too early, that was a bad mistake
[01:07] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: I see that developers seems to be much sensitive
[01:08] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: sorry, but you have sounded so defensive it has actually been aggressive - It may not have been your intention, the language barrier can make heated discussion evern more heated but that's even more of a reason to weigh your words carefully.
[01:09] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: what is wrong in my words?
[01:09] <ari-tczew> show me
[01:09] <Laney> I think you guys should maybe take this to PM now
[01:09] <imbrandon> or email
[01:11] <ari-tczew> easiest way is say shut up and get out there, because just you're too small and you're only contributor and we are a developers! yea this is it
[01:18] <ari-tczew> I hope that you'll merge all packages and clean sponsors queue. Fix all CVEs and invite more contributors. good luck!
[01:20] <carstenh> #583698 is imho wronly tagged "importance low" and has an trivial debdiff attached
[01:23] <carstenh> that should have been "wrongly"
[01:32] <samliu> hi there, anyone happen to know how to package java applications from source? I could use some pointers
[01:35] <carstenh> apt-get source weirdx or any other random java package does not help?
[01:36] <carstenh> ok, X in java does not sound that easy, but there are other packages
[01:43] <micahg> carstenh: I think that was set low because it was a corner case, but I might be wrong
[01:44] <carstenh> wrong decisions can be fixed ;)
[02:25] <ScottK> ari-tczew: Ubuntu needs a community and that means people need to be able to deal with criticism without being reactive and hostile.
[02:29] <ari-tczew> ScottK: are you sure that you are able to got criticism?
[02:30] <ari-tczew> after thoughts I want to tell you, that your opinion is very exaggerated
[02:33] <ScottK> ari-tczew: I'm not always perfect at it.
[02:33] <ScottK> No one is perfect at anything.
[02:34] <ScottK> If you can't accept feedback from fellow developers I don't trust you to have upload rights.
[02:34] <ScottK> Your continuing to argue about it convinces me more that I am correct.  If you want to change my mind, start by accepting responsiblity for them.
[02:35] <ari-tczew> ScottK: since 4 hours I want to show: only your opinion is correct. ONLY!
[02:35] <ari-tczew> and I can say nothing
[02:36] <ScottK> ari-tczew: FWIW, I agree with you that there are developers that don't do a proper job of documenting changes.
[02:40] <ari-tczew> ScottK: is your opinion irrefutable? always are sure 100%?
[02:40] <ari-tczew> can not I criticise you?
[02:41] <ScottK> ari-tczew: No.  I'm not always 100% certain, but you're aggressive behaviour at the moment is convincing me more that I am correct in this case.
[02:41] <ScottK> By attacking me, you are making it worse.
[02:41] <ScottK> You may also note that several other people have said similar things to you.
[02:41] <ScottK> You might consider that we aren't all wrong.
[02:42] <ari-tczew> ScottK: who?
[02:43] <ari-tczew> I know about you and Laney but with Laney we have a clear situation
[02:43] <ScottK> I read kklimonda's comments as similar.
[02:43] <ScottK> That's just today.
[02:44] <ari-tczew> ScottK: I suggest to update your opinion about: do you have problem with me about packaging skill or problem with behavior?
[02:45] <ari-tczew> I think that we need to split these issues
[02:45] <ScottK> ari-tczew: I haven't sponsored anything of yours recently (if ever), so I don't have an opinion on your packaging skills.
[02:45] <ScottK> I don't think I've ever said anything bad about them.
[02:46] <ari-tczew> ScottK: I don't like see "he is damaging bug tracker"
[02:47] <ScottK> Ah.  That's not packaging exactly in my view.
[02:48] <ScottK> You were making inappropriate changes to the bug tracker and saying you were going to continue doing it.
[02:48] <ScottK> That was damaging the bug tracker.
[02:48] <ScottK> You did, in the end, change your mind on that.
[02:50] <ari-tczew> ScottK: I have enough, sorry. Good luck and have fun!
[02:51] <ScottK> ari-tczew: Please also note that nowhere have I said you should never be a MOTU nor have I said you should not contribute to the project.
[02:52] <ScottK> (for reference, I have said that before and that individual is still the only person ever to have been disallowed from volunteering for MOTU work)
[02:52] <ajmitch> now he was damaging
[02:52] <ScottK> Yes.
[02:52] <jean>  
[02:53] <ari-tczew> fine then. I won't damage anymore
[02:54] <ScottK> ari-tczew: If I see a pattern of you being accepting of feedback from other developers and not hostile/defensive, then I'll reconsider my position, but I have to see it first.
[02:56] <ari-tczew> ScottK: argumented feedback OK, but with this damaging is very big word
[02:56] <ari-tczew> nothing else which has done is not important, only this one mistake
[02:56] <ajmitch> wasn't that text removed from the feedback section?
[02:56] <ScottK> I'm double checking
[02:57] <ajmitch> from what I can see, it was only there for an hour until you changed it to be more diplomatic
[02:58] <ScottK> ari-tczew: The word you are complaining about isn't there anymore.
[02:58] <ScottK> It hasn't been for quite some time.
[02:58]  * ajmitch isn't quite sure of the value of changing -1build1 uploads to -1fakesync1 - AFAIK it's only -XubuntuY revisions that are special-cased for syncs
[02:58] <ScottK> ajmitch: In theory if we use fakesync1, then the sync script could get smart enough to autosync new upstream versions.
[02:59] <ScottK> But not new revisions that would need to be handled manually.
[02:59] <ari-tczew> I heard that autosync from Debian is going to sync XbuildY packages, but if this is fakesync, autosync provides a lot of error messages and archive admins are not satisfied
[03:00] <ScottK> That's correct.
[03:00] <ScottK> Traditionally I've always used ubuntu1 for a fakesync exactly so syncsource wouldn't attempt to sync it.
[03:01] <ari-tczew> so I'm going to make fakesyncs for not provide error messages by autosync
[03:01] <ari-tczew> but if it's ubuntu1 then we don't know directly about mismatching tarball
[03:03] <ari-tczew> ScottK: so changing version to fakesync it;s correct or not?
[03:03] <ScottK> ari-tczew: I think it's a new idea and there is no clear policy yet.
[03:03] <ScottK> I think it's fine to do it, but I also wouldn't be suprised if other people disagreed.
[03:03] <ari-tczew> fine, so let's sponsor my patches
[03:04] <ScottK> ari-tczew: I've got other work planned for this evening.
[03:04] <ari-tczew> ScottK: I said this generally, not precisely point this work on you
[03:04] <ScottK> ari-tczew: OK.
[03:06] <ari-tczew> ok, let's get shutdown launchpad and irc. see you! good luck and have fun again
[03:07] <ajmitch> it must be fairly late there :)
[03:07] <ari-tczew> yea
[03:08] <kklimonda> ajmitch: don't even ask. this discussion has been too long ;)
[03:08] <ajmitch> kklimonda: oh I know
[03:09] <ajmitch> I've been watching it go on
[03:09] <ajmitch> and I'm still not convinced about uploading a whole lot of fakesyncs where the only change is in the changelog to shut up buggy tools
[03:10] <kklimonda> ok, time to get as much sleep as I can. g'night :)
[03:11] <ajmitch> night
[03:16] <ScottK> ajmitch: I agree we shouldn't upload just to call it fakesync, but I think there's a useful distinction to be made and so when doing a new fakesync (for other needed reasons), it's a decent idea to use Xfakesync1.
[03:16] <ajmitch> right, but quite a few of the packages by ari-tzcew that I can see in the sponsoring queue are just for this
[03:17] <ScottK> I wouldn't support that.
[03:17] <ajmitch> which is why I was checking up on what the autosync tools look at
[03:17] <ScottK> Currently it will just overwrite buildX.
[03:17] <ajmitch> I didn't think there'd be any difference between -1build1 and -1fakesync1 at this point
[03:17] <ScottK> It's probably trivial to teach it to have new upstream versions overwrite fakesync.
[03:18] <ajmitch> at least not in terms of errors done
[03:18] <ScottK> Maybe it's the other way around.
[03:18]  * ScottK didn't look.
[03:18] <ajmitch> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/exifprobe/+bug/591259 is an example of one I was hesitant to sponsor
[03:19] <ScottK> wgrant: Will syncsource.py do a sync for a fakesync1 revision?
[03:19]  * ajmitch has the LP source to look at here
[03:20] <ajmitch> though wgrant is the acknowledged expert
[03:20] <ScottK> Oh, right.  Forgot you do that stuff too.
[03:20] <ajmitch> I don't really :)
[03:20] <ScottK> You have the source, so you're way ahead of me.
[03:22] <ajmitch> from what I can see, it's only looking for the string 'ubuntu' in the version
[03:24] <ScottK> OK,
[03:24] <ajmitch> it shouldn't need forcing for either -1build1 or -1fakesync1, and would treat them the same
[03:24] <ajmitch> amusing, it calls dak_utils.fubar() to complain
[03:25] <ScottK> How hard would it be for it to treat XfakesyncY like XbuildY if the candidate has a new upstream and like XubuntuY if it is just a new revision?
[03:25] <ScottK> Nice.
[03:26] <ajmitch> from what I can see, it wouldn't take much, if it splits the upstream versions & compares on those if faeksync is in the debian revision
[03:28]  * ScottK whistles inoccently and looks around for someone with the source handy to make a branch....
[03:28] <ajmitch> fine, I'll fork it :P
[03:29] <ajmitch> testing this will be fun
[04:21] <TheMuso> raywang: Seems Debian's git repos have been updated with at-spi2 v0.3.3. I am probably going to base off those for the time being. What is wrong with v0.3.3 at the moment?
[04:21] <raywang> TheMuso, okay, I'll find some clue for you. :)
[04:22] <TheMuso> raywang: Its just that you said there were important bugs in it, and are sticking with 0.3.2 in your PPA.
[04:22] <TheMuso> raywang: I am just curious as to why.
[04:24] <raywang> TheMuso, no, no, I just mean that if there is no one taking care of packaging at-spi2, I'd love to help on, but if someone is doing it.I'd like to use them. :)
[04:24] <TheMuso> raywang: ok I will likely uploading the Debian packages to a PPA later, that is if I don't need to make changes myself to suit Ubuntu.
[04:26] <raywang> TheMuso, and what I mean for 0.3.2 is I just know there are some/few bugs that i believe is important, they might break something, so i didn't package 0.3.3.  but I'll find them for you. and then we will see. :-)
[04:26] <TheMuso> raywang: Doesn't matter, it all needs testing anyway, I'll just upload the latest.
[04:27] <raywang> TheMuso, that's great
[04:27] <TheMuso> 8/c
[04:32] <raywang> TheMuso, so where I can find the new at-spi2 upload?
[04:32] <raywang> TheMuso, and who is currently maintain them?
[04:32] <TheMuso> raywang: They are currently in the pkg-a11y git repo on git.debian.org
[04:33] <raywang> alright
[04:36] <raywang> TheMuso, okay, I may made some mistake, the latest release would probably good enough. and I forget the bug that I have seen before. :P
[04:39] <TheMuso> ok
[04:42] <raywang> it's great to see Samuel Thibault is taking care of those packages.
[04:45] <TheMuso> yep
[04:46] <TheMuso> hrm. They don't have at-spi2-pyatspi there it seems.
[04:46] <raywang> TheMuso, it's call pyatspi
[04:46] <raywang> called
[04:46] <TheMuso> raywang: that explains it then. :p
[04:48] <raywang> TheMuso, so, he is taking charge of them, but anyway I would still like to do something for a11y, if there is anything i can do, please let me know. :)
[04:48] <TheMuso> raywang: Sure, thanks for the offer of assistance.
[04:48] <raywang> my pleasure
[05:56] <ripps> Does anybody here know how to make dkms package. Lucid/Maverick aren't able to use wacom bamboo ctl-460+ because the kernel uses out of date code. I was hoping I could help a lot of people by using dkms to auto-update the wacom module everytime a kernel is installed
[06:00] <ScottK> ripps: Did you try looking at a package that already uses dkms?
[06:01] <ripps> ScottK: not yet, do know an example of one that's well done?
[06:01] <micahg> does virtualbox-ose use it?
[06:02] <ripps> hmm, there's a virtualbox-ose-dkms package
[06:03] <ScottK> bcmwl uses it too.
[06:06] <ripps> any packages that use debhelper 7?
[06:08] <ripps> well, I found a template that uses cdbs, I guess that'll have to do.
[06:55] <jetienne> http://packages.debian.org/sid/nodejs this package is in debian but not in ubuntu, what is the process to get it included in ubuntu repositories ?
[07:02] <statik> jetienne, you can use the requestsync tool to file a bug requesting that the package be synced into ubuntu.
[07:02] <jetienne> statik: ok. i will see how to use this tool
[07:03] <ajmitch> it is in maverick
[07:06] <jetienne> Connecting to fiordland.ubuntu.com:25 ...
[07:06] <jetienne> Sync request mailed.
[07:06] <jetienne> should i supposed it worked ? where can i double check?
[07:07] <ajmitch> a sync request wasn't needed
[07:08] <ajmitch> !backports
[07:11] <jetienne> ajmitch: so the request wont make it happen ?
[07:11] <statik> ah, i just took your word for it that it wasn't in ubuntu
[07:11] <statik> sorry about sending you in the wrong direction there
[07:13] <ScottK> jetienne: It's already happened.
[07:13] <jetienne> ScottK: nodejs is already in ubuntu you mean ?
[07:13] <ScottK> Yes.
[07:14] <jetienne> ScottK: why apt-cache search dont find it ?
[07:14] <ScottK> It's just in the maverick release, not lucid.  If you want to get it backported to lucid, follow the backports process
[07:15] <jetienne> ScottK: oh cool, thanks. next release is fine by me
[07:25] <ajmitch> I'll close the bug now then :)
[07:27] <jetienne> https://bugs.launchpad.net/lucid-backports/+bug/592034
[07:30] <RAOF> What?  _Another_ javascript interpreter?
[07:31] <jetienne> RAOF: this is v8, you can find it in chrome and chromium. This is the server version + nice network library
[07:53] <dholbach> good morning
[12:19] <BlackZ> if a new package in debian is still not synced in ubuntu should be filed a sync request? (also if the package isn't in ubuntu)
[12:45] <dholbach> Packaging Training Session in 15m in #ubuntu-classroom: Operation Cleansweep and the Patch Reviewers Team!
[14:15] <jetienne> BlackZ: yes (according to what i have been told this morning)
[14:18] <sebner> jetienne: BlackZ : Auto-syncs should still run some time?!
[14:19] <jetienne> sebner: ? dunno, just repeating what i have been told
[14:19] <BlackZ> sebner: yeah, but it's not still synced in ubuntu, BTW I'd like to ask the sync because there's a package which FTBFS because of a missing dependence
[14:20] <siretart> did you check that it's not still in the NEW queue?
[14:23] <BlackZ> siretart: seems not
[15:01] <ScottK> BlackZ: In Debian Main or Contrib/Non-free?
[15:01] <BlackZ> ScottK: main
[15:02] <ScottK> jetienne: What you were told before wasn't exactly correct.  Prior to Debian Import Freeze (which is were we are now), there should be no need to file sync requests.
[15:02] <ScottK> BlackZ: What package?
[15:02] <BlackZ> ScottK: glue-schema
[15:02] <jetienne> ScottK: ok, how long is the Debian Import Freeze ?
[15:03] <ScottK> !schedule | jetienne
[15:03] <ScottK> oops.
[15:03] <ScottK> Let me get you the link.
[15:03] <jetienne> http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/releases <- this one is a 404
[15:04] <ScottK> jetienne: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MaverickReleaseSchedule
[15:05] <BlackZ> ScottK: so, should I file a sync request?
[15:05] <ScottK> BlackZ: Looking
[15:06] <jetienne> ScottK: ok
[15:08] <ScottK> BlackZ: It depends on how urgent it is.  It's a relatively new package.  New packages only get brought in by a separate type of sync run that is done less often.  It will get run again before DIF, so I'm certain it will get into Maverick.  If you can wait, I wouldn't file the sync request as it's more manual work for the archive admins.
[15:09] <jetienne> the interest of lucid is the LTS support. especially for the package relevant on servers
[15:15] <BlackZ> ScottK: I can wait, but it's a required dependence for a package (actually it FTBFS due to that)
[15:16] <ScottK> BlackZ: If for some reason it's not here by DIF, then request a sync.  I'm pretty sure it will be.
[15:16] <ScottK> It's very difficult to reliably work on archive consistency stuff like that prior to DIF anyway.
[15:18] <BlackZ> ScottK: ok, thanks
[16:15] <tonyyarusso> Where does dh_install look for files, in v6 mode?
[16:30] <ScottK> Why v6?
[16:36] <tonyyarusso> ScottK: I thought it might be useful to make things compatible with hardy still.  I guess if that's stupid I could skip it.
[16:37] <ScottK> tonyyarusso: Hardy has debhelper 7 in backports.
[16:37] <tonyyarusso> oh, wait.  debhelper is only a build-depends, not a depends.  Then yeah, this is stupid.
[16:38]  * tonyyarusso was thinking about the production servers for some reason instead of just build machines
[16:41] <tonyyarusso> ScottK: the first part of the question still stands I guess, although supposedly it looks in $builddirectory/debian/tmp.  Testing that now...
[16:46] <tonyyarusso> gah
[16:46] <tonyyarusso> Still getting "dh_install: nagios-xi-agent missing files (conf/nrpe.d/*.cfg), aborting"
[16:46] <tonyyarusso> from ls, /tmp/buildd/nagios-xi-agent-0.1/debian/tmp/conf/nrpe.d:
[16:47] <tonyyarusso> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1.2K Jun 10 15:45 common.cfg
[16:47] <ScottK> What if you change *.cfg to common.cfg?
[16:49] <tonyyarusso> I'll try that, but the documentation seems to agree that dh_install should be okay with wildcards.
[16:51] <tonyyarusso> On the plus side, it's making me really happy that I'm not waiting for some 3-hour compile every time to figure this out :P
[16:53] <tonyyarusso> cp: cannot stat `debian/tmp/conf/nrpe.d/common.cfg': No such file or directory
[16:54] <Rhonda> tonyyarusso: You don't have to completely build, you even can run the dh_ scripts manually by hand.
[17:00] <tonyyarusso> I wish I could find some good examples of this somewhere.
[17:27] <xteejx> Hey guys, trying to merge a package with the merge-buildpackage script and it keeps coming up with "tail: cannot open `debian/changelog' for reading: No such file or directory"  help?
[17:31] <xteejx> Any ideas?
[17:32] <xteejx> I'm in the same directory as the merge script
[17:47] <geser> you should call it from the packaging dir
[17:48] <xteejx> geser: You mean from the source dir or the build dir (where the dsc and tars are?
[17:56] <geser> in the unpacked directory
[18:02] <xteejx> ah ha!! thanks geser it's working now, didn't think to try something as simple as that hehe :)
[18:16] <Guest24362> hello is there anyone who could review my application? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=cortina
[18:17] <Guest24362> nick eric
[18:18] <eric2> ok well no one answers... could someone tell me the next review day??
[18:19] <carstenh> patience ... people don't read irc all day
[18:19] <eric2> ok
[18:35] <heff09> hello ive just upgraded to lucid and have some questions, is any 1 on ?
[18:36] <Pici> heff09: If you're looking for a support channel, #ubuntu is the place, if this is a packaging/motu question then please continue.
[18:37] <heff09> ok my problem is to do with fgrun not opening when installed ?
[18:37] <heff09> is there help here with that ?
[18:39] <danohuiginn> I have a bug that's fixed by rebuilding the package (bug #589443).
[18:39] <danohuiginn> so I believe the correct procedure is to add an entry to the changelog, so the build daemons will rebuild it. Is that right?
[18:39] <Pici> heff09: Why do you think that is something for the MOTUs?
[18:39] <danohuiginn> And Is there somewhere I can see build logs for the earlier package, to figure out what went wrong beforehand?
[18:40] <heff09> sorry noob here dont know what MOTUs is
[18:40] <ScottK> danohuiginn: Those are stored in Launchpad as wekk.
[18:40] <Pici> heff09: You are in the #ubuntu-motu channel right now, not #ubuntu
[18:41] <heff09> ok
[18:41] <Pici> heff09: This channel is for the people who do the packaging of applications in the repositories, it is not the place to get regular support.
[18:42] <hyperair> !#ubuntu
[18:42] <Pici> !support
[18:42] <hyperair> ah whoops =p
[18:42] <Pici> :)
[18:44] <danohuiginn> ScottK: thanks. Where exactly do I find wekk on launchpad? searching isn't turning anything up
[18:44] <asomething> danohuiginn: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/48295354/buildlog_ubuntu-maverick-i386.pdfshuffler_0.5-1_FULLYBUILT.txt.gz
[18:44] <danohuiginn> thanks, asomething
[19:06] <ScottK> danohuiginn: I agree it needs a rebuild.
[19:09] <ScottK> danohuiginn: For a rebuild it's trivial to upload a no chance version.  I'll take care of it.
[19:09] <danohuiginn> Ok. thanks, ScottK
[19:10] <danohuiginn> although the build log seemed to contain a few errors as well
[19:10] <ScottK> It did.  I checked and it builds fine now.
[19:11] <danohuiginn> great
[19:21] <ScottK> danohuiginn: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pdfshuffler/0.5-1build1
[19:22] <ScottK> danohuiginn: Thank you for your contribution to Ubuntu.
[19:22] <danohuiginn> thanks for being so welcoming :)
[19:25] <jcastro> hyperair: were you the one working on putting pdfmod in ubuntu/debian?
[19:26] <hyperair> jcastro: yes. i'm stuck at getting pdfsharp in.
[19:26]  * jcastro nods
[19:26] <hyperair> jcastro: it'll take time, and i haven't had a suitably contiguous block of time
[19:26] <hyperair> to look at it, i mean
[19:26] <jcastro> is there anything I can do to help?
[19:26]  * jcastro thinks it would be a nice featured app in the software center
[19:28] <hyperair> jcastro: nothing much really. i'll just have to figure out how to use xbuild, and then get it to work on pdfsharp
[19:28] <hyperair> i should probably start working on poppler-sharp too, i've gotten it autotoolized upstream
[20:20] <MaximLevitsky> what is the policy on EXPREMENTAL in the ubuntu kernel?
[20:21] <imbrandon> not to say someone wont awnser here, but you might have a b it better luck in #ubuntu-kernel for that one
[20:21] <imbrandon> s/b it/bit
[22:28] <gnomefreak> did anyone else get emails from admin@ubuntu.com?
[22:28] <ajmitch> you meanapart from the usual spam/phishing/general crap that comes through with fake addresses?
[22:29] <geser> "Subject: ubuntu.com account notification"?
[22:30] <gnomefreak> yes
[22:30] <ajmitch> that's usual, just delete them
[22:30] <geser> I've currently 66 of them in my spambox
[22:30] <gnomefreak> thats the first time i saw them but none of them say to me
[22:36] <gnomefreak> thanks for the info
[22:42] <ajmitch> ScottK: so I've changed sync-source.py to complain & bail out if trying to sync a package with fakesync in the revision & same upstream versions
[22:43] <ajmitch> the fun part will be testing it, and seeing if the archive admins with shell access will find it useful
[22:43] <ScottK> Cool.
[22:43] <ScottK> I'd say if it tests out, send mail to ubuntu-devel and let's discuss.
[22:44] <ajmitch> & then run the launchpad patch submission gauntlet
[22:46] <ScottK> meh.  Details.
[23:24] <ajmitch> [NOT Updating - Fakesync] hello_2.5-0fakesync1 (vs 2.5-1)
[23:24] <ajmitch> k, so that works
[23:26] <geser> but hello 2.6-1 would get autosynced?
[23:26] <ajmitch> yes
[23:27] <ajmitch> apt_pkg.upstream_version() is useful for that
[23:53] <jcastro> directhex: #sparkleshare on gimpnet pls.