[07:30] <dholbach> good morning
[07:45] <iulian> Good morning Daniel.
[07:46] <iulian> Hey DktrKranz.
[07:50] <DktrKranz> hey iulian
[07:58] <kaushal> hi
[07:59] <kaushal> is this the right channel to discuss about pxe image to install ubuntu server on a new server ?
[08:03] <Rhonda> I don't think so, but I might be wrong.
[08:03] <maxwellian> !#ubuntu-motu
[08:03] <maxwellian> :\
[08:06] <maxwellian> kaushal: The topic of this channel is the maintenance of Ubuntu packages and repositories.
[08:06] <maxwellian> kaushal: You will probably have more luck in #ubuntu.
[08:07] <kaushal> maxwellian, Thanks
[08:09] <maxwellian> kaushal: Welcome.
[09:07] <huats> morning
[09:17] <artfwo> is anyone feeling like looking at a merge bug 601754? (with source package renamed)
[09:44] <kaushal> can someone please guide me about my post on https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-server/2010-July/004402.html
[10:51] <ara> hello all! what was the ubuntu-dev-tools command to update the maintainers field?
[10:52] <soren> update-maintainer :)
[10:52] <soren> ara: ^
[10:52] <ara> soren, thanks, I could have guessed that one ;-)
[10:53] <soren> ara: no comment :)
[11:04] <geser> ara: sorry, that we aren't creative enough to give the scripts obscure names. patches welcome :)
[11:05] <lifeless> geser: uum :P
[11:09] <freeflyi1g> persia: ping
[11:56] <ryanakca> Whoever last merged a package made all of the changes inline. Is it better to lug around inline patches or can I add quilt to debian/control and manage them there?
[11:59] <Laney> don't add a patchsys if there isn't one already
[12:00] <soren> It's a matter of taste, really.
[12:00] <soren> If there's already a bunch of patches applied "inline", I woulnd't recommend adding quilt to the mix. That would be very confusing.
[12:01] <soren> If the package has no patches applied, and you're going to add a bunch, I'd probably use quilt (perhaps by way of a 3.0 (quilt) format source package).
[12:02] <soren> The goal is to minimise a) confusion and b) effort to merge the stuff back to Debian.
[12:02] <bilalakhtar> Hey there! If I have an Ubuntu.com e-mail address, can I maintain packages in ubuntu?
[12:02] <soren> bilalakhtar: Anyone can maintain packages in Ubuntu.
[12:02] <Laney> If you mean "can I be the sole uploader", then probably not
[12:03] <bilalakhtar> soren: I mean, having Maintainer: set to you in control
[12:04] <soren> bilalakhtar: The Maintainer field can (at least in theory) be set to anything.
[12:04] <bilalakhtar> soren: ok, read the wiki page, got it
[12:04] <soren> bilalakhtar: But other people may still upload the package.
[12:05] <bilalakhtar> soren: of course, ^^ is always possible
[12:05] <bilalakhtar> Maverick DIF complete? So soon?
[12:29] <kaushal> hi
[12:29] <kaushal> is there a way to create PXE Netboot image ?
[17:10] <shadeslayer> uh... any ideas on this error : http://pastebin.com/875CDQMj .. im seeing it for the first time ( new upstream release of qtcreator )
[17:11] <micahg> shadeslayer: file in patch no longer exists?
[17:12] <shadeslayer> micahg: i removed the patch,same error....
[17:12] <shadeslayer> ( in fact i removed the whole debian/patch folder )
[17:14] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: the problem isn't with the patches you've got, but with the one it's trying to generate
[17:14] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: my guess is clean is responsible
[17:15] <shadeslayer> uh.. ok...so edit the rules file?
[17:15] <tumbleweed> well you need to find where that change is coming from
[17:16] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: hm... well i checked the sources and upstream is responsible i think...
[17:16] <shadeslayer> there are new symlinks to files...
[17:17] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: the reason it's generating the patch is because that symlink was created inbetween source extraction and source building
[17:18] <tumbleweed> so probably in the clean rule
[17:18] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: what patch? there is no patch ...
[17:19] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: source format 3.0 (quilt) takes all the changes you've made to the source outside /debian, and turns them into a quilt patch
[17:19] <shadeslayer> ahh.. but i didnt change anything ...
[17:19] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: but the clean rule gets run before the source package gets built
[17:26] <shadeslayer> ah.. so effectively its because clean gets run,that causes changes to the source
[17:26] <tumbleweed> my guess is that, yes
[17:27] <shadeslayer> hmm.. ill poke this some more...
[17:27] <tumbleweed> (btw, when working with 3.0 quilt packages, always check to see that you didn't generate a quilt patch by mistake)
[17:27] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: btw do patches contain info on how many lines have been changed? or just the position of the lines
[17:28] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: man diffstat
[17:28] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: thanks
[17:29] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: btw how long will you be around?
[17:31] <tumbleweed> probably all evening
[17:31] <shadeslayer> kool :D
[17:31] <tumbleweed> (/me shouldn't say that) :)
[17:31] <shadeslayer> hehe :D
[17:40] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: lol... i just cleaned out everything and ran debuild again and its working :P
[17:41] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: good. just check that it hasn't generated a debian-changes-foo patch
[17:41] <shadeslayer> nope
[17:42] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: btw can you help me with kdepim-runtime?
[17:42] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: oh wait... it just generated a patch
[17:42] <shadeslayer> dolphin refresh rates are low i guess....
[17:43] <tumbleweed> ok, you need to stop it generating that patch
[17:43] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: how?
[17:43] <tumbleweed> see what's in it, try adn work out where they came from
[17:45] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: http://pastebin.com/8nptsb0i
[17:58] <abhi_nav> shadeslayer, you there?
[17:58] <tumbleweed> sorry, I timed out for a while there (ZA has big connectivity issues atm). shadeslayer: just delete those two files at teh end of clean?
[17:58] <shadeslayer> abhi_nav: yes
[17:59] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: ok
[17:59] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: just using rm -rf debian/patches
[17:59] <abhi_nav> I am doint this from motu wiki
[17:59] <abhi_nav> sudo pbuilder create --distribution $(lsb_release -cs) \
[17:59] <abhi_nav> >         --othermirror "deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu $(lsb_release -cs) main restricted universe multiverse"
[17:59] <shadeslayer> uh..
[17:59] <shadeslayer> abhi_nav: #ubuntu-packaging
[17:59] <abhi_nav> what is this? it is now for long time just retriving each package and validating it
[17:59] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: that's not a fix
[18:00] <abhi_nav> shadeslayer, you free to talk naa?
[18:00] <shadeslayer> abhi_nav: kinda
[18:00] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: not a fix as in?
[18:00] <shadeslayer> you mean i have to find the actuall problem and fix it? oh ok
[18:00] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: deleting the patch after dpkg-source creates it is ugly at best
[18:01] <shadeslayer> :P
[18:11] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: btw why does that patch get created?
[18:12] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: source format 3 has debian.tar.gz which only has the contetns of debian. It can't hold changes to other files, like .diff.gz can
[18:13] <shadeslayer> ohh.. so  it gets converted to a patch...
[18:13] <tumbleweed> correct. But it's bad, you should create the patches yourself (and describe them decently in their header)
[18:13] <shadeslayer> hmm
[18:14] <shadeslayer> that reminds me,i have to look at qipmsg as well :P
[18:48] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: uh.. i think i found the issue
[18:48] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: i was basically renaming the extracted folder..
[18:49] <shadeslayer> so i think that caused the issue... renamed it from qt-creator to qtcreator
[18:50] <tumbleweed> glad you found it
[18:51] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: now you will have to sponsor the upload :P
[18:52] <shadeslayer> ill just let it run through debuild once..
[18:52] <shadeslayer> after kdepim is done :P
[18:53] <tumbleweed> test in a pbuilder if you can
[18:53] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: sure... i can use that too.. its just that qtcreator takes about 90 mins to build :P
[18:53] <shadeslayer> i can use debuild -nc if something goes wrong with debuild
[18:53] <shadeslayer> not with pbuilder
[18:54] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: /usr/share/doc/pbuilder/examples/C10shell
[18:54] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: the hook that exits to shell?
[18:54] <shadeslayer> i have it.. can i run debuild nc with it?
[18:56] <tumbleweed> that hook fires up a shell and installs vim so you can look around and try things. not too sure what you are asknig on the second line
[19:00] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: ^^
[19:00] <shadeslayer> oh sorry
[19:01] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: i meant that after i drop to shell,can i run debuild -nc ?
[19:01] <tumbleweed> it's a root shell, and doesn't have devscripts installed, so I noramlly just do debian/rules binary
[19:02] <shadeslayer> hm
[19:02] <tumbleweed> not qidentical to building in fakeroot, but you can work out what's wrong, test solutions, and then try again
[19:03] <tumbleweed> "quite identical"
[19:03] <shadeslayer> ok
[19:55] <ScottL> chrisccoulson, have you had a chance to consider the gnome-network-admin bug concerning the disabled gui for Ubuntu Studio
[19:55] <ScottL> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-system-tools/+bug/570828
[19:56] <ScottL> chrisccoulson, i was hoping to have it resolved for 10.04.1
[20:01] <ScottL> ubuntu studio doesn't ship network-manager by default because it generally creates too much latency for recording
[20:02] <ScottL> and with network-admin having a disabled gui this people who are not hard wired into a router that handles DCHP for them automagically without ANY network
[20:12] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: around?
[20:13]  * shadeslayer needs help with revu comments 
[20:13] <shadeslayer> well... anyone who can help with http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=8338 : last comment
[20:16] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: what do you need help with in particular?
[20:16] <shadeslayer> ah : * The last sentence of the short-gpl3+ is completely wrong in this context since we, as a debian system distribute the license in the mentioned location the reader of this file will in 90% of all cases not look at the source package but at the file as installed along the binary package.
[20:17] <shadeslayer> dont understand what apachelogger means :P
[20:17] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: we change the sentance about writing to FSF to say that you can find the GPL3 in /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-3 on debian based systems
[20:17] <shadeslayer> hmm
[20:18] <shadeslayer> http://pastebin.com/rRS79UHQ
[20:18] <shadeslayer> tumbleweed: line 30?
[20:18] <tumbleweed> replace lines 29 and 30
[20:19] <shadeslayer> hmm... with? You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
[20:19] <shadeslayer>        along with QIpMsg.  If not, see "/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-3"
[20:19] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: look at other packages on your system
[20:20] <shadeslayer> ok
[20:39] <mirak_> hi
[20:50] <loneowais_> Hey guys, I wrote an small app
[20:50] <loneowais_> a gmail/google apps notifier for ubuntu. Any chance of making it into the universe
[20:50] <MTecknology> this may be a stretch but... is it possible to make a package that just changes configs? Like, apache has one config, I install a package that has apache as a dependency, and all it does it install a different config over it
[20:50] <MTecknology> loneowais_: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/
[21:00] <carstenh> MTecknology: this would require a dpkg with support for config file diversions to work well.  there are some hacks around like config-package-dev.
[21:02] <Laney> Do you have to overwrite? Apache has /etc/apache2/*-available and a2en* that you can use
[21:03] <MTecknology> apache was an example
[21:03] <MTecknology> I want to write a package for my servers that changes the configs for a few packages
[21:04] <MTecknology> half the packages don't support /etc/default/
[21:04] <carstenh> puppet is another hack to solce such things ;) an example config is available in the debian dsa git repository
[21:04] <carstenh> solve
[21:04] <Laney> I don't think there is a policy compliant way to do it
[21:05] <MTecknology> :(
[21:05] <MTecknology> so I'd be better off actually tweaking the packages themselves?
[21:06] <Laney> have a look at policy §10.7.4
[21:06] <Laney> but of course if you don't intend to distribute the package then you can do whatever you like
[21:07] <carstenh> MTecknology: an tweak them again on every security upgrade? (btw dpkg-repack would be a tool to du such things)
[21:07] <carstenh> s/an/and/
[21:08] <tumbleweed> you can preseed debconf settings, but not very much is exposed that way
[21:09] <MTecknology> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html
[21:09] <carstenh> slack is another tool to handle config files
[21:10] <MTecknology> oooh
[21:10] <Laney> a package probably isn't the best way
[21:11] <MTecknology> either slack is amazingly simple or there's not much for docs about it
[21:11] <carstenh> both ;)
[21:11] <MTecknology> thanks :)
[21:12] <carstenh> MTecknology: dget the source package and check the files in it, the packaging is missing the most useful documentation
[21:13] <MTecknology> alrighty, it looks like a really nice tool
[21:24] <MTecknology> !info php5-cgi