[01:08] persia: are you around? === shadeslayer is now known as evilshadeslayer === fta_ is now known as fta === yofel_ is now known as yofel [02:12] tumbleweed: poke [02:12] tumbleweed: bug 603831 [02:12] Launchpad bug 603831 in fprint-demo (Ubuntu) "Please Merge fprint-demo from debian" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/603831 === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta === MTecknology is now known as MTeck-ricer === fta_ is now known as fta === pythonlova is now known as apachelogger === warp11 is now known as warp10 === thekorn_ is now known as thekorn [09:34] is REVU actively used lately ? [11:04] Hello, I need help with an apport script, I want to get the value of a config variable, so I did this: [11:04] SLModemdDevice = command_output(['sh', '-c', '[ ! -r /etc/default/sl-modem-daemon ] || (. /etc/default/sl-modem-daemon ; echo $SLMODEMD_DEVICE)']) [11:04] is that correct ? [11:06] also, is there a way to test some apport functions directly in a python shell ? I tried , import apport ; command_output('ls') ; but that gave the following error: [11:06] NameError: name 'command_output' is not defined [11:06] when you use "import apport" then you need "apport.command_output('ls')" [11:07] or use "from apport import *" then "command_output('ls')" works [11:11] (although command_output is in apport.hookutils not apport) [11:37] ah, ok === BlackZ_ is now known as BlackZ [11:42] thanks === fta_ is now known as fta === Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech [13:40] tumbleweed: ping [13:41] ari-tczew: hi, is LP: #414247 good to go? [13:42] tumbleweed: do you mean bug 414247 ? [13:42] Launchpad bug 414247 in firmware-addon-dell (Ubuntu) "Please upgrade firmware-addon-dell to 2.2.9 version" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/414247 [13:42] ari-tczew: yes [13:42] tumbleweed: I'm not sure to coolbhavi package. Some things are not included. [13:51] tumbleweed: could you look at bug 602450 ? [13:51] Launchpad bug 602450 in python-xattr (Ubuntu) "Sync python-xattr 0.4-5 (universe) from Debian unstable (main)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/602450 [13:52] ari-tczew: my question on that is should I look at it or unsubscribe sponsors? [13:53] tumbleweed: hmm, not yet. I'd like to see a feedback from sponsor, who is expierenced with python packages. [13:54] in that case I'll look. If there's anything I know about, it's python [13:55] xattr sync looks good [14:07] anyone with experience with ruby apps packaging ? [14:08] this app Makefile is using /usr/local/lib/site_ruby for a ruby module (or whatever it's called), I have no idea on the expected place for ruby [14:21] joaopinto: look for motu ruby on launchpad [14:21] ok, tks [14:22] ari-tczew: btw you took on kadu right [14:22] ari-tczew: it doesnt need a merge :P [14:26] evilshadeslayer: I didn't look at kadu yet. [14:26] ari-tczew: doesnt need merging.. not from what i interpreted [14:28] evilshadeslayer: why? [14:28] ari-tczew: well,we the ubuntu package has a added dep,and debian doesnt ship with that dep [14:29] evilshadeslayer: so ubuntu should ship that dep. [14:29] so it;s needs merging [14:29] it;s due to new kde IIRC - that said debfx [14:30] you should rather understand why and whether we need to keep it [14:30] ari-tczew: uh wait,youve got it the wrong way :P [14:30] ari-tczew: we *do* ship that dep [14:30] ari-tczew: debian *doesnt* [14:30] build dep [14:31] evilshadeslayer: so why you want to drop it? [14:31] i dont want to drop it... [14:31] thats why it doesnt need a merge [14:35] evilshadeslayer: I don't understand you. [14:35] i dont understand my self sometimes:P [14:35] QtWebKit is no longer part of libqt4-dev so all packages using it need to build-depend on libqt4-webkit-dev. [14:36] ari-tczew: do you mind if i took a look at kadu? [14:37] evilshadeslayer: I think that we should ship that B-D. [14:37] ari-tczew: ok lemme look a it,and ill get back :) [14:46] would be nice if that changelog had more detail === fta_ is now known as fta [14:55] What ari-tczew said about QtWebKit is exactly correct. We're using a newer version of Qt than Debian, so we need to add this, whereas they don't. === shadeslayer_ is now known as evilshadeslayer === shadeslayer_ is now known as evilshadeslayer === evilshadeslayer_ is now known as evilshadeslayer [17:36] kadu ftbfs: error: 'fchmod' was not declared in this scope :( [17:43] ari-tczew, include #include in the ftb file [17:44] coolbhavi: already exist [17:44] or check if the header if already included is properly linking on to the compiler [17:45] coolbhavi: how can I check it? [17:53] ari-tczew, maybe something like this: gcc -include /path/to/directory/containing/header_name/header_name.h -o myoutputfile myoutputfile.c and you can compile and check again [17:54] coolbhavi: you are doing a lot work for Ubuntu. I encourage you to present here more frequently. In team we can do more and more. [17:54] ari-tczew, sure! [17:55] :P [17:55] ari-tczew: yeah i got involved with rbot.. seems debian released a new package [17:56] evilshadeslayer: what is rbot? [17:56] ari-tczew: one sec [17:56] !info rbot [17:56] rbot (source: rbot): IRC bot written in ruby. In component universe, is optional. Version 0.9.14-2ubuntu1 (lucid), package size 459 kB, installed size 1608 kB [17:56] aha [17:56] ^^ for eg [17:56] evilbot: hi [17:56] howdy, evilshadeslayer! [17:57] o_O [17:57] ari-tczew: hmm? [17:58] evilshadeslayer: nothing ;p don't care [17:58] :P [17:59] the current version doesnt work in ubuntu [17:59] was fixed in latest release [17:59] evilshadeslayer, rbot ftb'd on my PPA due to missing rake and some modules [17:59] coolbhavi: yeah im fixing those :P [18:00] :P [18:00] idk how but it doesnt ftbfs in debian [18:00] evilshadeslayer, build environments are different [18:00] yeah [18:01] probably build deps get pulled in properly there [18:01] hmm [18:16] coolbhavi: rbot fixed :) [18:16] just going through patches [18:17] evilshadeslayer, It required module tweaking and b-d on rake I guess :) [18:17] coolbhavi: had to add a few more build deps [18:17] coolbhavi: rake, rubygems, libgettext-ruby1.8 [18:18] evilshadeslayer, thats what i meant i think :) [18:18] yeah .. was just telling you which ones i added ;) [18:19] rock on :) [18:21] yeah.. will have to drop patches [18:21] :) === IdleOne is now known as IdleTwo === IdleTwo is now known as IdleOne [18:28] coolbhavi: am I correct with following command? gcc -include /usr/include/sys/stat.h -o main main.cpp [18:28] ari-tczew, try out on trial and error mate you ll stick! [18:30] coolbhavi: only errors in output ... [18:30] ari-tczew, try linking with ftb file [18:30] and see [18:31] if the header is included on recompilation [18:36] I don't understand. No idea how to fix it. === evilshadeslayer is now known as evilbot === evilbot is now known as skynet === skynet is now known as shadeslayer === shadeslayer is now known as Saphira === Saphira is now known as Arya === Arya is now known as Razac === Razac is now known as Solembum === Solembum is now known as editGrimrr === editGrimrr is now known as Grimrr === Grimrr is now known as Thorn === Thorn is now known as Glaedr === Glaedr is now known as Roran === Roran is now known as evilshadeslayer [19:04] if package doesn't have a patchsystem and I'm preparing a merge, can I patch files directly? [19:04] yes [19:06] the patch will appear in diff.gz.. === virtuald_ is now known as virtuald === evilshadeslayer is now known as Roran === rmcbride_ is now known as rmcbride [19:29] tumbleweed: I thought that if you'll join MOTU, then you'll doing less, but I see that you're active. I'm glad. thanks! [19:29] hmm [19:29] anyone up for a merge? [19:29] https://edge.launchpad.net/~rohangarg/+archive/experimental/+packages << merge from there.. after it builds === Roran is now known as evilshadeslayer [19:31] ari-tczew: yeah I thought I'd do less too. Dunno what happened :P [19:32] * evilshadeslayer looks at tumbleweed [19:33] tumbleweed: what do you think about upgrade libsmbios? [19:34] ari-tczew: yes, it's borken and needs to be fixed. I saw the merge bug, looks like it needs work [19:34] I have an SRU patch for when we have maverick sorted out [19:35] ok rbot built and needs love [19:38] evilshadeslayer: you don't like the review queue? :) [19:38] tumbleweed: i can upload to revu for merges too? :) [19:38] sweet :D [19:38] evilshadeslayer: [19:38] no, I meant ubuntu-sponsors [19:38] oh [19:38] evilshadeslayer: revu is for new packages [19:38] ari-tczew: yeah [19:39] tag: needs-packaging [19:39] ari-tczew: thats why i was surprised :P [19:39] tumbleweed: uh.. well.. sure.. ill file a bug [19:39] evilshadeslayer: can't you use a 1 nickname? [19:40] ari-tczew: ah.. i was registering a nick for the bot :P [19:40] ScottK: around? I'd like to try to figure out why we're seeing different results with drkonqi. :P [19:40] but all of them were taken :P [19:40] evilshadeslayer: if you have not the upload rights you have *always* to file a merge bug [19:40] BlackZ: yes.. im filing it [19:41] ScottK: ah, nm, I installed rekonq and see what you're seeing now. seems like it's different from kate somehow. [19:42] hi BlackZ: haven't seen much from you on the review queue recently [19:42] tumbleweed: I'm busy with exams, however I'm working on some merges now [19:43] BlackZ: can i point to the PPA instead of attaching a debdiff? [19:43] BlackZ: good :) [19:44] evilshadeslayer: no, please post the diffs, it makes life easier for the reviewer [19:44] tumbleweed: ok.. [19:44] or use bazaar [19:44] yeah, that too (although I still find the diff workflow faster) [19:45] evilshadeslayer: it would be better to attach a debdiff in the bug as a patch: 1. this will indicate the sponsors there's a patch; 2. the work of the sponsors will be facilitated [19:45] ok [19:47] evilshadeslayer: also, according to our policy for the merges, you have to attach two debdiffs to the bug report (if you just attach the debdiff of versiondebian -> versiomerged that's not a big deal) [19:48] yes, the ubuntu -> ubuntu diff can be massive. If it's more than a few screenfulls, nobody will read it anyway [19:48] BlackZ: im attaching diff of our current ubuntu packaging and new ubuntu packaging,since this is a new upstream release [19:50] I miss for archive admins :( [19:50] evilshadeslayer: if you're doing a version-upgrade the debdiff aren't suitable [19:50] i know ;) [19:50] since they can be too big (of size) [19:50] MoM would looks cleaner after ACKed syncs [19:50] yeah i pasted a 5 MB debdiff once [19:51] you could use your PPA (if you have one) for that [19:51] or a branch [19:51] evilshadeslayer: is this something debian doesn't have? or something debian is lagging behind in? [19:52] tumbleweed: whut? [19:52] evilshadeslayer: why are we getting a new version, not syncing from debian? [19:52] tumbleweed: were merging from debian since a sync would not work,we need extra deps to make the package not FTBFS [19:53] evilshadeslayer: in that case, you post a diff between the current debian version and your fixes [19:53] that diff should be small [19:53] evilshadeslayer: so it's not a version upgrade [19:53] evilshadeslayer: if that fixes a bug, it's a bug fix ;) [19:54] tumbleweed: ok.. that would mean just the changelog,control and rules files [19:54] BlackZ: well [19:54] BlackZ: idk if it fixes any bugs :P [19:54] but it will make rbot work :P [19:55] let my pot on my bot developer hat and say "use ibid" :) [19:55] ibid ?? :P [19:55] launchpad.net/ibid (it's in the repos) [19:56] tumbleweed: i like my ruby bot :P [19:56] evilshadeslayer: if it's a bug, report a bug and attach your debdiff [19:57] then subscribe ubuntu-sponsors and wait [19:57] kewl [19:57] * evilshadeslayer has to upload kdegames after this === fta_ is now known as fta [20:00] BlackZ: tumbleweed so i just post the changes i did to debian packaging right? [20:01] in the bug report [20:01] evilshadeslayer: as a debdiff [20:01] ok [20:04] evilshadeslayer: if that's the first modify in ubuntu for the package, yes [20:04] otherwise you have to modify the *currently* ubuntu package for include your modify [20:05] BlackZ: that will make the debdiff huge [20:05] evilshadeslayer: why? if that will happen, just do a clean to the debdiff [20:06] BlackZ: because debian has a new version and packaging has changed alot [20:06] evilshadeslayer: I don't understand: are you doing a merge? [20:07] yes [20:07] evilshadeslayer: ah, then yes: just do as you said (remember to flag it as a patch) [20:07] ok [20:08] evilshadeslayer: obviously it must be a debdiff [20:09] yeah ok :) [20:18] BlackZ: http://pastebin.com/jLWK7aRN << i get that in the debdiff,but i didnt modify that [20:18] i think its the doing of debuild -S -sa [20:19] due to that it makes a file debian-changes-0.9.15+post20100705+gitb3aa806-1ubuntu1 in debian/patches http://pastebin.com/VwyDt1zU [20:19] evilshadeslayer: does the package use quilt 3.0 ? [20:19] yes [20:20] evilshadeslayer: so is there a patch in debian/patches auto-generated during the build? [20:20] yes [20:21] http://pastebin.com/VwyDt1zU << thats the one [20:23] evilshadeslayer: you should check what's happened there; maybe the problem is a patch [20:23] most likely it's an issue with clean not cleaning up enough [20:24] evilshadeslayer: ever if you didn't modified nothing outside the debian directory [20:24] tumbleweed: yeah [20:24] hmm [20:24] BlackZ: since i was not sure,i pulled clean debian sources again and modified the stuff again [20:25] but it still created the patch [20:29] uh wait [20:29] doh... debian ships that patch [20:30] evilshadeslayer: it's still a bug [20:30] so how do we fix it? [20:30] * tumbleweed has a look [20:30] maybe debian did want to modify that file? [20:32] can I run 2 builds both on pbuilder? [20:32] ari-tczew: afaik no [20:33] ari-tczew: if you have two different base tarballs then yes [20:33] evilshadeslayer: they used to have a line in their clean rule to remove that file, but it's gone [20:33] I want to build two differents packages, so differents tarballs and .dsc [20:33] tumbleweed: mv debian/rbot/usr/share/rbot/plugins/$${PL}.rb debian/rbot/usr/share/rbot/plugins/$${PL}.rb.disabled; \ [20:34] ari-tczew: base tarball of pbuilder :P [20:34] uh wait [20:34] evilshadeslayer: no, rm -f lib/rbot/pkgconfig.rb [20:34] tumbleweed: where does it clean that file in debian/rules? [20:35] uh.. no such stuff here [20:35] evilshadeslayer: "used to" [20:35] ohh [20:35] right [20:35] tumbleweed: so they delibrately removed it? [20:35] looks like it was an accident [20:36] they forgot to B-D on rake, too (and possibly other things) [20:42] yeah [20:43] so i add that to clean right [20:43] yip [20:43] uh waut [20:43] tumbleweed: see debian/clean [20:44] whats that file? [20:44] evilshadeslayer: oh I missed that. man dh_clean [20:44] :P [20:44] right [20:44] only problem is that dh_clean gets called before this file is created [20:44] then were missing dh_clean [20:45] no, cdbs calls dh_clean for you [20:45] hmm [20:45] oh ok === fta_ is now known as fta [20:47] tumbleweed: so we still have to add that command manuall in clean: ? [20:47] *manually [20:50] yes, so we might as well delete debian/clean [20:50] ok [20:53] tumbleweed: i can remove the patch as well then right? [20:54] the debian series patch that is auto generated [20:54] evilshadeslayer: yes [20:54] ok [20:55] tumbleweed: http://pastebin.com/kEpkj0fp [20:55] im attaching that [20:55] I thought you were going to delete that debian-xxx patch? [20:55] i did [20:56] did you? [20:56] tumbleweed: debdiff of debian package with new ubuntu package [20:56] not old ubuntu package and new ubuntu package :) [20:56] oh i see it was in the debian source too. nm [20:57] :) [20:58] evilshadeslayer: to make your reviewer's life easier, you can remove the debian-changes-0.9.15+post20100705+gitb3aa806-1 section of the debdiff [20:58] it'll get deleted when the reviewer bulids the ubuntu source package [20:58] tumbleweed: ah ok :) [20:58] please forward that patch to debian [20:58] (but don't send them our changelog or maintainer-changes [20:58] hehe :P [20:59] of course not [20:59] err, what was I saying, it won' tget deleted [20:59] first lemme upload with the correct stuff to ubuntu and will forward later [21:00] (with source format 1, it would get deleted, but with 3, because it's a quilt patch it has to be manually deleted) [21:10] tumbleweed: ok,i cant remove the debian-changes stuff from debdiff,since ill be posting this debdiff as is and ask the reviewer to apply it to current debian packaging [21:11] evilshadeslayer: I can't understand that [21:11] tumbleweed: ill ask the reviewer to download the debian package and apply this debdiff on top of it [21:11] so,i cant remove the debian-changes stuff [21:11] evilshadeslayer: that's the normal way merges are handled, yes [21:12] no, don't remove that, I was wrong (as I said) [21:12] ok :P [21:13] bug 604102 [21:14] Launchpad bug 604102 in rbot (Ubuntu) "Please merge rbot from debian unstable" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/604102 [21:14] tumbleweed: ^^ [21:14] evilshadeslayer: did you forward th epatch to debian? [21:14] tumbleweed: im going to [21:14] but just in a few secs [21:14] please link to the bug when you do [21:14] tumbleweed: ok,should i mail it to them or upload it somewhere? [21:15] evilshadeslayer: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Debian [21:16] evilshadeslayer: btw merge bugs are normally titled with this format: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/Merging#File a merge bug [21:17] oh [21:17] and you need to subscribe ubuntu-sponsors if you want it to show up in the sponsorship queue [21:21] done [21:21] tumbleweed: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-universe-sponsors ?? [21:21] evilshadeslayer: no, just ubuntu-sponsors [21:22] ah ok [21:22] universe and main sponsors were merged into one [21:22] done [21:23] great. Now we'll give debian a few days to pick up your fix, otherwise we go with your merge [21:23] tumbleweed: :P === fta_ is now known as fta [21:30] tumbleweed: btw i cant find a build log on that page [21:30] evilshadeslayer: which page? [21:31] tumbleweed: http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/rbot.html [21:31] evilshadeslayer: that's because it's an arch all package. It was built on the maintainer's PC [21:31] -.- [21:32] tumbleweed: he just uploaded the .deb? [21:32] debian does binary uploads for one arch, and the buildd farm builds the rest (if necessary) [21:32] yes [21:32] .... [21:32] yes, he really should have tested in pbuilder :) [21:33] tumbleweed: i could not imagine debian could be this lazy/callous :P [21:33] oh also, should i add my self to debian changelog as well? [21:33] documenting the changes [21:34] evilshadeslayer: no, don't touch the changelog [21:34] uh alright [21:39] uh, Debian accepts direct .deb uploads ? [21:49] tumbleweed: uh.. i used reportbug .. but .. it sent the mail and all... but i didnt get a chance to attach a patch :P [21:50] i didnt even get a bug number [21:50] evilshadeslayer: you'll be e-mailed th ebug number [21:50] then you can attach the patch [21:50] oh ok [21:50] evilshadeslayer: btw submittodebian makes it all easier [21:50] hmm [21:50] well the page said to use reportbug :P [21:51] evilshadeslayer: submittodebian is a wrapper around reportbug [21:51] hmm didnt see that [21:59] tumbleweed: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=588657 [21:59] Debian bug 588657 in rbot "The current rbot packaging has missing build deps and needs a patch to correct it" [Important,Open] [21:59] tumbleweed: i just send a mail to the specified bug address with the patch? [22:01] evilshadeslayer: yes, but while you are there, let's do a few more things [22:01] uh ok [22:02] tumbleweed: what needs to be done? [22:02] ok, so, you filed the bug as important, but you can actually raise it to serious [22:03] ok,how? [22:03] you should also add the tag "patch" [22:03] tumbleweed: i have no idea how to do this :P [22:04] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control [22:05] cc your email to control@bugs.debian.org, and start it with this http://paste.ubuntu.com/461747/ [22:07] tumbleweed: just that part of pastebin in the body? [22:09] evilshadeslayer: yes, the bug control server follows instructions in the mail body. It'll stop when it gets to thanks. [22:09] ok [22:09] oh, if you want to mark the bug as coming from debian, you can add this in too: [22:09] user ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com [22:09] usertag 588657 + origin-ubuntu maverick [22:09] anything in subject? apart from " Patch for rbot " [22:09] ...coming from ubuntu, I mean [22:09] fine [22:09] :) [22:10] sent :D [22:14] tumbleweed: hmm.. somethings wrong.. where do i add the upstream url again? [22:14] to LP bugs [22:14] "also affects distribution" [22:15] tumbleweed: and i put the bug link right? === fta_ is now known as fta [22:15] yes [22:15] doesnt work :( [22:16] tumbleweed: you try [22:16] you chose Debian as the distribution? [22:18] wait [22:18] tumbleweed: done :D [22:18] now i wait :P === Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech === fta_ is now known as fta