[04:15] <maxwellian> From w3m code: "is_hangul = wtf_is_hangul((wc_uchar *) str);"
[04:15]  * maxwellian loves self-documenting code
[05:36] <SunilThaha> Hi all, is there a way I can specify in debian packaging install-file to ignore files?
[10:28] <Laney> SunilThaha: -Xitem
[10:28] <Laney> see the manpage
[11:07] <LucidFox> Gah, this is going to be a pain
[11:07] <LucidFox> libdc0 doesn't build in Debian on armel because it doesn't pass a test there...
[11:07] <LucidFox> but it passes it on Ubuntu...
[11:07] <LucidFox> I have no idea how to approach this
[11:08] <NCommander> LucidFox: abandoned all hope?
[11:09] <NCommander> LucidFox: where's the Debian build log?
[11:09] <LucidFox> Well, it's one obscure architecture, specific to Debian and not reproducible on Ubuntu, I don't have the hardware to check, and it prevents it from entering testing
[11:09] <LucidFox> Debian build log: https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?&pkg=libdc0&ver=0.3.23-1&arch=armel&stamp=1273321478&file=log
[11:09] <LucidFox> Ubuntu build log: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/44543051/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-armel.libdc0_0.3.23-1_FULLYBUILT.txt.gz
[11:09] <NCommander> LucidFox: lots of people would complain that armel is obsecure :-)
[11:10] <LucidFox> Well... what *is* armel?
[11:10] <bilalakhtar> !armel
[11:10] <bilalakhtar> oops, the bot doesn't kno
[11:10] <azeem_> little endian arm, with a modern ABI
[11:10] <bilalakhtar> !architecture
[11:10] <NCommander> LucidFox: ARM architecture, basically embedded devices, mobile phones, and other handy stuff
[11:10] <LucidFox> ah
[11:11] <NCommander> LucidFox: hrm, interesting
[11:11] <LucidFox> Well, I don't have the needed hardware to test-build the package on sid :/
[11:11] <azeem_> LucidFox: you can't install qemu? :P
[11:11] <azeem_> but to be fair, it's probably a local issue with the Debian build
[11:11] <azeem_> d
[11:11] <LucidFox> qemu supports armel?
[11:12] <RAOF> Yeah.
[11:12] <NCommander> LucidFox: yup, though its a bit slow.
[11:12] <LucidFox> on an AMD64 host CPU?
[11:12] <tumbleweed> LucidFox: yes, although it works best if you use qemu-static rather than CPU emulation
[11:12] <RAOF> NCommander: Slower than the native hardware? :)
[11:12] <NCommander> LucidFox: are you a DD? You can get access to the armel porter box
[11:12] <NCommander> RAOF: yes :-/
[11:12] <LucidFox> No, not a DD
[11:12] <tumbleweed> RAOF: pretty fast, though
[11:12] <tumbleweed> (because you can throw many cores at it)
[11:12] <RAOF> There's actually a script to build an armel chroot with qemu-static.  It's pretty simple.
[11:13] <RAOF> I think it's a part of pbuilder-dist?
[11:13] <NCommander> RAOF: there's also rootstock. ogra ^
[11:13] <ogra> rootstock is way t complex
[11:13] <ogra> if you only want a chroot use qemu-debootstrap
[11:14] <LucidFox> neat
[11:14] <LucidFox> And well, I wouldn't be able to become a DD even if I wanted to, since apparently you need your key personally signed, and there are like 2 DDs in all of Russia
[11:15] <tumbleweed> LucidFox: next time you go on holiday...
[11:16] <LucidFox> eh...
[11:16] <tumbleweed> (look for DDs when you are in other countries)
[11:17] <LucidFox> Let's just forget it, okay?
[11:17]  * LucidFox grumbles
[11:19] <LucidFox> Okay, found the needed option in man pbuilder-dist, thanks
[11:24] <LucidFox> Why is it called "armel" anyway?
[11:24] <LucidFox> What does the "el" part stand for?
[11:24] <Rhonda> Endian Little
[11:24] <LucidFox> ah
[11:26] <Rhonda> LucidFox: http://wiki.debian.org/ArchitectureSpecificsMemo might be a helpful overview. :)
[11:45] <pmjdebruijn> hi
[11:45] <pmjdebruijn> I'm building package on my PPA, which works just fine
[11:45] <pmjdebruijn> however I want to add a -dbg variant
[11:45] <pmjdebruijn> that all seems simple enough, but the only change would be the not-stripping of the symols
[11:46] <pmjdebruijn> however, I'd like to debug version to be compile with different options
[11:46] <pmjdebruijn> since the application in question (darktable) can have extra internal checks that slow it down, but are useful for debugging
[11:47] <pmjdebruijn> so Ideally I want to to build two binary packages out of a single source package
[11:47] <pmjdebruijn> with a different ./configure
[11:47] <pmjdebruijn> can anybody give me some hints as how to do this (elegantly :)
[11:49] <RAOF> pmjdebruijn: There are a couple of packages which build multiple times with differnet options.
[11:49] <RAOF> The one I've touched most recently was mesa - that builds about 6 times with different configure options ;)
[11:53] <pmjdebruijn> RAOF: aha!
[11:54] <pmjdebruijn> RAOF: I'll look into it, thanks
[11:54] <RAOF> Mesa is more complex than the simplest case, but it'll be something to start with.
[11:55] <pmjdebruijn> yeah thanks
[11:57] <bigon> could someone new beid package?
[11:58] <pmjdebruijn> eh?
[13:18] <\sh> siretart: ping -> please join #fai@oftc thx :)
[14:12] <coolbhavi> hello I ve a doubt, I m maintaining mobile-broadband-provider-info in debian and ubuntu .. How to request SRU in case of an exception? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#mobile-broadband-provider-info
[14:21] <pmjdebruijn> anybody have a simpler example of building multiple binary packages from a single source packages with different configures
[14:21] <pmjdebruijn> maybe cdbs/debhelper7 based, since I'm trying to move anyway from normal packages
[14:25] <pmjdebruijn> btw
[14:25] <pmjdebruijn> out of curiousity
[14:25] <pmjdebruijn> how do the -dbg packages actually work
[14:26] <pmjdebruijn> I mean you have the /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/foo binary
[14:26] <pmjdebruijn> would I need to start that directly?
[14:26] <Rhonda> You don't start it.
[14:26] <pmjdebruijn> gdb just "knows"?
[14:26] <Rhonda> Yes.
[14:26] <pmjdebruijn> huh?
[14:26] <pmjdebruijn> ok?
[14:26] <pmjdebruijn> funky
[14:27] <pmjdebruijn> so if I gdb /usr/bin/foo, it actually start /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/foo ?
[14:27] <pmjdebruijn> that's actually quite cool
[14:27]  * Rhonda . o O ( and why do connected topics always appear within a short timeframe for me? )
[14:27] <Rhonda> No, it doesn't start that.
[14:27] <Rhonda> …
[14:27] <pmjdebruijn> but what if a binary has it's own libraries (for plugins or whatnot)?
[14:28] <pmjdebruijn> do those get redirected automatically as well to /usr/lib/debug?
[14:28]  * pmjdebruijn guesses they will
[14:28] <Rhonda> There is no redirection happening at all.
[14:28] <pmjdebruijn> huh?
[14:28] <Rhonda> Those are just the stripped out debugging informations.
[14:28] <pmjdebruijn> are there any docs on that?
[14:28] <Rhonda> Nothing gets started from there.
[14:28] <Rhonda> The debuggers look in there for context, nothing more nothing less.
[14:28] <pmjdebruijn> Rhonda: those aren't full binaries?
[14:29] <Rhonda> No, definitely not. :)
[14:29] <pmjdebruijn> oh
[14:29] <pmjdebruijn> hmm
[14:29] <pmjdebruijn> ok
[14:29] <pmjdebruijn> though I've talked to some developer who note that compiling with -O2 for example does destroy some info handy on debugging?
[14:29] <pmjdebruijn> /on/when/
[14:33] <LucidFox> Okay. The worst thing someone can do is provoke me into being honest.
[14:34] <LucidFox> And I'll be honest. I think the Debian New Maintainer is such ridiculous, overcomplicated bull that it's a wonder they ever get new DDs to begin with.
[14:37] <Rhonda> LucidFox: *blinks*  :)   Well, yes and no. :)
[14:38] <LucidFox> The "web of trust" requirement reeeeeally annoys me
[14:38] <carstenh> LucidFox: you need to 1. maintain some packages in debian 2. enter your mail on some internet site 3. wait 4. answer questions (the templates that are normally used are available via public svn) you get per mail from someone 5.  maintain your packagesand wait
[14:38] <carstenh> getting two or three signatures can't be that hard
[14:38] <LucidFox> No sane open source project should include meeting an existing developer in person as a requirement to become a developer
[14:38] <LucidFox> carstenh> ...
[14:38] <LucidFox> Not when the nearest DDs are like half the continent away
[14:39] <pmjdebruijn> :(
[14:39] <azeem_> LucidFox: go to a UDS and get your key signed there
[14:39]  * LucidFox sighs
[14:39] <LucidFox> You don't understand, do you?
[14:39] <azeem_> I think I don't care
[14:39] <LucidFox> I was able to become a MOTU without *ever* meeting *any* other Ubuntu developer in person.
[14:40] <azeem_> that's great; it doesn't mean other policies are insane
[14:40] <carstenh> LucidFox: you can't upload binary packages to ubuntu
[14:40] <LucidFox> And I'm not exactly made of money to go to developer meetings
[14:53] <RainCT> coolbhavi: Have you seen https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure ?
[14:55] <RainCT> LucidFox: have you got in touch with them to ask for an alternative? the docs say there are other ways if you live too far away from other DDs
[14:56] <carstenh> | If there is no Debian Developer close to you, alternative ways to pass the ID check may be permitted as an absolute exception on a case-by-case-basis. See the identification page for more information.
[14:57] <LucidFox> "as an absolute exception on a case-by-case-basis" generally means "no"
[14:57] <LucidFox> And it'I'm sure that
[14:57] <LucidFox> And it's Debian, I'm sure that "half of Russia away" is close enough by their standards
[14:58] <Rhonda> No, it doesn't generally mean "no".
[14:58] <maco> LucidFox: it has happened
[14:58] <Rhonda> Pleading that it generally means "no" without giving it a try is spreading FUD, sorry to speak so frankly. :/
[14:59] <Rhonda> And I guess you know that I am the least person who is against you or anything along that lines.
[15:01] <LucidFox> I know
[15:01] <LucidFox> But reading the procedure makes me want to cry
[15:02] <azeem_> pfft
[15:03] <LucidFox> I know, I know, "But we all had to go through this!!!11"
[15:03]  * Rhonda hugs LucidFox comfortingly.
[15:03] <LucidFox> That doesn't change my opinion about the procedure
[15:03] <Rhonda> LucidFox: You can depend on my full support on this if it becomes of a real issue with the frontdesk, to speak with them.
[15:04] <LucidFox> Well, I'm not thinking of becoming a DD actually
[15:04] <LucidFox> my contributions to Debian aren't nearly enough
[15:04] <RainCT> LucidFox: It's not that bad, the questions aren't anything special (if just my AM hadn't dissapeared after saying he'd check some package and give the final ack :/)
[15:05] <maco> RainCT: the questions arent the problem. the keysigning is
[15:05] <RainCT> Yeah
[15:06] <Rhonda> LucidFox is in somewhat the same boat with respect to keysigning like Vagrant.
[15:06] <LucidFox> Vagrant?
[15:06] <Rhonda> … though from a completely different angle.
[15:06] <LucidFox> Who's Vagrant?
[15:07] <Rhonda> LucidFox: Vagrant is a linux terminal server project developer who abandoned his "legal" name long ago and refuses to hand out a paper that he doesn't believe in.
[15:07] <LucidFox> Ah
[15:07] <LucidFox> Well, that's a factor too
[15:08] <LucidFox> As you can imagine, I have objections to the idea of contributing under the name written in my passport
[15:08] <LucidFox> so even if I showed it to a DD, it wouldn't be of much use
[15:08] <Rhonda> I've met him at at least three debconfs so far and dared to state once that I might be thinking about signing his key because I have way more trust in him than in some others that hand out regular passports on keysigning parties.
[15:09] <Rhonda> LucidFox: Vagrant isn't contributing under his legal name neither.
[15:10] <Rhonda> LucidFox: echo vagrant | nc db.debian.org finger
[15:10] <maco> i've signed for an alias before
[15:11] <LucidFox> Actually
[15:11] <LucidFox> Disregard this...
[15:11] <LucidFox> it turns out that there's a DD in my city
[15:11] <LucidFox> but the point still stands!
[15:11] <Rhonda> Yes, it might not be easy, but I am quite confident that your case is special enough to warrant some discussion/effort in that area, and I am willing to help.
[15:11] <maco> for someone i'd known for like a year
[15:12] <LucidFox> turns out he's quite newly admitted, I was surprised to see a DD in Novosibirsk
[15:12] <LucidFox> But this changes nothing.
[15:13] <LucidFox> Honestly I don't think my contributions to Debian are enough even for DMship, I just happen to maintain a few packages ported from Ubuntu - it's more like I felt bitter about the whole air of elitism around the procedure.
[15:13] <LucidFox> compared to Ubuntu, again
[15:17] <LucidFox> Sorry if I sounded offensive...
[15:18] <Rhonda> See it from a different angle - if it weren't for those itches, ubuntu might not even exist and mark would still be a happy DD. ;)
[15:18] <LucidFox> Rhonda> I don't think it was his main motivating factor for creating Ubuntu
[15:19] <Rhonda> I wouldn't rule out that it was part of the reason.
[15:31] <carstenh> LucidFox: this should be enough for DM and nowaday people are required to become DM before the become DD.
[15:31] <carstenh> RainCT: you could ask frontdesk about getting a new AM
[15:31] <LucidFox> AM?
[15:32] <carstenh> account manager, the person who puts the question templates from svn.debian.org into a mail
[15:32] <LucidFox> ah
[15:32] <carstenh> ... checks the answers and checks the packages and then recommends applicants to the frontdesk
[15:35] <carstenh> s/account manager/application manager/
[15:38] <Rhonda> carstenh: Well, the case is on a completely different area, like mentioned. I'd like to have further discussion on this topic in here, how helpful and "convincing" they are meant with "go to UDS" or similar to have dropped. Thanks for understanding.
[15:39] <shadeslayer> Rhonda: around? :)
[15:40] <Rhonda> No, that's just a clone and bot of myself.
[15:40] <shadeslayer> heh :P
[15:41] <shadeslayer> Rhonda: i just uploaded a package on mentors,any ideas how to move forward? nobody on debian-qt-kde is around :(
[15:41] <shadeslayer> well.. not just,i uploaded my package yesterday
[15:41] <shadeslayer> Rhonda: http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/sponsor-pkglist?action=details;package=fastuserswitch
[15:42] <Rhonda> shadeslayer: did you try #debian-mentors or #debian-ubuntu or the mentors mailinglist?
[15:42] <shadeslayer> i trued debian-mentors,left a message yesterday,someone is yet to reply
[15:42] <shadeslayer> *tired
[15:42] <shadeslayer> oh gwad
[15:42] <shadeslayer> *tried :P
[15:44] <shadeslayer> Rhonda: btw just a question,my package is called plasma-widget-fastuserswitch but the source is called fastuserswitch,will i be questioned for that?
[15:45] <azeem_> no
[15:46] <shadeslayer> ok... good to know
[15:49] <Rhonda> shadeslayer: It is generally adviced to have as source package name one of the binary package names …
[15:49] <Rhonda> azeem_: erm, your no isn't completely right
[15:49] <Rhonda> azeem_, shadeslayer: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=581337#29
[15:50] <Rhonda> For a context of why it is a bad idea to not have the source package name match one of its binaries.
[15:50] <azeem_> Rhonda: it's adviced to have the source package name as the upstream tarball name
[15:50] <shadeslayer> Rhonda: ok,but upstream provides the tarball named as fastuserswitch , but , the tarball has a plasmoid, thus i named the package plasma-widget-fastuserswitch
[15:50] <Rhonda> azeem_: No, it isn't.
[15:50] <azeem_> *shrug*
[15:50] <Rhonda> azeem_: See the perl packages, for instances.
[15:51] <Rhonda> And please read the linked bugreport and the woes it brings.
[15:51] <shadeslayer> right i see what this can cause
[15:51] <shadeslayer> so what do you suggest?
[15:51] <shadeslayer> rename upstream tarball?
[15:52] <Rhonda> It's a simple mv. :)
[15:52] <azeem_> Rhonda: isn't that bug report about a binary package from another source package which is also called sm?
[15:52] <shadeslayer> Rhonda: no i meant to ask if its advised :P
[15:53] <Rhonda> shadeslayer: I would suggest that, yes. It avoids some confusion.
[15:54] <shadeslayer> Rhonda: great,thanks for the advice,now one last thing,since that package has already been uploaded,is it possible to delete it? or rather what do i do with that pacakge
[15:55] <Rhonda> I have no clue about how the mentors site works in that area. Given that it requires one to always do a full source upload including orig.tar.gz I think it is training wrong behavior anyway and usually advice to use a random webserver as dropbox. :)
[15:55] <Rhonda> Have to leave now, sorry.
[15:56] <RainCT> shadeslayer: You can delete it from the "My packages" (or whatever it's called) section
[15:56] <shadeslayer> RainCT: ah thanks
[15:56] <shadeslayer> Rhonda: thanks again
[15:57] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: yes you need to delete from mentors
[15:57] <coolbhavi> hi tumbleweed
[15:58] <tumbleweed> coolbhavi: hi
[15:58] <tumbleweed> shadeslayer: actually, I can't remember if you need to delete after it's been uploaded, but it's wise to delete after you've got an interested spnsor (who will presumably upload)
[15:59] <shadeslayer> :D
[15:59] <shadeslayer> done
[15:59] <shadeslayer> will upload with proper fix :P
[16:00] <RainCT> well you could also set it as "not looking for a sponsor", but there isn't really a point in having it there for no reason
[16:00] <coolbhavi> tumbleweed, if you have time can you please take a look at https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ugene/+bug/606642
[16:01] <tumbleweed> coolbhavi: I can't look right now, but it's in the sponsor queue (and an open tab in my browser)
[16:02] <coolbhavi> tumbleweed, okay!
[17:59] <Kasuko> Hello, I am having a package that is failing to build on the PPA, it's just a simple command line program in python using distutils. I followed https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Python exactly and it builds on my own computer. But when I submit it to the launchpad PPA it fails with the error being "/bin/sh: python2.5: not found" Any idea why?
[18:00] <danohuiginn> Kasuko: probably because maverick is using python2.6
[18:00] <danohuiginn> you'll need to adjust the python version somewhere
[18:00] <danohuiginn> or, ideally, configure things to automatically use the appropriate version
[18:02] <Kasuko> danohuiginn: I never set it to use python 2.5, I only ever said it depends on python >= 2.5
[18:02] <Kasuko> its using the cdbs though
[18:02] <Kasuko> so should there be a build-depends on python2.5?
[18:04] <carstenh> run "grep -r python2.5 ." in the source directory to find the error
[18:05] <carstenh> or rather "in the source packages top directory"
[18:05] <Kasuko> nothing
[18:05] <carstenh> weird
[18:07] <Kasuko> I have no doubt it's probably me but I don't know where to find information on why something isn't building on the PPA. It builds fine on my computer
[18:08] <Kasuko> the error is while running "running build_py
[18:08] <carstenh> posting the link to the build log could help
[18:09] <Kasuko> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/52217318/buildlog_ubuntu-karmic-i386.pyxis_0.1-0ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[18:11] <carstenh> for buildver in 2.6 2.5; do cd /build/buildd/pyxis-0.1 && cd . && python$buildver setup.py build --build-base="/build/buildd/pyxis-0.1/./build"; done
[18:11] <carstenh> this doesn't look correct but i have no idea how python is packaged this season
[18:13] <carstenh> /usr/share/cdbs/1/class/python-distutils.mk:67: WARNING:  Use of XS-Python-Version and XB-Python-Version fields in debian/control is deprecated with pysupport method; use\ debian/pyversions if you need to specify specific versions.
[18:13] <Kasuko> so what do I do?
[18:13] <carstenh> this warning is about versions, you got problems with version, thus fixing it can't hurt ;)
[18:14] <danohuiginn> yeah that error seems to come from within cdbs: for buildver in $(cdbs_python_build_versions)
[18:14] <Kasuko> carstenh: I don't know how to fix it though
[18:16] <pmjdebruijn> hmm I'm trying to add a -dbg (with the same configure), to my darktable package
[18:16] <pmjdebruijn> however I end up with two empty directories in debian/darktable and debian/darktable-dbg and two empty packages
[18:16] <pmjdebruijn> while debian/tmp is filled with lots of good stuff
[18:17] <pmjdebruijn> http://wiki.debian.org/DebugPackage
[18:17] <pmjdebruijn> I have this both with cdbs and debhelper
[18:17] <azeem_> pmjdebruijn: do you have a debian/darktable.install
[18:17] <azeem_> ?
[18:18] <shadeslayer> pmjdebruijn: you need install files ;)
[18:18] <carstenh> Kasuko: is this an arch all or an arch any package?
[18:19] <pmjdebruijn> shadeslayer: I was afraid of that
[18:19] <pmjdebruijn> I'd expected some automagics here as well
[18:19] <pmjdebruijn> ok
[18:19] <carstenh> Kasuko: could be http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=577580
[18:19] <pmjdebruijn> well in theory I could just install straight into debian/darktable too, right?
[18:20] <pmjdebruijn> having .install files for darktable and darktable-dbg package is a bit pointless since everything except /usr/lib/debug has to go in darktable
[18:22] <shadeslayer> hmm
[18:22] <shadeslayer> pmjdebruijn: can you paste your rules files?
[18:22] <pmjdebruijn> I could
[18:22] <shadeslayer> please do :)
[18:22] <pmjdebruijn> just a minute different machine, I need to reattach my screen :)
[18:22] <shadeslayer> ok :)
[18:23] <Kasuko> carstenh: so essentially I am SOL till the builders use cdbs?
[18:24] <pmjdebruijn> shadeslayer: http://pastebin.com/11KNLfrd (debian/rules)
[18:24] <carstenh> Kasuko: they use cdbs, but possibly a buggy version or something completly different is broken in your package.  at least you begin to understand why many people don't use cdbs ;)
[18:25] <shadeslayer> hmmm.. that seems about right.. why isnt it installing files then :/
[18:25] <pmjdebruijn> I didn't have .install files yet
[18:25] <pmjdebruijn> I tried that just a minute ago
[18:25] <pmjdebruijn> failed because of a typo
[18:25] <shadeslayer> :P
[18:25] <pmjdebruijn> I just wanted to check if that's the proper way
[18:25] <carstenh> Kasuko: (because black magic is fine if it works but if it does not it is hard to debug)
[18:25] <pmjdebruijn> also in there a .install struction to take everything _Except_ something
[18:25] <shadeslayer> having install files is the proper way
[18:26] <shadeslayer> yeah
[18:26] <pmjdebruijn> is*
[18:26] <shadeslayer> uh wait... no
[18:26] <shadeslayer> afaik .install files install everything inside them
[18:26] <pmjdebruijn> right :(
[18:26] <shadeslayer> pmjdebruijn: you need to document which files you didnt install
[18:26] <Kasuko> carstenh: ya its installing version 0.4.59 on the chroot but that bug is fixed in 0.4.81 :(
[18:27] <shadeslayer> pmjdebruijn: put them in debian/not-installed
[18:27] <Kasuko> carstenh: so essentially you are saying learn debhelper :P
[18:27] <pmjdebruijn> shadeslayer: huh?
[18:27] <shadeslayer> pmjdebruijn: if you dont install something,you have to put it in debian/not-installed
[18:27] <pmjdebruijn> shadeslayer: that's not what I ment
[18:28] <pmjdebruijn> shadeslayer: I just wanted to install everything into darktable.install but /usr/lib/debug which goes into darktable-dbg
[18:28] <shadeslayer> pmjdebruijn: yes i know,but just giving you more info :)
[18:28] <pmjdebruijn> the point is I wouldn't have to update darktable.install every time the content changes
[18:28] <shadeslayer> yep
[18:29] <carstenh> Kasuko: does it work for newer versions?
[18:29] <Kasuko> carstenh: does what work for newer versions?
[18:30] <geser> Kasuko: looking at your build problem: it looks like it doesn't need any compilation for a specific python version. What's the XS-Python-Version value for that package?
[18:30] <carstenh> Kasuko: building on karmic fails, karmic is more than a year old. did the autobuilder try to build it on lucid or on maverick?
[18:31] <Kasuko> no, I was going to build it on karmic then copy to lucid and maverick
[18:31] <carstenh> Kasuko: but listen to geser, he is more experienced with python
[18:31] <Kasuko> geser: 2.5
[18:31] <Kasuko> carstenh: I listen to everyone :P
[18:35] <Kasuko> geser: yes, it's pretty much a simple python program. All it needs is some features from 2.5 (and they are only to remove deprication warnings)
[18:37] <geser> try XS-Python-Version: all or build-depend on python-all (as this would pull in python2.5 and python2.6)
[18:39] <Kasuko> geser: should I be using XS-Python-Version still or debian/pyversions?
[18:42] <Kasuko> geser: giving it a try, uploaded ... waiting for build
[18:46] <Kasuko> Aw crap, I have screwed the PPA up
[18:54] <shadeslayer> Kasuko: which one?
[18:55] <Kasuko> my pyxis one, I deleted the ubuntu1 version and was trying to reupload it. I should have just made an ubuntu2 version right?
[18:55] <Kasuko> ppa:pyxis/pyxis
[18:56] <shadeslayer> noo
[18:56] <shadeslayer> Kasuko: give me the link
[18:57] <shadeslayer> Kasuko: do you know how to version packages in ppa's?
[18:57] <Kasuko> https://launchpad.net/~pyxis/+archive/pyxis
[18:57] <shadeslayer> Kasuko: look at https://edge.launchpad.net/~rohangarg/+archive/experimental for hints
[18:58] <shadeslayer> awww....
[18:58] <shadeslayer> pyxis 0.1-0ubuntu1 <<
[18:58] <Kasuko> ... what?
[18:58] <Kasuko> ok I will add the ~ppa1 in
[18:58] <Kasuko> one question
[18:59] <shadeslayer> Kasuko: ok,when you upload to PPA's add something like ~lucid1~ppa1 or ~ppa1
[18:59] <Kasuko> would it be 0ubuntu0~ppa1?
[18:59] <shadeslayer> well.. since this package is currently not in debian but in ubuntu,it should be 0ubuntu1
[18:59] <shadeslayer> thats my take...
[19:01] <Kasuko> But its not in Ubuntu
[19:01] <Kasuko> This is the first it is being packaged. Actually the first it's being distributed
[19:01] <shadeslayer> Kasuko:  i meant that since your uploading the first ubuntu package :P
[19:01] <Kasuko> ok
[19:02] <Kasuko> also since it isn't distribution specific I was told I didn't need a ~lucid1
[19:03] <maxb> Typically I'd call something -0ppa1 in this scenario
[19:03] <shadeslayer> maxb: 0ubuntu1-0ppa1 ?
[19:03] <maxb> No, just upstreamwhatever-0ppa1
[19:04] <shadeslayer> seems reasonable ..
[19:04] <Kasuko> maxb: pyxis_0.1-0ubuntu1~ppa1
[19:05] <shadeslayer> Kasuko: no pyxis_0.1-0ppa1
[19:05] <Kasuko> alright
[19:06] <maxb> The reason not to do 0.1-0ubuntu1~ppa1 here, is that version sounds like 1) Ubuntu packaged 0.1-0ubuntu1, and then 2) I backported it in my ppa
[19:06] <Kasuko> maxb: I agree, but I was thinking it would have been more like 0ubuntu0~ppa1 but just ppa1 makes more sense
[19:07] <Kasuko> will there be any issues if I do want to get it into the ubuntu repos?
[19:07] <maxb> You are right, there used to be some poor advice on a launchpad wiki which had people doing the ubuntu0~ppa thing far too often
[19:08] <Kasuko> so if I version it ppa1 and then version ubuntu1 comes out which superscedes what?
[19:08] <maxb> Issues of what kind? The only thing related to versioning is that all of your PPA versions should be "less than" the version number which would be assigned to a first ubuntu upload
[19:08] <maxb> In this case, 0ppa1 is less than 0ubuntu1 so it all works out nicely
[19:09] <maxb> This is because "u" is later in the alphabet than "p"
[19:09] <Kasuko> oh ok, I wasn't sure how alphanumerical characters worked
[19:09] <Kasuko> maxb: thank you for your help, I guess I should stop assume wiki's words are laws :P
[19:10] <maxb> Wikis are helpful, but ultimately they *are* editable by pretty much anyone, so well-meaning misinformation may be present
[19:25] <Kasuko> and its GOOD! Thank You all!
[20:27] <lfaraone> If I'm just doing a package rename, is there an easy way to streamline the process for the Archive Admins? (the content is the same)
[21:02] <fabrice_sp> who just uploaded aceitoneiso?
[21:02] <fabrice_sp> it still FTBFS for me in amd64
[21:02] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, ?
[21:15] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: please take a look on MoM/universe, package yakuake, maybe you'll be interested in merge
[21:25] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: yes?
[21:25] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: im overloaded with merges ^_^
[21:25] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: i uploaded aceitoneiso - it builds on amd64
[21:26] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: i can do it after this week only
[21:26] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: no problem for me
[21:26] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, strange, as I updated my chroot before building it :-/
[21:26] <fabrice_sp> you're using sbuild or pbuilder?
[21:27] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: pbuilder
[21:27] <fabrice_sp> hmm, I'm using sbuild
[21:27] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: are you behind a mirror?
[21:27] <fabrice_sp> not really: only caching packages
[21:27] <geser> bdrung: argh
[21:28] <bdrung> geser: ?
[21:28] <fabrice_sp> but I can see the libqtwebkit-dev package in my chroot
[21:28] <geser> bdrung: how did you convince soyuz to accept "Architecture: linux-any
[21:28] <geser> "?
[21:28] <geser> bug #605002
[21:29] <geser> bdrung: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/acetoneiso/2.2.2-2 has no build records
[21:29] <fabrice_sp> I saw that: i thought it tookt time
[21:30] <bdrung> geser: i wasn't aware of that bug. i didn't argued with soyuz - it just accepted the package.
[21:32] <geser> bdrung: I looks like you need to upload it again with Architecure: any to get build records
[21:33] <geser> bdrung: you uploaded it with syncpackage from u-d-t, right?
[21:33] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: handed over merge to yofel :D
[21:34] <shadeslayer> but he will need a bit of help :D
[21:34] <bdrung> geser: yes
[21:40] <Laney> wgrant: what's wrong with the Haskell mdt page? It says tons of packages are outdated in sid when they aren't
[22:01] <tyarusso> Anyone alive to tell me what I'm doing wrong with debconf?  The questions are asked during a dpkg-reconfigure, but not during installation.  https://edge.launchpad.net/~tonyyarusso/+archive/ppa/+sourcepub/1241047/+listing-archive-extra for source.
[22:07] <kees> tyarusso: debconf defaults to using the system-set priority level (high by default) when installing, and dpkg-reconfigure implies -plow
[22:09] <kees> tyarusso: and I think you only need the final "db_go"
[22:09] <kees> but I'm rather guessing at this point :0
[22:10] <toabctl> hi
[22:11] <toabctl> i downloaded a package with "bzr branch lp:ubuntu/xf86-input-wacom" , changed the package to a new upstream version and want to push th package now back to launchpad and send a merge request. how can i push the package to launchpad?
[22:11] <toabctl> i tried "brz push lp:~toabctl/ubuntu/xf86-input-wacom/new_upstream_0.10.7" but this does not work. any ideas?
[22:11] <tyarusso> kees: Okay, so I have one question set as "low" and one as "high", so from that I would expect the latter to be asked at least, wouldn't it?  As for the db_go point, I have no idea, although I thought the samples I found had it after each.
[22:12]  * tyarusso is rather amazed at how hard it seems to be to find someone well-versed in debconf - I thought everyone used this!
[22:13] <geser> toabctl: try "lp:~toabctl/ubuntu/maverick/xf86-input-wacom/new_upstream_0.10.7", don't if this is really the issue
[22:15] <geser> tyarusso: debconf is required for user interaction but not every package needs user interaction and depend on the work someone does or the package he touches, he might never need to touch debconf
[22:16] <ari-tczew> bdrung: very, very quick response. thanks!
[22:16] <tyarusso> geser: Fine, s/everyone/lots of people/ :P
[22:18] <geser> tyarusso: if you don't find here an answer, try asking #debian-devel@OFTC; DDs should have some knowledge of debconf too :)
[22:18] <tyarusso> geser: #debian-devel eh?  (I've been trying #debian-mentors; wasn't sure if the other was appropriate)
[22:20] <geser> hmm
[22:20] <geser> I don't know which one is better, I'm not very familiar with the #debian-* channels
[22:20] <tyarusso> mmk
[22:21]  * tyarusso will just try things until he either gets an answer or gets yelled at