[02:17] <fargiolas> does ubuntu default installation includes udev extra stuff? I received a bug report in cheese about missing v4l_id in an almost fresh install of ubuntu 10.04
[02:24] <ion> The udev package comes with v4l_id.
[02:27] <fargiolas> ion: thanks, I wonder how the reporter managed to remove it
[02:28] <ajmitch> fargiolas: the reporter says that they do have it, if you're referring to bgo #625999
[02:29] <fargiolas> ajmitch: uh definitely shouldn't read bugmail at 3 am
[02:29] <fargiolas> ajmitch: you're right
[02:29] <ajmitch> hehe :)
[02:29] <fargiolas> thanks :P
[02:30]  * ajmitch has no idea about what the udevadm output is meant to be showing though
[02:30] <ajmitch> I just know that cheese does work with lucid & my HP laptop :)
[02:31] <fargiolas> ajmitch: it should show three properties ID_V4L_VERSION, ID_V4L_PRODUCT and ID_V4L_CAPABILITIES
[04:28] <lool> slangasek, cjwatson: I think tracking xdeb bugs just in Ubuntu is enough as long as it isn't used outside of Ubuntu; releases are effectively happening in Ubuntu
[05:24] <porthose> If there is an archive admin around I would like to request a rebuild or darcs-2.4.4-2 please.
[05:25] <ajmitch> porthose: you should be able to hit 'retry' yourself on LP
[05:25] <porthose> ooh ok was not aware of that thx :)
[05:25] <ajmitch> see https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/darcs/2.4.4-2/+build/1904438
[05:26] <ajmitch> it should have Retry this build
[05:26] <porthose> ajmitch, thx :)
[05:55] <slangasek> lool: ack
[06:12] <pitti> Good morning
[06:41] <dholbach> good morning!
[06:42] <dholbach> Packaging Training Session: Fixing Small Ubuntu Bugs in 18 minutes in #ubuntu-classroom
[07:09] <pitti> ScottK:
[07:09] <pitti> - * (openoffice.org-kde) [i386 amd64 powerpc armel]
[07:09] <pitti> + * (openoffice.org-kde) [i386 amd64 powerpc] #powerpc oversized
[07:09] <pitti> ScottK: I guess that was a typo?
[07:09] <pitti> ScottK: ah, nevermind; next commit :)
[07:27] <DktrKranz> ScottK: indeed. It's quite trivial to fix in case new parted isn't plan to land in maverick
[07:27] <pitti> superm1: hm, I can't make sense of http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/livefs-build-logs/maverick/mythbuntu/20100805/, the logs seem cut off; but they failed again :/
[08:12] <ara> pitti, when you said yesterday, about the mtdev package, that "you already did" you were meaning that you already accepted it in the archive, or that you already were archive admin the previous day?
[08:12] <pitti> ara: I accepted it on Tuesday already
[08:13] <ara> pitti, mmm, and how long does it take before it is actually available?
[08:13] <pitti> it should have been available from Tuesday evening
[08:13] <ara> pitti, ah, OK, it must be something with the mirror
[08:13] <ara> pitti, thanks again!
[08:13] <pitti> ibmtdev-dev | 1.0.6-0ubuntu2 | maverick/universe | amd64, armel, i386, sparc
[08:13] <pitti>  libmtdev1 | 1.0.6-0ubuntu2 | maverick/universe | amd64, armel, i386, sparc
[08:13] <pitti>      mtdev | 1.0.8-0ubuntu1 | maverick/universe | source
[08:13] <pitti> mtdev-tools | 1.0.6-0ubuntu2 | maverick/universe | amd64, armel, i386, sparc
[08:14] <pitti> looks good here
[08:14] <pitti> apparently ia64 didn't build
[08:14] <pitti> but I guess that's the least of your worries/
[08:14] <pitti> ?
[08:14] <ara> yes, that does not keep me from sleeping :)
[08:24] <Adri2000> ccheney: any ETA on fixing bug #570147 ? could you please at least make a comment pointing to a fix or describing what the fix could be?
[09:31] <LucidFox> dholbach, nigelb, what would you say about changing the Behind MOTU theme? Someone I know has suggested moving away from the default WordPress one.
[09:33] <dholbach> LucidFox: no opinion :)
[09:46] <geser> mvo: bug #613756 should probably be moved to python-apt, right?
[09:46] <mvo> geser: yes please
[10:04] <pitti> superm1: ah, log synced now, but still the same problem as it seems
[10:06] <pitti> superm1: it needs to build against libmpcdec6?
[10:28] <LucidFox> dholbach, the WordPress admin interface also lists you as the administrative contact
[10:28] <LucidFox> I wonder
[10:28] <LucidFox> maybe we could create a Launchpad team and a mailing list, and send the contact there?
[11:00] <JamesWStubbs> Hello, is porting Ubuntu a mobile device ( The Apple iPhone ) Considered appropriate in this room?
[11:02]  * LucidFox blink-blink
[11:02] <JamesWStubbs> ?
[11:03] <JamesWStubbs> If it isn't please tell me and I'll go elsewhere,
[11:09] <nigelb> LucidFox: +1
[11:09] <nigelb> LucidFox: go for it.
[11:09] <LucidFox> nigelb> Oh, you're here!
[11:10] <nigelb> LucidFox: also if you're free later today, we could talk about how to go about taking interviews from now.  Probably in another 3.5 hours
[11:10] <LucidFox> Sure!
[11:10] <nigelb> LucidFox: yeah, at work.  busy day.
[11:10] <LucidFox> Okay. I've created a Launchpad team with a mailing list, added you and bobbo
[11:11] <LucidFox> the mailing list will apparently take some time to activate, though
[11:16]  * nigelb hugs LucidFox 
[11:16] <nigelb> you're awesome :)
[11:27] <bdrung> tumbleweed: please don't forget to unsubscribe ubuntu-sponsors
[11:47] <bdrung> pitti: ping
[11:48] <pitti> hello bdrung
[11:50] <bdrung> pitti: hi. why is the udev version '151-12'?
[11:50] <bdrung> BlackZ: ^
[11:50] <pitti> bdrung: there's a newer one in bzr, but Keybuk said it wouldn't boot
[11:51] <bdrung> pitti: to be more specific: why is it 151-12 and not 151-0ubuntu12?
[11:51] <pitti> bdrung: ah; Scott's decision
[11:52] <bdrung> pitti: is it allowed to decide that the version clashes with debian?
[11:52] <pitti> I'm not happy about it myself
[11:52] <BlackZ> pitti: why the maintainer isn't Ubuntu Developers ?
[11:56] <dholbach> LucidFox: for now I think we could just replace my name with somebody else
[11:56] <LucidFox> In WordPress?
[11:56] <dholbach> yep
[11:56] <dholbach> LucidFox: shall I put you in ther for now?
[11:57] <LucidFox> I've tried changing the contact email to the mailing list, but no email arrives and nothing is in moderation either
[11:57] <LucidFox> I'll try changing it to mine
[11:58] <LucidFox> huh, it did arrive
[11:58] <LucidFox> changed the email
[11:58] <vish> pitti: hi , when you get time could you merge this : https://code.launchpad.net/~evfool/jockey/proprietary/+merge/29254
[12:00] <pitti> vish: it's still on my list
[12:01] <vish> pitti: awesome thanks. [/me just trying to get it in before UIF :)]
[12:01] <BlackZ> pitti: for udev: can't we just merge the package from debian?
[12:01] <LucidFox> ...Great
[12:02] <pitti> BlackZ: I'm afraid not; we use a pretty clean upstream packaging, and Debian uses its own set of rules still
[12:02] <LucidFox> Yahoo is being "clever" and doesn't recognize Epiphany as a supported browser
[12:02] <LucidFox> for its New and Improved mail
[12:04] <BlackZ> pitti: ah, ok. Now it makes sense: so that's the reason why we have our own package in ubuntu and an ubuntu developer set as maintainer of the package?
[12:08] <pitti> BlackZ: right; it's totally independent from the Debian version and is on the sync blacklist
[12:08] <pitti> I'm still not quite happy about using Debianish version numbers, but oh well
[12:12] <tumbleweed> bdrung: whoops, thanks
[12:12] <bdrung> tumbleweed: for example bug #550261
[12:13] <vish> tumbleweed: how do we check the package has been uploaded to -proposed?
[12:13] <vish> is it still building?
[12:13] <tumbleweed> vish: it's waiting on archive admin approval
[12:14] <vish> tumbleweed: ah , cool ..thanks
[12:14] <tumbleweed> bdrung: err, yes. I used to always unsubscribe sponsors but I noticed some other people don't when they mark incomplete
[12:15] <bdrung> when marking as incomplete and requesting fixes, you need to comment that they should resubscribe u-s
[12:19] <tumbleweed> bdrung: righto.
[12:25] <ScottK> pitti: Did you respin kubuntu on powerpc?
[12:31] <pitti> ScottK: no, sorry; misunderstanding; doing now
[12:31] <pitti> ScottK: desktop, alternate, and/or DVD?
[12:36] <pitti> dvd seems alright, I'll start with desktop
[13:38] <tumbleweed> anyone know anything about the merges.ubuntu.com issue? Should a RT ticket be opened?
[13:54] <superm1> pitti, that's weird, i just did a test build in my sbuild with no change rebuild and was able to install it fine...
[13:55] <pitti> superm1: indeed; the build seems fine, but I don't see it in my chroot
[13:55] <pitti> and nothing in NEW
[13:55] <highvoltage> yay
[13:56] <superm1> i think we might have to skip a3 then for now, i wont be able to look more until tomorrow or so :(
[13:56] <pitti> superm1: ok..
[14:12] <smoser> cjwatson, i would appreciate your thoughts on bug 613463
[14:30] <ScottK> pitti: Kubuntu desktop live powerpc is what I was looking for.
[14:30] <pitti> ScottK: ah, good; it's on cdimage now
[14:30] <ScottK> So it is.
[14:30] <ScottK> No longer oversized, so it worked.
[15:07] <dupondje> are there any plans to upgrade php5 in maverick ?
[15:29] <ScottK> dupondje: 5.3.3 is planned after Alpha 3 is out.
[15:31] <ScottK> NCommander, ogra, etc: I see Bug #504365  and Bug #579187 and am left deeply confused about the proper solution to http://launchpadlibrarian.net/52996671/buildlog_ubuntu-maverick-armel.uw-imap_8:2007e~dfsg-3.1ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz - It looks like re-uploading the fix in 504365  would solve the FTBFS, but is somehow "wrong".  Help.
[15:32] <ogra> ScottK, cant help much here, i dont think the fix is wrong as a workaround, there seems to be no clean upstream solution though
[15:33] <ScottK> ogra: Could you or NCommander take this on.  It's well out of my area and I'm not the one to argue with upstream about it.
[15:33]  * ScottK just wants the package to build.
[15:34] <ogra> ScottK, i'll ask NCommander about it and worst case re-add the ubuntu patch
[15:34] <ScottK> Thanks.
[15:34] <ogra> it served us well for karmic and lucid :)
[15:35] <ScottK> ogra and NCommander: There's an NMU update in Debian you'll probably want to pick up at the same time.
[15:36] <ogra> k
[15:40] <dupondje> ScottK: great :) as alot of bugs fixed in it
[15:41] <dupondje> ScottK: is there an SRU planned also?
[15:41] <ScottK> dupondje: No idea.
[15:41] <dupondje> 5.3.2-2 version in sid fixes lotsa bugs, would be nice to get it sru'ed
[15:44] <ScottK> dupondje: I think SpamapS would be the one to ask.
[15:44] <Chipzz> dupondje: I don't think "a lot of bugs" qualifies for an SRU?
[15:50] <dupondje> Chipzz: http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/p/php5/current/changelog check the changes in 5.3.2-2, think its nice it would be included in 10.04.1 no ?
[15:51] <zul> dupondje: no it wont get srued as a whole but you can ask for a backport
[15:52] <dupondje> maby not as a whole indeed, but some changes should be included
[15:54] <sabdfl> hi folks, who's the expert on daily build packages? i'm hoping for a favour!
[15:55] <Chipzz> dupondje: what I meant is, aren't SRU's meant to be *individual* changes, rather than a whole batch?
[15:55] <Chipzz> individual -> specific, targeted
[15:56] <Chipzz> dupondje: SRU's are, iirc, specifically not meant to fix a whole bunch of random changes; they're meant to fix high-impact bugs
[15:56] <Chipzz> s/changes/bugs
[15:57] <Chipzz> dupondje: and this:
[15:57] <Chipzz>    * Upload PHP 5.3.3 to experimental for further testing
[15:57] <Chipzz> is a TOTAL red herring
[15:58] <dupondje> Chipzz: I don't say anything about 5.3.3 :) its 5.3.2-2 :)
[15:58] <Chipzz> that still doesn't adres the other things I said
[15:59] <Chipzz>    * Cherry pick patch to allow the timeout on mssql to be effective p/query
[15:59] <Chipzz> I seriously doubt that such changes qualify for an SRU. By a VERY long shot
[16:00] <dupondje> true, but    * Cherry pick patch to fix a memory leak in the cyclical gc for example should be added
[16:00] <Chipzz> no it shouldn't?
[16:00] <Chipzz> it doesn't fix a crash
[16:00] <dupondje> it does
[16:00] <Chipzz> not from the description it doesn't
[16:01] <Chipzz> leaking memory is a very different thing than crashing
[16:03] <dupondje> well the patch fixed a segfault for me. (http://www.dupondje.be/gdb.txt)
[16:03] <Chipzz> I'm not saying leaking memory isn't bad; I AM saying it is seriously doubtfull such fixes qualify for an SRU
[16:03] <Chipzz> then that is even more reason not to include it, unless you can clear out why the decsription differs from what it does
[16:04] <Chipzz> I'ld say that quite the contrary, the fact that it does things which aren't in the description, makes it more likely that there are unwanted side-effects, making it unsuitable for an SRU
[16:05] <tumbleweed> sabdfl: how big a favour? I've got one package I daily-build (no expert)
[16:06] <sabdfl> tumbleweed: daily package of murrine and light-themes? murrine needs a git import (should Just Work on lp)
[16:06] <sabdfl> cimi is doing some work for the Canonical design team and we want folks to be able t track it without having to build locally
[16:06] <Chipzz> dupondje: but seriously, SRU's are not the free ticket to bug-fixes you seem to think they are
[16:06] <tumbleweed> sabdfl: I'll have a shot at it
[16:07] <Chipzz> dupondje: the whole point of SRU's is fixing bugs in a *controlled* manner; that means that we'ld rather live with bugs we *do* know, than fix those bugs "at random", possibly introducing new bugs
[16:07] <dupondje> Chipzz: I know its not every bug is good for an sru, but this one looked ok to me (as it was causing a segfault)
[16:07] <sabdfl> tumbleweed: can i send you mail with details?
[16:08] <sabdfl> addy?
[16:08] <tumbleweed> sabdfl: sure, stefanor@ubuntu
[16:08] <Chipzz> dupondje: anyway, I don't decide what qualifies for an SRU and what doesn't; but from the look of it, this certainly doesn't
[16:08] <sabdfl> thanks, if it's not straightforward that's ok, just tell me and i'll bring in the big guns :-) but i appreciate the offer of help!
[16:09] <tumbleweed> hah :)
[16:09] <Chipzz> like someone else mentioned before, you should cherry-pick the patches one by one, and make sure you understand what they do, and what their impact is
[16:11] <sabdfl> tumbleweed: sent, and thanks again for having a shot at it
[16:12] <Chipzz> dupondje: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates ; please read this and understand what it says
[16:13] <dupondje> i'll do, thx Chipzz
[16:29] <SpamapS> mathiaz: so, I really would like to mark ceph as "DONE" today and not "POSTPONED" ... is there anything more I can do to help you sponsor/review it?
[16:34] <mathiaz> SpamapS: working on this now
[16:37] <SpamapS> mathiaz: You are also my hero now.
[16:37] <SpamapS> :)
[16:38] <SpamapS> mathiaz: https://launchpad.net/clb  ... this is my proof of concept backend for node registration
[16:38] <SpamapS> mathiaz: pretty lame but it works ;)
[16:52] <mathiaz> SpamapS: is the ceph module in the maverick kernel?
[17:12] <mathiaz> SpamapS: the ceph package fails to build
[17:12] <mathiaz> SpamapS: in the debian/rules, src/logrotate.conf is copied to debian/
[17:12] <mathiaz> SpamapS: and src/logrotate.conf doesn't exist
[17:18] <SpamapS> mathiaz: oh hmm, I wonder if I just missed it on the import
[17:22] <SpamapS> mathiaz: ok, I pushed a new one, and started a pdebuild on my system...
[17:28] <mathiaz> SpamapS: next error while building the package: http://paste.ubuntu.com/473594/
[17:29] <zul> there mysql 5.1.49, openldap 2.4.23 and php 5.3.3 uploaded
[17:29] <SpamapS> zul: ^10
[17:32] <SpamapS> mathiaz: clearly my merge from upstream's 0.21 tarball was incomplete. :(
[17:36] <SpamapS> mathiaz: ok, I *think* the latest push fixes it.. takes a while to build though so I will confirm in about 20 minutes
[17:37] <SpamapS> mathiaz: if nothing else I can confirm we're in sync with Sage's git repository
[17:37] <mathiaz> SpamapS: ok
[17:37] <mathiaz> SpamapS: I'm also looking that rrdtool merge
[17:37] <SpamapS> mathiaz: cool.. I think I need to poke some people about the libdbi MIR
[17:38] <SpamapS> mathiaz: I thought we only kept the changelog entries after the debian version...
[17:39] <mathiaz> SpamapS: when merging we keep all of the changelog entries
[17:39] <fta> any archive admin to reject python-pysnmp4/2010-07-29 from the lucid/proposed queue? i've uploaded a better version afterwards. https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=python-pysnmp4
[17:39] <mathiaz> SpamapS: so that we know since when we've been doing changes and why
[17:39] <SpamapS> mathiaz: Oh, thats actually not how I've done it up to now. :-/
[17:41] <mathiaz> SpamapS: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/maverick/samba/maverick/annotate/head%3A/debian/changelog
[17:41] <mathiaz> SpamapS: ^^ here is an example - the maverick branch for samba has lucid and hardy changelog entries
[17:41] <SpamapS> actually wait
[17:42] <SpamapS> no I have been doing that
[17:42] <SpamapS> I just didn't realize it, because merge-o-matic did it for me
[17:43] <SpamapS> seriously.. I don't know if one release cycle is long enough for Ubuntu dev status... there's just too many things to learn in 6 months. ;)
[17:43] <mathiaz> SpamapS: :)
[17:44] <mathiaz> SpamapS: we're learning all the time
[17:44] <mathiaz> SpamapS: if you don't know and are unsure, better ask
[17:44] <mathiaz> SpamapS: even when you're an Ubuntu core dev
[17:45] <SpamapS> mathiaz: I have a very bad habit of "'tis better to ask forgiveness than permission" .. the sponsorship process is beating it out of me tho
[18:03] <SpamapS> mathiaz: current package builds and installs
[18:04] <mathiaz> SpamapS: /o\
[18:14] <mathiaz> SpamapS: hm - It seems that there are some changes in the ceph bzr branch that haven't been included in the orig tarball
[18:15] <mathiaz> SpamapS: doing lsdiff -z ceph_0.21-0ubuntu1.diff.gz shows some changes outside the debian/director
[18:15] <mathiaz> SpamapS: debian directory
[18:15] <SpamapS> mathiaz: the orig tarball changed on us
[18:16] <mathiaz> SpamapS: well - if I take the tarball currently available from the usptream website
[18:16] <SpamapS> mathiaz: hum
[18:16] <mathiaz> SpamapS: it still seems that there are changes in the bzr branch
[18:16] <SpamapS> mathiaz: the fact that we got a 0.21 that was not in fact 0.21 is driving me absolutely batty
[18:17] <SpamapS> mathiaz: will diff against the tarball...
[18:17] <mathiaz> SpamapS: IIUC you've merged all of the upstream git repo into the bzr branch
[18:17] <mathiaz> SpamapS: so there may be some upstream changes that have been picked up while doing so
[18:17] <mathiaz> SpamapS: there is a problem with that - the changes just need to be documented
[18:18] <mathiaz> SpamapS: if they're bug fixes for the 0.21 release they may worth including
[18:18] <SpamapS> mathiaz: the upstream tarball is broken I think.
[18:18] <mathiaz> SpamapS: we just need to make sure we know what we're shipping
[18:18] <mathiaz> SpamapS: and can figure out what changed
[18:18] <SpamapS> mathiaz: right I'd rather ship w/ those things as patches
[18:19] <SpamapS> mathiaz: the logrotate, and sbin/mkcephfs are the two issues I think
[18:20] <SpamapS> mathiaz: the Makefile.am in the tarball puts mkcephfs in usr/sbin ... and logrotate.conf is not there at all
[18:21] <mathiaz> SpamapS: right
[18:21] <SpamapS> mathiaz: so maybe we ship w/ logrotate.conf already in debian (taking out the cp part of the rules file)
[18:21] <SpamapS> mathiaz: and patch Makefile.am w/ quilt
[18:21] <mathiaz> SpamapS: it's ok to include patches that fix these things so that it can build correctly
[18:21] <mathiaz> SpamapS: seems like a solution to me
[18:22] <mathiaz> SpamapS: I'd rather stick to 0.21 as close as we can
[18:23] <SpamapS> mathiaz: agreed
[18:23] <SpamapS> I'll push something momentarily
[18:23] <mathiaz> SpamapS: great thanks
[18:33] <SpamapS> mathiaz: I'll go ahead and let my build finish and test it a little, then push..
[20:12] <mathiaz> kees: hi - would you mind looking at libdbi MIR - bug 608552?
[20:27] <kees> mathiaz: in a bit, sure. i'm trying to get through some security publications first
[20:27] <mathiaz> kees: np - thanks!
[20:30] <azeem_> W 40
[20:35] <geser> ttx: as you sponsored the opendrim-* packages: they are currently in DEPWAIT on sfcb (multiverse). Should they get moved to multiverse too?
[20:53] <neeraj> if a file inside source code, there is a filed Exec=@prefix@/bin/program
[20:54] <neeraj> now I want to add a flag that i should always run in full screen mode
[20:54] <neeraj> -f flag to be precise.
[20:54] <neeraj> How should I add it..  Exec=@prefix@/bin/program -f will do?
[20:55] <neeraj> or Exec=@prefix@"/bin/program -f"
[20:56] <hyperair> the first one will do.
[21:03] <RoAkSoAx> tumbleweed: Another way to what you help me do yesterday: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/473686/
[21:04] <ScottK> geser: I filed a bug asking for them to be moved already.
[21:05] <geser> ok
[21:05] <ScottK> geser: 613624
[21:07] <geser> ScottK: some opendrim-* source packages are already in main, while their binaries are in universe. Do you know if a tool will notice this or are bugs needed to "fix" it?
[21:09] <ScottK> geser: I just grabbed the ones that hadn't built yet due to depwait for 613624.  If moving ends up with some packages in Main/Universe depending on multiverse packages, I think that will get noticed.
[21:18] <smoser> Keybuk, or slangasek maybe... or anyone... what causes mounted-varrun.conf to fire ?
[21:18] <smoser> "start on mounted MOUNTPOINT=/var/run TYPE=tmpfs"
[21:18] <smoser> does mountall just always mount a tmpfs on /var/run ?
[21:20] <neeraj> ty hyperair
[21:22] <Keybuk> well
[21:22] <Keybuk> yes
[21:22] <Keybuk> if mountall's config tells it to
[21:34] <Keybuk> slangasek: so there's one problem with back-porting the manual/override stuff from 0.10 to 0.6
[21:46] <smoser> Keybuk, mountall's config ?
[21:47] <smoser> ah. i see. /lib/init/fstab
[21:49] <slangasek> Keybuk: yes?
[22:02] <Keybuk> slangasek: it's a big problem
[22:09] <slangasek> Keybuk: it will crash the financial system?
[22:11] <Keybuk> worse
[22:11] <Keybuk> it means we have to come up for a name for the directory
[22:50] <slangasek> Keybuk: heh
[22:52] <Keybuk> since they're local overrides, rather than defaults, I did thing /etc/local/*.conf
[23:53] <unimatrix> http://packages.ubuntu.com/maverick/ any idea what's going on here?