[02:20]  * ScottK decides to hit "save as draft" instead of publish to his blog post about the notion that planet.ubuntu.com should be multilingual.
[02:22] <ajmitch> slightly inflammatory?
[02:25] <ScottK> Yes and the comments of the outraged are entirely predictable.
[02:29] <ScottK> Clearly from my position of priviledge I can't understand the perspective of the downtrodden, so it will have to be explained to me.
[06:42] <dholbach> good morning!
[06:42] <dholbach> Packaging Training Session: Fixing Small Ubuntu Bugs in 18 minutes in #ubuntu-classroom
[06:46] <micahg> zul: do you mind if I merge request-tracker3.8?
[07:10]  * ajmitch is watching #u-classroom, honest
[08:04] <sbronsted> wgrant:  How often is http://qa.ubuntuwire.org/ftbfs/ updated?
[08:10] <wgrant> sbronsted: Once an hour.
[08:11]  * micahg can't wait for sparc to go away, that page will be much smaller :)
[08:13] <sbronsted> wgrant: But when I build eg httpcomponents-core locally I don't get an error !?
[08:13] <jpds> micahg: So will the archive.
[08:14] <geser> sbronsted: the packages don't get automatically retried (except DEPWAIT) and the page only shows the current state
[08:14] <dholbach> TheMuso: can you extend my membership in ubuntu-universe-sponsors so I can keep running the script that auto-assigns u-u-s bugs to ubuntu-sponsors?
[08:14] <sbronsted> wgrant: and when I look a the error log in launchpad it is from the 2010-06-15 !?
[08:15] <ajmitch> sbronsted: that log does mention that it's executing maven in offline mode, so it may only have issues when unable to fetch stuff from the internet
[08:15] <ajmitch> the buildds have no internet access at all, so builds must be self-contained
[08:16]  * ajmitch doesn't know enough about it to know if that error is the cause of it, but it's the most likely
[08:16] <sbronsted> but I will expect the build script always build offline (I hope)
[08:18] <ajmitch> given that it's only had one debian upload, and it's arch: all, it's something that's easily missed
[08:20] <ajmitch> you may find answers in #ubuntu-java
[08:21] <wgrant> sbronsted: We don't retry every build failure every day.
[08:21] <geser> given that it doesn't appear anymore in the recent archive rebuild anymore, I give it back to a retry
[08:21] <geser> let's see what happens
[08:23]  * ajmitch would expect the same sort of result tbh
[08:23] <ajmitch> and launchpad explodes in a ball of flame
[08:25] <sbronsted> wgrant: so how do know which of the build errors still are still  valid?
[08:25] <sbronsted> sorry: ....still are valid
[08:25] <wgrant> sbronsted: That page can't tell you that.
[08:25] <wgrant> Launchpad doesn't know.
[08:27] <geser> sbronsted: check if the package builds now and request a give-back if it does. All the page show is the current state in the archive (that a package didn't got build when it got tried)
[08:32] <sbronsted> geser: you mention "recent archive rebuild". How do I see that?
[08:38] <geser> sbronsted: the results are here: http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu_ftbfs.cgi
[08:46] <geser> ajmitch: "Successfully built  on rothera (i386)" for httpcomponents-core and LP still seems to be there :)
[08:47] <sbronsted> geser: the httpcomponent-core build is okay now
[08:48] <geser> sbronsted: yes, it should vanish from http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ on the next update of that page
[08:50] <chilicuil> Laney: I'm trying to build several chroots systems for pbuilder I've modified my .pbuilderrc ( http://pastebin.com/DFg1Ry0S ) so results can be placed in a different directory, then I've run pbuilder-dist and it seems like it doesnt read that file, which file should I change instaed (I've already tried with the $VARS available, but they're not enough)?
[08:51] <ajmitch> geser: OK, I was wrong :)
[08:51] <ajmitch> geser: LP exploding was it telling me that it was unable to contact a server
[08:51] <ajmitch> which went away on page refresh
[08:52] <lifeless> ajmitch: did you get an oops ?
[08:52] <ajmitch> no OOPS
[08:52] <ajmitch> otherwise I'd have something useful to tell you
[08:52] <ajmitch> this was on edge, btw
[08:52] <wgrant> When was that?
[08:52] <lifeless> did you grab a picture ?
[08:52] <wgrant> That's meant to be fixed.
[08:53] <ajmitch> lifeless: no I didn't, it was afaik a standard "sorry, please try again" sort of message, 30 minutes ago now
[08:53] <wgrant> Damn.
[08:53] <ajmitch> sorry
[08:53] <wgrant> It must have regressed.
[08:54] <wgrant> But I don't see how.
[08:54] <lifeless> edge upgrade perhaps
[08:54] <wgrant> Possibly, true.
[08:54] <lifeless> wgrant: were you on edge?
[08:54] <wgrant> It wasn't me.
[08:54] <ajmitch> doesn't that message come up when there's no appserver to talk to, however briefly?
[08:54] <lifeless> bah
[08:54] <lifeless> ajmitch: &
[08:55] <ajmitch> sorry that I didn't get info from it, if it happens again I'll grab a screenshot at least
[08:56] <lifeless> ajmitch: we have dozens of appservers
[08:56] <lifeless> ajmitch: so its not meant to happen at all
[09:37] <huats> mornig
[12:55] <TheMuso> dholbach_: If nobody else has done it by now, sure I'll take care of it.
[12:57] <TheMuso> dholbach_: done
[13:30] <dupondje> https://merges.ubuntu.com/universe.html
[13:30] <dupondje> houston we have an issue !
[13:30] <dupondje> :)
[14:12] <dholbach_> TheMuso: thanks
[15:15] <Riddell> dholbach, jpds, nhandler: anyone from motu council want to weigh in on the ubuntu-tweak question?
[15:17] <dholbach> Riddell: the MOTU Council is not around any more - I don't have any opinion on it
[15:18] <Riddell> dholbach: shouldn't https://edge.launchpad.net/~motu-council be updated then?
[15:18] <dholbach> Riddell: yeah, thanks
[15:34] <ScottK> Riddell: Such questions should go to the TB now.
[16:01] <micahg> zul: do you mind if I merge request-tracker3.8?
[16:01] <zul> micahg: no go ahead
[16:01] <micahg> zul: thanks
[17:46] <shadeslayer> hi.. https://merges.ubuntu.com/ seems to be down, any particular reason?
[17:47] <shadeslayer> ( opening anything gives me a 500 error )
[18:34] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, about bug 623870
[18:34] <fabrice_sp> bug 613870
[18:35] <fabrice_sp> I was working on it (assigned to me)
[18:36] <fabrice_sp> perhaps, the first of ack-sync should be unassign sponsors and assign yourself
[18:36] <fabrice_sp> +step
[18:37] <fabrice_sp> I assume you are looking at 613891, so I'll stop looking at the sponsoriship queue
[18:42] <shadeslayer> would it be a good idea to get a new package in maverick into lucid backports?
[18:43] <shadeslayer> ( qoauth to be specific )
[18:44] <micahg> shadeslayer: if people need it in Lucid and it doesn't have a lot of deps, you can request it
[18:44] <shadeslayer> ok.. ill just check the deps once
[18:44] <ari-tczew> didrocks: ping
[18:46] <ari-tczew> didrocks: how do you upload debdiffs? why my patches are signed to Bhavani Shankar? I don't understand this situation. bug 595499
[18:47] <shadeslayer> micahg: seems to have minimal deps : Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 7.0.50~), libqca2-dev, qt4-qmake, libqca2-plugin-ossl
[18:48] <micahg> shadeslayer: looks good :)
[18:48] <shadeslayer> micahg: is there a script of sorts to do this? :D
[18:48] <micahg> shadeslayer: no, you file a request on the lucid-backports project
[18:48] <micahg> !backports | shadeslayer
[18:48] <shadeslayer> right
[18:48] <shadeslayer> micahg: i was browsing that page :P
[18:48] <didrocks> ari-tczew: your patches? only gnu-efi:
[18:48] <didrocks> ari-tczew: see https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnu-efi/+bug/595499/comments/1
[18:49] <micahg> shadeslayer: oh, you mean like requestsync?, sounds like a good candidate for u-d-t, maybe file a bug :)
[18:49] <ari-tczew> didrocks: yes, I mean gnu-efi
[18:49] <ari-tczew> sorry for confusing
[18:50] <didrocks> going for dinner now
[18:50] <shadeslayer> micahg: will look into it this weekend then ;)
[18:51] <ari-tczew> didrocks: I look forward to your response
[18:52] <didrocks> ari-tczew: I've answered
[18:52] <didrocks> ari-tczew: see, the first patch already contained everything, I took it
[18:52] <didrocks> ari-tczew: see my link
[18:53] <ari-tczew> didrocks: not enough. I've finished  this patch enough for upload, so why someone else is as uploader?
[18:53] <ari-tczew> I'm upset this situation
[18:54] <didrocks> ari-tczew: but the first comment already contained that patch!!!
[18:54] <ari-tczew> sorry, but I'm not plain worker
[18:54] <didrocks> ari-tczew: the work was already done
[18:54] <Laney> The only change between your patch and the first one is the changelog
[18:54] <Laney> it's only polite to sponsor the one that was there first...
[18:55] <didrocks> thanks Laney, that's exactly what I mean :)
[18:55] <ari-tczew> I thought that our cooperate will be succesed
[18:55] <ari-tczew> sorry, but I don't want making patches for someone else and there is any word that I've worked on this
[18:56] <didrocks> ari-tczew: if you have done the work, someone else post the same patch just after the same patch slightely modified, won't you be upset if I sponsor the second?
[18:59] <Laney> ari-tczew: maybe you lost the changes you meant to add?
[18:59] <Laney> please have a look at your patch
[18:59] <ari-tczew> didrocks: I won't be upset, because because Bhavani said, that I can take this merge
[19:00] <didrocks> ari-tczew: I didn't see he told that, in that case, I'm sorry about that mistake, but in any case, there were no need for a second patch as the first one contained everything (all changes we have were in the first one)
[19:00] <didrocks> really going for dinner now
[19:00] <Laney> No, there's no mistake. Don't be sorry.
[19:01] <ari-tczew> didrocks, Laney: I have offer: I'll prepare a 100 merges and these patches are be not completed. you (both) will finish patches and all these 100 patches will be uploaded per my. it will be ok?
[19:01] <Laney> I've done many fixes where someone else gets the upload credit in the end
[19:02] <Laney> it's part of collaborative maintenance
[19:02] <Laney> at the end of the day your +related-software page doesn't mean that much
[19:03] <ari-tczew> Laney: so you will finish my 100 patches ok?
[19:03] <shadeslayer> will a package built in a ppa do fine for backports?
[19:03] <Laney> shadeslayer: if you've tested it, then as long as it's built in a clean environment it'll be fine
[19:04] <tyarusso> So I have a package that uses the new 3.0 (quilt) source format, but I have some people requesting it for jaunty/hardy - would someone be able to walk me through converting a copy to the old format for them?
[19:04] <shadeslayer> Laney: also.. is there any particular version for backports?
[19:04] <Laney> shadeslayer: does it require source changes
[19:04] <Laney> ?
[19:04] <ari-tczew> didrocks: did you read all comments on bug? Bhavani Shankar  wrote on 2010-07-29 sure, go ahead!
[19:04] <shadeslayer> Laney: nope
[19:05] <ari-tczew> Laney: can you answer on my question?
[19:05] <Laney> ari-tczew: No, because you are being combative
[19:05] <shadeslayer> like.. do i version it 1.0-0ubuntu1~lucid1 or just 1.0-0ubuntu1
[19:05] <Laney> shadeslayer: Then you don't need to worry, the archive admin scripts will take care of it
[19:05] <shadeslayer> ah ok
[19:06] <ari-tczew> Laney: I'm only getting my claim
[19:06] <porthose> tyarusso, remove /debian/source and rebuild
[19:06] <ari-tczew> even debian/changelog doesn't mean about me
[19:06] <ari-tczew> just a plain worker, which is finishing someones debdiffs
[19:07] <ari-tczew> Laney: maybe you can be a thrall, not me and I've respect for me
[19:07] <fabrice_sp> ari-tczew, claiming one line more in +related-software ? I really don't understand you
[19:08] <fabrice_sp> sorry to be crude, but this happens, and as I already told you: this is not the number that is important
[19:08] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: yes, this one more line
[19:08] <fabrice_sp> ari-tczew, and?
[19:08] <fabrice_sp> what's the point?
[19:09] <fabrice_sp> you win something?
[19:09] <fabrice_sp> no, I don't think so
[19:09] <tyarusso> porthose: Is that really all there is to it?  Note that I do actually have a patch in debian/patches/.
[19:09] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: yes because it's a proof, that I've worked on this package
[19:09] <fabrice_sp> and?
[19:09] <porthose> tyarusso, I didn't say /debian/patche I said /debian/source
[19:09] <fabrice_sp> as a sponsor, I don't get rewarded for uploading others people package
[19:09] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: and it's a proof, that I've worked on this package
[19:10] <porthose> s/patche/patch/g
[19:10] <tyarusso> porthose: I know, but I was under the impression knowing that it was using the quilt format is what made the stuff in patches get applied.
[19:10] <fabrice_sp> ari-tczew, what for? what are you seeking? having touched all the packages in the universe?
[19:11] <porthose> aaah, then it will be a little more difficult
[19:11] <porthose> tyarusso, which package
[19:11] <fabrice_sp> anyway, /me goes back to do something useful
[19:11] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: no. he was lazy for update his patch. I've finished it and debian/changelog says that he finish it
[19:11] <tyarusso> porthose: nagios-agent, in the nagiosinc PPA.
[19:12] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: unassign sponsors and assign yourself before doing anything is a good idea. patches are welcome :)
[19:12] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: I feel like I cleaned up after somebody
[19:12] <porthose> tyarusso, see pm
[19:12] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, if you look at the changelog of the patch, you'll see that it's what I've done ;-)
[19:13] <fabrice_sp> s/patch/bug
[19:13] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: yes, but you did it after i loaded the bug page
[19:14] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp, Laney, didrocks: my patch includes both workers on bug. I thought that it's fair. now I see that I'm nothing important here
[19:14] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, maybe: I always refresh the bug page before doing anything, to avoid that kind of 'cross work' :-)
[19:16] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, I think I'll update ack-sync to first unsubscribe the sponsors and then download the source. Shouldn't be to complicated
[19:16] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: maybe we should update ack-sync to check for assigned people
[19:17] <fabrice_sp> is it a long build? becuase I subscribe around 15 minutes before you uploaded it, so I really first step should be subscribe the sponsor to the bug
[19:18] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: yes, it took quite a while
[19:19] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, so I think you were already building it when I assigned it to myself
[19:20] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: are you working on ack-sync?
[19:20] <fabrice_sp> I was going to update it to assign the bug to sponsor as the first step
[19:21] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: can you add a check if there is someone assigned to it?
[19:21] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, I'm no python guru, but I can try :-)
[19:22] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: i can do it if you want
[19:23] <fabrice_sp> hmm, I think it will be quicker and less error prone if you do it, but I can also try. It's up to you
[19:25] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: ok, i give it a try
[19:25] <fabrice_sp> ok
[19:27] <fabrice_sp> have to reboot
[19:54] <shadeslayer> bdrung: thanks for the qtcurve sync ;)
[19:59] <bdrung> shadeslayer: yw
[19:59] <shadeslayer> bdrung: another one coming up :P
[20:00] <bdrung> shadeslayer: great. need some for testing my ack-sync changes :)
[20:00] <shadeslayer> it seems there are 2 parts to that package
[20:00] <shadeslayer> awesome :D
[20:08] <shadeslayer> bdrung: bug 613974
[20:09] <shadeslayer> build log attached
[20:34] <zooko> Dear people of #ubuntu-motu: Tahoe-LAFS needs an upgrade! There is a very reliable new version of Tahoe-LAFS available upstream. I would be happy to get this new version into Maverick. The FeatureFreeze is approaching. Help! :-)
[20:34] <zooko> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tahoe-lafs/+bug/609755
[20:50] <bdrung> zooko: you need to find someone who actually does the update. maybe ask the previous uploader?
[21:05] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: uploaded
[21:05] <bdrung> please test
[21:09] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, thanks! is there any sync request left?! :-)
[21:09] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: yes
[21:10] <ScottK> zooko: Did you get tahoe-lafs into Debian yet?
[21:10] <fabrice_sp> oh right: 4
[21:12] <fabrice_sp> taking bug 613931 to test
[21:14] <zooko> ScottK: no, it is not in Debian.
[21:16] <zooko> bdrung: thanks! Let's see, who *was* that... Here's my list of everyone who helped get Tahoe-LAFS into Karmic in the first place: http://pubgrid.tahoe-lafs.org/uri/URI:DIR2-RO:ixqhc4kdbjxc7o65xjnveoewym:5x6lwoxghrd5rxhwunzavft2qygfkt27oj3fbxlq4c6p45z5uneq/blog.html#2009-09-02
[21:16] <zooko> iulian: are you available to help with this?
[21:22] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, ack-sync is trying to do something with my mouse
[21:22] <fabrice_sp> the pointer change to a cross
[21:22] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: wtf?
[21:23] <fabrice_sp> yeah :-/
[21:23] <fabrice_sp> forget it: I was running sh ack-sync
[21:23] <fabrice_sp> instead of ack-sync directly
[21:24] <fabrice_sp> bdrung, status could have been changed to In Progress, no?
[21:25] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: sh ack-sync? it's a python script!
[21:25] <fabrice_sp> yeah: I'm tired! :-D
[21:26] <bdrung> fabrice_sp: yes, setting in progress would be possible.
[21:26] <fabrice_sp> but the effect is strange :-)
[21:26] <fabrice_sp> try and you'll see ;-)
[21:31] <fabrice_sp> seems good!
[21:33] <ajmitch> fabrice_sp: it was probably trying to run 'import'
[21:33] <ajmitch> which is part of imagemagick, used for taking screenshots :)
[21:34] <ajmitch> faces of doom
[21:34] <ajmitch> meh
[21:34] <fabrice_sp> ehhhhh
[21:34] <fabrice_sp> that's why it was trying to capture something on my screen ;-)
[21:45] <scott-work> a week or go i was looking for a web page that mentioned packages that failed to build from source, i thought the link started with people.canonical.com
[21:45] <scott-work> i found it again:  http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/NBS/
[21:46] <scott-work> just wanted to share that with the group :)
[21:46] <scott-work> although it's not FTFS but rather NBS
[21:46] <scott-work> s/FTFS/FTBFS
[21:49] <micahg> scott-work: yeah, those are binaries without a source
[21:52] <paultag> Hey MOTU. I'll cross-post here because I'm not having much luck. I'm trying to use source format 3's multiple tar.gz feature, but I'm not having much luck. The Deb spec ( yes i've googled this ;) ) seems to suggest that it's to be inside the orig.tar.gz, and that can't be right
[21:52] <paultag> Has anyone used this & have any idea as to where it extracts the "sister" tar.gz files?
[22:00] <bdrung> paultag: we use two tarballs in eclipse
[22:00] <bdrung> paultag: apt-get source eclipse
[22:00] <paultag> bdrung: thanks
[22:03] <bdrung> \o/ i sponsored the first merge request with sponsor-patch \o/
[22:04] <micahg> bdrung: want another to sponsor?
[22:05] <bdrung> micahg: yes (otherwise i pick a random main merge request)
[22:05] <micahg> bdrung: I need to file the bug, give me a minute
[22:09] <micahg> bdrung: bug 614036
[22:11] <paultag> thank bdrung. I think I've got it. Thanks for the tip, that really helped
[22:11] <bdrung> you're welcome
[22:12] <bdrung> sponsor-patch needs work
[22:51] <ScottK> scott-work: I think you want http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/
[22:52] <highvoltage> the freeze is over right?
[22:54] <ScottK> Yes.
[22:54] <highvoltage> whohoo!
[22:58] <micahg> bdrung: should I just subscribe u-s to my merge bug?
[22:58] <ari-tczew> is merges.ubuntu.com closed?
[22:59] <bdrung> micahg: nope.
[22:59] <micahg> bdrung: k, I'll be patient :)
[23:00] <bdrung> micahg: it just takes a little bit longer...
[23:00] <micahg> ok
[23:08] <ari-tczew> didrocks: around?
[23:45] <bdrung> micahg: done