JanCRhonda: you can try running an x86 guest OS with qemu on your PowerPC notebook  ;)00:00
micahgcan someone please give back minitube on armel and powerpc: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/minitube/1.1-103:43
funkyHatI'm stuck trying to run debuild on a package I grabbed using bzr ( bzr branch lp:ubuntu/gnome-system-tools )03:47
funkyHatdpkg-source: error: can't build with source format '3.0 (quilt)': no orig.tar file found03:48
micahgfunkyHat: you need to use bzr-builddeb03:48
funkyHatmicahg: ah thanks ⡈)03:49
micahgfunkyHat: np03:49
funkyHatooh, that's a little broken (or I'm doing something else wrong)03:51
funkyHatbzr-buildpackage on its own failed, and bzr-buildpackage -S has no way to specify that I don't want to sign it, so that fails too03:52
funkyHatBut it's ok, running bzr-buildpackage pulled down the orig.tar.gz so I can do it with debuild now ;D03:52
micahgfunkyHat: it should actually generate the .orig.tar.gz from the bzr repo if pristine-tar is used03:53
funkyHatOh, well it did perhaps do that03:53
funkyHatBut the orig.tar.gz was there, which is the important thing ;D03:54
ScottKmicahg: lamont will run a script to resurrect all the failed builds once gcc 4.5 is done building on both archs.  Probably tomorrow or monday.04:00
micahgScottK: k, I won't worry about it then, thanks04:01
funkyHatScottK: does that only apply to those archs, gnome-system-tools needs a rebuild I think, just testing04:08
ScottKfunkyHat: Just powerpc and armel.  We had a breakage yesterday and today in gcc that made almost all builds on those two archs fail.04:09
funkyHatScottK: ok, I'll carry on filing this bug+branch then ⡈)04:10
Laibschanybody here using pbuilder together with custom hooks?  I'm trying to use the $BUILDRESULT variable in one of my hooks, but for some reason the variable is empty or not set to any value.  The script itself is called just fine.  /usr/lib/pbuilder/hooks/B10-test: http://paste.debian.net/87862/05:36
LaibschOutput of that script from a pbuilder run is just "BUILDRESULT is set to ", so the variable seems to be not set to any value.  I thought it was one of the "official" variables that I could use freely?05:37
ScottKThe pbuilder package has some example scripts in it.  I'd check those.05:54
LaibschScottK: good suggestion05:55
LaibschIn fact I already looked at them05:55
LaibschBut there are none that use the BUILDRESULT variable, it seems05:55
LaibschActually, I have specified what BUILDRESULT should be in /etc/pbuilderrc and that's where the resulting debs are indeed put.05:56
RhondaJanC: Sure, and learn to appreciate the speed of a c64 again?08:59
geserfunkyHat: bzr bd -S -- -us -uc (or any other debuild options you need)09:14
bilalakhtartumbleweed: Thanks for that merge!09:33
OwaisLHey everyone, I just uploaded my package to REVU. Would anyone check it out please.12:54
micahgOwaisL: what package?12:56
OwaisLit's in a ppa too12:56
st__why ubuntu maintainers never generate a .pot files in source packages?13:28
* 52AACAD66 is away: Zurzeit abwesend13:45
=== xfaf is now known as zul
LaneyDktrKranz: ping re: gtk-sharp-beans14:03
Laneyand congrats on the point release ;)14:03
* 52AACAD66 is back.14:07
st__why ubuntu maintainers never generate a .pot files in source packages?14:07
Laneywe don't translate universe packages in ubuntu14:09
lucidfoxI have a question, since I'm writing my own app using GSettings14:12
Rhondast__: Because there is nothing generated in the source package by ubuntu maintainers - that would be an upstream job to do.14:13
lucidfoxAt what stage are GSettings schemas compiled into the binary format? I've looked at evince, but the debs only install the XML files14:13
lucidfoxand I can find no postinst commands or anything14:13
=== 52AACAD66 is now known as ximion_
=== freeflyi1g is now known as freeflying
DktrKranzLaney: will do after dinstall run is finished14:57
bilalakhtarAnAnt: السلام علئكم Thanks for that endorsement! But its incomplete!15:27
AnAntbilalakhtar: yes, that is my first, I still didn't finish it15:28
DktrKranzLaney: done15:45
LaneyDktrKranz: thanks so much!15:46
Laneydidrocks: we are nearly over the finish line15:46
kklimondacan someone sponsor bug 629495?16:13
ubottuLaunchpad bug 629495 in hamster-applet (Ubuntu) "Update hamster-applet to 2.31.90 in 10.10" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/62949516:13
nigelbkklimonda: don't you need Ffe?16:17
nigelbor is it just bug fix :)16:17
LaneyYes, I'd say that needs a freeze exception16:19
kklimondaWell, it's part of gnome and I've asked seb128 whether it's fine to go with it but I can always request an official FFe16:22
Laneyplease post that in the bug then16:22
Laney(that it has been approved)16:23
kklimondamhm, done16:25
=== paul__ is now known as Elbrus
ElbrusI just added a debdiff to bug 621905, and subscribed ubuntu-sponsors, but I am not sure if that is correct with regard to any freeze17:46
ubottuLaunchpad bug 621905 in lazarus (Ubuntu) "lazarus in repo demands "Build Lazarus", that is not true." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/62190517:46
Elbrusor if ubuntu-sponsors was the right group to subscribe (the subscription went one step to quick where I wanted to verify)17:47
OwaisLhey, I uploaded my first ever package to REVU today. Got some errors warnings, anyone got time to guide me through? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=85818:04
RhondaHmm, now I wonder why it says lucid and not maverick?18:07
RhondaOwaisL: You sure about that number? It's archived since may 2008?18:08
OwaisLwhat's happening to me...18:09
OwaisLhere it is18:09
RhondaWhich warning are you wondering about?18:16
* RainCT updates REVU's config file (lucid->maverick)18:17
RhondaRainCT: That's helpful indeed. :)18:17
RainCTok, the warning is gone now18:17
RhondaOr wait a month and switch it directly to nattie? ;)18:18
RainCTHeh. Hey, things don't change by themselves if nobody complained about them :P18:18
RainCTOwaisL: Cool. You could start by looking at the warnings REVU is showing you18:19
RainCTOwaisL: are you upstream for that app?18:24
OwaisLRainCT: Oh, I didn't notice.18:26
OwaisLYes, I am.18:26
RainCTOwaisL: Okay, I've left a review. By the way, are you aware that you can't get the package into Ubuntu until Maverick is released?18:38
OwaisLRainCT: yes, i know that.18:38
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
OwaisLRainCT: Just two warnings left now.19:41
OwaisLRainCT: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/gmailwatcher19:42
AlanBello/ Laney21:01
AlanBellok, bit of context for others before we carry on21:02
AlanBell!info blogtk21:02
ubottublogtk (source: blogtk): GTK Weblogging client. In component universe, is optional. Version 1.1-2ubuntu3 (lucid), package size 68 kB, installed size 572 kB21:02
AlanBellblogtk does not run in maverick, it fails because of a lack of python-gtkhtml2 which has been deprecated21:03
micahgAlanBell: ugh, I should fix that, we missed that in Lucid21:03
AlanBellthe dependency was removed, but not the code, which left it non-starter in lucid and maverick21:03
AlanBellupstream is on launchpad here https://launchpad.net/blogtk21:03
AlanBelland the dependency is properly fixed, it runs, seems nice.21:04
AlanBellThe upstream bzr and tar.gz includes a /debian directory and does not seem to be quite as expected when following the python packaging guide21:05
micahgthanks tumbleweed21:11
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
tumbleweedmicahg: np21:12
AlanBellwould it be best to create a new branch from lp:blogtk/2.0 without the /debian directory? or try to use what is there? I am not sure how to proceed21:12
=== jrib1 is now known as jrib
tumbleweedAlanBell: why does it matter what thye have in bzr? Is there no release since fixing this?21:14
AlanBelltumbleweed: the tar.gz has /debian in it too21:15
tumbleweedAlanBell: source format 3 deletes /debian in upstream source when unpacking21:15
tumbleweed(3.0 quilt, that is)21:16
=== warp11 is now known as warp10
=== nhandler1 is now known as nhandler
AlanBellok, so that could be a good .tar.gz to start from then, excellent21:16
* AlanBell is new to this packaging stuff21:16
=== nhandler is now known as Guest53292
tumbleweedyes, you should be able to use it21:17
AlanBellok, should I be following the python packaging guide or is there a better document I should use?21:19
AlanBells/better/more appropriate/21:19
tumbleweedAlanBell: are we abandoning the existing packaging?21:20
tumbleweedoh, I see it was removed from debian21:21
AlanBellhmm, not sure. I checked the debian/patches directory and looked at the current source, most seem to have been applied upstream (or rewritten differently)21:21
AlanBellyeah, it is no longer in debian21:21
micahgtumbleweed: only because it was abandoned upstream21:21
micahgdebian 55100521:21
ubottuDebian bug 551005 in wnpp "RFP: blogtk -- client for weblog systems" [Wishlist,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/55100521:21
micahgand debian 44313321:21
ubottuDebian bug 443133 in ftp.debian.org "RM: blogtk -- RoQA; orphaned; dead upstream; few users; RC-buggy" [Normal,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/44313321:21
tumbleweedyeah, just read those21:22
tumbleweedok, the existing packaging isn't *that* bad21:23
tumbleweedAlanBell: python-support's  README is a reasonable guide for what's needed21:23
AlanBellso is the way forward to try and get it back in debian? or put it directly in Ubuntu?21:23
Laneyis the project really alive again?21:24
tumbleweedlast commit 12 weeks ago...21:24
AlanBelltrunk was last touched 12 weeks ago21:24
AlanBellthe maintainer has ppa packages https://launchpad.net/~jayreding/+archive/ppa21:25
=== tm__ is now known as tm
LaneyI'm just sceptical about including something which has been removed before21:26
AlanBellthe 2.0 release was a year ago21:26
AlanBellit looks to me like development moved from sourceforge to launchpad and debian was waiting for the sourceforge one to be updated21:27
micahgLaney: we should either update it to 2.0 or drop it from maverick21:27
tumbleweedLaney: it's currently in maverick, so if an update can save it from deletion, that sound sensible21:27
Laneymicahg: right21:28
tumbleweedbut yes, longer term it should either get back into debian or go away21:28
Laneytumbleweed: is it? No sense reviving unmaintained stuff21:28
tumbleweedLaney: depends how unmaintained and how much revival is required21:29
Laneysomething which manages to release broken and then remain in that state for a further 3 months doesn't seem particularly maintained to me21:30
=== Guest53292 is now known as nhandler
AlanBellat the moment in maverick it is unstartable21:30
Laneybut yes if someone is actually volunteering to take care of it21:30
micahgthe problem is updating to 2.0 is that MOTU or its replacement would be obligated to support it for 18 months even if upstream is dead21:30
Laneythen I'm all for fixing it…21:30
AlanBellthe blog has quite a lot of posts about development updates going back to 2008 on a fairly regular basis21:31
Laneyit's not just upstream, there has to be a distribution maintainer too21:31
tumbleweedwhich is a continual problem with MOTU packages that we don't get from debian21:32
LaneyI don't know if you're aware of my views on this. :)21:32
* tumbleweed isn't. but personally I'm impressed by how bad they are whenever I come across one of those21:33
Laneybasically don't do it21:33
* micahg would suggest dropping from maverick, if someone is interested, go through the RFP in Debian, sync to natty and backport21:34
tumbleweederk. if any ubuntu-release people are here, please unsubscribe your team from bug 36799021:40
ubottuLaunchpad bug 367990 in PyRoom 0.4 "Program crashes on startup" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/36799021:40
AlanBellso the RFP is debian bug 551005 and the latest on that in January was that they were waiting for a 2.0.1 release21:42
ubottuDebian bug 551005 in wnpp "RFP: blogtk -- client for weblog systems" [Wishlist,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/55100521:42
AlanBellthat being after the 2.0 release from 2009-09-22 I guess means they were not happy with the state of the 2.021:43
tumbleweedAlanBell: ask DktrKranz21:43
=== ScottK2 is now known as ScottK
AlanBellDktrKranz: we are looking at blogtk which is currently broken in Ubuntu and not in Debian, you mentioned on debian bug 551005 that you were waiting for a 2.0.1 release, is that a blocker for the RFP?21:47
ubottuDebian bug 551005 in wnpp "RFP: blogtk -- client for weblog systems" [Wishlist,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/55100521:47
tumbleweedany core devs? here's a main package that looks good (but listed under unseeded): https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~rsalveti/ubuntu/maverick/x-loader/fix-628243/+merge/3432522:22
mario-kemperHi there, I am the author of Shutter. Is there anything I can do to get an update of Shutter into maverick? I've already requested an update here: Bug #62670423:07
ubottuLaunchpad bug 626704 in shutter (Ubuntu) "[Update package] Shutter 0.86.3" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/62670423:07
Laneymario-kemper: I suggest you mail the Debian maintainer23:07
mario-kemperAlready done - he is not responding currently23:08
mario-kemperI'll open another bug in the debian bug tracker to get his attention23:10
kklimondabah, I like pixelize from 0.86.0 release but at this point it would require a Feature Freeze exception and a good soul to sponsor it ;)23:48
micahgkklimonda: that's newer than 1.0.0-1?23:49
ScottKkklimonda: I well reasoned FFe that include "Upstream asked us to update" and a good draft package has a reasonable chance of getting an FFe for Universe.23:50
kklimondaScottK: I can probably prepare one then23:50
kklimondamicahg: what do you mean?23:51
ajmitchkklimonda: even dapper has pixelize 0.9.2, 1.0.0-1 has been around since karmic23:52
kklimondaajmitch: pixelize as in the feature of 0.86.0 release where you can hide parts of screenshot unde.. pixels ;)23:53
kklimondaI was just checking the changelog of shutter :)23:53
ajmitchok, shutter.. you hadn't mentioned the package name, so we assumed that you meant pixelize :)23:54
kklimondaajmitch: yeah, I can see that now :)23:54

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!