| JanC | Rhonda: you can try running an x86 guest OS with qemu on your PowerPC notebook ;) | 00:00 |
|---|---|---|
| micahg | can someone please give back minitube on armel and powerpc: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/minitube/1.1-1 | 03:43 |
| funkyHat | I'm stuck trying to run debuild on a package I grabbed using bzr ( bzr branch lp:ubuntu/gnome-system-tools ) | 03:47 |
| funkyHat | dpkg-source: error: can't build with source format '3.0 (quilt)': no orig.tar file found | 03:48 |
| micahg | funkyHat: you need to use bzr-builddeb | 03:48 |
| funkyHat | micahg: ah thanks ⡈) | 03:49 |
| micahg | funkyHat: np | 03:49 |
| funkyHat | ooh, that's a little broken (or I'm doing something else wrong) | 03:51 |
| funkyHat | bzr-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 too | 03:52 |
| funkyHat | But it's ok, running bzr-buildpackage pulled down the orig.tar.gz so I can do it with debuild now ;D | 03:52 |
| micahg | funkyHat: it should actually generate the .orig.tar.gz from the bzr repo if pristine-tar is used | 03:53 |
| funkyHat | Oh, well it did perhaps do that | 03:53 |
| funkyHat | But the orig.tar.gz was there, which is the important thing ;D | 03:54 |
| ScottK | micahg: 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 |
| micahg | ScottK: k, I won't worry about it then, thanks | 04:01 |
| funkyHat | ScottK: does that only apply to those archs, gnome-system-tools needs a rebuild I think, just testing | 04:08 |
| funkyHat | ? | 04:09 |
| ScottK | funkyHat: 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 |
| funkyHat | ScottK: ok, I'll carry on filing this bug+branch then ⡈) | 04:10 |
| Laibsch | anybody 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 |
| Laibsch | Output 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 |
| ScottK | The pbuilder package has some example scripts in it. I'd check those. | 05:54 |
| Laibsch | ScottK: good suggestion | 05:55 |
| Laibsch | In fact I already looked at them | 05:55 |
| Laibsch | But there are none that use the BUILDRESULT variable, it seems | 05:55 |
| Laibsch | Actually, I have specified what BUILDRESULT should be in /etc/pbuilderrc and that's where the resulting debs are indeed put. | 05:56 |
| Rhonda | JanC: Sure, and learn to appreciate the speed of a c64 again? | 08:59 |
| geser | funkyHat: bzr bd -S -- -us -uc (or any other debuild options you need) | 09:14 |
| bilalakhtar | tumbleweed: Thanks for that merge! | 09:33 |
| OwaisL | Hey everyone, I just uploaded my package to REVU. Would anyone check it out please. | 12:54 |
| micahg | OwaisL: what package? | 12:56 |
| OwaisL | gmailwatcher | 12:56 |
| OwaisL | it's in a ppa too | 12:56 |
| OwaisL | ppa:loneowais/ppa | 12:56 |
| st__ | why ubuntu maintainers never generate a .pot files in source packages? | 13:28 |
| * 52AACAD66 is away: Zurzeit abwesend | 13:45 | |
| === xfaf is now known as zul | ||
| Laney | DktrKranz: ping re: gtk-sharp-beans | 14:03 |
| Laney | and 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 |
| Laney | we don't translate universe packages in ubuntu | 14:09 |
| lucidfox | I have a question, since I'm writing my own app using GSettings | 14:12 |
| Rhonda | st__: Because there is nothing generated in the source package by ubuntu maintainers - that would be an upstream job to do. | 14:13 |
| lucidfox | At what stage are GSettings schemas compiled into the binary format? I've looked at evince, but the debs only install the XML files | 14:13 |
| lucidfox | and I can find no postinst commands or anything | 14:13 |
| === 52AACAD66 is now known as ximion_ | ||
| === freeflyi1g is now known as freeflying | ||
| DktrKranz | Laney: will do after dinstall run is finished | 14:57 |
| Laney | cheers | 14:57 |
| bilalakhtar | AnAnt: السلام علئكم Thanks for that endorsement! But its incomplete! | 15:27 |
| AnAnt | bilalakhtar: yes, that is my first, I still didn't finish it | 15:28 |
| DktrKranz | Laney: done | 15:45 |
| Laney | DktrKranz: thanks so much! | 15:46 |
| Laney | didrocks: we are nearly over the finish line | 15:46 |
| kklimonda | can someone sponsor bug 629495? | 16:13 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 629495 in hamster-applet (Ubuntu) "Update hamster-applet to 2.31.90 in 10.10" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/629495 | 16:13 |
| nigelb | kklimonda: don't you need Ffe? | 16:17 |
| nigelb | or is it just bug fix :) | 16:17 |
| Laney | Yes, I'd say that needs a freeze exception | 16:19 |
| kklimonda | Well, 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 FFe | 16:22 |
| Laney | please post that in the bug then | 16:22 |
| Laney | (that it has been approved) | 16:23 |
| kklimonda | mhm, done | 16:25 |
| === paul__ is now known as Elbrus | ||
| Elbrus | I just added a debdiff to bug 621905, and subscribed ubuntu-sponsors, but I am not sure if that is correct with regard to any freeze | 17:46 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 621905 in lazarus (Ubuntu) "lazarus in repo demands "Build Lazarus", that is not true." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/621905 | 17:46 |
| Elbrus | or if ubuntu-sponsors was the right group to subscribe (the subscription went one step to quick where I wanted to verify) | 17:47 |
| OwaisL | hey, 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=858 | 18:04 |
| Rhonda | Hmm, now I wonder why it says lucid and not maverick? | 18:07 |
| Rhonda | OwaisL: You sure about that number? It's archived since may 2008? | 18:08 |
| OwaisL | what's happening to me... | 18:09 |
| OwaisL | today | 18:09 |
| OwaisL | here it is | 18:09 |
| OwaisL | http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=8582 | 18:09 |
| Rhonda | Which warning are you wondering about? | 18:16 |
| * RainCT updates REVU's config file (lucid->maverick) | 18:17 | |
| Rhonda | RainCT: That's helpful indeed. :) | 18:17 |
| RainCT | ok, the warning is gone now | 18:17 |
| Rhonda | Or wait a month and switch it directly to nattie? ;) | 18:18 |
| RainCT | Heh. Hey, things don't change by themselves if nobody complained about them :P | 18:18 |
| RainCT | OwaisL: Cool. You could start by looking at the warnings REVU is showing you | 18:19 |
| RainCT | OwaisL: are you upstream for that app? | 18:24 |
| OwaisL | RainCT: Oh, I didn't notice. | 18:26 |
| OwaisL | Yes, I am. | 18:26 |
| RainCT | OwaisL: 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 |
| OwaisL | RainCT: yes, i know that. | 18:38 |
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| OwaisL | RainCT: Just two warnings left now. | 19:41 |
| OwaisL | RainCT: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/gmailwatcher | 19:42 |
| AlanBell | o/ Laney | 21:01 |
| Laney | hoi | 21:01 |
| AlanBell | ok, bit of context for others before we carry on | 21:02 |
| AlanBell | !blogtk | 21:02 |
| AlanBell | !info blogtk | 21:02 |
| ubottu | blogtk (source: blogtk): GTK Weblogging client. In component universe, is optional. Version 1.1-2ubuntu3 (lucid), package size 68 kB, installed size 572 kB | 21:02 |
| AlanBell | blogtk does not run in maverick, it fails because of a lack of python-gtkhtml2 which has been deprecated | 21:03 |
| micahg | AlanBell: ugh, I should fix that, we missed that in Lucid | 21:03 |
| AlanBell | the dependency was removed, but not the code, which left it non-starter in lucid and maverick | 21:03 |
| AlanBell | upstream is on launchpad here https://launchpad.net/blogtk | 21:03 |
| AlanBell | and the dependency is properly fixed, it runs, seems nice. | 21:04 |
| AlanBell | The upstream bzr and tar.gz includes a /debian directory and does not seem to be quite as expected when following the python packaging guide | 21:05 |
| micahg | thanks tumbleweed | 21:11 |
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| tumbleweed | micahg: np | 21:12 |
| AlanBell | would 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 proceed | 21:12 |
| === jrib1 is now known as jrib | ||
| tumbleweed | AlanBell: why does it matter what thye have in bzr? Is there no release since fixing this? | 21:14 |
| AlanBell | tumbleweed: the tar.gz has /debian in it too | 21:15 |
| AlanBell | http://launchpad.net/blogtk/2.0/2.0/+download/blogtk-2.0.tar.gz | 21:15 |
| tumbleweed | AlanBell: source format 3 deletes /debian in upstream source when unpacking | 21:15 |
| tumbleweed | (3.0 quilt, that is) | 21:16 |
| === warp11 is now known as warp10 | ||
| === nhandler1 is now known as nhandler | ||
| AlanBell | ok, so that could be a good .tar.gz to start from then, excellent | 21:16 |
| * AlanBell is new to this packaging stuff | 21:16 | |
| === nhandler is now known as Guest53292 | ||
| tumbleweed | yes, you should be able to use it | 21:17 |
| AlanBell | ok, should I be following the python packaging guide or is there a better document I should use? | 21:19 |
| AlanBell | s/better/more appropriate/ | 21:19 |
| tumbleweed | AlanBell: are we abandoning the existing packaging? | 21:20 |
| tumbleweed | oh, I see it was removed from debian | 21:21 |
| AlanBell | hmm, 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 |
| AlanBell | yeah, it is no longer in debian | 21:21 |
| micahg | tumbleweed: only because it was abandoned upstream | 21:21 |
| micahg | debian 551005 | 21:21 |
| ubottu | Debian bug 551005 in wnpp "RFP: blogtk -- client for weblog systems" [Wishlist,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/551005 | 21:21 |
| micahg | and debian 443133 | 21:21 |
| ubottu | Debian bug 443133 in ftp.debian.org "RM: blogtk -- RoQA; orphaned; dead upstream; few users; RC-buggy" [Normal,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/443133 | 21:21 |
| tumbleweed | yeah, just read those | 21:22 |
| tumbleweed | ok, the existing packaging isn't *that* bad | 21:23 |
| tumbleweed | AlanBell: python-support's README is a reasonable guide for what's needed | 21:23 |
| AlanBell | so is the way forward to try and get it back in debian? or put it directly in Ubuntu? | 21:23 |
| Laney | is the project really alive again? | 21:24 |
| tumbleweed | last commit 12 weeks ago... | 21:24 |
| AlanBell | trunk was last touched 12 weeks ago | 21:24 |
| AlanBell | the maintainer has ppa packages https://launchpad.net/~jayreding/+archive/ppa | 21:25 |
| === tm__ is now known as tm | ||
| Laney | I'm just sceptical about including something which has been removed before | 21:26 |
| AlanBell | the 2.0 release was a year ago | 21:26 |
| AlanBell | it looks to me like development moved from sourceforge to launchpad and debian was waiting for the sourceforge one to be updated | 21:27 |
| micahg | Laney: we should either update it to 2.0 or drop it from maverick | 21:27 |
| tumbleweed | Laney: it's currently in maverick, so if an update can save it from deletion, that sound sensible | 21:27 |
| Laney | micahg: right | 21:28 |
| AlanBell | http://blogtk.jayreding.com/blog/ | 21:28 |
| tumbleweed | but yes, longer term it should either get back into debian or go away | 21:28 |
| Laney | tumbleweed: is it? No sense reviving unmaintained stuff | 21:28 |
| tumbleweed | Laney: depends how unmaintained and how much revival is required | 21:29 |
| Laney | something which manages to release broken and then remain in that state for a further 3 months doesn't seem particularly maintained to me | 21:30 |
| === Guest53292 is now known as nhandler | ||
| AlanBell | at the moment in maverick it is unstartable | 21:30 |
| Laney | but yes if someone is actually volunteering to take care of it | 21:30 |
| micahg | the 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 dead | 21:30 |
| Laney | then I'm all for fixing it… | 21:30 |
| AlanBell | the blog has quite a lot of posts about development updates going back to 2008 on a fairly regular basis | 21:31 |
| Laney | it's not just upstream, there has to be a distribution maintainer too | 21:31 |
| tumbleweed | which is a continual problem with MOTU packages that we don't get from debian | 21:32 |
| Laney | right | 21:32 |
| Laney | I 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 those | 21:33 | |
| Laney | basically don't do it | 21:33 |
| * micahg would suggest dropping from maverick, if someone is interested, go through the RFP in Debian, sync to natty and backport | 21:34 | |
| tumbleweed | erk. if any ubuntu-release people are here, please unsubscribe your team from bug 367990 | 21:40 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 367990 in PyRoom 0.4 "Program crashes on startup" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/367990 | 21:40 |
| AlanBell | so the RFP is debian bug 551005 and the latest on that in January was that they were waiting for a 2.0.1 release | 21:42 |
| ubottu | Debian bug 551005 in wnpp "RFP: blogtk -- client for weblog systems" [Wishlist,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/551005 | 21:42 |
| AlanBell | that being after the 2.0 release from 2009-09-22 I guess means they were not happy with the state of the 2.0 | 21:43 |
| tumbleweed | AlanBell: ask DktrKranz | 21:43 |
| === ScottK2 is now known as ScottK | ||
| AlanBell | DktrKranz: 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 |
| ubottu | Debian bug 551005 in wnpp "RFP: blogtk -- client for weblog systems" [Wishlist,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/551005 | 21:47 |
| tumbleweed | any 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/34325 | 22:22 |
| mario-kemper | Hi 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 #626704 | 23:07 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 626704 in shutter (Ubuntu) "[Update package] Shutter 0.86.3" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/626704 | 23:07 |
| Laney | mario-kemper: I suggest you mail the Debian maintainer | 23:07 |
| mario-kemper | Already done - he is not responding currently | 23:08 |
| mario-kemper | I'll open another bug in the debian bug tracker to get his attention | 23:10 |
| kklimonda | bah, 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 |
| micahg | kklimonda: that's newer than 1.0.0-1? | 23:49 |
| ScottK | kklimonda: 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 |
| kklimonda | ScottK: I can probably prepare one then | 23:50 |
| kklimonda | micahg: what do you mean? | 23:51 |
| ajmitch | kklimonda: even dapper has pixelize 0.9.2, 1.0.0-1 has been around since karmic | 23:52 |
| kklimonda | ajmitch: pixelize as in the feature of 0.86.0 release where you can hide parts of screenshot unde.. pixels ;) | 23:53 |
| kklimonda | I was just checking the changelog of shutter :) | 23:53 |
| ajmitch | ok, shutter.. you hadn't mentioned the package name, so we assumed that you meant pixelize :) | 23:54 |
| kklimonda | ajmitch: yeah, I can see that now :) | 23:54 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!