[00:00] <hggdh> ari-tczew: done, new debdiffs uploaded. I hope this time I got it right :-)
[00:03] <ari-tczew> hggdh: I'll start in a couple of minutes.
[00:04] <micahg> ari-tczew: since when can you upload security stuff?
[00:05] <ari-tczew> micahg: I can't upload this one. I can ACK as MOTU SWAT.
[00:05] <micahg> ari-tczew: ok
[00:24] <ari-tczew> hggdh: did you test is version 0.5.4 affected by this bug?
[00:29] <ari-tczew> hggdh: what do you think about use bazaar to send patches?
[00:29] <micahg> ari-tczew: one step at a time ;)
[00:30] <ari-tczew> micahg: hmmm?
[00:30] <micahg> ari-tczew: bzr's a lot for new contributors
[00:31] <ari-tczew> micahg: 4 commands.
[00:31] <ari-tczew> bzr push lp:foo/bar
[00:31] <ari-tczew> patch -p1 < ../*debdiff
[00:31] <ari-tczew> bzr commit --fixes lp:foo
[00:32] <ari-tczew> bzr push (at start branch, mistake)
[00:32] <micahg> ari-tczew: debdiff is a lot simpler
[00:33] <ari-tczew> micahg: yes but I have one last suggestion :P and if he will work again, I suggest to send patches via bzr
[00:33] <micahg> ari-tczew: it's actually not possible in this case
[00:33] <micahg> no -security branches
[00:33] <ari-tczew> micahg: it doesn't matter.
[00:33] <micahg> ari-tczew: it does
[00:34] <ari-tczew> micahg: no. sponsor will grab debdiff from requested bzr branch merge.
[00:35] <micahg> ari-tczew: you can't do a merge if the branch doesn't exist, it's a bug
[00:35] <micahg> and UDD AFAIK isn't used for security sponsoring
[00:36] <ari-tczew> micahg: yes, you're right, but contributor can request bzr merge on normal branch. LP will generate diff (preview) correct.
[00:36] <micahg> ari-tczew: it's a waste of time
[00:37] <ari-tczew> micahg: waste of time was today's discussion
[00:37] <micahg> ari-tczew: no, it's faster to just make a debdiff vs using bzr
[00:38] <micahg> apt-get source foo is much faster than bzr branch lp:ubuntu/foo
[00:39] <ari-tczew> micahg: I prefer to use pull-lp-source
[00:39] <micahg> ari-tczew: same difference, much faster than bzr branch
[00:45] <hggdh> ari-tczew: I did not test 0.5.4 (natty)
[00:48] <hggdh> ari-tczew: I just found what is possibly the fix in GIT -- http://repo.or.cz/w/ncmpcpp.git/commit/d1b82557d266795621244c62644d4d0604cf5453
[00:58] <ari-tczew> hggdh: couldn't you grab this patch in the whole?
[01:06] <ari-tczew> hggdh: if this patch also fixes issue, we should upload it from git upstream.
[01:16] <hggdh> ari-tczew: I will look at the dependencies
[01:16] <ari-tczew> hggdh: about your debdiffs: I would like to use Author tag instead From because you created this patch.
[01:17] <hggdh> ari-tczew: no prob, easy edit, will upload corrected in a few
[01:17] <ari-tczew> hggdh: My propose: please hang on while you will test this git's patch.
[01:17] <hggdh> roj
[01:21] <ari-tczew> hggdh: roj?
[01:22] <hggdh> ari-tczew: shorthand for 'roger', meaning 'I understand'
[01:23] <ari-tczew> hggdh: ok, so I'm unsubscribing ubuntu-sponsors till your feedback about git's patch.
[01:23] <ari-tczew> Thank you for your contribution.
[01:23] <hggdh> ari-tczew: OK, sounds file
[01:23] <hggdh> sound fine
[02:53] <micahg> psusi: powernowd is in Debian and Ubuntu at the moment.  If it's obsolete, why is it not being removed?
[02:55] <psusi> micahg, I have filed a bug in debian asking for it to be removed
[02:55] <micahg> psusi: ah, ok
[02:55] <psusi> the last upstream release was almost 3 years ago and they said it would be the final one because it is obsolete
[02:56] <micahg> psusi: shouldn't that be an rc bug? debian 602052
[02:56] <psusi> dunno what that means... I'm not very familliar with debian bts
[03:03]  * micahg tried, we'll see if it works
[08:32] <dholbach> good morning!
[08:34] <ajmitch> morning dholbach
[08:35] <dholbach> hey ajmitch
[08:35] <ajmitch> how was uds?
[08:36] <dholbach> excellent, but hectic as usual :)
[08:36] <dholbach> I have yet to see how many work items I ended up with
[08:37]  * nigelb waves to ajmitch 
[08:37] <nigelb> ajmitch: were you able to get back to classroom team re:session? :)
[09:14] <ajmitch> nigelb: yeah I did eventually reply
[09:14] <nigelb> ajmitch: as you did now :p
[09:15] <nigelb> 'eventually' :D
[09:15]  * ajmitch was doing other stuff :P
[09:15]  * nigelb was just kidding :)
[09:16]  * ajmitch is always picked on :)
[09:16]  * nigelb hugs ajmitch 
[10:33] <Laney> and the blueprint spam begins!
[10:36] <nigelb> Laney: haha
[10:54] <directhex> laney: that's why i don't sign up to blueprints
[11:30] <ari-tczew> crimsun: around?
[11:48] <ikonia> does anyone know why sabily-grub-artwork are in the ubuntu Universe ?
[11:53] <dholbach> ikonia, why are you wondering?
[11:56] <ari-tczew> dholbach: oh, good to see you here. I have a proposition to sponsors overview
[11:56] <dholbach> ari-tczew, can you file a bug report?
[11:56] <dholbach> ari-tczew, I'm not the only one working on it
[11:56] <ari-tczew> dholbach: yes, I can
[11:56] <dholbach> super, thanks
[12:05] <ari-tczew> dholbach: bug 669418
[12:05] <dholbach> ari-tczew, thanks
[12:07] <ikonia> dholbach: sorry was AFK for a moment
[12:08] <ikonia> dholbach: just because it's not an ubuntu distro package, it's a package for a derivative, just wondered why it was in the ubuntu repos ?
[12:08] <dholbach> ikonia, it's what a lot of derivatives do
[12:08] <ikonia> I'm sure, I just picked that one as an example
[12:09] <dholbach> I think it makes a lot of sense for derivatives to not host their own infrastructure, but get their stuff into Ubuntu directly
[12:09] <dholbach> it's the easiest way of doing it
[12:09] <dholbach> and if Ubuntu users, want to try it out they mostly just install their derivative-metapackage
[12:09] <ikonia> the image based packages such as the splash images don't seem a big deal what about packages that may create/cause conflict ?
[12:09] <ikonia> how is that managed
[12:09] <dholbach> ikonia, they set proper Conflicts/Replaces fields in the package metadata
[12:10] <ikonia> so Ubuntu as a project is happy hosting derivative packages in Universe as a position
[12:10] <ikonia> or supports it I should say
[12:10] <dholbach> yes
[12:11] <dholbach> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DerivativeTeam might have some more information on the topic
[12:11] <ikonia> cool, thank you
[12:11] <ikonia> nice looking link too, thank you
[12:11] <dholbach> anytime
[12:13] <ikonia> dholbach: an excellent link infact, thank you
[12:30] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: could you sync package from bug 669412 ? necessary for FTBFS fix
[12:33] <Rhonda> Why does the changelog contain twice "email address hidden" and once the real email address?
[12:34] <Rhonda> Is the code to hide the email address not able to work with domains like 43-1.org? :)
[12:35] <cjwatson> ari-tczew: you know that I'll generally do them within about a working day without you having to ask, right? :)
[12:35] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: perhaps :P
[12:36] <cjwatson> (in general, don't ask unless it's urgent, it slows other things down.)
[12:55] <cjwatson> ari-tczew: I've done my second sync pass for the day now though, so that bug is fixed
[14:05] <micahg> SpamapS: are you going to work on teh SRU for bug 557024?
[14:54] <ari-tczew> thanks cjwatson
[14:55] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: MoM is again paused?
[14:56] <cjwatson> looking
[14:56] <cjwatson> ValueError: process failed 25: dpkg-source -x ace-of-penguins_1.3-1ubuntu1.dsc /srv/patches.ubuntu.com/unpacked/a/ace-of-penguins/1.3-1ubuntu1
[14:56] <cjwatson> hmm
[14:57] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: ups... looking on who did upload this one :D
[14:57] <cjwatson> dpkg-source: info: applying 11-include-imagelib.patch
[14:57] <cjwatson> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file games/spider.c.rej
[14:58] <cjwatson> ari-tczew: that would be you ;-)
[14:58] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: oh my gosh :p package is synced already, MoM shouldn't handle this one
[14:59] <cjwatson> it's trying to generate a diff from that version to the next version
[14:59] <cjwatson> let me see what can sanely be done about that
[14:59] <cjwatson> (this isn't for merges.ubuntu.com, but for patches.ubuntu.com, which is populated by the same set of cron jobs)
[15:03] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: could script skip this one?
[15:04] <cjwatson> it could, but there would be no way to distinguish between out of disk space (=> need to wait until we have some) and broken package (=> skip)
[15:04] <cjwatson> so I think I would prefer to just kill this one with fire instead
[15:05] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: huh, I hope that Canonical will buy some HDDs :)
[15:06] <cjwatson> sure, but it's vital that merge-o-matic doesn't just carry on regardless
[15:06] <cjwatson> killed; as far as MoM is concerned, that version now never existed
[15:09] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: another question. FTBFS page could check whether package is DEPWAIT. is possible to create a function, which LP/builders will detect why is FTBFS? e.g. Reason: missed linking libs => detect by "could not read symbols: Invalid operation"
[15:10] <cjwatson> no idea, I'm afraid - the FTBFS page has nothing to do with me
[15:10] <cjwatson> and I don't generally work on LP
[15:11] <micahg> ari-tczew: that sounds prone to error
[15:11] <cjwatson> in general?  it sounds possible to create some heuristics, although tedious.  I suspect that it would be better to try that kind of feature outside Launchpad
[15:12] <cjwatson> since it would be easier to evolve the code that way
[15:13] <ari-tczew> This feature can bring easier way to sort kind of FTBFS.
[15:13] <geser> ari-tczew: for that the script would need to fetch *every* build log from LP and inspect it (and the script takes already long enough to run just to fetch the build status)
[15:14] <micahg> it would be nice if DEPWAIT at it's supposed to work, just worked( I noticed at the end of maverick it worked spradically, haven't checked lately)
[15:15] <geser> micahg: known problem, I'm waiting on lamont to review a fix for it (and deploy it)
[15:17] <micahg> geser: ok, great
[15:21] <ari-tczew> geser: or builder will check kind of FTBFS and add to list
[15:22] <ari-tczew> script will fetch done list
[15:22] <geser> when LP supports that, I can add it to the page
[15:23] <ari-tczew> geser: are you an author of FTBFS script?
[15:23] <geser> yes
[16:21] <SpamapS> micahg: re bug 557024, yes I'll do the SRU, will need somebody to accept it for Lucid.
[16:21] <micahg> SpamapS: I can find someone to do that
[16:21] <Laney> ME!
[16:22] <micahg> hi Laney :)
[16:22] <Laney> hiya
[16:23] <micahg> SpamapS: I can review teh SRU, I just can't upload yet
[16:25]  * ScottK slaps micahg around a bit as motivation to fix that.
[16:26] <micahg> ScottK: it's just a matter of time (1 week actually :D)
[16:26] <ScottK> micahg: I'm not well known for my patience.
[16:27] <micahg> heh, it wasn't pressing enough to chase after 4 DMB members at UDS, so I'm waiting
[16:27] <SpamapS> ScottK: thats why we try to keep you inebriated whenever we see you...
[16:28] <ScottK> SpamapS: Like I need motivation for that.
[16:28]  * ScottK notes that the group present when the bar closes each night at UDS skews significantly older than the average age of those attending UDS as a whole.  Apparently the youngsters have early bed times.
[16:29] <Laney> Or they go offsite
[17:50] <bilalakhtar> andreserl: Can I take bug #547267 from you?
[17:52] <andreserl> bilalakhtar, sure go ahead :)
[17:52] <bilalakhtar> andreserl: thanks
[18:05] <stefanlsd> Is something like DEB_PYTHON_INSTALL_ARGS_ALL = --no-compile -O0 --install-layout=deb
[18:05] <stefanlsd> still required, or is it fixed in cdbs?
[18:05] <geser> is this an Ubuntu delta?
[18:06] <stefanlsd> geser: yeah
[18:06] <geser> just check if the package builds without it or not
[18:06] <stefanlsd> geser: yeah, package builds
[18:07] <stefanlsd> geser: just not sure its putting it in the right place (tm)
[18:07] <geser> did you compare the package contents between the old and the new package
[18:07] <ebroder> stefanlsd: try running debdiff on the .deb files
[18:09] <stefanlsd> let me check. thx
[18:17] <stefanlsd> ok. thanks. no difference in debdiff of .deb files. so i think its ok
[18:23] <ebroder> pitti: does pkgbinarymangler run on all packages, or just those in main? (i.t. will universe packages that are built after your changes get scour'ed and optipng'ed?)
[18:24] <ebroder> *i.e
[18:26] <geser> ebroder: pkgbinarymangler runs on all packages, but not every part is done for all packages (e.g. pkgstriptranslations is only done for main)
[18:27]  * ebroder meant to send that to #ubuntu-devel, where pitti is actually joined.
[18:29] <geser> ebroder: looking at the code for pkgbinarymangler, optipng is called as part of pkgstripfiles which doesn't care about the component
[18:29] <ebroder> geser: awesome, thanks
[19:23] <micahg> SpamapS: just use a debdiff for mongodb in Lucid, merge proposal won't work since there's no -proposed branch
[19:42] <SpamapS> micahg: is it not acceptable to propose merging into lucid, and then just let the uploader in essence "creat" the proposed branch?
[19:43] <micahg> SpamapS: the uploader cannot create the branch and the lucid branch is frozen
[19:43] <SpamapS> micahg: well the upload creates it
[19:44] <micahg> SpamapS: right, but the hassle of a merge proposal isn't worth it since all the changes will be lost
[19:44] <SpamapS> hassle?! I think they're awesome. :)
[19:44] <SpamapS> but I don't sponsor stuff.
[19:45] <micahg> SpamapS: I think they're awesome too if the history is kept, otherwise, it's pointless
[19:46] <SpamapS> Other than it has its own comment structure, and is updatable... ;)
[19:46] <SpamapS> and the history is not "lost"
[19:46] <SpamapS> that branch lives on forever as long as I don't delete it.
[19:46] <micahg> SpamapS: right, but it's in limbo since it cannot be merged
[19:47] <SpamapS> You can just mark it merged after the upload. Its not the status of the MP that makes the MP special really.
[19:50] <micahg> SpamapS: I did that recently due to issues with UDD and source format 3 (was not happy about that)
[19:51] <SpamapS> yeah, the two efforts do not play nicely together really
[21:08] <sebner> hoi RainCT =)
[21:08] <RainCT> hi sebner
[21:14]  * iulian waves from the back of his cave.
[21:14] <sebner> iulian: :)
[21:17]  * geser tries to lure iulian out of his cave :)
[21:19]  * sebner greets geser :)
[21:19] <iulian> Hehe. :-)
[21:20] <iulian> How's it goin' guys?
[21:30] <RainCT> finishing some statistics homework :p
[21:32] <ari-tczew> RainCT: is your comment on MoM for package zsync is up-to-date?
[21:33] <RainCT> ari-tczew: dunno, probably not, last time I visited MoM was probably half a year ago
[21:33] <iulian> RainCT: Yay, stats!
[21:33] <iulian> Uh.
[21:33] <RainCT> iulian: channel fail :P
[21:34] <RainCT> iulian: ah no nevermind, I failed, thought that was in -cli :P
[21:34] <ajmitch> ari-tczew: yeah, MoM comments don't get cleared up at the end of the cycle, it's a bit annoying :)
[21:35] <iulian> RainCT: :-)
[21:36]  * ajmitch wishes the plugin would load
[21:37] <ajmitch> oh look, it's waiting on a 10-page EULA to install
[21:39]  * RainCT wonders wth is wrong with OpenOffice.org that it insists in putting a space before each ":" he writes -.-
[21:39] <sebner> RainCT: libreoffice ftw! :P
[21:40] <RainCT> sebner: it's the same, GNU/Linux distros ship go-oo which is being merged into libreoffice :p
[21:40] <sebner> RainCT: libreoffice > go-oo > openoffice ;D
[21:41] <RainCT> Btw, does anyone know how long it takes to compile it? I've been thinking about fixing some bugs but I don't feel like having my poor laptop 24 hours building :p
[21:41] <sebner> RainCT: dunno, I tried a git build for some hours but it failed because of a clutter bug (pulls in so many (external) sources) xD
[21:42] <RainCT> sebner: Why does it want Clutter? o.O
[21:42] <ari-tczew> RainCT: I usually check on Launchpad, how long took a last build. Example: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt-watch/0.3.2-13ubuntu4/+build/1898377
[21:42] <sebner> RainCT: don't ask me xD
[21:42] <ari-tczew> Finished on 2010-07-31 (took 3 minutes, 20.1 seconds)
[21:45] <RainCT> (took 1 hour, 21 minutes, 54.2 seconds)
[21:46] <RainCT> on amd64, and on i386: (took 9 hours, 21 minutes, 35.8 seconds)
[21:46] <RainCT> o.O
[21:46] <geser> arch-dep vs arch-indep probably
[22:32] <ari-tczew> what means on LP "Binary packages awaiting approval in NEW queue:" ?
[22:33] <paultag> ari-tczew, I have no idea, but my guess it's similar or related to the Debian NEW queue
[22:33] <paultag> if you don't have the link it's at http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
[22:33] <ari-tczew> paultag: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/db/5.0.26-3ubuntu1
[22:33] <paultag> do the archive masters have to approve new binary packages?
[22:33] <paultag> for Ubuntu
[22:33] <ebroder> Yes
[22:33] <ari-tczew> dunno. let's ask cjwatson
[22:34] <paultag> I mean, I'd guess so, there must be someone like the FTP master for Ubuntu
[22:34] <chrisccoulson> it means exactly what it says - that the package that was uploaded contains new binary packages which need approval before they enter the archive
[22:37] <ari-tczew> chrisccoulson: is tracker able to merge? I remember, that some packages can't be merged from Debian. Only packaging from scratch.
[22:37] <geser> ari-tczew: the flow of a new source package is: source NEW -> build -> binary NEW -> published
[22:37] <chrisccoulson> ari-tczew, no idea, i've not looked at the changes
[22:37] <geser> if new binary packages get introduced the only need the second part: binary NEW -> published
[22:38] <ari-tczew> geser: hmm. it was a big merge. bump from upstream 4 to 5.
[22:39] <chrisccoulson> "* Add libdb5.0-{sql,stl}{,-dev} packages" is why it is in NEW
[22:40] <ajmitch> yet another libdb version, yay
[22:40] <geser> ari-tczew: it's nothing about big or small change; libdb5.0* wasn't seen before so the archive admins have to take a "look" and put them into the right component (usually the same as the source)
[23:07] <cjwatson> ajmitch: FWIW MoM comments should get cleaned up now once the merge goes away, but I only fixed that bug last week
[23:07] <cjwatson> so it's still possible for there to be old stale comments
[23:07] <ajmitch> cjwatson: great, thanks for fixing that
[23:12] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: could you approve these binaries? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/db/5.0.26-3ubuntu1
[23:12] <ari-tczew> I need this for fix FTBFS.
[23:17] <cjwatson> ari-tczew: no
[23:17] <cjwatson> ari-tczew: I uploaded the package - I should not also process it through NEW
[23:22] <ari-tczew> hard process
[23:22] <cjwatson> just sensible
[23:23] <cjwatson> don't review your own work