[00:12] Spamaps: ...weird. It definitely killed it for me [00:32] NCommander: Did you manage to summon uploading capabilities? I was hoping to harrass the patch pilot into sponsoring bug #601732 :) [00:32] Launchpad bug 601732 in update-inetd (Ubuntu Maverick) "postinst using both update-inetd and debconf hangs on first install" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/601732 [00:34] ebroder: I'm not a core dev. [00:34] ebroder: MOTU and some Kubuntu [00:35] NCommander: Oh, didn't realize. No worries then [00:35] NCommander: if something needs uploading I'm sure there are people who would help the friendly patch pilot to do that [00:36] Riddell: if I review the patch, would you be willing to upload? [00:36] NCommander: yes [00:45] ebroder: this looks sane (and important) and my netbook is running maverick, so I'll test and review there [00:46] Don't have a lucid system thats currently functional so I can't easily test there [00:46] New dev here, I found a bug and patched it but the original package reported differs from where I found the actual issue and patched it [00:46] does someone have a minute to go over this with me? [00:47] and when I say patched it, I mean I just found the code and corrected the issue. I haven't actually created a patch, cause well... derp [00:47] abuDawud: sounds like the bug was reported against a previous release (or pre-release version) and you fixed it in a later one [00:48] NCommander, the package it was reported against was Apport, but I found the issue in apport-symptoms. [00:48] kirkland: how to progress with bug #427612? should i wait for a review by upstream or should i add the patch to the ubuntu package? [00:48] Launchpad bug 427612 in qemu-kvm (Ubuntu) "kvm sends caps lock key up event twice" [Low,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/427612 [00:48] abuDawud: sounds like pitti (apport's upstream) split the package in maverick or natty. [00:48] kirkland: will it reviewed by upstream or is there something to do for me? [00:48] 7- [00:49] abuDawud: so what you need to do is when you make a patch is properly file it against both the old and new packages (there's a button in LP to do this) [00:49] abuDawud: alternatively, the original subbitter could have filed it against the wrong package (fairly common if it came from a non-dev) [00:49] NCommander, can you go over this with me if you have a minute or is there a wiki article on this? [00:50] there is no package in launchpad for apport-symptoms. [00:50] abuDawud: sure, I'm patch pilot for today, so I can look at it. I don't know if there is a wiki page for this [00:50] NCommander: Feel free to push my stuff to a lower priority [00:50] abuDawud: Launchpad only sees source packages for bug reportting purposes [00:50] I'll try and create a diff or a patch and put it up for you to look at and maybe go over what needs to happen with me [00:50] ebroder: your next on deck after I finish with MAME [00:51] I'm waiting for pbuilder to finish building, I haven't used this netbook for dev work before and ports.u.c. is very slow tonight [00:52] abuDawud: it looks like the bug is against the wrong package in this case, if you can link me, I can look to be sure [00:53] NCommander, give me a minute, gonna eat with the family then I'll get a patch up [00:53] thanks for your help thusfar [00:54] abuDawud: I meant the launchpad bug you were workng against ;-) [00:54] but dinner++ === blueyed_ is now known as blueyed [00:57] pbuilder on armel === SLOW [00:57] ugh [00:58] NCommander: you're working on mame? [00:58] regards to main sponsors - you have a lot of work to sponsor [00:58] micahg: yeah, commentted on the bug. [00:58] NCommander: I thought the patch pilots were supposed to be focusing on the core packageset [00:59] micahg: wiki says anything I can choose. I can actually touch universe/multiverse packages (and some kubuntu). [01:00] micahg: so those get priority for me unless something looks urgent. At most, on a core packageset I can say a patch is sane but can't upload it [01:00] NCommander: well, the main backlog is the stuff that MOTU can't upload [01:00] NCommander, heres the bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/+bug/678371 [01:01] micahg: argh [01:01] NCommander: not your issue I guess [01:01] * NCommander had a kernel oops break a filesystem [01:01] ARGH [01:01] [ 4247.950000] EXT4-fs error (device sda1) in ext4_dirty_inode: Journal has aborted [01:01] I can't win today [01:04] NCommander: BTW, I had a build issue with mame in pbuilder for natty, it was trying to use an arch specific gcc [01:04] micahg: I'm on an armel netbook ATM, if it FTBFS's, I'll throw it in a PPA and try there. [01:07] ah [01:07] Architecture: i386 amd64 [01:07] blast [01:07] Oh well, will check it later [01:14] So the issue I am working on a package that does not have a /debian/patches folder so edit-patch is kicking me out. [01:14] I ended up just making a diff file but I'm unsure what to do now [01:15] Adri2000: apport-symptons is maintained in bzr, you should pull the branch down and apply it to the source directly since apport-symptons is a native package and only exists in Ubuntu [01:16] wrong person, but I got it. I pulled the bazaar package and the apt-get source down so after I have the patch I should just apply it and request a merge? [01:16] ebroder: I managed to confirm the bug [01:16] eek [01:17] abuDawud: sorry about that, I multitask-failed :-). If a package is maintained in bzr, you shouldn't use apt-get source, you should grab the source branch (apt-get source will tell you what it is), apply it there, upload it, then request merge, and I'll review it and make comments [01:17] stupid question, how do I request a merge? [01:18] abuDawud: upload the branch to LP under your own namespace, then click it, and then click request merge, and then put the branch its going against. Also make sure when you make the commit on your own branchdo bzr ci --fixes lp:bugno [01:19] that will tell LP that branch is for the bugm and magically connect it to the bug [01:19] awesome, I'll give it a go [01:19] thanks [01:19] abuDawud: NP [01:19] debcommit does bzr ci --fixes magic with the changelog entry as the commit message [01:20] ^- abuDawud [01:20] * NCommander may be a luddite with some of the tools we use due to old habits [01:20] so the recommendation is package it myself then upload it? [01:21] I'm not familiar with debcommit, but I'm about to read the man page so expert incoming [01:21] abuDawud: grab the branch, download it, edit it, push it, request a merge, and then poke the sponsors queue or patchpilot [01:21] abuDawud: debcommit is fairly straightforward [01:22] Riddell: you still around? [01:22] NCommander: yo [01:22] abuDawud: there's a good guide somewhere on the wiki on the specifics of VCS packaging [01:22] abuDawud: here the beginning of the docs on Ubuntu bzr dev stuff (UDD) https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistributedDevelopment/Documentation [01:23] ah [01:23] :-) [01:23] * NCommander is saved from using the wiki's search [01:23] micahg, thanks. I'll give it a go [01:23] Riddell: I think I have a patch I'm ready for you to look at, ebroder's patch for maverick looks sane [01:24] ebroder: silly questionm, why did all the po files get regenerated? [01:25] NCommander: Hmm. Good question [01:25] ebroder: the po's looks like they got regenerated inproperly [01:26] ebroder: can you respin your branch without them there, since I'm seeing blank Language fields which seems to be wrong. [01:26] Riddell: disregard, currently not recommending merger [01:26] * NCommander comments on the bug [01:26] NCommander: I don't see those changes in my branch. I wonder if it's just something that happens when you debuild -S [01:26] Anyone, since the version number is already at 0.9 what should I move it up to? [01:27] ebroder: hrm [01:27] ebroder: modified: debian/po/cs.po [01:27] abuDawud: is this for Natty? [01:27] abuDawud: 0.10 [01:27] (if its for natty, if its a backport/SRU, it changes) [01:28] ebroder: er, indeed. modified: debian/po/cs.po [01:28] I was doing just the Natty side right now [01:28] working off the current bazaar branch [01:28] ebroder: *coughs* [01:28] disregard the noise [01:28] NCommander: Looking [01:28] abuDawud: dch -i usually does the right thing for new version [01:28] it put in 0ubuntu1 at that end [01:29] abuDawud: ah, hmm... [01:29] and marked it as Maverick [01:29] argh [01:29] Riddell: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cernlib/+bug/601732 - can you look at the mvercik branch and merge/upload please if it also looks sane to you? [01:29] abuDawud: you can set the series with -D [01:29] abuDawud: just change it by hand, although its recommended if your doing Ubuntu dev work, you be on the latest version. [01:30] or what micahg said [01:30] :-) [01:30] coolbeans, I'll set to 0.10 and natty [01:30] thanks gents [01:31] ebroder: Thank you for your contribution to Ubuntu. [01:31] NCommander: Haha, thank you for piloting :) [01:32] * micahg will file a bug about Ubuntu native package versioning being incorrect [01:34] bug 680334 in case anyone wants to subscribe [01:34] Launchpad bug 680334 in devscripts (Ubuntu) "dch -i should just DTRT with native packages" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/680334 [01:35] I have a nasty feeling I am going to screw this up. I don't have a ppa set up or anything and I think this is ready to go up [01:35] abuDawud: from every failure comes a lesson learned [01:35] can either micahg or NCommander walk me through how to do this without destroying everything? [01:35] (or something like that) [01:36] abuDawud: 1. Don't Panic [01:36] abuDawud: pbuilder is your friend (or pbuilder-dist) [01:36] which you can use to test build packages [01:37] NCommander, in the process of moving pbuilder to natty [01:38] Riddell: ping? [01:39] NCommander: hi [01:39] I'm looking at it [01:40] Riddell: thanks, just wanted to make sure the earlier ping didn't drop into the void [01:40] NCommander: uploading [01:40] ebroder: ^ [01:46] Riddell: Thanks :) [01:46] Riddell: also: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kexec-tools/+bug/642071 - no-changes rebuild required. If you have amd64, can you quickly check and confirm for me? [01:47] ebroder: or do you have an amd64 install? [01:47] NCommander: Yeah, I can test [01:48] ebroder: thanks, if you can test, Riddell can sponsor :-) [01:48] NCommander, I think I broke it [01:48] abuDawud: well, what's your patch? (stuff it in a pastebin or on paste.ubuntu.com) === Amaranth_ is now known as Amaranth [01:49] NCommander, I tried to upload it to a personal branch and.... it gave some upsetting info [01:49] see: http://pastebin.com/XMZkUKbc [01:50] ah I see, bzr status shows uncommitted changes, hrm [01:51] abuDawud: got your SSH keys in LP properly and told bzr of your launchpad-login? [01:51] yep [01:53] is there a good place to ask about python-apt? [01:53] did you do bzr unbind to make the branch local and stop trying to commit to the trunk? [01:54] NCommander: I can reproduce the kexec bug. Doing a rebuild now [01:54] mwhudson: just ask [01:54] ebroder: on natty or maverick? [01:54] NCommander: maverick [01:54] Do you want a natty repro? [01:54] is there a way to get the version of a apt.debfile.DebPackage ? [01:54] (I've got one of those lying around, too) [01:54] ebroder: that would be nice [01:54] mwhudson: no idea :-/, you might want to poke mvo, or ask in one of the Debian channels [01:55] mwhudson: (or someone else here might nice, pitti possibly) [01:55] might KNOW [01:55] ARGH [01:55] :-) [01:55] ok thanks [01:55] NCommander, I was able to commit my changes and tried pushing to the same location and it said it pushed up to Revision 10 [01:56] buha! Worked. [01:56] * ebroder thinks this quid pro quo thing could be a real win [01:56] https://code.launchpad.net/~abudawud0/apport/apport-symptoms [01:58] ebroder: ? [01:58] NCommander: I just think you're doing a good job of getting other people involved [01:59] ebroder: that's the idea of the patch pilot [02:00] NCommander: I need to sleep, anything you need me for? [02:02] mwhudson: I can see an ugly way to do it, but it doesn't seem like a nice solution at all (looking at _sections) [02:02] Riddell: looks like a double no-changes rebuild? Up for the task, or do I need another victi^H core dev? [02:02] NCommander: can do if it needs doing now [02:03] ajmitch: is python-apt the sort of wrapper where things get added as needed? [02:04] NCommander: no-change rebuild is good on maverik [02:04] it's the sort of wrapper that seems to have multiple confusing layers [02:04] *maverick [02:04] Same for natty [02:04] Riddell: just got confirmation [02:04] Riddell: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kexec-tools/+bug/642071 [02:04] mwhudson: I've only used it a bit, I just found _sections['Version'] by a bit of trial & error [02:05] ajmitch: that works for now, i guess, and i'll bug mvo tomorrow [02:05] ajmitch: thanks :-) [02:07] * ajmitch was hoping for something that would return a Version object (iirc) [02:08] mwhudson: what are you looking for ? [02:08] Riddell: thanks for the sponsorships [02:08] NCommander, ebroder: so upload kexec-tools to maverick-proposed and natty? [02:08] mwhudson: 'debian' might be a better module to work with. [02:09] Riddell: bingo [02:09] Riddell: Yes [02:09] NCommander, I am proposing the merge, who should I set as the 'reviewer'? [02:09] lifeless: i'm writing something that creates debian packages on the fly (a bit like pbuilder does for build deps); am trying to test it [02:09] abuDawud: ubuntu-reviewers or ubuntu-sponsors I *think* [02:09] abuDawud: If you're merging to lp:ubuntu/whatever, you can leave the reviewer blank [02:10] k [02:10] (It'll get automatically set to...something reasonable; no clue what, though) [02:11] i went for python-apt because we're using that already in the project, but that's not actually a good reason to use it for this, i guess [02:12] lifeless: is 'debian' documented somewhere? "python-debian documentation" is fairly google proof :-) [02:12] Ergh... It won't let me propose a merge to apport-symptoms, should it be merged to apport? [02:13] mwhudson: pydoc ? [02:13] yeah, that actually works ok [02:13] abuDawud: I'm not sure [02:13] abuDawud: I think you want to merge to lp:~ubuntu-dev/apport/apport-symptoms [02:14] let me give that a try [02:14] ebroder: I think that's sane [02:14] wow [02:14] NCommander: It's the Vcs-Bzr field for the package [02:14] it just started snowing heavily outside :-/ [02:14] ebroder: do you have a lucid box by any chance? :-) [02:14] NCommander: Wow, really? Where are you based? [02:15] NCommander: I have Lucid chroots [02:15] ebroder: about 20 miles north of Portland, OR [02:15] ebroder: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cernlib/+bug/601732 - can you test and confirm on lucid? I already poked maverick [02:15] neat :) I think I am to the actual pilot part, https://code.launchpad.net/~abudawud0/apport/apport-symptoms/+merge/41542 [02:16] * NCommander looks [02:16] abuDawud: your diff looks ... insane [02:17] NCommander: I tested it on Lucid before I submitted the MP [02:17] ebroder: MP? [02:17] abuDawud: your branch is badly broken, and has conflicts [02:17] merge proposal. I'm trying to get the abbreviation to catch on, but it doesn't seem to be working yet :) [02:18] abuDawud, I honestly have no idea what I am doing, all I know is I believe I patched the issue [02:18] ebroder: doesn't everyone call them MPs anyway? :) [02:18] I have a pdebuild of it, is that what should have been uploaded? [02:20] wow what the hell happened to my diff lol [02:20] abuDawud: no, you need a clean branch. The diff is very very messy. I don't know what you did ... [02:20] NCommander: no common branch ancestor [02:21] ajmitch: ah, can you help abuDawud fix it? [02:21] * NCommander marked it resubmit on LP for the merge proposal [02:21] due to lp:ubuntu/apport-symptoms being a different branch from lp:~ubuntu-dev/apport/apport-symptoms [02:22] ajmitch, any guidance on how to correct it, is it just because I messed up the upload to my personal branch? [02:22] ah [02:22] I see what happened [02:23] abuDawud: you pulled the wrong branch, you pulled the LP packaging branch and not the dev branch (I realize this is confusing, but basically, for every package, LP makes a bzr branch for each upload to the archive) [02:23] abuDawud: what you need is to grab the actual development branch and put your changes against it, then push to LP, and submit a new merge propsal [02:23] ajmitch: thanks :-) [02:24] NCommander: sorry I can't help more right now, having to do some javascript hackery :) [02:24] NCommander, I'll give it a run, thanks guys [02:24] ajmitch: eek :-P [02:25] NCommander: jquery helps, but it's never fun :) [02:30] * NCommander is properly caffinated now [02:38] NCommander, okay, now its not a bajillion pages long [02:38] https://code.launchpad.net/~abudawud0/apport/apport-symptoms/+merge/41543 [02:38] shit and I already see an error [02:39] 'head the test tones'? [02:39] heh, before that [02:39] press close this window [02:40] *sigh* [02:40] yeah, that was also a bit confusing [02:41] at least pushing a new commit isn't too hard, I think the diff updates [02:41] well, at least I am getting some practice lol [02:42] well its pushed, I don't see it updating though, maybe it takes a sec [02:43] back [02:43] laptop decided it wanted to lock up [02:43] * NCommander <3s irssi+screen+ssh [02:44] abuDawud: it takes a minute or so, also there's a link on https://code.launchpad.net/~abudawud0/apport/apport-symptoms/+merge/41543 saying that it has been superseded by a later proposal - following that will take you to the new commit [02:45] ajmitch, yea I resubmitted over it [02:45] its up [02:45] https://code.launchpad.net/~abudawud0/apport/apport-symptoms/+merge/41544 [02:45] the diff on merge proposals will be updated on a push of a new revision btw [02:45] but it can take a couple of minutes [02:46] abuDawud: patch looks sane, but I'm not sure this is the correct approach. I'll mark that I looked at it, and the code changes look sane === virtuald is now known as leagris [02:46] abuDawud: but I'll leave it for pitti to decide if this is the correct approach or not [02:47] NCommander, there is another way to do it but honestly I don't know how to create a new UI window, and don't know if its good to create the one UI window just for that specific window [02:47] abuDawud: as I said, I'll leave for pitti to decide, he's basically apport's upstream === leagris is now known as virtuald [02:48] NCommander, k, thanks for all the help anyway. Back to my bug reporting land where I feel at least a bit comfortable [02:49] abuDawud: marked Approved by me, but pitti will be the final judge [02:49] Thank you for your contribution to Ubuntu === asac_ is now known as asac [03:24] any core devs abount? [03:24] * NCommander pokes asac [03:25] NCommander: if he's home, he's in UTC+1 [03:25] micahg: I know, but I was gambling on him not having a life and being around [03:26] * micahg thinks people w/out a life are definitely sleeping at 4AM [03:26] heh [03:26] ajmitch: your not a core dev, are you? [03:26] * NCommander has lost track on who is who [03:26] NCommander: I am, what do you need? [03:27] ajmitch: review and sponsor please: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cheetah/+bug/663343 [03:29] slightly confusing with the branch statuses & the comments [03:29] 217k line diff is pretty special :) [03:31] 217k lines deleted in 7 files? [03:31] That's the best kind of diff! [03:31] yeah, one file was test.strace [03:31] so you can imagine how big that was [03:32] that was uploaded by someone? [03:32] >.<; [03:32] not sure, I'm still trying to untangle the branches & what's been uploaded [03:32] that shouldn't be in the merge proposal :-/ [03:32] micahg: there are times where that is valid (massive diffs), but very rare [03:33] this bug is a bit confusing with a couple of separate branches & differing statuses [03:34] * micahg won't complain so much since it was uploaded over a year ago [03:34] a year? [03:34] ajmitch: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~clint-fewbar/ubuntu/natty/cheetah/natty-merge-with-debian/revision/11 [03:35] I hadn't checked, I'd assumed that that file was added in the most recent upload this week [03:35] what a waste of space :) [03:35] ajmitch: so did I which should warrant a new merge proposal [03:35] *should have [03:36] but it wasn't [03:36] orig.tar.gz is 186K, diff.gz was 1.4MB :) [03:36] right [03:44] ajmitch: ugh, I hate when that happens [03:44] ajmitch: I think I sent you looking at a bad bug [03:44] * NCommander fails [03:45] NCommander: still valid, the first branch had been uploaded, the 2nd was a valid branch for review [03:46] thanks ajmitch === SolidLiq is now known as solid_liq [03:58] I'm calling it a day [03:58] @pilot off [03:58] (pilot (in|out)) -- Set yourself an in or out of patch pilot. [03:59] ... [03:59] oh [03:59] @pilot out === udevbot changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Archive: Open | Development of Ubuntu (not support, not app development) | #ubuntu for support and general discussion for dapper -> maverick | #ubuntu-app-devel for application development on Ubuntu | http://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment | See #ubuntu-bugs for http://wiki.ubuntu.com/HelpingWithBugs | Current Friendly Patch Pilots: [04:01] NCommander: ok, thanks for your efforts :) [04:02] * NCommander decides if he wants to head home yet [04:03] * ajmitch should decide if he should put his name down for the patch pilot programme [04:03] ajmitch: Dooooo it :) [04:04] ebroder: requires time & dedication on a particular day [04:04] ajmitch: It's true. I'm kind of tempted to do it some time, given how much success NCommander had harrassing core-devs [04:05] I'll be sure to hide next time then :P [04:05] ajmitch: talk to jono. Right now, all ubuntu devs from Canonical are on the list, but I'm pretty sure we can get more on there [04:05] * micahg suggests a cloak that says ImNotACoreDev [04:05] NCommander: There's some space at the end of months for community members to fill in. Also weekends [04:06] micahg: heh ;-) [04:06] NCommander: it certainly looks open to getting more people involved [04:07] * micahg wonders if the main sponsors queue will be affected by this programme [04:07] micahg: isn't that sort of the point? [04:07] ajmitch: not from what I can tell [04:08] It was definitely a big motivator for the UDS discussion [04:08] the patch pilot discussion came out of trying to get sponsoring to work well, from what I know [04:08] ajmitch: Right, and core is where sponsoring isn't working well already [04:09] right, because we're all lazy [04:09] or at least I am :) [04:11] I think NCommander did a great job as pilot though [04:12] micahg: I pointed core developers to bugs and got three knocked out [04:12] I think its a success [04:12] it'll depend on who's around to poke, though [04:16] * ajmitch must run [07:47] RAOF: My theory was that if I locked my machine, DPMS wouldn't fire. My machine disproved that during my lunch break. Perhaps my DPMS has moods ... [07:53] Good morning [07:53] cjwatson: d-i> sure, thanks [07:54] Sarvatt, bdrung: just wanted to rebuild those two (128 and mach), since these haven't changed in a while, and they carried big changelogs [07:54] I uploaded no-change uploads for packages where the chance is very high that they won't get another "regular" upload in natty [07:55] NCommander: apport package structure hasn't changed in ages; apport-symptoms has always been a separate package, FYI [07:56] good morning! [07:58] pitti: didn't know [07:58] good morning === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan [08:26] apw: the WI tracker is yelling at me now [08:26] File "/home/platform/work-items-tracker/report_tools.py", line 160, in workitems_over_time [08:26] ') GROUP BY status, date' % ms_sql, (team,)) [08:26] sqlite3.OperationalError: no such column: status [08:26] * pitti RTFS [08:27] pitti, huh, that has to be my fault [08:27] but i'd swear i'd run the full tests [08:28] and I don't see a fundamental change there, too [08:28] bibble [08:28] oh, hang on [08:28] there's a subselect now [08:28] apw: ah [08:29] it stumbles over the outer GROUP BY status in report_tools.py:160 [08:29] apw: not sure what the column header is called with that, "w.status"? [08:29] * pitti tries a "w.status as status" in the inner select [08:29] well when i tested it in sqlite it was status ... hrm [08:30] i even have that exact piece of sql in my sqlite history [08:30] select status, date, count(status) from (SELECT DISTINCT w.status, date, w.description, w.assignee FROM work_items w, specs s ON w.spec = s.name LEFT JOIN teams ON (s.assignee = teams.name OR w.assignee = teams.name) WHERE (teams.team = 'canonical-kernel-team' OR w.assignee = 'canonical-kernel-team' OR s.assignee = 'canonical-kernel-team')) group by status, date; [08:31] which runs and produces output !?! [08:31] pitti, just be aware there are 4 the same in that function [08:31] *nod* [08:32] platform@lillypilly:~/work-items-tracker$ ./burndown-chart -d ../work-items-db/natty.db -t canonical-desktop-team -o /tmp/x.svg [08:32] ok, that reproduces it nicely and quickly [08:32] apw@dm$ ./burndown-chart -d current.db -t canonical-desktop-team -o /tmp/x.svgapw@dm$ [08:32] hrm, no error for me [08:33] apw: lillypilly is on hardy -- different python/sqlite? [08:33] poop === smb` is now known as smb [08:33] it must be something like that [08:33] as that command here produced a nice little graph :( [08:34] well at least i know why my testing is a fail [08:36] pitti, feel free to just revert that commit and i can go work out how to do it with hardy [08:36] I'll try to bang on this for a while [08:36] "w.status AS status" doesn't seem to work unfortunately [08:37] pitti, crap, well as i say i am happy to take it offline and sort it out [08:38] oh, hang on -- just forgot a trailing space [08:38] ah, that does it [08:38] pitti, where ? [08:39] after the ( ? [08:39] apw: pushed [08:39] apw: no, I forgot it when I added "AS status" [08:39] ahhh [08:39] so it ended up being "w.status AS statusFROM [08:40] pitti, wel thank you for fixing that one [08:40] thanks for fixing the original bug [08:40] * apw adds 'test on people' to his list [09:02] mvo, hi, I'm trying to upgrade my machine to maverick using do-release-upgrade, it fails and points me at some log files, would you mind having a look and telling me what is wrong? I've tried this several times but I fail to see the "that's why" error message [09:03] mvo, the log (main.log) is here http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/535478/ [09:08] zyga: sure, could you mail me the "apt.log" file as well? it can not resolve some dependencies, that file contains the details [09:10] mvo, may I pastebin, thunderbird fails to display on this device [09:11] mvo, apt.log http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/535479/ [09:11] mvo, I removed all my PPAs and removed/purged all the packages that were "obsolete/local" in aptitude [09:11] mvo, trying again [09:14] mvo, that worked [09:15] zyga: cool, looking at the log it seems like libdrm-poulsbo1 might be the trouble maker [09:16] and xserver-xorg-video-psb - out of curisoity, what repo has/had that? [09:16] the "gma500" ppa? [09:16] mvo, yes [09:16] mvo, special handling needed? [09:17] mvo, unfortunately without that ppa my hardware is useless [09:21] zyga: yeah, I think there should be a quirk handler for this in the release upgrader if its a common ppa [09:23] mvo, do you have any code for quirks like that already? [09:26] zyga: not for the exact problem, but for similar ones in DistUpgrade/DistUpgradeQuirks.py [09:27] looking [09:28] Hello === azul_ is now known as jodh [09:47] mvo, wow, you even have arm quirks! [09:51] zyga: yes :) [09:51] zyga: nothing that I can test it against, but there are some /proc/cpuinfo fixtures in tests/ for this [09:51] (nothing real) [09:52] mvo, yeah I wac curious if it's possible to test the quirk resolver alone against a set of fixtures [09:52] mvo, othewise developing this is a lot harder [09:54] zyga: the tests infrastructure in that code is not ideal :/ but its relatively straightforward to add the fixture stuff with apt.Cache(rootdir="./testdir"). then testsidr just needs etc/apt/sources.list, var/lib/apt/lists etc [09:54] zyga: most importantly var/lib/dpkg/status [09:55] * ogra puts on helmet and overall [09:56] ogra: what for? [09:56] * dholbach cheers for ogra [09:57] mvo, I see, ... still I have no idea how I'd use that to test the quirks code, sorry :-( [09:58] ogra: fffffllllllyyyyyy [09:59] zyga: no worries, if you report a bug I will check it out, make sure to include the system_state file (that contains the dpkg status file) [09:59] @pilot on [09:59]