/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/12/05/#ubuntu-motu.txt

=== emma is now known as em
crimsunari-tczew: the debian-ubuntu debdiff that you attached to #685345 is for fetchmail, not j-a-c-k.00:52
ari-tczewcrimsun: ah, late time... I'm on it00:53
ari-tczewcrimsun: fixed. wanna sponsor?00:55
crimsunari-tczew: uploaded, thanks!01:05
ari-tczewcrimsun: np. wanna sponsor also fetchmail? (:01:05
crimsunbug # ?01:06
ari-tczewcrimsun: bug 68506501:07
ubottuLaunchpad bug 685065 in fetchmail (Ubuntu) "Merge fetchmail 6.3.18-2 (main) from Debian unstable (main)" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/68506501:07
crimsunari-tczew: uploaded, thanks!01:18
ari-tczewcrimsun: np, thanks me too01:18
=== Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech
=== Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech
ianm_1anyone interested in helping package up a ruby app this evening?04:04
=== Amaranth_ is now known as Amaranth
=== em is now known as emma
=== Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech
ssj6akshatI submitted a patch using submittodebian tool05:37
ssj6akshathow do I confirm it has reached the BTS?05:37
micahgssj6akshat: you should get an email?05:37
ssj6akshatmicahg, in how much time?05:38
micahgssj6akshat: a couple hours05:38
* ssj6akshat doesn't like to wait05:39
micahgssj6akshat: patience is very important :)05:39
ssj6akshatshould I add the patch to the launchpad bug as well?05:39
micahgssj6akshat: if you're using submittodebian I assume it's already been fixed in natty?05:40
ssj6akshatmicahg, ah well, here is the debdiff http://paste.ubuntu.com/539895/05:46
ssj6akshatbug #60267105:47
ubottuLaunchpad bug 602671 in One Hundred Paper Cuts "Description: p7zip " [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/60267105:47
micahgssj6akshat: first, you should target to natty instead of maverick, after that, yes you should attach it, also, I would think type of bug the change should be approved before forwarding05:49
ssj6akshatmicahg, whoops it should be natty05:50
* ssj6akshat spent a whole day learning how to fix this05:52
micahgssj6akshat: please link the Debian bug when you have it06:07
ssj6akshatok06:08
micahgssj6akshat: also, see my comment in teh bug, your patch is lacking something that's in the current description06:09
=== Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech
ssj6akshatmicahg, I do not understand what you said in the bug06:13
micahgssj6akshat: the description explains why you should install p7zip instead of p7zip-full06:14
micahgssj6akshat: also, I think you misunderstood what the 2 sections in the description were for, the first paragraph was explaining what the current package does, the second about the alternative06:27
ssj6akshatmicahg, p7zip doesn't appear in software center but rather p7zip-full does06:36
micahgssj6akshat: they should both be available06:36
vishmicahg: it's hidden as a technical item..06:45
micahgvish: but it's not06:45
vishhmm.. /me not sure about that, maybe thats another bug we need to get fixed..06:45
vishseems someone decided p7zip-full is better than confusing users with too many options..06:46
micahgvish: it's for people that only need 7zip archives and not the rest06:46
* micahg is not in favor of hiding things06:47
vishright, but the person needs to be technical enough to realize he will not ever need any of the other archive types. ;)06:47
micahgvish: also, we can't change the description just to look good in SC, it has to reflect the nature of the packages as well06:47
ssj6akshatmicahg, software center shows Version:9.04~dfsg.1-1 (p7zip-full) for 7zip06:48
vishmicahg: yea, but what are we missing there? (which does not reflect good on the package)06:48
micahgvish: I commented in the bug on that, the current description shows what is in teh pacakge and what the other one does06:49
* vish confused, reads comment again..06:49
micahgvish: p7zip explains what p7zip is and why you might want p7zip-full, p7zip-full does the opposite06:51
vishmicahg: we are changing only the description for p7zip-full.. not touching p7zip now, since its hidden06:52
micahgvish: right, but you need to keep the explanation of what the 2 packages are06:52
vishoh are you saying that the description needs to mention '-full' ?06:53
micahgvish: it's fine to clarify points in the description06:53
micahgvish: yes, and also a short summary of p7zip like the current description06:53
vishmicahg: i dont see why the user needs to know it is the -full , the package title itself is "7zip", the -full part is just a package details/packaging technicality . why bother the user with that? is it going to harm them?  rather if this was a limited package then i see the need for stressing that "this package is $foo and no such options are here, look at the other $bar"06:59
micahgvish: because this description has to work for both distros06:59
vishmicahg: why would it be wrong in any other distro?07:00
vishwe just treat the p7zip-full package as the main package, just like there is only one 7zip07:00
micahgvish: right, but we can't do that since it's not and the description needs to work for cli users in Debian and Ubuntu as well07:00
vishmicahg: maybe i'm not understanding something here, why is it not the main package? is there any other main p7zip package?07:02
vishfor cli it does mention "Additionally, it provides you with the 7z and 7za commands at the command line."07:02
micahgvish: it's not about main vs not main, there's the full version and the one with just the 7z utils07:02
vishmicahg: p7zip is the one with just the utils?07:03
micahgvish: yes07:04
vishmicahg: so would "Complete list of supported formats handled in p7zip-full:" be better?07:09
micahgvish: yes, and also, we should keep the short description of p7zip07:10
vishmicahg: you mean this last line? "p7zip provides 7zr, a light version of 7za, and p7zip a gzip like wrapper around 7zr.""07:11
micahgvish: yes07:11
vish nah.. then that just ends up being confusing. and user will wonder what is difference between p7zip and p7zip-full, rather we can probably make it better in the p7zip description07:14
micahgvish: it's common for descriptions to list alternative choices when appropriate, I don't think the Debian maintainer will drop it07:14
vishmicahg: well, let's try first.. :)07:15
vishoh i so wish that they would just publish the SC usability testing data.. would save a lot of explaining :)07:16
vishdebian folks are too adamant at times :(07:16
* vish hides07:16
micahgvish: SC is not the only package interface07:16
micahgvish: that's what I was trying to explain before07:16
vishmicahg: yea.. but still for whom are such packages meant for?07:17
micahgvish: anyone07:17
vishmicahg: remember we are not trying to fix every description out there. :)07:17
vish and everyone needs to understand. and not get confused.07:18
micahgvish: yes, but you have to balance the casual user with the technical user07:19
vishyup..07:19
micahgand we can't hijack Debian's description because it's better for our users, we can enhance the description to make things clearer07:19
vishhehe! ;)07:19
vishmicahg: no one said we would hijack, first we send them a description, if they are OK, we use it..07:20
vishelse we tweak07:20
micahgvish: I'd rather send one they're less likely to reject, but c'est la vie07:21
vish;)07:21
spaceboyHi guys07:49
spaceboyI noticed the packaging channel doesn't have a lot of activity.  Should I just ask packaging questions in this channel instead?07:49
micahgspaceboy: well, it's the weekend, so it's a little slow, but I didn't see any questions there in the last several hours07:50
=== Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech
MTecknologyWhat was the dh tool for editing the changelog?08:56
c2tarunMTecknology: i think its "dch -i"08:57
c2taruntry it08:57
MTecknologythanks08:57
MTecknologyhm.. it doesn't like me08:57
MTecknologyit doesn't like that the upper level isn't the version number08:58
MTecknologylooks like dch -e changelog 'should' work but it still complains08:58
MTecknologydch: fatal error at line 616:  Found debian/changelog for package nginx in the directory  /home/builder/collab-nginx/trunk  but this directory name does not match the package name according to the  regex  PACKAGE(-.+)?.08:59
micahgMTecknology: to edit the current entry, use dch if it's your first time editing, or dch -e if you've edited it before, use dch -i to add a new entry on top08:59
MTecknologymicahg: I tried -e to edit an existing entry but got the same error09:01
MTecknologymicahg: http://paste.ubuntu.com/539919/09:02
micahgMTecknology: no, in the trunk dir run dch -e09:02
MTecknologyoh!09:03
micahgor dch if you're not the one in the changelog entry09:03
MTecknologythanks :)09:11
=== Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan
micahgricotz: why aren't you in uploaders for docky?09:55
micahgor can you not upload?09:55
ricotzmicahg, i cant upload09:56
micahgricotz: I'm test building your sync request now BTW09:56
ricotzmicahg, thanks09:56
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
ricotzmicahg, arent you going to upload docky?11:13
Laneywhy upload it if it's a sync?11:13
ricotzLaney, i mean sync ;)11:14
Laneyit will get processed by an archive admin as normal11:14
Laneymicahg: you did forget to subscribe ubuntu-archive though11:14
Laneydone11:15
ricotzLaney, ok, that would have been my next question11:15
ricotzLaney, thx11:16
geserLaney: while you are here: do you have an idea what needs fixing here: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/58533827/buildlog_ubuntu-natty-armel.haskell-binary-shared_0.8-1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz11:16
Laneynps11:16
Laneyooh11:17
LaneyI haven't looked at any haskell yet this cycle11:17
geserI see that only in armel builds of haskell-* packages11:17
Laneyseems like a toolchainish thing doesn't it11:18
geseri386 and amd64 doesn't seem to be affected (at least the recent archive rebuild doesn't list haskell-* packages)11:18
geserI don't know how linking of ghc6 programs works, so I don't have an idea if building hlibrary.setup needs the -lpthread or ghc6 itself when linking libHSunix-2.4.0.0.a11:20
LaneyMe neither, let me check on my armel machine11:26
Laneymight have to raise to glasgow-haskell-users11:26
ari-tczewhow can I leave memo msg?11:28
=== Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech
RainCTari-tczew: /msg MemoServ HELP12:11
Laneygeser: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4523#comment:112:22
Laneyi'll test against ghc6 with that patch and then upload if it works12:22
Laneymight take some time for ghc6/armel to build though…12:23
geserthanks12:24
Laneyurgh, bootstrapping problem12:50
=== ssj6akshat is now known as ssj6akshat_afk
Laneyghc6 build-depends ghc6 and builds a script as part of configure, which fails due to this problem12:50
geser:(12:51
=== ssj6akshat_afk is now known as ssj6akshat-afk
=== Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech
cdbsbdrung: there?13:35
ari-tczewRainCT: why did you change from Ubuntu binary package from zeitgeist-fts-extension to zeitgeist-extension-fts ?13:38
ari-tczewapt-rdepends is enough to find depends on X package14:12
ari-tczew?14:13
Rhondagrep-available -FDepends $package -sPackage14:13
Rhondaapt-cache showpkg also show reverse depends14:14
=== Zhenech_ is now known as Zhenech
geserdepending on why you need it you might also need to check for rbuild-depends14:15
ari-tczewRhonda: grep-available: invalid option -- 'f'14:19
RhondaWhere did I say -f?14:19
ari-tczewgeser: ATM I'm looking for depends on binary package.14:19
ari-tczewRhonda: I used: $ grep-available -FDepends $zeitgeist-fts-extension -szeitgeis-fts-extension14:20
Rhondaerm …14:20
RhondaThat's not what I said. :)14:20
geserari-tczew: for that case it's unlikely that this package is used as a build-dependency14:20
RhondaOnly substiture $package with the package name.14:20
Rhondaari-tczew: So grep-available -FDepends zeitgeist-fts-extension -sPackage14:20
=== emma is now known as em
ari-tczewgeser: I wanrt to sync zeitgeist-extensions, but RainCT has changed binary package name in Debian and if I want to sync it, I have to resolve Build-Depends and Depends.14:22
ari-tczews/wanrt/want14:22
ari-tczewthanks Rhonda, now I got output14:22
RainCTari-tczew: Hey. There's not much point in syncing, the geolocation extensions which the Debian package includes isn't really useful yet and other than that I think they're the same.14:27
ari-tczewRainCT: I'm really convinced to reduce delta between Debian and Ubuntu. (again I must start open the same discussion)14:28
RainCTDelta by itself isn't bad.14:29
ari-tczewRainCT: we prefer to manage package through Debian14:29
ari-tczewRhonda: can I use this command to find b-d?14:32
RhondaSure, though you would need grep-dctrl instead of grep-available and hand it the Sources file as argument.14:35
RhondaLike grep-dctrl -FBuild-Depends,Build-Depends-Indep $package -sPackage /var/lib/apt/lists/*_Sources14:35
* Rhonda . o O ( and again, *only* substiture $package with your search term, nothing else in that commandline )14:36
geseror use reverse-build-depends from u-d-t14:38
ari-tczewgeser: nice tool! do you have something similiar for looking for Depends field?14:41
geserfor that I usually use "apt-cache rdepends"14:44
ari-tczewgeser: thanks, it works!14:53
quidnuncI'm trying to use checkinstall (yeah, I know I should make a real package) but it fails because of missing dependencies, glib2 among them. I can't find a package named glib2 in the repositories and I am confused about how checkinstall determined a debian package dependency.14:57
Bachstelzequidnunc: it probably didn't, please pastebin the exact messge you get15:10
=== Zhenech__ is now known as Zhenech
quidnuncBachstelze: The error is15:33
quidnuncBachstelze:  "dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of xmonad-log-applet:15:34
quidnunc xmonad-log-applet depends on glib2; however:15:34
quidnunc  Package glib2 is not installed."15:34
quidnuncBachstelze: The full paste is http://pastebin.ca/201120715:34
Bachstelzequidnunc: your pckages has dependencies, maybe the upstream tarball has a debian/ folder?15:46
quidnuncBachstelze: no debian folder15:47
quidnuncit does have a .spec file15:47
quidnuncI have never seen that before15:48
quidnuncgoogle search tells me it is for rpms15:48
quidnuncIs there a utility to build debs using .spec files?15:51
coolbhaviquidnunc, glib2 is in main repos https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glib2.0/2.27.4-0ubuntu115:54
coolbhaviquidnunc, glib2.0 package15:55
coolbhaviquidnunc, you should look at installing libglib2.0-015:57
Bachstelzecoolbhavi: the ackage asks for glib2, so it won't find libglib2.0-016:00
Bachstelzethe problem is how the dependency got there in the first place16:00
Bachstelzequidnunc: how about editing the .spec file, or deleting it altogether?16:00
coolbhaviBachstelze, hmm maybe i got the problem wrong16:01
=== ssj6akshat-afk is now known as ssj6akshat
quidnuncdeleting the spec solved my problem, thanks16:56
coolbhaviquidnunc, great!16:57
ari-tczewmr_pouit: Seems that you're a XFCE master. my admiration!17:33
micahgLaney: thanks17:41
micahgricotz: syncs are now processed regularly by archive admins, should happen Monday or Tuesday17:42
=== ssj6akshat is now known as ssj6akshat|sleep
ricotzmicahg, alright, i wasnt aware of this change17:59
udienzanyone there?18:31
udienzi looking at sponsor for lp:#6318918:32
hakermaniaHello all. In Revu (http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/), some packages still need review and (as the site tells) have been uploaded almost 2 years now (the older was uploaded at 08 May 2009 11:39 ). So, I uploaded wallch (it is the last package now if you see). I would like to know when it will be reviewed. I am not in a hurry, but simply to know, because I find very strange all these packages than need review from 2009 and so.18:44
micahgudienz: it's in NEW right now, but I think there are still some issues18:45
micahghakermania: yes, we don't have the people power to review large numbers of packages, that's why we usually suggest going through Debian18:46
udienzmicahg: what issue?18:46
hakermaniamicahg: So, when it will be reviewed ?18:47
micahgudienz: first, the version looks off, second there are some lintian warnings18:47
micahghakermania: idk18:47
hakermaniaBut there is a MAIN problem: in the changelog i have given "natty". When my package is reviewed natty will have been released! So my package will go back to needs work!!!!!!! ?18:49
hakermaniaHave anyone though about this?18:50
micahghakermania: if that's the only issue it's easy enough to resolve, usually there are more issues than that with a package on REVU18:50
hakermaniaHow many people are working on revu?18:51
micahghakermania: a handful I think18:51
udienzmicahg: hm.. i see. so i want to fix "missing-debian-source-format " in lintian i must put "3.0 (native)" in debian/source/format?18:52
micahgudienz: I requested that an archive admin delete the package that was uploaded already since there are some changes and it's still going through churn for Debian18:52
micahgudienz: why is it native?18:52
micahgudienz: native means Debian or Ubuntu is the upstream18:53
hakermaniaOk, so what can I do so my package to be in the natty distro? You told something about Debian i think18:54
udienzmicahg: hm.. thanks, so i must change version at debian/changelog to 1.2-0-1ubuntuX?18:55
udienzand sorry for my bad english :D18:55
micahgudienz: actually 0ubuntuX if it enters Ubuntu before Debian18:55
micahgudienz: not a problem :)18:55
hakermaniaOk, so what can I do so my package to be in the natty distro? You told something about Debian i think18:56
micahgudienz: if you don't have a rush need for it to be in Ubuntu immediately, you can finish up the work in Debian and it'll get sync'd, it just has to be in by Feb 24 201118:57
micahghakermania: what type of application is it?18:57
hakermaniaAccessory18:57
hakermania(Utils)18:57
udienzmicahg: ok i'll finishing it at debian18:58
micahgudienz: just keep that date in mind, you should make sure it's sync'd to Ubuntu by that date to insure it's in Natty18:58
udienzmicahg: okay18:59
hakermaniamicahg: ?19:00
micahghakermania: maybe some of the other MOTUs have time, they'll read the backscroll and might take a look19:00
hakermaniamicahg: no, you previously asked me what kind of program it is. Why?19:01
micahghakermania: if one of the Debian teams fits your package, you can try to get it in through Debian and get it reviewed by that team, http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/19:01
micahghakermania: oh, I was going to try to see if it fits with a Debian team, offhand I'm not sure which one, hence I gave you the link to look for yourself to see if there's a good fit19:02
hakermaniaOk, does DEBIAN has e.g. GNOME Desktop? Supports gconftool, imagemagick ?19:03
hakermaniaand something else, the Advocated Package libassuan2 by user jr was uploaded at 03 Dec 2010 16:18 at is already fully accepted!!!! What???? That's not fair! There are package waiting 2 years now to be reviewed and libassuan2 was reviewed in 2 days time!19:05
hakermaniaIS THIS FAIR?19:05
hakermaniasorry for bad english19:06
micahghakermania: the package was fine, and was adovcated and accepted19:07
macopackages arent necessarily reviewed in order of first-uploaded...more like first-correct19:08
micahghakermania: the uploader happens to be an Ubuntu developer, so it just needed review from one person19:08
hakermaniaHow do I become ubuntu developer/19:08
hakermania?19:08
micahgor rather more specially user is a core-dev19:09
hakermaniaunfair >:o unfair >:o unfair >:o unfair >:o unfair >:o unfair >:o unfair >:o unfair >:o unfair >:o unfair >:o19:09
micahghakermania: that won't help your case19:09
macoyou become an ubuntu dev by demonstrating over the course of several months that you know what you're doing and need minimal supervision19:09
hakermaniaI thought that only in Greece there are those things :@19:09
maco(several months to years, really)19:10
micahghakermania: most of the reviewers are volunteers, they work on what they want to work on19:10
hakermaniaAnd why in debian it's easier?19:10
macodebian requires only one person to say "its good"19:10
macoubuntu requires wo19:10
maco*two19:10
macoalso, debian has 10x as many developrs who can do reviews19:11
micahghakermania: not necessarily easier, but they have more people power, we only have about 180 devs total19:11
macowe're up to 180 now??19:11
Laneyand it's more easy to identify (groups of) people who might be inclined to review a particular package19:11
micahg153 capable of advocating for packages19:11
macoohok that sounds more reasonable19:12
hakermania153 people are unable to handle 1-2 packages per day?19:12
micahghakermania: who says they have time to review any?19:12
micahghakermania: they're also responsible for 15k+ packages already in Ubuntu19:13
hakermania....19:13
hakermaniaI spent 3 months to build my app :(19:13
hakermaniaand to know if I have something wrong I have to wait 2 years or so...19:13
hakermania!19:14
hakermaniamad. :|19:14
macono...19:14
macothe packages that are on there for 2 years are abandoned packages19:14
macoit frequently occurs that soemone uploads something, they get one review telling them they did it wrong, and they dont bother fixing it19:14
maco2 years later, its still sitting there19:14
hakermaniayeah, because nobody wanted to review them. That's a kind of racism19:15
macoA) its nothing to do with the uploader's race, so don't try that19:15
macoB) they've generally been reviewed but *not* advocated -- the review said "wrong. start over"19:15
macoif you upload something and are told you're doing it wrong, you should upload a fixed version19:15
macoitll bump your package back up to the top of the queue, iirc19:16
hakermaniaSo why they aren't at Needs Work section?19:16
macoif you never upload a fixed version, it will languish because reviewers are still waiting for you to get around to it19:16
macothe whole unapproved thing *is* "needs work"19:16
hakermaniaok19:16
hakermaniaHmmm19:17
hakermaniaouao19:18
hakermaniamy package has been reviewed19:18
hakermaniait is telling that there's not watch file19:18
hakermaniaouao19:18
hakermania:)19:18
hakermaniaI was wrong :)19:18
hakermaniaSo, if I retype dput revu *changes19:18
hakermaniait will say that wallch already exists19:18
hakermaniahow do I force the upload?19:18
macorm the .upload file19:19
macobut!19:19
macomake sure you regenerate the .dsc and .changes and everything after adding the watch file19:19
hakermaniayes ok19:19
hakermanials -al doesn't show any .upload directory... :/19:20
hakermaniaor file19:20
hakermaniaor something..19:20
hakermaniafound19:21
hakermania-f, --force - force an upload of an already uploaded package.19:21
LaneyCould you use enter a bit less, please?19:24
udienzmicahg: thanks for last chat, i've successfully uploaded to mentors.d.o19:31
micahgudienz: np, let me know if I can help further19:32
udienzmicahg: how to make lintian report at my PC19:44
udienzsame like at revu19:44
micahgudienz: I'm not sure what REVU uses, but you can run lintian -iIEv --pedantic on a .changes or a .deb file19:48
micahgor a .dsc19:49
udienzit's work with *dsc, thanks19:50
lfaraoneudienz: you'll get the full report if you run it on the .changes created after a binary build.19:50
udienzlfaraone: wonk fine too19:51
udienzbut i still got debian-watch-file-in-native-package19:51
udienzbut i still got error wthi "debian-watch-file-in-native-package"19:51
udienzhow can i solved this problem?19:52
lfaraoneudienz: is there a .orig.tar.gz or a similarly named file in the folder above where your debian/ folder is?19:52
udienzyes, aspell-id_1.2-0.orig.tar.gz is in above debian directory19:53
lfaraoneudienz: what's your package's version number?19:54
micahgudienz: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Recipes/DebianWatch19:54
udienzlfaraone: 1.2-0-419:54
lfaraonemicahg: no, the issue is his package is building as native mistakenly.19:54
lfaraonehm, odd.19:55
udienzlfaraone: i try to build this package from Lucid and Lenny and got same error19:55
micahgthe -0 might be throwing it off, idk19:56
micahgudienz: did you try setting 3.0 (quilt) in debian/source/format?19:56
lfaraonemicahg: per Debian policy, "The upstream_version may contain only alphanumerics[33] and the characters . + - : ~ (full stop, plus, hyphen, colon, tilde) and should start with a digit."19:57
micahglfaraone: in other words, should be fine :)19:57
lfaraoneright.19:58
udienzmicahg: if i put "3.0 (quilt: and re run debuild and checked wuth lintian. the error is gone19:59
lfaraoneexciting.19:59
udienz* 3.0 (quilt)19:59
micahgudienz: and you get a .debian.tar.gz in the same dir as teh .orig.tar.gz that's smallish?19:59
udienzmicahg: yes i got it: named aspell-id_1.2-0-4.debian.tar.gz20:00
micahgudienz: and it only has the debian dir in it and not the source?20:00
udienzmicahg: yes only debian dir20:01
micahgudienz: \o/20:02
udienzit that right?20:02
micahgudienz: yep :)20:02
udienzmicahg, lfaraone: thanks advice..20:03
quidnuncI'm trying to build a package which is failing with "fatal error: dbus/dbus.h: No such file or directory". I believe that file is provided in one of the following: "Setting up libglib2.0-dev (2.26.0-0ubuntu1) ... Setting up libdbus-glib-1-dev (0.88-2) .." which I added to build-depends. What am I doing wrong?20:30
hakermania?20:31
hakermaniait is maybe a linking error!20:32
quidnunchakermania: Are you speaking to me?20:32
hakermaniaYes!20:32
hakermaniaare you using qt?20:32
tjcaseyhi guys, quick question, if I push changes via bzr push and then request merge, do I still need to attach the diff file to the bug report?20:32
quidnunchakermania: How can it be a linking error the error suggests that the compiler didn't find a header file20:32
Laneyyou want libdbus-1-dev20:33
quidnunchakermania: What?20:33
Laneyhttp://packages.ubuntu.com/search?searchon=contents&keywords=dbus.h&mode=exactfilename&suite=natty&arch=any20:33
quidnuncLaney: I have that as well20:33
quidnuncLaney: I tried adding every single dbus dev package that I could find20:33
Laneythen you probably aren't setting CFLAGS right20:33
quidnuncto build-depends20:33
quidnuncLaney: That may be it: I'm not setting CFLAGS at all20:34
Laneypastebin the build log20:35
Laneyplease :)20:35
quidnuncWhere is that stored again?20:35
Laneydepends how you are building20:35
quidnuncprevu20:36
Laneydon't know :(20:36
Laneyback soon20:36
quidnuncit just wraps pbuilder20:37
quidnuncI'll just paste stdout20:39
quidnunc+ stderr20:39
quidnuncLaney: http://pastebin.ca/201141720:43
Laneyquidnunc: Looks like the cflags are indeed missing. Try adding pkgconfig-depends: dbus-1 in the cabal file.20:48
=== Pici` is now known as Pici
quidnuncLaney: That didn't seem to help but thanks for the tip21:01
hakermaniahow should I name the General Public License 3 in order not to get from REVU: 'The GNU General Public License is mentioned in debian/copyright but     there seems to be no copy of it included in the source tarball, which     is a requirement for it. (Note: The file may be there but have an     uncommon name; please double-check before trusting this warning). '  I have tried GPL3 but it doesn't work21:01
dapaluse COPYING for the file, it's one of the common names21:02
dapalif you already embed it, with another name, say so :)21:02
hakermaniadapal: Thank you. When it says in the source tarball it means inside the folder with the source, doesn't it?21:04
dapalyes21:04
geserlucas: how often is the information about new Ubuntu uploads for http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu_ftbfs.cgi updated? I'm wondering why fbb is not in outdated already when I uploaded a fixed package to Ubuntu on Friday (the page lists no outdated packages at all yet).21:45
bcurtiswxhow do i find which package libnotify belongs to ?21:56
micahgbcurtiswx: apt-file search?21:56
macodpkg -S filename21:56
maco(if its installed)21:56
bcurtiswxmicahg, maco thx21:57
geserbcurtiswx: binary package to source package? or file to binary package?21:57
bcurtiswxgeser, first21:57
micahgbcurtiswx: oh, hmm, apt-cache show PKG | grep ^Source21:58
macoor apt-cache showsrc PKG | head -n121:58
geserif you have a source repository configured (deb-src): "apt-cache madison" and look for the source line21:58
micahgmaco: Source isn't the first line21:59
macoits not?21:59
micahgnot for me at least22:00
macoyes it is22:00
macofor showsrc the first line is Package:  and shows the source package name22:00
micahgmaybe it depends on the package :)22:00
macosecond line is Binary:  and shows the binary package name22:00
macoits the difference between show and showsrc22:00
micahgoh, sorry, I didn't notice you said showsrc :)22:00
bcurtiswxback, had connectivity issues22:01
micahgmaco: you are correct :)22:01
gesermicahg: your line doesn't work as not every package has a Source entry (only those where the binary name != source name)22:02
micahggeser: you are also correct22:02
geserbcurtiswx: did you see out replies?22:02
bcurtiswxnot after i said "geser, first"22:03
bcurtiswxuntil micahg said "oh sorry, i ddin't notice..."22:03
micahgbcurtiswx: it should all be in the logs now22:03
geser"apt-cache showsrc PKG | head -n1" or "apt-cache madison PKG" (for both you need a source repository (deb-src) entry)22:04
bcurtiswxOK, thx all22:04
bcurtiswxi did a bzr merge-upstream which gave a conflict.  i see a BASE|OTHER|THIS file how do I "resolve" this conflict ?22:39
RAOFWork out what the resolution should be, save it, then run “bzr resolve”22:40
RAOFThe BASE|OTHER|THIS files are just a part of the standard conflict resolution info; one is the BASE file, one is the BASE file + the changes made in THIS tree, one is the BASE file + the changes made in the OTHER tree.22:41
bcurtiswxRAOF, the next step to solving would be identifying the issue.  the .BASE .OTHER .THIS file hold this information ?22:41
RAOFMostly you can ignore the .BASE/.OTHER/.THIS files, because bzr will put conflict markers in the file.  Looking like <<<<HEAD ...stuff from your tree... ==== ...stuff from other tree...>>>>other22:43
bcurtiswxOK, looking22:44
bcurtiswxfound that section, lemme pastebin22:46
bcurtiswxRAOF, http://paste.ubuntu.com/540110/ how do I tell it which to keep ? i would assume the stuff after the ==== is more specific and is what should be kept22:47
RAOFWorking out what to keep requires understanding what was changed, both in the ubuntu branch and in the upstream branch.22:47
RAOFIn this case, the second branch (after the ====) looks like the right one.22:48
bcurtiswxyup, my thoughts too22:48
bcurtiswxRAOF, do i just delete all but what I'm keeping for those lines ?22:50
RAOFYou leave the file in the state it should end up in; so you'd delete from <<<HEAD to ====, then the >>>MERGE SOURCE22:52
bcurtiswxROAF, OK Thx22:52
bcurtiswxRAOF, then bzr resolve ?22:54
RAOFYup.  That will pick up that you've fixed the conflict, and will mark it as resolved.22:55
bcurtiswxhmm, i quilt push -f with a refresh on all patches, and it works.. but when i bzr bd.. it fails..23:05
gesererror message?23:05
bcurtiswxyup, lemme pastebiun23:05
bcurtiswxhttp://paste.ubuntu.com/540113/23:06
bcurtiswxgeser, ^^23:06
geserand "push"ing each patch after a "quilt pop -a" works?23:08
bcurtiswxgeser, http://paste.ubuntu.com/540114/23:11
geserdoes it also work when you leave out the -f?23:14
bcurtiswxgeser, yes. saem result23:14
bcurtiswxsame*23:14
geserhmm23:15
geserbcurtiswx: just curious: you seem to update libnotify on your own, a) why not take libnotify 0.7.0-3 from Debian experimental and apply the Ubuntu delta if still needed and b) what's the difference to libnotify4 0.7.0+git20101118-0ubuntu2?23:20
geserfrom the libnotify4 changelog from Nov 11: "Rename source package and -dev binary to be versioned, so that we can install both in parallel for a while."23:21
bcurtiswxgeser, i'm trying to package empathy 2.91.3 and it has a build-dep on that libnotify.. i assume the easy way would be updating the empathy build-dep to libnotify4 instead of the current one23:21
bcurtiswxi guess I can do that23:22
bcurtiswxdidn't see libnotify4 :) thx23:22
geserbcurtiswx: yes, looks like you should build-depend on libnotify4-dev23:22
gesersorry that I couldn't help you with your original problem23:24
bcurtiswxgeser, you've been a great help :) thx23:25
bcurtiswxgeser, if im moving things to GTK+3 then libglib2.0-dev and libgtk2.0-dev get bumped to libglib3.0-dev and libgtk3.0-dev ?23:30
geserI guess so, but apt-cache shows me only a libgtk3.0-dev package but no libglib3.0-dev (or similar). Better ask the folks in #ubuntu-desktop.23:34
bcurtiswxgeser,  thanks.  i guess 2.0 is still used. (missed an entry in their NEWS file)23:36

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