/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/12/08/#ubuntu-release.txt

=== jjohansen is now known as jj-afk
=== smb` is now known as smb
dokoRiddell: please could you wait a few hours with the kde uploads?14:26
dokoespecially not uploading a new kdebindings before the armel build is in the archive14:27
Riddelldoko: why?14:33
dokodid you read my email about making python 2.7 the default today?14:34
Riddelldon't think I did14:38
=== bjf[afk] is now known as bjf
=== jj-afk is now known as jjohansen
GrueMasterCan someone publish linux-image-2.6.35-24-omap?  It is pending publication, and I need to get it tested from -proposed before it can be released.18:27
GrueMasterStill waiting for a kernel to get published.20:54
cjwatsonGrueMaster: processed; should be visible in ~1.5 hours21:16
GrueMasterThanks.  I've been asked to test it for two days now.21:22
cjwatsonit only appeared in the NEW queue six or seven hours ago.21:27
GrueMasterI know.  But the kernel team released it yesterday.21:33
GrueMasterAnd it was published for everything BUT armel.21:34
cjwatsonI can't make armel builds go faster :-)  I imagine somebody looked at the queue when armel hadn't finished building yet, that's all.21:34
GrueMasterSo it is a manual process.  Good to know.21:35
cjwatsonAny time package names change it requires manual intervention.21:35
cjwatsonThus, any kernel ABI change requires manual intervention.21:36
=== bjf is now known as bjf[afk]
sconklinHow can I solve this problem? - A source package containing an incorrect .orig.tar.gz (which had the correct file name) was uploaded to a ppa, and now I need to make that orig.tar.gz go away, or replace it with the correct one.22:53
cjwatsonsconklin: you'll have to ask #launchpad if there's a way - the Ubuntu archive admins have no control over PPAs23:02
sconklincjwatson: thanks23:02
cjwatson(for Ubuntu the answer would be "the only way is to bump the upstream version")23:02
sbeattiethat's also pretty much true for ppas, as well.23:03
sconklinthat's a bit of a problem for the kernel ;-)23:06
sbeattiesconklin: I don't disagree, and I also think it should be relaxed for PPAs versus the ubuntu archive, but that's what people in #soyuz tell me.23:07
cjwatsonthere are some good reasons for it in corner cases around making corresponding source available, even for PPAs23:08
sbeattiesconklin: it's *possible* for it to go away eventually from the ppa, if you delete it and wait on the order of a couple of weeks.23:08
sconklinyeah. It's a case of totally understanding the rules and why they exist, but trying to unwind a mistake23:08
sconklinok, I tried deleting it and waiting an hour23:08
cjwatsonanyway, #launchpad may be able to advise on adminy options that are available23:09
sconklinI'm asking there23:09
ScottKsconklin: Make a different PPA and upload it there.  consistency among PPAs is not enforced.23:09
sconklinScottK:  this is our non-virtualized kernel build PPA23:10
ScottKYeah, well that makes it a bit tough.23:10
ScottKYou might arange for a hot spare in case it's needed.23:11
cjwatson(corner cases: imagine that your new version fails to build on one architecture.  now ppa.launchpad.net is distributing source for the new version but can't distribute source for the old version due to a filename clash.  imagine you never bother to fix this.  is ppa.launchpad.net now violating the GPL?)23:11
sconklincjwatson: totally understood. And it's possible that someone (anyone) grabbed a copy of the built package23:12
ScottKcjwatson: That wouldn't necessarily be an issue for a private PPA.  Perhaps the rules could be relaxed for those (I've got a use case for that).23:13
cjwatsonI expect actually that it's just too annoying to figure out the publication rules :-)23:18

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