[01:55] <Leon_Nardella> Hi. There's a bug in Natty's cmake (2.8.3) regarding asm support to which I seem to have a working patch and packages built in a PPA. Any pointers on how should I go about trying to get it accepted?
[01:56] <Leon_Nardella> It's actually fixed in cmake's git already. Should be fixed in 2.8.4.
[06:39] <Takyoji> Anyone happen to know the package maintainer of the 'gogoc' package? It just says "Ubuntu Developers <ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com>" for the maintainer.
[06:42] <micahg> Takyoji: Ubuntu doesn't have maintainers
[06:42] <nigelb> Takyoji: Craig Small <csmall@debian.org> --> its a package syned from debian.
[06:42] <nigelb> *synced
[06:42] <Takyoji> ahh
[06:42] <nigelb> Also, Ubuntu doesn't really have the concept of maintainers.
[06:42] <nigelb> Generally, you guess based on who touched in last in the changelog.
[06:43] <micahg> Takyoji: do you have a bug?
[06:43] <Takyoji> Yes; it just hangs using 100% CPU
[06:44] <Takyoji> I've tried all suggestions and either: get errors and it dies, or hangs and doesn't terminate via "service gogoc stop", unless if SIGKILL is sent
[06:45] <Takyoji> Shall I submit it to: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gogoc/ ?
[06:46] <Takyoji> There's some bugs on there that haven't been touched for months.
[06:46] <Takyoji> as it seems
[06:49] <micahg> Takyoji: feel free, but there's no guarantee it will be looked at, if that happens, feel free to ask in #ubuntu-bugs to have it triaged
[06:50] <Takyoji> I actually just emailed the package maintainer and hopefully I should get a response in a few days or less.
[06:51] <micahg> Takyoji: Debian maintainers usually prefer bugs in the BTS, not direct e-mails
[06:52] <Takyoji> Which BTS though? Launchpad, or?
[06:52] <cdbs> Takyoji: the debian BTS at bugs.debian.org
[06:52] <Takyoji> alrighty
[06:53] <Takyoji> Thank you all for your assistance.
[06:53] <cdbs> Takyoji: You may file a bug at Launchpad, but the Debian Maintainer usually prefers bugs at bugs.d.o
[06:53] <cdbs> Ubuntu-specific bugs at LP
[06:53] <Takyoji> as I would assume
[07:29] <JackyAlcine> C++ is fun.
[16:48] <WasserDragoon> hi there, i'm building deb packages and want to know how to exclude .svn folders (without deleting them) and without using --exclude option, because i will upload it to launchpad and can't manipulate the build command there
[16:49] <WasserDragoon> maybe there's a chance to list these folders in a file to exclude them from packaging?
[16:50] <WasserDragoon> im back in ~40min
[17:07] <mterry> WasserDragoon, use -i and -I arguments to debuild to not put common VCS folders and such in the source package
[17:45] <russellb> WasserDragoon: alternatively, instead of using an svn checkout, you could just use "svn export" and not have the .svn directories there in the first place
[18:23] <ricotz> chrisccoulson, hello :), is there a ppa with a firefox 4.0 beta 8 package available for natty?
[18:28] <JackyAlcine> Guys, I need clarification; what's the different between a shared library and a static library?
[18:30] <ion> One reads the topic and the other doesn’t.
[18:30] <JackyAlcine> ?
[18:30] <JackyAlcine> Oops, sorry.
[18:32] <ion> Statically linked libraries are copied to the executable, dynamically linked are loaded from a library path in runtime.
[18:34] <JackyAlcine> Okay, that clarifies a lot; thanks ion
[18:35] <micahg> ricotz: the firefox-next PPA should have it tomorrow, I uploaded it last week, but it FTBFS and I haven't had time to fix it yet
[18:41] <ricotz> micahg, great, thanks!
[18:41] <chrisccoulson> ricotz, i will upload it to natty soon too, but i'm on vacation atm
[18:41] <chrisccoulson> i might do it tonight if i get some time
[18:42] <ricotz> chrisccoulson, hi, nice, i am desperately waiting for an update since b7 is quite buggy ;)
[18:42] <chrisccoulson> ricotz, ok, i'll try and do it later
[18:43] <micahg> chrisccoulson: if you like I can upload to natty, I was waiting on teh translations stuff
[18:43] <chrisccoulson> micahg, yeah, that's what i still need to do
[18:43] <ricotz> thanks you, guys
[21:28] <WasserDragoon> russellb: sorry, i was busy till now. thanks, didn't know about this
[21:28] <russellb> you're welcome.  :-)
[21:33] <WasserDragoon> but i thought there could be a more native method
[22:39] <Leon_Nardella> Hi, all. Who should I ping to have a bug in Natty's cmake looked on? I seem to even have a fix for it (although I wouldn't call myself a dev).
[22:41] <ari-tczew> Leon_Nardella: report a bug - $ ubuntu-bug cmake
[22:42] <Leon_Nardella> ari-tczew, Done that already.
[22:42] <ari-tczew> Leon_Nardella: and have you got prepared a fix? patch?
[22:42] <Leon_Nardella> ari-tczew, Yes. I found the fix in upstream's git and extracted the patch.
[22:43] <Leon_Nardella> Even built a package in a PPA to test it.
[22:43] <ari-tczew> Leon_Nardella: you should find sponsorship. more on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SponsorshipProcess
[22:43] <ari-tczew> in shortcut: subscribe ubuntu-sponsors if you have prepared a debdiff or bzr branch
[22:44] <crimsun> Leon_Nardella: cool, thanks for your efforts. I think in this case, because there isn't an existing Ubuntu delta from the Debian source package in experimental, it's nicer to get it into Debian's source package so it can be synced to Ubuntu.
[22:46] <Leon_Nardella> crimsun, Yes, I realize that. The thing is that I don't use Debian. Really not used to it. I hoped someone who knows Debian's internals could take it for spin.
[22:50] <crimsun> Leon_Nardella: that's fine. We'll work on getting submitting it to Debian first.
[22:50] <crimsun> s/getting//
[22:51] <Leon_Nardella> That's lp#695335, by the way.
[23:02] <Leon_Nardella> crimsun, Is a merge proposal the only way to get a sponsor? I took look on lp:ubuntu/cmake and it doesn't seem to match the package in Natty, so I can't work on it.
[23:06] <crimsun> Leon_Nardella: no, any diffs are ok
[23:07] <Leon_Nardella> crimsun, Sorry. There's a section in that wiki page about importing from Debian. I should've read till the end. ;)
[23:24] <kklimonda> is there a reason we ship busybox with su and sulogin compiled in, but without suid bit set for the executable?
[23:49] <soreau> Why is ubuntu kernel built without snd-pcm-oss.ko? Can't the module be built and just blacklisted?