[00:09] <oojah> I've a package that's not quite in Debian (reviewed a few times and should just need to be uploaded, alas). If I get it into Ubuntu via revu for Natty and for Debian for Natty+1 then am I right that the Debian package will effectively override the existing Ubuntu one?
[00:10] <micahg> oojah: it can, you still have 2 months to get the package in Debian before feature freeze though
[00:12] <oojah> micahg: I thought the important one was debian import freeze, which was 12 minutes by my reckoning.
[00:13] <micahg> oojah: no, that's jsut the automatic import of packages, manual syncs of new packages can be requested until Feature Freeze
[00:13] <oojah> micahg: Ah, my misunderstanding then.
[00:14] <oojah> Are there any docs on the criteria needed for manual syncs?
[00:18] <micahg> oojah: before Feature Freeze there aren't any
[00:18] <oojah> micahg: Okey dokey.
[00:18] <micahg> oojah: you can use requestsync from ubuntu-dev-tolls
[00:18] <micahg> *ubuntu-dev-tools
[00:18] <oojah> That's a great relief all round!
[00:19]  * oojah nods
[00:25] <bdrung> micahg: ubuntu-dev-trolls :D
[00:25] <micahg> bdrung: I was thinking that too
[00:26] <oojah> Good job I didn't install that one by mistake...
[01:12] <mase_wk> I managed to get around my ant problem by setting the build tool to autoconf in debian/rules
[01:12] <ari-tczew> nice
[01:14] <mase_wk> however now when i run dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot i get this error
[01:14] <mase_wk> dh_auto_configure: ./configure --build=x86_64-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr --includedir=${prefix}/include --mandir=${prefix}/share/man --infodir=${prefix}/share/info --sysconfdir=/etc --localstatedir=/var --libexecdir=${prefix}/lib/timber --disable-maintainer-mode --disable-dependency-tracking failed to to execute: No such file or directory
[01:15] <mase_wk> i really don't want the build system to actually build anything
[01:15] <mase_wk> but it seems you can't use buildsystem=none
[01:34] <mase_wk> if i use pbuilder i get "make: dh: Command not found"
[01:34] <mase_wk> however dh is installed and i can call it
[04:27] <mase_wk> ok well i am quite happy with myself. I am sure it's far from perfect, (but lintian doesn't complain ). I now have  a branch in my git repo which has only the debian dir in it. So if anyone wants to make an ubuntu / debian package they can ( from the master branch ) do a git branch package; git merge debian; debuild -S -uc -us; cd ../; sudo pbuilder build timber_0.70.dsc
[04:27] <mase_wk> and come out with a package
[06:40] <cdbs> bdrung:
[06:40] <cdbs> bdrung: oops, sorry, typed that by mistake, was giong to do a whois instead
[10:13] <cdbs> bdrung: :o When did you become DD?
[10:14] <sebner> cdbs: yesterday ^_^
[10:14] <cdbs> bdrung: Congrats!
[10:15] <bdrung> cdbs: thanks
[10:16] <sagaci> is there a tool to use that will foster real-time collaboration on code
[10:16] <sagaci> almost like teamviewer, I guess
[10:19] <hakermania> Hey, anybody knows the use of debian/compat ?
[10:20] <hakermania> It contains debhelper's version?
[10:20] <geser> it tells which debhelper version all the dh_* should "use"
[10:34] <dapal> hakermania: man debhelper, search for "Debhelper compatibility levels"
[10:35] <hakermania> dabal, geser: Thx
[10:36] <dapal> congrats bdrung :)
[10:36] <dapal> welcome aboard :)
[10:36] <bdrung> dapal: thanks
[10:53] <hakermania> Can anybody check if this debian/copyright is correct (using DEP-5): http://paste.ubuntu.com/548773/  Thx :)
[11:04] <bdrung> hakermania: it's not up-to-date: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/dep/web/deps/dep5.mdwn?op=file&rev=152
[11:05] <bdrung> hakermania: and "Files:" is missing
[11:06] <bdrung> hakermania: you should have two sections. one "Files: *" and one "Files: debian/*"
[11:09] <hakermania> bdrung: Thank you.
[11:14] <hakermania> bdrung: How about now?
[11:14] <hakermania> http://paste.ubuntu.com/548784/
[11:14] <cdbs> bdrung: I am packaging a package which uses AGPL-3. Should I paste the whole license text to the thing?
[11:14] <cdbs> bdrung: I mean, in the License: para
[11:16] <tumbleweed> bdrung: if it isn't in common-licences, you have to
[11:16] <bdrung> cdbs: only the agpl-3 header.
[11:16] <tumbleweed> err cdbs
[11:16] <cdbs> tumbleweed: the whole license? :o
[11:16] <cdbs> bdrung: it ain't in common-licenses
[11:16] <tumbleweed> cdbs: the code has to be shipped with the whole licence available
[11:16] <bdrung> not good.
[11:17] <cdbs> tumbleweed: Can we write: Refer to the COPYING file in the source root directory
[11:17] <tumbleweed> cdbs: COPYING isn't distributed in th edeb
[11:17] <cdbs> of course not
[11:17] <tumbleweed> so you can't
[11:17] <cdbs> tumbleweed: adding the dots (.) in place of empty lines would be a headache for such a large license
[11:18] <tumbleweed> cdbs: that's why you use an editor with automation ability
[11:18] <tumbleweed> :%s/^ *$/ ./ would do the job in vim
[11:20] <cdbs> thanks
[11:21] <bdrung> how long does the apport retracer take to retrace a core dump?
[11:21] <cdbs> tumbleweed: and I use vim
[11:21] <cdbs> :)
[11:30] <hakermania> bdrung: Is it OK now? :S http://paste.ubuntu.com/548784/
[11:31] <tumbleweed> hakermania: I'd suggest simply https://sourceforge.net/projects/wall-changer/ for source, or you'll have to change it on every new upsstream version
[11:31] <tumbleweed> hakermania: you can drop the "You should have received a copy..." paragraphs
[11:32] <bdrung> hakermania: i forgot that you are both. so you can drop the second paragraph (Files: debian/*)
[11:35] <hakermania> now it must be OK :) http://paste.ubuntu.com/548796/
[11:36] <tumbleweed> LGTM
[11:39] <hakermania> Cool.
[11:44] <bdrung> i fail to configure my ~/.mailrc. can someone help me? i want to set the from mail address
[11:48] <tumbleweed> bdrung: set from=foo? (can't say I send much mail with mailx...)
[11:49] <tumbleweed> you may of course need to tweak your MTA to allow from address spoofing
[11:49] <bdrung> tumbleweed: i tried: set from="bdrung@debian.org"
[11:49] <bdrung> but it didn't work
[11:53] <bdrung> tumbleweed: do you know how to tweak the MTA?
[11:55] <tumbleweed> bdrung: start by seeing if that's the issue, by using sendmail -fbdrung@debian.org
[12:02] <ari-tczew> how long is Debian frozen?
[12:02] <tumbleweed> bdrung: on my system I need to use set smtp=localhost (i.e. use localhost instead of sendmail) to get the from address to be set. It looks like mail doesn't pass -f to sendmail
[12:02] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: until it's ready
[12:03] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: I mean when it's started
[12:03] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: it was announced during debconf, early august
[12:05] <bdrung> tumbleweed: set smtp=localhost doesn't work, too
[12:06] <tumbleweed> bdrung: presumably your mta then, which one?
[12:06] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: ok thanks
[12:07] <bdrung> tumbleweed: postfix
[12:07] <tumbleweed> hmm, postfix should respect from address coming from mynetworks
[12:09] <bdrung> and i didn't changed anything in postfix
[12:33] <hakermania> :)
[13:17] <hakermania> New upload for package wallch: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/wallch
[13:54] <xteejx> Hi all, quick question: What is the chances that vim will be updated to at least 7.3.075 before Natty release? Re bug 137854
[14:00] <bdrung> xteejx: it depends. ask the debian maintainer to update the package (in unstable or experimental) and then let's merge it.
[14:01] <xteejx> bdrung: File an update request report?
[14:02] <bdrung> xteejx: yes. "Please update vim to version XY"
[14:02] <xteejx> bdrung: Cool thank you :)
[14:03] <bdrung> and you could say: it will fix LP xxxxxx and yyyyyy
[14:03] <xteejx> No probs :)
[14:21] <ari-tczew> do you know any good software for editing patches?
[14:23] <bdrung> ari-tczew: apply the patch, edit the patched files, refresh the patch
[14:24] <ari-tczew> I use geany for reviewing patches, but there is no option to remove changes
[14:24] <ari-tczew> bdrung: you didn't get me. MoM adds a lot of .pc files and I have to delete them for patch
[14:24] <ari-tczew> manually work taking a lot of time
[14:24] <ari-tczew> s/for/from
[14:25] <bdrung> ari-tczew: maybe use debdiff to regenerate the patch?
[14:27]  * hakermania uploaded another wallch package because his description was quite loud, like an advertisement. http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/wallch
[14:28] <ari-tczew> hakermania: you don't need to comment on revu that you've uploaded new source...
[14:28] <ari-tczew> we can guess that you've followed with our advices
[14:28] <ari-tczew> and you pushed fixed version
[14:28] <hakermania> ari-tczew: Confirmation :D
[14:29] <hakermania> ari-tczew: Reminding :D
[14:29] <ari-tczew> bdrung: good point.
[14:29] <ari-tczew> now looks better
[14:30] <ari-tczew> bdrung: there is a MoM bug. package includes patches, but MoM diff shows changes to files directly also :/
[14:31] <bdrung> ari-tczew: MoM should be fixed.
[14:31] <ari-tczew> bdrung: should :P
[14:44] <ari-tczew> bdrung: or would be nice to have a plugin for software like gedit - remove lines from xxx to yyy
[14:44] <bdrung> ari-tczew: i dunno if gedit is the right place for it.
[15:49] <lfaraone> bdrung: congrats, re @d.o. Welcome to the madhouse. :)
[15:57] <hakermania> How does everybody know that bdrung become a DD ?
[16:01] <bdrung> lfaraone: thanks.
[16:02] <bdrung> hakermania: today i wrote a blog post.
[16:05] <ari-tczew> bdrung: really? congrats then!
[16:06]  * ari-tczew is pleased when core-dev is also DD. cheers to bdrung and quadrispros
[16:11] <bdrung> ari-tczew: yes, really. ;) look: http://packages.qa.debian.org/v/vlc/news/20101229T221850Z.html
[16:15] <ari-tczew> can I use another way like debian/rules instead adding 99 patch?
[16:15] <bdrung> ari-tczew: for what?
[16:16] <ari-tczew> bdrung: lxpanel
[16:16] <ari-tczew> 99 patch causing add patch debian-changes-*
[16:17] <ari-tczew> bdrung: does this case mean that you're going to do more for Debian than Ubuntu? :>
[16:18] <bdrung> ari-tczew: i will go on with my "debian first" approach.
[16:19] <bdrung> ari-tczew: instead of 99-autotools.patch you could use dh-autoreconf
[16:20] <ari-tczew> bdrung: what do you think, is it better way than 99 patch?
[16:20] <ari-tczew> 99 patch always has to be updated
[16:20] <bdrung> ari-tczew: if the packages uses dh, using dh-autoreconf may be simpler
[16:21] <ari-tczew> bdrung: lxpanel uses dg
[16:21] <ari-tczew> dh *
[16:21] <bdrung> ari-tczew: then try dh-autoreconf
[16:22] <ari-tczew> bdrung: should it be first or after override_dh_auto_configure: ?
[16:22] <ari-tczew> I guess that 1st
[16:23] <bdrung> ari-tczew: something like dh $@ --with dh_autoreconf should work
[16:24] <ari-tczew> bdrung: does this change add also changes in files like 99 patch?
[16:24] <bdrung> ari-tczew: it runs autoreconf and cleans up in the clean target
[16:24] <bdrung> ari-tczew: you should drop the 99 patch
[16:24] <ari-tczew> yep I know
[16:30] <ari-tczew> bdrung: guess that should also B-D on dh-autoreconf right?
[16:31] <bdrung> ari-tczew: yes
[16:32] <ari-tczew> bdrung: fail. http://paste.ubuntu.com/548869/
[16:32] <bdrung> ari-tczew: man dh-autoreconf
[16:35] <ari-tczew> bdrung: yeah, fixed ;)
[16:53] <sebner> bdrung: does that mean it won't work with dh8?
[16:53] <lfaraone> bdrung: yay for debian first! :)
[16:54] <bdrung> ari-tczew: no, it'll work with dh 8.
[16:55] <ari-tczew> bdrung: hm?
[16:55] <sebner> bdrung: man dh-autoreconf says dh --with autoreconf $@ where debhelper8 uses dh $@ --foo
[16:55] <bdrung> was for sebner:
[16:56] <bdrung> ari-tczew, sebner: use "dh $@ --with autoreconf"
[16:56] <ari-tczew> bdrung: but lxpanel suses dh7
[16:56] <ari-tczew> uses*
[16:57] <sebner> bdrung: the manpage should have a note about that imho
[16:57] <bdrung> ari-tczew: dh 7 allows both orders, but dh 8 will be more strict
[16:57] <ari-tczew> Can't exec "autopoint": No such file or directory at /usr/share/autoconf/Autom4te/FileUtils.pm line 345.
[16:58] <ari-tczew> autoreconf: failed to run autopoint: No such file or directory
[16:58] <bdrung> ari-tczew: autopoint installed?
[16:58] <ari-tczew> bdrung: in pbuilder?
[16:58] <ari-tczew> B-D autopoint you mean?
[16:58] <bdrung> ari-tczew: b-d?
[17:01] <sebner> bdrung: dh-autoreconf recommends autopoint though
[17:37] <fat0ss> hello, I am new to ubuntu
[17:37] <fat0ss> and try to follow the instruction given on Motu page
[17:39] <fat0ss> I Installed the all development tools. and installing the ubuntu development release
[17:39] <fat0ss> am I on right track ?
[17:41] <ari-tczew> fat0ss: why not?
[17:43] <fat0ss> ari-tczew, I am asking because ..it was so easy like a "piece of cake"
[17:43] <ari-tczew> fat0ss: now you can go ahead with development
[17:44] <fat0ss> ari-tczew, my connection speed is not so good.. I think it will take few hours to download the development release
[17:45] <ari-tczew> fat0ss: perhaps
[17:46] <tumbleweed> hmm, postfix should respect from address coming from mynetworks
[17:46] <tumbleweed> grr, exceuse that
[17:47] <fat0ss> ari-tczew, after installing developer release..I can go directly to bug fixing ?
[17:47] <ari-tczew> fat0ss: yes. already you can go with bug fixing.
[17:47] <ari-tczew> !SRU | fat0ss
[17:53] <ari-tczew> bdrung: is it possible that --with autoreconf creates debian-changes-* ?
[17:53] <ari-tczew> or is it my fault?
[17:58] <ari-tczew> what is wrong? http://paste.ubuntu.com/548881/
[18:15] <tumbleweed> bdrung: syncpackage-681693 is ready for some review
[18:30] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: can you help me?
[18:37] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: looks like you left out the part where the failure happened
[18:37] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: I added dh $@ --with autoreconf
[18:37] <ari-tczew> now configure couldn't go ahead
[18:50] <hakermania>  /ping
[18:50] <hakermania> :/
[18:55] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: I mean the error happened before the lines you posted, it starts with "exit 1"
[18:55] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: as usual with configure, look in config.log
[19:01] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: config.log in pbuildeR?
[19:01] <tumbleweed> yes
[19:02] <bdrung> tumbleweed: i want online unittest for this branch.
[19:03] <tumbleweed> bdrung: I'll bet. I can probably do some offline testing too
[19:10] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: where is config.log in pbuilder?
[19:11] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: in th edirectory it's building in. Set up a hook to open a shell if the build fails (there's an example hook that does that)
[19:11] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: is it on wiki?
[19:11] <tumbleweed> in the package
[19:14] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: enjoy (I'm going out)
[19:14] <ari-tczew> heh, thanks
[19:29] <ari-tczew> fu** it, I'm not going finish it until new year
[20:48] <c_korn> how can I allow a package to overwrite a file from anotherpackage so I do not get the error: <package> tries to overwrite <file> which has already been installed by package <package>
[20:49] <Bachstelze> c_korn: ad a diversion on the ol package's version of the file with dpkg-divert
[20:49] <Bachstelze> add* old*
[20:51] <c_korn> ah, this seems to be what I want
[20:51] <c_korn> now I have to execute this at packaging time somehow
[20:51] <c_korn> does it go to postinst ?
[20:53] <Bachstelze> c_korn: actually, you have to be careful that the old package still works after that file is renamed
[20:53] <Bachstelze> otherwise, just make your package conflict with it
[20:54] <c_korn> hm, I will describe my problem more clearly:
[20:57] <c_korn> it is the game urbanterror. is has a data package urbanterror-data which has its own tarball. and now there is the package urbanterror which contains the game's executable. but now there is a version of urbanterror which has an improved exe and I want to package it as urbanterror-optimized. this also includes some optimized game files which are in the urbanterror-data package. now I add a conflict to the urbanterror  package and I also want
[20:57] <c_korn> the package to allow to update some of the game content which has been installed by urbanterror-data
[21:01] <Bachstelze> hmm
[21:02] <Bachstelze> I would make urbanterror-optimized replace urbanterror, and add a diverison for the files in urbanterror-data that create a conflict
[21:02] <Bachstelze> presumably, urbanterror-optimized doesn't need the old files anymore
[21:11] <c_korn> yes, do I have to do this in postinst?
[21:11] <c_korn> or is there a special config file
[21:11] <c_korn> like package.links