[04:54] <highvoltage> u/join #weirdos
[04:55] <ebroder> Somebody's been reading the blogs :-P
[05:12] <stalcup> what's a blog?
[14:16] <ari-tczew> bdrung: interesting case. update-maintainer from daily u-d-t couldn't work: update-maintainer: Error: No Maintainer field found in ./debian/control.
[14:16] <ari-tczew> bdrung: get source of seahorse-plugins from Debian unstable and check it
[14:18] <bdrung> ari-tczew: if you want to help, file a bug report and distillate a testcase (ubuntutools/test/test_update_maintainer.py)
[14:19] <ari-tczew> bdrung: how can I run it?
[14:19] <bdrung> ari-tczew: bug confirmed
[14:19] <ari-tczew> (sorry for my lack of knowledge)
[14:20] <bdrung> ari-tczew: build the package and see what is done.
[14:21] <ari-tczew> bdrung: which package?
[14:22] <bdrung> ari-tczew: ubuntu-dev-tools
[14:22] <bdrung> the test are run on build
[14:22] <bdrung> s/test/tests/
[14:22]  * bdrung is currently very busy.
[14:23] <ari-tczew> still confused
[14:23] <ari-tczew> bdrung: do you need reported bug?
[14:25] <bdrung> ari-tczew: either file a bug or propose a bzr branch merge that add a testcase which tests this issue
[14:25] <ari-tczew> bdrung: I'll report a bug
[14:41] <dholbach> good morning
[14:42] <ari-tczew> hello dholbach
[14:59] <ari-tczew> maco: should we forward your patch to Debian? bug 345727
[15:00] <nigelb> Laney_: people seem to walk into that channel and then leave :p
[15:00] <nigelb> Laney_: (you know the one where you entered and said ':O' and left :p)
[15:00] <Bachstelze> #ubuntu ?
[15:01] <ari-tczew> maybe he was excited of number of developers in one place
[15:01] <Bachstelze> that's what I feel like saying every time I go there
[15:05] <Laney> nigelb: :P just wanted to see if it still existed
[15:16] <nigelb> Laney: hehe
[15:17] <nigelb> Laney: me and jonathan are trying to make it cool to hang out there ;)
[15:34] <evaluate> dapal, ping?
[15:34] <dapal> evaluate: pong, will look at the package later tonight :)
[15:35] <evaluate> dapal, just wanted to let you know that I just had a look at the installation again, and it throws me a bunch of errors right now...
[15:35] <dapal> ah :)
[15:35] <evaluate> not sure why though, the first time it worked really fine...
[15:35] <dapal> take your time to fix/look at it then, there's no hurry :p
[15:35] <dapal> (and I'm a bit busy too)
[15:36] <evaluate> ok, I will let you know if/when I find the issue
[15:36] <Laney> look! a hanska!
[15:36] <dapal> eeeek!
[15:51] <evaluate> dapal, hmm, it seems that the script also uses some custom smarty stuff, so I guess I can't use the shared smarty library after all...
[15:52] <dapal> uhm :/
[15:53] <evaluate> so I'd either have to use the smarty lib they supply or create some patches so that it works with the shared one (if this is even possible -- I will have to look at it), but I think the first one would be much better IMO
[15:54] <dapal> I agree
[15:54] <dapal> if you can, make a diff between the customised smarty and the system one, just to understand what's different
[15:54] <dapal> maybe the system one could be patched
[15:55] <evaluate> dapal, thing is that they don't use the current smarty version that is in debian. they use 2.6.25 and debian has 2.6.26
[15:55] <dapal> ah
[15:55] <dapal> if the difference is only in the version, maybe you could try to patch CMS
[15:55] <dapal> for simplicity, you could just leave the code there though
[15:56] <evaluate> dapal, well, from what I can tell, they expect different function names from smarty. let me paste you something real quick
[16:00] <evaluate> dapal, http://paste.debian.net/104313/
[16:00] <Bachstelze> is there a standard procedure to request a sync? bug 694387 is fixed in a newer Debian version
[16:01] <Laney> !sync
[16:01] <geser> Bachstelze: requestsync from ubuntu-dev-tools
[16:03] <evaluate> dapal, also, it seems that the file that contains the different code gets loaded directly from the smarty core file, so I can't actually tell the shared smarty librari from debian to load my custom file, because it loads the default one automatically.
[16:03] <dapal> evaluate: ok ok, keep the embedded one
[16:36] <evaluate> dapal, btw, setting the permissions in the rules file doesn't seem to work...
[18:18] <evaluate> dapal, finished and uploaded the new package. Whenever you've got time :-)
[18:41] <hrw> hi guys
[18:50] <ari-tczew> hi hrw
[20:25] <kklimonda> ugs, update-maintainer takes 7 seconds to replace two lines..
[20:26] <kklimonda> heh.. it runs rmadison underneath..
[20:32] <kklimonda> bdrung: does it really make sense to make update-maintainer handle all cases under the sun? runnig rmadison twice makes it really slow, and the reason for that is apparently preventing developers from shooting themselves into feet
[20:50] <ari-tczew> kklimonda: which u-d-t do you use? from archive or daily?
[20:53] <kklimonda> ari-tczew: from archive
[21:09] <bdrung> kklimonda: 7 seconds? it runs rmadison?
[21:09] <udienz> Hello, dep5 have rev 155 can i used it now for new packages for Ubuntu?
[21:10] <kklimonda> bdrung: the version for natty does
[21:13] <ari-tczew> udienz: sure
[21:13] <bdrung> kklimonda: natty still have the pre-rewritten u-m. please use https://launchpad.net/~udt-developers/+archive/daily until the next release of udt
[21:14] <bdrung> real	0m0.048s
[21:14] <kklimonda> bdrung: will do
[21:19] <micahg> txwikinger: ping
[21:19] <txwikinger> micahg: pong
[21:20] <micahg> txwikinger: could you please look at bug 684510 re ichthux-meta
[21:20] <txwikinger> micahg: ok.. I do
[21:21] <micahg> txwikinger: thanks
[21:21] <txwikinger> micahg: Yes.. I think the package should be dropped.. it is not needed
[21:21] <txwikinger> You want me to write a comment into the bug report?
[21:22] <micahg> txwikinger: the meta package or the binary?
[21:22] <udienz> ari-tczew, when we must send a patch wih 'submittodebian'? if a patch apllied in debian packages or whan a patch has works well?
[21:23] <ari-tczew> udienz: if it's non ubuntu specific, then forward.
[21:23] <ari-tczew> udienz: btw. submittodebian is no only way
[21:24] <ari-tczew> udienz: I'll comment your application tomorrow
[21:24] <ari-tczew> udienz: or later if deadline is not tomorrow
[21:24] <txwikinger> micahg: which meta package?
[21:25] <micahg> txwikinger: ichthux
[21:25] <txwikinger> no. ichthux should stay
[21:25] <udienz> ari-tczew, i don't know it's a patch is ubuntu spesific or not. i mean a patch works if used debian experimental
[21:25] <txwikinger> I will modify it to take out the sword language packages
[21:25] <udienz> ari-tczew, aha thanks... feel free to comments when you free
[21:26] <ari-tczew> udienz: "used debian experimental" - can't gotcha
[21:26] <ari-tczew> what does it mean?
[21:26] <micahg> txwikinger: great, thanks, let me know if you need a sponsor
[21:26] <txwikinger> ok.. thanks micahg
[21:26] <udienz> ari-tczew, i mean in debian ustable a packages works well by "dpkg-buildpackage" but not in debian-experimental
[21:27] <udienz> i use gcc-4.5 and binutils-gold
[21:27] <ari-tczew> udienz: how do you testing packages to get build?
[21:28] <udienz> ari-tczew, yes, always. minimum 3 times, building via dpkg-buildpackage, pbuildr and ppa
[21:28] <udienz> *pbuilder
[21:28] <udienz> just make sure this package have bug
[21:28] <lfaraone> tumbleweed: sent off your report to the front desk, they'll check it and send it along to DAM, who will say "yes", and tell DSA to create you an account.
[21:29] <ari-tczew> udienz: if you're working of fix ftbfs with binutils-gold/gcc4.5 you don't need to sending every package to PPA. pbuilder natty is enough.
[21:29] <ari-tczew> udienz: and one time is enough.
[21:30] <ari-tczew> another case if you do: build package -> update pbuilder -> build package once again - that's fine then
[21:35] <bdrung> tumbleweed: do you want to become uploader of u-d-t once you are DD?
[22:10] <udienz> fixed bug 701476
[22:22] <tumbleweed> lfaraone: that was amazingly quick, thanks
[22:23] <tumbleweed> bdrung: sure, I imagine I'll be involved in it for a while to come
[22:24] <bdrung> tumbleweed: your merge proposals are still on my todo list.
[22:25] <tumbleweed> bdrung: good good, I still have some stuff to do for the builders. been busy with NM and other things
[22:26] <bdrung> tumbleweed: we should do at least one u-d-t release this month
[22:26] <tumbleweed> yeah, sounds good, otherwise there's way too much untested code
[22:27] <lfaraone> tumbleweed: hehe, 3 days is unheard of, you're right. but don't worry, they'll have you in the DAM queue for a week at least.
[22:28] <bdrung> tumbleweed: my NM process took nearly a year. ;)
[22:28] <lfaraone> bdrung: I was in it for 6 months.
[22:28] <bdrung> tumbleweed: btw, we should try to create a testcase for every bug that is reported.
[22:29] <lfaraone> to tumbleweed 's credit, he did apply in October.
[22:32] <tumbleweed> bdrung: yeah, that's always a good idea (sorry timed out there, dodgy DSL line)
[22:32] <DktrKranz> bdrung: I think you can even upload u-d-t to unstable this time
[22:33] <bdrung> DktrKranz: then why did we upload it to experimental?
[22:33] <DktrKranz> in case we need to fix things before squeeze, but I don't think it'll be the case anymore
[22:34] <DktrKranz> anyway, it's fine to have it in experimental for another upload too
[22:47] <ari-tczew> DktrKranz: so, people forgot that Debian isn't yet released?
[22:50] <lfaraone> ari-tczew: no… people *can* upload to unstable if they want.
[22:50] <ari-tczew> aha
[22:57] <Laney> I imagine Debian will release quite soon, so no need
[22:58] <DktrKranz> ari-tczew: basically, we didn't upload to unstable to be given the chance to upload fixes straight to unstable instead of targeting t-p-u, now that we're close to release, and there weren't lots of bugs reported, uploading to unstable could be an option