=== Amaranth__ is now known as Amaranth === Amaranth_ is now known as Amaranth [03:25] micahg: do you will upload barry's patch? === Amaranth_ is now known as Amaranth === nhandler is now known as Guest18627 === nhandler_ is now known as nhandler [07:10] Hello, can someone help me with this FTBFS: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/62644475/buildlog_ubuntu-natty-powerpc.verilator_3.810-1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz [07:10] I am getting the same FTBFS on Debian sparc [07:11] AnAnt: just looks like it's trying to remove a file that's not there [07:11] micahg: ?! [07:12] micahg: what file ? [07:12] it's trying to remove a .exe file for some reason [07:13] micahg: that happens on all archs, but does not cause the FTBFS [07:13] https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=verilator;ver=3.810-1;arch=powerpc;stamp=1295690749 [07:14] personally I was suspecting something like toolchain difference [07:15] oh sorry, didn't see the next break [07:16] %Error: ../test_v/top.v:8: syntax error, unexpected $undefined [07:16] yup [07:20] it looks like the build hung [07:20] yes, this build error does hang the build if I was on an interactive shell [07:21] this "%Error: ../test_v/top.v:8: syntax error, unexpected $undefined" does not happen on other archs [07:21] upstream doesn't have a clue either [07:22] when I compared build logs on Debian, I noticed that successful builds used gcc 4.4.5, while sparc (the failing build) used gcc 4.4.4 [07:22] AnAnt: well, we're on gcc 4.5.2 I think in natty [07:23] yup [07:23] and its building well with other archs on natty [07:25] yeah, but each arch has its quirks, you can try asking doko [07:27] hmmm, different binutils revision [07:27] ah [07:28] but I would suspect that this would be the reason === yofel_ is now known as yofel [12:53] cdbs: new nickname ? [12:53] AnAnt: yep, since 2 months I guess [14:08] perl -pi -e 's/mantainance/maintenance/' jetring-0.*/debian/control # typos in first line of description are annoying, anybody want to fix that? :) [14:17] nonix4: please file a bug against the debian package :) === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan [14:42] debfx: for minor typo fix, maintonly@bugs.debian.org would be right place? [14:48] nonix4: I would just send it to submit@b.d.o with severity minor but maintonly seems appropriate as well [16:17] Hi, for the changelog line - zeitgeist-sharp (0.1.1.0~m4n1sh1~natty) natty; urgency=low [16:17] and tarball name [16:17] zeitgeist-sharp_0.1.1.0.orig.tar.gz [16:17] I am getting this error [16:17] dpkg-source: error: can't build with source format '3.0 (quilt)': no orig.tar file found [16:17] what is wrong in it? [16:17] almaisan-away: ping [16:18] m4n1sh, missing debian revision [16:18] m4n1sh: filename is wrong [16:18] m4n1sh, 0.1.1.0-1 is the base, not 0.1.1.0 [16:19] directhex: debian revision is needed? I thought not [16:19] m4n1sh, you need a - in there, the bit before the - is the orig version [16:19] directhex: this is a new package [16:19] zeitgeist-sharp (0.1.1.0-1~m4n1sh1~natty) natty; urgency=low [16:19] this is fine? [16:19] no [16:19] m4n1sh, yes. [16:19] m4n1sh: 0.1.1.0-0ubuntu1 [16:19] directhex: ? [16:19] ari-tczew: +1 [16:20] it's not in Debian, so a fake Debian revision shouldn't be added [16:20] micahg, well, it's in NEW [16:20] directhex: oh, ok, well in that case :), if it's a backport of that version it's fine [16:21] thanks everyone [16:21] folks, conclusion: REVU or Debian? [16:21] ari-tczew: for? [16:22] debian. always. [16:22] micahg: where m4n1sh is working for? new package for REVU or Debian? [16:22] ari-tczew, for his ppa. the packackage is already in debian NEW [16:22] m4n1sh: aha, add natty1 rather for PPA [16:22] then you can add more revisions natty2, natty3 etc [16:23] ari-tczew: I was putting it in debian because dnielsen (banshee contributer) asked for natty package [16:23] ari-tczew: means 0.1.1.0-0ubuntu1~natty1 [16:23] m4n1sh: for PPA looks fine [16:23] m4n1sh: you can use -1 if it's a straight backport of the Debian package [16:24] micahg: means 0.1.1.0-1ubuntu1~natty1 instead 0.1.1.0-0ubuntu1~natty1 [16:24] i wouldn't until it clears NEW, personally [16:24] m4n1sh: what's the version in debian NEW? [16:24] show us [16:24] ari-tczew: directhex knows it better [16:25] m4n1sh: hmm, ok, well, go with 0.1.1.0-0ubuntu1~natty1~ppa1 that way there's no chance of conflicting with an official backport [16:25] thanks [16:25] +1 ^^ [16:25] directhex: you're right again :) [16:25] yeah, i guess micahg has good advice there [16:26] it is possible for -1 to get rejected, in which case there's confusion over what the "real" -1 is [16:26] so 0ubuntu1 which is identical to -1 in new is a reasonable assumption. so go with micahg's suggestion [16:26] * ari-tczew has lunch [17:42] almaisan-away: we need your help in bug 675622. see comment 5 [17:42] Launchpad bug 675622 in glew (Ubuntu) "Merge glew 1.5.7-1 (main) from Debian experimental (main)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/675622 [17:44] nonix4: I can give +1 for backport w3m to maverick. [17:44] nonix4: lucid needs changes in d/control [17:46] ari-tczew: 'k. Regarding my patch, Tatsuya just confirmed that it looks correct. [17:47] nonix4: there were opinions that patch works as new feature, no bugfix. what do you think? [17:51] From viewpoint of w3m package, it indeed seems like a new feature, but for launchpad-foundations/canonical-identity-provider it is a bugfix imho. [17:51] nonix4: I would suggest -backports + an FAQ then [17:52] (then again the rest of 0.5.2-2.1...0.5.2-10 difference is even more features) [17:53] right, but in -backports, that's fine :) [17:56] tbh -backports is quite unknown to majority of normal users, so that FAQ would need careful choice of words. I'd rather prefer that in a default server installation, ubuntu-bug "just works" once normal upgrades have been installed. [17:57] +1 ^^ [17:57] siretart: ping [17:58] nonix4: you could e-mail the tech board and ask for an exception [18:00] waking up all developers for one button sounds like hardcore [18:00] ari-tczew: tech board isn't that many people [18:02] 6 active members? [18:02] nonix4: right, you can send a request to the ML [18:02] micahg: but it shows our bureaucracy [18:02] we are not in the department [18:03] ari-tczew: we have procedures to keep stability in the Stable Releases [18:03] micahg: "procedures" [18:04] repeating bureaucracy [18:04] ari-tczew: we have more relaxed rules than Debian [18:06] well, to be able to handle high volume of patches, some form of bureaucracy/hierarchy seems to be more or less necessary, however itchy it feels :-/ [18:06] also, this is an exception [18:09] micahg: please consider whether you are too inflexible, bureaucratic, official [18:09] ari-tczew: hi [18:09] siretart: hello. have you got time to have a look for 2 packages? [18:09] ari-tczew: unclear, which ones? [18:09] ari-tczew: it falls outside the guidelines of a stable release update, so the options are -backports or TB exception, I didn't create the rules [18:10] TB? [18:10] tech board [18:11] siretart: want to sync libgcrypt11 and libgpg-error from experimental. only remaining changes are dirs - files *.install, *links [18:12] siretart: one request is filed, bug 702765 [18:12] Launchpad bug 702765 in libgcrypt11 (Ubuntu) "Please sync libgcrypt11 1.4.6-4 (main) from Debian experimental (main)" [Wishlist,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/702765 [18:12] siretart: I'd like to get your feedback whether these changes are necessary or not. [18:13] micahg: but you are keeping bureaucratic which is not good. [18:15] ari-tczew: It's *our* responsibility as uploaders to follow the guidelines that are in place, if you think something should be changed, you should propose it (not sure about the correct forum probably -devel ML) [18:16] * ari-tczew must go out. [18:18] ari-tczew: btw I could do some proofreading of your QuickResponse writing some day, think I spotted some minor grammar issues there. [18:43] ari-tczew: okay, please hilight me with the other request as well, I'll do it when I find some more time [19:51] nonix4: OK, I'm open for feedbacks. [19:55] Does anyone know how I can bump bug #703718 ? [19:55] Launchpad bug 703718 in fluxconf (Ubuntu) "Requesting removal of source package `fluxconf' from Ubuntu" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/703718 [19:56] paultag: you just have to wait for the archive admins to process [19:56] micahg: great. thanks! [20:09] siretart: what do you think, is might be able for Ubuntu? http://paste.ubuntu.com/557346/ [20:10] ari-tczew: what's the intention behind this change? [20:10] siretart: the diff which I sent above is a Debian change. [20:11] ari-tczew: AFAIUI, debian is moving the libs from /usr to /, which we in ubuntu do for quite some time now [20:11] ari-tczew: ah, I see. Well, compare the file installation lists of the binary packages. what file locations did change? [20:11] if none, then everything is great :-) [20:12] siretart: our delta: http://paste.ubuntu.com/557348/ [20:14] ari-tczew: why do we still need the delta? [20:15] siretart: we don't need delta. :-) [20:16] siretart: I'm just making sure that we can drop delta. I noticed that you've some uploads related to /lib dir. [20:16] okay. - let me try it the other way: try building the unmodified source from debian in ubuntu. then compare the output of 'dpkg-deb -c $deb' from the new package with the existing packages [20:17] if all files end up in the same locations, then let's get rid of our local changes [20:17] if there are differences, then we need to review the changes [20:17] we need to look at the results here, I think [20:17] siretart: let me build it - I'm on it! [20:18] ari-tczew: that change doesn't make sense, a -dev package shouldn't be putting anything in /lib [20:18] FYI, there was a whole discussion on debian-devel about this [20:18] micahg: what do you think, the package from experimental is better? [20:19] micahg: there is, but we really had enough trouble with the divergence here. I'd prefer if we could finally get these two packages in sync again [20:19] siretart: indeed [20:20] I was just noting that the diff seems unnecessary for practical reasons [20:30] micahg: +1 ^^ [21:12] siretart: odd error: my natty can't find binary libgpg-error0-udeb [21:19] uh? [21:20] siretart: ok I know what is wrong. Section: debian-installer [21:21] me sends thanks to yofel [21:33] siretart: OK, compared. natty: http://paste.ubuntu.com/557392/ experimental: http://paste.ubuntu.com/557394/ [21:33] micahg: maybe you're interested ^^ [21:35] yeah, I think that's better [21:36] but you should just verify with someone who uses the package, just because it fits the standards better, doesn't mean it won't break stuff :) [21:37] micahg: but this is library, hard to find who uses it [21:37] ari-tczew: well, I meant, who "maintains" something that uses it, that or test build something that depends on the -dev package with it [21:38] micahg: hmm, then I have to use PPA [21:38] micahg: build test is enough? [21:40] ari-tczew: idk, I'm not a core-dev :), seems like StevenK did most of that work originally, maybe he has an opinion on the issue [21:41] ari-tczew: it's a bit hard to compare, but it looks great to me so far! [22:11] micahg: you forgot to subscribe ubuntu-archive to bug #701536 [22:11] Launchpad bug 701536 in python-mpd (Ubuntu) "Please sync python-mpd 0.3.0-1 (universe) from Debian experimental (main)" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/701536 [22:13] bdrung: sorry, I thought I got better at that :-/ [22:13] bdrung: in future you should use in d/changelog "Sync on Debian" instead "Merge from Debian experimental, no remaining change." [22:13] if no remaining changes, it can't be merge :) [22:14] ari-tczew: i can do with my package what i want :P [22:14] bdrung: :> [22:14] ari-tczew: merge from debian, drop all changes, and add new ones. [22:15] bdrung: I took this method from tumbleweed [22:15] ari-tczew: i kept ubuntu's changelog entry, otherwise it would be a sync. [22:15] yay, my build recipe for ffmpeg/trunk packages finally works! https://code.launchpad.net/~motumedia/+recipe/ffmpeg-daily [22:16] congratz siretart :) [22:16] so I can finally start testing upgrades by throwing natty sourcepackages at that ppa [22:17] but that's for later this week. good night! [22:17] siretart: do you know wrap-and-sort? [22:18] bdrung: no, what's that? [22:18] siretart: it sorts and wraps build-depends and co. [22:18] siretart: wrap-and-sort; $vcs diff [22:19] * bdrung should blog about it. [22:19] sounds interesting, I'm looking forward to that blogpost [22:20] siretart: you forgot to add an epoch to the daily build! [22:21] siretart: recommendation: 0.7~~{revno}+{time} -> 4:0.7~daily~{revno}+{time} [23:36] micahg, siretart: gnupg2 built fine on my PPA with libgcrypt11 and libgpg-error from experimental. [23:39] ari-tczew: great