=== myriam_rs is now known as Mamarok
[00:12] <ari-tczew> Riddell: could you sponsor bug 713422 for me?
[00:12] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 713422 in paramiko (Ubuntu) "Sync paramiko 1.7.6-5.1 (main) from Debian unstable (main)" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/713422
=== SolidLiq is now known as solid_liq
[02:42] <c2tarun> hi
[02:55] <c2tarun> In case if a patch fails rejects are saved in .cc.rej file. If the patch is already applied we should remove the patch. but what to do with .rej file? should we remove them too?
[03:05] <maco> c2tarun: here's a hint:  when you're not sure if a patch will apply, use --dry-run to test it first. itll still claim to write to .rej but it wont actually do it, just give you warnings about what all failed.
[03:05] <maco> c2tarun: but yes, remove the .rej after you're sure all conflicts have been resolved
[03:08] <c2tarun> maco: 2/3 patches failed. I checked them, 2nd one is already implemented in the source files, but in case of third patch I don't know. Third patch claims on four files, 2 files missing and I think line numbers are wrong for the next two files.
[03:09] <c2tarun> maco: there is also nothing mentioned about the missing files in changelog?
[03:10] <maco> debian/changelog or upstream changelog?
[03:11] <c2tarun> debian/changelog? what is upstream changelog?
[03:11] <c2tarun> maco: I mean where is upstream changelog
[03:11] <maco> the changelog from the original source
[03:11] <jjesse> anyone have any luck installing alpha2?
[03:11] <maco> its usually named CHANGELOG and not in the debian/ dir
[03:11] <maco> but its also usually as simple as "added feature X" not as complex as a per-file listing
[03:12] <c2tarun> nothing about those files in upstream changelog also, wait let me check in prev version
[03:13] <c2tarun> maco: yup those files are there in previous version :( what to do now
[03:13] <c2tarun> ?
[03:13] <maco> either port the patch or drop it
[03:13] <maco> actually first... determine whether its even needed anymore
[03:14] <c2tarun> maco: how to do that? Actually with missing files what is the need of the patch? I think we should drop it
[03:14] <maco> is this for natty?
[03:15] <c2tarun> previous version is for lucid, I am packing it for natty.
[03:15] <maco> ok and what software is this?
[03:15] <maco> its not in maverick at all?
[03:15] <c2tarun> bibshelf.
[03:16] <maco> oh it is, its just a binary copy. i see
[03:17] <c2tarun> maco: so what should I do?
[03:17] <maco> c2tarun: where'd the patch come from?
[03:17] <c2tarun> maco: don't know, how to check that?
[03:18] <maco> you dont know where you got it/
[03:18] <maco> *?
[03:18] <maco> was it in the old version of the source package? or you grabbed it off a bug report? or what?
[03:18] <jjesse> hrm ok alpha2 of natty doesn't install in virtualbox, runs fine in the live cd but not able to install
[03:18] <c2tarun> sorry :) I downloaded from uscan.
[03:18] <jjesse> after typing in password and hitting next the installer closes
[03:18] <jjesse> same bug i had in alpha 1
[03:18] <maco> jjesse: lovely
[03:19] <jjesse> might be something in X?
[03:19] <maco> c2tarun: thats how you got the new tarball then. but the patch you're trying to apply is from....where?
[03:19] <maco> jjesse: alpha 2 has a new X stack
[03:19] <c2tarun> I downloaded its source code, simply by 'apt-get source bibshelf'
[03:19] <maco> c2tarun: what version are you running right now?
[03:19] <maco> of kubuntu
[03:19] <c2tarun> kubuntu10.10
[03:20] <maco> ok so you pulled down the old source package
[03:20] <c2tarun> maco: yup
[03:20] <maco> uscan grabbed a new upstream source tarball
[03:20] <c2tarun> maco: yup
[03:20] <maco> now you've done.... what? copied debian/ from the old source package to the unpacked new source tree?
[03:20] <c2tarun> yup :) exactly.
[03:22] <c2tarun> maco: ping
[03:22] <maco> im trying it right now
[03:22] <c2tarun> maco: ok :)
[03:26] <maco> c2tarun: ok so 01 applies. 02... did you check to see if that change is already in the source?
[03:26] <c2tarun> 02 and 03 both failed.
[03:27] <c2tarun> maco: 02 is already implemented in source code, but the problem is with 03
[03:27] <maco> ok so do you know how to tell it not to use 02 anymore?
[03:28] <c2tarun> maco: its in the source + it failed, so its of no use. (I guess)
[03:28] <maco> yeah but...do you know how to tell *quilt* that?
[03:29] <c2tarun> by removing the name from series file.
[03:29] <nigelb> heh,  I'm having a flashback of maco teaching me quilt :P
[03:29] <maco> c2tarun: right
[03:29] <maco> nigelb: hiya :)
[03:30] <c2tarun> maco: so what to do with 03*?
[03:30] <maco> wow. upstream changelog is so... useful...
[03:30] <maco> hahaha and they spelled debian wrong
[03:31] <c2tarun> hehehe :)
[03:32] <maco> wow ok so those changes seem...not linux related
[03:32] <maco> like.... if aix...
[03:32] <maco> if solaris...
[03:32] <maco> yeah id drop that one too
[03:33] <c2tarun> maco: so I am droping 02 and 03 both. for 02 i'll write that applied upstream. What should I write 03?
[03:33] <c2tarun> maco: what should I write for 03?
[03:33] <maco> c2tarun: doesnt apply
[03:33] <c2tarun> maco: ok.
[03:33] <maco> broken patches are fair game
[03:37] <c2tarun> maco: can you please check my changelog entries? http://paste.ubuntu.com/562884/
[03:38] <maco> c2tarun: that should do. are you communicating with the debian maintainer at all?
[03:39] <c2tarun> maco: nope, I never thought its necessary? should I communicate?
[03:40] <maco> yes
[03:40] <c2tarun> maco: I mean only for this package i never thought its necessary, I am also working on schedio and I communicated with the upstream maintainer.
[03:40] <maco> ah nevermind. i see it's not in debian
[03:40] <maco> perhaps you should see about submitting it to debian as well
[03:41] <c2tarun> maco: but I don't know how to submit it to debian, all i know is that i'll upload the file in the bug on LP
[03:41] <maco> there are many ubuntu developers who can sponsor uploads to debian
[03:42] <maco> http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/welcome
[03:43] <maco> generally, the way things go is packages are uploaded to debian and then at the start of each ubuntu dev cycle they are automatically sync'd to the ubuntu archive. given debian's large & highly-technical userbase, we benefit from their additional testing while they quite like it when they get the software too instead of us hoarding it
[03:46] <c2tarun> maco: hmm... ok i'll surely look for sponsorship in debian :) thanks a lot :)
[03:46] <maco> i mean, at this point in the cycle you'd have to either quickly request a sync or upload to both anyway, but still...should get it into debian too!
[03:50] <nigelb> It might be a good idea to ask for sponsorship in #debian-ubuntu on oftc
[03:50] <nigelb> far less people there, but they'd all appreciate it
[03:51] <nigelb> and lots of Ubuntu people there
[03:56] <c2tarun> nigelb: I'll surely do that, right now i placed my file for reviewing on bug 713023 if this bug is declared fixed then I'll apply :)
[03:56] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 713023 in bibshelf (Ubuntu) "Newer Version Available" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/713023
[04:18] <c2tarun> most of the time when i look for needs-packaging or upgrade bugs they are in ubuntu. Is ubuntu and kubuntu have same repository?
[04:19] <maco> yes
[04:19] <maco> the only difference is the default set of packages installed
[04:22] <c2tarun> maco: so contributing to ubuntu means contributing to kubuntu?
[04:26] <nigelb> Yes.
[04:30] <c2tarun> what is difference b/w pull-lp-source and apt-get source?
[04:31] <maco> c2tarun: if anyone's made changes in bzr the former will get it while the latter just grabs the source package
[04:34] <c2tarun> maco: I was working on this list http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/uehs/no_updated.html   is it necessary to file a upgradation bug everytime I pick one?
[04:34] <maco> uhh i dont know
[04:34] <maco> i can upload to the archive, so i just would....
[04:34] <maco> i guess since you need to request sponsorship for it, yes
[04:35] <c2tarun> maco: can you please look at bug 713023 I posted the file as an attachement to the bug? do i still have to look for the sponsorship?
[04:35] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 713023 in bibshelf (Ubuntu) "Newer Version Available" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/713023
[04:36] <maco> well you cant upload to the archive yourself, so of course you need sponsorship
[04:36] <maco> youve tested that your new package builds in pbuilder right?
[04:36] <c2tarun> maco: hmm.... so how to apply for it?
[04:36] <maco> and did you test that it installs and runs on 11.04?
[04:36] <maco> you subscribe the ubuntu-sponsors team to the bug to get them to look at it
[04:37] <maco> i dont have an 11.04 system to test on, so i wouldnt feel comfortable sponsoring it without first doing that
[04:37] <c2tarun> how can i test it on 11.04 I have natty pbuilder with me.
[04:38] <c2tarun> maco: ^
[04:38] <maco> by setting up a natty vm
[04:38] <c2tarun> maco: Can't we build the .deb file in natty environment and check in on maverick only?
[04:39] <maco> i guess, if it runs on maverick...
[04:39] <maco> there's no guarantee that a deb built for natty will either install or run on maverick though
[04:40] <c2tarun> maco: ok where can i guess iso of natty?
[04:40] <maco> cdrelease.ubuntu.com
[04:40] <maco> erm
[04:40] <maco> cdimage.ubuntu.com
[04:40] <maco> or releases.ubuntu.com
[04:40] <maco> alpha 2 just came out
[04:40] <c2tarun> maco: where can i get the latest one, that alpha2?
[04:41] <maco> both should have it i think
[04:44] <c2tarun> maco: ok got it, thanks :)
[10:15] <apachelogger> Quintasan: do we haz a bangarang maverick ppa build stuff thing?
[10:16] <Quintasan> apachelogger: you want it for maverickz too?
[10:16] <apachelogger> well
[10:16] <apachelogger> no way in hell am I going to do a talk running broken natty and broken natty x11 and broken stuff
=== myriam__rs is now known as Mamarok
[10:16]  * apachelogger has quite the hangover
[10:17] <Quintasan> you broke the X yourself, noone told u to upgrade broken stack :P
[10:18] <Quintasan> apachelogger: can i go to our backports ppa?
[10:19] <Quintasan> it*
[10:19] <apachelogger> Quintasan: well, whereever 4.6 is
[10:19] <apachelogger> as it will be the suck with 4.5 anyway
[10:23] <Quintasan> apachelogger: stuff builds, uploading to backports PPA
[10:26] <Quintasan> apachelogger: cookies for me
[10:27] <apachelogger> kubotu: order cookies for Quintasan
[10:27]  * kubotu slides a whole bunch of world's finest cookies down the bar to Quintasan.
[10:40] <Quintasan> apachelogger: built in ppa
[10:40] <Quintasan> but not published yet :S
[11:55] <Quintasan_> apachelogger: jpw
[11:55] <Quintasan_> grr
[11:55] <Quintasan_> bangarang working?
=== Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan
[12:08] <apachelogger> Quintasan: slow speed
[12:09] <Quintasan> apachelogger: hmmmm
[12:09] <Quintasan> what makes it work slow
[12:09] <apachelogger> no
[12:10] <apachelogger> I mean the networx is the slow
[12:10] <Quintasan> ooh
[12:10] <apachelogger> the intarwebs connection and stuff
[12:10] <apachelogger> you know, here in egypt intarwebs is all screwed thesedays
[12:12] <ari-tczew> does somebody know how can I test aspell?
[12:14] <apachelogger> by mispelink something
[12:15] <ari-tczew> apachelogger: I have to test deutsch umlaut \, probably I have to install german language
[12:16] <apachelogger> yus
[12:29] <apachelogger> Quintasan: thanks for the bangarang
[12:29] <apachelogger> it is the worky worky
[12:29] <Quintasan> nps
=== apachelogger is now known as fosdemlogger
[14:58] <c2tarun> hi
=== freeflyi1g is now known as freeflying
[16:56] <ryanakca> Quintasan: Any changes to bangarang that I should apply in Debian?
[17:11] <shadeslayer> Quintasan: ^^
[17:26] <ScottK> Tm_T: Dunno if you saw, but I got the powerpc live image added to the alpha 2 release based on your testing.
[17:28] <Tm_T> ScottK: nice, and sorry a bit laggy testing
[17:28] <ScottK> Tm_T: No problem.  It worked out fine.
[17:47] <ScottK> If anyone's around that has kubuntu.org access, please PM me.
[18:04] <shadeslayer> ScottK: one sec ... i'll need to check logs
[18:04] <shadeslayer> nope ... Riddell sent me instructions via PM ... and i don't have them anymore :S
[18:04] <ScottK> shadeslayer: Someone else is already sending it to me.
[18:04] <shadeslayer> ah kool
[18:04] <ScottK> Thanks for looking.
[18:05] <shadeslayer> sure no problem :)
[18:23] <ari-tczew> I've got a problem on kubuntu natty. I removed some widget from panel accidentally. Now panel can't show me opened windows. what happened?
[18:24] <shadeslayer> ari-tczew: you might have removed the taskbar widget
[18:25] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: hmm, "task manager" ?
[18:26] <shadeslayer> thats the one
[18:27] <ari-tczew> shadeslayer: thanks! it works :)
[18:27] <shadeslayer> :)
[18:27] <tazz> shadeslayer, what do you need done, in neon ?
[18:27] <shadeslayer> tazz: ah ... hmm ... ever packaged anything before?
[18:27] <tazz> shadeslayer, i just packaged bc
[18:28] <tazz> shadeslayer, erm... repackaged.
[18:28] <shadeslayer> righto
[18:28] <Quintasan> ryanakca: I did no changes when uploading and apparently it works
[18:30] <shadeslayer> Quintasan: dude .. i need a upload of kdegames
[18:31] <Quintasan> and I need faster interwebz
[18:31] <shadeslayer> that's a primal need that is never going to be satisfied
[18:35] <shadeslayer> sheytan_: dude!
[18:35] <shadeslayer> sheytan_: i need Project Neon presentation templates
[18:37] <CIA-40> [messages] efremov * 1219026 * trunk/l10n-kde4/ru/messages/extragear-sysadmin/desktop_extragear-sysadmin_libqapt.po SVN_SILENT Add extragear-sysadmin/desktop_extragear-sysadmin_libqapt.po
[19:53] <ari-tczew> do we have to keep this change in d/control? kdelibs5-dev (>= 4:4.5.2a-0ubuntu2)
[19:55] <ari-tczew> libkutils4 transition
[20:08] <ScottK> ari-tczew: Yes.  Until after Natty releases.
=== Mamarok_ is now known as Mamarok
=== Mamarok_ is now known as Mamarok
=== tazz_ is now known as tazz
=== Mamarok_ is now known as Mamarok