[01:11] <smoser> anyone able to verify this or suggest why ?
[01:11] <smoser> my hardy UEC builds (http://uec-images.ubuntu.com) have built for quite some time with no changes
[01:12] <smoser> this week, they started to fail on an apt-get update
[01:12] <smoser> that seems to be because of a change in https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-on-ec2/+archive/ppa
[01:12] <smoser> previously, I would log messages like:
[01:13] <smoser>   Get:17 http://ppa.launchpad.net hardy/multiverse Packages
[01:13] <smoser> now i'm getting things like:
[01:13] <smoser>   Err http://ppa.launchpad.net hardy/multiverse Packages
[01:13] <smoser>    404 Not Found
[01:13] <smoser> which is causing the 'apt-get update' to fail
[01:14] <smoser> i could very easily modify vm-builder to not add 'multiverse' and such (its certainly not needed), but I dont believe that I did anything to the ppa that would have caused this change
[01:15] <smoser> was there a change in launchpad that would have caused this ?
[01:19] <spiv> smoser: yes
[01:20]  * spiv digs up the relevant message
[01:20] <spiv> smoser: https://lists.launchpad.net/launchpad-users/msg06219.html
[03:29] <smoser> spiv, thank you
[04:30] <poolie> spiv, smoser, maybe we should blog that
[04:34] <poolie> i think i will
[07:39] <col> Hi! I'm a newbee here because the web page directed me here. I was trying to start a test project an the page says there is a code upgrade happening. What's the go?
[07:41] <lifeless> staging is down at the moment, you can use qastaging.launchpad.net instead
[07:41] <col> cheers lifeless. I'll try that.
[11:02] <apw> does anyone know if you can find out the previous status of a tasks via the launchpad api
[11:15] <wgrant> apw: The BugActivity records are exposed... you could possibly parse those.
[11:15] <wgrant> apw: Otherwise there is limited state transition data exposed on the BugTask.
[11:15] <wgrant> date_confirmed, date_in_progress, etc.
[11:15] <apw> wgrant, are you referring to the date_triaged ... those don't ever seem to get values assigned
[11:16] <apw> the activity report looks possible, but its not task specific ... sigh
[11:16] <wgrant> apw: Hm, those should be set.
[11:17] <apw> wgrant, i do have a library in the way, which might be buggy
[11:17] <apw> but some do have values, the others never do
[11:18] <apw> the entering and leaving new and closed are right, the incomplete one seems vlaid, but the others not
[11:18] <wgrant> If you find an example please give me a poke.
[11:18] <apw> wgrant, can you see the raw data to confirm or deny the underlying data ?
[11:19] <wgrant> Not directly, but the API is very close.
[11:19] <apw> 714719 was transitioned from triaged to incomplete at the end
[11:19] <apw> so it must have been in triaged, i am seeing None as the date_triaged
[11:22] <apw> wgrant, ^
[11:23] <wgrant> apw: Ah. date_triaged is unset when the task is set to a status below Triaged. :(
[11:23] <apw> is incomplete below those?
[11:23] <wgrant> Yes.
[11:24] <apw> thats a bit useless ...
[11:24] <wgrant> New, Incomplete and Confirmed come before Triaged.
[11:24] <apw> why would we unset them surley the relationship to the highest one is useful
[11:24] <wgrant> I'm not sure, sorry.
[11:25] <apw> its cirtainly completely contrary to the documentation of the attribute ... sigh
[11:33] <davmor2> morning guys is staging.launchpad still having it's db upgraded or were there issues?
[11:35] <wgrant> staging will probably be offline until some time during the weekend when the next DB restore completes.
[11:35] <wgrant> But you can use qastaging.launchpad.net instead.
[11:35] <wgrant> Older versions of launchpadlib don't have a predefined service root for it, but 'https://api.qastaging.launchpad.net/' is what you want.
[11:37] <davmor2> wgrant: I'm trying to test Software-Center-Agent staging which of course points to staging.launchpad.net for ppa hosting, access control  etc etc etc etc
[11:37] <wgrant> Ah, I see.
[11:38] <wgrant> I'm guessing that's not easy to redirect to qastaging?
[11:39] <davmor2> Nope, I'll leave it for Monday and work on something else :)
[11:57] <apw> wgrant, so when a bug is 'status tracked' how does one determine that ?
[11:58] <wgrant> apw: Status tracked?
[11:58] <wgrant> You mean a task shows as "Status tracked in Natty"?
[11:59] <apw> it seems that a bug which is nominated to natty actually has a linux (Ubuntu) and a linux (Ubuntu Natty) task .. but one is suprrressed in the web
[11:59] <apw> yes when the web shows the status tracked in natty thingy
[12:00] <wgrant> apw: That's called task conjoining, and it doesn't seem to be exposed on the API at the moment. But the linux (Ubuntu) task should have the same status and importance as linux (Ubuntu Natty).
[12:00] <apw> wgrant, yeah it has the same stauts, but the wrong name when tracking changes to it via the activity log
[12:00] <wgrant> apw: Tasks are conjoined when a task exists for the development focus of the distribution.
[12:00] <wgrant> You could possibly detect that situation.
[12:01] <wgrant> But what are you actually trying to do here?
[12:01] <apw> where can i find that infroamtion
[12:01] <apw> all i want to know is the previous status of a bug task in the incomplete state
[12:01] <apw> so i can move it back to the previous state when someone replies
[12:02] <apw> as you cannot tell incomplete with and incomplete without response appart in the web and that makes it useless
[12:03] <apw> in an ideal world incoplete with would be a real state, Replied or something
[12:04] <wgrant> Are there bugs on the issues that you are trying to work around?
[12:04] <apw> anyhow we are experimenting with moving back to their prevous state, but i am struggling to reconstruct that info
[12:04] <apw> wgrant, i haven't filed on on this issue no
[12:04] <wgrant> apw: You should probably try to get Launchpad fixed before you start trying to work around it in awkward ways :)
[12:05] <apw> wgrant, to be honest i've not had my nonminations broken bug fixed, and that is much more annoying for me as i cannot work round it, so i am disinclined to add any more bugs to the list
[12:05] <apw> and when i started this this morning, it was going to be a 2 min fix, whcih we could use for a bit
[12:06] <apw> to work out if it was what we wanted really before asking for it
[12:06] <apw> as asking for it, you lot fixing it, then us hating it, would be embaressing
[12:06] <apw> but it does seem a bunch of things stand in my way
[12:08] <apw> i guess for my purposes i can just use a hard coded Natty and see how that works
[12:11] <wgrant> apw: distribution.current_series
[12:11] <apw> wgrant, ta
[12:34] <wgrant> apw: Bug #569298 seems to cover the root issue.
[15:19] <Adri2000> bug #606612 comment number 3 is spam
[15:19] <Adri2000> if someone can remove it...
[15:33] <bigjools> Adri2000: thanks I'll assign to an admin to remove it
[17:54] <fta> Corrupted MAC on input.
[17:54] <fta> Disconnecting: Packet corrupt
[17:54] <fta> bzr: ERROR: Connection closed: Unexpected end of message. Please check connectivity and permissions, and report a bug if problems persist.
[17:54] <fta> (4th time reporting this here)
[18:00] <bigjools> fta: filing a bug would be a better way of reporting it
[18:02] <fta> bigjools, matsubara was supposed to forward this to spm, who asked for more info the 1st time i reported it
[18:03] <bigjools> fta: if that was done via a bug we'd have a permanent record of it
[18:03] <bigjools> I am about to finish for the day so I'm afraid I can't chase this up, but the bug will get attention as soon as someone is available.
[18:14] <matsubara> fta, I did forward the issue to spm through email. let me dig that
[18:15] <fta> matsubara, great (i didn't say you didn't do it, just that you were supposed to do it ;))
[18:19] <matsubara> fta, so, in the email thread I brought that issue up, mwhudson pointed to this article http://blogs.sun.com/janp/entry/ssh_messages_code_bad_packet. At the time the first occurrence happened spm thought it could be related to some edge redirects that were put in place but it's been reverted, so that's not it. not sure how I can help you more with this
[18:21] <matsubara> fta, is this blocking you somehow?
[18:22] <fta> matsubara, the 4 times it happened, it produced a ftbfs for the chromium dailies (failed to create the source tarball)
[18:23] <fta> matsubara, it happens only with launchpad/bzr, and only once in a while
[18:23] <matsubara> fta, what's a ftbfs?
[18:24] <fta> matsubara, failed to build from source
[18:24] <fta> debian jargon
[18:26] <matsubara> fta, so do you see that error in some LP builder page? or is it local to you?
[18:27] <fta> matsubara, the last 2 errors, it was while doing a huge bzr export (lp->local)
[18:28] <fta> well, maybe not that huge
[18:30] <fta> 90MB for the tip of a 300MB branch
[18:33] <matsubara> fta, I think the best to follow up with this at this point is to file a bug or a question. at least we'll have a public permanent record of the conversation
[18:55] <smokex> there wouldn't happen to be anyone here in #sourceforge would there?
[18:56] <maxb> You could join it and see?
[18:57] <smokex> banned atm
[18:57] <smokex> I had some connection probs the other night
[18:58] <smokex> and they banned me so they wouldn't have to constantly see join/leave messages
[18:58] <smokex> I was afk and came back banned to 3 channels :P
[18:58] <smokex> any way trying to get unbanned
[19:01] <maxb> You could "/msg chanserv access #sourceforge list" and try contacting some of those people