[00:33] <psusi> can someone point me to an example of how to define an enum in dbus xml?
[00:44] <broder> psusi: dbus doesn't support enums directly. telepathy defines its own extensions to the xml format and imports them into a separate namespace
[00:44] <broder> but the actual types are just ints of one sort or another
[00:45] <psusi> broder, yea, I guess I'll just use a byte then
[00:54] <psusi> broder, I'm confused... dbus emits a glib sleeping signal, but I don't see any handler registered for the signal, or where it emits the corresponding dbus signal.. there isn't a way to have the dbus signal emitted automatically in response to emitting the glib signal is there?  you have to register a signal handler that re-emits it over dbus, don't you?
[00:55] <broder> psusi: not sure. i've done very little with glib and dbus, and nothing on the object-exporting side
[07:50] <Rhonda> XTaran: Kannst du dich noch erinnern, wer dieser Bizarre Cathedral Typ auf identi.ca war?
[07:50] <Rhonda> erm, sorry, wrong window  (off by one, alt-d instead of alt-e for window 23 instead of 13 ;))
[07:58]  * iulian yawns.
[08:07] <dholbach> good morning
[08:18] <iulian> G'morning dholbach.
[08:18] <dholbach> hey iulian
[08:43] <c2tarun> how can I know the order in which patches will be applied in cdbs format?
[08:44] <dholbach> c2tarun, alphabetically afaik
[09:11] <c2tarun> why I am getting this error while submitting bug? http://pastebin.com/LhRsYjHQ
[09:11] <mok0> persia: hope you are ok
[09:29] <geser> c2tarun: better ask the Debian guys for help (they are on the OFTC network, but I don't know which channel is best for your problem)
[11:01] <Laney> maco: have you gotten on the DMB list yet?
[13:27] <maco> Laney: no
[14:08] <geser> Laney, maco: only persia has admin access to the DMB list now, so you have to wait on him :(
[14:08] <Laney> :(
[14:08] <Laney> just remember to forward us anything in the meantime i guess
[14:09] <geser> will do
[14:09] <geser> luckily it's a low-volume list
[14:39] <dholbach> geser, Laney: talk to the guys in #canonical-sysadmin and get people added
[14:39] <dholbach> also get a backup list admin
[14:39] <dholbach> there's no reason to wait for 2+ weeks
[17:41] <c2tarun> I was trying to pack new version of koffice and I got this error http://paste.ubuntu.com/578922/  it came out that lines responsible for installing kformula are commented in CMakeLists.txt I asked about this on #koffice and a dev said that kformula is broken and so the lines are commented, he said to pack it I have to somehow update the configuration of .deb can anyone please help me with this.
[17:47] <kklimonda> c2tarun: is it broken in the current natty package too?
[17:50] <c2tarun> kklimonda: not sure, but if package is broken in upstream then what is the point of including it?
[17:51] <ari-tczew> bdrung: around?
[17:51] <kklimonda> c2tarun: there is kformula.install file that has a list of all files for kformula package - you could remove it, along with the d/control entry, but you should check if the current natty package works or not.
[17:52] <c2tarun> kklimonda: but koffice package will not install the current natty package, it will install the broken one included within the koffice-2.3.3 source code.
[17:52] <kklimonda> c2tarun: that doesn't make much sense - can you rephrase it? :)
[17:54] <c2tarun> kklimonda: you asked me to check the current natty package right but koffice will not check our archive for current natty package, it will install the setup inside the orig tarball which is broken (am I making sense this time :( )
[17:55] <kklimonda> c2tarun: I was asking you you check if the current kformula that is available in the natty (version 1:2.3.1-0ubuntu3) works or not.
[17:55] <geser> c2tarun: does kformula from koffice 2.3.1 work? (the current koffice version in natty)
[17:56] <c2tarun> geser: well that package built successfully and I copied my debian folder from there only, that means it is working. (am I wrong?)
[17:57] <geser> that only means that it builds, the program can still crash if you try to run/use it
[17:57]  * c2tarun looking into koffice bugs
[17:59] <c2tarun> geser kklimonda: there is no bug about kformula not working in koffice-2.3.1
[18:01] <geser> c2tarun: is koffice 2.3.3 the current "stable" version? the homepage still lists 2.3.1 as last version
[18:01] <geser> as we are in FeatureFreeze, do you have hope to get a FeatureFreeze exception for the new version? (we want to release in April)
[18:02] <c2tarun> geser: well they confirmed the release of 2.3.3 on #koffice and Riddell suggested me to pack it for kubuntu. So I hope to get a FF exception.
[18:03] <geser> then it seems to be ok
[18:03] <kklimonda> c2tarun: does he know about kformula not working in 2.3.3?
[18:04] <c2tarun> kklimonda: I dont think so, he is busy in kde.conf.in
[18:04] <kklimonda> c2tarun: I'd really suggest asking him, or some other Kubuntu folks (ScottK?) about it.
[18:05] <kklimonda> c2tarun: may be that kformula doesn't really work in our current package, and it could be dropped - but someone from Kubuntu should really comment on that, especially given that we are after Feature Freeze.
[18:06] <c2tarun> kklimonda: well yofel is helping me out in #kubuntu-devel and he agrees that we should remove the file, do you still think I should ping ScottK
[18:06] <ScottK> You already did.
[18:06] <ScottK> I'd work with yofel.
[18:07] <c2tarun> ScottK: thanks for replying :) *waiting for your comments*
[18:07] <ScottK> Don't.  You have them.  Work with Yofel.
[18:07] <c2tarun> ScottK: sure thanks :)
[19:31] <ari-tczew> oes dh_auto_clean handle automatic removal of all stuff listed after $(RM)?
[19:31] <ari-tczew> does*
[19:36] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: dh_auto_clean calls make clean or python setup.py clean, etc. depending on the detected build system. I don't know what $(RM) you are talking about
[19:57] <steinex> #ubuntu-motu
[19:57] <steinex> 20:35:18 -!- bcurtiswx [~bcurtiswx@wx.mesa.gmu.edu] has quit [Changing host]
[19:57] <steinex> 20:35:18 -!- bcurtiswx [~bcurtiswx@ubuntu/member/bcurtiswx] has joined #ubuntu-motu
[19:57] <steinex> oops
[19:57] <steinex> sorry :)
[19:58] <bcurtiswx> lol, np
[20:22] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: I'm trying to make d/rules smaller by overriding. This is a based file: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/debian/sid/gnome-pilot/sid/view/head:/debian/rules
[20:23] <ari-tczew> line 24
[20:29] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: dh_auto_clean replaces line 23. for the manually deleted files, either use debian/clean (read by dh_clean) or override dh_clean
[20:30] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: how can I override lines 24-28?
[20:30] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: you add an override that has the contents of lines 24-28
[20:33] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: look on this http://paste.ubuntu.com/578986/
[20:34] <ari-tczew> you can judge all file :P
[20:34] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: drop lines 12 and 13. and the \ on lines 16 and 17
[20:35] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: line 17 to drop?
[20:36] <tumbleweed> I don't understand that question, but let me explain
[20:36] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: you wrote and the \ on lines 16 and 17
[20:36] <tumbleweed> line 12: dh_clean $(RM) build-stamp  That means dh_clean rm build-stamp
[20:36] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: ok nevermind, gotcha
[20:36] <tumbleweed> which means it'll try and delete rm and build-stamp
[20:36] <tumbleweed> unecessary
[20:37] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: I deleted line 12 then lines 16 and 17 was 15 and 16, a little misunderstanding
[20:37] <tumbleweed> aah
[20:37] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: what about handling multiple CFLAGS?
[20:38] <ari-tczew> as a whole is it necessary?
[20:38] <tumbleweed> "multiple CFLAGS"?
[20:40] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: from based file, lines 5-9 and line 14
[20:41] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: do you know about dpkg-buildflags? It can do that
[20:42] <ari-tczew> omg
[21:32] <ari-tczew> siretart: could you look at last comment on bug 449729 ?
[22:55] <ari-tczew> broder: ping
[22:56] <broder> ari-tczew: what's up?
[22:56] <ari-tczew> broder: do you force contributor to forward changes to Debian as a sponsor?
[22:57] <broder> force? no. encourage when i think it's appropriate
[22:57] <broder> would you like to complain about a specific action i took instead of asking vague, general questions?
[22:57] <ari-tczew> broder: bug 719181
[22:57] <broder> that was forwarded
[22:57] <ari-tczew> broder: where?
[22:58] <broder> sorry - i guess there was already a bug open. debian bug #555565
[22:58] <broder> hmm, no, that's not it
[22:59] <broder> give me a moment - geofft is a friend of mine and i discussed this privately with him...somewhere
[23:01] <broder> ari-tczew: he said that lprng upstream took a different patch, and the debian maintainer was trying to get them to roll a release, which he would upload
[23:02] <broder> i didn't see any point in uploading a different patch that does the same thing, and i figured that whoever next handles the merge should be able to figure out what happened
[23:03] <broder> i know that you watch merges more closely than most of us, so if you want to ping me when that merge comes up, i'm happy to handle it
[23:07] <ari-tczew> broder: if you have time you can try to testbuild debian revision whether upstream has fixed ftbfs.
[23:08] <ari-tczew> broder: in future, it doesn't hurt if you or your friend could give information how did you try to fix ftbfs on BTS. there is reported bug: debian bug 555565
[23:08] <ari-tczew> it prevents from unnecessary questions.
[23:23] <bdrung> ari-tczew: now, but only short
[23:24] <ari-tczew> bdrung: I'd ask you for help in shortening d/rules, but if you are out of time, it's fine.
[23:25] <bdrung> ari-tczew: you could ask me tomorrow. i have to go to bed asap.
[23:25] <ari-tczew> bdrung: ok. g'night.
[23:59] <whiskeykisses> hello