| === chuck_ is now known as zul | ||
| c2tarun | there is bug 732457 , I guess darksnow package follows cdbs patching system in which patches are applied alphabetically. There exists a patch which is editing file Makefile.in should I edit that patch or create a new patch? If I create a new patch what patch name should I use? Patch name for older patch is fixing_Makefile.in.patch | 03:40 |
|---|---|---|
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 732457 in darksnow (Ubuntu) "Package darksnow_0.6.1-3 failed to build from source with "ld --as-needed" option" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/732457 | 03:40 |
| Bachstelze | c2tarun: assuming cdbs sorts numbers before letters, ytou could name it 00fix_Makefile_for_gold | 03:43 |
| c2tarun | Bachstelze, that will be a problem because the line i have to edit is added by patch fixing_Makefile.in.patch | 03:44 |
| Bachstelze | I'm surprised that patches are not numbered in the first place, though, it seems like tha natural thing to do when they are applied in alphabetical order | 03:44 |
| Bachstelze | c2tarun: then make it sort after it ;) | 03:45 |
| Bachstelze | like fixing_Makefile_blahblah | 03:45 |
| c2tarun | Bachstelze, should I rename the patch fixing_Makefile.in.patch to 02_fixing_Makefile.in.patch and my new patch to 03_fix_ftbfs_binutils-gold.patch? there is also a patch with number 00 | 03:45 |
| Bachstelze | shouldn't be necessary, just find out when exactly your patch should be applied, and name it accordingly | 03:47 |
| c2tarun | Bachstelze, ok then :) I'll name my patch as z_fix_ftbfs_binutils-gold.patch | 03:47 |
| Bachstelze | if the curreznt patch is in Debian, only the DEbian maintainer should touch it IMO | 03:47 |
| c2tarun | Bachstelze, well renaming the patch and sending it to debian can be a solution I guess? | 03:48 |
| Bachstelze | could be, but it's a very minor issue, it it is one at all | 03:49 |
| Bachstelze | if it is* | 03:49 |
| c2tarun | hmm.... it could be an issue if someday number of patches increase to 6 or 7? | 03:50 |
| Bachstelze | so don't bother with it, there are more important things to do :) | 03:50 |
| c2tarun | ok :) | 03:50 |
| c2tarun | I'll name my patch as z_fix_ftbfs_binutils-gold.patch | 03:50 |
| Bachstelze | sounds good | 03:50 |
| c2tarun | Bachstelze, can you please look at this error? | 03:56 |
| c2tarun | http://paste.kde.org/8012/ | 03:56 |
| * Bachstelze looks | 03:57 | |
| Bachstelze | I don't have a lot of experience with cdbs, but by the looks of it, it tries to reverse-apply your patch and fails | 04:00 |
| Bachstelze | so make sure your patch is correct, and try to apply/unapply it manually to see what happens | 04:01 |
| c2tarun | how to apply a cdbs patch? | 04:02 |
| c2tarun | Bachstelze, ^ | 04:02 |
| Bachstelze | can't you apply them with patch ? | 04:03 |
| Bachstelze | c2tarun: I must go to bed, it's 5 am here :p good luck with your package | 04:11 |
| c2tarun | Bachstelze, thanks :) good night | 04:11 |
| fabrice_sp | slangasek, Hi! I saw you uploaded a multiarched version of libsm, and I now have a compilation issue because vtk has reference to usr/lib/libSM.so in cmake files. I already uploaded a non changes upload of vtk 4 days ago because of libexpat. when do you think you will have uploaded all multi-arched patches? | 06:18 |
| slangasek | fabrice_sp: when we enter beta freeze, I'll be done. why is vtk embedding paths to libraries in its cmake files? Can that be corrected so vtk doesn't do that? | 06:19 |
| jmarsden | vtk is not alone. I suspect there are several packages doing bad stuff like that which FTBFS as a result of multiarch as libraries are migrated. php5 is one (in its autotools stuff) I am currently trying to fix up... bug #739977 | 06:26 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 739977 in php5 (Ubuntu) "PHP5 FTBFS in Natty" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/739977 | 06:26 |
| slangasek | yeah, doesn't surprise me that php also has problems | 06:32 |
| slangasek | there are far too many NIH build systems about | 06:32 |
| fabrice_sp | slangasek, so a correct fix for vtk would be to include only lib name in cmake files and no path? I'll try (the bad part is that vtk takes 4 hours to build) | 06:33 |
| RAOF | s/NIH//. Given that none of them have managed to materially improve on *autotools* they might as well all die :) | 06:33 |
| slangasek | fabrice_sp: yes, exactly | 06:34 |
| fabrice_sp | slangasek, thanks for the tip! | 06:34 |
| slangasek | fabrice_sp: and if you can future proof this by doing this for *all* libs vtk uses, you won't have to change it again for each new library that gets multiarch support next cycle... | 06:34 |
| fabrice_sp | slangasek, this is exactly what I was thinking in doing | 06:35 |
| dholbach | good morning | 07:34 |
| geser | good morning | 07:37 |
| mok0 | ls | 09:12 |
| iulian | Morning. | 09:53 |
| Rhonda | Has. | 09:54 |
| iulian | Siervus. | 09:57 |
| iulian | s/Siervus/Servus/ | 09:59 |
| === ziviani is now known as JRBeer | ||
| === nigelbabu is now known as nigelb | ||
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| verwilst | if i have a package with an official release of 1.0 for example, and 1.1 isnt out yet | 12:46 |
| verwilst | but i want to package a source checkout/snapshot | 12:46 |
| verwilst | how should i version it? | 12:46 |
| verwilst | 1.0.99? | 12:46 |
| verwilst | 1.0.99snapshot.. :P | 12:46 |
| soren | 1.1~something. | 12:48 |
| verwilst | soren, but when 1.1 final comes out | 12:48 |
| verwilst | it might think 1.1~something is higher, no? | 12:48 |
| verwilst | verwilst@laptop:~$ dpkg --compare-versions "1.1-0" gt "1.1~sth" && echo "1.1-0 is greater" | 12:50 |
| verwilst | 1.1-0 is greater | 12:50 |
| verwilst | hm | 12:50 |
| verwilst | so i can name it 1.1~spre1 | 12:51 |
| verwilst | pre* | 12:51 |
| Rhonda | The ~ character got specificly implemented to mean "lower than anything, even the empty string" | 13:07 |
| Rhonda | dpkg --compare-versions 1~ lt 1 && echo "yes, 1~ is less than 2" | 13:08 |
| Rhonda | … minus the typo in the echo message, of course ;) | 13:08 |
| Rhonda | So release candidates, pre-release versions and anything can make use of ~ | 13:08 |
| Rhonda | But in your case, I'd rather settle for 1.0+vcs20110324-1 or something like that. | 13:09 |
| soren | Yeah. it depends on how sure you are that the release will actually be 1.1. | 13:11 |
| directhex | the use of 1.0+ and 1.1~ generally comes down to what you consider the "base" version to be | 13:31 |
| Rhonda | 1.0.99 is not a sane approach because upstream hasn't done it as 1.0.99 | 13:33 |
| Rhonda | I'd stick with the version information that is inside the upstream VCS as basis for judgement. | 13:33 |
| soren | Rhonda: That's a good idea. | 13:49 |
| soren | That's what I've been (subconsciously) doing, I guess. | 13:49 |
| * Rhonda would like to ask for some testers for bug #734731 so it can marked confirmed | 13:57 | |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 734731 in lucid-backports "Please backport irssi (0.8.15-2ubuntu1/main)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/734731 | 13:57 |
| === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan | ||
| verwilst | hello | 14:41 |
| verwilst | trying to upload a package with a fixed source tarball, but keep getting "File php-sphinx_1.1.0.orig.tar.gz already exists in PPA for Bart Verwilst, but uploaded version has different contents." | 14:41 |
| verwilst | i tried removing my package from the ppa and then doing a new upload | 14:41 |
| Bachstelze | verwilst: PPA-related questions are better asked in #launchpad ;) | 14:43 |
| verwilst | ah ok | 14:43 |
| verwilst | Bachstelze, fixed ;) | 14:44 |
| Bachstelze | :) | 14:45 |
| kim0 | Hi folks .. Letting you know Ubuntu Cloud Days starting in 10mins in #ubuntu-classroom .. You can discuss in #ubuntu-classroom-chat .. Thanks | 15:51 |
| petani | all can help me compile php with gd enable | 16:38 |
| micahg | petani: maybe in #ubuntu-packaging | 16:38 |
| petani | oke thx | 16:39 |
| petani | micahg why php-gd not support antialiasing image | 16:39 |
| micahg | petani: I think it comes with gd support in any case, specific php questions should be asked in #ubuntu-server | 16:40 |
| petani | oke thx again's | 16:41 |
| RoAkSoAx | james_w: /win 3 | 16:42 |
| RoAkSoAx | argggh | 16:43 |
| RoAkSoAx | james_w: sorry :) | 16:43 |
| arand | Are all these files generated by automake, would they all pass as "redistributed under the same license as the project" or would I need to document them in debian/copyright? http://paste.debian.net/111831/ | 17:11 |
| ximion | arand: You don't need to mention them in debian/copyright | 17:53 |
| ximion | as they're auto-generated, they don't belong to the "original" source code provided in upstream tarball. | 17:53 |
| ximion | (also, they will imho have the same license as the project in general) | 17:54 |
| arand | ximion: Not even the install-sh which has an odd extra copyright not from FSF? | 17:54 |
| arand | ximion: But if they are included in the upstream tarball? I should ask upstream to remove them? | 17:55 |
| ximion | arand: yes, it would be better if upstream provided a clean tarball | 17:55 |
| ximion | if there's a copyright mentioned you would have to document it, but for these automake files it really makes no sense | 17:56 |
| ximion | upstream schould remove the files | 17:56 |
| ximion | (or use automakes ability to create a clean source tarball | 17:56 |
| ximion | ) | 17:56 |
| arand | ximion: Well, I'll see if that might float. Though if I get a "meh, no need"-response, I would have to find a way to include them? | 17:59 |
| ximion | arand: yes (just to be sure) - or repackage the sources | 18:41 |
| ximion | but it would be very ignorant if upstream gives a "no need" response | 18:42 |
| === blankdisk is now known as blankdisk|away | ||
| === blankdisk|away is now known as blankdisk | ||
| verwilst | in Depends, where are the results for ${php:Depends} fetched from? | 20:37 |
| verwilst | or misc:Depends, or stuff like that | 20:38 |
| verwilst | hm,i think i know | 20:41 |
| verwilst | kinda | 20:41 |
| verwilst | dh_shlibs etc | 20:41 |
| hakermania | micahg: Friend.... I don't know what to say... We are expecting this review for so long :( Please, be a bit interested with Wallch :((( | 21:20 |
| hakermania | micahg: It's not a personal problem. I don't want it to see it like this. I know that nobody is being paid for this, but I don't like taking "I'll try this weekend" tree weekends now :( :'( | 21:23 |
| hakermania | three* | 21:23 |
| micahg | hakermania: you still need someone else to review it besides me | 22:11 |
| hakermania | micahg: Do the first step, and i'm sure someone will follow | 22:40 |
| dustin_ | anyone on here right now use tumblr blogging? | 22:47 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!