[01:11] <smoser> @pilot out
[06:47] <ohsix> anyone around to provide some advice? would ubuntu carry an "up" ported patch to restore functionality? the project has stonewalled on proxy support after removing it making transmission useless for a lot of people, but its far and away the best client otherwise https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/transmission/+bug/713604
[07:02] <ohsix> also, can anyone give me pointers on how to get started preparing a patch to revert the changes & restore the functionality?
[07:56] <ohsix> how can i get debuild to be louder about why a patch application failed, trying to prepare a revert for what i mentioned earlier
[07:57] <ohsix> the patch works fine outside of debian/patches
[07:58] <ohsix> hm nm it says already
[07:59] <ohsix> how are you supposed to prepare patches? will quilt rebase them? i've been preparing them against the unpatched source
[08:18] <infinity> ohsix: Generally, assuming there's a patch target, you can "debian/rule patch", then prepare your patch against the patched sources, and toss it in the end of the quilt series.
[08:18] <infinity> ohsix: There are automated tools to do that sort of thing, but I never remember them. :P
[08:18] <ohsix> yea i was using quilt wrong
[08:19] <ohsix> <3 quilt, should have just read the documentation again instead of assuming i'd remember everything
[08:21] <ohsix> i'm supposed to edit debian/channgelog if i'm ultimately providing a debdiff, no?
[08:21] <ohsix> or whatever tool that does that for me
[08:22] <ohsix> guess the patch will do for now
[09:06] <mdke> could anyone help me with this error message  when running dput - I haven't had it before and I don't think I've changed anything
[09:06] <mdke> http://paste.ubuntu.com/595059/
[09:08] <mdke> the package appears to have uploaded successfully actually, perhaps I don't need to worry about it?
[09:20] <sladen> ohsix: yes, describe your change in debian/changelog and link to the '(LP: #NNNN)' bug report in the same patch
[09:21] <ohsix> sladen: ok thanks
[09:24] <sladen> ohsix: if there isn't already and entry.  Add one above, bump the number and change the target 'natty' to 'UNRELEASED'
[09:27] <ohsix> hm you wouldn't know offhand why svn merge -c <rev> might look like it's including stuff other than what is in the rev you selected?
[09:28] <ohsix> will it do that if theres no other revision to merge to? how can i get it to just act as if the rev never existed than papering over it to the next possible rev
[09:29] <sladen> ohsix: is it including .svn/.bzr ?
[09:29] <sladen> ohsix: or rebuilt translations?
[09:30] <ohsix> no nothing like that, i'm just trying to make a patch to be proposed for inclusion in a package, it restores something upstream removed, i'm not the maintainer of the package or anything; and i'm poking at svn to get it to give me the 3 reverts i need to make it happen
[09:31] <ohsix> say, something in rev 4 is ending up in my revert of 3 and i can't tell why
[09:33] <sladen> ohsix:  debuild -S  to build a source package with your changes
[09:34] <sladen> ohsix: debdiff ../package_1.2.3.{4,5}.dsc | less -S      to get the .debdiff
[09:37] <ohsix> well it was an svn question, svn diff -r 3:4 shows the right diff, but svn merge -c 4 seems to include 5, 6 and some other rev into the revert
[09:48] <iulian> mdke: It currently sits in the unapproved queue.  No need to upload it again.
[09:59] <ohsix> ahh nm there's a conflict and it was bringing in extra versions to resolve it
[10:23] <bambee> Hello, anyone has noticed introspection errors with python-dbus (see http://paste.ubuntu.com/595083/) ? I get the same error with language-selector too
[11:50] <ohsix> how do you name versions in a ppa that you want to supersede the ubuntu version, but not "replace" it, like say 2.13-0ubuntu8 is the current archive version, i'm guessing calling it 2.13-0ubuntu9 is inappropriate
[11:50] <arand> ohsix: use "~"
[11:51] <ohsix> ok i did that already, thanks
[11:51] <ohsix> i was just asking because the ppa browser page still said there was a newer version with the extra version
[11:53] <sladen> ohsix: 2.13-0ubuntu8~ppa1
[11:53] <arand> ohsix: The ordering is 8,  9~1, 9, afaik, I think it will also pick up proposed packages as "newer".
[11:53] <ohsix> does it need a number at the end? i named it 2.13-0ubuntu8~proxy
[11:54] <arand> Works as well, however if I remeber correctly that will make it a version below ..ubuntu8, the ~ decreases...
[11:55] <ohsix> ah
[11:56] <ohsix> so will i need to reupload when the 9 version comes around? or can i supersede them all
[11:57] <arand> Well you can use any version number, though it's recommended to allow superseeding by security updates..
[11:57] <ohsix> k
[11:58] <arand> ohsix: If you use 8~proxy now I think that will be seen as a lower version than just 8.
[11:58] <ohsix> is this somewhere in the debian handbook
[11:59] <arand> I remember reading it somewhere, but can't find it atm...
[11:59] <ohsix> me too :\
[12:00] <ohsix> found it
[12:01] <ohsix> For example, the following parts are in sorted order from earliest to latest: ~~, ~~a, ~, the empty part, a.
[13:02] <ohsix> how long typically is "awaiting publication" for freshly finished builds on ppas
[13:03] <ohsix> arand: it did make it an older version D:
[13:06] <ohsix> arand: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/559074 D:
[13:07] <arand> ohsix: Matter of <15min from my exparience.
[13:12] <ohsix> ok sorted this version business
[13:12] <ohsix> arand: thanks for your input
[13:14] <mdke> iulian: thanks. I will ignore the error message then for now!
[14:34] <ohsix> is there a way to keep private notes for things on launchpad? like information i want to remember next time i update the ppa, without stashing it locally
[14:52] <bloops1> is there a way to test a build of g++ locally without installing?
[14:52] <ohsix> install it into a prefix other than /usr
[14:52] <bloops1> yes I did
[14:52] <bloops1> then when I call the g++ executable it complains about
[14:53] <bloops1> not being able to execute cc1plus
[14:53] <bloops1> there is a cc1plus binary in the same directory
[14:53] <ohsix> how did you set the prefix, at configure time or at install time? it needs to know about its own prefix and you need to have it in your PATH
[14:54] <bloops1> wait, I didn't set the prefix.
[14:55] <bloops1> it installed in src_directory/host-x86.../gcc
[14:55] <bloops1> ok can set the prefix now or do I have to make again?
[14:56] <ohsix> that's just where the target ended up, install phase puts it somewhere else; i haven't ran gcc out of tree, you might be able to execute it in place just by changing your PATH
[14:59] <bloops1> how do I change my PATH? can you point me to some docs?
[14:59] <bloops1> i don't think it's there at http://gcc.gnu.org/install/
[14:59] <ohsix> the PATH is a list of directories your shell searches for things to run
[15:00] <bloops1> oh I see.
[15:20] <bloops1> ohsix: it worked after adding to PATH. but then it couldn't find the include files.
[15:20] <bloops1> ohsix: I gave up and did make install
[16:08] <ohsix> how difficult is it wiring something up that needs to be ran at boot, before rw remounts; trying to figure out how i can cobble together an fsnotifyd type thing that osx has for time machine, in order to do something like it
[16:08] <ohsix> theres a chicken & egg problem with changes if it's not done early
[21:10] <ailo_> I'm trying to figure out what is causing gtk themes to not work on Ubuntu Studio Natty. I would file a bug report, but I'm not sure which package or packages are involved
[21:10] <ailo_> Where could I look for errors?
[21:11] <ailo_> The theming is only partly working
[21:12] <ailo_> Panels and desktop right-click menu falls back on the basic gtk theme
[21:12] <ailo_> While windows like nautilus will use the chose theme
[21:13] <ailo_> Also, Icons cannot be changed,
[21:13] <ailo_> This is on a fresh install of Ubuntu Studio Natty
[21:15] <ailo_> This apparently only happens on some systems
[21:28] <ivan_> hii
[22:41] <mr_pouit> bah, "550 Changes file must be signed with a valid GPG signature" apparently means "waiting for approval"…
[22:44] <lifeless> no
[22:44] <lifeless> its a bug with the uploader
[22:44] <lifeless> when a sysadmin is here - about 1.5 hours - we'll get it kicked again
[22:44] <lifeless> and the root issue should fixed this week
[22:44] <mr_pouit> ah, okay
[22:45] <lifeless> the bug doesn't stop the package being handed off to the backend
[22:45] <mr_pouit> archive admins, sorry if there are 12 thunar uploads in queue :s
[22:45] <lifeless> that then correctly validates the upload
[22:46] <iulian> Ouch.  There are only 9, not 12.
[22:46] <iulian> Or probably the other 3 are on their way.
[22:46]  * iulian shrugs.
[22:47] <mr_pouit>  :(