[00:17] Hello [00:18] Anybody know why I get connection refused trying to connect/upload to ppa.launchpad.net? [00:18] Using ftp, using sftp or scp it times out. [00:18] trentg: It broke [00:18] Oh [00:19] Any ideas when it might be back online? [00:21] It worked for me just now. [00:21] it's back online at the moment [00:22] This is kinda offtopic, but does anyone one know if there is a bug tracker that allows setting a bounty for a bug, real money? ) [00:23] Thanks, it's working now [00:25] for an open source project [00:29] kri0: There are bug bounty sites out there - never used ones; of course there are also places that youc an buy support (as you say OT) [00:40] yeah, i see some 'bug bounty programs' from different vendors, what i'd like is to have a reverse 'bounty option' built-in to a tracker. That is, when someone submits a bug he would really like to see fixed, he could assing a bounty from his pocket, not the vendors. and others to be able to chip in micropayment like. The bounty goes to the developer who fixes it. [01:54] GAH!!! [01:54] I build perfect in a pbuilder environment; but breaks right near the tail end on lp [01:55] MTecknology: do you have a buildlog? [01:55] https://launchpadlibrarian.net/70703826/buildlog_ubuntu-maverick-amd64.nginx_1.0.0-svn3185-ppa205~maverick1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz [01:56] Ampelbein: builds nginx-light and nginx-full great; almost finishes nginx-extras; poof [01:58] aah........ [01:58] it's missing from the pushed branch [01:59] that'll make a big difference. :P [02:24] wow! [02:24] estimated time until build.... on 2011-05-01 [02:37] Hi, I'm trying to make a launchpad-recipe, merging 2 branches. They have partially common folders, but no common files, like branch1: test/file1 and branch2: test/file2. If I try "merge" I get "Branches have no common ancestor", if I try "nest-part" I get "ERROR: Conflicts from merge" It's somewhat bug #515731, but not packaging related. Any solutions or workarounds? I have to keep the branches separately. [02:37] Launchpad bug 515731 in bzr-builder "Support merge of two branches that have no common ancestor" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/515731 [02:40] reviczky: Why must they be set up like that? [02:40] That sounds like an awful mess :( [02:40] because they are two different projects [02:40] even messier than the recipes I needed to come up with :P [02:41] reviczky: And you have to merge the trees at the same level to build? [02:41] yes [02:41] Why? [02:42] so I'm importint the code into launchpad, 2 different branches, and one is the main containing the program, the others are extension modules that needs to be there at build time [02:42] You can't include them as a subdirectory instead? [02:42] the use the same folder structure [02:42] scripts/... doc/.. are all shared [02:42] but no conflicts [02:42] Well, there are conflicts :) [02:42] Just not file conflicts. [02:43] yeah, thats what i mean [02:43] a directory is a conflict the same as a file [02:43] i see [02:43] until now i was merging by hand, means copying together, i wanted to have some automation [02:43] a copy isn't a merge [02:44] a merge is for branches that separated [02:44] reviczky: How do you normally build it during development? [02:44] reviczky: Having to manually merge two trees together sounds like a terrible task. [02:44] well this is what i did until now, by hand: [02:44] getting the two branches [02:44] copying them together [02:44] add the debian tree [02:44] and build [02:45] so i could do the same in 1 branch [02:45] but it since they are maintained deparately it would be nicer to hve them in separate branches [02:45] It seems like a fairly bad idea to be trying to merge two trees together like that. [02:45] the branches? [02:45] They should either be one branch, separate packages, or one should be in a subdirectory of the other. [02:46] what does the Fix commited in bug 515731 mean? is it solved? how? is it available on the launchpad buildfarm? [02:46] Launchpad bug 515731 in bzr-builder "Support merge of two branches that have no common ancestor" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/515731 [02:47] It's not available on Launchpad yet. [02:47] reviczky: what branches? [02:47] so this is what i have right now: https://code.launchpad.net/context-beta [02:47] its more then 2 branches, but that doesnt matter [02:48] What's the difference between /context and /context-beta? [02:48] that this uses an experimental tree [02:49] It should probably not be a separate project unless it's a fork, but OK. [02:49] i have some own modifications [02:49] but yeah, ive noticed that [02:49] but until i dont really have it working, i just wanted to experiment with the repices [02:50] reviczky: Is there a good reason to not have the separate trees as separate packages? [02:50] A reasonable rule is that one source tree => one source package [02:50] reviczky: something like that... each separate module you're building should be in it's own sib directory and your packaging should handle bringing the process together, even better - the vompile process .. (assuming these are modules) [02:50] s/rule/guideline/ [02:51] Or that, yes. [02:51] hmm, right, i can do that [02:51] thanks, im gonna give that a try [02:52] reviczky: I would really encourage you to use the existing https://launchpad.net/context project instead. [02:52] ok, im gonna get in touch with them [02:53] You can just push branches up there. [02:53] i see [02:55] the problem is also btw, that they dont have a version controlled source code ... [02:55] and that wont change in the near future [02:55] That is quite spectacular. [02:56] so i have to import the code myself or with a script [02:56] :/ [02:56] and this is why id like to have the branches separate, because i would loose the overview [02:57] I guess this explains why it seems somewhat insane and completely VCS-unfriendly. [02:57] right, so using separate subdirs is fine, thanks for the help [02:57] :( [02:57] yeah, its all a mess a right now :( [02:58] and it doesnt work out of the box in ubuntu anymore [02:58] thats why i have some patches [03:02] wgrant: please make builds go faster! :'( [03:03] buy 500 machines for builders! [04:05] MTecknology, You could use AWS yourself. [04:19] cody-somerville: hm? [04:20] cody-somerville: oh! amazon? [04:20] cody-somerville: It was building perfectly fine in my own setup; turns out i missed svn add on 3 files in obscure places [04:21] MTecknology, My comment was in reference to "buy 500 machines for builders!". ;) [04:22] cody-somerville: i don't think my purchase of amazon systems would help launchpad ... and i'm still struggingling to pay for taxes in the next 3 months [04:24] I'm suggesting using in lieu of Launchpad. It would be pretty cheap for just yourself and you could spawn as many builders as you needed. [04:25] cody-somerville: but then how would the nightly builds end up on launchpad? [04:25] https://code.launchpad.net/~nginx/+recipe/nginx-nightly [04:25] Don't ask me why I sent it to build for oneiric..... [04:27] is the toolchain for 11.11 even close to settled yet? [04:28] This probably isn't the right place to ask that. [04:28] true, i'd go bug in +1 but that's still closed [04:29] MTecknology: *11.10* [04:30] ..... [04:30] wow.... i've been calling it 11.11 for so long too [04:30] face meets palm moment [04:30] maybe its a sign :) [04:31] MTecknology: And if you read ubuntu-devel-announce, you'd see that doko announced 11.10 is open for uploads over eight hours ago. [04:33] cody-somerville: a sign that i need sleep? [04:33] StevenK: Over eight hours ago? [04:33] StevenK: i thought the toolchain still changed after uploads were opened [04:34] StevenK: It was well over 12. [04:34] MTecknology: It's mostly done before that. [04:34] There will be further minor changes, mostly after UDS. [04:34] The major toolchain changes are done in a PPA per [04:34] ... before release. [04:34] So the new series can be opened within hours of the previous series' release. [04:35] (assuming the mirrors aren't misbehaving, which caused this one to take almost 24 hours :/) [04:36] wgrant: Meh, the point is, it was multiple hours ago, so there is no point going "Geee, when does Oneiric open for uploads?" [04:36] Indeed. [04:39] StevenK: pretty sure, that's not what I asked [04:39] I sent this to upload... [04:39] MTecknology: However, wgrant answered your question anyway. [04:39] yes, he did [04:41] StevenK: I used to remember you being a really helpful and friendly person. :( === yofel_ is now known as yofel [15:55] hello, I keep getting this error with my script: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=72urwRAa [16:09] c_korn: staging's broken at the moment. You might want to use qastaging.launchpad.net for the next few days instead. [16:22] hm, if I knew how to change this. I think this is the line I somehow need to configure: launchpad = Launchpad(credentials, EDGE_SERVICE_ROOT, cachedir) [16:51] c_korn: Thats a pretty old-style invocation of launchpadlib, what version are you using? [16:55] the version of natty I think [16:56] Installed: 1.9.7-0ubuntu2 [17:12] c_korn: OK, for your immediate issue, pass 'qastaging' instead of EDGE_SERVICE_ROOT [17:12] maxb: ok, this works now, launchpad = Launchpad.login_with('My Application', 'production'). thanks for the hint === nhandler_ is now known as nhandler [20:18] my day wait for build is almost up :D [21:08] 0 source packages (5.3 KiB) [21:09] seems odd to me that 0 source packages takes up 5.3 KiB of space :) [21:09] perhaps due to lazy package deletion? [21:22] timrc, indexes probably count [22:06] hi! can anybody help my in using my existing gpg key. debsign returns with "...secret key not available" even if my key is showing up in gpg --list-keys [22:07] If I remember gpg --edit-secret [22:07] will let you see that [22:08] hmm. it says invalid options [22:12] check the help :) [22:13] [sorry I'm not all that helpful, I'm really not here today] [22:13] akoskm: Try gpg --list-secret-keys [22:14] just tried, that shows nothing [22:16] akoskm: That would imply you have no secret keys available in your current keyring [22:16] what I did was # gpg --search-keys akoskm, it listed me I selected that entry [22:16] maxb: indeed. what should I do to add the secret key too? [22:16] Where is your secret key currently stored? [22:17] in ~/.ssh/ [22:17] Your GPG key is stored in your ~/.ssh/ ? I am sceptical [22:17] if that one is which end with .asc [22:18] I'm not really sure in these terms, just followed the guide on launchpad.. [22:19] Which guide? [22:19] where I can modify the OpenPGP keys [22:19] there were the instructions to create and upload the key [22:20] I did that and signed my packages so far successfully [22:20] akoskm: I'm fairly sure none of that would have told you to put OpenPGP keys in ~/.ssh, because that would just be weirdly confusing [22:21] Well, what have you changed since you last signed a package successfully? [22:21] upgraded my ubuntu to natty [22:21] so I suppose some things were gone [22:21] Did this involve doing anything destructive to your home directory? [22:22] no, it is on a separate drive [22:25] here is the message what I'm getting at the end of debuild: http://pastebin.com/6eMP9pfX [22:25] and my key is uploaded to http://keyserver.ubuntu.com/ [22:26] This seems to indicate that you have somehow lost your secret key from where it should be stored in ~/.gnupg/secring.gpg [22:31] Indeed, all files in that directory were created today. :/ [22:32] Oh dear. [22:32] Did you have a backup? [22:33] akoskm: just a wild guess, is the filesystem with your home mounted? as you indicated it is on a seperate drive. [22:33] from that directory? no. [22:33] Ampelbein: it is [22:33] :) [22:33] akoskm: ok, I had the same problem once, wondered where all my stuff is gone ;-) [22:40] maxb: so, if there is no backup about that directory I can't use my key, it is simple like that? [22:40] yes [22:40] You will have to generate a new one from scratch, and redo all setup steps involved. [22:41] hmm [22:41] can I sign the code of conduct with one account twice? [22:41] (and there is no way to remove your old key from the public keyservers, ever) [22:44] Oh, you can skip the CoC step - your old signature still counts for that [23:00] maxb: thank you, I'll back up my key next time ;)