[00:34] <sooth> Is jdk-5 no longer in the repositories?
[08:25] <c2tarun> debian bug 614487
[08:36]  * dupondje just fixed himself a virtual build server ^^
[08:55] <c2tarun> in new epdfview tarball there is no Changelog file, in older version there is an empty
[08:55] <c2tarun> Changelog file
[08:59] <dupondje> help2man: can't get `--help' info from ../src/toonloop => any idea? (see https://launchpadlibrarian.net/71114766/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-i386.toonloop_2.0.6-1ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz)
[09:00] <dupondje> This builded fine some hours ago :s
[09:42] <micahg> dupondje: archive can change fast in the dev release, check for a new version of help2man and what changed
[10:05] <dupondje> micahg: compiled it yesterday with up-to-date build env
[10:05] <dupondje> help2man got changed 4 days ago ...
[10:05] <dupondje> weird
[10:05] <micahg> dupondje: k, well, perl just changed :)
[10:45] <c2tarun>  can anyone please help me with this error? http://paste.kde.org/51937/
[10:49] <maxb> The doubled backslash looks mildly suspicious
[10:51] <c2tarun> maxb: for my error?
[10:51] <maxb> yes
[10:52] <c2tarun> maxb: there is just one slash in rules file, dont know how I got there double slash.
[10:53] <c2tarun> maxb: there is just one slash in build log
[10:53] <maxb> Does a file debian/links or debian/*.links exist?
[10:54] <c2tarun> maxb: yes http://paste.ubuntu.com/603622/
[10:55] <maxb> OK, I think it is a bit wrong to be invoking dh_link with pathnames *and* referencing pathnames in the links files
[10:56] <maxb> It also seems wrong to be invoking dh_link from an override_dh_installdocs target at all
[10:57] <chrisccoulson> does debian/spyder/usr/share/doc/spyder/html/_static/ even exist?
[10:57] <chrisccoulson> i'm pretty sure dh_link will fail if it doesn't
[10:57] <c2tarun> chrisccoulson: yes it exist, I checked
[11:00] <c2tarun> though /usr/share/doc/spyder/html/_static/jquery.js location is missing, does that make any sense?
[11:24] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: it makes sense that it's doing that, but I don't know why it's causing trouble. sphinx installs a jquery into _static, and it's a common packaging practice to replace that with a symlink to libjs-jquery's version
[11:24] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: I can build spyder 2.0.11-1 in oneiric without any trouble
[11:32] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: you can??
[11:32] <c2tarun> how?
[11:32] <c2tarun> I mean why did it fail on my system?
[11:42] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: http://paste.ubuntu.com/603639/
[11:44] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: can you please show me your rules file?
[11:45] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: unmodified debian source
[11:46] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: that explains, here is the rules file that MoM provided me http://paste.ubuntu.com/603641/ I included the ubuntu changes. :/ that are causing trouble
[11:47] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: I got it built on my system as well :) thanks
[11:50] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: from skimming the changelog I can't see any reason not to sync, but I haven't read the diff (it's messy :P )
[11:53] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: did you built source package as well?
[11:53] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: I am getting errors with debuild -S
[11:56] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: got it. some files are created due to debuild -b those were creating problem, but this never happened before. Is there something wrong with the package?
[11:56] <tumbleweed> yeah, it doesn't clean properly
[11:57] <tumbleweed> some packages are broken like that. Download the source again (and shake a fist / file a bug at the debian maintainer)
[11:58] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: hmm... should I wait after filing a bug or request for sync after filing bug?
[11:59] <tumbleweed> naah, it doesn't matter for syncing
[11:59] <Laney> c2tarun: lesson — don't trust grab-merge too much
[11:59] <tumbleweed> it's only a minor bug
[12:00] <c2tarun> Laney: I wont even try that again, I'll just read the report from web and do a manual test.
[12:00] <Laney> I'd actually recommend doing a few merges manually
[12:00] <tumbleweed> that's how I do all my merges
[12:00] <tumbleweed> although these days I tend to use UDD to help a bit
[12:00] <c2tarun> UDD?
[12:00] <Laney> me too, but without UDD
[12:01] <Laney> I use emerge-files or meld or vimdiff or ...
[12:01] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: wiki.ubuntu.com/UDD (bzr-based packaging)
[12:02] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: I have a script that does the same thing as grab-merge but with bzr branches
[12:02] <c2tarun> hmm.... I'll do few merges manually :)
[12:38] <c2tarun> If I want to do a merge manually, where should I get the appropriate debian folder? grab-merge.sh scripts provides a folder which includes debian as well as ubuntu versions contents. Otherwise any debian folder is not perfect.?
[12:48] <yofel> c2tarun: well, manually merging means getting the debian folder and applying all changes from the ubuntu package to it that should be kept for ubuntu
[12:48] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: you take the current debian source, the current ubuntu diff (which you can get from merges.ubuntu.com / grab-merge), and you make all the same changes (either manually or by applying bits of patch)
[12:49] <yofel> you can use merge-changelog to not manually merge that
[12:49] <tumbleweed> yes, that's handy
[12:49] <c2tarun> yofel: what is merge-changelog?
[12:49] <yofel> see --help
[12:50] <yofel> since the ubuntu and debian debian/changelog files won't be the same you need to merge them in the right order, merge-changelog does that for you
[12:51] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: the advantage of doing everything by hand, is you see every single change, and get a chance to understand it, why it's there, and make the decision to keep it  / reject it / do it better and/or forward it to debian
[12:54] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: from where I can find ubuntu.patch without using grab-merge?
[12:54] <tumbleweed> by debdiffing previous debian & ubuntu sources or getting the patch from merges.ubuntu.com
[12:55] <geser> which is also linked in the PTS page for that package
[12:57] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: actually I have a slow internet connection so donwloading sources for all the packages and getting the diff will consume a lot of time.
[12:57] <c2tarun> geser: I looked at PTS page but couldn't find one, for example this page http://packages.qa.debian.org/aeskulap
[12:58] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: bottom right corner
[12:58] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: wow. .. :) got it thanks
[12:59]  * tumbleweed knows the slow internet connection pain all too well (although my ISP gives free access to their mirror, so I've started mirroring at home. It's awesome. /me waits for them to complain)
[13:42] <effie_jayx> hello all
[13:43] <xdatap> effie_jayx, _o/
[13:43] <effie_jayx> I am having an Issue with a package for Lucid. It appears python2.pm which was introduced by the current co maintainer in debian and it seems not to work when building in Lucid http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/603692/
[13:59] <effie_jayx> in my perl install there is no python2.pm, only python-central.pm python-support.pm
[14:00] <effie_jayx> that's when searching /usr/share/perl5/Debian/Debhelper/Sequence/
[14:12] <geser> effie_jayx: that file is in "python" in maverick or later
[14:13] <wejaeger> Hey, anyone up for reviewing l2tp-ipsec-vpn? It's a little applet to configure and manage L2TP IPsec VPN connections.
[14:13] <wejaeger> I've just uploaded a new upstream release. http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/l2tp-ipsec-vpn
[14:15] <effie_jayx> geser: well debhelper is using clean --with python2, can I just change that for anything else. python-support?
[14:21] <geser> I don't know, better ask someone more familiar with Python packaging
[14:22] <geser> ScottK: as you're familiar with backporting and also Python packaging, can you help effie_jayx? ^^
[14:24] <ScottK> I missed the start of the conversation (IRC bot troubles).
[14:24] <ScottK> What's the question?
[14:28] <effie_jayx> ScottK: since python2.pm is not available in lucid, what can I use as an option for dh clean. In maverick we use dh clean --with pyhton2, can I use python-support?
[14:29] <ScottK> If you want to backport a dh_python2 package to lucid you either need to switch it to pycentral/pysupport or we need to backport python-defaults/debhelper.
[14:29] <ScottK> The latter is probably more reasonable.
[14:29] <ScottK> barry: ^^^ We should work on this.
[14:59] <effie_jayx> ScottK: I switched it to python-support, this will be the only difference between the maverick and natty packages. that and the python-all version to 2.6.5~
[14:59] <ScottK> Should ~work.
[15:31] <c2tarun> need help with package named asciijump. I used grab-merge.sh script and it applied the ubuntu1.patch and it worked fine. Then I downloaded the debian source code and applied that patch manually and that patch failed at many locations. why so?
[16:03] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: in this case it was because the changes were accepted by debian
[16:04] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: then how mom is able to apply the same patch?
[16:04] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: or grab-merge.sh
[16:05] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: I hope you are getting, grab-merge.sh applies the ubuntu.patch file to debian source code.
[16:06] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: how did it apply the same patch which I couldn't.
[16:08] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: if you compare asciijump_1.0.2~beta-3ubuntu1.patch to asciijump_1.0.2~beta-4.patch you'll see all the changes from the first patch are in the new debian version
[16:08] <Rhonda> It seems to be able to recognize that the patch already is in the source.
[16:08] <Laney> it does a three way merge
[16:09] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: it doesn't just try to apply the previous patch, because that'll never be applyable (the changelog will conflict). It's a bit more intelligent...
[16:09] <Rhonda> Which when you want to apply it manually it isn't
[16:17] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: I agree that all the changes are applied, but the beta4 in debian is not building on ubuntu oneiric, while the one beta4-ubuntu1 provided by grab-merge.sh is building properly
[16:18] <c2tarun> no I need to understand what grab-merge.sh exactly do with the debian version? which patch is applied to it and with what intelligence. :/ otherwise I wont be able to figure out what I did wrong.
[16:19] <c2tarun> /s/no/now
[16:22] <Laney> c2tarun: so check the debdiff between the one that doesn't work and the one that does
[16:22] <c2tarun> Laney: good idea :)
[16:23] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: actually, just unpack the debian source
[16:23] <tumbleweed> and look at the topmost patch
[16:23] <tumbleweed> basically, the debian maintainer screwed up
[16:23]  * c2tarun thought that debian maintainers were good O_O
[16:24] <Laney> people make mistakes
[16:24] <Laney> tumbleweed: I was trying to lead him to find that out :-)
[16:25] <tumbleweed> Laney: I know, but I thought it wasn't obvious from the debdiff
[16:25] <Laney> fair
[16:25] <Laney> i wrote a lintian check which should be in the next version to warn about debian-changes patches
[16:38] <c2tarun> The version which is working (which is provided by grab-merge.sh) contains one extra patch. Please take a look http://paste.ubuntu.com/603770/
[16:38] <c2tarun> Laney tumbleweed ^^
[16:40] <c2tarun> and I couldn't find where did this patch came from, there is no mention about it in this asciijump_1.0.2~beta-3ubuntu1.patch file. :(
[16:40] <c2tarun> I am bit confused about what is happening.
[16:50]  * c2tarun will be back in a while, guys please hold your responses
[16:57] <c2tarun> did anyone replied to my query?
[17:09] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: look at the the part of the patch starting at line 28
[17:10] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: yeah that's what I am talking about, from where did that patch come?
[17:11] <tumbleweed> user error
[17:11] <c2tarun> sorry? I lost you :( what do you mean by user error?
[17:11] <tumbleweed> the person adding ld-as-needed.patch didn't apply the patch when he/she added it
[17:12] <tumbleweed> so when they ran debuild, it generated a patch of the changes, which excatly reverses ld-as-needed..patch
[17:14] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: ok, we can say that till line 84 its ld-as-needed patch, what about afterlines?
[17:14] <Laney> you need to take the debian package and remove the debian-changes-blah patch from it
[17:14] <Laney> minimally you can achieve this by removing it from series
[17:14]  * Laney hates patches-applied
[17:16] <c2tarun> Laney: ok , I removed the that debian-changes blah patch and it build successfully. Now what should we call this a sync or a merge?
[17:16] <tumbleweed> you call it a sync, but with an additional change
[17:16] <tumbleweed> and please file a bug in debian :)
[17:16] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: sorry, I never exactly filed a bug in debian :( how do we do that?
[17:17] <tumbleweed> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Debian/Bugs
[17:18] <Laney> " You will also need to change the smtphost option in the same file as it is set to fiordland.ubuntu.com which does not allow relaying"
[17:18] <Laney> then why is it set to that?
[17:19] <c2tarun> Laney: sorry from which file?
[17:19] <tumbleweed> that was fixed
[17:19] <Laney> wiki should be fixed then
[17:19] <c2tarun> what are we talking about here?
[17:20] <tumbleweed> Laney: it probably still applies to old versions
[17:21] <tumbleweed> it was fixed in 0.115
[17:23] <Laney> even so, it should be reworded
[17:23] <Laney> "if you get errors about fiordland, do this"
[17:29] <hakermania> Why in Natty the 'whitelist' isn't by default set to '[all]' and only to Skype and Java applications?
[17:30] <arand> hakermania: Because they want to actively steer applications away from using that.
[17:31] <Laney> that's a question for #ayatana really
[17:31] <hakermania> Ayatana? What's this?
[17:31] <tumbleweed> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Ayatana
[17:32] <hakermania> ok, got it, thanks
[17:52] <stlsaint> hey folks, so im trying to learn packaging but my primary os is debians crunchbang, my question is will i be able to follow the ubuntu packaging guide with a debian host? (IE: ubuntu-dev-tools is ubuntu specific so can i work without them and still have valid results?)
[17:52] <aboudreault> Hi. Can I tell dpatch to not execute a dist-clean?
[17:53] <aboudreault> now, it fails when I try to create a new patch
[18:59] <wejaeger> Hey, anyone up for reviewing http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/l2tp-ipsec-vpn
[19:12] <ScottK> stlsaint: You should be able to.  Ubuntu-dev-tools is in Debian.
[19:13] <stlsaint> ScottK: problem is that it will install a heap load of stuff i done see the use of (LAMP stack) and others
[19:13] <ScottK> aboudreault: Use dpatch-edit-patch to work with dpatch.
[19:13] <ScottK> stlsaint: Shouldn't.
[19:14] <c2tarun> If debian version of a package is built successfully on oneiric. But there are some conflicts in debian/control file. should we still call for sync? I think yes, Just making sure.
[19:14] <ScottK> Depends: binutils, dctrl-tools, devscripts, diffstat, dpkg-dev, lsb-release, python-apt (>= 0.7.93~), python-debian (>= 0.1.15), python-launchpadlib (>= 1.5.7), python-lazr.restfulclient, sudo, perl, python2.7 | python2.6, python (>= 2.7.1-0ubuntu2), python (<< 2.8)
[19:14] <stlsaint> ScottK: maybe not full lamp but from what i say it installs the apache, mysql-client packages from what i remember from memory
[19:14] <stlsaint> ScottK: one sec i will show ya
[19:14] <ScottK> stlsaint: ^^^ is the depends for it.
[19:14] <ScottK> That's it.
[19:15] <geser> c2tarun: what kind of conflicts?
[19:15] <ScottK> stlsaint: Recommends add a bit more, but no lamp:
[19:15] <ScottK> Recommends: bzr, bzr-builddeb, ca-certificates, debian-archive-keyring, debian-keyring, debootstrap, genisoimage, libwww-perl, pbuilder | cowdancer | sbuild, perl-modules, python-dns, python-gnupginterface, python-magic, python-soappy, reportbug (>= 3.39ubuntu1)
[19:15] <c2tarun> geser: well simple control file conflicts, like maintainer name and Standards-Version and all
[19:15] <geser> c2tarun: the other Ubuntu delta got merged?
[19:15] <stlsaint> ScottK: aye, the basic lamp stuff was only suggested but still bothersome with the other required install packages
[19:16] <ScottK> Don't bother with suggests.
[19:16] <stlsaint> ScottK: http://paste.ubuntu.com/603829/
[19:17] <c2tarun> geser: there was just one delta this conflict. actually my point is, we simply cannot take debian/control file from debian versions, so any changes in control file can make a new ubuntu1 version. Shouldn't that go for a merge?
[19:17] <ScottK> stlsaint: Most of those are pretty smal.
[19:17] <stlsaint> ScottK: aye
[19:18] <stlsaint> ScottK: mainly wasnt sure if it was needed since i will be in a debian environment and the wiki said that that package was ubuntu specific
[19:18] <geser> c2tarun: there was an Ubuntu delta in the past else there wouldn't be a Maintainer change. So got the Ubuntu delta got included in the Debian package? if yes, then the Maintainer change can be dropped (as there is no other Ubuntu delta requiring an update of the Maintainer field)
[19:19] <ScottK> It is, but you can work on Ubuntu stuff from a Debian box no problem.  It just requires using a chroot or vm for building.
[19:21] <stlsaint> ScottK: so is that package particularly required for building?
[19:21] <ScottK> No.
[19:21] <ScottK> It just has stuff that makes it easier.
[19:21] <stlsaint> ScottK: kk, i will keep that in thought
[19:21] <stlsaint> ScottK: thanks for enlightenment
[19:24] <c2tarun> geser: please look at this control conflict
[19:24] <c2tarun> http://paste.ubuntu.com/603831/
[19:24] <c2tarun> geser: I should drop maintainer field of debian and build-depends field of ubuntu.
[19:25] <c2tarun> geser: but I am not sure that we need a new ubuntu version for these changes?
[19:29] <geser> c2tarun: drop the changes completely as we don't care about hildon anymore (someone please correct me if I'm mistaken)
[19:30] <c2tarun> geser: hildon?
[19:31] <geser> c2tarun: see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hildon
[19:31] <c2tarun> geser: ok, I'll take a look, what you just suggested is I should simply call for sync with requestsync script without bothering about those conflicts?
[19:33] <geser> c2tarun: yes, just sync as the first Ubuntu changes to 0.9-1 were related to hildon and the other one (add libgnomevfs2-dev to build-depends) seems to be in the Debian package now too
[19:33] <c2tarun> geser: thanks :)
[19:34] <geser> NCommander: do you know if we keep our "hildon" patches or can they be dropped?
[19:49] <aboudreault> hmm... with libtool..... if I want to name my libX.so libX.so.1.3.0, which mean libX version 1.3.0, what should I use?
[19:49] <aboudreault> I tried the -version-info... but it produces 1.0.3.
[19:54] <broder> aboudreault: the soname of a library shouldn't be the same as the version number of the package, it should be based on how you change the ABI
[19:54] <broder> http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Updating-version-info.html has some information on that
[19:55] <aboudreault> the ABI should only change between minor version, and not revision. so, 1.2 -> 1.3 etc..
[19:56] <aboudreault> so my so name should be .so.1.3 ?
[20:28] <slangasek> c2tarun: hi, I see that you recently (in natty) uploaded a new upstream version of pympd to Ubuntu.  Are you aware that this package has subsequently been removed from Debian because it's "dead upstream" and was orphaned for over a year?  Do you have any interest in maintaining this package in Debian as well, so Debian and Ubuntu could be in sync on this?
[20:42] <oussama> Hi, do i need to regenerate my public ssh key and my gpg key every time i have installed a newer version of ubuntu ?? Sorry for my bad english
[20:43] <tumbleweed> no, just copy them from your old install
[20:43] <tumbleweed> (or upgrade)
[20:58] <NCommander> geser: Death can come to Hildon
[21:06] <c2tarun> slangasek: I was not aware that package has been removed. I am interested in maintaining the package, but I dont have any knowledge about its source code and other stuffs. Do you still think that I can maintain it?
[21:07] <slangasek> c2tarun: if you understand the packaging and take responsibility for relaying bug reports to upstream, you don't have to understand the upstream code very well
[21:07] <c2tarun> slangasek: well I can do that :)
[21:08] <slangasek> c2tarun: and effectively, by uploading a newer upstream version to Ubuntu that will never be synced again from Debian, you've already made yourself the go-to guy for bugs with this package; if you do so in Debian as well, at least you'll have better structure in place to support you being a package maintainer, since Ubuntu doesn't really do that :)
[21:09] <slangasek> c2tarun: are you currently involved in Debian at all?  Let me see what I have for "getting started" links
[21:10] <c2tarun> slangasek: Nope I just submitted few patches to debian and nothing else
[21:10] <slangasek> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Debian/ForUbuntuDevelopers
[21:12] <c2tarun> slangasek: thanks :) I'll go through it.
[21:12] <slangasek> c2tarun: you're welcome :)
[21:13] <slangasek> c2tarun: when it comes time for uploading the package, you can ping me for sponsorship - but you should also make friends with the debian-mentors mailing list, because I don't scale :)
[21:13] <c2tarun> slangasek: sure :)
[22:35] <rexbron> Hi, is it appropreate to ask for sponsorship in this channel?
[22:39] <tumbleweed> rexbron: absolutely :)
[22:41] <rexbron> anyone interested in taking a look at bug 778071? I've updated to a new upstream and fixed some packaging bugs so that it installs and works. Currently in natty the package is uninstallable.
[22:43] <tumbleweed> rexbron: debias has 0.7.8-1, any reason to not just sync that?
[22:43] <tumbleweed> debian
[22:46] <rexbron> tumbleweed: Ubuntu uses a different package name for the fglrx drivers
[22:46] <rexbron> so two of the bugs are fixed already in debian
[22:46] <rexbron> but the bug that makes it uninstallable still persists
[22:48] <tumbleweed> ok, how about syncing + that fix?
[22:48] <rexbron> tumbleweed: sure, so request a sync then fix that?
[22:49] <tumbleweed> no, you can do it all in one go
[22:49] <tumbleweed> take the debian source, modify it, propose that
[22:49] <rexbron> ok