[05:55] <kaushal> Hi
[06:17] <kaushal> as per https://wiki.kubuntu.org/PackagingGuide/Recipes/PackageUpdate
[06:17] <kaushal> How do i get both soure for JAVA6 U24 and U26
[08:03] <hyperair> `c
[08:03] <hyperair> oops
[08:40] <dholbach> good morning
[08:42] <micahg> hi dholbach, thanks for taking care of that zabbix merge
[08:42] <dholbach> micahg, no worries
[09:42] <G> dholbach: thanks from me as well :)
[09:42] <micahg> G: sorry about that :)
[09:42] <G> micahg: no problem, I have been meaning to do a couple of more merges of other packages, but suddenly got busy
[09:43] <G> trying to work out why the build failed though, it's odd
[09:44] <G> and it just built perfectly in pbuilder
[09:45] <micahg> G: which package?  do you have a log?
[09:46] <G> micahg: zabbix
[09:46] <G> the i386 build failed, once it got merged, but it builds in pbuilder
[09:46] <G> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/73256808/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-i386.zabbix_1%3A1.8.5-1ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[09:47] <micahg> G: is the pbuilder updated?  (dev release changes fast)
[09:49] <G> micahg: it's a compile time issue, I'd imagine pbuilder doesn't have much effect on that (but version wise, it's not the latest build or anything, I've got to fix up the second VM I got for building stuff before I can start following the latest greatest pbuilder
[09:49] <micahg> G: you can update the pbuilder instance to make sure you're running the latest base packages
[09:50] <G> oh you mean the pbuilder build env? or pbuilder itself?
[09:50] <G> I litterally just created the pbuilder build env for i386
[09:51] <G> it's as if the launchpad builders, aren't applying the patches after removing them
[09:54] <G> Is it me, or is this the problem: dpkg-source applies patches, rules file seems to call dh clean, doesn't reapply patches before ./configure?  http://pastebin.com/YgCYf5E6
[09:55] <micahg> yeah, that seems a little weird
[10:00] <geser> is "clean: unpatch" in debian/rules correct for v3? especially that I don't see a "patch" dependency
[10:04] <G> ahhh I know what it is....
[10:04] <geser> G: ^^ try without the "unpatch" dependency on the clean target
[10:04] <G> dh_autotools-dev_updateconfig, is running dh_clean?
[10:08] <G> geser: I'm not sure if that is it, http://pastebin.com/7jTi81zT (pbuilder i386 build) http://pastebin.com/8R9nuHMi (Launchpad builder build)
[10:08] <G> pbuilder is running dpkg-source -b zabbix-1.8.5 which applies the patches, again, but the LP Builder isn't
[10:09] <G> dholbach: do you have your buildlogs from when you said that it built okay in a VM for yourself?
[10:09] <dholbach> G: no, not any more
[10:10] <G> oh wait, launchpad builders, build from the bzr checkout, don't they? they don't create a source package first and build that do they...
[10:15] <micahg> G: no, they build from the uploaded source package
[10:16] <G> micahg: so the code is merged, then a sourec package is made by the merger, and uploaded?
[10:16] <G> (basically)
[10:16] <micahg> G: correct
[10:16] <G> micahg: ahhh okay, I thought that could explain why dpkg-source -x wouldn't be run
[10:17] <micahg> G:  you can pull down the version that dholbach uploaded and compare it to yours
[10:17] <G> yeah I think I will
[10:17] <G> do that while I get a cup of tea
[10:36] <G> micahg: mine looks the same as dholbach's upload, both do the 'right thing' in pbuilder etc
[10:37] <micahg> G: I'm sorry, I don't have time to actually look into it at the moment, but maybe someone else does
[10:37] <G> micahg: yeah, thanks for the pointers
[10:37] <G> micahg: I thought I may have been testing it wrong
[10:37] <micahg> G: are you using an up to date mirror w/pbuilder?
[10:39] <G> micahg: should be up to date, I'm using mirrors.kernel.org
[10:40] <geser> G: do you have a pbuilder build log at hand you could upload somewhere?
[10:40] <micahg> G: depending on which mirror they're 2 hrs-1 day behind
[10:43] <G> geser: http://dev.nigelj.com/zabbix-pbuilder.txt
[10:46] <geser> G: ah, the difference is that your pbuilder also build the source package (see the dpkg-source -b call before "debian/rules build") which applies the patches again but LP doesn't build the source package
[10:46] <G> geser: ah ha,
[10:47] <G> geser: but shouldn't "prepare: patch prepare-stamp" take care of that for us?
[10:48] <G> geser: oh, I now get what you are talking about w/ removing clean: unpatch now...
[10:50] <G> I guess cleaning shouldn't unpatch anyway, right?
[10:52] <geser> G: not sure right now after looking at the debian/rules file more closely
[10:52] <G> I'm pretty sure 'prepare: patch prepare-stamp' isn't really involved w/ this issue, because otherwise we should be seeing automake etc run
[10:53] <geser> G: yes, prepare is not called as far as I see
[10:54] <geser> there is build -> build-%-stamp -> configure-%-stamp -> extract-%-stamp and the chains ends there, only extract calls prepare
[10:54] <G> yeah, debian/rules clean, is getting called, which is wiping the patches, followed by debian/rules build  (before that on pbuilder, dpkg-source reapplies the patches, but LP doesn't)
[10:57] <G> geser: so does the change need to be... build: patch $(foreach ....
[10:57] <G> errr I mean: 'build: prepare $(foreach...'
[10:57] <G> that would I think 'fix' it
[10:58] <G> that way: patch, dh_autotools-dev_updateconfig, aclocal, autoconf etc, would all be called, only once, before the source is copied into the variant directories etc
[10:59] <geser> yes, might work
[11:07] <geser> G: the Debian build log shows the same (the patches get removed but not applied again), you might want to file a bug about it (in Debian)
[11:07] <G> geser: yep, I will do
[11:07] <geser> thanks
[11:31] <G> geser: looks like that was it
[11:31] <G> geser: PPA build has managed to progress to the mysql build, which holds promise
[11:38] <G> so, whats the best way to get this sorted, another bzr merge review?
[11:41] <micahg> G: that or a bug + debdiff + subscribe ubuntu-sponsors
[11:42] <G> easier to just to a merge-review I think :)
[11:49] <G> micahg: geser: thanks guys
[12:33] <G> Daviey: thanks!
[12:33] <G> sorry, I missed that extra space too
[12:36] <Daviey> G, no worries :)
[12:36] <Daviey> G, You are using dch, right?
[12:37] <G> Daviey: I had used dch, and then I realised I would have ugly merge proposal, and did a copy & paste, and it must've added an extra space somewhere
[12:37] <Daviey> ah
[12:37] <G> (copy and paste, due to just deciding to use a completely new branch locally)
[12:38] <Daviey> G, BTW - if you do open a LP bug for things like that - you can link it to the Debian bug - which makes it easy for people in the future when merging to look at the LP bug and trace it back to Debian etc.
[12:39] <G> Daviey: yeah, good point, I'll keep it in mind
[12:43] <Daviey> G, good o.. i think i would have been pulling my hair out finding that fix, good job.
[12:44] <G> Daviey: credit goes to micahg and geser for pointing in the right directions etc
[12:45] <Daviey> Ah yes, i see in scrollback
[13:07] <micahg> gusnan: sciteproj retried on all archs
[13:07] <gusnan> micahg, thank you!
[16:08] <dholbach> tumbleweed, if you have a bit of time and can review https://code.launchpad.net/~dholbach/ubuntu-sponsoring/734746/+merge/64157 we'd get a little bit closer to finishing our two work items regarding harvest :)
[16:09] <tumbleweed> dholbach: yeah I noticed that, I'll look this evening
[16:09] <dholbach> yeehaw! :)
[16:09] <dholbach> thanks muchly tumbleweed
[16:09] <tumbleweed> I see you've also got a list of CSV files to attack, great :)
[16:10] <dholbach> I think the bulk of them will land on bdmurray's plate - I hope there's a lot of reusable code involved
[16:11] <dholbach> the others were from gaspa and geser(?)
[16:13] <bdmurray> dholbach: what's on my plate?
[16:14] <dholbach> bdmurray, bug 734746 is all about moving harvest-data feeds from .csv to .json as it would allow us to show long descriptions too
[16:15] <dholbach> it's nothing super urgent, but optional data is much easier to handle with json and it'd be nice to not only show bug numbers, but also bug titles, and stuff like that
[16:15] <dholbach> https://code.launchpad.net/~dholbach/ubuntu-sponsoring/734746/+merge/64157 has an example for the generation of sponsoring data
[16:16] <dholbach> comment 4 on the bug lists all the feeds which would be nice to have moved over to json output
[16:17] <bdmurray> got it thanks
[16:17] <dholbach> thank YOU :)
[17:16] <nigelb> tumbleweed: Not someone.  Its me and iamfuzz :-)
[17:18] <tumbleweed> nigelb: right :)
[17:21] <nigelb> tumbleweed: my IRC was sucky or I'd have chimmed in the meeting, I just got the notification about that ping.
[17:21] <nigelb> Clearly, I'm in too many channels for irccloud to process :p
[17:22] <tumbleweed> nigelb: heh, well we really need to do something about those FTBFSs
[17:22] <tumbleweed> normally the big push is at the end of the release schedule
[17:22] <nigelb> tumbleweed: which means a lot of them don't get fixed.
[17:37] <tumbleweed> nigelb: any time frame on that list?
[17:38] <nigelb> tumbleweed: 20th is the deadline we're set to finish the list.
[17:38] <nigelb> so, another 10 days.
[17:39] <tumbleweed> is it on the wiki?
[17:40] <tumbleweed> nigelb: we were wondering about marking some FTBFS bitesize, or somehow grouping them. I think your list would be a good test to see how easily we can get FTBFS-fixers
[17:40] <nigelb> tumbleweed: the list I'm making is only of the ones failing due to the ld change.
[17:40] <nigelb> tumbleweed: I believe those are easy enough to be marked bitesize
[17:42] <tumbleweed> agreed
[18:14] <vish> what is the difference between https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-dev  and  https://launchpad.net/~motu  ?   I'm confused cause ~ubuntu-dev also mentions MOTU..
[18:16] <ScottK> All MOTU are ubuntu-dev.  Not all ubuntu-dev are MOTU.
[18:16] <tumbleweed> vish: I think people can be members of a packageset team without having motu rights
[18:17] <broder> ~ubuntu-dev also contains people who have PPU rights, i thought
[18:17] <tumbleweed> that description on ~ubuntu-dev is confusing, yes
[18:17] <vish> so ~ubuntu-dev is for PPU folks only?
[18:17] <tumbleweed> no, it's all ubuntu developers
[18:17] <broder> i thought it was anyone who has any upload rights
[18:18] <tumbleweed> broder: yeah that's what I was trying to say
[18:18] <vish> tumbleweed: so if someone were to be added to only that team, what would they have applied for?
[18:18] <ScottK> vish: The people who are in ubuntu-dev, but not MOTU have some kind of restricted upload right.
[18:18] <ScottK> Most, but not all of these will be PPU.
[18:18] <tumbleweed> vish: PPU, I'd guess? /me isn't a DMB member
[18:18] <ScottK> There is at least one person who is kubuntu-dev, but not MOTU, so it's not just PPU.
[18:19] <vish> maco/ Laney: could you fix that description to something that is better :)
[18:19] <vish> ?
[18:20] <vish> i was looking at https://launchpad.net/~hrw and was confused.. its better i just ask hrw i guess :D
[18:21] <vish> hrw: you are in ~ubuntu-dev , so you get BugControl membership too with that. I would like to deactivate your membership in bugsquad mentoring, is that OK? (unless you feel you need specific mentoring)
[18:37] <cjwatson> vish: ubuntu-dev is mainly for voting rights
[18:38] <cjwatson> at least by way of things that use that team
[18:38] <vish> ah!
[18:39] <vish> cjwatson: i couldnt figure out hrw's membership, whether he was MOTU or …  i guess he got PPU access recently
[18:40] <ScottK> He did.
[18:41]  * vish nods
[18:42] <hrw> vish: feel free
[18:42] <vish> hrw: neat! thx..
[18:42] <hrw> vish: I use bugcontrol only on bugs against my packages
[18:43] <vish> k..
[18:58] <hrw> vish: now I only need to find a way to unsubscribe from that team ML ;)
[18:58] <vish> hrw: i think i sent the mail first and then deactivated you, probably why you got the mail :)
[19:02] <hrw> ok, then I am fine with it
[19:02] <hrw> have a nice weekend
[20:00] <oier> hello guys
[20:00] <oier> i have a question regarding #682202
[20:01] <oier> I fixed the bug for latex-beamer but since there is no bazaar trunk in launchpad I created a package using pbuilder
[20:01] <oier> where can I upload the package or have other devs sponsor it?
[20:05] <psusi> oier: sure there is: lp:ubuntu/latex-beamer
[20:06] <oier> allright, many thanks!