[07:34] <dholbach> good morning
[11:34] <cjwatson> micahg: libdkim is fixed now
[11:43] <hrw> can someone take a look at bug 791321?
[11:44] <hrw> I attached debdiff there and subscribed sponsors already
[12:45] <geser> hrw: would the package compile without the -msse or would it fail then too? (see the related Debian bug #626672)
[12:53] <hrw> geser: it uses headers available only on x86 archs
[12:53] <hrw> but can check
[13:05] <hrw> geser: raxml needs xmmintrin.h which is x86 only and uses asm instructions.
[13:05] <Laney> warp10: why don't you contribute your sparkleshare packages to debian?
[13:07] <hrw> geser: but will write to debian bug too
[13:07] <geser> hrw: it would be good if both Debian and Ubuntu use the same solution to that problem: either do runtime check if SSE can be used (if easily possible) or build only on any-i386, any-amd64 (don't know if any is supported at this place)
[13:08] <geser> hrw: thanks
[13:08] <Laney> (then we might have been able to make you aware of cli/mono packaging helpers)
[13:15] <hrw> geser: mail sent.
[13:15] <hrw> geser: so now we wait for Debian maintainer to react and then will sync
[13:16] <geser> hrw: ideally yes
[13:37] <hrw> bug 791326 - best way is to report this also as bug in debian?
[13:38] <hrw> as this is not ubuntu only problem
[13:40] <Laney> hrw: reportbug -B debian --smtphost=reportbug.debian.org gnu-smalltalk
[13:42] <hrw> wrote to maintainers directly
[13:48] <highvoltage> good morning
[13:49] <Laney> hiya
[13:51] <Rhonda> hrw: It did build on Debian? Potentially there is a toolchain difference, so severity should be normal or important, but not higher.
[13:52] <hrw> Rhonda: it may build on Debian but soon will stop building
[13:53] <hrw> Rhonda: multiarch landed in natty and is starting to land in Debian too
[13:53] <Rhonda> Sure, I don't question that.
[13:54] <Rhonda> But if it doesn't FTBFS right now in Debian, you shouldn't file it with a release critical severity. A fair amount of package maintainers react a bit "jumpy" on receiving RC bugs.
[13:54] <hrw> Rhonda: I did not reported bug in Debian - I mailed maintainers with review/merge request
[13:56] <Rhonda> I understood that, just generally speaking. Better safe than sorry.
[13:57] <Rhonda> If something FTBFS in ubuntu and you haven't checked whether the same issue really is currently _already_ happening in Debian, avoid release-critical severities.
[13:57] <hrw> Rhonda: ftbfs kind of bug on package which I do not even know what it does is never RC kind for me
[13:59] <hrw> Rhonda: wednesdays are bug fixing days for me - I am looking at 'arm-porting-queue' tag in launchpad and goes though the list.
[13:59] <hrw> Rhonda: part of Linaro's 'arm porting queue' weekly
[13:59] <Rhonda> Sweet tradition. :)
[14:04] <hrw> lunch time
[14:30] <warp10> Laney: there is an ITP already in debian BTS, and work is in progress. I opened that PPA upon request of sparkleshare upstream, who needed a bunch of packages for Ubuntu and Debian ASAP
[14:31] <Laney> warp10: the ITP is owned by me :-)
[14:31] <Laney> it's kind of 'on behalf of' the Debian CLI applications team
[14:31] <warp10> Laney: ah, sorry, didn't noticed that :D
[14:32] <Laney> what's this other terminus PPA?
[14:32] <warp10> Laney: actually, I'm not interested in mono packaging (and am not an expert at all)
[14:32] <warp10> Laney: ETA for your package to land in debian?
[14:33] <Laney> just saying that if you want to help with maintaining it in Debian then we can work something out
[14:33] <Laney> haven't got one yet, was waiting for upstream to sort itself out
[14:33] <Laney> seems to have happened now, so a few days
[14:33] <directhex> oh, sparkleshare. i guess it's in a packageable state now
[14:34] <Laney> apparently, haven't downloaded it yet to check
[14:34] <warp10> Laney: ok, sounds great.
[14:34] <directhex> the worst sins of the source are gone. i should re-evaluate it for the office
[14:34] <Laney> i'd base it on one or other of the ppa packages
[14:34] <directhex> i think hbons is in the meeting room down the hall, i could quiz him...
[14:34] <Laney> warp10 seems to have done a copyright file :-)
[14:34] <Laney> heh
[14:34] <Laney> quiz him on why he pushed for a PPA instead of doing it properly ...
[14:35] <warp10> Laney: yeah, it *should* be complete. Feel free to grab it, but please re-check everything
[14:35] <warp10> Laney: BTW: many files have missing license header
[14:35] <Laney> it's a good start, but I noticed that you don't use any of cli-common-dev, for example
[14:36] <Laney> which is why you had to manually add that dep on webkit-sharp
[14:37] <warp10> Laney: is cli-common-dev an helper for mono packages?
[14:37] <directhex> warp10, yes
[14:37] <Laney> it provides a dh sequence and some helpers, indeed
[14:38] <warp10> Maybe it fixes the few files having +x permission too?
[14:38] <Laney> dunno
[14:39] <Laney> anyway, I have to go to down to buy a fishing license for my father's birthday (he likes exciting things, y'see)
[14:39] <Laney> will look at this when I get back
[14:39] <warp10> Laney: :D ok
[14:40] <warp10> Laney: looks like there is only one issue with upstream code (a missing hashbang in a python script), but I'm going to warn guys in #sparkleshare, hopefully they will release a fix in time for your packaging
[15:03] <DorianJaminais> Hi there!
[15:04] <DorianJaminais> I am fairly new to packaging apps for ubuntu and i face a problem i do not understand
[15:05] <DorianJaminais> I manage to create the source package using dbuilder but one I upload it on launchpad, it fails to build
[15:05] <DorianJaminais> the error launchpad give me is here : http://paste.ubuntu.com/627324/
[15:05] <DorianJaminais> Does any of you guys can explain me what i am doing wrong ?
[15:06] <cjwatson> looks like you have hardcoded paths in your source package that only exist on your system
[15:06] <cjwatson> you can't assume that /home/player exists
[15:06] <cjwatson> use grep -r to find where you're doing that
[15:08] <DorianJaminais> alright
[15:08] <DorianJaminais> thanks very much
[15:09] <DorianJaminais> what i've done is run cmake before dh_make
[15:09] <DorianJaminais> should i avoid running cmake ?
[15:11] <cjwatson> DorianJaminais: cmake should be run when building the package, but there's no reason to run it before preparing the source package
[15:11] <cjwatson> DorianJaminais: 'debian/rules clean' should clean up bits and pieces left by cmake, though, so check why it isn't
[15:12] <cjwatson> ah, yes, clean is the thing that's failing due to the hardcoded path nonsense
[15:12] <cjwatson> you'll need to clean that up before uploading the source package
[15:13] <DorianJaminais> but can i run dh_make if i haven't got any makefiles ? (like before running cmake)
[15:18] <cjwatson> yes
[15:18] <cjwatson> dh_make just spits out a template source package
[15:18] <cjwatson> (you're expected to edit what it produces)
[15:18] <hrw> another bug done - bug 791312 is also debian bug 626671
[15:19] <DorianJaminais> okay I i misunderstood that, i thought that dh_make was using the makefile to determine dependencies
[16:30] <renemoraes> i'm having a problem with my unity launcher, can someone help me?
[16:31] <Ampelbein> renemoraes: hi, please use #ubuntu for support, this channel is about maintaining universe packages.
[16:31] <renemoraes> ok.. sorry! thank u
[16:32] <Ampelbein> no worries
[16:32] <mistyrouge> back again
[16:32] <mistyrouge> so a rebuild my package without using cmake before
[16:33] <mistyrouge> as expected i don't find any references to my home folder know
[16:33] <mistyrouge> but i still have the same error message when trying to build on launchpad
[16:33] <Ampelbein> mistyrouge: can you point to the location of the *.dsc file?
[16:35] <mistyrouge> https://launchpad.net/~mistyrouge/+archive/vescape-ppa/+files/pagedgeometry_1.1.0-0ubuntu3.dsc
[16:36] <mistyrouge> and here is the build log : https://launchpadlibrarian.net/73570469/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-amd64.pagedgeometry_1.1.0-0ubuntu3_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[16:37] <Ampelbein> mistyrouge: in the Makefile there is  $(CMAKE_COMMAND) -E cmake_progress_start /home/player/pagedGeometry/pagedgeometry-1.1.0/CMakeFiles /home/player/pagedGeometry/pagedgeometry-1.1.0/CMakeFiles/progress.marks
[16:38] <mistyrouge> how can i get rid of it ?
[16:39] <Ampelbein> mistyrouge: I don't know to be honest, you should ask upstream to fix the buildsystem.
[16:39] <mistyrouge> all right thank you very much
[16:42] <mistyrouge> just a thinking : can't the problem come from the fact i am using cmake to create a makefile ?
[16:58] <mistyrouge> Ampelbein : where did you find the makefile ? I can't find it
[16:59] <mistyrouge> I think I know what the problem is
[17:00] <mistyrouge> the first time, i uploaded an incorrect .orig.tar.gz file
[17:00] <mistyrouge> and launchpad seems to use this one intead of the new one
[17:00] <mistyrouge> is there a way to upload a new orig.tar.gz file ?
[17:00] <Ampelbein> mistyrouge: only with a new version
[17:01] <mistyrouge> a new version of the upstream software or a new version of the package ?
[17:01] <Ampelbein> mistyrouge: and the makefile is in the package directory, after 'dpkg-source -x *.dsc'
[17:02] <Ampelbein> mistyrouge: a new upstream. you should never change upstream tarballs without changing the tarball's name.
[17:02] <mistyrouge> thanks, i found it on launchpad but it is not on my computer, that is why i figured out that it hasn't the right version of the orig file
[17:03] <mistyrouge> al right so i need to create a fake new minor version of the upstream project ?
[17:04] <Ampelbein> mistyrouge: or use a version name like foo_0.1.2-proper.orig.tar.gz
[17:04] <Ampelbein> mistyrouge: and a fitting debian version foo_0.1.2-proper-0ubuntu1
[17:04] <Ampelbein> (you get the idea)
[17:04] <mistyrouge> okay I will try this
[17:05] <mistyrouge> thank you very much for your help
[20:06] <micahg> cjwatson: re libdkim> ACK, thanks