=== Adri2000 is now known as Guest22931 [07:34] good morning === jmarsden_ is now known as jmarsden === Guest22931 is now known as Adri2000 [11:34] micahg: libdkim is fixed now [11:43] can someone take a look at bug 791321? [11:43] Launchpad bug 791321 in raxml (Ubuntu) "raxml version 7.2.6-1 failed to build on armel" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/791321 [11:44] I attached debdiff there and subscribed sponsors already [12:45] hrw: would the package compile without the -msse or would it fail then too? (see the related Debian bug #626672) [12:45] Debian bug 626672 in src:raxml "raxml: Uses -msse" [Grave,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/626672 [12:53] geser: it uses headers available only on x86 archs [12:53] but can check [13:05] geser: raxml needs xmmintrin.h which is x86 only and uses asm instructions. [13:05] warp10: why don't you contribute your sparkleshare packages to debian? [13:07] geser: but will write to debian bug too [13:07] 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] hrw: thanks [13:08] (then we might have been able to make you aware of cli/mono packaging helpers) [13:15] geser: mail sent. [13:15] geser: so now we wait for Debian maintainer to react and then will sync [13:16] hrw: ideally yes [13:37] bug 791326 - best way is to report this also as bug in debian? [13:37] Launchpad bug 791326 in gnu-smalltalk (Ubuntu) "gnu-smalltalk version 3.2.4-1 failed to build on armel" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/791326 [13:38] as this is not ubuntu only problem [13:40] hrw: reportbug -B debian --smtphost=reportbug.debian.org gnu-smalltalk [13:42] wrote to maintainers directly [13:48] good morning [13:49] hiya [13:51] hrw: It did build on Debian? Potentially there is a toolchain difference, so severity should be normal or important, but not higher. [13:52] Rhonda: it may build on Debian but soon will stop building [13:53] Rhonda: multiarch landed in natty and is starting to land in Debian too [13:53] Sure, I don't question that. [13:54] 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] Rhonda: I did not reported bug in Debian - I mailed maintainers with review/merge request [13:56] I understood that, just generally speaking. Better safe than sorry. [13:57] 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] Rhonda: ftbfs kind of bug on package which I do not even know what it does is never RC kind for me [13:59] 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] Rhonda: part of Linaro's 'arm porting queue' weekly [13:59] Sweet tradition. :) [14:04] lunch time [14:30] 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] warp10: the ITP is owned by me :-) [14:31] it's kind of 'on behalf of' the Debian CLI applications team [14:31] Laney: ah, sorry, didn't noticed that :D [14:32] what's this other terminus PPA? [14:32] Laney: actually, I'm not interested in mono packaging (and am not an expert at all) [14:32] Laney: ETA for your package to land in debian? [14:33] just saying that if you want to help with maintaining it in Debian then we can work something out [14:33] haven't got one yet, was waiting for upstream to sort itself out [14:33] seems to have happened now, so a few days [14:33] oh, sparkleshare. i guess it's in a packageable state now [14:34] apparently, haven't downloaded it yet to check [14:34] Laney: ok, sounds great. [14:34] the worst sins of the source are gone. i should re-evaluate it for the office [14:34] i'd base it on one or other of the ppa packages [14:34] i think hbons is in the meeting room down the hall, i could quiz him... [14:34] warp10 seems to have done a copyright file :-) [14:34] heh [14:34] quiz him on why he pushed for a PPA instead of doing it properly ... [14:35] Laney: yeah, it *should* be complete. Feel free to grab it, but please re-check everything [14:35] Laney: BTW: many files have missing license header [14:35] it's a good start, but I noticed that you don't use any of cli-common-dev, for example [14:36] which is why you had to manually add that dep on webkit-sharp [14:37] Laney: is cli-common-dev an helper for mono packages? [14:37] warp10, yes [14:37] it provides a dh sequence and some helpers, indeed [14:38] Maybe it fixes the few files having +x permission too? [14:38] dunno [14:39] 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] will look at this when I get back [14:39] Laney: :D ok [14:40] 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] Hi there! [15:04] I am fairly new to packaging apps for ubuntu and i face a problem i do not understand [15:05] I manage to create the source package using dbuilder but one I upload it on launchpad, it fails to build [15:05] the error launchpad give me is here : http://paste.ubuntu.com/627324/ [15:05] Does any of you guys can explain me what i am doing wrong ? [15:06] looks like you have hardcoded paths in your source package that only exist on your system [15:06] you can't assume that /home/player exists [15:06] use grep -r to find where you're doing that [15:08] alright [15:08] thanks very much [15:09] what i've done is run cmake before dh_make [15:09] should i avoid running cmake ? [15:11] DorianJaminais: cmake should be run when building the package, but there's no reason to run it before preparing the source package [15:11] DorianJaminais: 'debian/rules clean' should clean up bits and pieces left by cmake, though, so check why it isn't [15:12] ah, yes, clean is the thing that's failing due to the hardcoded path nonsense [15:12] you'll need to clean that up before uploading the source package [15:13] but can i run dh_make if i haven't got any makefiles ? (like before running cmake) [15:18] yes [15:18] dh_make just spits out a template source package [15:18] (you're expected to edit what it produces) [15:18] another bug done - bug 791312 is also debian bug 626671 [15:18] Launchpad bug 791312 in monav (Ubuntu) "monav version 0.3-3 failed to build on armel" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/791312 [15:18] Debian bug 626671 in src:monav "monav: Uses -march=native" [Grave,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/626671 [15:19] okay I i misunderstood that, i thought that dh_make was using the makefile to determine dependencies === stdin is now known as Guest80131 === Guest80131 is now known as ts2 [16:30] i'm having a problem with my unity launcher, can someone help me? [16:31] renemoraes: hi, please use #ubuntu for support, this channel is about maintaining universe packages. [16:31] ok.. sorry! thank u [16:32] no worries [16:32] back again [16:32] so a rebuild my package without using cmake before [16:33] as expected i don't find any references to my home folder know [16:33] but i still have the same error message when trying to build on launchpad [16:33] mistyrouge: can you point to the location of the *.dsc file? [16:35] https://launchpad.net/~mistyrouge/+archive/vescape-ppa/+files/pagedgeometry_1.1.0-0ubuntu3.dsc [16:36] and here is the build log : https://launchpadlibrarian.net/73570469/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-amd64.pagedgeometry_1.1.0-0ubuntu3_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz [16:37] 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 === hannesw_ is now known as hannesw [16:38] how can i get rid of it ? [16:39] mistyrouge: I don't know to be honest, you should ask upstream to fix the buildsystem. [16:39] all right thank you very much [16:42] just a thinking : can't the problem come from the fact i am using cmake to create a makefile ? [16:58] Ampelbein : where did you find the makefile ? I can't find it [16:59] I think I know what the problem is [17:00] the first time, i uploaded an incorrect .orig.tar.gz file [17:00] and launchpad seems to use this one intead of the new one [17:00] is there a way to upload a new orig.tar.gz file ? [17:00] mistyrouge: only with a new version [17:01] a new version of the upstream software or a new version of the package ? [17:01] mistyrouge: and the makefile is in the package directory, after 'dpkg-source -x *.dsc' [17:02] mistyrouge: a new upstream. you should never change upstream tarballs without changing the tarball's name. [17:02] 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] al right so i need to create a fake new minor version of the upstream project ? [17:04] mistyrouge: or use a version name like foo_0.1.2-proper.orig.tar.gz [17:04] mistyrouge: and a fitting debian version foo_0.1.2-proper-0ubuntu1 [17:04] (you get the idea) [17:04] okay I will try this [17:05] thank you very much for your help === artfwo_ is now known as artfwo [20:06] cjwatson: re libdkim> ACK, thanks === paul_ is now known as Elbrus === yofel_ is now known as yofel === ximion2 is now known as ximion === ximion2 is now known as ximion === ximion2 is now known as ximion === ximion2 is now known as ximion === ximion is now known as ximion2