[06:51] wgrant: Hi, what was the magic url for the LP build chroots again? hrw was looking for it yesterday [06:52] geser: https://launchpad.net/api/devel/ubuntu/oneiric/i386 [06:53] thanks [06:53] hrw: ^^ [06:58] good morning [06:59] good morning dholbach [07:01] hi geser [07:43] Morning dholbach, geser. [07:44] hey iulian [07:47] How's it going? [07:59] wgrant, geser: thanks [09:09] uf. now I have chroot where package fail ;D [09:10] is that what you wanted? :) [09:11] yes [09:12] package built in my chroots and not on launchpad. now I have LP one locally [09:47] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/courier/0.66.1-1ubuntu1/+build/2611450/+files/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-i386.courier_0.66.1-1ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz [09:47] umask 0022 is default to build no ? [09:51] dupondje: bigjools and/or wgrant in #launchpad should know it [10:00] seeing as we just changed the default in ubuntu, it's quite likely that affected sbuild too [10:00] oh, that was noted in #ubuntu-devl [10:01] ye :) [10:07] found issue ;) [10:07] i486 != i686 != i486 [10:07] die i386... asap [10:07] what was different about the launchpad chroot that triggered that? [10:09] tumbleweed: bug 802985 hold me from using i386 chroot before [10:10] Launchpad bug 802985 in eglibc (Ubuntu Hardy) "[lucid] /var/lib/dpkg/tmp.ci/preinst: 399: arithmetic expression: expecting EOF: "3.0-0-generic"" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/802985 [10:10] so I tested on amd64 which is totally different [10:10] new lesson learnt [10:10] new patch to gcc-4.4 (nearly obsolete now) generated [10:11] ah right === dholbach_ is now known as dholbach [12:37] dh_installman manpages/*.{5,8} [12:37] this doesn't work anymore ? [12:47] dupondje: that's a bashism separate it into two parameters [12:48] err, prentend I used some punctuation there [12:48] weird it worked before tho :s [12:49] bash used to be the default shell (a while ago) [12:50] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shorewall-lite/+bug/806457 [12:50] Ubuntu bug 806457 in shorewall-lite (Ubuntu) "Fix FTBFS in oneiric" [Undecided,New] [12:50] looks fine ? [12:50] I'd have put them both on the same line [12:50] also, that's something to submit to debian [12:51] and the changelog entry isn't very helpful :) [12:51] dh_installman didn't change at all [12:52] true, its because bash isn't the default shell anymore :) [12:52] it also fails in debian [12:52] please file a RC bug [12:53] User: debian-release@lists.debian.org Usertags: goal-dash [12:53] dupondje: "Removed a bashism from debian/rules" would be far clearer. [12:54] hm no that tag does not apply [13:00] but its still usefull to get it fixed in Ubuntu no ? [13:01] yes, but as it's RC in debian, we can probably get it uploded there quite quickly. (if the maintainer doesn't respond within a week or so, ping me, I'll NMU it) [13:01] yes, but it needs fixing in debian too [13:02] * dupondje hates debian's bugsystem [13:02] launchpad is much more easier :) [13:03] hrm, I'd say they both have their advantages. I'll agree launchpad is easier to use, though [13:03] I can file it if like [13:04] been massfiling the last few days anyway, one more does not matter :) [13:04] well i'll try it out myself :) [13:04] gotto learn it one day :D [13:05] you hate it, but you've never filed a bug there? [13:05] well did file a bug [13:05] or add comment [13:05] but not alot :) [13:05] and every time I need to read its man page again ^^ [13:10] man page? [13:10] reportbug packagename ... [13:10] geser: http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting [13:10] :) [13:11] I use reportbug, answer the questions, write the mail body, attach the patch and send it [13:12] reportbug crashes for me every 2nd time ._. [13:13] jtaylor: why? [13:13] ought to file a bug for that, but I always just use regular email [13:13] no idea [13:14] its random, did not really have any success at debuggingit [13:26] so many opendrim packages broken :( [13:27] we have someone working on those [13:27] it's really easy to fix [13:27] who? [13:28] scarneiro [13:28] they should be marked then [13:28] he had branches filed for most of them that needed work. pitti marked them as "needs fixing" in his patch piloting today [13:28] before thta, they were showing up on the bug pages [13:29] oh, they still are [13:29] I just picked one that wasn't [13:32] jtaylor: there, marked them. [13:32] tumbleweed: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/74646996/shorewall-lite.debdiff [13:32] dupondje: LGTM [13:36] thx but you missed quite a few [13:36] I marked the ones he had branches for [13:36] ah ok [13:40] Rhonda, you don't happen to have access rights to the backports.debian.org keyring do you? [13:40] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=632851 and forwarded to debian [13:40] Debian bug 632851 in shorewall-lite "FTBFS due to bashism in debian/rules" [Serious,Open] [13:41] dupondje: please link it to the ubuntu bug [13:42] done [13:44] yey lua-svn has a randomly failing testsuite [13:56] * Rhonda laughs madly at directhex [13:56] directhex: who else but me? :) [13:57] * Rhonda hmmms, I had rt.d.o open somewhere today already for processing tickets … [13:57] directhex: buy me a beaverage at debconf :P [13:57] Rhonda, sadly i won't be at debconf :( [13:57] Rhonda, fosdem 2012? [13:57] too chaotic to attend for me [13:59] Rhonda, i can get robot101 to pay if i give a talk. the trick is working out a subject to talk about at debconf [14:00] does lua shake have an expect test macro? [14:00] Is it? I've been tricked into giving four this year .. %-) [14:00] Rhonda, :o [14:01] * Rhonda . o O ( alright, bits from the web team and bits from the backports team ones don't really count ) [14:11] Rhonda, thanks. also thanks from sledge [14:11] Is he sitting beside you? [14:12] I can't reproduce this failure anymore: bug 771137 but instead there is a different problem causing a build failure [14:12] Launchpad bug 771137 in lua-svn (Ubuntu Oneiric) "lua-svn version 0.4.0-2 failed to build on amd64 with GCC-4.6/oneiric" [High,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/771137 [14:12] should I edit the bug or close it and open a new one? [14:12] Rhonda, he's in #debian-uk on oftc. [14:13] Why can't he send me the kudos himself? :) [14:13] jtaylor: I'd just recycle the bug [14:14] Rhonda, well i told him to relay beer on my behalf. [14:15] … only if they have good beer in bosnia. ;) === med_out is now known as medberry === medberry is now known as med_out === ximion2 is now known as ximion === ximion1 is now known as ximion === med_out is now known as medberry [19:29] tumbleweed: are you uploading pppstatus? [19:30] micahg: err, just did [19:30] k, I was looking at it as well... [19:30] sorry, I'll stop [19:30] tumbleweed: no, please continue [19:30] hah [19:30] I've just been uploading things from the same guy [19:31] I just wish there was a way to flag something as working on in the UDD view [19:31] tumbleweed: you're just doing the FTBFS fixes, right? [19:31] yeah [19:32] k, I'll grab other things [19:32] there's plenty to do :) [19:32] in that case, I'll look at some more [19:33] tumbleweed: thanks === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan === yofel_ is now known as yofel [21:00] Rhonda: 'grats on the debian backports gig, just saw that mail :) [21:00] well done :) [21:01] 'aint real until it's appeared on d-d-a eh? ;-) [21:01] :) [21:45] jtaylor: not waiting on a debian response for oval-interpreter? [21:46] no the RC bug in debian is too old with no reaction [21:46] sounds NMUable :) [21:47] let's give it a few days with a patch, and if there's no response, NMU it [21:48] actually I'll nmu it now, it's an ancient bug [21:48] well there is still much time till debian release, does it need a nmu? [21:48] 3 month old RC bug, with no maintainer response. Sounds fine to me [21:50] go ahead, I'm no dm so I can't [22:01] jtaylor: uploaded to delayed/2 [22:01] thx [22:26] bdrung_: hrm, are we doing some thing wrong with sponsor-patch? I'm noticing udd inconsistancies with branches I've sponosred [22:26] tumbleweed: that's your code :P [22:26] oh, duh, I probably didn't bzr commit while editing (sponsor-patch -e). Maybe we should detect uncommitted changes.. [22:27] ...oh, you're supposed to commit with -e? [22:27] you are in a bzr checkout, so yes [22:28] i assumed sponsor-patch would run debcommit for me [22:28] it does, doesn't it [22:28] hmm, it does [22:28] it should make sure that everything is committed before pushing [22:28] * tumbleweed takes a closer look at the inconsistancies [22:31] oh, quilt, urgh === medberry is now known as med_out