[00:39] <RenatoSilva> anyone know how to create a filter in synaptic for showing checked changes only from proposed?
[00:42] <RenatoSilva> also, how to exclude filters in synaptic? exclude button doesn't work, so I need to hack into the files...
[00:47] <RenatoSilva> RenatoSilva: remove manually from /root/.synaptic/filters
[00:47] <RenatoSilva> thanks
[01:42] <RenatoSilva> sorry guys but #ubuntu is mostly useless, sorry for asking here: can I safely do a sudo cp /etc/skel/.bashrc /root/.bashrc in Natty (11.04). Are they the same file in Natty????
[02:06] <RenatoSilva> thanks all anyway
[05:38] <AnAnt> Hello, what's the preferred bug title for merge requests ?
[05:39] <RAOF> AnAnt: Depends - do you want something to be merged, or do you want a merge sponsored?
[05:40] <AnAnt> to be sponsored
[05:40] <RAOF> “Please merge $FOO from $DEBIAN_RELEASE” is what I'd go with.
[05:40] <philipballew> hey, there's a package in apt-get thats like 6 years out of date. can i build a deb for it or sugest it gets updated for 11.10?
[05:43] <AnAnt> RAOF: and use merge tag ?
[05:43] <RAOF> philipballew: Certainly!
[05:43] <philipballew> its kismet
[05:43] <jmarsden> philipballew: Yes.  You can also check if it is being synced from Debian, and if so, talk with its existing maintainer, or become its maintainer :)
[05:43] <philipballew> i would love to be a maintainer!
[05:44] <philipballew> how can i learn!
[05:44] <RAOF> AnAnt: I guess; I generally don't look at tags, and it'll just hit the sponsoring queue, which I think I'm due to be wandering through tomorrow :)
[05:44] <AnAnt> RAOF: you sponsor main packages ?
[05:44] <RAOF> AnAnt: Now that I'm a core-dev, yes :)
[05:44] <jmarsden> philipballew: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/  is one place to start
[05:45] <AnAnt> RAOF: ah, congrats
[05:45] <philipballew> sounds like ill have some fun reading!!!
[05:45] <zooko> Folks: we're hoping to upgrade Tahoe-LAFS in Ubuntu to the new Tahoe-LAFS v1.9 (not yet released) when it is ready. It will have a new dependency -- on protovis. Does anyone want to package protovis for Ubuntu?
[06:34] <RenatoSilva> how to notify the propose guys some package should not go into mainstream, because it's buggy?
[06:34] <RenatoSilva> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/emerald
[06:35] <RenatoSilva> proposed for natty is buggy, just tested, what works is the one from https://launchpad.net/~malteworld/+archive/compiz
[06:36] <RAOF> RenatoSilva: Post a follow up message to (one of) the SRU bugs the proposed package is intended to fix; it'll be marked verification-failed and will not be propogated to -updates.
[06:37] <RAOF> Or even propagated ;).  Also, man, we still have emerald in the archive?  And it works at all with the new compiz?
[06:37] <RenatoSilva> what's SRU? just forgot
[06:38] <jmarsden> RenatoSilva: Stable Release Update
[06:38] <RAOF> Stable Release Update; in order to get into -proposed that emerald package must have been marked as fixing at least one SRU bug.
[06:41] <RenatoSilva> RAOF: Emerald working nicely in Natty: http://www.videolog.tv/video.php?id=670508
[06:41] <philipballew> jmarsden, once i learn how to package, how can i get started with ubuntu?
[06:41] <RenatoSilva> the bug that points to that ppa which contains a 0.8.8 version of emerald, is not listed in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/emerald
[06:43] <RenatoSilva> however see comment 28 in Bug 733393
[06:43] <RenatoSilva> so it should be listed there on the package bugs, but can't find it!
[06:46] <RAOF> That's one of the SRU bugs; please follow up on that (or on bug #749047) if you've been testing the -proposed package and found a problem.
[06:47] <lifeless> RenatoSilva: its fix released in oneiric
[06:47] <lifeless> RenatoSilva: the non-series bug view shows bugs based on their conjoined-master task, and the conjoined-master is updated when the default-series task is changed.
[06:48] <lifeless> RenatoSilva: so that bug has a conjoined-master which is fix released and thats why yu can't see it
[06:50]  * RenatoSilva dizzy
[06:51] <RenatoSilva> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/emerald/+bug/733393/comments/31
[06:53] <RAOF> Note that we're not going to pull in a PPA package into the stable release :).
[06:54] <RenatoSilva> Just commented on the original bug where I found the solution to my problem, is that enough or I need to comment somewhere else?
[06:54] <RenatoSilva> RAOF: I think you can just pull the Oneiric's
[06:55] <RenatoSilva> RAOF: they're probably the same stuff
[06:55] <RAOF> We're unlikely to pull in oneiric's, either, although if the current version is *totally* broken then we might.
[06:56] <RenatoSilva> I mean pull from oneiric
[06:57] <RenatoSilva> oneiric contains the 0.8.8 package, then just use it in natty, that's my suggestion
[06:58] <RenatoSilva> RAOF: yes, the current version in release, 0.7.2-0ubuntu6, DOESN'T WORK
[06:59] <RenatoSilva> RAOF: it doesn't show up ANY border in the windows. I think it's just because current Natty's compiz is too new, and 0.8.8 is the one which works with the new compiz.
[07:00] <RenatoSilva> RAOF: just to be very clear: the proposed 0.7.2-0ubuntu6.1 doesn't work either (can't see right border)
[07:04] <RenatoSilva> I just want to help in the sense that (1) current emerald is totally broken (2) that fix in proposed is broken too (3) the 0.8.8 version works fine in natty (at least the one from that PPA, which is likely the same as the one pushed to Oneiric)
[07:04] <RAOF> Right.
[07:08] <RenatoSilva> ok so anything else I could do? Comment on another bug or something?
[07:16] <RenatoSilva> gotta go. I'm subscribed to that bug in any case
[07:16] <RenatoSilva> thanks all
[07:20] <dholbach> good morning
[09:50] <oier> Hi, I uploaded a new package (an indicator)  I wrote to REVU, and I get an error about the maintainer field "The Maintainer field is invalid. It has to contain an @ubuntu.com address (usually the Ubuntu Developer Team's). The packager can leave his/her name as XSBC-Original-Maintainer. "
[09:51] <oier> since I wrote the package and intend to maintain it I don't understand the error
[09:51] <dupondje> What we do with a package that got removed in Debian?
[09:53] <oier> you can check the control file here http://paste.ubuntu.com/646361/
[09:53] <jtaylor> what the reason for the removal?
[09:55] <oier> BTW, I got a second question. Should the version number be 0.1 or 0.1-0ubuntu1? it has never be published before in debian or ubuntu
[09:56] <jtaylor> 0ubuntu1 then
[09:57] <oier> but the i get the error because of the maintainer field
[09:57] <oier> dpkg-source: warning: Version number suggests Ubuntu changes, but Maintainer: does not have Ubuntu address
[09:58] <oier>  and also "dpkg-source: warning: Version number suggests Ubuntu changes, but there is no XSBC-Original-Maintainer field"
[09:58] <oier> does that mean that only ubuntu members can be maintainers?
[09:58] <jtaylor> ubuntu has no dedicated maintainer I think
[10:00] <oier> so what should i put in the maintainer field then?
[10:04] <jtaylor> I guess you can ignore that messages, its probably do prevent that ubuntu users spam debian maintainers with ubuntu bugs
[10:04] <jtaylor> but as there is no debian version that should not apply
[10:05] <Laney> we still usually use the list for maintainer and packager for XSBC-Original-Maintainer
[10:05] <dupondje> jtaylor: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=633715
[10:09] <jtaylor> dupondje: sounds like it can be removed from ubuntu too only has a vote of 91, maybe ask the last ubuntu uploader
[10:10] <jtaylor> does someone have a working armel pbuilder? I fail to get mine working
[12:35] <rsajdok> Any suggestions? http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1796856
[12:37] <Laney> ask in #gwibber for gwibber support
[12:37] <tumbleweed> rsajdok: you are running it in the source directory
[12:38] <tumbleweed> also: sudo setup.py install isn't easily uninstallable :)
[13:59] <jdstrand> fyi, here is the hardy supported list: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-security/ubuntu-cve-tracker/master/view/head:/hardy-supported.txt
[14:12] <oier> Hi, anyone up for reviewing indicator-bug? it's indicator that displays a list of bugs for  Launchpad projects that match the defined search settings (tags,status...) and notifies you if there a new bugs (for example if there are new bitesize bugs)
[14:13] <oier> I uploaded a candidate at http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=9147
[14:14] <jtaylor> Copyright: (C) YEAR THE PACKAGE'S COPYRIGHT HOLDER?
[14:15] <jtaylor> you can also drop the (C) its redundant
[14:17] <oier> done. thanks jtaylor
[14:18] <oier> anything else?
[14:19] <jtaylor> writing a comment at revu
[14:28] <jtaylor> oier: sent
[14:29] <jtaylor> as your upstream, the star should have a tooltip, its not clear that it opens the about dialog
[14:29] <jtaylor> in preferences
[14:29] <oier> ok thanks
[14:31] <jtaylor> can you only monitor one project with it?
[16:00] <dupondje> How can we get a new package in Ubuntu
[16:00] <dupondje> its already packaged by Debian
[16:01] <micahg> dupondje: requestsync
[16:02] <dupondje> ok done
[16:02] <dupondje> :D
[16:02] <dupondje> didn't know it was THAT easy :D
[16:02] <dupondje> héhé
[16:04] <Laney> providing you tested it works and said why we want the package in the sync request, yes
[16:07] <dupondje> http://packages.qa.debian.org/p/partclone.html
[16:07] <dupondje> quite nice to have no ?
[16:07] <Laney> dunno
[16:08] <dupondje> partition cloner
[16:08] <dupondje> used in clonezilla
[16:08] <dupondje> :)
[16:08] <dupondje> damn good stuff
[16:10] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/812388 there :D
[16:11] <Laney> you built it on oneiric?
[16:15] <dupondje> err forgot
[16:15] <dupondje> doing now
[16:16] <dupondje> builds :)
[16:16] <Laney> sync request (as a sponsor) mantra: builds installs (upgrades) runs, rationale
[16:16] <Laney> sponsoree
[16:17] <dupondje> :D
[16:18] <dupondje> gotto love the speed :D
[16:19] <oier> what is the format of a watch file if upstream is in Launchpad?
[16:20] <jtaylor> something like this:	 https://launchpad.net/nunitv2/+download .*/NUnit-([\d.]+)-src\.zip
[16:22] <oier> thanks
[17:11] <technomancy> Is this appropriate for getting this package updated in oneric, or should a separate sync request be filed? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/clojure/+bug/731979
[17:12] <micahg> technomancy: you can just edit that bug with the output from requestsync
[17:12] <micahg> technomancy: and then subscribe ubuntu-sponsors
[17:13] <technomancy> micahg: thanks!
[17:13] <micahg> technomancy: oh, and reset the status back to new as well, thanks
[17:14] <technomancy> is it cutting it kind of close in terms of timing to make it into oneric, or is there a good chance it could land?
[17:15] <technomancy> I've got a new package I'd love to see make it in, but it has this plus three other deps that need to be synced.
[17:15] <micahg> technomancy: we're still 3 weeks out from feature freeze
[17:16] <technomancy> that sounds encouraging. =)
[17:17] <technomancy> hm; the package is clojure1.2 in sid, should that be considered a new package for the purposes of requestsync?
[17:18] <micahg> technomancy: yes
[17:20] <technomancy> so just take the output of requestsync and add it as a comment?
[17:20] <technomancy> it doesn't look like I can edit the description
[17:20] <micahg> technomancy: I'd just suggest a new request since it's for a new source
[17:21] <micahg> technomancy: is Debian deprecating the old sourcE?
[17:21] <oier> hi again, after addresing the packaging issues I had thanks to jtaylor, I am looking for some MOTUs to take a look at my package on REVU and upload it eventually http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=9150
[17:21] <technomancy> micahg: I don't think so
[17:21] <sbeattie> clojure1.2 is already in oneiric, FYI.
[17:21] <oier> I would aprreciate your help very much
[17:21] <micahg> sbeattie: indeed :)
[17:22] <technomancy> sbeattie: oh dang; how did I miss that?
[17:23] <technomancy> I guess I was just looking at "clojure"
[17:23] <technomancy> ok, I must be dumb; I can't see how to close this bug I just created
[17:24] <sbeattie> technomancy: should be able to set the task state to invalid
[17:25] <technomancy> there we go; thanks
[17:25] <technomancy> it's my first day on launchpad; I guess I need to be cut some slack =)
[17:26] <dupondje> hoho
[17:26] <dupondje> we can do a mass sync :P
[17:27] <dupondje> tryton*
[17:38] <dupondje> Laney: we can sync https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hdbc right :)
[17:38] <dupondje> bdrung: I testbuild all my sync reqs in pbuilder. So they all should build fine :)
[17:39] <bdrung> dupondje: that's my standard procedure. on which arch do you build them?
[17:39] <dupondje> amd64
[17:39] <bdrung> dupondje: building the packages does not consume the time. the time consuming part is to check the diffs
[17:40] <dupondje> well true :)
[17:45] <bdrung> dupondje: and 2 of 12 failed to build today. so that's a valid check.
[17:45] <bdrung> dupondje: even if you build them, they can ftbfs days later
[17:45] <dupondje> thats true
[17:47] <Laney> dupondje: yes, likely. Check the reverse dependencies are still installable with the new package.
[17:57] <technomancy> just loaded my GPG key into LP... feels like some James Bond stuff going on. =)
[17:59] <Ampelbein> lfaraone: hi! you don't need to request a freeze exception yet, feature freeze is still some 3 weeks away (august 11th) (regarding bug 812409)
[18:01] <dupondje> bdrung: dunno if your able to sync tryton-*
[18:01] <dupondje> thats like 40 packages :p
[18:01] <bdrung> dupondje: 40 packages?
[18:01] <bdrung> dupondje: i have enough for today.
[18:02] <Laney> erm
[18:02] <Laney> please, as we have repeatedly urged, exercise restraint when requesting syncs
[18:03] <micahg> dupondje: the only point in syncing them at this point is if the Debian uploaded added something on top of the Ubuntu patch
[18:03] <micahg> dupondje: otherwise, just wait for next cycle, or a new Debian upload with something we need
[18:04] <technomancy> why do I get "relay access denied" with requestsync? do I need to provide lp credentials or something?
[18:05] <Ampelbein> technomancy: that's a message from a smtp-server.
[18:05] <dupondje> cause it can't email :)
[18:06] <Daviey> technomancy: use requestsync --lp
[18:06] <technomancy> Daviey: thanks
[18:06] <Daviey> then it'll use the lp api, rather than mail.
[18:06] <Daviey> (/me ponders why that isn't the default.)
[18:07] <geser> technomancy: which ubuntu-dev-tools version do you use?
[18:07] <micahg> Daviey: not everyone wants to have an LP account/auth against it, I guess
[18:07] <Daviey> micahg: then they can use --mail :)
[18:07] <micahg> heh
[18:08] <Daviey> micahg: it's not like it's running a binary blob with credentials. :/
[18:08] <geser> Daviey: when --lp got added, I didn't want to change the default (mail) and till now there was no discussion about the default mode so it stayed that way
[18:09] <technomancy> geser: 0.104 on one machine; natty on another
[18:09] <Daviey> geser: I actually aliased it myself because i'm lazy.
[18:10] <technomancy> that worked; thanks
[18:10] <micahg> technomancy: 0.104 uses an old mail relay
[18:11] <geser> technomancy: u-d-t till version 0.115 has a smtp-server hardcoded which isn't a MX for launchpad.net anymore
[18:12] <oier> if some motu is bored and doesn't know on what to spend time, reviewing indicator-bug is fun! http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=9150
[18:12] <technomancy> worked fine with --lp after I ran manage-credentials; just would have appreciated a better error message
[18:12] <technomancy> anyway, got my sync requests in; sweet
[18:12] <Daviey> ScottK: Hey, How did you get on with those ARM boxes you were given for people to use?
[18:13]  * micahg thinks bored motu is an oxymoron
[18:24] <bdrung> dupondje: re bug 812454 were is the change "Change BD on haddock to ghc-haddock"?
[18:41] <lfaraone> Ampelbein: haha, sorry, lol.
[18:42] <lfaraone> Ampelbein: I got my freezes confused.
[18:42] <Ampelbein> ;-
[18:42] <Ampelbein> *;-)
[18:43] <lfaraone> Ampelbein: anyway, those bugs need to be fixed to fix a urgency: high bug in oneric.
[18:43] <lfaraone> lp 807860
[18:44] <Ampelbein> lfaraone: yeah, I guess someone from ~ubuntu-archive will run a sync soon-ish. There's quite some in the queue.
[18:44] <lfaraone> oh joy.
[18:48] <ScottK> Daviey: I'm hoping we'll get native support for them in Oneiric soon so they can be updated.  I do have one I can give MOTU access to if needed.
[19:18] <dupondje> bdrung: that seems a mistake indeed! My excuses
[19:19] <dupondje> Laney: http://packages.qa.debian.org/h/haddock.html haddock got removed in debian. Guess the package should be fixed in debian also. I see your the maintainer :)
[19:20] <micahg> dupondje: he's not the maintainer of that
[19:20] <dupondje> 'the package' = hdbc :)
[19:20] <dupondje> which uses haddock as bdep
[19:20] <micahg> ah
[19:21] <dupondje> But its evening :) time to stop doing things where I need to think :D
[22:08] <kernal> hi all!