[05:48] <micahg> Ampelbein: osm-gps-map has a new upstream version in unstable and hasn't been merged this cycle, I think you noted to wait for the .la file diff to be taken by Debian, but FF is tomorrow, would you care to merge it?
[08:51] <philipballew> anyone know any good guides to get started in packaging?
[08:55] <Rhonda> Like the one in the wiki?
[08:56]  * afranke waves hello from Desktop summit
[08:58] <afranke> I have a few package requests (some are bumping versions on existing packages) and there doesn't seem to be any activity in the reports, so I was wondering what they to draw attention was.
[08:58] <philipballew> Rhonda, sure. I want to know how to build them and start helping motu
[08:58] <afranke> didrocks told me I should try talking about it here.
[09:00] <afranke> The most urgent is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/planner/+bug/805612
[09:06] <Rhonda> philipballew: Is there troubles with the guide in the wiki?
[09:07] <philipballew> is that a compleate guide? by reading that will I know how to help and begin packaging?
[09:14] <Rhonda> Read it, and if you have any further questions, feel free to bring them up. :)
[09:23] <geser> !packaging guide
[09:45] <afranke> !backports
[09:47] <Laney> afranke: the problem is they need someone to do the work
[09:47] <afranke> Laney: sure
[09:47] <afranke> But it's hard to see if they are being ignored or read by anybody.
[09:47] <Laney> correct
[09:47] <Laney> see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=632993 for planner, fyi
[09:48] <Laney> someone in Debian is working on updating it, you might email them to offer help or find out how it's going
[09:48] <afranke> Oh, Xavier forgot to keep me updated about it.
[09:48] <afranke> He just told me he wanted to orphan it.
[09:49] <afranke> But isn't it too late for the sync with Debian then?
[09:50] <Laney> looks bug fix, so no
[09:51] <afranke> Ok, great.
[09:51] <afranke> Should I talk about my other requests here too :) ?
[09:52] <Laney> for upstream versions I recommend you talk to the Debian maintainers
[09:52] <afranke> What about backports+
[09:52] <afranke> ?
[09:52] <Laney> file a bug, test it builds/installs/runs and then give me a link :-)
[09:52] <Laney> (and if any reverse dependencies [apt-cache rdepends $package], that they still work with the new version installed)
[09:53] <afranke> Bug is https://bugs.launchpad.net/lucid-backports/+bug/776360
[09:53] <afranke> :)
[09:54] <Laney> ok, that bug needs information that the version from maverick-updates builds/installs/runs on lucid
[09:54] <afranke> And building/installing/testing... well, I'm no packager (and I don't intend to become one), so...
[09:54] <Laney> there's a program prevu that can help you do this easily
[09:54] <Laney> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Prevu
[09:55] <afranke> Should I just try downloading the .deb for Maverick and try to install it on Lucid?
[09:55] <afranke> Oh.
[09:55]  * afranke started reading the page about Prevu.
[09:56] <afranke> Well, I'll see what I can do about it when I'm back home.
[09:56] <Laney> jdong: is prevu still maintained?
[09:56] <afranke> Thanks for the link.
[09:56] <Laney> afranke: alternatively you can download the source package for maverick and upload that to a PPA
[09:56] <afranke> Oh ok.
[09:57] <afranke> Sounds good.
[09:57] <Laney> I think there's a new script called backportpackage to help with that, but I don't know how it works I'm afraid
[09:57] <Laney> (it's in the ubuntu-dev-tools package)
[09:57] <Laney> ah, maybe this supersedes prevu actually
[09:58] <afranke> Meh.
[09:58] <Laney> broder: can backportpackage create the chroot if it doesn't exist?
[09:58] <afranke> ubuntu-*dev*-tools sounds like something I don't want to have a look at :)
[09:58] <Laney> you can ignore the rest of the scripts :P
[09:59] <afranke> I'm just trying to keep focused. There's already much I have to work on, so I don't want to start looking into Ubuntu packaging for instance.
[09:59] <afranke> But if there are simple things I can test, I'll do them.
[09:59] <Laney> backportpackage -u ppa:yourlaunchpadusername/yourppa -s maverick -d lucid tuxguitar
[09:59] <afranke> Ok, I'll try that at home.
[10:00] <Laney> you know what, I'll try that (so I can tell other people how to do it in the future)
[10:00] <afranke> Oh
[10:00] <afranke> Great, thanks a lot!
[10:02] <Laney> broder: I can't run backportpackage on sid (backportpackage: Error: Unknown release codename maverick
[10:02] <Laney> )
[10:02] <Laney> do you want bugs instead?
[10:12]  * afranke has to detach.
[10:12] <afranke> See you later and thanks again.
[10:12] <Laney> bye bye
[10:17] <willem_> Hi, is there any chance that Eclipse might be update to 3.7 with the upcoming release? If not, because it is still 3.5.2 in Debian. How could I help to bring the newer version to Debian/Ubuntu?
[10:18] <Rhonda> willem_: Pester the package maintainers in Debian. :)
[10:18] <Rhonda> Oh, there is 3.7 in experimental in Debian …
[10:19] <Laney> bdrung looks at that AFAIK, and he's away for a little while
[10:19] <Rhonda> There might actually be a reason behind that it hasn't got uploaded to unstable.  In this case I'd suggest to ask them what the reasoning behind is, and in case it's of no importance and the package there is fine, ask for a sync request from experimental.
[10:20] <hakermania> Hello, how should I upload the second version of a program whose 1st version Rests In Peace in revu?
[10:20] <Laney> just upload it again
[10:20] <hakermania> I have different GPG keys also, but I've used them in lanchpad as well, so REVU will find them :)
[10:20] <willem_> Rhonda, ok I will do that
[10:20] <hakermania> Laney, I did with dput -f but the new package didn't show up in revu
[10:20] <Rhonda> willem_: Just pinged nthykier on irc.debian.org about it, I'll keep you updated. :)
[10:21] <willem_> ok, I will stick around then :)
[10:21] <Laney> hakermania: don't know then, sorry
[10:21] <Laney> ajmitch: you do revu stuff, right?
[10:21] <Laney> or at least have access to logs
[10:28] <hakermania> Is this enough to associate it with REVU? http://i.imgur.com/S9KZE.png
[10:28] <Laney> don't know :(
[10:28] <Laney> RainCT: ^
[10:28] <hakermania> I will try again... :/
[10:29] <RainCT> hakermania: Yeah, but you need to log into REVU so it'll sync the keys from Launchpad
[10:31] <ajmitch> Laney: yeah
[10:31] <Laney> nm, RainCT saved the day
[10:32] <ajmitch> that's ok, I'm used to being too slow :)
[10:32] <Laney> silly upside down people
[10:33] <ajmitch> it gets hard to hold on
[10:33] <hakermania> RainCT, Do you mean that I have to be logged in into REVU via launchpad to have the package uploaded? So, does this mean it's a cookie issue or something :O ?
[10:33] <RainCT> hakermania: no, you just need to log in once after putting your key on Launchpad
[10:33] <ajmitch> hakermania: no, the act of logging in syncs the keys for that lp ID
[10:34] <RainCT> yeah, that
[10:35] <hakermania> Oh, so I will relogging
[10:35] <hakermania> got it
[10:36] <hakermania> Can I see from inside REVU the associated keys?
[10:36]  * hakermania wants to be sure
[10:38] <Rhonda> willem_: <nthykier> Rhonda: among things, I have not actually installed it and tried it starts... tests suggests that at least one of its r-depends are broken and if depends on stuff in experimental :P
[10:39] <Rhonda> willem_: So it might require a bit more investigation than just requesting a sync from experimental.
[10:40] <willem_> Rhonda: What would be a good way to proceed? Install Debian_experimental in a VM and see if it starts for myself?
[10:41] <Rhonda> I would give it a try if it's at all buildable in oneiric, and get it running there.
[10:42] <willem_> Rhonda: OK, will see if I can make some time available for that this evening... :) Thanks for the information!
[10:44] <hakermania> Rhonda, willem, are you talking about a new package?
[10:45] <Rhonda> hakermania: eclipse
[10:45] <Rhonda> For certain definitions of "new" :)
[10:45] <hakermania> !
[10:45] <hakermania> willem_ wants to upload it for review? Or not?
[10:46] <Rhonda> Wonders if it would be possible to get 3.7 into oneiric.
[10:46] <willem_> yep
[10:46] <Laney> it's not source NEW if that is what you are asking
[10:47]  * Rhonda . o O ( wow, feature freeze starting tomorrow and I managed to remember the codename properly, didn't expect that )
[10:48] <Laney> spelling it was the most difficult part for me for some time
[10:49] <hakermania> Is feature freeze tomorrow? No! I think it's on Saturday
[10:49] <Laney> nope, tomorrow
[10:49] <hakermania> Is this the last day for accepting packages?
[10:50] <Laney> no, you'll just need a freeze exception
[10:50] <hakermania> How do I get this?
[10:50] <Laney> !ffe
[10:52] <hakermania> Laney, Do I have any chance if I upload the package now to have it reviewed?
[10:52] <hakermania> :S
[10:52] <Laney> you could ask the patch pilot
[10:52] <Laney> reviewer time is extremely limited
[10:54] <hakermania> Its says 15 in the release schedule and I accidentaly thought 15 of August, what a pity :(
[10:55] <Laney> nah, i expect you can get the exception
[10:56] <hakermania> Laney, and what am I supposed to say here: "State why the addition of the package should get considered" ?
[10:57] <Laney> precisely that, why you want to get it in
[10:58] <hakermania> Laney, because it's great software (kidding :P). What should I say? It's not that important :P, it's a simple wallpaper changer LOL
[11:02] <hakermania> I want to get it in because it has unity support, something that ubuntu needs so as to support its new features! (that sounds good ;) )
[11:03] <jtaylor> hmm why are there no dbgsym for libnotify4?
[11:04] <Laney> hakermania: realistically, new leaf packages (as this is) don't introduce much risk, so freeze exceptions are relatively easy to get
[11:10] <hakermania> Laney, Hmm, good to know that, but why is this link broken? (File a bug against the Ubuntu distribution (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug), attach the source package to it (or link to it).)
[11:10] <hakermania> It redirects me somewhere else, wheere I cannot fill the bug :/
[11:10] <Laney> works for me
[11:11] <Laney> are you logged in?
[11:13] <hakermania> Yes
[11:14] <hakermania> Laney, doesn't it redirects you to https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs ?
[11:16] <jtaylor> how strict is the feature freeze actually?
[11:16] <jtaylor> I'd like to get meld 1.5.2 in
[11:16] <hakermania> Hehe :)
[11:16] <jtaylor> but the debian maintainer is on vacation
[11:16] <jtaylor> so it will only be in debian probably next week
[11:16] <hakermania> jtaylor, does the link above works for you?
[11:17] <jtaylor> should I package it myself in ubuntu or can I get an exception?
[11:17] <jtaylor> it does add new features, but also solves a bunch of bugs
[11:17] <jtaylor> hakermania: yes
[11:25] <Laney> jtaylor: if you test it sufficiently it should be fine
[11:26] <hakermania> Guysm I don't know why but it constantly redirects me to https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs, I tested both from firefox and chrome and I cleared history and cache :/
[11:28] <chrisccoulson> hakermania, that's deliberate
[11:28] <Laney> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug?no-redirect&field.tag=needs-packaging
[11:28] <chrisccoulson> it's to discourage people from filing bugs using the launchpad interface
[11:28] <Laney> does that work?
[11:28] <chrisccoulson> i was just about to suggest that :)
[11:28] <jtaylor> how long does it usually take for SRU uploads to get approved?
[11:29] <jtaylor> so they are published in -proposed?
[11:29] <chrisccoulson> and the page you're redirected to explains how to override it anyway
[11:30] <hakermania> Laney, yes, it did, thanks
[11:30] <jtaylor> soya is waiting for approval since 1.aug :(
[11:31] <hakermania> jtaylor, soya? I don't seem to find it at revus main page
[11:32] <jtaylor> its in the natty proposed upload queue
[11:32] <hakermania> link?
[11:33] <jtaylor> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/natty/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=
[11:34] <hakermania> jtaylor, and what's this? Is this a reviewing or something? such as revu?
[11:34] <jtaylor> no, a sponsor uploads a package to -proposed and the stable release team approves the upload
[11:34] <jtaylor> then it goes into proposed for people to test, if that succeds it will go into -updates
[11:35] <jtaylor> its for packages already published in stable releases
[11:35] <jtaylor> see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
[11:38] <hakermania> Oh got it, it's for package updates, for packages that are already in the repositories, new versions etc.
[11:38] <hakermania> ?
[11:38] <jtaylor> y
[13:41] <Laney> ghc takes a depressingly long time to build
[13:46] <jtaylor> anyone have experience with pynotify?
[13:49] <directhex> Laney, mcs is uncommonly fast as a compiler - most other things take a long time to build
[13:50] <Laney> didn't help that i had to disable tmpfs because i don't have enough ram :(
[13:50]  * Laney eyes bill gates
[13:53] <jtaylor> be glad youre not compliling pypy
[13:53] <jtaylor> that monstrosity needs more than 4G ram to compile ._.
[13:53] <paultag> *cough* eclipse *cough*
[13:54] <Laney> yes, I have 4G
[13:54] <nigelb> I keep my room warm with that.
[13:54] <nigelb> (eclipse)
[13:55] <jtaylor> well then you do not have enough to compile pypy ^^
[13:55] <jtaylor> < 4G and it started swapping after 45 minutes :(
[13:56] <paultag> jtaylor: to the build farm!
[13:57] <jtaylor> and it prints nice but useless mandelbrot pictures onto the terminal instead of percentage indicators
[14:28] <hakermania> Can a feature freeze exception bug filled in and requested i.e. tommorow?
[14:29] <Laney> yes
[16:09] <Rhonda> wow. bug-watch-updater seems to work again. a bit delayed, but …
[16:10]  * Rhonda . o O ( bug #693584 fixed in debian in may, bug-watch-updater noticed half an hour ago :) )
[17:24] <hakermania> Should I request deletion of wallch in revu so as to be removed from there? I want to upload ASAP the 2nd version and I don't know what to do or how. Should i simply use 'dput -f' as usual?
[17:24] <Laney> just upload it again, yes
[17:27] <hakermania> Laney, thanks, about the 'subscribe (don't assign to) ubuntu-release' step of filling a feature freeze exception bug, how do I do this? i am on the step of 'Further information' (regarding the bug report) but I can't see anywhere saying 'subscribe X'
[17:27] <hakermania> Is this later?
[17:27] <Laney> it's on the right
[17:27] <Laney> after you've filed the bug
[17:27] <hakermania> OK thanks again
[17:36] <Rhonda> Is a sync request meant to be set to confirmed or triaged by the MOTU, or left as New after subscribing ubuntu-archive? I somehow had the impression that it should be set to confirmed for ACKs, now I see triaged with someone else …
[17:37] <Rhonda> I don't find this documented in the wiki at all under SyncRequestProcess, to be honest …
[17:38] <Laney> either should be fine. I'm not sure what the archive admin scripts actually require
[17:38] <Laney> cjwatson: ^ ?
[17:43] <Rhonda> requestsync sets confirmed :)
[17:47] <micahg> Rhonda: yeah, I'm keeping an eye on eclipse 3.7, I already requested one new build-dep to be sync'd and let the release team know we might need an FFe for it
[17:49] <Rhonda> Great!  Not that I use it myself, but …  ;)
[17:50] <iulian> Rhonda: I usually set them to Confirmed.
[17:51] <Rhonda> Me too, just though saw two request ACKs done by debfx and was puzzled for a moment :)
[17:51] <iulian> New means that the syncs haven't been looked at if I recall correctly.
[17:53] <iulian> Triaged and confirmed are used interchangeably noawadays for ack'd syncs.
[17:54] <iulian> From what I can see...
[17:54] <hakermania> hey
[17:54] <hakermania> What about this bug?
[17:54] <hakermania> http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/revu1-incoming/wallch-1108101954/lintian
[17:55] <Laney> it looks like the sync script doesn't care about the status
[17:55] <hakermania> when I built the application in 11.10 it complained for the opposite
[17:55] <Laney> 3.9.2 is fine
[17:55] <Laney> the server probably has an old lintian
[17:55] <hakermania> nice to hear that
[17:57] <hakermania> How does it sound? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/824102
[18:00] <iulian> Laney: How's Notts holding on with regards to the rioters and looters? I've heard that it had some action as well.
[18:17] <Laney> iulian: not so bad compared, check out the police website for a summary
[19:33] <hakermania> How would I know if my bug report for featurefreeze exception is accepted?
[19:33] <Laney> the release team will update it
[19:49] <dupondje> Could somebody check if https://bugs.launchpad.net/pkg-gearman/+bug/682680 still doesn't build on a sbuilder ? Seems to build fine on a pbuilder here
[19:54] <geser> dupondje: you could test it by uploading to a PPA (for test-building)
[19:56] <dupondje> true, lets see :)
[20:33] <micahg> dupondje: that would be interesting if it builds, but understandable
[21:12] <dupondje> micahg: https://launchpad.net/~dupondje/+archive/ppa/+packages the amd64 did build fine
[21:12] <dupondje> the i386 fails somehow
[21:15] <micahg> dupondje: interesting
[21:15] <dupondje> FAIL: libtest/unittest
[21:15] <dupondje> but WHY lovely :)
[21:15] <dupondje> no errors it seems
[21:20] <ajmitch> it'd be more understandable if it failed in building the arch-independent parts, but silently failing unit tests on i386 only is just annoying
[21:20] <dupondje> true :)
[21:30] <dupondje> it fails in pbuilder on i386 also btw
[21:30] <dupondje> stupid thing :p
[21:30] <juli_> Hi! Could someone please tell me if it is possible to remove a source and binary packages  after FF?
[21:30] <juli_> Or packages removal is considered to be a new feature?
[21:31] <dupondje> why you would want to remove a package ?
[21:33] <juli_> well, if I won't be able to find someone who will support and update it, it is  better to remove
[21:34] <dupondje> what package are you talking about ?
[21:35] <juli_> anyway it is better to know if there is any deadline for removal
[21:35] <juli_> netbeans
[21:36] <Laney> did you speak to juli_?
[21:36] <Laney> erm
[21:36] <Laney> you are juli_ :P
[21:36] <Laney> are you no longer able to maintain it?
[21:37] <juli_> yes
[21:37] <Laney> I don't think there's a specific deadline really, to answer your question
[21:38] <ajmitch> deadline is probably when the archive is finally frozen a few hours before release
[21:38] <ajmitch> packages have been removed up until then before
[21:38] <juli_> ok, thanks!
[21:39] <juli_> I'll try to safe the package anyway:)
[21:39] <TheMuso> A lot of packages depend on netbeans.,
[21:40] <TheMuso> I was working on one such last week.
[21:40] <TheMuso> And not being up on java stuff, wasn't able to get it to build.
[21:41] <Laney> I don't see any
[21:41] <juli_> what is the name of the package?
[21:41] <Laney> I'm sure a lot of users rely on it though
[21:42] <juli_> I'm currently investigating the impact from removal, so any info is welcome)
[21:42] <TheMuso> I can't remember off the top of my head.
[21:42] <dupondje> is it that hard to upgrade it ?
[21:43] <TheMuso> visualvm
[21:43] <juli_> visualvm depends on libnb-platform-java
[21:43] <Laney> ah, build depends
[21:44] <TheMuso> Still a dependency.
[21:44] <TheMuso> Whether it be build or runtime.
[21:45] <juli_> Laney, what package?
[21:45] <micahg> yeah, visualvm is the only external thing that deps on netbeans and it's a build time dep
[21:45] <dupondje> micahg: any idea how to debug the issue ? :) running make test in a pbuilder fails also
[21:46] <dupondje> make -d test doesn't give any usefull info
[21:46] <micahg> dupondje: clean chroot
[21:46] <dupondje> have that in a clean chroot now :)
[21:46] <Laney> TheMuso: I know, I meant that I only checked apt-cache rdepends.
[21:47] <TheMuso> Laney: right
[21:48] <micahg> juli_: visualvm is the only thing and it's a build time dependency
[21:50] <juli_> yes I see, thanks. I'll talk to doko about that
[22:29] <matttbe> Hello,
[22:29] <matttbe> I'm looking for one sponsor (or more) in order to upload 3 packages before the feature freeze (sorry to be a bit late :-/) in universe: cairo-dock, cairo-dock-plug-ins and latexila.
[22:29] <matttbe> All these 3 packages are beta versions (they are almost stable but perfectly usable!) and their stable versions are expected for September or before.
[22:29] <matttbe> I've opened 3 bug reports linked to 3 bzr branches with 3 merge proposals:
[22:30] <matttbe> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cairo-dock/+bug/823513
[22:30] <matttbe> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cairo-dock-plug-ins/+bug/823514
[22:30] <matttbe> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/latexila/+bug/823566
[22:30] <matttbe> 'bzr merge-upstream' has been used to commit these revisions on these bzr branches and they should be ready to be uploaded on Universe.
[22:31] <matttbe> Note that I've compiled them with pbuilder and test it on Ubuntu Oneiric with a liveUSB