[05:12]  * Rhonda sighs at bug #833228
[05:21] <Rhonda> Actually, I don't understand the bugreport.  Does ubuntu change the meaning of recommends/suggests, I can't find anything "add-ons" in the software center application (on my Debian system, though)?
[05:23] <ajmitch> I think the software centre may have changed its UI a bit in oneiric, but I haven't used it to try
[05:28] <Rhonda> Ah, and not uploaded to Debian since … 2.0.7  *yuck*
[05:30] <Rhonda> Should have checked first that I'm outdated. :)
[05:30] <Rhonda> Hmm, so where to head for a geocache today.
[05:54] <jbicha> Rhonda: it looks to me like Ubuntu Software Center uses wesnoth-1.8-core as the primary app since it has a .desktop
[05:55] <jbicha> and because it doesn't recommend the campaigns, they don't show up as "addons"
[05:55] <Rhonda> jbicha: Erm, I think that was ruled out before already, that is an issue I remember from about 2 years ago
[05:55] <jbicha> suggests works also
[05:56] <jbicha> if you look at thunderbird, you can see the addons presented
[05:56] <Rhonda> But the whole point of the wesnoth-1.8 and wesnoth-1.8-core separation is to have one that gets you all the campaigns, and one that doesn't
[05:56] <jbicha> right
[05:56] <jbicha> but suggests might be ok
[05:57] <Rhonda> If you go to the wesnoth-1.8 package in software center, do you see the music as add-on?
[05:58] <jbicha> Rhonda: no, but that isn't a suggests of wesnoth-1.8 either
[05:58] <Rhonda> It is?
[05:58] <Rhonda> $ apt-cache show wesnoth-1.8 | grep music
[05:58] <Rhonda> Recommends: wesnoth-1.8-music (= 1:1.8.5-1)
[05:59] <jbicha> it is an addon for wesnoth-1.8-data though
[05:59] <jbicha> sorry I meant it wasn't a suggests of wesnoth-1.8-core since that has the .desktop
[05:59] <Rhonda> I think it might be time that I at least install me ubuntu in some virtual environment and run it within a window.  %-)
[06:00] <Rhonda> jbicha: But the bug reporter didn't speak about the -core package, explicitly hinted that he wanted to unselect some campaigns.
[06:00] <jbicha> this is a guess, but app-install-data-ubuntu might need to be regenerated for your changes to take effect anyway
[06:00] <Rhonda> Any suggestions on what to use to run another environment with X inside a window?
[06:00] <Rhonda> … besides qemu? :)
[06:01] <jbicha> I believe USC magically uses the .desktop to represent the package without showing that it's actually the -core package
[06:02] <jbicha> but I might be rather confused too
[06:04] <jbicha> version says "wesnoth-1.8 1:1.8.6-1" so I guess I was wrong about the -core part
[06:04]  * Rhonda sticks her tongue at jbicha ;)
[06:05] <jbicha> what? you don't like me making it up as I go?
[06:05] <Rhonda> Sure, go ahead, just teasing. :)
[06:06] <jbicha> Rhonda: I use VirtualBox which is a bit more heavyweight than qemu or xen but it's easier to use
[06:08] <jbicha> maybe Enhances: would work
[06:08] <jbicha> I see that Thunderbird suggests latex-xft-fonts and libthai and those aren't shown as addons
[06:09] <Rhonda> Software Center would be the first application to support enhances then. :D
[06:10] <Rhonda> Always liked that relationship field actually.  I guess I have to rethink the dependencies once again, but it's already so heavy and complicated it makes my head ache …
[06:10] <Rhonda> 27 binaries from that source  %-)
[06:12] <jbicha> actually, installing Wesnoth from Software Center installs everything except for the server, music, and tools
[06:12] <jbicha> so we don't need to worry about the campaigns since the user will already have those
[06:13] <ajmitch> Rhonda: use virtualbox
[06:14] <ajmitch> & I see that jbicha already suggested that, I'm too slow :)
[06:14] <Rhonda> jbicha: I wonder about music because music is in recommends.
[06:17] <jbicha> music is hidden as a "technical item", that might be why it doesn't show as an addon
[06:18] <jbicha> nope, muttprint is hidden too but it still shows up for thunderbird
[06:18] <jbicha> enhances is still my best guess
[06:18] <micahg> enhances is probably it :)
[06:21]  * Rhonda goes and throws in Enhances just for the sake of it.
[07:20] <dholbach> good morning
[07:36] <mase_work> morn dholbach
[07:36] <dholbach> hi mase_work
[07:37] <Rhonda> jbicha, ajmitch: Looking into Xephyr together with lxc now. :)
[07:47] <hakermania> tumbleweed, thanks for the advocation. I'd left the .qm files accidentaly to data/to_usr_share/wallch/translations, but it isn't a problem as the clean rule wipes them and rebuilds from  the .ts file placed at data/translations, right?
[08:11] <hakermania> micahg, are you interested in advocating wallch :) ? If you have time and apetite of course :)
[08:12] <micahg> hakermania: sorry, in the middle of something ATM
[08:20] <hakermania> micahg, ok, no problem, I'll try to find somebody else :)
[08:49] <pmjdebruijn> hi folsk
[08:49] <pmjdebruijn> I'm trying to backport libvirt (_with_ macvtap)
[08:49] <pmjdebruijn> libvirt's configure checks the installed headers for macvtap support
[08:49] <pmjdebruijn> which fails on 2.6.32 (lucid)
[08:50] <pmjdebruijn> install the 2.6.35 headers packages on lucid doesn't help as it seems the configure scripts seems to check the matching headers of the running kernel
[08:50] <pmjdebruijn> though I can't influence the running kernel on the ppa buildfarm
[08:50] <pmjdebruijn> any advice on dealing with this?
[08:50] <pmjdebruijn> maybe just patch the configure to a static kernel and install the 2.6.35 kernel headers as a build dependancy
[08:50] <pmjdebruijn> ?
[08:52] <cjwatson> I would be inclined to patch configure.ac to allow overriding that check using a --enable-* option, if it doesn't have such an option already
[08:52] <cjwatson> or if you aren't familiar with autoconf you could just hack the test out and force it to true
[08:58] <hakermania> cjwatson, are a reviewer? (you know what I want xD)
[09:00] <cjwatson> sorry, no time
[09:00] <pmjdebruijn> cjwatson: thanks
[09:01] <hakermania> cjwatson, ok, np
[09:36] <al-maisan> hello there, how do I find a specific orig tar ball in the primary archive?
[09:37] <al-maisan> also, is there a way to copy an entire package from the primary archive to a ppa?
[09:47] <hakermania> What is the 'Archive+' button on the right? http://i.imgur.com/lz0yx.png
[09:49] <Rhonda> al-maisan: you go to the pool directory of the package, or go to http://packages.ubuntu.com/packagename and follow the links from there
[09:49] <al-maisan> Rhonda: thanks, will try that.
[09:54] <jbicha> Rhonda: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SoftwareCenter#Add-on_packages
[10:23] <Rhonda> jbicha: Then I wonder why the music package doesn't show up in the add-ons
[10:25] <jbicha> Rhonda: I'm guessing a simple suggests isn't enough; that specification isn't 100% reality
[10:27] <Rhonda> It's a Recommends, not a Suggests
[10:31] <jbicha> Rhonda: bug 833650 filed :-)
[11:04] <geser> al-maisan: LP has the links to the .orig.tar.gz (and the other files too) in the web UI too
[11:04] <geser> al-maisan: what's your use-case for copy main-archive -> PPA?
[11:05] <al-maisan> it's the python-ampqlib rev. 1.0.0 that was uploaded to oneiric recently .. I need to make use of it in natty
[11:06] <al-maisan> geser: I did find the LP links on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+source/python-amqplib
[11:06] <al-maisan> thanks :)
[11:07] <geser> al-maisan: it's better to do a "backport" into your PPA instead of just copying it (think of upgrades from natty + your PPA to oneiric when both have the same version but are different)
[11:07] <al-maisan> I re-uploaded the package in question to the PPA: is that the backport approach you had in mind?
[11:08] <geser> unless you copy source+binaries (if the depends can be satisfied on natty)
[11:08] <al-maisan> geser: I realised that copying that package was not ideal .. hence re-uploaded it to the PPA
[11:09] <geser> al-maisan: yes, did you "downgrade" the version to be less than oneiric so dist-upgrade will update it to the oneiric one in future?
[11:09] <al-maisan> geser: yup .. I used "natty"
[11:23] <al-maisan> thanks for your advice geser !!
[11:49] <dholbach> tumbleweed, bdrung: did you have a think about a check-before-submit tool? (basically sponsor-patch, but just something that new contributors could use)? I was just having a look at https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/community-o-developer-initiatives again
[11:51]  * tumbleweed had forgotten about that
[11:54] <nigelb> heh
[11:55] <nigelb> tumbleweed: we setup a totall of 1 challenge this cycle.
[11:56] <nigelb> :)
[11:56] <nigelb> maybe we should first sit down and plot what challenges are possible in a cycle and work from there
[12:11] <Laney> we should get a good programme of challenges going
[12:11] <Laney> maybe make each one last 2-3 weeks
[12:16] <nigelb> I'm happy to help do the coordination bits
[12:16]  * ajmitch wonders what these challenges are
[12:16] <tumbleweed> a range of related, easy bugs, I guess
[12:17] <geser> do we get achievement points for finishing challenges? :)
[12:17]  * ajmitch needs to do something easy
[12:17] <ajmitch> geser: you get hugs from dholbach :)
[12:17] <tumbleweed> first rule of ubuntu development: you're never finished :)
[12:18] <dholbach> :-)
[12:18]  * hakermania pokes sladen
[12:22] <Laney> examples might be some subset of ftbfs, simple porting (nbs) or fixing problems flagged up by piuparts or whatever
[13:06] <Rhonda> Is it possible to see the ratings of packages that software center displays somewhere on the web?
[14:20] <hakermania> Ok, i have a question, if a file has CC0 license is it enough to provide the online link? If not, what name should have the file provided inside the source?
[14:22] <hakermania> Because the cc0 doesn't seem to be at /usr/share/common-licenses
[14:50] <sladen> hyperair: sorry you didn't get an answer yet :(
[14:51] <hyperair> eh?
[14:51] <hyperair> what answer?
[14:51]  * hyperair gives sladen a confused stare.
[14:52] <sladen> hyperair: I was helping hakermania but need to do UI-Freeze things, so bounced hakermania to #ubuntu-motu
[14:52] <sladen> in the hope that somebody else could take over with the question above
[14:52] <sladen> and then pressed   h<tab>
[14:52] <hyperair> aaah
[14:52] <hyperair> right.
[14:52] <hyperair> okay
[15:02] <cjwatson> hakermania: you should copy the text of the licence into debian/copyright
[15:02] <cjwatson> it is not enough to link to it
[15:04] <paultag> hey cjwatson, congrats dude
[15:09] <cjwatson> thanks :)
[15:50] <andy753421> Could I trouble someone in ubuntu-sponsors to finish a sync request for me for launchpad bugs 832611, 832613, and 832614?
[15:51] <andy753421> The feature freeze was approved, so i think it just need to be synced? (sorry for the last minute rush, and for cross-posting in #ubuntu-devel as well)
[15:54] <tumbleweed> andy753421: happy to sponsor that
[16:08] <hakermania> cjwatson, what if the files are 2? 2 with the same license but bot with different copyright holder
[16:08] <hakermania> and different info (different online link)
[16:10] <cjwatson> debian/copyright is allowed to have multiple licences in it!
[16:14] <hakermania> cjwatson, yes, i mean should I dublicate entry of the same license because of different copyright
[16:14] <cjwatson> that's not normally necessary, no
[16:15] <cjwatson> different online link is irrelevant if the actual licence is the same
[16:16] <hakermania> cjwatson, so say both names in the copyright, same license and below the license to place the info about the links.
[16:16] <hakermania> ?
[16:17] <cjwatson> sounds plausible enough, as long as it has all the information in it
[16:17] <cjwatson> (there is a machine-readable format with stricter rules which we'll probably move everything to eventually, but you're still allowed to write just free text)
[16:23] <hakermania> cjwatson, the whole CC0 is 121 lines o.O
[16:26] <tumbleweed> cjwatson: may I syncpackage some NEW uploads, or would you prefer to process those manually? (the ones andy753421 mentioned above)
[16:26] <hakermania> cjwatson, is this a problem? It doesn't seem to have a brief description of the cc0, like gpl3 has
[16:28] <tumbleweed> hakermania: yes, you include tho whole thing. It's a pain, yes
[16:28] <tumbleweed> the only reason we don't do that for gpl is because it's in /usr/share/common-licences
[16:28] <cjwatson> hakermania: including the whole thing is just fine
[16:28] <cjwatson> tumbleweed: syncpackaging them is fine provided you/he don't mind them being credited to you
[16:34] <hakermania> Is it correct to say: For the specific files, the copyrights holders are displayed respectively to each image
[16:34] <hakermania> ?
[16:38]  * tumbleweed doesn't understand that
[16:40] <hakermania> tumbleweed, I mean that the First person mentioned at the Copyright field is the one who owns the copyrights of the first pic, the 2nd is the one of the 2nd pic, how would I say that in english? Also should I add a .(dot) in every empty newline of CC0, as in GPL3?
[16:41] <tumbleweed> hakermania: separate Files+Licence+Copyright blocks. You don't need the full licence body every time, you only need it once. See the examples in DEP5
[16:49] <hakermania> tumbleweed, in this example (from DEP5), there are 2 entries of the PSF-2 license, in both it seems to use full body
[16:50] <hakermania> http://paste.ubuntu.com/674623/
[16:50] <hakermania> (it doesn't say that PSF-2 license text have been mentioned above etc)
[16:51] <tumbleweed> hakermania: yeah, that's a bad example. Look at the bits about standalone licence paragraphs
[16:53] <hakermania> aha,now its clear
[17:30] <hakermania> jbicha, I can confirm your bug in 11.10 alpha 3... The add-on being in 'recommends' field doesn't show up either in my DEB if opened with USC
[18:57] <andy7534212> tumbleweed: thanks for syncing librsl and libgrits, are you planning on syncing aweather as well?
[19:00] <Quintasan> tumbleweed: You're on for DMB? :D
[20:07] <ahasenack> hmm, is this a recent change perhaps? I noticed "bzr commit" is working like "debcommit" now
[20:08] <ahasenack> for example, I did a quick debian/changelog change, ran "bzr commit" fully expecting an editor to open, but it used the changelog change as the commit message
[20:08] <ahasenack> I'm on lucid, but using bzr from the ppa
[20:08] <ahasenack> 2.4.0-1~bazaar1~lucid1
[20:15] <andy7534212> tumbleweed: (or someone else) any chance of getting bug 832611 synched in the next hour or so before the beta freeze?
[20:20] <jtaylor> andy753421: it will be synced, beta freeze does not invalidate ffe's for new packages
[20:24] <jtaylor> andy7534212: ^
[20:25] <andy7534212> jtaylor: ah, the comment on the bug log said (if done before beta freeze) so I thought it had to be done right away
[20:26] <micahg> jtaylor: well, the approval is contingent on being completed before beta release, I think that's the concern
[20:26] <jtaylor> oh
[20:29] <jtaylor> as its two deps where already synced for it already I'm sure it will get reapproved
[20:31] <tumbleweed> andy7534212: sorry, I missed that one
[20:31] <tumbleweed> looking at that now
[20:31] <micahg> tumbleweed: actually I'm about to ACK it
[20:32] <tumbleweed> micahg: go ahead then (I was going to syncpackage)
[20:32] <micahg> tumbleweed: go for it then :)
[20:32] <tumbleweed> have you test built it? :)
[20:32] <micahg> tumbleweed: yes, test built on amd64
[20:33] <tumbleweed> cool :)
[20:33] <micahg> tumbleweed: my only concern is the other libs haven't built on powerpc/armel yet
[20:33] <micahg> but there's not really time to wait I guess
[20:33] <tumbleweed> they built everywhere in Debian
[20:37] <tumbleweed> whoops https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+queue
[20:37] <micahg> tumbleweed: no worries, one will get rejected
[20:38] <micahg> tumbleweed: oh, hmm, was that syncpackage?
[20:39] <tumbleweed> first time I ran it, I hadn't bzr pulled-ed so it didn't close the bug
[20:39] <tumbleweed> I assumed it would auto-reject the second one, but in hindsight, obviously not
[20:39] <jtaylor> what is with the enthough 4 syncs? should they also be done before beta freeze?
[20:40] <jtaylor> pyface, envisage, traitsui
[20:40] <micahg> tumbleweed: well, the bug is closed now, so either should be fine :)
[20:46] <andy7534212> tumbleweed/micahg/jtaylor: great, thank you
[20:47]  * micahg wishes the lack of +uploaded-packages recognition will get fixed soon
[20:48] <tumbleweed> micahg: bigjools seems to be working through them all quite fast
[20:48] <tumbleweed> Quintasan: heh, I'm running, I have low hopes. But it is something Im' interested in and pay attention to...
[20:49] <micahg> tumbleweed: yep, waiting anxiously
[20:49] <Quintasan> tumbleweed: +1 :P
[21:01] <hakermania> Ouao, it's exciting watching Ubuntu guys working on it :D
[21:17] <jtaylor> why are packages which have not been multiarched install into mutliarch paths?
[21:17] <jtaylor> I have seen this in a few ftbs already
[21:21] <micahg> jtaylor: maybe they're not overriding sane defaults?
[21:23] <jtaylor> I don't get where the paths are coming from
[21:33] <jtaylor> ok it appears to be QT_INSTALL_PLUGINS
[21:33] <jtaylor> which is set to multiarch by default
[21:34] <jtaylor> can I leave that or will it fail at runtime?