[04:20] <micahg> Laney: opencv finished, I'm testing wallch with the changes
[04:25] <micahg> lenios: so, asm3 doesn't even build in oneiric
[04:40] <micahg> Laney: new opencv uploaded, so in ~5-6 hours you should be able to retry your build
[04:40] <micahg> Laney: I mean no-change-rebuild opencv, not new :)
[06:44] <dholbach> good morning
[08:15] <Laney> micahg: oh, cool. wallch worked then
[08:16] <Laney> ?
[08:16] <micahg> Laney: hmm, failed in LP worked locally, maybe it didn't publish, trying again
[08:19] <Laney> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=641670
[08:19]  * Laney giggles
[08:31] <micahg> Laney: wallch finished, so go ahead and retry yours
[08:31] <Laney> okey dokes
[08:33] <Laney> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdecodeqr/0.9.3-5ubuntu1/+build/2784201
[08:33] <Laney> keep an eagle eye out
[08:34] <micahg> we
[08:34] <micahg> err, we'll see how much longer I'm awake, but will check in the morning
[08:45] <lenios> build of asm3 lacking mh_clean...
[08:50] <Laney> micahg: yeah, looks like it worked
[08:50] <Laney> good call
[08:50] <micahg> awesome
[08:55] <lenios> i can get the latest asm3 build, but i need to remove the mh_clean added in debian/rules (which is said to clean up after the maven helpers)
[09:00] <lenios> looks like maven-repo-helper >= 1.5 is needed to use mh_clean
[09:00] <lenios> and oneiric only have 1.2
[09:09] <micahg> so, basically eclipse needs to go in a PPA for oneiric
[09:09] <lenios> wait, maven-repo-helper is actually 1.5.2 in oneiric
[09:11] <lenios> i think i can put it in my ppa
[09:14] <lenios> what i don't know is why asm3 building is not finding maven-repo-helper even if it's in Build-Depends-Indep. I do have to install the package on my machine
[09:29] <Laney> how are you building it?
[09:31] <lenios> i install maven-repo-helper (i don't know why it doesn't work without it), and then use pbuilder and pdebuild
[09:34] <Laney> you sometimes need extra packages to run a clean target
[09:45] <lenios> and how do i specify extra packages when uploading to ppa?
[09:46] <Laney> by "run a clean target" I meant in order to build the source package on your machine
[09:46] <Laney> dpkg-buildpackage -S or similar
[09:47] <Laney> if you need to add extra packages then put them in build-depends(-indep)
[09:50] <Laney> lenios: I just built asm3 and it worked just fine
[09:51] <Laney> try pbuilder build asm3_3.3.2-1.dsc
[09:51] <lenios> there's no problem with 3.3.2?
[09:51] <lenios> you mean 3.2?
[09:52] <lenios> try http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/a/asm3/asm3_3.3.1-1.dsc
[09:52] <lenios> i don't have any issues with latest ubuntu (3.2) but they added an mh_clean in debian/rules in the 3.3.1
[09:53] <Laney> what release are you trying to build on?
[09:53] <lenios> i dget the debian dsc and try to build on oneiric
[09:53] <lenios> it works... only if i install maven-repo-helper before using pbuilder
[09:54] <Laney> what /exact/ commands are you using?
[09:54] <Laney> 3.3.1 works fine too.
[09:54] <Laney> (I am using sbuild as opposed to pbuilder though)
[09:55] <lenios> using pdebuild with http://pastebin.com/wqz3buBy
[09:58] <Laney> never used it, but I suspect that the problem is you need maven-repo-helper and/or ant installed to build the source package. This happens /outside/ of pbuilder.
[09:58] <lenios> would it work on ppa?
[09:58] <Laney> that's why I suggested just doing pbuilder build ...dsc
[09:59] <Laney> should do
[10:03] <lenios> pbuilder build ...dsc works for me too
[10:03] <Laney> great
[10:03] <Laney> so what happens is that when you build a source package, the clean target from debian/rules is invoked, and sometimes this needs extra packages
[10:04] <lenios> i see
[16:49] <jtaylor> hm how does one do a bzr-merge-upstream when the patches are applied in the branch?
[16:50] <jtaylor> as the new upstream may conflict with the patches
[16:51] <jtaylor> why does bzr do this, it only causes me problems and I don't see any advantage ..
[16:59] <tumbleweed> do what? applied patches?
[16:59] <jtaylor> yes
[17:00] <tumbleweed> because then bzr can manage them. Yes it's currentyl very not-ideal
[17:00] <tumbleweed> eventually they should be managed as a patch queue
[17:12] <jtaylor> gna, what should be a 2 minute operation turns into 30 minutes, screw bzr I'll make a debdiff
[17:13] <tumbleweed> :)
[17:13] <Laney> because of .pc conflicts?
[17:15] <cjwatson> jtaylor: quilt pop -a; bzr merge --force; while quilt push; do quilt refresh; done
[17:15] <jtaylor> yes but verifing the patch is unecessarilty painful
[17:15] <cjwatson> WFM
[17:23] <jtaylor> btw force does nto seem to work with merge-upstream
[17:49] <cjwatson> jtaylor: no - that's a bug I think
[19:26] <micahg> jtaylor: heh, Debian just uploaded a fixed version of tahoe-lafs
[19:26] <jtaylor> yes talk about bad timing ._.
[19:26] <jtaylor> I'll take care of syncing it next cycle
[19:32] <Laney> is there a diff left?
[19:32] <jtaylor> nothing worth syncing
[19:33] <jtaylor> and I don't want to check the package again for screwups ._.
[19:36] <jtaylor> well I might also bug someone from sr to fix it in natty ._.
[19:36] <jtaylor> it never ends with that package
[19:36] <micahg> jtaylor: I was wondering if you fixed that with the security upload
[19:37] <jtaylor> I was thinking about doing it
[19:37] <jtaylor> hmm I should ahve added the missing mock dep ...
[19:38] <micahg> right :)
[19:38] <jtaylor> that only fixes 50% but saves another upload
[19:38] <micahg> jtaylor: what do you mean 50%?
[19:38] <jtaylor> there are two issues
[19:38] <jtaylor> mock is the easy one
[19:39] <jtaylor>  well the one where upstream does not disagree with me
[19:40] <jtaylor> for solving the pycryptopp issue there are two possibilities
[19:40] <jtaylor> the screw some users which have some broken corner case non package managed installation
[19:40] <jtaylor> or update a package in an sru
[21:13]  * ScottK votes SRU
[21:14] <ScottK> Security updates should be a minimal change, so two uploads is appropriate in any case.
[22:37]  * davidsarah catches up
[22:55] <davidsarah> so that's all fixed in http://packages.debian.org/sid/tahoe-lafs 1.8.3-2, right?
[22:58]  * davidsarah checks the Ubuntu packages
[23:06] <davidsarah> hmm. I have tahoe-lafs 1.7.1 installed on Maverick. I run Update Manager and install everything it prompts about. shouldn't that apply the security fix?
[23:06] <davidsarah> it doesn't
[23:06] <davidsarah> I'm not prompted to install any new tahoe-lafs package
[23:09] <ajmitch> davidsarah: pastebin the output of 'apt-cache policy tahoe-lafs' - launchpad says it was published 3 hours ago
[23:10]  * ajmitch can see the package on security.ubuntu.com, too
[23:21] <davidsarah> http://codepad.org/PnsARp1P
[23:21]  * davidsarah looks on security.ubuntu.com
[23:21] <ajmitch> that is the version that was uploaded a few hours ago by jtaylor
[23:21] <davidsarah> really?
[23:21] <ajmitch> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tahoe-lafs/1.7.1-0ubuntu1.1
[23:22] <davidsarah> I grepped for the fix
[23:22]  * davidsarah checks they didn't make a mistake doing that
[23:22] <ajmitch> diff between -0ubuntu1 & -0ubuntu1.1 is on the page if you want to check that
[23:24] <davidsarah> oh, it is updated
[23:24] <davidsarah> why didn't my original grep find that?
[23:25]  * ajmitch shrugs
[23:25] <ajmitch> as long as it is really fixed now? :)
[23:26] <davidsarah> still checking
[23:27] <davidsarah> yes, it is fixed
[23:28] <ajmitch> great
[23:28] <davidsarah> but why didn't I see a summary of the update in Update Manager?
[23:28] <ajmitch> I don't know what parts are involved in update manager listing changelogs
[23:30] <davidsarah> it didn't mention that tahoe-lafs was being updated at all
[23:30] <davidsarah> (but it was, because I ran the same 'grep -Rn fills-holes /usr/share/pyshared/allmydata' command before and after running Update Manager, so it had not already been updated)
[23:30] <ajmitch> don't know, sorry, I don't tend to use update-manager
[23:31] <davidsarah> I used it because I figured that is what a non-developer/techie user might use, and I wanted to see what they would see
[23:31] <ajmitch> it could depend on when it had checked for updates, if you'd checked automatically, and if security updates are set to install automatically
[23:32] <davidsarah> I didn't explicitly turn on any automatic updating, and I tend to turn off options like that if I see them
[23:33] <broder> changelogs are fetched from a separate server. there at least used to be a delay between archive publishing and changelog generation. i don't know if there still is
[23:34] <ajmitch> broder: the package should still appear in u-m even if there's no changelog
[23:34] <davidsarah> yes, that's what I thought
[23:34] <broder> summary of the update> i thought you were referring to the description section
[23:34] <ajmitch> "Install security updates without confirmation" is an option in software sources, I don't know if it's the default
[23:35] <davidsarah> I was referring to the top pane
[23:35]  * davidsarah looks whether that is set
[23:35] <broder> you...did click the "check" button, right?
[23:35] <davidsarah> yes
[23:35] <broder> might just have not gotten to your mirror yet
[23:36] <ajmitch> right, but it is installed now, somehow :)
[23:36] <davidsarah> yes, but I'm trying to understand why the package... what ajmitch said
[23:36] <broder> ...oh, i see. that's what i get for not paying attention
[23:37] <ajmitch> so I was trying to figure out if it was silently installed, but I don't know update-manager's behaviour
[23:37] <broder> you could go look in /var/log/apt/
[23:39] <davidsarah> oh, /var/log/apt/history.log does include: tahoe-lafs:amd64 (1.7.1-0ubuntu1, 1.7.1-0ubuntu1.1)
[23:39] <davidsarah> maybe I just missed it in the list of updates