[04:33] <ScottK> Rhonda: IA-32 libs didn't even sound like a good idea at the time, it was just something that could be done quickly.
[06:18] <Rhonda> ssh, don't debunk my catch phrase :)
[06:23] <ajmitch> don't let facts get in the way of a good argument? :)
[06:34] <Rhonda> 'sactly!
[06:54] <dholbach> good morning
[07:28] <Rhonda> huhm
[07:28] <Rhonda> I think I now saw the issue with packages.ubuntu.com myself …
[08:30] <Rhonda> \o/ tumbleweed :)
[08:33] <tumbleweed> Rhonda: lintian wasn't very impressed with it, though
[08:47] <Rhonda> hmm?
[08:47] <tumbleweed> E: gitolite: control-file-has-bad-permissions md5sums 0664 != 0644
[08:47] <tumbleweed> E: gitolite: control-file-has-bad-permissions templates 0664 != 0644
[08:47] <Rhonda> duh, how did that happen? Doesn't over here
[08:48] <Rhonda> Ah, some umask probably playing into it on the build server
[08:48] <tumbleweed> yeah, ubuntu changed umask recently
[08:49] <Rhonda> but there is this "find $(TMP) ! -type l -print0 2>/dev/null | xargs -0r chmod go=rX,u+rw,a-s" in debian/rules which should adjust that?
[08:49] <Rhonda> ah, wait, templates and md5sums, the control files
[08:49] <tumbleweed> heh, I see Rhonda doesn't like packaging helpers :P
[08:49] <Rhonda> which get generated _after_ the fixperms
[08:50] <Rhonda> Hey, I wanted to know what kind of magic was going on in the background. Apparently not that much. :)
[08:52] <Rhonda> tumbleweed: not liking is based on bad experiences where I had to do handstand coding to get rid of some annoyances, but that was years ago :)
[08:54] <tumbleweed> it's a rather short rules for a no-helper package, I guess it helps that it's a nice simple one
[08:57] <Rhonda> I tried to keep it short and simple so that it can be used as example :)
[08:57] <Rhonda> Maybe I should throw in comments like "# this is the magic that dh_fixperms is actually doing"
[08:58] <Rhonda> For more complex packages it though gets complicated and irritating. Don't look at spl's debian/rules.  ;)
[08:59] <Rhonda> Hmm, not that overwhelming than I thought, but that might just be me and my experience with code …  226 lines
[09:01] <Rhonda> tumbleweed: Should I fix the lintian issues you are seeing and request again, does that mean the package is now blocked, or is it even though it's an error acceptable?
[09:02] <tumbleweed> I'd either suggest uploading 2.0.3-1ubuntu1 with that fixed, or just fix that in Debian and sync. If you made other changes in Debian too, I'd want to review it again
[09:03] <Rhonda> I'd fix some other lintin output too
[09:03] <tumbleweed> if that's manpages, that's fine with me
[09:03] <Rhonda> debian-rules-missing-recommended-target
[09:03] <Rhonda> out-of-date-copyright-format-uri
[09:04] <Rhonda> Those three lines
[09:04] <tumbleweed> fine
[09:06] <Laney> the guy requesting the inkscape backport is my new best friend
[09:13] <hrw> ok. I do not catch it. Package libc6-dev-armhf-cross provides libc6-dev-armhf-armel-cross but gcc-4.6-multilib-arm-linux-gnueabi depends on libc6-dev-armhf-armel-cross and complains on install that libc6-dev-armhf-armel-cross is not installed. Why "provides" does not solve it?
[09:14] <Laney> is the depends versioned?
[09:15] <hrw> Laney: package is 2.13 and depends is on >= 2.5
[09:16] <Laney> versioned deps on virtual packages won't work http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-virtual
[09:17] <hrw> thanks
[09:17] <hrw> will have to create dummy packages then
[09:18] <hrw> let amd speeds up with buldozer cpus... I need to upgrade my machine
[09:37] <Rhonda> tumbleweed: uploaded. :P
[10:36] <Rhonda> hmm. Now I have gitolite_2.0.3-2_source.changes - what next? Never used syncpackage before, where to upload that to? :)
[10:39] <Rhonda> And why did syncpackage re-sign the .dsc file while it already had a good signature?
[10:39] <Laney> are you trying to do a --no-lp upload?
[10:40] <Rhonda> No clue. :)
[10:40] <Rhonda> So far I only did upload to my PPA, and did requestsync :)
[10:40] <tumbleweed> oh, sorry Rhonda I should have been clearer when I suggested using syncpackage :)
[10:41] <tumbleweed> I meant a new syncpackage that can do LP native syncing
[10:41] <Rhonda> No problem, I want to learn. :)
[10:41] <tumbleweed> >= 0.129
[10:43] <Rhonda> ubuntu-dev-tools                          0.101
[10:43] <tumbleweed> ah, we don't have a backport to debian stable
[10:44] <Laney> I bet that's a rather small userbase :-)
[10:44] <tumbleweed> although the PPA build for maverick might work on there
[10:44] <Rhonda> Laney could do it, he got upload permissions to backports recently. :P
[10:44] <tumbleweed> otherwise, it should run fine out of a bzr checkout
[10:44] <Laney> it requires some other backports too
[10:44] <Laney> since some scripts moved about
[10:44] <Rhonda> Anyway, I let it rest for now, will try at home from my wheezy laptop
[10:44] <tumbleweed> yeah, stuff moved to devscripts, distro-info, and lp-tools
[10:45] <Laney> bdrung said a backport to natty would be too hard, so stable …
[10:45] <tumbleweed> Laney: OTOH, backporting this specific feature anywhere wouldn't be that hard
[10:45] <ScottK> I'm fine with that.
[10:45] <bdrung> Laney: you can do it, if you backport devscripts, distro-info, lp-tools, and python-debian
[10:46] <Laney> if [list of tiresome things]
[10:47] <Laney> I wouldn't know enough about how cherry-pickable syncpackage is — didn't it require some changes in ubuntutools/?
[10:47] <Laney> but, I support doing that
[10:47] <tumbleweed> I'm happy to do some exploration into that
[10:48] <Rhonda> Laney: I wouldn't accept a cherry-picked backport anyway. :P
[10:49] <Laney> I was referring to natty-backports
[10:49] <tumbleweed> this is a generally useful thing to backport in Ubuntu
[10:49] <tumbleweed> probably less so in Debian
[10:51] <tumbleweed> talking of which, I still need someone to review my u-d-t SRUs in Ubuntu. I don't like verifying my own SRUs
[10:53] <Laney> Rhonda: btw, is there any plan for backports integrating with the bts? Like it learning about backports versions and so on.
[11:30] <Rhonda> Laney: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/06/msg00247.html and following
[11:32] <Rhonda> Laney: tl;dr - no version tracking in the BTS, but most important: No concept of different maintainers for a package
[11:33] <Laney> well yeah, but that's not unsolvable
[11:33] <Laney> if backporting, change the maintainer and let the bts know that different versions can have different maintainers
[11:33] <Laney> but i will read it
[11:33] <Rhonda> I'll tell don that we have a volunteer  \o/
[11:34] <Rhonda> But that's exact the issue: The bts doesn't has the concept yet that different versions can have different maintainers
[11:36] <Laney> or have backports bugs sent to some pts keyword that the maintainer isn't subscribed to by default
[11:40] <Rhonda> There are loads of ideas how it could be done, but noone doing the actual code. The issue is known since a pretty long time now. (in this case) unfortunately there isn't a canonical behind Debian that would make sure that such things get done in a timely manner, and it didn't itch noone big enough yet to fix it
[11:41] <Rhonda> I'd be more than interested in digging into it, but there are so much other tasks that I look after that otherwise would be lying around because they are also uninteresting to others
[11:41] <Laney> :-)
[11:42] <Rhonda> Heck, I haven't got to looking at the squeeze RC graph since a few months, and squeeze is meant to be a supported release.  %-/
[12:10] <tumbleweed> Laney, bdrung: I did a quick and dirty backport in bug 860506
[12:10] <tumbleweed> there is unecessary stuff included, but I don't think it's dangerous, and I preferred to backport whole files where possible
[12:12] <Laney> cool
[12:12] <Laney> it'd be good to test various types of sync
[12:13]  * tumbleweed only did simulated requestsync and syncpackage
[14:11] <hrw> why when I am dputting http://paste.ubuntu.com/697897/ to ppa I do not get orig.tar.gz uploaded http://paste.ubuntu.com/697898/ ?
[14:11] <Zhenech> did you include it in "build"?
[14:12] <hrw> good point. _source.changes lacks it
[14:12] <Zhenech> -sa to debbuild
[14:14] <hrw> Zhenech: thx
[14:14] <Zhenech> it defaults to include it in -1 uploads and do not in everything else
[14:15] <hrw> but there was no uploads of it previously and package is -1~linaro5 for a reason
[14:15] <hrw> ok, /me -> code
[14:15] <Zhenech> weill, -1~linaro5 isn't -1 ;)
[14:17] <Zhenech> and debuild doesnt know that you didnt upload anything else yet
[14:17] <hrw> yep
[17:26] <SMJ> is Box2D going to be updated any time soon?
[17:28] <SMJ> oh, feature freeze.
[18:40] <tumbleweed> SMJ: yeah, it would require lots of jumping up and down to make it happen (and a good reason, and some testing)