[01:00] tumbleweed: from http://people.ubuntu.com/~stefanor/upload_activity/: The last timestamp in the dataset was at Sun, 18 Dec 2011 22:00:00 GMT (so presumably that's how up to date this page is). [01:01] micahg: :) [01:01] that should improve slightly with the next batch of UDD data [01:01] we are ignore dates more than 2 weeks away from SPPH record creation [01:01] ok [01:04] tumbleweed: you need to me reimport stuff already? :) [01:04] s/to me/me to/ [01:19] ajmitch: not quite yet. In a few days [01:20] ok === jussi01 is now known as Guest40168 === Guest78115 is now known as jussi01 === ubott2 is now known as ubottu [09:21] slangasek: You around to mentor a mentee? :P [09:23] I'm trying to make a package for desura but I'm getting stuck here http://paste.ubuntu.com/755811/ [09:28] is the CMakeLists.txt perhaps in a different subdirectory? === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan [09:30] geser: One does not exist in the tarball from upstream [09:33] are there any instructions how to build it? [09:40] geser: It appears it was my own error the tarball they provided does not seem to contain any source anyways =/ === yofel_ is now known as yofel [11:37] hi, i'm looking for reviewers for http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/unity-lens-bliss [12:13] hi everyone [12:14] i need a bit of advice with creating an ubuntu package and putting it up on a ppa on launchpad [12:14] feel free to ask [12:14] i have two libraries that are not present in the ubuntu repositories but need to be distributed with the game i want to package [12:15] i want to statically link them to my game [12:15] should i put them in the source package along with the game? [12:15] why statically linking? [12:16] ok, i suppose static linking isn't really neccessary here [12:16] but i need to bundle the libraries with the game somehow [12:16] statically linking is frowned upon [12:16] ok, noted :-) [12:17] package the libraries seperately (in your PPA), and let your game depend on them (build-depend on the -dev packages for linking) [12:17] awesome [12:17] i hadn't thought of that [12:17] i have a related question then [12:18] no, actually i don't [12:18] that makes perfect sense [12:18] btw, can i depend on a package in another ppa? [12:19] yes, if you specify that your PPA depends on that other PPA (works also for build-dependencies) [12:19] thanks a lot! [12:19] i suppose the questions weren't really motu-related [12:20] but this seemed like a good place to ask [12:20] #ubuntu-packaging is a good place to ask something if its not motu related but packaging :) [12:20] didn't know about that channel [12:20] thanks! [12:20] np, have fun! :) [12:42] any devs around to answer a few questions on building? [12:42] :D [12:43] Just ask, someone will answer if they know. [12:44] Ok so the problem I keep running into is when I grab source of a app that needs to be packaged and I do cmake I get a error about cmakelists.txt not being found [12:45] does the package use cmake? (not every package uses cmake) [12:46] Well a example is I tried building the Unity Lens Bliss source that someone has finished ^ [12:46] and yeah no luck [12:46] * bkerensa is just going based on the guide here http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/packaging-new-software.html [12:47] How would I determine which I should use? [12:52] check what files are in the source tarball [12:52] CMakeLists.txt -> cmake [12:53] configure, Makefile.am -> configure and then make (the package uses the autotools) [12:53] just a Makefile -> make (the package probably uses a hand crafted Makefile) [12:54] NO [12:54] why does that talk about REVU! [12:54] heh [12:55] bkerensa: why would you try to build unity-lens-bliss manually? just run debuild. [12:55] Laney: ah, you ment the link, not my simple classification [12:56] bkerensa: that tutorial mentions cmake because this packages uses cmake for building [12:56] geser: I see ;) [12:56] yes :P [12:56] sorry for being a total greenhand at this ;) I have only had to compile something a few times from source :P [13:00] ockham_: When I'm building a new package and I use debuild and it asks for a changelog where do I go from there? [13:01] bkerensa: so your goal is to create a new package based on some existing source? [13:03] ockham_: My goal is to learn how to package in general that way I can contribute by packaging stuff that needs packaging [13:03] ;) [13:03] bkerensa: cool. well, have you found https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Complete and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/HandsOn ? [13:05] bkerensa: the unity-lens-bliss package which I uploaded should be ready for just building, so you don't really have to anything else than just run debuild in order to get a binary package. [13:05] ockham_ Nope ;) thanks.... For some reason MOTU was suggesting http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/ instead of the ones you referenced which seem way more through [13:07] bkerensa: everything needed for packaging goes to the debian/ dir, so you should look at that directory if you want to see how it's done [13:07] ockham_: kk :D thanks btw [13:08] and if you want to start a new package, the PackagingGuides I referenced will tell you to use dh_make on the source for initializing things [13:08] ockham_: np. though i'm afraid i have to leave kinda now... maybe someone else can help you as you go... === Laney is now known as Guest60660 === Laney is now known as Guest19719 [15:26] bkerensa: hmm? :) [15:27] slangasek, do you already know what you all will focus your efforts on during the BSP? [15:28] dholbach: yes, multiarch ;) (and some other stuff) [15:28] nice [15:29] we'll mention it in the dev update today === Guest19719 is now known as Laney === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away === Laney is now known as HOHOHaney [17:16] * HOHOHaney Claus [17:19] Heh. [17:27] Is this where I can get advice on submitting my first bug fix patch? [17:31] jgneff: Indeed it is. [17:31] Great. I found this , which helps a lot, but do I create the patch against oneiric or the very latest precise? [17:32] jgneff: Precise. [17:34] And is there an easy way to go through the code, test, debug cycle than doing the whole (slow) pbuilder-dist thing and installing the package? I'm used to the much quicker "make; make install" into /usr/local for testing. [17:36] I'll test the final built package on a pristine development ISO at the end, but I don't want to do that for every little change. Am I missing something? [19:08] bkerensa: oh, so you were up in the middle of the night making a new package, I see. http://wiki.debian.org/IntroDebianPackaging :) [19:39] hey masters of the univers [19:39] e [19:40] is this a good place to ask my question about making a deb from some downloaded source? [19:48] marshall, -packaging might be better, but that and here sometimes overlap a tad [19:51] Resistance: ok, thanks [19:52] Would this be the correct place to address an issue with Ubuntu repo management? [19:52] TaiChiMustDo: that depends on your question, so if you ask, we can probably redirect to the proper place [19:53] I would like to address version updates of packages that are not contained in the Ubuntu repo when they are contained in others, ie, KDE apps, etc. [19:54] the way i understand it, an application doesnt get updated in the repos unless (a) its a new backport, in which case its in the backports repo, or (b) its been confirmed necessary and stable by the people who check stability before release of packages [19:54] but that's just my understanding, micahg is more likely to know better [19:55] TaiChiMustDo: stable releases usually don't get updates unless there's a stable release update exception or it's a backport [19:55] micahg, update exceptions, such as major security fixes? [19:56] Resistance: bug and security fixes are usually cherry picked [19:56] update exceptions like this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions [19:57] For the purpose of this discussion, I'll address something more simple. There are a few plasmoids that are contained in the Ubuntu repos that are behind two or more versions while listed on KDE-*.org ashaving been updated plus to other repos [19:57] TaiChiMustDo: are they behind in the devel release as well? [19:57] No. [19:58] TaiChiMustDo: are they part of KDE itself? [19:58] TaiChiMustDo: are they part of KDE itself? <-- as in part of the kde core, or a direct dependency of kde core? [19:59] KDE has a micro release exception, but only for core components AIUI [19:59] that's what i thought [19:59] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy [20:00] No, they are not core but I have confirmation the developer has upstreamed the new versions as he finishes them. Here is an example, http://goo.gl/bxJZj [20:00] In the above example, the plasmoid is at v1.0.96 while in the Ubuntu repo it's 1.0.94. [20:00] micahg, if its not core, it doesnt get updated, right? [20:00] TaiChiMustDo: so, unless the version in the archive is broken to the point where it doesn't work at all, you'd most likely be looking at requesting a backport [20:02] Resistance: whatever that wiki page says, I haven't reviewed it [20:02] The reason why I am inquiring about it is I am a person with a disability. Any automation is especially appreciated. If I install something using a package manager but then have to wait months to be able to update it also using the package manager that defeats a huge purpose whom have difficulties manually compiling. [20:04] TaiChiMustDo: we have a new requestbackport script in ubuntu-dev-tools in precise which should make requesting these updates easier. In general, the stable release is stable w/out new versions except for what has exceptions (Firefox, Thunderbird, ClamAV, KDE point releases, Banshee point releases, GNOME point releases) [20:05] anything else that you want a new version for that's not entirely broke in the stable release, should probably be a backport (if that's allowed for the package) [20:05] Okay, I will check the backports but I do have them active in my repo sources [20:05] TaiChiMustDo, if i may ask you... what's the package name that you're trying to get updated? and does it exist in Precise yet as updated? [20:06] TaiChiMustDo, backports need requested by users. and tests to prove it wont break things [20:06] * Resistance has backported a couple of packages before, so... :P [20:07] It's called Fancy Tasks http://goo.gl/bxJZj The developer also posted this: "Warning! [20:07] Starting with version 1.0.95 applet requires KDE 4.7." Which for most of us who are using Kubuntu or KDE are already there. [20:07] i asked for the package name [20:08] not the plasmoid's name [20:08] ;P [20:08] I understand. One moment pls [20:08] plasma-widget-fancytasks [20:09] ah cool [20:09] *scans the Precise repos* [20:09] Yes, thank you. [20:09] TaiChiMustDo: precise needs to be updated first, then you can request a backport [20:09] ^ [20:09] Ah, okay, I didn't see that when looking at the info of the package in Synaptic [20:09] not to mention .96 isnt even *in* precise [20:10] Hmmm...The developer told me it is. [20:10] if it were, it'd *possibly* be backportable ;P [20:10] well then precise hasnt been updated yet [20:10] you can use rmadison from devscripts to check versions in all releases [20:10] I'll inquire with him again. [20:10] Okay, very good, thank you. [20:10] TaiChiMustDo: you can file a bug request for an update and tag upgrade-software-version [20:11] micahg, in precise? [20:11] Resistance: hopefully, if there's time, someone will update it in precise [20:11] :P [20:11] i also just checked debian's sid repos [20:12] .96 of this person's requested package doesnt exist there either [20:12] (although note this system is evil-ish so... it might be wrong) [20:12] since it's not something we inherit from Debian, updates depend mainly on Ubuntu developer availability, you might ask if anyone in #kubuntu-devel has any interest in updating the package as well [20:12] By activating Precise's repo, will that cause a dist-upgrade for my current 11.10 instance? [20:13] TaiChiMustDo: no, after it's in precise, you'd have to request a backport [20:13] mhm [20:13] TaiChiMustDo, if you'd like, lemme know when its in precise, i'll help you with the backport request process... [20:13] or the motus can help here too [20:13] Thanks, micahg, That is an excellent suggestion to check with the kubuntu-devel [20:13] * Resistance does, however, test-backport within a PPA before actually submitting backport requests ;P [20:15] Okay, very good. You've been a great help and very knowledgeable. Most appreciated on behalf of the disability community. [20:15] Now, if we can get voice recognition to work well under Linux. Been tough ride. [20:16] * Resistance chuckles [20:16] yeah, that'll be a toughie ;P === Resistance is now known as EvilResistance === medberry is now known as mka === mka is now known as medberry === EvilJackyAlcine is now known as [Jacky] [21:26] Hi, I fixed a typo in psmisc package(it's my first:), the last changelog entry is "psmisc (22.14-1) unstable; urgency=low" so should my entry be "psmisc (22.14-1ubuntu1) unstable; urgency=low" (adding 'ubuntu1' to the version) ? [21:27] ashams: you want to target precise in the debdiff, or UNRELEASED in bzr [21:28] micahg, sorry, I don't know what you mean! [21:28] ashams: instead of unstable [21:28] yeah [21:29] so I add UNRELEASED instead of unstable, that's it? [21:29] ashams: depends if it's bzr or for a debdiff [21:29] I'm using bzr [21:30] yeah, so target UNRELEASED in a merge, or you can do this when creating the changelog by using: dch -i -DUNRELEASED [21:32] ashams: is it worth to do an ubuntu revision for a typo fix? [21:33] micahg, don't know, at all [21:33] oops [21:33] jtaylor, what you think? [21:33] that's a good point, probably just worth forwarding to Debian unless it's going to impair usage [21:34] so, I'll just attach the patch? [21:35] ashams: reportbug -B debian -A /path/to/patch psmisc [21:37] micahg, ah, thank you === warp11 is now known as warp10