[01:00] <micahg> 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] <tumbleweed> micahg: :)
[01:01] <tumbleweed> that should improve slightly with the next batch of UDD data
[01:01] <tumbleweed> we are ignore dates more than 2 weeks  away from SPPH record creation
[01:01] <micahg> ok
[01:04] <ajmitch> tumbleweed: you need to me reimport stuff already? :)
[01:04] <ajmitch> s/to me/me to/
[01:19] <tumbleweed> ajmitch: not quite yet. In a few days
[01:20] <ajmitch> ok
[09:21] <bkerensa> slangasek: You around to mentor a mentee? :P
[09:23] <bkerensa> I'm trying to make a package for desura but I'm getting stuck here http://paste.ubuntu.com/755811/
[09:28] <geser> is the CMakeLists.txt perhaps in a different subdirectory?
[09:30] <bkerensa> geser: One does not exist in the tarball from upstream
[09:33] <geser> are there any instructions how to build it?
[09:40] <bkerensa> geser: It appears it was my own error the tarball they provided does not seem to contain any source anyways =/
[11:37] <ockham_> hi, i'm looking for reviewers for http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/unity-lens-bliss
[12:13] <ranko> hi everyone
[12:14] <ranko> i need a bit of advice with creating an ubuntu package and putting it up on a ppa on launchpad
[12:14] <geser> feel free to ask
[12:14] <ranko> 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] <ranko> i want to statically link them to my game
[12:15] <ranko> should i put them in the source package along with the game?
[12:15] <geser> why statically linking?
[12:16] <ranko> ok, i suppose static linking isn't really neccessary here
[12:16] <ranko> but i need to bundle the libraries with the game somehow
[12:16] <geser> statically linking is frowned upon
[12:16] <ranko> ok, noted :-)
[12:17] <geser> package the libraries seperately  (in your PPA), and let your game depend on them (build-depend on the -dev packages for linking)
[12:17] <ranko> awesome
[12:17] <ranko> i hadn't thought of that
[12:17] <ranko> i have a related question then
[12:18] <ranko> no, actually i don't
[12:18] <ranko> that makes perfect sense
[12:18] <ranko> btw, can i depend on a package in another ppa?
[12:19] <geser> yes, if you specify that your PPA depends on that other PPA (works also for build-dependencies)
[12:19] <ranko> thanks a lot!
[12:19] <ranko> i suppose the questions weren't really motu-related
[12:20] <ranko> but this seemed like a good place to ask
[12:20] <nigelb> #ubuntu-packaging is a good place to ask something if its not motu related but packaging :)
[12:20] <ranko> didn't know about that channel
[12:20] <ranko> thanks!
[12:20] <nigelb> np, have fun! :)
[12:42] <bkerensa> any devs around to answer a few questions on building?
[12:42] <bkerensa> :D
[12:43] <nigelb> Just ask, someone will answer if they know.
[12:44] <bkerensa> 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] <geser> does the package use cmake? (not every package uses cmake)
[12:46] <bkerensa> Well a example is I tried building the Unity Lens Bliss source that someone has finished ^
[12:46] <bkerensa> 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] <bkerensa> How would I determine which I should use?
[12:52] <geser> check what files are in the source tarball
[12:52] <geser> CMakeLists.txt -> cmake
[12:53] <geser> configure, Makefile.am -> configure and then make (the package uses the autotools)
[12:53] <geser> just a Makefile -> make (the package probably uses a hand crafted Makefile)
[12:54] <Laney> NO
[12:54] <Laney> why does that talk about REVU!
[12:54] <nigelb> heh
[12:55] <ockham_> bkerensa: why would you try to build unity-lens-bliss manually? just run debuild.
[12:55] <geser> Laney: ah, you ment the link, not my simple classification
[12:56] <geser> bkerensa: that tutorial mentions cmake because this packages uses cmake for building
[12:56] <bkerensa> geser: I see ;)
[12:56] <Laney> yes :P
[12:56] <bkerensa> sorry for being a total greenhand at this ;) I have only had to compile something a few times from source :P
[13:00] <bkerensa> 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] <ockham_> bkerensa: so your goal is to create a new package based on some existing source?
[13:03] <bkerensa> ockham_: My goal is to learn how to package in general that way I can contribute by packaging stuff that needs packaging
[13:03] <bkerensa> ;)
[13:03] <ockham_> bkerensa: cool. well, have you found https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Complete and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/HandsOn ?
[13:05] <ockham_> 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] <bkerensa> 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] <ockham_> 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] <bkerensa> ockham_: kk :D thanks btw
[13:08] <ockham_> 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_> ockham_: np. though i'm afraid i have to leave kinda now... maybe someone else can help you as you go...
[15:26] <slangasek> bkerensa: hmm? :)
[15:27] <dholbach> slangasek, do you already know what you all will focus your efforts on during the BSP?
[15:28] <slangasek> dholbach: yes, multiarch ;)  (and some other stuff)
[15:28] <dholbach> nice
[15:29] <dholbach> we'll mention it in the dev update today
[17:16]  * HOHOHaney Claus
[17:19] <iulian> Heh.
[17:27] <jgneff> Is this where I can get advice on submitting my first bug fix patch?
[17:31] <iulian> jgneff: Indeed it is.
[17:31] <jgneff> Great. I found this <http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/fixing-a-bug.html>, which helps a lot, but do I create the patch against oneiric or the very latest precise?
[17:32] <iulian> jgneff: Precise.
[17:34] <jgneff> 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] <jgneff> 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] <slangasek> 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] <marshall> hey masters of the univers
[19:39] <marshall> e
[19:40] <marshall> is this a good place to ask my question about making a deb from some downloaded source?
[19:48] <Resistance> marshall, -packaging might be better, but that and here sometimes overlap a tad
[19:51] <marshall> Resistance: ok, thanks
[19:52] <TaiChiMustDo> Would this be the correct place to address an issue with Ubuntu repo management?
[19:52] <micahg> TaiChiMustDo: that depends on your question, so if you ask, we can probably redirect to the proper place
[19:53] <TaiChiMustDo> 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] <Resistance> 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] <Resistance> but that's just my understanding, micahg is more likely to know better
[19:55] <micahg> TaiChiMustDo: stable releases usually don't get updates unless there's a stable release update exception or it's a backport
[19:55] <Resistance> micahg, update exceptions, such as major security fixes?
[19:56] <micahg> Resistance: bug and security fixes are usually cherry picked
[19:56] <micahg> update exceptions like this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions
[19:57] <TaiChiMustDo> 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] <micahg> TaiChiMustDo: are they behind in the devel release as well?
[19:57] <TaiChiMustDo> No.
[19:58] <micahg> TaiChiMustDo: are they part of KDE itself?
 TaiChiMustDo: are they part of KDE itself?  <-- as in part of the kde core, or a direct dependency of kde core?
[19:59] <micahg> KDE has a micro release exception, but only for core components AIUI
[19:59] <Resistance> that's what i thought
[19:59] <micahg> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kubuntu/UpdatesPolicy
[20:00] <TaiChiMustDo> 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] <TaiChiMustDo> In the above example, the plasmoid is at v1.0.96 while in the Ubuntu repo it's 1.0.94.
[20:00] <Resistance> micahg, if its not core, it doesnt get updated, right?
[20:00] <micahg> 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] <micahg> Resistance: whatever that wiki page says, I haven't reviewed it
[20:02] <TaiChiMustDo> 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] <micahg> 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] <micahg> 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] <TaiChiMustDo> Okay, I will check the backports but I do have them active in my repo sources
[20:05] <Resistance> 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] <Resistance> 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] <TaiChiMustDo> It's called Fancy Tasks http://goo.gl/bxJZj The developer also posted this: "Warning!
[20:07] <TaiChiMustDo> 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] <Resistance> i asked for the package name
[20:08] <Resistance> not the plasmoid's name
[20:08] <Resistance> ;P
[20:08] <TaiChiMustDo> I understand. One moment pls
[20:08] <micahg> plasma-widget-fancytasks
[20:09] <Resistance> ah cool
[20:09] <Resistance> *scans the Precise repos*
[20:09] <TaiChiMustDo> Yes, thank you.
[20:09] <micahg> TaiChiMustDo: precise needs to be updated first, then you can request a backport
[20:09] <Resistance> ^
[20:09] <TaiChiMustDo> Ah, okay, I didn't see that when looking at the info of the package in Synaptic
[20:09] <Resistance> not to mention .96 isnt even *in* precise
[20:10] <TaiChiMustDo> Hmmm...The developer told me it is.
[20:10] <Resistance> if it were, it'd *possibly* be backportable ;P
[20:10] <Resistance> well then precise hasnt been updated yet
[20:10] <micahg> you can use rmadison from devscripts to check versions in all releases
[20:10] <TaiChiMustDo> I'll inquire with him again.
[20:10] <TaiChiMustDo> Okay, very good, thank you.
[20:10] <micahg> TaiChiMustDo: you can file a bug request for an update and tag upgrade-software-version
[20:11] <Resistance> micahg, in precise?
[20:11] <micahg> Resistance: hopefully, if there's time, someone will update it in precise
[20:11] <Resistance> :P
[20:11] <Resistance> i also just checked debian's sid repos
[20:12] <Resistance> .96 of this person's requested package doesnt exist there either
[20:12] <Resistance> (although note this system is evil-ish so... it might be wrong)
[20:12] <micahg> 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] <TaiChiMustDo> By activating Precise's repo, will that cause a dist-upgrade for my current 11.10 instance?
[20:13] <micahg> TaiChiMustDo: no, after it's in precise, you'd have to request a backport
[20:13] <Resistance> mhm
[20:13] <Resistance> TaiChiMustDo, if you'd like, lemme know when its in precise, i'll help you with the backport request process...
[20:13] <Resistance> or the motus can help here too
[20:13] <TaiChiMustDo> 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] <TaiChiMustDo> Okay, very good. You've been a great help and very knowledgeable. Most appreciated on behalf of the disability community.
[20:15] <TaiChiMustDo> Now, if we can get voice recognition to work well under Linux. Been tough ride.
[20:16]  * Resistance chuckles
[20:16] <Resistance> yeah, that'll be a toughie ;P
[21:26] <ashams> 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] <micahg> ashams: you want to target precise in the debdiff, or UNRELEASED in bzr
[21:28] <ashams> micahg, sorry, I don't know what you mean!
[21:28] <micahg> ashams: instead of unstable
[21:28] <ashams> yeah
[21:29] <ashams> so I add UNRELEASED instead of unstable, that's it?
[21:29] <micahg> ashams: depends if it's bzr or for a debdiff
[21:29] <ashams> I'm using bzr
[21:30] <micahg> yeah, so target UNRELEASED in a merge, or you can do this when creating the changelog by using: dch -i -DUNRELEASED
[21:32] <jtaylor> ashams: is it worth to do an ubuntu revision for a typo fix?
[21:33] <ashams> micahg, don't know, at all
[21:33] <ashams> oops
[21:33] <ashams> jtaylor, what you think?
[21:33] <micahg> that's a good point, probably just worth forwarding to Debian unless it's going to impair usage
[21:34] <ashams> so, I'll just attach the patch?
[21:35] <micahg> ashams: reportbug -B debian -A /path/to/patch psmisc
[21:37] <ashams> micahg, ah, thank you