[10:53] <ogra_> hmpf, why does my manual omap4 armhf build fail with oem-config being out of sync
[10:53] <ogra_> bah, ftbfs on hf
[10:54] <ogra_> install: cannot create regular file `debian/ubiquity/usr/lib/ubiquity/flash-kernel/flash-kernel-installer': No such file or directory
[10:54] <ogra_> GRMBL !
[10:55] <ogra_> weird, f-k-i udeb should be there
[10:58] <ogra_> cjwatson, could it be that we miss an update of the integrated udeb stuff in ubiquity ?
[10:58] <ogra_> (to pick up armhf bits)
[11:00] <ogra_> hmm, no, should have happened
[11:02]  * ogra_ scratches head ... the udeb is on ports.u.c, the last ubiquity upload claims to have it picked up but still it doesnt seem to be in the source
[11:29] <cjwatson> ogra_: that's fixed in bzr
[11:29] <ogra_> cjwatson, yes
[11:29] <cjwatson> I'll do a quick upload now
[11:29] <ogra_> dont clash with infinity !
[11:29] <ogra_> :)
[11:30] <cjwatson> oh, if he's doing it, fine
[11:30] <cjwatson> yeah, I notice he fixed my broken symlinks :)
[11:30] <ogra_> well, he sounded like :)
[12:28] <ogra_> hmm, seems infinity didnt upload
[13:06] <mvo> hi, I wonder if someone could review the release-upgrader-{apt,python-apt} in lucid-proposed, it would be nice to get it in there so that we can start with the lucid->precise auto-upgrade-testing properly (i.e. testing the multiarch transition on amd64)
[14:10] <pitti> mvo: sure, doing an SRU run now
[14:11] <mvo> \o/
[14:25] <pitti> mvo: hm, I don't see it in https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+queue?queue_state=1
[14:25]  * mvo looks
[14:25] <mvo> subject: [ubuntu/lucid-proposed] release-upgrader-python-apt
[14:25] <mvo>         0.8.0ubuntu9+upgrader1 (New)
[14:25] <mvo> subject: [ubuntu/lucid-proposed] release-upgrader-apt
[14:25] <mvo>         0.8.16~exp5ubuntu13+upgrader1 (New)
[14:25] <pitti> oh, new
[14:25] <mvo> its both source and binary new
[14:25] <mvo> as it needs to be co-installable
[14:35] <pitti> mvo: my  main nitpick is that the version number is higher than the original one
[14:35] <pitti> 0.8.16~exp5ubuntu13+upgrader1
[14:36] <pitti> it would be safer to do 0.8.16~exp5ubuntu13~upgrader1
[14:36] <pitti> for lucid->precise that won't be a problem
[14:36] <pitti> but for lucid->maverick or lucid->oneiric it will
[14:36] <pitti> mvo: for libapt-pkg4.11 and the other common package names
[14:37] <pitti> mvo: will we get a conflicts:/replaces: in precise for the new release-upgrader-libapt-pkg-dev etc. packages to clean them up?
[14:42] <mvo> pitti: indeed, I'm happy to fix the version number, good point
[14:43] <mvo> pitti: the release-uprader-libapt-pkg-dev will never be installed directly its just used for building release-upgrader-python-apt so I have not actually considered adding a C/R there
[14:43] <pitti> mvo: ok
[14:43] <pitti> mvo: but we need one for release-upgrader-python-apt, I suppose
[14:43] <ogra_> sigh, finally ubiquity published
[14:44]  * ogra_ tries another omap4 armhf build
[14:44] <pitti> mvo: ok, I'll reject the two uploads; I'm happy with + -> ~, will accept those
[14:46] <mvo> pitti: release-upgrader-python-apt> indeed, good point. I was actually planning to just use the normal release-upgrader cleanup handle this, but doing it at the packaging level is pretty nice
[14:47] <pitti> mvo: ah, in cleanup sounds fine
[14:47] <pitti> mvo: it's only r-u which will pull it in in the first place
[14:47] <pitti> so whatever is easier
[14:48] <mvo> yeah
[14:48] <mvo> thanks a bunch for the review, I will fix the mentioned issues and re-upload
[14:50] <pitti> mvo: issues? it's just the version number, right?
[14:51] <mvo> yes
[14:51] <mvo> maybe issues is a bit strong of a word for that :)
[14:53] <ogra_> disasters ?
[14:53] <ogra_> :)
[14:54] <mvo> lol
[15:19] <elmo>   workrave |    1.9.3-2 | natty/universe | source, amd64, armel, i386, powerpc
[15:19] <elmo>   workrave | 1.9.4-2~oneiric1 | oneiric-backports/universe | source, amd64, armel, i386, powerpc
[15:19] <elmo>   workrave |    1.9.4-3 | precise/universe | source, amd64, armel, i386, powerpc
[15:19] <elmo> how is that possible?
[15:19] <elmo> as in, why would it not be in oneiric at all?
[15:19] <pitti> elmo: in oneiric it was uninstallable/unbuildable
[15:19] <pitti> so it got removed
[15:20] <pitti> it was ported to the gnome-panel-3 stuff too late for oneiric
[15:20] <elmo> blink
[15:20] <elmo> ok
[15:20] <elmo> do we not enable -backports by default yet?
[15:20] <elmo> s/not //
[15:21] <pitti> I thought we do now, but with pinning so that you need to opt-in still
[15:21] <pitti> mvo: ^ right?
[15:21] <cjwatson> right
[15:21] <cjwatson> apt-setup (1:0.49ubuntu5) oneiric; urgency=low
[15:21] <cjwatson>   * Enable backports by default now that we have NotAutomatic enabled and
[15:22] <cjwatson>     working.
[15:22] <elmo> hmm
[15:22] <cjwatson>  -- Iain Lane <laney@ubuntu.com>  Thu, 12 May 2011 08:39:39 +0100
[15:22] <cjwatson> dunno about upgraded systems
[15:31] <mvo> yeah, I don't think the release-upgrader adds them, that sounds like a bug
[16:05] <Laney> hmm?
[16:09] <Laney> ah, yes, I would expect it to be added on upgrades too
[16:20] <elmo> is there some way to "reset" my sources.list to what it would be on a default install?
[16:20] <elmo> (short of finding a fresh install somewhere and copying it across)
[16:32] <slangasek> none that I can think of
[18:44] <stgraber> infinity: looks like I need to upload a new edubuntu-meta adding armhf? (just got a build failure)
[18:48] <infinity> stgraber: Almost certainly.  But check your germinate-created package lists and see if it's even near complete.  If not, not much point yet.
[18:48] <infinity> stgraber: (If there are any blockers, let me know, we're still unsnagging a lot of universe)