[01:07] <EvilResistance> ScottK:  is there any way to make a debian sid base.tgz within Ubuntu, for building debian unstable source packages?
[01:15] <EvilResistance> or anyone else :P
[01:24] <ajmitch> EvilResistance: yes, I believe pbuilder-dist should be set up to do that without having to tweak things
[01:24] <ajmitch> though building source packages shouldn't be a problem
[01:24] <EvilResistance> ajmitch:  the issue is building the binaries and then testing them
[01:24] <EvilResistance> trying to get something into debian :P
[01:25] <ajmitch> right, 'pbuilder-dist sid create'
[01:26] <EvilResistance> ajmitch:  is there a way to run the built binaries within a sid chroot?  the debian mentor peoples want me to test the binaries before uploading the "repaired" source package
[01:27] <ajmitch> yes, you can do it, though I usually prefer a VM for testing
[01:27]  * EvilResistance had two rejected uploads of the package, but is allowed to resubmit only when he's repaired it as much as he can
[01:27] <EvilResistance> you tell me how to make a sid VM that doesnt explode and i'll use that
[01:27] <ajmitch> you can risk bind-mounting home, I think the PbuilderHowto wiki page has info on that
[01:27] <ajmitch> 'explode' how?
[01:28] <EvilResistance> ajmitch:  by "explode" i mean it results in numerous errors ranging from stdin/stdout to FATAL: Cannot stat <blah> stuff
[01:28] <EvilResistance> going from stable -> unstable by modifying the apt sources list stuffs
[01:28] <ajmitch> sounds fun
[01:28] <EvilResistance> yeah that's what i said
[01:29] <EvilResistance> in #debian-mentors @ OFTC xD
[01:29] <ajmitch> yeah I saw
[01:29]  * ajmitch is sitting in an airport so can't really help you through setting it up :)
[01:29] <EvilResistance> OW!
[01:29] <EvilResistance> damn, these compressed air cans get COLD
[01:29] <EvilResistance> very quickly :/
[07:54] <jincreator> Hi. Is it possible to request remove package and sync together?
[07:57] <tumbleweed> why do you need to remove & sync?
[07:58] <jincreator> tumbleweed: Beacuse the ppackage I want to request sync has higher version than package in Debian.
[07:58] <tumbleweed> jincreator: removing it won't help
[07:59] <tumbleweed> people may already have it installed, so they won't upgrade unless the version is higher
[08:00] <jincreator> tumbleweed: Hmm...You are right.
[08:01] <tumbleweed> which packge is this?
[08:01] <jincreator> tumbleweed: ttf-unfonts-core, ttf-unfonts-extra
[08:03] <tumbleweed> both have been removed from debian
[08:03] <jincreator> tumbleweed: Actually changed to fonts-unfonts-core, fonts-unfonts-extra.
[08:03] <tumbleweed> I see
[08:03] <jincreator> tumbleweed: and there's also ttf-unfonts-core, ttf-unfonts-extra, but just metapackage.
[08:05] <tumbleweed> the version for ttf-unfonts in Ubuntu is currently 1.0.3.is.1.0.1-0ubuntu1, so I suggest just following that scheme
[08:08] <jincreator> tumbleweed: Well, but version fot ttf-unfonts in Debian is 1.0.2-080608-5 - higher version.
[08:10] <jincreator> tumbleweed: Actually I heard merging package is one way to solve this question. But seems ttf-unfonts is not in merges.ubuntu.com. Or am I do something wrong?
[08:10] <jincreator> (I have never merge package before)
[08:14] <tumbleweed> jincreator: 1.0.2 < 1.0.3
[08:15] <jincreator> tumbleweed: I mean 1.0.3 is actually 1.0.1-0ubuntu1
[08:16] <tumbleweed> we need to do 1.0.3.is.1.0.2-080608-5ubuntu1 (or something like that)
[08:21] <jincreator> tumbleweed: So, how can I merge package if it's source is not in merges.ubuntu.com?
[08:22] <tumbleweed> by hand
[08:22] <tumbleweed> you take every change we made, and apply it to the new version
[08:23] <tumbleweed> (that's how I tend to merge, anyway, when it's not trivial)
[08:25] <jincreator> tumbleweed: Hmm...after I did it, report to launchpad is enough? Seems I also need to add comment at m-o-m summary page.
[08:30] <tumbleweed> yes
[08:32] <jincreator> tumbleweed: I'll try. Thanks!
[09:02] <KNRO> so I'm wondering, if a user can go ahead and add a PPA to their sources, how come 'one-click' install is not available in Ubuntu? i.e. ability to add repo and packages from one go?
[09:12] <tumbleweed> KNRO: You can see some of the concerns to that here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ThirdPartyRepositoryApplicationProcess
[09:15] <KNRO> tumbleweed: "last edited 2009-06-16" so it looks like nothing happened much about it. OpenSUSE has a one-click install method that worked pretty well I recall.
[09:15] <tumbleweed> that's not the point. The point is that one-click install is dangerous
[09:16] <geofft> I hear there's lots of Windows malware available via 'one-click' installs.
[09:37] <jincreator> ls
[09:37] <jincreator> oops...
[09:37] <KNRO> Tumbleweed: You can ask user for permission. At any rate, the user can manually add the PPA and install the 'dangerous' software
[09:39] <tumbleweed> KNRO: considering the size of the ubuntu repositories, and broken situations users are already getting into with 3rd party repositories, is that necessary?
[09:39] <jtaylor> isn't there a firefox plugin that kind of does that?
[09:39] <jtaylor> adds ppa's on click of a link
[09:40] <KNRO> Tumbleweed: It makes software release for 3rd party folks easier. Instead of telling users how to add PPA to software center, I just say click here to download the latest version
[09:40] <jtaylor> KNRO: opera has something like that
[09:40] <jtaylor> they offer a deb which can be "one click" installed
[09:40] <jtaylor> the deb then adds a ppa
[09:40] <tumbleweed> so does google chrome
[09:40] <jtaylor> so you get autoupdates
[09:41] <tumbleweed> but it's ugly!
[09:41] <tumbleweed> chrome even has a cron job that re-adds the ppa if you disable it :/
[09:41] <tumbleweed> KNRO: how about packaging your app in Debian / Ubuntu?
[09:41] <jtaylor> lol
[09:42] <tumbleweed> err s/ppa/repository/
[09:42] <KNRO> really, so I might look into how Opera does it :P
[09:42] <KNRO> see, they have to resort to "hacks" to get that done
[09:43] <tumbleweed> KNRO: we really don't encourage our users to find software on the web, but rather find it in the software centre
[09:43] <KNRO> Tumbleweed: yeah, I will ask for my packages to be added to Universe soon.
[09:44] <tumbleweed> KNRO: going via Debian is preferred
[10:03] <KNRO> tumbleweed: Does Debian has something akin to the Universe repo?
[10:03] <jtaylor> KNRO: debian has main for all free stuff
[10:03] <jtaylor> which is ~ ubuntu main + universe
[10:04] <KNRO> jtaylor: Ok thanks!
[10:45] <jtaylor> anyone else getting hangs with apt-cacher-ng in precise?
[10:45] <jtaylor> localhost works, but remotes work for a short while and then lock up
[11:26] <ISK> Hello!
[17:06] <EvilResistance> ScottK:  how can I run a Debian linitian check on a package, short of grabbing a debian VM and running lintian there?
[17:06] <EvilResistance> i need to find out whether or not this is still occuring: W: maintainer-script-lacks-debhelper-token debian/postrm
[17:06] <EvilResistance> (and if so, how to fix it)
[17:07] <jtaylor> which ubuntu version hasn'T got that check?
[17:07] <jtaylor> I don't think thats new
[17:07] <Laney> --profile debian should work anyway
[17:07] <Laney> i think
[17:07] <ScottK> Yes.  It does.
[17:08] <jtaylor> ubuntu does not check that?
[17:08] <Laney> I can't believe that it doesn't
[17:09] <jtaylor> me neither, I'm pretty sure I saw it in the past
[17:09] <Laney> anyway you can just look at postrm and see if the token is there
[17:10] <EvilResistance> is the token just #DEBHELPER#?  that's what the lintian docs over at Debian say, but i'm not sure
[17:10] <Laney> yes, do lintian-info -t maintainer-script-lacks-debhelper-token
[17:14] <EvilResistance> ah.  well i think i fixed that lintian error now... :)
[17:41] <alkisg> On my-package.postinst, I want to display a notice to the users that I regenerated a certificate that had expired, and they need to copy it to all their computer lab clients, otherwise the program won't work.
[17:41] <alkisg> What would be an appropriate way to do that? A debconf note?
[17:42] <jtaylor> Debian.news probably
[17:43] <jtaylor> NEWS.Debian
[17:43] <alkisg> Ah, thanks, I couldn't find it in google :)
[17:44] <jtaylor> though that won't be displayed by default
[17:44] <alkisg> Hmm that won't do then
[17:44] <alkisg> I only have a few users, and it's only going to be for that one upgrade, so I know they'll appreciate the notice, it won't annoy them
[20:41] <Q-FUNK> hi
[20:41] <Q-FUNK> would anybody be interested in reviewing a suite of 6 packages that are ready to submit to Precise's NEW queue?
[20:49] <EvilResistance> um... werent you here yesterday?
[20:49] <EvilResistance> and didnt they say it'd be easier to get new packages into Ubuntu by first submitting them to Debian?
[20:49] <Q-FUNK> EvilResistance: yes. and?
[20:49] <Q-FUNK> EvilResistance: actually, it's not easier.
[20:50] <EvilResistance> says you
[20:50] <Q-FUNK> says 10 years of experience at this.
[20:50]  * EvilResistance has a package sitting in the Debian acceptance queue that are likely going to be accepted in the next 2 days
[20:50] <EvilResistance> according to the debian sponsors i've spoken to :P
[20:50] <Q-FUNK> I uploaded my first package at Debian in 2003 and have been a user longer.
[20:51] <EvilResistance> i've been an end user since two years ago.  i started packaging things 9 months ago.  i've become pretty decent at it.
[20:51] <EvilResistance> just because you've been doing this longer doesnt mean you know that its easier to submit direct to Ubuntu than to Debian
[20:51] <jtaylor> it certainly shouldn'T be easier, but its better
[20:52] <Q-FUNK> EvilResistance: I'll say this exactly once:  I came here asking for constructive feedback on the packaging. unless you're gonna chip in on this, please stop.
[20:52] <EvilResistance> fine, watch the MOTUs tell you similar stuff
[21:20] <EvilResistance> alright, that's it, no more packaging for me for the next week or so
[21:20] <EvilResistance> i've about had it with the evil asinine methods Debian has for packages
[21:22] <jtaylor> ?
[21:22] <EvilResistance> jtaylor:  i've got issues with how Debian wants code structured for packaging
[21:22] <EvilResistance> esp. Python apps
[21:23] <EvilResistance> if they have a specific structure of an upstream program for packaging, they need to fscking PUBLISH their desired structure
[21:23] <jtaylor> whats your problem with the policy?
[21:23] <EvilResistance> give TEMPLATES
[21:23] <EvilResistance> not leave people in the dust and give ambiguous unhelpful shitstatements
[21:23]  * EvilResistance is done, walks off for a while
[21:23] <jtaylor> there are many thousand templates in the archive