[04:37] seems that one new package I had uploaded was rejected, except that there was no explanation other than "rejected by archive admin". what next? [04:41] "rejected by archive administrator" is not a helpful message at all. [04:49] What package? [04:49] (The AA that rejects it is supposed to mail you with the details) [04:49] I don't mind the package being rejected per-se, but it would be useful to know why, so that I can fix it. [04:50] libdigidoc (2.7.0-0ubuntu1) precise; [04:54] Q-FUNK: Did you upload it more than once? There's still a copy in New: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+queue?queue_state=0&queue_text=libdigidoc [04:56] ScottK: not that I recall, but it's possible that I inadvertently did so while intending to upload a copy to our team's PPA. [04:57] My guess is someone saw two copies in queue and rejected the older one just to clean things up. [04:57] ScottK: that reminds me, is there a policy for setting Maintainers to a LP team? Ideally, the contact address for this would be ~esteid as a team, not just myself personally. [04:58] Maintainer needs to be an *buntu.com address. [04:58] An LP team in launchpad.net doesn't cover it. [04:58] ScottK: ok, that might be the reason. It just wasn't indicated, so it's hard for me to guess. [04:59] XSB-Original-Maintainer can be anything. [04:59] alright. I guess I'll have to be the official maintainer on behalf of the team... ;) [04:59] You can make ubuntu-developers maintainer [04:59] right, that one can indeed be anything, but LP teams don't necessarily have any external e-mail, correct? [05:00] There's no rule like for Debian where someone in Maintainer/Uploaders needs to be an actual live person. [05:00] That's true, but you can get mailing list. [05:00] True, and it could make sense for us to have such a list. How do we apply for one? [05:01] Then, we could set that list as our PPA team's contact, too. [05:01] It's in the LP U/I somewhere. [05:01] ok. I'll check. [05:01] Thanks for the idea! [05:03] ScottK: btw, would you happen to know how often new packages get checked? We have a suite of 6 packages that need to get into Precise to provide support for the national Estonian ID card, the added to Estonian language dependencies. [05:03] ScottK: the first one of these (smartcardpp) finally cleared binary-new today. [05:06] It's irregular. [05:06] All the archive admins also have other duties. [05:06] Anything that's uploaded before feature freeze will get in though. [05:06] ok [05:08] It was all uploaded earlier this week, pending approval and eventually landing in dep-wait. === yofel_ is now known as yofel === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan [13:29] hi, just tested cloudprint 0.5 deb, it misses one depend: python-pkg-resources [13:32] Kano: which distribution? [13:33] both, the same file anyway for oneric/precise [13:33] nevermind, oneiric [13:33] it works in precise [13:33] sure, but only because python-pkg-resources was preinstalled [13:33] clean chroot [13:34] probably some of its depends pulls it in [13:34] that a script only [13:34] no automatic depend detection [13:34] tested it on squeeze and found that [13:35] of course a script will not pull dependencies [13:35] you need a package for that [13:36] it's common for packages to miss dependencies on python-pkg-resources, because that has to be explicitly stated [13:36] unless you use dh_python2 and it has a correct requires.txt [13:37] that will convert setuptool dependency into a pkg-resources one [13:40] feel free to change it the way it works correct [13:42] someone familiar with ocaml here? [13:43] bye [14:27] Hey guys... someone here can remove condor and classads from precise ? [14:27] classads has been removed from debian because is now in condor [14:28] current condor version in ubuntu requires classads as dep, but it does not exist [14:28] file a bug and subscribe ubuntu-archive [14:28] ok, I'm going [14:28] + sponsors if needed [14:28] thanks :) [14:29] though if its removed from debian some script should remove it automatically [14:29] I think [14:29] ah no ok, classads is not in precise [14:30] hi, i have a packaging related question [14:30] if i want to fork a package, can i use quilt to patch files inside the debian directory, eg. the rules file or the control file? [14:31] it might work, but you should not do that [14:31] just use a VCS [14:32] why do you want to fork a package? [14:32] jtaylor, bug 919671 - thanks :) [14:32] Launchpad bug 919671 in condor (Ubuntu) "Please remove classads and condor from ubuntu precise" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/919671 [14:33] l3on: so condor is uninstallable? [14:33] jtaylor, yep... it's need a new version... I tried to upgrade it, but I should spend to much time to well understand how condor works [14:34] jtaylor, bug 518848 [14:34] Launchpad bug 518848 in condor (Ubuntu) "A new upstream release of condor (7.6.6) is available" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/518848 [14:35] have you spoken to the guy you uploaded condor? [14:36] jtaylor, yep [14:36] I sent him an email 4 days ago... still waiting for a reply [14:36] he wants it removed too? [14:36] I dind't talk about removal... [14:36] just about new release and depends problem [14:37] the remove reason is: ROM; No longer released separately, moved to different source package [14:37] can't the new package be used? [14:37] jtaylor, of course [14:37] if someone starts to work [14:37] I tried, but it seems not too much simple [14:47] jtaylor, would you sponsor a merge for me ? :) [14:48] which one? [14:49] shogun [14:49] bug 914523 [14:49] Launchpad bug 914523 in shogun (Ubuntu) "Please merge shogun 1.1.0-1 (universe) from Debian unstable " [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/914523 [14:51] thats not nice Add mono-gmcs as build-depends to fix FTBFS [14:52] it should use the default [14:53] in configure.ac it looks for gmcs [14:53] * Laney eyes this package [14:53] no clideps? [14:53] nope .. [14:53] configure: if gmcs --version >/dev/null 2>&1 [14:53] it should use mono-csc [14:54] patch it if necessary [14:54] hm ahs the hdf5 transition in deiban started already? [14:54] http://release.debian.org/transitions/ [14:54] So... what I would do? [14:54] try to replace gmcs with mono-csc ? [14:54] first file an RC bug in debian [14:55] hm where's my template [14:55] debian does not have this problem, cause they have mono-gmcs as depends in mono-devel [14:55] not anymore [14:56] I'll file the debian bugs [14:56] jtaylor, mmm http://packages.debian.org/sid/mono-2.0-devel [14:56] it didn't even come on our transition radar because the dependencies are wrong [14:56] they are RC, so will hopefully be fixed soon, then we look at the merge again [14:57] fancy asking antlr and zeroc-ice to rebuild? [14:57] me? in debian? why? [14:57] i pinged #debian-java on irc but no response [14:57] because you're filing bugs :P [14:57] i'll do it later if yo udon't want to [14:57] if you tell me the reason I can do it [14:58] just rebuildonly? [14:58] they have mono bindings [14:59] I'm not following you :P [15:00] shogun has mono-2.0-devel as build-dep, which has mono-gmcs as dep [15:00] so, it works [15:00] thats most likely wrong [15:00] jtaylor, ah ok, can you file the bug ? [15:00] yes [15:01] thanks, please CC me :P [15:01] ok.. and then .. let's go on with paprefs :D [15:07] Laney: I can copy pasted your coco-cs mail? [15:09] l3on: debian bug 656756, 656757 [15:09] Error: Debian bug 656757 could not be found [15:09] Debian bug 656756 in shogun "shogun: Please use debians default csharp compiler" [Serious,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/656756 [15:10] jtaylor, thanks :D [15:10] if you're free... paprefs seems ready too [15:12] note that I updated dsc to althiot, waiting for a sponsor there. Maintainer also hasn't yet replied me after some days. [15:14] Laney: bugs filed [15:36] jtaylor: thanks, and yeah that's what I would do [17:47] siretart: ups did not see your message on the mplayer bug [17:48] I synced the version from debian almost-testing, it fixes the issue [17:56] jtaylor: what version did you sync? the one from unstable? [17:56] yes [17:57] okay, then please just close the bug. I would have done exactly the same :-) [17:57] already done [17:57] sorry I forgot to assign myself [17:58] no problem [22:48] I'm having trouble packaging something into a deb file, can anyone help me out [22:52] antoniu: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Complete [22:57] well here's the thing I am able to package it and when I upload it to the ppa it builds successfully, however it's a dkms package that contains a post add script, I made sure to make the script executable but when I install the deb it says the script isn't executable [22:58] however I packaged it using dkms [23:53] If I have a .install file that I'm trying to place a templated config file in, can I have .install rename the file as well? [23:54] no [23:54] debian/install cannot rename files [23:56] Then what's the proper way to have a file renamed during package creation from a tarball? [23:57] use mv in rules [23:57] jtaylor: And that'll take effect after the file is copied into place? [23:58] it'll take place at the point you put it in in your rules file [23:58] i.e. if it happens before dh_install it'll happen then. after -> after [23:58] Hm, there's no dh_install in my rules file. [23:58] is there a dh_postinstall? [23:59] you can override it [23:59] override_dh_install: [23:59] dh_install [23:59] #do more stuff [23:59] assuming a dh-7 like package