[02:24] <quidnunc> darcs get --partial http://code.haskell.org/xmonad-extras; cd xmonad-extras; cabal-debian --debianize --maintainer="foo@bar.com"; sudo prevu;
[02:24] <quidnunc> ^ Can someone help me? The prevu command is failing
[02:25] <quidnunc> due to dependency issues. Shouldn't it just work?
[06:48] <micahg> jtaylor: are you interested in bug 910503 as you touched it last
[07:09] <micahg> what do we do for sync sponsoring where the person doesn't have a real name, should we just not sponsor it?
[08:19] <tumbleweed> micahg: I'm not aware of any policy requiring a real name
[08:20] <tumbleweed> I always used to suggest to new sponsorees that they provide a real nam and e-mail address on their lp profile
[08:20] <micahg> right, the problem is usually no name means no E-Mail address
[08:20] <tumbleweed> well, lp has to have an e-mail address for the account
[08:20] <tumbleweed> and it'll use that for the sync
[08:23] <micahg> tumbleweed: which leads to a disclosure issue :)
[08:24] <tumbleweed> yup
[08:24] <micahg> I don't think we should allow that
[08:24] <tumbleweed> for signing changelogs (vs syncs) I was am more agressive
[08:24] <micahg> perhaps if there's no public e-mail address is just leaves a note that in order to be sponsored, you must provide an e-mail address on LP
[08:27] <tumbleweed> talking of policy requiring real names, did you see http://lists.debian.org/debian-newmaint/2011/12/msg00017.html ?
[08:27] <micahg> not a list I'm on
[08:27] <tumbleweed> but that appears to be a well known, permenant alias, not someone hiding behind a nick
[08:29] <tumbleweed> micahg: lots of people don't have public e-mail addresses on lp
[08:29] <tumbleweed> lots of ubuntu-devs even
[08:30] <micahg> well, if the person is an ubuntu member, we can use an ubuntu alias if there's no e-mail address
[08:30] <tumbleweed> there's no guarantee that the lp username is an ubuntu.com alias
[08:30] <tumbleweed> AFAIK for many old timers, it isn't the case
[08:30] <micahg> if the person is an ubuntu member, there should be
[08:30] <micahg> oh, right
[08:31] <tumbleweed> one can do the roundabout approach of:
[08:31] <tumbleweed> guess lpusername@ubuntu.com
[08:31] <tumbleweed> ask lp to search by e-mail address, and see if you get lpusername back
[08:32] <tumbleweed> if not, fail ;)
[08:32] <tumbleweed> oh, then walk GPG keys looking for ubuntu.com, and doing the same check
[15:01] <jtaylor> micahg: re xawtv, yes I was just letting it age a bit first
[15:03] <jtaylor> I could do it now, it upstreamed a gazillion of patches :)
[17:45] <jtaylor> someone now alessio?
[17:46] <jtaylor> someone should teach him about test building before syncing ._.
[17:48] <jtaylor> see lv2proc and stk
[17:48]  * jtaylor writting mail
[18:23] <l3on> hey guys.. someone can help overriding lintian in a package ?
[18:24] <l3on> I tried this http://paste.ubuntu.com/830393/
[18:24] <l3on> but I get:
[18:24] <l3on> E: ion: malformed-override libion0: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames
[18:24] <jtaylor> why do you want to override that?
[18:24] <jtaylor> if it should not be public, make it private
[18:25] <l3on> jtaylor, cause there are more than 20 libraries...
[18:25] <jtaylor> great so another one of these "will break with as-needed" things ._.
[18:26] <l3on> what ?
[18:26] <l3on> W: libion0: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libbp0 libcfdp0 libcgr0 libdgr0 libdtn2fw0 libici0 libipnfw0 libltp0 libtcpcla0 libudpcla0
[18:26] <jtaylor> just link them all into libion0?
[18:26] <jtaylor> I bet all those are underlinked?
[18:26] <l3on> nono.. linked
[18:27] <l3on> http://debomatic64.debian.net/unstable/pool/ion_2.5.3-1/ion_2.5.3-1.contents
[18:27] <jtaylor> ah that cool thing :)
[18:28] <jtaylor> still, either make them private, make a package per library, or link them all into one giant library
[18:29] <l3on> well .. you know what? I did it.. I had 5 library packages, but a debian developer said: "It useless introduce so many shlibs packages... I suggest you to back on one single package and override"
[18:29] <l3on> so.. :/
[18:29] <l3on> boh
[18:30] <jtaylor> wtf
[18:30] <jtaylor> who said that?
[18:30] <l3on> private
[18:30] <l3on> :P
[18:30] <jtaylor> I agree adding so many library packages is most likely overkill
[18:30] <jtaylor> thus private libraries makes most sense
[18:30] <l3on> ah can I do that ?
[18:31] <l3on> do you have some webpage explaining that ?
[18:35] <jtaylor> so many things for /usr/bin/ :/
[18:36] <jtaylor> does it conflict with anything in the archive?
[18:38] <l3on> how check ? :)
[18:40] <jtaylor> hm apt-file them all I guess
[18:40] <l3on> oki :)
[18:41] <jtaylor> concerning making them private, install them into a subfolder of /usr/lib and give rpath's to all executables
[18:41] <jtaylor> see e.g. ncbi-blast+
[18:42] <jtaylor> but you should discuss that with your sponsor, if he wants overrides then do that
[18:42] <jtaylor> I can't sponsor ;)
[18:48] <jtaylor> libltp conflicts with ltp-dev
[18:49] <l3on> damn... now ?
[18:50] <jtaylor> its not a direct conflgict, but it has a libltp.a, and ion as libltp.so
[18:51] <l3on> LOOK FOR: /usr/bin/tcpcli
[18:51] <l3on> ucspi-tcp: /usr/bin/tcpclient
[18:51] <l3on> ucspi-tcp-ipv6: /usr/bin/tcpclient
[18:51] <l3on> ah nono... sorry
[18:51] <l3on> :)
[18:51] <l3on> what about ltp ?
[18:51] <l3on> is it ok or I need to do something ?
[18:51] <jtaylor> depends on what you are going to do, merging the libraries or making them private solves the issue
[18:52] <jtaylor> else you should add a Breaks to debian/control
[18:56] <l3on> done :)
[18:56] <l3on> but I don't know exactly how to make library private
[18:57] <l3on> let's check ncbi-blast+
[18:58] <l3on> mmm... it's not so simple with ion, cause it source is "splitted" in 4-5 subpackages
[18:59] <l3on> s/it source/its source/
[19:36] <blair> will the latest version of git be pulled into 12.04 just before it is cut?
[19:37] <blair> or frozen
[19:53] <micahg> jtaylor: no, letting xawtv age is a good thing, just wanted to make sure someone was watching it, thanks :)
[19:55] <micahg> blair: probably not unless someone requests it (I assume you mean 1.7.9)
[19:56] <blair> micahg, yes
[19:56] <jtaylor> 1.7.9 would be nice in precise
[19:56] <jtaylor> it has some useful new features
[19:57] <blair> the LTS releases have two competing pressures, one to have the software be as fresh as possible since in a few years it's going to be very old, but then you also want it to be stable
[19:57] <blair> it's an interesting balance
[19:59] <jtaylor> it is only a minor release so it should not break much
[20:00] <jtaylor> also there is still plenty of time to fix potential bugs
[20:49] <blair> jtaylor, opened a sync request https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/927305
[20:50] <jtaylor> thx