[00:12] <adhorden> hi all, what is the best way to export a directory to $PATH inside a package?
[00:16] <RAOF> l3on: Did you re-run autoconf?
[00:20] <RAOF> adhorden: You mean, installing the package causes $PATH to contain more directories?
[00:21] <adhorden> RAOF: I am creating a new package but the binaries are in /usr/share/package/bin and I either need this in the path or symlink to /usr/bin
[00:23] <RAOF> Can you not just install the binaries to /usr/bin?  Why are they installed to /usr/share/package/bin?
[00:24] <l3on> RAOF, yes
[00:25] <l3on> too late here, going bed... see you!. (and thanks)
[00:25] <RAOF> K.
[07:46] <dholbach> good morning
[08:50] <iulian> Morning dholbach.
[08:50] <dholbach> hi iulian
[10:04] <micahg> bdrung: vlc 2.0.0  final still FTBFS on powerpc
[10:14] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: will you look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/spyder/+bug/887177/comments/9 ?
[14:17] <hakermania> Hello, I would like to ask where is the deadline for submitting my application (Wallch) through debian for inclusion in 12.04
[14:18] <hakermania> when*
[14:28] <tumbleweed> hakermania: feature freeze was last week
[16:16] <pabelanger> I know featurefreeze is in affect, but anything else needed for bug 897006 and bug 408757
[16:17] <tumbleweed> !ffe|pabelanger
[16:19] <pabelanger> tumbleweed, understood, but do you think it is worth it going to down that path?  Otherwise i'll just maintain my own local version and wait for Ubuntu 12.04 +1 for them to be included
[16:21] <tumbleweed> if you want it in precise, go down that path. If you don't think it's that urgent, it's less paperwork to just make that change in debian and wait for ubuntu to get it next cycle
[16:22] <tumbleweed> (you'd probably get the FFe, if you applied)
[16:24] <pabelanger> okay, thanks for the info
[17:59] <jtaylor> tumbleweed: autch, ugly, I'll pull the bugfix release
[18:00] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: we couldn't have known... :)
[18:00] <jtaylor> better inform the debian maintainer, he is preparing a stable bpo
[18:01] <tumbleweed> yup
[18:26] <jtaylor> any oppinions on git-buildpacakge 0.6 in precise?
[18:27] <jtaylor> or is it to late?
[18:27] <jtaylor> it has a quite large number of changes
[18:27] <tumbleweed> any good new features?
[18:28] <micahg> pabelanger: also, there'a always backports :)
[18:28] <tumbleweed> that's true, we should start getting peopl eto use pre-release backports
[18:29] <jtaylor> a couple, gbp sqitch, force replacement of patchqueue branch are some that caught my eye
[18:30] <jtaylor> pbuilder support seems improved
[18:31] <jtaylor> its nothing we absolutly need
[18:32]  * tumbleweed is ambivalent. Meaning you'd probably get an FFe from me.
[18:35] <jtaylor> hm pbuilder-dist powerpc setup creates size 0 tarballs ._.
[18:36] <tumbleweed> that sonuds bad
[18:36] <jtaylor> hm E: qemu-debootstrap failed, how do I get a better error message?
[18:39] <tumbleweed> qemu-debootstrap should have outputted things
[18:39] <tumbleweed> pbuilder-dist precise powerpc create seems to be working for me (on debian)
[18:39] <jtaylor> I: Configuring initramfs-tools...
[18:39] <jtaylor> E: qemu-debootstrap failed
[18:40] <jtaylor> W: Aborting with an error
[18:40] <jtaylor> < oneiric
[18:45] <jtaylor> tumbleweed: as you have a working one, can you try and install libmagickcore-dev?
[18:46] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: it's still creating... don't know if it'll work
[18:54] <tumbleweed> hrm, it debootstrapped, and then died during an a hook
[18:54] <tumbleweed> Reading package lists...
[18:54] <tumbleweed> E: Can't mmap an empty file
[18:54] <tumbleweed> W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these problems
[18:57] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: the oneiric one created fine
[18:58] <jtaylor> I'll try and update that one then :)
[19:04] <jtaylor> qemu: uncaught target signal 11 (Segmentation fault) - core dumped
[19:04] <jtaylor> so much for that
[19:06] <tumbleweed> powerpc doesn't work that well under qemu :)
[19:13] <jtaylor> the builders are pretty unusable for a while too, pypy and libreoffice xD
[19:14] <jtaylor> good that my stuff is done already
[19:17]  * tumbleweed wonders if pypy is at the end of the first translation or second
[19:17] <tumbleweed> probably first
[19:26] <jtaylor> what is the sandboxed pypy?
[19:42] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: it's safe to run untusted code in
[19:42] <tumbleweed> it only has read-only access to a subset of the filesystem, and can't make dangerous system calls
[19:54] <jtaylor> hm how bulletproof is that?
[19:56] <jtaylor> was pypy designed from beginning to provide such a feature?
[19:57]  * ajmitch thought it was
[19:58] <jtaylor> regular python does not provide such a mode or?
[19:59] <ajmitch> http://docs.python.org/library/restricted.html
[19:59] <jtaylor> the warning at the top of that page makes me question pypy :)
[19:59] <ajmitch> heh
[20:00] <ajmitch> I think there was some other implementation of it, I think zope may have used http://pypi.python.org/pypi/RestrictedPython
[20:01] <jtaylor> trying to add such things onto frameworks not designed to provide such features mostly goes wrong, I wouldn't trust it
[20:02] <ajmitch> what could possibly go wrong? :)
[20:02] <ajmitch> tbh, I don't know most of the details around it, so don't trust anything I say
[20:05] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: yes
[20:06] <tumbleweed> chances are there's a security hole somewhere in it, but I'd trust it more than anything that runs in cpython
[20:07] <tumbleweed> FWIW: http://doc.pypy.org/en/latest/sandbox.html
[20:08] <ajmitch> so when can we use python instead of javascript in a mainstream browser? :)
[20:08] <tumbleweed> JIT is disabled for the sandobx :)
[20:10] <jtaylor> maybe pypy will grow a javascript translater :)
[20:10] <jtaylor> would probably still be better than dart ;)
[20:13]  * tumbleweed makes a mental not to orphan it if it does
[20:13] <tumbleweed> note
[20:14] <ajmitch> the problem with having something in a browser (like dart) is getting enough support for it so that you don't have to write both JS & whatever other language
[20:14] <ajmitch> but it'd still be nice to have python :)
[20:16] <hakermania> tumbleweed, I know about featurefreeze, but does this mean that no application can lay in USC anymore for 12.04?
[20:18] <tumbleweed> hakermania: it means you go through the freeze exception process, or through the new "Upload to backports because we are in feature freeze" process
[20:18] <ajmitch> tumbleweed: is that open & available now?
[20:18] <broder> tumbleweed: pre-release backports are kind dead in the water at the moment - you can't upload to the backports pocket because i haven't gotten my lp patch in, and there's still the inter-backports build-dep issue
[20:18] <tumbleweed> broder: ah, there we go, then
[20:18] <broder> (the former is kind of the bigger issue at the moment)
[20:18] <ajmitch> broder: right, the latter issue is still due to sbuild?
[20:19] <broder> right
[20:19] <hakermania> tumbleweed, what do you recommend : P?
[20:19] <micahg> hakermania: there's always backports post release as well
[20:19] <ajmitch> broder: anything we can help with for that?
[20:19]  * ajmitch would like to get some things synced from debian once uploaded there :)
[20:19] <hakermania> Also, shouldn't it be an easy way to lay an update (a new version) of an application already in USC?
[20:19] <micahg> hakermania: get it into Debian :)
[20:20] <hakermania> micahg, of course, that is what I'll do :)
[20:20] <hakermania> But I want to make sure that it will lay on usc in ubuntu
[20:22] <broder> ajmitch: well, i actually want to follow up with the TB about one aspect of the pan
[20:22] <broder> *plan
[20:23] <broder> we originally said that we wanted to build with the same component isolation on the buildds that we have for other pockets
[20:23] <broder> but given that we're planning to bump the version number and reupload anything in p-backports to q, i don't actually think that's necessary
[20:24] <hakermania> a) Is there any chance an application to be imported to USC while the new release is out? b) Does getting an app into debian mean automatically and quickly mean that it will be ported to usc in ubuntu?
[20:25] <micahg> broder: well, is there an option for main+restricted+backports only?
[20:26] <broder> micahg: huh?
[20:26] <tumbleweed> hakermania: that's what ARB does, but it can't replaces packages in the archive
[20:26] <tumbleweed> hakermania: but you can do a backport of a package in the archive, post-release
[20:26] <micahg> broder: that's where you'd run into component issues, in that corner case if we're doing rebuilds anyways
[20:26] <ajmitch> broder: I guess it's a little late to add a tb agenda item now
[20:27] <hakermania> tumbleweed, I don't get anything, let me do a bit of searching about the terms, or, even better, because I've heard of this, may I give the code to somebody really interesting in packaging and all this stuff so as to do it for us? Somebody who loves this process?
[20:30] <tumbleweed> hakermania: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppReviewBoard https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBackports https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess
[20:30] <hakermania> tumbleweed, thanks :)
[20:34] <broder> micahg: i'm still confused. the question is which components should be enabled for builds in the backports pocket. i think our original plan involved a pocket-copy from precise-backports to q, and because of that the TB asked for us to enable the same components that normal pockets would get
[20:34] <broder> but since we're going to be doing rebuilds when we copy the backport packages into the next release, i'm not sure that makes sense
[20:34] <broder> it creates the potential for additional build failures due to component mismatches, but i feel like that happens anyway
[20:35] <micahg> hrm, right, it doesn't make sense
[20:35] <micahg> we had this discussion before :)
[20:36] <tumbleweed> indeed, I seem to remember it
[20:46] <broder> ajmitch: anyway, we could still land uploading to non-release pockets pre-release
[20:47] <broder> i have the patch written, but haven't had time to adjust the tests
[20:47] <broder> i don't know when i will, so if you wanted to help, i could throw that your way :)
[20:48] <broder> (or anybody, for that matter. http://paste.ubuntu.com/850487/ is the patch i have so far)
[20:48]  * ajmitch could take a look but not promise a lot - I need to update my local LP instance, it hasn't been touched for awhile :)
[20:48] <ajmitch> got a branch for that?
[20:48] <broder> nope
[20:48] <hakermania> tumbleweed, if I got it right, I upload the package here: http://developer.ubuntu.com/publish/, then I request a FF exception?
[20:48] <tumbleweed> hakermania: that's not for apps in the Ubuntu archive
[20:49] <hakermania> tubmleweed, backporting is for this?
[20:49] <ajmitch> broder: of course you're touching scary bits of code that can cause everything to explode :)
[20:49] <broder> ajmitch: where's the fun if you don't? :-P
[20:49] <hakermania> ok, got it
[20:49] <ajmitch> it's like juggling chainsaws
[20:50] <tumbleweed> if you want to go that route (ARB) your application shouldn't be in ubuntu
[20:50] <tumbleweed> yes, backporting is for packages in the archive
[20:50] <tumbleweed> ARB is a separate world
[20:50] <ajmitch> packages submitted via the ARB also have other restrictions about what they can do, where files can be, etc
[20:50] <ajmitch> since extras.ubuntu.com is not technically part of ubuntu as such :)
[20:51] <tumbleweed> ajmitch is reminding me of recent dicussions in the tech board...
[20:51] <ajmitch> tumbleweed: yep
[20:51] <tumbleweed> by sabdfl's definition, it is
[20:52] <ajmitch> it can be considered part of ubuntu for remixes, but afaict is still considered separate
[20:52] <ajmitch> it's all confusing :)
[20:53] <tumbleweed> :)
[20:54] <ajmitch> tumbleweed: I think there's a TB meeting in a few minutes if you want to bring it up again? :)
[20:58] <stgraber> please don't, I'm kind of counting on a short TB meeting ;)
[21:05] <ajmitch> stgraber: looks like it may be short after all
[21:26] <tumbleweed> so much for short... /me grabs some virtual popcorn
[21:27]  * micahg brings the soda
[21:28] <ajmitch> tumbleweed: yeah, this was the discussion I showed up for :)
[21:29] <ajmitch> of course I got interrupted by phone calls at work
[22:37] <l3on> Hi all, someone can sponsor me a rebuild for bug #935116 ?
[22:37] <jtaylor> spyder already fixed :O
[22:37] <l3on> (or I need to bzr merge-propose?)
[22:38] <jtaylor> no change rebuild?
[22:38] <l3on> jtaylor, apparently not
[22:38] <l3on> I'm rebuild it again
[22:38] <l3on> just to be sure 100%
[22:40] <l3on> jtaylor, no changes needed → http://debomatic.debian.net/precise/pool/glmark2_2011.09-0ubuntu2/
[22:40] <jtaylor> urg a waf package :(
[22:40] <l3on> it has just a changelog entry
[22:41] <jtaylor> l3on: do we even need to rebuilt it? closing the bug seems sufficient?
[22:41] <jtaylor> or is it part or some transition
[22:42] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: impressive :) please sync it
[22:42] <jtaylor> tumbleweed: will do, though I would have liked it if they took a bit more time
[22:42] <jtaylor> probably more bugs in that panic release ._.
[22:42] <tumbleweed> heh
[22:43] <l3on> jtaylor, the FTBFS comes from the test rebuild
[22:43] <broder> l3on: oh, hey, since you're around, https://code.launchpad.net/~l3on/ubuntu/natty/gdevilspie/fix-for-783568/+merge/89717 can be marked as merged since it's already been uploaded (just not accepted), right?
[22:44] <tumbleweed> l3on: ifit doesn't FTBFS any more, then close the bug
[22:44] <jtaylor> I checked the depends
[22:44] <jtaylor> ony difference higher libc
[22:45] <jtaylor> so not part of a transition no rebuild required just close the bug
[22:45] <jtaylor> thouugh I only tried it on amd64
[22:45] <jtaylor> maybe its i386 specific
[22:45] <l3on> we do not need to "kick" a new changelog entry ?
[22:45] <jtaylor> l3on: there is nothing to change
[22:45] <jtaylor> did you rebuild on i386?
[22:45] <l3on> ah ok :)
[22:45] <l3on> jtaylor, yes
[22:45] <l3on> broder, let me remember :P
[22:45] <jtaylor> k then just close it
[22:46] <l3on> oki
[22:46] <l3on> status ?
[22:47] <jtaylor> doesn'T really matty, I'd say fix released as it was broken at the time of the rebuild for some reason
[22:47] <jtaylor> *matter
[22:47] <l3on> done
[22:48] <l3on> broder, well.. I don't know what going on there
[22:48] <l3on> yes changes appear to be in *-proposed
[22:49] <jtaylor> sorry I forgot to mark it merged
[22:49] <jtaylor> oh I can't I'm not member of sponsors :/
[22:49] <broder> l3on: ah, ok. merge proposals for SRUs are weird - they pretty much never get cleaned up on automatically
[22:49] <broder> it's not a sponsors thing
[22:49] <jtaylor> who can add me to that team?
[22:49] <broder> only !ubuntu-branches or the branch submitted can change the state of an SRU MP
[22:49] <broder> err, s/!/~/
[22:50] <l3on> Laney, around ?
[22:53] <l3on> ah if somebody merge this https://code.launchpad.net/~l3on/ubuntu/precise/flow-tools/fix-936170/+merge/93728
[22:53] <l3on> I can close another FTBFS (always with rebuild)
[22:55] <l3on> ah and I would like to discuss with you this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gdb-msp430/+bug/935098
[22:55] <l3on> I would say "won't fix" since it's not compatible with the gdb version in precise
[22:55] <tumbleweed> l3on: that's an RC bug in debian, right?
[22:56] <tumbleweed> why don't we NMU it there and sync?
[22:56] <l3on> tumbleweed, at which one do you refer ?
[22:56] <l3on> (bug I mean)
[22:56] <tumbleweed> flow-tools
[22:57] <l3on> ah ok.. yes, it can be done.. I took patch from there
[22:57] <tumbleweed> although, it was from a DD, he could have NMUed it himself
[22:59] <l3on> so, we have to wait or to merge my branch ?
[23:00] <tumbleweed> either option works
[23:02] <tumbleweed> if you prepare an NMU, I'll sponsor it for you
[23:07] <l3on> ok, let me do it.
[23:24] <Laney> l3on: hello
[23:24] <l3on> Laney, hello... do you remeber the bug of yesterday?
[23:25] <l3on> the acinclude.m4 ?
[23:25] <l3on> I don't know how to fix it :P
[23:25] <l3on> I countinue to have:
[23:25] <l3on> ./configure: line 2625: `  PKG_CHECK_MODULES(AUGEAS, augeas >= 0.8)'
[23:25] <l3on>  ./configure: line 2625: syntax error near unexpected token `AUGEAS,'
[23:26] <Laney> show me the diff?
[23:28] <l3on> Laney, http://paste.ubuntu.com/850690/
[23:34] <Laney> I don't see 0.8 there anywhere - is that what you applied?
[23:34] <Laney> anyway my diff is like this
[23:35] <Laney> -   AC_CHECK_HEADERS([augeas.h],[],[has_augeas_h=no])
[23:35] <Laney> +   PKG_CHECK_MODULES(augeas,[augeas],has_augeas_h=yes,has_augeas_h=no)
[23:35] <Laney> +#   AC_CHECK_HEADERS([augeas.h],[],[has_augeas_h=no])
[23:39] <l3on> tumbleweed, http://paste.ubuntu.com/850703/
[23:41] <l3on> checking for library containing aug_init... -laugeas
[23:41] <l3on> ./configure: line 2627: syntax error near unexpected token `augeas,augeas,has_augeas_h=yes,has_augeas_h=no'
[23:41] <l3on> ./configure: line 2627: `PKG_CHECK_MODULES(augeas,augeas,has_augeas_h=yes,has_augeas_h=no)'
[23:41] <l3on> Laney, bah bah
[23:41] <l3on> $ autoconf --version
[23:41] <l3on> autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.68
[23:46] <l3on> mmm... but run autoreconf fixes that