[06:39] <stewart> hi all! I'm having a (probable) encounter with a launchpad bug. on https://bugs.launchpad.net/percona-server/+bug/688646/+nominate  I cannot see the series https://launchpad.net/percona-server/5.5 that i want to target the bug to.
[06:40] <stewart> (and the 5.5 series shows up in other bugs)
[06:40] <stewart> e.g. https://bugs.launchpad.net/percona-server/+bug/906813/+nominate
[07:03] <wgrant> stewart: It looks like it was previously targeted to 5.5, but then that task was removed.
[07:04] <wgrant> And it apparently didn't record that properly, so you can't renominate it.
[07:05] <stewart> wgrant, huh. darn. any way to have that fixed?
[07:07] <wgrant> stewart: There was a little while when deleting a task didn't fix the nomination record. It looks like the 5.5 task was deleted in that window.
[07:07] <wgrant> I'll see if I can get the DB fixed.
[07:08] <stewart> wgrant, thanks. i opened https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/188467 to track it if that's any help.
[07:08] <wgrant> Ah, thanks.
[07:08] <wgrant> Will follow up there.
[09:34] <rmk> any admins around who can help resolve an issue with my private ppas?
[09:36] <czajkowski> rmk: whats wrong wit them
[09:36] <czajkowski> *with
[09:36] <rmk> well, submitting a new package and its being rejected claiming the new package has a mismatched orig.tar.gz
[09:37] <rmk> but I deleted all the packages which had that tar associated to it
[09:38] <wgrant> rmk: https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+faq/990
[09:39] <czajkowski> wgrant: thanks
[09:40] <czajkowski> adds to the book mark section for future reference
[09:41] <wgrant> Yep, it's a common one :)
[09:42] <rmk> I suppose this is why I need to use pristine tars
[09:42] <rmk> It is a new package, but the orig is the same
[09:42] <rmk> generating the orig via git-buildpackage tags
[09:43] <wgrant> If it's just a random git revision then you probably want to include something like +git20120222 in the version.
[09:43] <wgrant> If it's a particular release from a tag, then you need to either generate it once and reuse it, or use pristine-tar, yeah
[09:44] <rmk> its the latter .. ok
[09:44] <rmk> thanks
[10:33] <dpm> good morning thedac. I see that the full language pack export completed successfully, thanks! -> https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+language-packs - Did the run gave any hints as to why langpack exports had stopped happening automatically?
[10:34] <sagaci> +1 for thanks
[10:38] <czajkowski> dpm: morning
[10:38] <dpm> morning czajkowski
[14:13] <ESphynx> hey guys... Is there any way to 'sign' recipes?
[14:13] <ESphynx> recipe built packages i mean
[14:50] <dobey> ESphynx: they are signed by the gpg key that is generated for the ppa they are put in, when that ppa was created. there's no way to sign them with your own key
[15:12] <ESphynx> dobey: ah ok... but it says: Uploader: on signer
[15:14] <dobey> it says no signer, because the source package wasn't signed and uploaded by you. the source package doesn't get signed in the recipes afaik, but the binaries should be signed in the PPA
[15:15] <ESphynx> ah ok good.
[15:32] <thedac> dpm: great. looking through the logs I found carob:~dames/language-pack-exporter.log-20120221
[16:32] <ESphynx> hey guys, why would a pacakge build fine for us with oneiric with dpkg-build, but fail on the build bot?
[16:32] <ESphynx> It seems to not be finding a temporary shared library that we put in our intermediate directories... (But builds fine on Lucid, Natty)
[16:48] <Ampelbein> ESphynx: Can you show a buildlog of a failed build?
[16:49] <Ampelbein> ESphynx: Also note that on buildd's you don't have network access, which is a common cause of errors.
[16:52] <ESphynx> Ampelbein: sure, https://code.launchpad.net/~ecere-team/+archive/ppa/+build/3230878/+files/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-amd64.ecere_201202221313-0~426~oneiric1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[16:52] <ESphynx> Ampelbein: I don't think the network access is the cause... nothing network going on
[16:55] <ESphynx> The first error, /build/buildd/ecere-201202221313/ear/cmd/ear.ec:13:1: error: Couldn't open obj/release.linux/ecere.sym,  is something like 'Couldn't dynamically load libecere.so.0 .... '  which is supposed to be in ../../obj/linux/lib/  ( export LD_LIBRARY_PATH = ../../obj/$(PLATFORM)/lib/  in ear/cmd/Makefile )
[16:55] <ESphynx> however since I can't actually access the machine state after the failed build, it's difficult to figure out what happened :P
[16:56] <Ampelbein> ESphynx: So, in a clean chroot does it work? I.e. with pbuilder or sbuild?
[16:56] <ESphynx> Ampelbein: we're doing a dpkg-build , is that the same ?
[16:57] <Ampelbein> ESphynx: Nope, that builds in your 'normal' environment.
[16:57] <ESphynx> 'dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -nc'
[16:57] <ESphynx> is what work
[16:58] <ESphynx> So pbuilder will do its own chroot and everything?
[16:58] <Ampelbein> !pbuilder | ESphynx
[16:58] <Ampelbein> Yes.
[16:58] <ESphynx> thanks
[16:58] <Ampelbein> That mimics the buildd environment more than a normal work system so might be useful to check if the error occurs there, too.
[16:59] <ESphynx> sure
[16:59] <ESphynx>  Ubuntu 11.10 64 bits .. Linux ec 3.0.0-16-generic #28-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jan 27 17:44:39 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
[16:59] <ESphynx> this is oneiric right ?
[16:59] <ESphynx> I'm putting my man on PBuilder :P
[17:02] <Ampelbein> ESphynx: Yes, oneiric.
[17:03] <ESphynx> ok he's building it hehe
[18:31] <dobey> anyone about that can help me with a rather odd issue with codehosting? code.launchpad.net and "bzr revno" list the latest revision as being lower than the bazaar.launchpad.net view does; though bazaar.launchpad.net looks to be the one that seems correct
[18:31] <dobey> for lp:ubuntuone-installer
[18:57] <shashik> help me, i am unable to save my ssh keys on the launchpad
[18:57] <shashik> it just says Invalid public key
[19:09] <dvestal> shashik: Have you made sure that you're trying to post the contents of the public key and not the private key?
[19:16] <shashik> can anyone help me, i am unable to upload my ssh, and gpg keys on launchpad,
[19:17] <dvestal> shashik: Have you made sure that you're trying to post the contents of the public key and not the private key?
[19:17] <shashik> any help please
[19:18] <shashik> hmmm
[19:18] <shashik> i have copied from .pub file
[19:18] <shashik> here is my pub ssh key
[19:18] <shashik> ssh-rsa AAAAB3NzaC1yc2EAAAADAQABAAABAQDFPpP+yl51HVdBhcfMVYpaTCzZJezMvclxBTEt9$
[19:19] <shashik> but in launchpad it is keep on saying invalid public key
[19:21] <dvestal> shashik:  Just to clarify, is that the entire part that you're pasting into the box?
[19:21] <dvestal> shashik:  Or is there more to the key?
[19:21] <shashik> have tried everything
[19:22] <shashik> AAAAB3NzaC1yc2EAAAADAQABAAABAQDFPpP+yl51HVdBhcfMVYpaTCzZJezMvclxBTEt9$
[19:22] <shashik> this too
[19:22] <shashik> but no help
[19:22] <shashik> AAAAB3NzaC1yc2EAAAADAQABAAABAQDFPpP+yl51HVdBhcfMVYpaTCzZJezMvclxBTEt9
[19:22] <shashik> even this
[19:22] <dvestal> shashik:  The key itself should be much longer than that.
[19:23] <shashik> private key is quite long but i am getting that much in my id_rsa.pub file
[19:24] <dvestal> shashik:  How did you generate the key?
[19:25] <dvestal> shashik:  My public key is roughly 5 times longer than what you posted.
[19:25] <shashik> ssh-keygen -t rsa
[19:25] <Ampelbein> shashik: What viewer do you use? The trailing "$" looks suspiciouly like a overlong line that is not being wrapped.
[19:26] <Ampelbein> shashik: Try a simple 'cat <YOUR_PUB_FILE>' in the terminal and copy from there
[19:26] <dvestal> shashik:  Ampelbein is right, that's what it looks like.
[19:27] <shashik> sorrry got it now, actually, i earlier used nano to copy the key, which actually truncated it somehow, tried it with vi, and got the whole thing..:)
[19:28] <Ampelbein> shashik: <alt>+$ in nano to soft-wrap works the same way.
[19:29] <shashik> okay..
[19:29] <shashik> what about my pgpkey,
[19:29] <shashik> F8E7 244F BC96 9B44 08A4  7805 95C0 D4A8 E120 2AB9
[19:29] <Ampelbein> shashik: Did you push it to a keyserver?
[19:29] <shashik> nope, how should i do that..??
[19:30] <Ampelbein> shashik: https://help.launchpad.net/YourAccount/ImportingYourPGPKey
[19:35] <antarus> How often do you make backwards incompatable changes to your API ?
[19:37] <lifeless> antarus: very rarely
[19:37] <lifeless> antarus: the devel api we feel free to make such changes, the versioned (currently 1.0) API we are very conservative about
[19:38] <antarus> excellent
[19:43] <ESphynx> is there anything special that must be done to enable multi-arch for the PPA builders?
[20:30] <dobey> ESphynx: what do you mean? there isn't any need for the builders themselves to use multi-arch really. if you mean for the packages you're building, multiarch is a matter of your packages being built correctly as i understand it
[20:31] <dobey> though maybe multiarch doesn't work for PPAs so well?
[20:31] <lifeless> ESphynx: well you need to be building for a multi-arch release
[20:32] <dobey> apt-get update doesn't seem to pull the amd64 Packages for the PPAs i'm sub'd to
[20:32] <dobey> oh; nm. there it is
[20:32] <dobey> so it does work i guess
[21:10] <antarus> man launchpad api has a ton of dependencies ;p
[23:15] <michaelh1> Hi there.  I need help for a release - I'm getting a timeout error while uploading the 150 MB source archive.
[23:15] <michaelh1> OOPS 6acb6414862499859f26aef311dc7bd3
[23:21] <lifeless> michaelh1: so, there is some untracked time apparently, but yeah its taking 11 seconds to hand off to the librarian
[23:22] <michaelh1> It worked last month.  Anything I can do to work around it?
[23:22] <lifeless> michaelh1: the librarian is busy rsyncing several TB of data around in prep for a move to a newer faster host (which will reduce this sort of issue)
[23:22] <lifeless> keep trying; try from a host closer to the UK; keep calm and keep on trying
[23:22] <michaelh1> I'm pushing from EC2 so that's fine.  It uploads then does the timeout.
[23:23] <michaelh1> Today is the release.  When will it be working by?
[23:23] <michaelh1> (I guess a day late is fine as the source is a secondary part)
[23:23] <lifeless> the migration, next week sometime
[23:24] <lifeless> michaelh1: bug 194558
[23:24] <lifeless> is the reason behind this - we double handle the upload
[23:24] <lifeless> if we didn't, it wouldn't give you grief