[04:15]  * micahg figures there haven't been enough chromium uploads this week and goes for one more :)
[04:20] <jalcine> :D
[07:19] <vibhav> Can I bring unity fixes to precise?
[07:19] <vibhav> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/934061
[07:54] <dholbach> good morning
[08:24] <vibhav> dholbach: hi
[08:24] <dholbach> hi vibhav
[08:25] <vibhav> dholbach: Did you recieve my email?
[08:25] <dholbach> yes I did
[08:25] <dholbach> but I received a lot of emails this weekend, so it'll take a while until I get to yours
[08:26] <vibhav> dholbach: Could you write the testamonial until Wednesday?
[08:26] <dholbach> I'll do my best
[08:27] <vibhav> Thanks dholbach
[08:32] <vibhav> Whenever  I aaply a patch, the .diff becomes empty and there is no patch applied , anybody experiencing this problem?
[08:34] <ajmitch> how are you applying the patch?
[08:35] <vibhav> patch < p.diff
[08:35] <vibhav> the file is empty
[08:35] <vibhav> Never mind though I have applied the patch manualy
[08:35] <ajmitch> if it's empty it's not going to do anything, I'd suspect you accidentally did > p.diff instead
[08:37] <vibhav> right
[08:37] <vibhav> I did that
[08:37] <vibhav> thanks ajmitch
[09:40] <danboid> Is aptitude broke in oneiric?
[09:42] <danboid> I've been using a combo of aptitude and apt-get under 11.10 and I've got a number of packages I can't install as its saying it can't install them due to the deps being a bit new that whats supposedly required it seems
[09:42] <danboid> a bit newer, sorry
[09:42] <tumbleweed> yes, if you have multiarch (amd64 will have i386 added as a foreign arch)
[09:43] <danboid> tumbleweed, What if I'm not even running x86 and haven't knowingly installed anything from another arch? I'm running the omap4 (armel) build
[09:44] <danboid> I won't have installed anything from another arch unless someone has mistaken packaged somnething that way in the 11.10 armel repos
[09:45] <tumbleweed> then aptitude should probably work
[10:15] <danboid> A number of packages are broken like libqt4-dev for example - it won't install as it says its deps are a bit too new basically :/
[10:15] <tumbleweed> danboid: can you pastebin the exact error?
[10:20] <danboid> That happens with apt-get and aptitude - apt-get -f install has been no help but yes will pastebin the error
[10:30]  * Laney cuddles pexpect
[10:31] <Laney> automating haskell syncs since 2012
[10:32] <Laney> http://paste.debian.net/159427/ uh oh
[10:39] <Laney> In [10]: c[0].comment_date
[10:39] <Laney> Out[10]: u'2011-12-12T13:49:17.718509+00:00'
[10:42] <tumbleweed> Laney: sounds like we should get around to writing that syncpackage module...
[10:42] <Laney> Oakland 2012 :-)
[10:43] <tumbleweed> heh
[11:25] <yann__> Dear MOTUs, please look at this FFe : https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/806291/comments/30  . Need ack of a 2nd MOTU , and/or upload to Debian then sync.
[11:27] <tumbleweed> yann__: ScottK and I both commented on that as release team members
[11:27] <tumbleweed> ScottK offered you archive-admin review, if it was a sync from debian, and I offered you an FFe if it was a sync. So what's blocking uploading it to Debian?
[11:50] <Guest52270> Here's an example of the sort of errors I get trying to install certain (mainly -dev it seems) packages under 11.10 armel:
[11:50] <Guest52270> http://pastebin.com/sLKQ8jBZ
[11:51] <Guest52270> I can still install some packages
[11:51] <Guest52270> apt isn't totally fubar - yet - I think! :)
[11:52] <Guest52270> Hopefully I won't have to re-install!
[11:52] <geser> did you disable the updates repository by chance?
[11:52] <Guest52270> geser, Don't think so but let me check..
[11:55] <Guest52270> geser, Ah! Seems I only had 'Important security updates' selected but not the other three so lets see..
[11:55] <geser> 4:4.7.4-0ubuntu8 is in oneiric while 4:4.7.4-0ubuntu8.1 is in oneiric-updates
[11:55] <Guest52270> geser, Dunno how it got unchecked
[12:48] <ScottK> tumbleweed: Lack of sponsoring.
[12:52] <tumbleweed> ScottK: yeah, and a package like that probably deserves some fairly thorough review (I wouldn't jump and sponsor it)
[13:06]  * ScottK neither.
[13:26] <jalcine> Is it possible to get the source qt-gstreamer backported to Maverick?
[13:26] <jalcine> Or has there been no interest in doing so? (I'm willing).
[13:45] <ScottK> jalcine: You know Maverick goes out of support in a month, right?
[13:46] <jalcine> eh, I know people who use Gutsy still. :p
[13:46] <ScottK> !backports
[13:46] <ScottK> jalcine: ^^^
[13:47] <jalcine> Thank you *clicks*
[13:50] <genupulas> some one plz http://pastebin.com/Qd2pzRXW
[13:51] <tumbleweed> genupulas: nothing to worry about there, you just didn't have a gpg key for the e-mail address you are using
[13:52] <genupulas> but i have uploaded an GPG key in my LP with that email
[13:53] <tumbleweed> http://keyserver.ubuntu.com:11371/pks/lookup?search=raja.genupula%40yahoo.com&op=vindex looks like there are *lots* of keys with that ID
[13:53] <tumbleweed> so it didn't know which one to use
[13:53] <genupulas> https://launchpad.net/~genupulas
[13:53] <tumbleweed> export the ID in DEBSIGN_KEYID
[13:58] <genupulas> tumbleweed:  like this export DEBSIGN_KEYID=92661626
[13:58] <genupulas>  ?
[13:59] <tumbleweed> export DEBSIGN_KEYID=0x92661626
[14:01] <genupulas> tumbleweed:  i did as you said , am i have to do total process again ?
[14:01] <tumbleweed> no
[14:01] <tumbleweed> are you wanting to upload it to a PPA? or just build a deb locally?
[14:01] <genupulas> debuild  -S
[14:02] <tumbleweed> yes
[14:02] <genupulas> i did but same error
[14:03] <tumbleweed> gpg --list-secret-keys 0x92661626 outputs anything?
[14:03] <genupulas> http://pastebin.com/rvRjH8kR
[14:04] <tumbleweed> genupulas: the error seemed reasonably clear: no secret key available
[14:04] <genupulas> yes gpg --list-secret-keys 0x92661626 gave me output
[14:04] <genupulas> it have sec,uid,ssb
[14:05] <yann__> Coming back to Boot-Repair's upload to Debian: thanks Tumbleweed and SkottK for your answers (i was disconnected so i may have missed someone-else answer). As SkottK said, it is now lacking sponsor for upload into Debian.
[14:05] <tumbleweed> genupulas: throw in a -k0x92661626 ? (to debuild)
[14:06] <tumbleweed> yann__: right. But we can't grant you an FFe in Ubuntu unless you can get an archive-admin who volunteers to review it
[14:06] <genupulas> didnt get you , sorry
[14:06] <tumbleweed> and that's far more likely if it comes from debian
[14:07] <tumbleweed> genupulas: debuild -S -k0x92661626
[14:07] <genupulas> tumbleweed:  thats awesome , thanks man
[14:08] <genupulas> tumbleweed:  thank you very much
[14:09] <tumbleweed> genupulas: I don't know why it wasn't finding your key. Maybe someone else has an idea?
[14:09] <genupulas> tumbleweed:  am i able to upload this in my Lp just for trail
[14:10] <tumbleweed> yes
[14:10] <tumbleweed> to a PPA
[14:10] <genupulas> yes
[14:20] <geser> tumbleweed, genupulas: my guess is that the key uid (including any comments) as used in the changelog entry doesn't match a uid on that key
[14:21] <geser> but as I can't find a keyserver which can lookup that key (timeouts), I can't check it
[14:22] <genupulas> export GPGKEY=k0x92661626 duane told me to do that in .bashrc , i did that and i am trying again
[14:22] <genupulas> i will let you know if i got any
[14:23] <genupulas> thank you tumbleweed geser
[14:28] <yann__> (sorry i have connectivity issues)
[14:30] <yann__> here is why i think it would be a good thing to put Boot-Repair in Ubuntu ISO : Boot-Repair is used by ~500 Ubunteros/day, and most of them currently have to download another ISO (Boot-Repair-Disk, or Ubuntu-Secured-Remix) to repair their boot/GRUB.
[14:35] <yann__> it's ok to wait for a mentor to upload in Debian, but this would probably mean no inclusion in Precise ISO. If by chance a MOTU was interested to review it now, i can take time to answer any question.
[14:42] <ScottK> yann__: It's very, very unlikely it would be added to the ISO now as we're well past feature freeze.
[14:44] <yann__> ok, no problem, then. I'll wait for Alessio to finish his exams ;)
[14:45] <tumbleweed> getting onto ISOs is hard, there's a big fight for space
[15:32] <dupondje> dh_installinit -a --no-start --name=cryptdisks-udev --upstart-only -> this installs the script for ALL run levels?
[16:40] <plustwo> if i uploaded a package to my ppa:lpusername and i cannot it is not there, where else could it have been uploaded?
[16:40] <plustwo> or how can i find it?
[16:40] <tumbleweed> if it was accepted, you'd have got an e-mail (within 5 mins or so)
[16:40] <tumbleweed> you sure the gpg key you signed it with was linked to your lp account?
[16:41] <plustwo> i think so, cause it said "Succesfully signed dsc and changes files"
[16:41] <tumbleweed> plustwo: that's unrelated
[16:42] <plustwo> tumbleweed: i'll need to recheck then
[16:43] <tumbleweed> by unrelated, I mean, that means you signed it, not that LP knew who signed it
[16:43] <dupondje> what signal can be used in upstart to start a task after umount ?
[16:43] <plustwo> ok
[16:44] <plustwo> tumbleweed: so i'll need to upload my key to LP?
[16:44] <tumbleweed> plustwo: yes
[16:45] <plustwo> ok, i'll recheck how to do that on the packaging-guide then. tnx
[16:45] <plustwo> tumbleweed: just thinking, will that mean i lost the ppackage?
[16:46] <tumbleweed> yes
[16:46] <plustwo> *ppackage/package
[16:46] <plustwo> ok. will try again then, tnx again
[16:48] <dupondje> any idea's ? :)
[16:51] <thibaud-ecarot> hi all
[17:05] <vibhav> dholbach: Could I PM you?
[17:06] <dholbach> vibhav, sure, if it's quick - I need to rush out in a bit :)
[17:06] <vibhav> thanks
[17:08] <dupondje> No upstart freaks around no ? ;)
[17:12] <plustwo> tumbleweed: the key is in LP, i just uloaded my first package to my ppa as well.
[17:12] <plustwo> it was successful.
[17:16] <tumbleweed> good
[17:17] <plustwo> now how do i ask for somebody to check if there's any mistakes to be relooked?
[18:23] <c_korn> hello, how can I put a directory with spaces in the install file?
[18:23] <jtaylor> you can't
[18:23] <c_korn> :/
[18:24] <jtaylor> if its required you ahve to install it in rules
[18:24] <jtaylor> (or with an executable install file, not recommended)
[18:35] <tumbleweed> or use wildcards
[18:36] <c_korn> wildcards?
[18:36] <c_korn> like ?
[18:37] <jtaylor> file*
[18:37] <jtaylor> standard shell globbing
[18:37] <tumbleweed> this*contains*spaces :)
[18:37] <jtaylor> this?space should work too?
[18:37] <tumbleweed> presumably
[18:53] <c_korn> ok, thank you, jtaylor and tumbleweed
[19:03] <c_korn> does this also work in links files?
[19:03] <jtaylor> no
[19:05] <c_korn> :/
[19:09] <jtaylor> there is dh_linktree in precise for mass linking
[20:23] <chilicuil> hi there, I'm trying to test if an app is completly translated, I do have a chroot environment (pbuilder) with the latest ubuntu version, know how can I installed the 'pt' version for example?
[20:28] <chilicuil> I know that the klavaro package is not complety translated, since I've it in ubuntu oneiric, I'd like to translate what's left
[21:21] <pabelanger> Question about the ubuntu sponsorship process for MOTU, it says to ask for some 'recommendations' to be added to your wiki page.  Should I actively be asking people to add them or do I just sit back and wait?
[21:22] <tumbleweed> when you apply for upload rights, it's usually a good idea to reach out to people who've sponsored several things for you in the past
[21:23]  * pabelanger nods
[21:23] <pabelanger> I feel kind cheesy asking for them, but I guess I have to start
[21:25] <broder> i don't think it's cheesy, especially since it's just part of the process
[21:25] <pabelanger> broder: I feel cheesy, not the process.
[21:26] <pabelanger> Never was one to get signature for a year book :)
[21:26] <tumbleweed> people are supposed to watch devel-permissions, and endorse/comment on applications that they see coming past
[21:26] <broder> tumbleweed: err, wat?
[21:26] <broder> news to me
[21:26] <tumbleweed> but that doesn't happen so much(as far as I know) most endorsements are solicited
[21:26] <tumbleweed> broder: I thought that was the purpose of devel-permissions?
[21:27] <broder> is it? i don't ever remember hearing that i was supposed to be watching it
[21:27] <tumbleweed> "supposed" is a strong word :)
[21:27] <Laney> i don't think so. it's just a public record of applications, but you can use it like that if you want
[21:28] <Laney> i expect people don't announce there until after they've secured some endorsements though
[21:28] <broder> pabelanger: you might find http://ubuntu-dev.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu-sponsorships.cgi helpful
[21:28] <pabelanger> broder: ack'd