=== almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away [06:27] broder: Hi, could you perhaps have a look at bug 898003? I added a usbip package to my testing PPA, but I'm not sure if it meets the requirements, especially the version number. Thanks! [06:27] Launchpad bug 898003 in usbip (Ubuntu) "usbip source is maintained in kernel tree now" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/898003 [08:38] hi [08:39] how to mention LP bug number in changelog to not get it closed on upload? [08:44] The bug number without LP in front of it? I haven't tried it but it should work I reckon. [08:45] For instance, `Changes here. #123456'. Or you could also try `Changes here. Bug 123456'. [08:45] Launchpad bug 123456 in xine-lib (Ubuntu) "podcast crashes amarok" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/123456 [08:46] I personally use that when I mention upstream bug reports. [08:50] or remove Launchpad-Bugs-Fixed from the .changes [08:56] Does it not need to be "LP #123456"? [08:56] Launchpad bug 123456 in xine-lib (Ubuntu) "podcast crashes amarok" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/123456 [08:57] Since otherwise it would refer to the Debian BTS..? [08:58] Oh... Nevermind, misread >_< [09:02] mr_pouit: thx, will do this [09:03] I prefer to not use #bugnumber as I feel that this is for Debian bts [09:04] hrw: just don't add the colon (i.e. LP #XXXXXX) [09:05] like arand mentioned I see [09:07] ok === tumbleweed changed the topic of #ubuntu-motu to: Precise: Archive frozen, but still open season for unseeded package bug fixing | Want to get involved with the MOTU? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Contributing | Sponsor queue: http://bit.ly/fz6AyQ | http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs | http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/NBS | http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/bugs/rcbugs/ | Fix-It Friday: http://pad.ubuntu-uk.org/KljH7rwo1X [09:45] Laney: better? [09:46] ye, looks good [09:47] Anyone got a hint what's needed when moving a conffile from one package to another one? I have a gut feeling that having a Replaces isn't enough [09:48] preserving user changes [09:48] there's dpkg-maintscript-helper though [09:48] Sure, that's a different topic. [09:48] different to "what's needed?" [09:48] But I have a situation here where the file still seems to be registered with the old package and I wonder why :/ [09:50] there's something to do with conffiles sticking around later than usual [09:53] hmm, in the replaced package there is the snippet about removing the obsolete conffile … [09:53] hi, i've got a fix for a bug in Precise, should I just subscribe ubuntu-release to the bug and link my fix (it's in a ppa) to the bug? [09:54] dpkg won't remove them for you, yeah [09:55] Amoz: bug fixes don't need release approval, please seek sponsorship as normal [09:55] diff or branch is easier than ppa [09:57] Laney, like this? https://launchpadlibrarian.net/100361095/pidgin_1%3A2.10.2-1ubuntu2_1%3A2.10.3-0ubuntu1.diff.gz [09:58] hm. I should probably do a debdiff [09:58] that is a seeded package [09:59] meaning? [09:59] but new upstream version → .diff.gz or branch [09:59] meaning that it needs a bit more review [09:59] should be ok though [09:59] it fixes the "contacts not going offline" bug [10:00] yep [10:00] okay I'll put it in a branch and propose it [10:00] and follow the normal sponsorship process? [10:01] subscribe ubuntu-sponsors to the bug, that's it? [10:01] yeah [10:02] mention that you tested it fixes the bug [10:02] I will [10:05] does someone remember what the build fix for "rsvg: command not found" was? [10:06] geser: use rsvg-convert [10:07] see unison [10:15] Hey. I fixed two items on upstream source. What i should do? [11:14] Ubuntu Mobile Edition is gone, right? [13:04] what would be the hard deadline for syncing a new version of ocrfeeder (that's not ready yet) which fixes an important bug when using tesseract 3.0? http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=661499 [13:04] Debian bug 661499 in ocrfeeder "ocrfeeder: Interprets Tesseract's version string as part of the OCRed text" [Normal,Open] [13:05] why do you want to wait until a hard deadline? [13:05] the sooner the better. [13:07] i know -- i've already added a comment to the upstream bug https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=670953 -- but it hasn't been fixed yet, so i thought telling them about a deadline might speed up things ;-) [13:07] Gnome bug 670953 in general "Tesseract 3.02 issues" [Major,Resolved: fixed] [13:07] (my comment is #12) [13:08] I fixed #972259 and #972205 on upstream version control system. What i should now do? Should i make patch for downstream ? [13:09] ockham: the really final deadline is april 24 [13:09] valdur55: if you want to see it fixed now, then yes (instead of waiting till a new upstream release, see it packaged in Debian and synced to Ubuntu) [13:10] Laney: ok. maybe i can think of some comment to ask for a fix for easter... [13:10] you could take a look at the code yourself :P [13:11] ok, time to generate arm{el,hf}-cross-toolchain-base 1.80 and upload [13:11] Laney: well, upstream already said he was going to take care of it, and i'd be much slower, i fear... [13:13] done. now all in hands of buildders... (but it built fine in pbuilder here) [13:14] will it also be possible to sync a new version (0.4.4) of a package (ocropus) whose previous version (0.3.x) has been removed from Precise (due to incompatibilities with tesseract 3.0) until the 24th? [13:15] (somewhat similar situation -- the debian maintainer's still working on an FTBFS bug in a dependency...) [13:16] possibly [13:17] it all depends on whether someone can review the fix in time [13:19] well, i hope it'll get done this weekend, too. if anyone cares, i'm talking about this bug: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=651402 [13:19] Debian bug 651402 in src:iulib "iulib: FTBFS: Checking for inflate() in C library tiff... no" [Serious,Open] [13:44] ockham: does this bug exists also in ubuntu? [13:44] hrw: the iulib one? [13:44] yes [13:45] ubuntu doesn't have iulib 0.4.x, only 0.3.3 [13:45] ok [13:46] you want us to bring in a new library? [13:48] um, yeah. it's a dependency of ocropus 0.4.4 [13:50] hrm [13:50] not good, at this time? [13:51] it has a new SONAME, but apparently no rdepends [13:51] might be ok [13:52] yeah, i figured it was only used by ocropus [13:53] with ocropus currently not in precise, it'd be pretty much useless, wouldn't it? [13:53] as far as the archive is concerned [13:53] others may be using it [13:54] true [13:54] so i'll hope for that bug to get fixed soonish, then test the new ocropus and file a sync request/FFe? [13:55] hrw: it will exist in ubuntu when the FTBFS is fixed (at least, that is ockham's plan) [13:55] ockham: yes, for both packages [13:55] ok [14:01] problem may be in scons itself [14:01] well, as for the FTBFS bug, i think it's largely solved; or do you mean the symbols? [14:02] ah, right - there was a patch [14:03] * hrw shuts up [14:06] for me it looks like test for tiff is broken. It checks for existance of tiff.h (which is fine) and is using 'inflate()' from zlib [14:07] http://code.google.com/p/iulib/issues/detail?id=27 has fix [14:07] Ok, I made patch with [ hg diff -g -r r1 -r r2 > fix.patch ] command output is here: http://paste.ubuntu.com/917450/ . What next? === genupulas is now known as raju-away === raju-away is now known as raju [15:41] Whoopie: i just started a new job, so i don't currently have the time to do anything for ubuntu other than skim irc once a day or so === Nafallo_ is now known as Nafallo [15:56] broder: how is stripe? are they letting you go to UDS? [17:13] i have binary files on my diff. [17:59] Lol.. my first package build is failed :P.... damn.. bad patch ... [18:13] hello everyone [18:14] I would like to know if it is too late to request that nsscache 0.21.17-2 be synced from Debian testing [18:14] If it's a bug fix no. [18:15] If it's more than that, we can talk. [18:15] the version in precise (0.8.8-1) is awfully out of date, and it would be good to fix bug #901701 [18:15] Launchpad bug 901701 in nsscache (Ubuntu) "nsscache syntax error in /usr/share/pyshared/nss_cache/lock_test.py " [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/901701 [18:15] (which is really just cosmetic, but still) [18:16] ScottK, thing is: I am not sure why 0.8.8-1 was brought in precise, given it is so dated (2009) [18:16] I am neither upstream nor the Debian maintainer, I am just interested in that package [18:17] OK. [18:17] Please have a look at the changes and see if there's feature changes and if so, file an FFe. [18:19] ScottK, ok, I will file an FFe. I am just surprised that we didn't synced 0.21.17-2 or -1 (or even 0.21.16-something) in the first place. [18:21] ScottK, actually, it seems like this package was uploaded for the first time in precise. Would a sync still require an FFe? That seems overkill. [18:21] EtienneG: Yes. [18:21] ScottK, ok then! [18:22] That will make it easier to get approved since there's no regression risk, but FFe is still needed. === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away [18:33] ScottK, filed as bug #975373, thanks a lot for the guidance! :) [18:33] Launchpad bug 975373 in nsscache (Ubuntu) "FFe: Sync nsscache 0.21.17-2 (universe) from Debian testing (main)" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/975373 [18:42] :D again fail with packaging... i have cloned upstream source and i wan't build PPA from it... === menesis1 is now known as menesis === jalcine_ is now known as Guest43720 === Guest43720 is now known as jalcine === jalcine is now known as Guest74149 === webjadmin_ is now known as Guest60810 [22:36] tumbleweed: definitely having a lot of fun so far, but also feel like it's going to take a while to legitimately get spun up. i will absolutely be at UDS