[06:45] <dholbach> good morning
[06:46] <geser> good morning
[06:47] <dholbach> hi geser
[08:56] <Rhonda> cjwatson_, is https://rt.ubuntu.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=19679 proper?  I seem to recall that last time it was put into some "internal" canonical RT I don't have access to?
[09:13] <cjwatson_> Laney: local modification - just to point to the local mirror
[09:13] <Laney> ah
[09:16] <cjwatson> Rhonda: not a sysadmin, I don't know how their priorities work :)
[09:16] <cjwatson> Rhonda: prod on #canonical-sysadmin?  should be easy
[09:16] <cjwatson> we reclaimed sulfur since it's a fast powerpc box and we needed another buildd
[09:16] <cjwatson> well, fast-ish
[09:23] <Rhonda> cjwatson: Alright, will try there.  I just seem to remember that last time you forwarded it to some internal RT. :)
[09:25] <Rhonda> Hmm, would mails to rt@ubuntu.com go to rt.ubuntu.com or to the internal RT?
[09:28] <cjwatson> Rhonda: rt.ubuntu.com
[09:45] <vibhav> what does rt stand for?
[09:54] <vibhav> can anybodt have a look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/accountsservice/+bug/873784
[09:59] <geser> vibhav: RT = request tracker
[10:02] <Rhonda> vibhav: Request Tracker
[10:02] <Rhonda> duh, late :)
[13:58] <dholbach> Ubuntu Development session (at Ubuntu Open Week) starting in 2 minutes in #ubuntu-classroom
[14:29]  * dupondje is teaching xaralx a lesson :)
[14:30] <tumbleweed> :P
[14:31] <dupondje> only sad a test build take +15mins :§(
[14:32] <dupondje> is there a way to make pbuilder-dist use multiple cores ? :)
[14:34] <tumbleweed> export DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=8 in .pbuilderrc
[14:34] <tumbleweed> or whatever value is appropriate
[14:34] <dupondje> sweet :)
[14:35] <tumbleweed> of course, the package needs to use dh --parallel or equivalent
[14:45] <dupondje> still using 1 core for xaralx
[14:45] <dupondje> thats sad on a quad core :)
[14:53] <gau1991> Hello .........
[14:53] <gau1991> i am new to Ubuntu to development
[14:54] <gau1991> is there any we to get inside development?
[14:56] <arand_> !development
[14:58] <arand_> Hmm, whatever happened to papercuts by the way, is that still going or not?
[14:58] <tumbleweed> I assume so
[14:59] <arand_> I guess it isn't new and shiny anymore :)
[15:02] <dupondje> dpkg-deb: building package `xaralx' in `../xaralx_0.7r1785-5ubuntu1_amd64.deb'.
[15:02] <dupondje> oh oooh!
[15:04] <dupondje> +#define JPEG_LIB_VERSION        80
[15:04] <dupondje> but thats quite dirty ofc
[16:01] <dupondje> tumbleweed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xaralx/+bug/992941
[16:01] <dupondje> enjyo
[16:03] <eagles0513875> hi guys :)
[16:04] <dholbach> hi eagles0513875, bobweaver, Resistance
[16:04] <bobweaver> Hello
[16:04] <Resistance> dholbach, i'm always here :P
[16:04] <dholbach> you had some more questions? please ask
[16:05] <Resistance> my questions are tucked away on some obscure logfile on another machine, hence my saying i'll poke you and the MOTUs later :p
[16:05] <bobweaver> I found error because I am on 12.10
[16:05] <bobweaver> it would not build in pbuilder
[16:05] <Resistance> bobweaver, godforbid you said 12.10
[16:05] <dholbach> Resistance, ok :)
[16:05] <dholbach> bobweaver, can you put up the build log snippet on paste.ubuntu.com maybe?
[16:05] <bobweaver> sure
[16:05] <eagles0513875> dholbach: just to understand i need to be on 12.10 to do packaging correct?
[16:06] <Resistance> eagles0513875, nope
[16:06] <Resistance> eagles0513875, i could tell you that, i'm on Natty and I build things for Precise
[16:06]  * Resistance keeps tarballs and VMs for Oneiric and Precise around for that reason
[16:06] <dholbach> it helps if you run the development release in "some way"
[16:06] <Resistance> no argument there :)
[16:06] <dholbach> be it a chroot, virtual machine, separate partition or some other way
[16:06] <eagles0513875> Resistance: your a freak of nature to not run the dev release :P
[16:07] <dholbach> it's important you are able to test what you build
[16:07] <Resistance> also no argument there :)
[16:07] <Resistance> especially when you're a backporter, you need to be able to test the backports :)
[16:07] <Resistance> anyways, i'll be quiet
[16:07] <Resistance> :)
[16:10] <bobweaver> Ok there was two error which I will post on was that it could not find the source package because I had run the command to change the debian/control 3 times so it was name different and also because it I was using 12.10 and not 12.04 :) thanks so much  http://paste.ubuntu.com/964956/
[16:10] <bobweaver> s|on|one
[16:11] <bobweaver> dholbach,  if you or others make video tutorial of how to package a updated one I will make video of me shaving my head
[16:12] <dholbach> bobweaver, it will take a few weeks until I get the time, but: challenge accepted :)
[16:12] <bobweaver>  \o/
[16:13] <bobweaver> I will get the buzz clippers ready (by the way I have hair )
[16:14] <gau1991> hello dholbach, after running pbuilder-dist precise build xicc_0.2-3ubuntu1.dsc, where i can find a updated package??? in my current directory there not a single deb of xicc...
[16:14] <dholbach> gau1991, ~/pbuilder/<release>_result/
[16:15] <gau1991> i got.... Thanks dholbach.... :)
[16:18] <bobweaver> I can not believe how much more simple that was then using dh_make and fakeroot and dpkg-buildpackage and all that jazz
[17:17] <eagles0513875> dholbach: ping i have a question when you get a chance
[17:17] <dholbach> eagles0513875, you can just ask your question in here - I'm in a meeting right now
[17:17] <dholbach> just ask and either I or somebody else will find the time to reply :)
[17:18] <eagles0513875> dholbach: what kind of hardware would one need to package and test on in regards to ubuntu phone?
[17:19] <dholbach> eagles0513875, I don't know of any Ubuntu phone
[17:20] <dholbach> if you mean Ubuntu on Android, then I don't know either I'm afraid - I still have a very old mobile phone
[17:20] <eagles0513875> dholbach: there is a phone version that canonical is working on i read they are wanting to release with the 14.04 LTS
[17:20] <eagles0513875> dholbach:  this is what im talkin bout http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/242853/canonical_to_expand_ubuntu_for_smartphones_tablets.html
[17:20] <dholbach> sorry, I don't know
[17:21] <dholbach> don't they have any specifics in one of those articles?
[17:21] <eagles0513875> sadly not
[17:21] <eagles0513875> im thinking of getting an arm based developers board from linaro to help out with development in that arena
[17:36] <tumbleweed> dupondje: \o/
[17:46] <eagles0513875> hey tumbleweed :D
[17:46] <dupondje> can
[17:52] <eagles0513875> hey dholbach question for you what happens if you have unpackaged source code how does one go about getting it packaged?
[17:53] <Resistance> you have to build the package around it or find someone to do that
[17:53] <Resistance> eagles0513875, you also need to make sure the licensing is compatible
[17:53] <eagles0513875> Resistance: ok
[17:53] <Resistance> there are instances where a license on a product is incompatible with Debian licensing policies for packages
[17:53] <dholbach> eagles0513875, just ask here in the channel - no need to ping me - somebody else might pick up the question as well :)
[17:53] <Resistance> including non-MOTUs ;)
[17:53] <dholbach> http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/ should have an article about it
[17:53] <eagles0513875> ok :)
[17:53] <dholbach> I'm still in a meeting and need to run in a bit
[17:54] <eagles0513875> ahh ok my bad :(
[17:54] <dholbach> no no worries
[17:54] <eagles0513875> ill harass Resistance he enjoys that
[17:54] <Resistance> you better not
[17:54] <eagles0513875> Resistance: dont i already do that in trekweb :p
[18:07] <dupondje> tumbleweed: you upload ?
[18:30] <bobweaver> If I run debconf in preinst to gather info can the info that is gathered also be using in postinst ?
[18:31] <bobweaver> like can I call in my postinst script
[18:44] <tumbleweed> dupondje: I will later. Not at home rgiht now
[18:47] <jtaylor> what happened to validate-desktop-file?
[18:49] <jtaylor> ah it was desktop-file-validate
[19:05] <soaringsky> does the myapp.developer.ubuntu.com process get a package into universe or extras?
[19:21] <tumbleweed> dupondje: as it's effectively a sync + patch, I'd drop all the old ubuntu-specific changelog bits
[19:21] <tumbleweed> dupondje: do we know why we are having to define JPEG_LIB_VERSION?
[19:22] <eagles0513875> hey guys i was just thinking is it possible to do nightly builds for libreoffice that can be put in a ppa for those that want the latest and greatest versions of  Libreoffice from the master branch or something of that sort to help with testing?
[19:22] <tumbleweed> eagles0513875: talk to sweetshark
[19:23] <eagles0513875> tumbleweed: hehe ya i know him well so to speak but what would i need to do to get something like that going for 12.04 users as well as next release developers etc that way we can offer the latest version for 12.10
[19:25] <eagles0513875> would he be the ideal person to speak too?
[19:25] <tumbleweed> well, he maintains the package
[19:25] <tumbleweed> backporting it isn't going to be particularly fun, but he should be able to help you
[19:26] <eagles0513875> tumbleweed: maybe not so much backporting except building and putting in a ppa for users to use
[19:26] <tumbleweed> it's the same thnig
[19:28] <eagles0513875> tumbleweed: who would i need to talk to in regards to the ubuntu smartphone version as I am interested in helping with that but i probably dont have the right hardware for it though
[19:29] <eagles0513875> to test and develop that is
[19:29] <tumbleweed> eagles0513875: I have no idea what hardware people are using for it
[19:29] <ScottK> Is there an #ubuntu-phone channel?
[19:29] <tumbleweed> one assumes so
[19:29]  * ScottK has a vague recollection of one being mentioned.
[19:30] <eagles0513875> thanks ScottK :)
[19:33] <bobweaver> hello there I am running into the error that I do not have permission to write to etc in my make file. which is here http://paste.ubuntu.com/965352/   the command that I am running to build package is      fakeroot dpkg-buildpackage -F   maybe the Makefile is under the wrong Dir right now it is under /debian
[19:34] <ScottK> Or mayber you're writing to an absolute path and not a relative one.
[19:36] <bobweaver> I am not sure I understand what you mean by "absolute" & "relative" could you explain a little more thanks for helping :)
[19:38] <bobweaver> are you saying that I need to modify the Makefile ? or are you talking about the dir that the Makefile is under ?
[19:40] <ScottK> It's the difference between /etc and etc.
[19:40] <ScottK> You may need to modify the Makefile, I didn't look.
[19:40] <ScottK> The symptom you are describing is often associated with using absolute paths in the build when you want relative paths.
[19:44] <bobweaver> Where should Makefile be placed ? or best place to place it after running dh_make -e <email> -c <copyleft> -f foo.tar.gz  ? should it stay under the upsource dir or go under /foo-10-foo/debian/    the reason I ask is after I run dh_make It says something about that But I do not understand what it is
[19:48] <bobweaver> this is what I am talking about |:|   Please edit the files in the debian/ subdirectory now. You should also check that the foo Makefiles install into $DESTDIR and not in / .
[19:48] <bobweaver> what does that mean ?
[19:51] <bobweaver> the Makefile part ^^ I know why it wants me too edit the /debian but I have no clue what it is talking about with the Makefile
[19:59] <dupondje> tumbleweed: we should include the libjpeg headers, but those have conflicting types with the xaralx code ...
[19:59] <dupondje> really? xaralx is crappy old
[19:59] <dupondje> anyway, the JPEG_LIB_VERSION is a 'workaround' :)
[20:23] <tumbleweed> dupondje: I can live with that, but I prefer a changelog entry that makes that clearer :)
[21:03] <dupondje> hmz :) tumbleweed you fix the changelog, or I upload new debdiff ?
[21:03]  * tumbleweed doesn't mind too much
[21:03] <tumbleweed> just sitting down to do it now
[21:04] <dupondje> I cant upload anyway *sadface* :)
[21:05] <micahg> dupondje: I'm sure you'll get there eventually
[21:06] <tumbleweed> yikes 143 uploads https://launchpad.net/~dupondje/+related-software
[21:06] <tumbleweed> dupondje: when are you applying for MOTU?
[21:07]  * dupondje hates writing texts :P
[21:09] <jtaylor> hehe that stopped me from applying for a quite a while :)
[21:09]  * jtaylor dreads doing it again for DD :/
[21:10]  * ajmitch applied when it was much less formal :)
[21:10] <dupondje> jtaylor: they should have templates ^^
[21:10] <dupondje> <insert name here>
[21:10] <dupondje> :)
[21:10] <jtaylor> I liked the DM application, just copy paste a small line of text and insert maintained pacakges :)
[21:10] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: DD doesn't require a public grilling on IRC :)
[21:11] <tumbleweed> and you only need to persuade one person to advocate you
[21:11] <tumbleweed> (did I just advertise Debian as being easier to get upload rights for than MOTU?)
[21:12] <micahg> yes :)
[21:12]  * micahg really should go for DD at some point
[21:12] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: (and you know you have a standing offer for advocation from me)
[21:13] <ajmitch> micahg: you should
[21:13] <jtaylor> I know thanks, my biggest obstacle is more my lazyness
[21:14] <Laney> you get to read licenses
[21:14] <Laney> and fix bugs
[21:14] <Laney> and write shell scripts!
[21:14] <tumbleweed> and recite policy
[21:15] <broder> "Debian as being easier to get upload rights for than MOTU"> I am so skeptical
[21:15] <Laney> nah, but DM is easier than PPU
[21:15] <Laney> and then much easier to extend
[21:15] <tumbleweed> broder: the advocation bar is quite high
[21:16] <tumbleweed> but once you're in the system, you won't be rejected
[21:16] <tumbleweed> (well, unlikely)
[21:16] <Laney> your progress might be somewhat slow
[21:16] <Laney> :P
[21:16]  * tumbleweed stalled an applicant I was AMing until he sorted his RC bugs out
[21:19]  * dupondje wanted to upload a new package to his ppa, but doesn't like the 18h delay on the builders :'(
[21:20] <jtaylor> mine build in one hour
[21:20] <tumbleweed> https://launchpad.net/builders <- 12hrs for amd64
[21:20] <jtaylor> though I was bad, uploaded a rebuild where a copy would have sufficed because I want to track how many oneiric user sI have :/
[21:21]  * tumbleweed has never played with PPA usage stats. Have you written a nice script to produce pretty graphs yet?
[21:21] <dupondje> was bit more some minutes ago
[21:21] <EvilResistance> can anyone help me debug this?  http://paste.ubuntu.com/965593/  Been at this for about two weeks and still cant figure out the cause of the break
[21:21] <EvilResistance> (might be so obvious i'm missing it)
[21:22] <jtaylor> tumbleweed: slow but works ok http://paste.ubuntu.com/965601/
[21:23] <tumbleweed> eagles0513875: do you have universe enabled?
[21:23] <tumbleweed> err EvilResistance
[21:23] <EvilResistance> tumbleweed:  might not in that chroot
[21:23] <EvilResistance> should i go an enable it within the chroot?
[21:23] <tumbleweed> yes
[21:28]  * EvilResistance knew it was something obvious
[21:30] <tumbleweed> yikes, my netatalk package has had 1698 downloads. No wonder people e-mail be about it
[21:30] <tumbleweed> I think I just uploaded it for someone to test, when picking at a lp bug
[21:30] <dupondje> heh :)
[21:30] <jtaylor> ^^
[21:30] <EvilResistance> do backports (when uploaded to [release]-backports) build with universe enabled?
[21:31] <tumbleweed> EvilResistance: same as non-backports
[21:31] <tumbleweed> universe packages build with univers, main packages build without it
[21:32] <Laney> tumbleweed: EvilResistance: Nope, backports has all components
[21:33] <Laney> primarily to cope with packages changing component across releases
[21:33] <EvilResistance> Laney:  is that bug that prevents backports from build-depending on other backports fixed yet?
[21:33] <Laney> no
[21:34] <EvilResistance> thought not, since i havent seen any updates on it (and I'm subscribed to it)
[21:34] <tumbleweed> Laney: oh
[21:34] <Laney> I did double check the code to be sure :P
[21:34] <Laney>     if pocket == PackagePublishingPocket.BACKPORTS:
[21:34] <Laney>         return component_dependencies['multiverse']
[23:21] <broder> tumbleweed: has there been any organization done for a keysigning party?
[23:21] <broder> (or Laney? i forget who claimed responsibility for this last fall)
[23:21] <tumbleweed> broder: I was actually thinking about that last night, but it's probably already too late
[23:21] <tumbleweed> (too late to do organisation-before-we-leave-ohme
[23:22] <broder> hmm...how much would you really need to do in advance?
[23:22] <SpamapS> time and a place is all you really need
[23:22] <ajmitch> depends on how formal you want to be
[23:23] <tumbleweed> SpamapS: they tend to be crazily disorganised, though
[23:23] <SpamapS> though the longer you have a single organizer who can print out the sheets .. the more keys will be sent.
[23:23] <ajmitch> it can be easier if everyone sends in their keys beforehand
[23:23] <tumbleweed> two UDSs ago, there were two versions of the sheets
[23:23] <tumbleweed> oh, and last UDS too
[23:23]  * ajmitch should probably replace his key soon
[23:23] <SpamapS> The one at UDS-P went well, once the initial "oops!" of printing the wrong things on the page was fixed.
[23:23] <ajmitch> UDS might be a good chance to do it
[23:23] <SpamapS> I need to get a 4K key setup
[23:24] <SpamapS> though IMO if I sign the new key with the old key, it should be enough for people to sign my new one. :-P
[23:24] <stgraber> ajmitch: yeah, I moved to a 4K key 3 UDSes ago, a day before the key signing :)
[23:25] <stgraber> SpamapS: some people do, but I had almost half of the people who signed my old key refuse to sign the new one until I see them in person again :)
[23:25] <broder> i've never been able to decide how i feel about that
[23:25] <SpamapS> stgraber: thats just because you're so much fun to hang out with
[23:26] <SpamapS> IMO it should be sufficient to have a signed message from the person whose key you signed, and the signature on the acutal key. It should also be time-sensitive. I'm not going to sign it 2 years after the message was signed and sent.
[23:26] <tumbleweed> going from http://bad.debian.net/list/2012-April/003491.html someone thinks our keysigning is already scheduled
[23:26] <SpamapS> But if I verified their identity once, whats the point of doing the verification again? :-P
[23:27] <broder> SpamapS: i'm not interested in verifying your identity. i'm interested in verifying in a cryptographically trustworthy way that you actually sent the message
[23:27] <broder> (and that your key wasn't compromised by someone who then signed the message)
[23:27] <tumbleweed> also, everyone has their own keysigning policies
[23:27] <SpamapS> broder: which you'd do..since I sent it w/ the key you signed. :)
[23:28] <SpamapS> well if you don't trust my key anymore.. why did you sign it!? ;)
[23:28] <SpamapS> tumbleweed: true enough. I'm not sure that actually helps the web of trust though.
[23:28] <broder> tumbleweed: anyway, based on past experience, there will be a keysigning party. i think it would be awesome if one of us could claim responsibility for it so we can be sure it will be run cluefully and in a way that lets everyone make their respective team dinners afterwards in a timely manner
[23:29] <broder> since that's been a traditional failure of the uds keysigning party
[23:29] <tumbleweed> broder: :)
[23:29] <sbeattie> SpamapS: FYI, if you convert to a 4k key, here's the notes the security team took while doing it for our own keys: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/GPGMigration
[23:29] <SpamapS> sbeattie: thank you!
[23:30] <SpamapS> As part of getting my DD status they asked me to promise to move to a 4K key
[23:30]  * ajmitch needs to get a transnational republic ID for a keysigning :)
[23:30] <tumbleweed> I seem to recall there once being a big stink because someone took a fake ID to a debian keysigning
[23:30] <ajmitch> tumbleweed: yep, it was that one
[23:31] <ajmitch> http://madduck.net/blog/2006.05.24:tr-id-at-keysigning/
[23:31] <SpamapS> tumbleweed: just to test people?
[23:31] <ajmitch> pretty much
[23:31] <ajmitch> hopefully my NZ passport looks official enough
[23:33] <broder> SpamapS: I'd also want to verify the new key in person because I basically don't use the web of trust - I have a one-hop path to everybody I want a cryptographically trustworthy path to
[23:33] <broder> And trusting your old key to verify the new key breaks that assumption for me
[23:33] <tumbleweed> well, should we go for 6 PM on wednesday as the locals are expecting?
[23:34] <broder> isn't it traditionally on thursday?
[23:34]  * broder is a local not expecting anything
[23:34] <tumbleweed> I was pointing at http://bad.debian.net/list/2012-April/003491.html (which turned up on a secret list far away)
[23:35] <broder> i'm not opposed. might be less hectic if there's less stuff happening in the evening currently
[23:35] <tumbleweed> going from the coordination around release-team dinner, dinners are all over the place
[23:36] <broder> uds is short. there's probably no way to win here
[23:36] <ajmitch> trying to schedule anything that doesnt' conflict is a bit of a hassle with this many people
[23:37] <tumbleweed> http://uds.ubuntu.com/event/ looks liek every evening has events
[23:38] <broder> if all the events are at 7, we can just have the keysigning party at 6! we'll *totally* all be done in time
[23:38] <broder> :)
[23:38] <ajmitch> of course you will
[23:40] <tumbleweed> we don't all have to sign everyone's key
[23:55] <stgraber> broder: considering 80% of the attendees are the "usual" ones, I'm starting to wonder if it wouldn't be faster to just do it the old way (everyone distributing pieces of paper) at the meet&greet
[23:55] <broder> stgraber: interesting. although i feel like i always find that one of the "usual suspects" is someone i haven't actually exchanged signatures with
[23:56] <ajmitch> I'll have to generate a new key & print out fingerprints before I go then
[23:56] <broder> basically because i don't actually know who has signed my key :)
[23:56] <tumbleweed> I cross people off the list before the signing if we've cross-signed
[23:56] <tumbleweed> but I usually miss a few
[23:56] <stgraber> broder: I usually look at <current version>-changes for anyone who uploaded quite a lot of packages without enigmail showing me that I have signed their key already
[23:56] <tumbleweed> (and don't necessarily remember
[23:57] <broder> heh
[23:57] <ajmitch> my key probably won't be signed by most of you
[23:57] <ajmitch> you'll trust that I am who I say I am, right? :)