[09:12] <vibhav> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grace/+bug/705202 is fixed in Debian, should I prepare a merge or just wait for it to get synced?
[09:23] <vibhav> Also, can https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-input-evdev/+bug/932439 be nominated for oneiric?
[13:04] <jtaylor> how does a fakesync work? it only changes the debian revision, how can it change the orig.tar?
[13:04] <Laney> you rebuild the source package with a different orig to the one debian has
[13:04] <Laney> so the checksums are different
[13:05] <jtaylor> so it keeps the ubuntu orig?
[13:05] <Laney> yes
[13:05] <Laney> i think syncpackage can detect this situation
[13:07] <jtaylor> it does
[14:26] <eagles0513875> micahg: nobody is installer that channel is dead :( dunno who i can turn to for some really show stopper bugs :(
[18:12] <Laney> eagles0513875: A lot of folk aren't around on the weekend.
[18:13] <eagles0513875> Laney: i know but nobody was in ubuntu-installer yesterday and it was friday
[18:13] <Laney> If it was the evening UK time then you might have been too late.
[18:16] <eagles0513875> ya I'm only uk +1 where i am
[18:16] <eagles0513875> Laney: do you think you could help me with an installer issue?
[18:17] <Laney> no I don't, sorry :(
[18:17] <Laney> This is one area that I have very little knowledge of
[18:19] <eagles0513875> its ok
[18:19] <eagles0513875> basically the way things are right now kubuntu is useless as a desktop for me
[18:19] <eagles0513875> be it live cd or otherwise
[18:21] <geser> is the kubuntu desktop installer that much different from the gnome desktop installer?
[18:21] <geser> I see now and then installer questions in #ubuntu-devel, perhaps you might have there any success
[18:22] <Laney> I would suggest that you just ask your question in #-installer and wait for a response.
[18:23] <Laney> Or post it to the installer mailing list.
[18:23] <Laney> Or, if it is a bug, file it on Launchpad.
[18:32] <eagles0513875> geser: no
[18:32] <eagles0513875> only thing that is different is the desktop that is installed
[18:35] <PaoloRotolo> Hi all!
[18:38] <eagles0513875> Laney: question
[18:38] <eagles0513875> my issue though is more related to grub
[18:39] <eagles0513875> cuz i have a fairly recent gnu and with noveau it needs nomodeset for grub to be able to boot cuz with out it i get a black screen so would that be something to discuss with the installer people?
[18:43] <PaoloRotolo> Hi, can You please sponsor my patch for this bug? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdenlive/+bug/1001646
[19:09] <AmberJ_> Hello
[19:10] <AmberJ_> Is there any reason why anyone should prefer Ubuntu "Packaging" over "CPack"?
[19:10] <AmberJ_> By Ubuntu "Packaging", I mean the Packaging guide on Ubuntu wiki...
[19:12] <geser> what is "CPack"?
[19:13] <PaoloRotolo> up :)
[19:15] <AmberJ_> geser, CPack is a packaging system for software distributions which is tightly integrated with CMake, but can function without it.
[19:16] <jtaylor> how does it handle dependencies?
[19:16] <AmberJ_> geser, It allows you to generate: Linux RPM, deb and gzip distributions of both binaries and source code; NSIS files (for Microsoft Windows); Mac OS X packages
[19:17] <jtaylor> a such a thing, you can often use that as a starting point, but to integrate it properly into the debian/ubuntu ecosystem extra work is required
[19:18] <AmberJ_> jtaylor, 'make'/'cmake' does the dependency handling for it.
[19:18] <PaoloRotolo> Hi, can you please sponsor my patch for this bug? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdenlive/+bug/1001646  :)
[19:18] <geser> AmberJ_: does it support the same "interface" to allow a buildd build the binary packages from a source package?
[19:19] <Laney> PaoloRotolo: Someone will get to it through the sponsors queue :-)
[19:19] <Laney> It's probably a good idea to send it upstream (to Debian) though, since we get this package unmodified from them.
[19:20] <jtaylor> AmberJ_: these tools are useful for upstreams to distribute to many plattforms, but if you want a package in the archive, follow the ubuntu/debian packaging guides
[19:20] <AmberJ_> geser, I don't know. I came here looking for help/info about pros and cons of cmake. I'm planning to package something and cmake seems to do it quickly but I was more interested to see if it follows same interface/standards.
[19:21] <AmberJ_> jtaylor, Do you mean that if I expect my package to be in ubuntu/debian repos, I need to follow ubuntu/debian packaging guides?
[19:21] <geser> AmberJ_: the Ubuntu (and Debian) build daemons only support Debian source packages, so if you intend to get a package into the Ubuntu and/or Debian archive, they must have that format
[19:21] <AmberJ_> ok I get it :) Thanks a lot!
[19:22] <AmberJ_> I'll go and start reading packaging guide then...
[19:22] <geser> but for your own homepage (or project page) you can also build them with CPack (assuming it generates good packages) (but of course proper Debian packaging would be preferred)
[19:23] <jtaylor> when is mergomatic going to be fixed?
[19:24] <geser> when IS handles that MoM ticket and looks into it
[19:24] <AmberJ_> Well, I might end up using CPack for osx/cygwin, but I'll use packaging guide for Ubuntu/Debian.
[19:37] <Laney> someone could run another instance
[19:37] <Laney> I tried but update-sources.py killed the m1.large I used :O