[06:57] <dholbach> good morning
[10:55] <bdrung> tumbleweed: can i do a udt release?
[10:57] <tumbleweed> bdrung: yup, I picked off the low hanging fruit a day or two ago
[10:57] <bdrung> tumbleweed: or do you want to do the upload?
[10:57]  * tumbleweed doesn't care too much
[10:57] <tumbleweed> thanks for sorting out devscripts dch
[11:02] <bdrung> tumbleweed: it needed some thought to work on all distributions correctly
[11:03] <tumbleweed> it does feel like distro-info is going to need some re-architecting when we have more distros
[11:05] <bdrung> tumbleweed: yes, but as long as every distro has a different release model, it makes no sense
[11:05] <tumbleweed> yup
[11:12] <bdrung> tumbleweed: when can we drop reverse-build-depends?
[11:14] <Laney> when reverse-depends gets an offline mode?
[11:14] <tumbleweed> Laney: reverse-build-depensd is a reverse-depends wrapper
[11:15] <Laney> oh
[11:15] <Laney> i thought it was a standalone command
[11:15] <Laney> or was it before?
[11:15] <tumbleweed> it used to be
[11:15] <Laney> i see
[11:16] <Laney> don't see why it needs removing then
[11:16] <tumbleweed> bug 910420
[11:16] <tumbleweed> give it another release or two...
[11:16] <Laney> doesn't cause any harm ...
[11:17] <tumbleweed> it results in a lintian complaint, because there isn't a manpage
[11:17] <bdrung> then i want a man page
[11:17] <Laney> hahaha
[11:37] <bdrung> uploaded
[13:33] <blueyed> I am merging vim from unstable for quantal, but get an error from debuild because of a locally modified po file: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=Ht1Qefmi Any hint why that is?
[13:33] <blueyed> debuild output: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=JfHH9RTN
[13:35] <blueyed> Probably because the po files get rebuild in a different way than upstream does..?!
[14:02] <geser> blueyed: I usually merge vim by hand (apply the Ubuntu delta) and handle the few patch rejects by hand (usually only debian/changelog)
[14:02] <geser> and don't bother with updated po-files (I don't know where it comes from in the first place)
[15:50] <Laney> http://paste.ubuntu.com/1054482/
[15:51] <AmberJ_> Hello
[15:51] <Laney> subscribes you to your uploads for X days
[15:52] <AmberJ_> Do I get it right that dh_make only debianizes the extracted upstream tarball directory?
[15:52] <AmberJ_> i.e. it only create debian/ ?
[15:53] <tumbleweed> yes
[16:00] <AmberJ_> Ah, it created orig.tar.gz as well...
[16:02] <tumbleweed> that sounds like something you don't want
[16:02] <tumbleweed> take the .tar.gz you got from upstream and rename it
[16:02] <AmberJ_> 'man dh_make' says: "Then dh_make proceeds to generate a "debian" subdirectory and the necessary control files in the program source directory." What do "necessary control files" refer to?
[16:03] <tumbleweed> the things inside debian
[16:11] <AmberJ_> Ok thanks!
[16:12] <AmberJ_> I don't want to use dh_make since it confirms settings before it debianizes (thus causing me not being ble to automate with a bash script).
[16:13] <AmberJ_> s/ble/able
[16:14] <tumbleweed> why are you automating this?
[16:15] <tumbleweed> packaging something is something you do once. you keep the package and incrementally improve/update it
[16:16] <AmberJ_> Upstream devs want a script that automates local deb creation. So that they can build locally (ideally after every commit).
[16:17] <tumbleweed> keep enough packaging in the trunk then?
[16:17] <AmberJ_> For PPA, I'll be using incremetally update model (UDD?)
[16:17] <tumbleweed> LP daily builds are also great for this kind of thing
[16:17] <tumbleweed> anyawy, dh_make gives you a tempalte. It doesn't give you packaging that's going to work (necessarily)
[16:18] <AmberJ_> Yes, that's why I can use a script to automate what dh_make does.
[16:18] <tumbleweed> you might find pkgme does a better job
[16:19] <AmberJ_> I will keep debian/ in a separate repo. My bash script branches upstream/ AND upstream-debian/ and copies debian/ to upstream/
[16:19]  * AmberJ_ googles pkgme
[16:19] <tumbleweed> that sounds like a very sensible approach. It's essentially how one usually does LP daily builds
[16:20] <AmberJ_> Does "LP daily builds" mean "PPAs"?
[16:21] <tumbleweed> AmberJ_: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/SourceBuilds
[16:22] <AmberJ_> ok. upstream devs want a script to build locally (on their server) after every commit. LP builds tend to be in queue for hours before they are built.
[16:22] <tumbleweed> you can use it locally
[16:22] <AmberJ_> But I didn't knew about LP daily builds. Thank you very much!
[16:22] <AmberJ_> yes reading
[16:24] <tumbleweed> it does require you to use bzr, though
[16:25] <AmberJ_> yes, upstream uses bzr/launchpad
[17:07] <Laney> https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~laney/+junk/lp-subscribe-uploads/view/head:/lp-subscribe-uploads
[17:07] <Laney> could/should something like that go in udt?
[17:07] <Laney> wasn't thinking about that when I was writing it, so maybe it needs some adjustment
[17:11] <tumbleweed> I see subscription and unsubscription, but no actions
[17:12] <Laney> actions?
[17:12] <tumbleweed> something that tells you about bugs
[17:12] <Laney> it doesn't do that
[17:12] <Laney> it subscribes you so that LP sends you them
[17:13] <tumbleweed> oh, duh
[17:29] <tumbleweed> Laney: sorry, got distracted. But, yes (lptools would also be a plausible home, but this is more ubuntu-specific I think)
[18:05] <dupondje> somebody with chromium installed here ?
[18:06] <dupondje> if so, please surf to www.hln.be , also getting white screen ?
[19:05] <FernandoMiguel> slangasek: ping
[19:44] <slangasek> FernandoMiguel: hi
[19:44] <FernandoMiguel> slangasek: hi. sorry to bother you
[19:44] <FernandoMiguel> I'm trying to dig into why last night updates broke both my systems
[19:45] <FernandoMiguel> one I got back by just installing ia32 libs
[19:45] <FernandoMiguel> but this laptop is still broken
[19:45] <FernandoMiguel> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
[19:45] <FernandoMiguel>  ia32-libs : Depends: ia32-libs-multiarch but it is not installable
[19:46] <slangasek> FernandoMiguel: the error at the bottom of the log you sent me shows you have a broken version of dpkg installed and are affected by bug #1015329.  You'll need to follow the recovery instructions posted in that bug description.
[19:47] <FernandoMiguel> thank you
[19:47] <FernandoMiguel> ill have a look
[19:52] <FernandoMiguel> slangasek: thank you once again. that did the trick
[20:47] <iamfuzz> us
[21:17] <AmberJ_> https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/SourceBuilds/BzrBuilder#Running_commands_in_recipes says: "Note: Launchpad does not support the run command. "
[21:18] <AmberJ_> How do we specify that I need to run tools such as cmake or autotools for LP daily builds?
[21:19] <AmberJ_> s/we/I
[21:21] <jtaylor> in debian/rules
[21:23] <AmberJ_> If I have a rule in debian/rules, do I need to specify run command in package.recipe ? I guess no (but then why does link above explicitly mentions about 'run autotools')
[21:24] <AmberJ_> Or maybe, I don't get it right
[21:24] <jtaylor> no idea
[21:24] <jtaylor> quite pointless when launchpad does not support it
[21:24] <AmberJ_> Ok, let me try building locally on my system without adding 'run autotools'.
[23:39] <AmberJ> Err... this is weird. Upstream compiles fine if I run: 'cmake .' and then 'make'. But if fails on PPA as well as locally (when using debuild).
[23:39] <AmberJ> Here's the PPA buildlog: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1055180/ (please scroll down to line 3883)
[23:40] <AmberJ> I don't understand why the build exits with error when using debuild. It builds fine when using 'make'.