[00:43] <dobey> jethrogb: #ubuntu-packaging is more appropriate
[00:58] <jethrogb> dobey: thanks, ill try it there
[00:58] <jethrogb> although i think ive mostly figured it out
[07:48] <blueyed> What's up with the PPA buildds? I have uploaded a package yesterday and it still needs ~8 hourse before it gets build?
[07:48] <pmjdebruijn> the build farm was moved, so it has been offline for a few days
[07:48] <wgrant> We still don't have all the builders back after the DC move last weekend
[07:48] <pmjdebruijn> so it's still catching up on the build log
[07:48] <wgrant> The queue's about half the length it was yesterday
[07:49] <wgrant> If you have some builds you particularly care about, they can probably jump the queue a bit :)
[07:50] <pmjdebruijn> btw is seems the i386 queue is much more congested, I guess this is because all arch builds are done on i386?
[07:50] <wgrant> pmjdebruijn: Right
[07:50] <blueyed> wgrant: I am waiting for build 3734327 and 3734333. Thanks.
[07:51] <pmjdebruijn> btw
[07:51]  * pmjdebruijn loves the PPAs
[07:51] <pmjdebruijn> wgrant: thanks for your great work
[07:52] <pmjdebruijn> (well and the rest of the launchpad team)
[07:52] <wgrant> blueyed: Should start in a couple of minutes
[07:52] <wgrant> pmjdebruijn: Thanks :)
[07:53] <wgrant> Hopefully the queues will clear in the next day or two
[07:54] <pmjdebruijn> wgrant: I used to host my own repo, without superclean builds and signed packages
[07:55] <pmjdebruijn> the PPAs were quite the leap forward :)
[07:59] <wgrant> Yeah, they make that all a tonne easier.
[08:03] <wgrant> blueyed: Those are built
[08:40] <vadi2> Hi. I'm following instructions at https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/UploadErrors for the 'File <UPLOADED_FILE> already exists in <LOCATION>' error. It mentions: 'note that there is no need to include the original tarball in the upload, a reference to the right file will suffice' <- how do I do that? To begin with, I only did debuild and dput.
[08:59] <stewart> Anyone got an idea on this:
[08:59] <stewart> bzr: ERROR: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~percona-core/percona-server/5.6/.bzr/repository/packs/a1849bf089d97de2c75cd97f17f4998e.pack is redirected to https://launchpad.net
[08:59] <stewart> $ bzr branch lp:percona-server/5.6 /home/jenkins/workspace/percona-server-5.6-trunk
[08:59] <stewart> You have not informed bzr of your Launchpad ID, and you must do this to
[08:59] <stewart> write to Launchpad or access private data.  See "bzr help launchpad-login".
[08:59] <stewart> bzr: ERROR: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~percona-core/percona-server/5.6/.bzr/repository/packs/a1849bf089d97de2c75cd97f17f4998e.pack is redirected to https://launchpad.net
[08:59] <stewart> czajkowski, ^ ?
[08:59] <stewart> czajkowski, this seems pretty consistent.
[09:01] <stewart> basically... are now *two* of our bzr repos in some way corrupt
[09:02] <mgz> if I curl that url, it's not a redirect
[09:02] <stewart> huh.
[09:02] <mgz> what happens if you log in and use bzr+ssh rather than http?
[09:03] <stewart> mgz, this is on jenkins slaves, which will never do bzr+ssh
[09:03] <mgz> ...but does it work?
[09:03] <stewart> trying locally...
[09:03] <wgrant> bzr+ssh would work, yes
[09:03] <wgrant> That HTTP thing was transient
[09:03] <stewart> okay... so if i try again it should work?
[09:03] <mgz> you could get your bot to do bzr+ssh by the way, some of ours do
[09:04] <wgrant> stewart: Yeah, it should work
[09:04] <stewart> mgz, even without launchpad login?
[09:04] <mgz> generally you create an account and generate an ssh key for it, then put that on the machine with the conf
[09:05] <stewart> we'd end up having a garbage account though... which wouldn't be ideal. just another place for compromise to occur :/
[09:09] <czajkowski> stewart: sorry wasnt looking at irc, I see mgz is helping and will know more anyways
[09:13] <stewart> hoping it works. kinda takes a while when you have a several hundred MB repo
[09:31] <maxb> stewart: If you're using http access currently, the machine pseudo-account doesn't need any specific privileges at all - so there's no compromise risk
[09:33] <vadi2> What does this exactly mean: Rejected: mudlet_2.0-rc13.dsc: Version older than that in the archive. 2.0-rc13 <= 2.0-rc12-2.1ubuntu2 <- no, it's not older, it's *newer*
[09:33] <maxb> vadi2: ah, I see what's happening
[09:33] <wgrant> vadi2: Nope, it's older
[09:33] <wgrant> vadi2: The upstream version is everything before the final -
[09:34] <vadi2> So I should try 2.0-rc12-3 ?
[09:34] <wgrant> So it's (2.0, rc13) vs (2.0-rc12, 2.1ubuntu2)
[09:34] <wgrant> Right, you'll need another hyphen
[09:34] <wgrant> With anything at all after it
[09:34] <wgrant> Or nothing, if you want to be strange
[09:35] <vadi2> Alright, thanks!
[09:35] <wgrant> vadi2: See http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Version for details of how versions are interpreted
[09:35] <wgrant> And considuer using dpkg --compare-versions to check
[09:42] <vadi2> What affects the naming of the resulting dsc file?
[09:42] <vadi2> It unfortunately got re-made as "mudlet_2.0-rc13" again.
[09:43] <vadi2> Ah, probably the changelog file
[10:36] <tsdgeos_> Hi, is launchpad slower than usual? I created https://code.launchpad.net/~aacid/unity-greeter/no_servers_configured/+merge/120736 30 min ago and the diff is still not updated while usually takes no more than 5 mins
[10:38] <czajkowski> tsdgeos_: there seems to be some delays
[10:38] <tsdgeos_> ok, no problem, just reporting in case something was broken
[10:39] <tsdgeos_> if it's just "slower" no biggie
[10:39] <czajkowski> they are looking into it
[10:42] <tsdgeos_> my diff just appeared :-)
[11:32] <FourDollars> Hi, When I execute `bzr branch lp:ubuntu/precise/totem`, it returns "bzr: ERROR: Revision {package-import@ubuntu.com-20120109161939-wfwd46cy3ytl1qq3} not present in "Graph(StackedParentsProvider(bzrlib.repository._LazyListJoin(([CachingParentsProvider(None)], []))))".".
[11:34] <mgz> let's stick to #bzr for that
[12:10] <KNRO_> Hello. I have a package with version 1.0ubuntu1-0~22~oneiric1. I tried to upload a new package with version 1.0~5~22~201208221205~oneiric1m but launchpad says the latter version is "older"! How can I fix this?
[12:14] <mgz> that's a lot of tildes.
[12:14] <mgz> KNRO_: see the log from earlier today which covered just this question:

[12:18] <KNRO_> so if I add a hyped 1.0-5 it will be newer than 1.0ubuntu1 ?
[12:18] <KNRO_> the 1.0ubuntu1 was a mistake at any rate, I forgot the hyper between the 1.0 and ubuntu1, and it seems I'm stuck now with this
[12:18] <KNRO_> hyphen lol
[12:24] <KNRO_> so it seems that debupstream 1.0ubuntu1 > 1.0 and this is where it fails
[12:28] <KNRO_> This is the changelog for the package: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mutlaqja/libindi/packaging/view/head:/indi-gphoto/changelog
[12:29] <KNRO_> isn't the debupstream supposed to be 1.0-ubuntu2?
[12:31] <maxb> The upstream version is the version with the last hyphen-separated segment removed
[12:31] <maxb> So, no
[12:32] <KNRO_> so just 1.0 in this case?
[12:32] <maxb> yes
[12:33] <KNRO_> so how do I make this newer than the one in archive 1.0ubuntu1 ?
[12:33] <KNRO_> other than making it 1.1 !
[12:33] <maxb> 1.0.0 would work
[12:34] <maxb> Because . is newer than u
[12:34] <KNRO_> hmm okay thanks I'll give that a try
[12:35] <maxb> That or 1.0z or 1.0+ or something like that
[12:56] <KNRO_> well, I tried using deb-version {debupstream}~{revno}~{time}
[12:56] <KNRO_> is there something wrong with using that deb-version?
[12:58] <KNRO_> I'm getting this log: bzr: ERROR: bzrlib.errors.BzrCommandError: Invalid deb-version: {debupstream}~22~201208221247~oneiric1: Could not parse version: {debupstream}~22~201208221247~oneiric1
[13:01] <dobey> {debupstream}+r{revno}-{revno:packaging} is what i use for my "daily" builds recipes
[13:01] <dobey> KNRO_: what bzr-builder format version are you using?
[13:03] <KNRO_> 0.4
[13:03] <KNRO_> I'll use your suggestion!
[13:03] <dobey> hrmm
[13:10] <mgedmin> http access to bazaar.launchpad.net are very slow, what's happening?
[13:27] <czajkowski> mgedmin: hey they are looking into that at present
[13:29] <mgedmin> czajkowski, awesome!
[13:35] <apw> KNRO_, if thats a raw error from the logs, doesn't that imply debupstream was not subbed in
[14:03] <mgedmin> bzr branches access over http seems to be back
[14:05] <wgrant> mgedmin: Yeah, should be back to normal now. Our apache rewritemap script ran into some trouble, and apache likes to wait around even for requests that don't actually need it.
[15:49] <Daviey> You do still need to increment version numbers on deleted published packages from a PPA, right?
[15:49] <Daviey> wgrant: ^?
[15:49] <wgrant> Daviey: Yes
[15:49] <Daviey> wgrant: thought so, thanks.
[16:27] <mandel> is there any reason why launchpad would say a branch is empty yet I can perfectly branch it?
[16:28] <mgz> mandel: if the branch scanner missed it in the datacentre futzing
[16:29] <mgz> generally pushing a new rev to the branch makes the scanner wake up and realise the branch is populated
[16:29] <mandel> mgz, ok, I'll do that to see what happens, thx
[17:44] <serg> hi. our repository on launchpad is apparently corrupted. what could we do?
[17:44] <serg> $ bzr branch lp:maria/5.1 foo
[17:44] <serg> bzr: ERROR: No such file: '/srv/bazaar.launchpad.net/mirrors/00/05/62/51/.bzr/repository/indices/b658cec5bdb393a80d29dc93e9c94ea3.rix'
[17:54] <TheLordOfTime> i take it PPAs cannot hold Maverick or EOL-release packages?
[17:54] <TheLordOfTime> (anymore)
[17:55] <dobey> TheLordOfTime: can't build new packages for them at least
[17:55] <TheLordOfTime> PPAs with old maverick packages will still publish them right?
[17:55] <TheLordOfTime> but no new ones can be built
[17:55] <TheLordOfTime> ?
[17:56] <dobey> i think previously built/published packages hang around, but you can't build new
[17:57] <dobey> at least, i have a ppa that seems to still have jaunty/intrepid/karmic/maverick packages in it
[17:57] <TheLordOfTime> lol
[17:57] <TheLordOfTime> i probably have a PPA with packages in it like that :P
[17:57] <TheLordOfTime> (in which case those PPAs must die)
[17:58] <mgz> ...launchpad likes scaring me with timeouts on the bounceback to mp page after I've done a really long comment
[18:00] <mgz> bounceback loses the page you were just editing, but does appear to mean the comment did get registered
[18:05] <TheLordOfTime> LP times out pretty often
[18:05] <TheLordOfTime> randomly too
[18:06] <mandel> I have problems with all the branches I push, I just pushed 3of them and lp states that the 3 of them are empty.. which is blocking some code from landing to trunk
[18:08] <mgz> mandel: pushes fresh from today?
[18:08] <mandel> mgz, yes, a few mins ago, max an hour ago
[18:10] <mgz> okay, that needs some action then
[18:10] <mandel> mgz, one of the branches is for example: lp:~mandel/ubuntuone-control-panel/fix-1019224 pushed 2 hours ago
[18:11] <mandel> mgz, and lp:~mandel/ubuntuone-control-panel/left-tabs has the same code pushed a few mins ago
[18:11] <mgz> the one from three hours ago seems to have worked though
[18:11] <mgz> so it may just be horrid lag, fallout from the datacentre move
[18:14] <mgz> mandel: so, apparently it's just being slow due to a backlog
[18:15] <mandel> mgz, ok, if you need more info let me know in the internal channel or here :)
[18:19] <cjohnston> Is anyone else having a problem looking at bzr branches in LP?
[18:20] <mgz> yes, depending on what exactly you mean.
[18:20] <cjohnston> It's very slow and/or timing out for me. Other parts of LP I am seeing fine
[18:23] <mgz> codehosting is little more unhappy than normal right now.
[18:29] <cjohnston> Thanks mgz, czajkowski
[18:31] <czajkowski> <--- vanishing
[18:41] <jethrogb> if i uploaded a native source packages with an omission in the control file that makes the build fail, how do i upload a new version of that package?
[18:42] <jethrogb> I get "Rejected: File hybrid-screenclone_20120821.0.tar.gz already exists in Jethro's packages, but uploaded version has different contents."
[21:29] <mparillo> Hi, I am trying to do a bzr push, and I am wondering if I am not getting bzr to recognize my ssh keys. I have bzr launchpad-login marco-parillo, which is my launchpad id.
[21:30] <mparillo> And I do have a ssh key set in launchapd.
[23:59] <veebers> Hi all, I have some automated jobs that run some 'bzr export' commands after a fresh install
[23:59] <veebers> twice just now I've received and error, both to do with the http access method