[04:22] <pitti> Good morning
[07:06] <dholbach> good morning
[07:07] <shadeslayer> eeeppp
[07:08] <shadeslayer> dholbach: hi!
[07:08] <shadeslayer> cjwatson: DVD images for Kubuntu 12.04 are missing :(
[07:08] <shadeslayer> dholbach: could you review a sqlite transition diff?
[07:09] <dholbach> I'm not sure I'm an expert, but sure
[07:11] <shadeslayer> dholbach: http://paste.kde.org/538790/
[07:13] <dholbach> hum, how did it offer a -sqlite2 and -sqlite3 package before?
[07:14] <shadeslayer> dholbach: I don't understand ...
[07:14] <dholbach> ah no, nevermind
[07:16] <dholbach> hum, I do wonder though why we need libsqlite0-dev and libsqlite3-dev as build-deps
[07:17]  * shadeslayer checks logs
[07:18] <shadeslayer> dholbach: checking for SQLite 2 driver headers... /usr/include/
[07:19] <shadeslayer> seems like something requires it
[07:19] <dholbach> isn't that the plugin which is removed?
[07:19] <shadeslayer> that's from the old logs
[07:19] <dholbach> aha
[07:21] <shadeslayer> ( oh cool, linuxplumbersconf uses summit )
[07:25] <shadeslayer> oh, that's wrong ...
[07:25] <shadeslayer> dholbach: I assumed libsqlite-dev will pull in libsqlite3-dev
[07:25] <shadeslayer> so that'll need fixing in the control file
[07:26] <bkerensa> gnight folks!
[07:26] <dholbach> shadeslayer, I'm just doing a test-build without libsqlite0-dev
[07:26] <shadeslayer> right :)
[07:29] <dholbach> ah no, seems necessary
[07:30] <dholbach> dh_install: gambas2-gb-db-sqlite3 missing files (usr/lib/gambas2/gb.db.sqlite3.*), aborting
[07:30] <dholbach> weird
[07:30] <shadeslayer> indeed
[07:30] <shadeslayer> I was looking at the configure output myself
[07:30] <shadeslayer> and since I made it dep on libsqlite-dev, it worked ( since that pulls in libsqlite0-dev which the package picks up as sqlite3 )
[07:34] <shadeslayer> dholbach: gb.db.sqlite3/configure seems like magic
[07:38] <cjwatson> shadeslayer: on holiday and very shortly off-net - somebody else can work it out
[07:38] <shadeslayer> sure
[07:39] <shadeslayer> it seems like everyone who would know how to fix this is on a holiday :P
[11:40] <ev> @pilot in
[11:41] <Daviey> jelmer: hey, are there plans to fix debian bug 634848 ?
[11:42] <jelmer> Daviey: not that I'm aware of
[11:43] <jelmer> Daviey: (I'm not involved with python-debian upstream)
[11:43] <Daviey> jelmer: oh, sorry.. i thought you were
[12:08] <larsweb> i am trying to assign a group write-access to a folder using the "setfacl" tool. but it doesnt seem to work? does anyone know this?
[12:16] <xnox> larsweb: support is in #ubuntu or askubuntu.com this is developer channel =)
[12:22] <hyperair> this is weird. how does chromium-browser even build?
[12:23] <hyperair> it just bails out saying "tar: This does not look like a tar archive"
[12:24] <xnox> hyperair: which one? the one in the archive or the one from daily ppa?
[12:24] <xnox> the former crashes, the later ftbfs/out-of-date
[12:24] <xnox> s/later/latter/
[12:27] <hyperair> xnox: the archive one.
[12:27] <hyperair> chromium-browser-18.0.1025.168~r134367
[12:27] <hyperair> i don't even know how i have the binary installed -- i unpack it, there's a tarball inside the source directory, which is unpacked
[12:28] <hyperair> and then the debian/rules doesn't even attempt to unpack the tarball
[12:31] <hyperair> aha, it looks like i can force this to work by running debian/rules pre-build
[12:39] <xnox> hyperair: i'd expect you to use 20.0.1132.47~r144678-0ubuntu5 or is this for precise?
[13:37] <mterry> mvo, ping about https://code.launchpad.net/~mterry/update-manager/stop-update/+merge/120318  - I'd like to get it in this next week before UIF
[13:42] <mvo> mterry: sure, let me have a look
[13:49] <xnox> mvo: what's the best way to submit patches to debtagshw? debian BTS + CC you for review?
[13:50] <mvo> xnox: yeah
[13:51] <mvo> xnox: I can commit them to git
[13:51] <mvo> xnox: out of curiosity, what is the patch about?
[13:51] <xnox> mvo: python3 support
[13:52] <xnox> mvo: i need to add dep8 test runner and i will submit
[13:53] <mterry> mvo, we've got time before UIF for me to add a test
[13:53] <mterry> mvo, I'll try to do that if I fail for some reason, will merge to make UIF
[13:54] <mvo> mterry: cool
[13:54] <mvo> xnox: please note that I will need py2 support for s-c as it looks like xapian will not make it for py3
[13:55] <xnox> mvo: it supports both =)
[13:55] <mvo> xnox: sweet
[13:55] <xnox> mvo: 2.6 or better required including all the way through 3.X =)
[15:47] <Andy80> dholbach: hi! Maybe there is a typo here https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/BugFixingInitiative or I'm just noob (more probable). I try to branch some packages and I always get the error that the branch doesn't exist. For example: bzr branch ubuntu:libboost1.46-dev
[15:47] <Andy80> bzr: ERROR: Not a branch: "bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/+branch/ubuntu/libboost1.46-dev/".
[15:47] <dholbach> ah, that's a binary package name, not a source package name
[15:48] <dholbach> apt-cache showsrc <package>      should tell you which source package it belongs too
[15:48] <dholbach> good point
[15:49] <Andy80> dholbach: another possible problem.... even if you do: apt-cache showsrc libboost1.46-dev - you can get: W: Unable to locate package libboost1.46-dev
[15:50] <dholbach> are you on precise?
[15:50] <Andy80> dholbach: I suspect because that particular version is only available in quantal
[15:50] <Andy80> and not in precise
[15:50] <Andy80> yes
[15:50] <Andy80> do I need Quantal to fix those packages? If yes I can't do :(
[15:50] <dholbach> ah no, it should exist in precise too
[15:50] <Andy80> maybe with a different version
[15:50] <dholbach> ah, do you have a deb-src line enabled in /etc/apt/sources.lists?
[15:51] <dholbach> or in software-properties you need to check 'sources'
[15:51] <dholbach> otherwise apt only knows about binary packages :)
[15:51] <Andy80> let me check...
[15:51] <Andy80> good point
[15:52] <dholbach> I'll see if that's covered in our docs
[15:54] <dholbach> filed bug 1041256
[15:55] <Andy80> dholbach: ok, my fault... it was because of the sources not enable. Now I get a loooooong output for the command: apt-cache showsrc libboost1.46-dev
[15:55] <Andy80> which one is the line that I need?
[15:55] <dholbach> the first one
[15:55] <Andy80> cool
[15:56] <Andy80> yeah! It's branching :)
[15:57] <dholbach> fantastico :)
[15:57] <Andy80> at least I'm testing the whole procedure/howto ;)
[15:58] <Andy80> by the way nice job! It's exactly what we need to make people start contributing
[15:59] <dholbach> yeah, let's see how it goes :)
[16:03] <Andy80> ok now I feel even more stupid :D I can't find the typo in the debian/control ;) you say "libboost1.46-dev (binary): unused-override spelling-error-in-description" but there are many descriptions... and I cannot find the "unused-override"
[16:04] <dholbach> haha ok, sorry - my mistake (again)
[16:04] <dholbach> lintian finds mistakes in packages
[16:05] <dholbach> you can override some of the warnings with a lintian-override
[16:05] <dholbach> it seems in this case an override was added, but it's not needed
[16:06] <Andy80> I still don't get it... it's because I don't know this "lintian-override". Which line is "bugged" in this case? And how should it be?
[16:08] <dholbach> it's a bad example I picked for the list - basically it went like this: at some stage there was a mistake in the package, lintian complained, the maintainer felt it was not a problem, so they added an override, so lintian would not complain any more - it seems like this problem in the past is gone now
[16:08] <dholbach> so the override is not needed any more
[16:09] <dholbach> there's a line in debian/rules where the spelling-error-in-description override is added - that line can be safely removed
[16:09] <dholbach> Andy80, I'm afraid you picked one of the harder problems :)
[16:10] <dholbach> but I just checked - this line can be removed
[16:13] <dholbach> have a great weekend everyone
[16:13] <dholbach> and good luck Andy80 - I'm sure there are others in here who can help you out if you should get stuck
[16:13] <Andy80> dholbach: while you were checking the problem I worked and committed the second one https://code.launchpad.net/~andreagrandi/ubuntu/quantal/kdevelop-custom-buildsystem/typo-fix/+merge/121223 :D
[16:14] <dholbach> great
[16:14] <dholbach> see you around! :)
[16:14] <Andy80> yeah I keep going :) it's easy ;)
[16:18] <Andy80> arghh..... I always get the weird problems...
[16:18] <Andy80> I saw another typo after I ran bzr lp-propose
[16:19] <Andy80> and I tried to run it again and I get this: bzr: ERROR: There is already a branch merge proposal: https://code.launchpad.net/~andreagrandi/ubuntu/quantal/kdevelop-custom-buildsystem/typo-fix/+merge/121223
[16:21] <Andy80> oh it's ok now
[16:33] <SpamapS> so, as an nvidia user, do I just have to wait until Nvidia drops new drivers to dist-upgrade?
[16:33] <SpamapS> (in quantal)
[16:35] <xnox> Andy80: by the way, boost1.46 is superseeded by boost1.49 in quantal.
[16:36] <xnox> Andy80: 1.46 is pending removal in quantal.
[16:37] <Andy80> xnox: oh... well... just refuse the mp
[16:41] <Andy80> ok, dinner time, I'll continue it later
[16:46] <infinity> xnox: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1164755/
[16:54] <xnox> infinity: damn it!
[16:54] <xnox> infinity: I am off to give ben a kick
[16:55] <infinity> xnox: Did you miss having build-deps in the transition tracker?
[16:55] <infinity> xnox: Might make some sense, from the POV of possible ORed false positives, but in the above case, only two of those are ORed deps (and should be fixed anyway), and the rest aren't.
[16:56] <xnox> infinity: I was fixing some of these in Debian, where there are errorous build-deps on a "libboost1.42-dev | libboost-dev"
[16:56] <xnox> infinity: will adjust the tracker to make it right.
[16:57] <infinity> This could be why I never use trackers.
[16:57] <infinity> And just trust the archive to not lie to me when I ask it questions.
[16:57] <infinity> Questions like "yo, archive, does stuff still depend on this thing that I want to remove?"
[16:57] <infinity> And it's all like "dude, don't do it, you have so much to live for."
[16:58] <infinity> And it all goes downhill from there.
[16:58] <infinity> Until the archive and I share a case of beer and reminisce about old times.
[16:58]  * xnox is taking notes on effective AA
[17:20]  * xnox ponders how mumble ever manages to work at all
[17:23] <ogra_> it steals unicorns and pixie dust from btrfs
[17:23] <ogra_> thats why btrfs never gets finished btw
[17:27] <Debolaz> Of course, the real reason is that they have no goals.
[17:27] <ogra_> the unicorns ?
[17:28] <Debolaz> Yes.
[17:43]  * penguin42 notes that a unicorn as a goalee would be messy; it would always catch the ball on it's horn
[18:02] <xnox> infinity: you have now send me down the path of taking (!) patches from asterisk to fix (!!) zeroc-ice for (!!!) java7 compat to merge (!V) mumble to remove (V) boost.
[18:04] <micahg> xnox: welcome to being a core dev :)
[18:06] <infinity> xnox: It's not too late to remove yourself from the group.
[18:07] <ogra_> infinity, !
[18:23]  * xnox decisions decisions decisions
[18:48] <Andy80> what does this command exactly: bzr bd -- -S      ?
[18:50] <micahg> Andy80: builds a source package from a bzr branch
[18:50] <slangasek> Andy80: it creates a temporary bzr export of your current branch (including any uncommitted changes) to a temp directory in ../build-area, then invokes dpkg-buildpackage with any arguments after the -- (in this case, -S, which means "only do a source build")
[19:17] <Andy80> micahg, slangasek I found it in this contest https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/BugFixingInitiative - so basically after I execute "bzr lp-propose" I also execute those two command to send the package to Debian, right?
[19:17] <slangasek> Andy80: what two commands?
[19:18] <slangasek> ah, bzr bd -- -S + submittodebian?  yes; the first is not actually part of sending it to Debian, it only verifies the source package can be built; you should also verify that your *binary* package builds before submitting to Debian
[19:19] <Andy80> yes
[19:19] <slangasek> Andy80: so I think you should run 'bzr bd' without the -S at all, here
[19:19] <Andy80> ah ok
[19:19] <Andy80> luckly I haven't sent it yet
[19:19] <Andy80> it's still building :(
[19:19] <Andy80> I'm on a slow netbook...
[19:21] <Andy80> and... that "submittodebian" does all work :P ? I mean the submitting...
[19:22] <slangasek> it automates as much of it as it can, then drops you into an editor so you can compose the bug report to Debian
[19:22] <pedahzur> hallyn: around?
[19:24] <Andy80> slangasek: it looks like something went wrong (executing: bzr bd) http://pastebin.com/Gtx9G835
[19:26] <pedahzur> soren: around?
[19:26] <slangasek> Andy80: yes; that command tries to build the package, and you need to have the build dependencies installed to build the package
[19:27] <slangasek> Andy80: let me have a closer look at that wiki page; maybe I'm sending you down a wrong path
[19:27] <Andy80> slangasek: yeah, I understand the missing deps, but... wasn't there a method to automatically install all the deps before building the package?
[19:27] <slangasek> Andy80: have you gone through http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/getting-set-up.html ?
[19:27] <slangasek> i.e.: have you set up pbuilder?
[19:28] <Andy80> I should have..... let me check (I don't remember if I did it on this netbook or on the office PC)
[19:28] <slangasek> Andy80: so you should be able to run 'bzr bd --builder=pdebuild'
[19:28] <slangasek> and that should take care of the dependencies for you
[19:30] <Andy80> slangasek: ok it looks like I didn't run pbuilder-dist. On my office PC it was ok, here I get this: andrea@andrea-1215P:~/Documents/sviluppo/Ubuntu/gambas2$ pbuilder-dist pangolin create
[19:30] <Andy80> Warning: Unknown distribution "pangolin". Do you want to continue [y|N]? n
[19:30] <slangasek> pangolin isn't the distribution name; the name is 'precise'
[19:31] <Andy80> oh sorry -.-
[19:31] <Andy80> how I'm stupid -.-
[19:32] <Andy80> ok... it's getting stuff ;)
[19:33] <hallyn> pedahzur: what's up?
[19:33] <Andy80> so I'll run 'bzr bd --builder=pdebuild' and it will build the package for "precise"
[19:33] <slangasek> Andy80: I believe that's correct
[19:35] <pedahzur> hallyn: I added the PPA from https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-virt/+archive/backports, but trying to upgrade qemu-kvm tells me seabios and vgabios are too old.  Did I do something stupid, or do I need to raise a bug to have seabios and vgabios backported as well?
[19:35] <pedahzur> hallyn: Sorry if I got the wrong channel to discuss this. Will happily move it if I need to.
[19:37] <hallyn> pedahzur: d'oh, if i created that then yes i should have backported those too.  i'll do that.
[19:37] <pedahzur> hallyn: Ah...OK...my sanity *is* in tact. :)
[19:37] <pedahzur> hallyn: Shall I raise a bug, or is that needed?
[19:39] <hallyn> pedahzur: no need.  thanks for bringing it up!
[19:40] <xnox> Andy80: although it's a pain, I do $ bzr bd -S; and then use pbuilder-dist $series build $package.dsc
[19:40] <pedahzur> hallyn: you're welcome. Thanks for responding quickly!
[19:40] <slangasek> xnox: however, 'bzr bd -S' can also fail due to missing build-dependencies
[19:40] <slangasek> as you probably know :)
[19:40] <xnox> Andy80: because with pdebuild a package can escape and nuke stuff in your home dir =/
[19:40] <slangasek> orly
[19:41] <xnox> slangasek: pdebuild builds source package locally, so it can also fail ;-)
[19:41] <slangasek> ah
[19:41] <slangasek> silly thing
[19:41] <slangasek> right, so we should scrap all references to pbuilder in the guide and replace them with sbuild immediately ;)
[19:43] <Andy80> xnox: so if I already have the .dsc, I do: pbuilder-dist precise build gambas2_2.23.1-1ubuntu6.dsc
[19:43] <Andy80> ?
[19:43] <slangasek> yep
[19:44] <Andy80> let's try...
[19:45] <Andy80> and it will get the deps automatically?
[19:45] <jbicha> sbuild wasn't too difficult to set up
[19:45] <xnox> slangasek: sbuild can also operate on the unpacked tree & escape *gasp*
[19:45] <Andy80> yes it's getting...
[19:45] <xnox> slangasek: clearly we should switch to yum & RPM
[19:45] <xnox> ;-)
[19:46] <slangasek> xnox: what packages are you building that you haven't already audited debian/rules on to make sure they don't rm -rf ~ ? :)
[19:46] <slangasek> you can certainly configure schroot to not bind-mount things you're worried about, if that's the issue
[19:47] <xnox> slangasek: not sure, there were some funny onces with vorlon@d.o in the change-by field. Do you know who that is?
[19:47] <slangasek> xnox: a dastardly rogue
[19:48] <xnox> slangasek: i think I got bitten by modifying packaging & adding patches.... only to have the build-dir purged and loosing my changes.
[19:48] <xnox> nothing too serious.
[19:49] <hallyn> pedahzur: I just blindly pushed them without a local build first (dependencies looked innocent).  They *should* build fine in a few mins
[19:49] <pedahzur> hallyn: seabios is already there...wow...that was fast!
[19:53] <slangasek> xnox: ah :)
[19:54] <pedahzur> hallyn: I see the packages listed now...do you know how long does it take to update the packages indexes?  Even after 'update' apt is still complaining.
[19:55] <pedahzur> (impatient, aren't I?)  :)
[19:57] <SpamapS> hm, why would quantal's argparse.py be different from debian unstable's?
[19:58] <SpamapS> http://paste.ubuntu.com/1165051/
[20:01] <slangasek> SpamapS: possibly because later versions of the package in Debian sid are including pulls of the release branch from the upstream VCS
[20:02] <xnox> sbuild-build-depends-lo-menubar-dummy : Depends: libboo-dev but it is not installable
[20:02] <xnox> boo sbuild boo =)
[20:02] <xnox> s/libboo/libboost/
[20:04] <hallyn> pedahzur: unfortunately the ppas are lower priority for the builders than the archive.  (naturally)
[20:04] <hallyn> i'd expect 20 mins or so, but some days it can be hours
[20:05] <pedahzur> hallyn: Ah...just because it's listed doesn't mean it's built. Gotcha.
[20:05] <pedahzur> hallyn: but it is here: http://ppa.launchpad.net/ubuntu-virt/backports/ubuntu/ :)
[20:05] <pedahzur> But not yet listed in http://ppa.launchpad.net/ubuntu-virt/backports/ubuntu/dists/precise/main/binary-amd64/Packages  Weird.
[20:06] <SpamapS> slangasek: ah, ok, well it seems horribly broken in sid
[20:06] <hallyn> i need to reboot into q for a test.  bbl
[20:06] <pedahzur> hallyn: So I take it the builders "sweep" the pools to generate the package indexes?
[20:06] <slangasek> SpamapS: probably warrants an RC bug against the package?
[20:07] <infinity> pedahzur: Err, there's only source there, not binaries.
[20:07] <pedahzur> hallyn: Ah!  The sources are in place, not the debs.
[20:07] <infinity> pedahzur: But I'll give the builds a bit of a bump.
[20:07] <pedahzur> hallyn: Yeah, sorry...was reading too fast when I was looking at pools.
[20:07] <pedahzur> hallyn: Again: thank you very much!  I'll be sure to bug you if seabios and vgabios have unresolved dependencies. :)
[20:08] <pedahzur> hallyn: Wow, they have no install-time deps...that simplifies things.
[20:49] <xnox> a package fails due to -fpermissive.... while using gcc-4.7?!
[21:03] <pedahzur> hallyn: Packages built, and they are installed. And there's the 1920x1080 screen option I was after in Windows. Thank you so very much!  It is greatly appreciated!
[21:21] <hallyn> pedahzur: this was in relation to an open bug, right?  can you comment on it so i can act on the email?  (i assume this means i get to find a patch to cherrypick that fix whatever was broken)
[21:22] <pedahzur> The version of vgabios installed did not have the 1920x1080 mode defined.  I had not opened a bug for it.  There *might* be an open bug for it.
[21:23] <pedahzur> hallyn: ^^
[21:23] <hallyn> ah.  yeah, rings a bell
[21:23] <hallyn> ok.  thanks.
[21:23] <hallyn> ttyl