[03:33] <rsalveti> hallyn: seems the problem is at the packaging side
[03:33] <rsalveti> blobs_arch += bamboo.dts mpc8544ds.dts
[03:33] <rsalveti> mpc8544ds.dts doesn't exist anymore at the qemu upstream
[03:33] <rsalveti> seems it's not needed as it's generated at runtime (previous one was a very minimal one)
[14:02] <hallyn> rsalveti: yep, kinda funny as before the last merge with debian that wasn't in there anyway.  still before i just remove that i'd like to test-build ona ppc box.
[14:27] <fishor> hallo all, i need you help. i'm kernel developer and i use latest ubuntu 12.10. Mostly it works fine for me. I installed vanilla kernel to work on some hardware issue on Asus zenbook UX32A. For some reasons skype sound scratchy on vanilla kernel.
[14:27] <fishor> Are there some special patches for pulseaudio in ubuntu kernel?
[14:28] <fishor> i'm confused because: ubuntu kernel sounds fine, include skype. and vanilla kernel sounds fine too except skype
[14:35] <cyphermox> fishor: you mean patches to the kernel for sound?
[14:49] <fishor> cyphermox, yep
[14:50] <fishor> or may be some extras for pulseaudio, for example some realtime patches
[14:50] <cyphermox> fishor: I'm not super familiar with the kernel stuff, but I'd suggest looking at http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu%2Fubuntu-quantal.git&a=search&h=HEAD&st=commit&s=SAUCE (sauce patches) for quantal
[14:50] <cyphermox> (or ask in #ubuntu-kernel)
[14:53] <cyphermox> I suspect it's more a kernel thing than something in pulse though, if it works fine on the ubuntu kernel and scratchy on vanilla
[14:55] <cyphermox> bbl, train near destination.
[15:08] <fishor> cyphermox, thx! i'll ask -kernel
[16:41] <hashem> What does it mean for a package to have a different source package? Why are they separate to begin with then? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/quantal/i386/compiz-plugins-default on the bottom says "Source package “compiz” package in Ubuntu"
[16:43] <tumbleweed> hashem: one source package can build multiple binary packages
[16:44] <tumbleweed> there are many reasons why its useful to break packages up into separate binary packages
[16:45] <tumbleweed> and yes, the names of the source packages are sometimes not trivially guessable
[16:46] <hashem> fair enough, thanks. Question 2: Is there a way to get debuild to install the required dependencies automatically?
[16:46] <cjwatson> just use 'sudo apt-get build-dep'
[16:48] <tumbleweed> or use sbuild / pbuilder to do your building in isolated chroots
[16:54] <hashem> thanks cjwatson. I'm trying to fix a segfault in /usr/lib/compiz/libgrid.so, however, apt-get build-dep compiz reports, "The following packages have unmet dependencies: libnotify-dev : Depends: libnotify4 (= 0.7.5-1) but 0.7.5-1ppa1precise is to be installed   Depends: gir1.2-notify-0.7 (= 0.7.5-1) but 0.7.5-1ppa1precise is to be installed E: Build-dependencies for compiz could not be satisfied." I'm running the command "bzr buil
[16:54] <hashem> ddeb".
[16:55] <hashem> tumbleweed, I'm following this guide http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/udd-getting-the-source.html#branching , so I have downloaded right now, an orig.tar.gz file, and a directory that contains the unpacked source, cmake folder and debian folder.
[16:55] <cjwatson> hashem: Using a chroot as tumbleweed suggested would isolate your builds from whatever random stuff happens to be going on on your system.
[16:55] <cjwatson> I'm not going to debug your system right now :-)
[16:56] <hashem> I'm very new to linux development. To me, libnotify4 version 0.7.5-1 looks like 0.7.5-1ppa1precise. I don't understand the difference or how to resolve the issue.
[16:57] <penguin42> cjwatson: The 'bricks Samsung uefi' laptop bug from a few weeks ago; do you know if any one managed to find someone at Samsung to prod?   It was suggested it needs marking as security given that it could be used for intentional bricking if anyone figures out what causes it?
[16:57] <cjwatson> The dependency is an exact one, so it doesn't matter if it "looks like" the same version, it isn't the same.
[16:58] <cjwatson> penguin42: Sorry, I haven't had time to follow up.  I suggest that somebody who does have time goes ahead and does so.
[16:58] <cjwatson> hashem: 'sudo apt-get -f install' might help clear things up a bit
[16:58] <cjwatson> (without extra arguments)
[16:58] <penguin42> cjwatson: I have neither the laptop or any contacts, does Canonical have any vendor contacts?
[16:58] <cjwatson> Since your package database is apparently inconsistent right now
[16:58] <cjwatson> penguin42: I have no idea; I am but a humble developer
[16:59] <cjwatson> penguin42: I don't do vendor relations
[16:59] <penguin42> cjwatson: OK, thanks
[16:59] <cjwatson> (Somewhat deliberately)
[17:00] <penguin42> yes, it's much safer!  Is there a team who does that should be subscribed to the bug?
[17:00] <cjwatson> I don't know a suitable team to subscribe, and it's Saturday so I'm not going to look
[17:00] <cjwatson> I'll add a to-do list item for Monday to have a look
[17:00] <penguin42> cjwatson: That's fine, thanks
[17:22] <hashem> I'm trying to set up pbuilder to build from the compiz.dev directory I got from bzr branch ubuntu:compiz. I ran sudo pbuilder create --debootstrapopts --variant=buildd, but when I run sudo pbuilder --debuild (which "builds a Debian package from the Debian source  directory.") there's no .deb file created
[17:22] <jtaylor> hashem: its in /var/cache/pbuilder/result by default
[17:23] <hashem> I have no dsc file, so I can't use sudo pbuilder build *.dsc
[17:23] <hashem> jtaylor, there is nothing in that directory
[17:24] <jtaylor> was the build successful?
[17:24] <jtaylor> you can create a dsc with debuild -S
[17:27] <hashem> Nothing in the output of pbuilder indicated it was building anything http://pastie.org/4781091 . When I ran debuild -S, it failed to start http://pastie.org/pastes/4781099/text
[17:28] <jtaylor> lets move to #ubuntu-packaging
[17:30] <hashem> ok