[06:26] <dholbach> good morning
[06:43] <obounaim> does Ubuntu sync "connman" form Debian I have some conflicts when merging from Debian?
[07:03] <obounaim> How to resolve bzr conflicts when merging from Debian please?
[09:21] <cjwatson> Laney: Did you get anywhere with debugging the haskell-cmdargs segfault on armhf?
[09:21] <Laney> oh, no, I kept putting it off :(
[09:22] <Laney> I managed to reproduce it, but not even consistently
[09:22] <Laney> some of (dpkg-buildpackage, runhaskell Setup.lhs ..., cabal install) worked and some didn't
[09:25] <Laney> cjwatson: At this point, given that I fail to get round to doing it, if you're inclined you could just submit what we've got upstream and promise that we'll try to reduce it down if they need it
[09:25] <cjwatson> If it's unreproducible we could just throw it at the buildd until it works? :-)
[09:26] <Laney> it always fails on the buildd
[09:26] <cjwatson> Damn
[09:26] <Laney> well, from what i've seen anyway
[09:26] <Laney> give it back if you want, won't hurt
[09:27] <cjwatson> Trying for laughs
[09:27] <Laney> you could munge d/rules to increase verbosity for a potentially more useful bug report
[09:27] <xnox> I did build haskell-cmdargs and it failed consistently in the sbuild for me =/
[09:28] <Laney> ok, maybe I tried to do incremental builds to narrow it down and it started succeeding or something
[09:28] <Laney> sorry, I've not been very useful on this
[09:28]  * Laney should ask for some +1 time
[09:30] <cjwatson> It's certainly sitting in   /usr/lib/ghc/lib/ghc -B/usr/lib/ghc --make -o dist-ghc/build/cmdargs/cmdargs -hide-all-packages -fbuilding-cabal-package -no-user-package-conf -package-conf dist-ghc/package.conf.inplace -i -idist-ghc/build/cmdargs/cmdargs-tmp -i. -idist-ghc/build/autogen -Idist-ghc/build/autogen -Idist-ghc/build/cmdargs/cmdargs-tmp -optP-include -optPdist-ghc/build/autogen/cabal_macros.h -odir ...
[09:30] <cjwatson> ... dist-ghc/build/cmdargs/cmdargs-tmp -hidir dist-ghc/build/cmdargs/cmdargs-tmp -stubdir dist-ghc/build/cmdargs/cmdargs-tmp -package-id base-4.5.1.0-8c67d52d15d6bd73226a17adad83c69d -package-id filepath-1.3.0.0-48f46361f0c76985974f14cae1eb2b26 -package-id process-1.1.0.1-fc1d9561f7585daae5100d436b332a54 -package-id template-haskell-2.7.0.0-0bf2a4803893b6943758a73d07a64ced -package-id ...
[09:30] <cjwatson> ... transformers-0.3.0.0-8adc8af166944d6a12d0b3cf842bba5f -O -XHaskell98 ./Main.hs   for a long time
[09:30] <cjwatson> (scheat)
[09:58] <cjwatson> Yeah, same failure on ishigaq
[09:59] <cjwatson> Laney: I'm not sure I have enough haskell context to know what to send upstream, even ...
[09:59] <Laney> cjwatson: OK, never mind, leave it with me
[10:00] <cjwatson> OK, thanks :-/
[10:01] <Laney> no worries, thanks for re-raising
[12:09] <geser> jtaylor: do you have time to fix the qtemu FTBFS from the archive rebuild? it looks like a missing "#include <unistd.h>"
[16:37] <ESphynx2> Hey guys... How do we get a package moved to the proper section? :) http://packages.ubuntu.com/source/quantal/misc/ecere-sdk  should be in devel, I wondered how it ended up in Misc? The control file said devel and in Debian it's in http://packages.debian.org/experimental/devel/
[16:39] <ESphynx2> Oh no it's also in misc for the Source package in debian :|
[16:40] <geser> in Debian the archive admins may override the section (which they apparently did), but Ubuntu uses the info from the control file
[16:40] <ESphynx2> geser: Control file says https://github.com/ecere/sdk/blob/ppa/debian/debian/control
[16:40] <ESphynx2> Section: devel
[16:41] <ESphynx2> The binary packages are in the proper section... just the source that's in misc :|
[16:44] <geser> Rhonda: ^^ can you help ESphynx2?
[16:46] <jtaylor> geser: looking
[16:46] <ESphynx2> thanks guys
[16:51] <jtaylor> meh more issues than just unistd ._.
[16:52] <ESphynx2> unistd? :|
[16:53] <geser> ESphynx2: not you, different issue
[16:53] <ESphynx2> oh :)
[16:54] <jtaylor> mh #define error(...) before system file includes, the question is now, intentional or bug ._.
[17:03] <obounaim> What the best thing someone can do now to help with Ubuntu 12.10 release?
[17:07] <jtaylor> obounaim: testing is always good
[17:08] <jtaylor> obounaim: you could also to go over this list and check if there is something worth syncing: http://qa.ubuntuwire.org/multidistrotools/universe.html#outdatedinB
[17:08] <jtaylor> speaking of it I should start getting to work on my action item ._.
[17:09] <jtaylor> obounaim: if you know how, there also many build failures to fix: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/
[17:10] <geser> or from the archive test rebuild: http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~wgrant/rebuild-ftbfs-test/test-rebuild-20120922-quantal.html
[17:12] <obounaim> thanks to all of you
[17:24] <cjwatson> ESphynx2: sections aren't really that important or well-maintained
[17:26] <ESphynx2> cjwatson: I was just curious why the source section didn't get picked up properly :|
[17:27] <ESphynx2> They help when you're looking for a package though...
[17:28] <cjwatson> source sections even less well-maintained in general :-)
[17:28] <cjwatson> The upstream control file is irrelevant - it's the one in the Debian source package that matters
[17:29] <cjwatson> Anyway, I've overridden the source section to devel for you now
[17:30] <ESphynx2> cjwatson: Ah thanks, but yeah the Debian source package control file is the one I was referring to...
[17:30] <cjwatson> It'll show up properly in the Ubuntu archive after the next publisher run
[17:31] <ESphynx2> thanks cjwatson
[17:32] <ESphynx2> http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/e/ecere-sdk/ecere-sdk_0.44.01-1.debian.tar.gz -- that does say Section: devel in there
[17:32] <ESphynx2> just wondering how it all happened :P
[17:32] <cjwatson> Don't know then
[17:32] <cjwatson> Suppose it could be a Launchpad bug
[17:33] <ESphynx2> cjwatson: But even on Debian it also shows up under misc for Sources
[17:33] <ESphynx2> i.e. http://packages.debian.org/source/experimental/misc/ecere-sdk
[17:33] <cjwatson> That suggests then that the Debian ftpmasters overrode it to misc
[17:33] <cjwatson> Which probably explains why https://launchpad.net/debian/+source/ecere-sdk/0.44.01-1 shows misc too
[17:33] <cjwatson> So probably not an LP bug
[17:34] <cjwatson> Not something I care enough about to investigate further really :)
[17:34] <ESphynx2> weird
[17:34] <ESphynx2> Well, at least it's gonna be in the right Ubuntu section :P So thanks :)
[17:35] <ESphynx2> I'll bring it up with the Debian guys :P
[17:39] <DktrKranz> ESphynx2, cjwatson: recent changes to dak set source overrides as misc/extra
[17:40] <DktrKranz> by default
[17:42] <DktrKranz> this is to address debian #626394
[17:43] <cjwatson> Seems conceptually unrelated though I can see why they happened together
[17:43] <cjwatson> Also slightly unfortunate if people really are attempting to browse by section in the packages.* web interfaces
[17:45] <DktrKranz> ACK
[17:45] <DktrKranz> sections could be removed for good in the future
[17:46] <DktrKranz> but I don't think that will happen so soon
[18:19] <ESphynx2> All source packages become misc ?
[18:51] <jtaylor> whats up with pwlib, huge installation numbers in popcon but almost zero vote
[18:52] <jtaylor> did something in the past pull that thing in?
[18:52] <jtaylor> a rverse-depends can check multiple series nice
[20:03] <Rhonda> ESphynx2: When uploading a package to Debian with an "override mismatch" one gets a mail that explains what to do.  I think it's a mail to the ftpmasters, or a bugreport against ftp.debian.org, but it's written in the mail after the upload …
[20:08] <ESphynx2> Rhonda: I didn't notice any such mail or 'override mismatch' ? :|
[20:09] <Rhonda> Well, if the control file says different than the pool, there *is* some override mismatch. :)
[20:09] <Rhonda> The override file is where the actual information is taken from into which section to put a package.
[20:10] <Rhonda> And it's controlled by the ftpmasters.
[20:12] <cjwatson> ESphynx2: You'd only have received it if you're the Debian maintainer of the package.
[20:12] <cjwatson> Which is not clear to me from the above.
[20:19] <ESphynx2> cjwatson: I am...
[20:19] <cjwatson> Then I don't know.
[20:20] <ESphynx2> where is that damn override file :P
[20:20] <ESphynx2> It's just on the FTP? (i.e. not inside any of the downloadable tarballs?)
[20:21] <cjwatson> /indices/ in the archive
[20:21] <cjwatson> Though that's a reflection of database state
[20:22] <ESphynx2> hmm no 'experimental' there?
[20:23] <ESphynx2> In the override.sid.main, there is ecere-sdk	optional	devel	 in there ... but it's just the source package that's wrongly placed
[20:26] <cjwatson> I think you want to be asking on a Debian channel at this point, really.  (No, I don't have a specific suggestion.)
[20:29] <ESphynx2> right. thanks guys.
[22:27] <jtaylor> whats the best way to do version comparison in a shell
[22:27] <jtaylor> so that 2.10 > 2.9
[22:29] <jtaylor> without dpkg --compare version so its upstream suitable
[22:55] <mfisch> can someone confirm that the upstream link for this package looks incorrect before I break it?  https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/owncloud
[23:02] <jtaylor> yes that looks wrong
[23:03] <mfisch> jtaylor: thanks, I'll break the link
[23:12] <jtaylor> made some hack with cut and lots of if's
[23:12] <jtaylor> this version comparison business should have been sorted out decades ago ._.