[07:47] <dholbach> good morning
[07:53] <geser> good morning
[11:39] <trijntje> Hi all, what is the proper way to get a package into ubuntu? (Ubuntu specific, not for debian)
[11:53] <xnox> trijntje: what is it?
[11:56] <trijntje> xnox: its a package with localised default settings, used to build localised iso's for dutch
[11:56] <trijntje> a similar package for italian is already present: ubuntu-defaults-it
[12:15] <xnox> trijntje: push a branch to launchpad. file a bug against ubuntu asking for sponsorship.
[12:15] <xnox> subscribe ubuntu-sponsors.
[12:17] <trijntje> xnox: Ill do that, thanks!
[12:31] <trijntje> xnox: how can I file a bug against ubuntu? If I click on 'report a bug' for the ubuntu project it forwards me to a wiki page
[12:32] <Laney> read the page, it tells you how
[12:32] <TheLordOfTime> trijntje:  ubuntu-bug [package]
[12:32] <TheLordOfTime> and yes, read that page.
[12:32] <xnox> TheLordOfTime: there is no package yet
[12:32] <TheLordOfTime> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug  then
[12:33] <xnox> TheLordOfTime: if you are not in bugcontrol that will redirect you to the wiki page ;-)
[12:33] <trijntje> TheLordOfTime: if I click that link I end up on the wiki
[12:33] <TheLordOfTime> xnox:  ah.
[12:33] <TheLordOfTime> xnox:  forgot about that one :P
[12:34] <TheLordOfTime> trijntje:  so read the wiki then
[12:34] <TheLordOfTime> it explains how to file a bug
[12:37] <trijntje> it does a pretty bad job of explaining how to file a bug requesting packaging of a program
[12:37] <TheLordOfTime> those're special bugs arent they?
[12:38] <trijntje> I've been able to file a bug against ubuntu itself using this link, but it's not exactly easy to find
[12:38] <trijntje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug/?no-redirect
[12:38] <Laney> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs#Filing_bugs_at_Launchpad.net links to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/NewPackages#Requesting%20a%20new%20package%20for%20Ubuntu
[12:38] <TheLordOfTime> did you try using the link they give?
[12:38] <TheLordOfTime> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug?no-redirect&field.tag=needs-packaging
[12:39] <TheLordOfTime> well, different link, but..
[12:41] <TheLordOfTime> the link i just gave comes from the page that Laney mentioned: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/NewPackages
[12:45] <trijntje> Thanks, I just got anoyed because I kept getting redirected to the wiki while I just wanted to file a bug against ubuntu itself
[12:45] <TheLordOfTime> you should read what it says on the wiki then
[12:46] <Laney> never mind, it's done now
[12:46]  * TheLordOfTime returns to fixing his webserver
[12:53] <trijntje> TheLordOfTime: or you could just have pointed me in the right direction. I asked a simple question, you repeatedly provided a wrong answer, and keep telling me to read a 15+ page wiki page to find 1 link, which links to another page, which has the answer i'm looking for
[18:33] <bobweaver> Hello I want to make diff for bug that I just filed
[18:33] <bobweaver> !bug 1077115
[18:34] <bobweaver> what is diff command to get difference in package. or should I just re-package the hole thing ?
[18:34] <bobweaver> whole *
[18:36] <bobweaver> really weired debian/control already has the dependency's of  python-vte, python-gtkspell  in it but when using it I had to install
[18:36] <bobweaver> becuase they where not installed Oo
[18:37] <JontheEchidna> that's because they are in the "Suggests" field, not the "Depends" field
[18:38] <bobweaver> ahh correct I should move to Depends: ?
[18:38] <micahg> bobweaver: no
[18:38] <bobweaver> and use wrap-and-sort as it is hard to read as shown above
[18:38] <micahg> reportbug is mainly used as a command line tool
[18:39] <bobweaver> ahh I see maybe make a metapackage called reportbug-gtk ?
[18:39] <bobweaver> if there is not one that is
[18:39] <micahg> bobweaver: that's a good idea, maybe discuss with the Debian maintainer
[18:39] <bobweaver> will do micahg
[18:40] <bobweaver> thanks all =)
[18:41] <bobweaver> or change code to use session installer to install the dependency's of the gtk part I am off to find maintainer thanks again
[18:45] <c_korn> hello, can someone please explain to me what the problem is here when packaging "the powder toy"? I never saw such an error before: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=0VnBac3Z (building in a schroot of precise/i386)
[18:50] <bobweaver> Is that a naming error ?  for lib ?
[18:51] <micahg> no, they're both symlinks to the actual binary
[18:53] <bobweaver> name of app is just powder ? I can not find anything called "the powder toy"
[18:54] <c_korn> it is precompiled. you can find it here: http://powdertoy.co.uk/
[19:04] <bobweaver> It compiled and is there running for me
[19:04] <bobweaver> are you sure that you added build-deps ?
[19:04] <bobweaver> from http://powdertoy.co.uk/Wiki/W/Compiling_for_Linux.html
[19:23] <obounaim> trying to build a source package for virtualbox using "bzr bd -- -S" fails "dpkg-source: info: building virtualbox using existing ./virtualbox_4.1.18-dfsg.orig.tar.xz
[19:23] <obounaim> unxz: (stdin): Unexpected end of input"
[19:28] <obounaim> any ideas?
[19:31] <micahg> bad file?
[19:36] <c_korn> bobweaver: I used the compiled binary. maybe I should compile it from source
[19:37] <bobweaver> c_korn,  are you trying to build package ? If so then Yeah I would say that you are going to have to install from source. (But I am new at all this get others options =) )
[19:44] <mfisch> Laney: I updated bug #1065637, I fixed the distroseries and deleted the patches
[19:51] <cjwatson> mfisch: you know that we already switched to 4.x for almost everything in 12.10, right?  seems odd to be putting much work into tiff3 at this point
[19:52] <mfisch> cjwatson: no, I didn't know that, if that's the case, then we can ignore tiff3
[19:52] <cjwatson> it's still there for the odd legacy thing, but probably best to do most ongoing maintenance if any in Debian
[19:53] <cjwatson> I think at least some of the cves were backported
[19:53] <micahg> there are still 2 handfuls of reverse dependencies on tiff3
[19:53] <micahg> or maybe 3 even
[19:53] <cjwatson> yeah, those were accidentally missed
[19:53] <cjwatson> only two packages red on the transition tracker though
[19:54] <cjwatson> I think there might have been one reverted due to regression, I forget
[19:54] <mfisch> the new upstream fixes incorporates 3 of the CVEs
[19:54] <mfisch> only 1 left ATM