[07:50] <dholbach> good morning
[07:52] <Rcart> good morning daniel o/
[07:52] <dholbach> hi Rcart
[07:54] <Rcart> dholbach: btw, are there any plans for the Motu shchool in this new dev cycle?
[07:54] <dholbach> Rcart, what I know we'll have is: regular hangouts-on-air, an Ubuntu Developer Week and updated videos :)
[07:55] <dholbach> about MOTU School I don't know
[07:55] <dholbach> it'd be great if somebody organised some sessions, but I can't guarantee I'm going to be this somebody this cycle :/
[07:56] <Rcart> yeah, that'd be nice
[07:58] <Rcart> seems like MOTU School must wait to hear from  Bhavani's plans :)
[07:59] <dholbach> :)
[08:00] <Rcart> see you around then o/
[08:00] <dholbach> take care :)
[08:02] <Rcart> thank you ;)
[12:26] <ricotz> debfx, hi, could you take a look at this and maybe sponsor it? there are debian-folder diffs too -- http://people.ubuntu.com/~ricotz/virtualbox/
[12:56] <highvoltage> xnox: lol. http://photos.pixoulphotography.com/Events/UDS-Raring-Ringtail/26357384_T6rzD6#!i=2197362820&k=7RrKp49&lb=1&s=A
[12:57]  * xnox can totally see that pic comming back again and again to haunt me down
[13:10] <highvoltage> there are a bunch of memeworthy pics in that collection
[13:30] <xnox> highvoltage: it was meant to be sad viking picture. not sure how well it turned out.
[16:24] <ricotz> debfx, i am back, in case you already seen the vbox proposal
[16:30] <debfx> ricotz: where is 38-fix-dkms-ftbfs-linux-370.patch from?
[16:32] <ricotz> debfx, i looked for a fix in 4.2.4 source and this "one-liner" is enough
[16:32] <ricotz> so from me
[16:32] <ricotz> i am running it and works normal on 3.7.0
[16:34] <ricotz> debfx, builds are available here https://launchpad.net/~ricotz/+archive/unstable/+packages
[16:36] <ricotz> debfx, btw, did you looked at 4.2.4 despite the dfsg concerns?
[16:36] <ricotz> it seems "only" the fuse driver needs greater work
[16:38] <ricotz> debfx, anyway i hope you are willing to sponsor 4.1.22
[16:43] <debfx> ricotz: no, I haven't looked at 4.2
[16:44] <debfx> I'll sponsor 4.1.22 soon
[16:44] <ricotz> debfx, thanks
[16:45] <ricotz> debfx, you said 4.2.x is not dfsg conformable anymore, so i thought you have taken a look
[16:48] <debfx> ricotz: upstream informed me of the change that makes it non-free before they released 4.2
[16:48] <debfx> but I haven't built or used 4.2
[16:48] <ricotz> debfx, alright, i see
[17:51] <debfx> ricotz: I've uploaded virtualbox, thanks for preparing and testing the update
[18:05] <ricotz> debfx, thank you
[21:54] <chilicuil> debian/patches/* can modify files in /debian/* ?, I created a patch who modify /debian/rules, but then I'm getting this error: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1356603/ , the patch is very simple: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1356606/
[21:55] <jtaylor> it can, but why would you want to do that?
[21:56] <jtaylor> the error message implies it just needs refreshing
[21:57] <chilicuil> jtaylor: I've refresh it, but still now working
[21:58] <chilicuil> jtaylor: not sure, I'm following the developer.ubuntu.com/packaging guide, it say I should create a patch
[21:59] <jtaylor> chilicuil: only for the upstream files
[21:59] <jtaylor> files in debian/ are usually changed directly
[21:59] <chilicuil> jtaylor: ok, then I'll download the branch again, and will modify them directly =)
[22:00] <chilicuil> someone should point out that on the guide, I'll look it in lp to see if I can suggest it
[22:12] <cjwatson> chilicuil: I would go further than jtaylor; modifying files under debian/ with debian/patches/* is Bad and Wrong and I would always reject or rewrite any proposed change that did that
[22:12] <cjwatson> Modifying debian/rules in particular would only even work at all under certain circumstances, and is too confusing an approach to be allowed to live
[22:19] <chilicuil> cjwatson: thanks for your further explanation, I'll never modify debian/ files with patches again, I've done it directly and it generated the .dsc just fine, now testing with pbuilder, btw, what happens if a change propones the contrary of another?, for example the bug I'm trying to fix #1023329 was generated when someone in Debian fixed #633934, full changelog: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1356647/ , I'm enabling cgribex
[22:33] <jtaylor> chilicuil: so its either the one or the other? can't both be enabled?
[22:45] <chilicuil> jtaylor: yep, it's with or without =S, however it's a little bit strange, because the original change was in debian, ubuntu pull it and according to the reporter, the debian version works as expected while the ubuntu not, I'll upload the change to a ppa, and will ask him to test it