=== Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha === chilicuil_away is now known as chilicuil === chilicuil is now known as chilicuil_away [05:14] bdrung: $ reverse-depends -b devscripts|grep -c \* says 282 for a quantity. It seems to be a wide variety of things. === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan [07:59] good morning [08:02] good morning :) [08:07] good morning === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan [08:15] dholbach: so the adding of the ubuntu changes by submittodebian this is in fact a bug or intentional of the tool? [08:16] if you work on 1.2.3-4ubuntu2, submittodebian will include the changes of 1.2.3-4ubuntu1 as well [08:17] but if I am bzr branch debian:package name I am not working on 1.2.4.-4ubuntu2 but instead am working with upstreams source package and yet in these cases it still drops ubuntu changes into it [08:18] it might be that submittodebian always uses the last ubuntu revision to diff against and not care about bzr branches overly much [08:18] in that case just bzr diff > ~/patch [08:19] and submit this on your own (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Debian/Bugs) [08:40] ScottK: how many have "build-depends: @cdbs@" in control.in? [08:55] ScottK: see my comments in debian bug #694760 [08:55] Debian bug 694760 in devscripts "devscripts: Please mark Multi-Arch: foreign" [Wishlist,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/694760 [08:55] ScottK: the only valid reverse dependency is bzr-builddeb (using dch) [09:09] Rhonda: hi [09:11] bdrung: I didn't really look since I don't care about the reasons :) [09:12] bdrung: why argue? M-A: foreign would be harmless [09:13] cjwatson: because you actually mention two issues: multiarch and build dependencies on devscripts [09:15] bdrung: it doesn't hurt to M-A: foreign random things with no architecture-dependent interfaces, regardless of the reasons [09:16] cjwatson: agreed. i was just commenting that package build depend on devscripts, which is wrong IMO [09:17] I don't care about that - I'm just trying to unblock as many cross-build issues as I can [09:17] the more things we unblock with strategic multiarching, the more we get to find out about real per-package issues [09:18] if you require us to change cdbs, then it'll be months or years before we can find out whether those packages cross-build once their dependencies are satisfied [09:19] sure, by all means try to reduce the build-dep graph - I'd just like that to be done in parallel with this [09:19] cjwatson: they are two different issues. i will commit your fix. [09:20] thanks [09:21] cjwatson: how import is that fix? do you think we will get a unblock request granted? [09:22] I wouldn't expect the Debian release team to consider it important for wheezy [09:22] aboudreault: great news. will you submit the fix to ubuntu/debian? [09:22] cjwatson: ok, then i will commit it into our master branch (will be in the next upload to experimental) [09:23] I'd like to have it for raring [09:23] ta [09:30] cjwatson: done: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=devscripts/devscripts.git;a=commitdiff;h=ae4fb54bdeb59649bcf89103d73bcf97b0dbd81b [09:31] cjwatson: when is feature freeze? [09:34] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RaringRingtail/ReleaseSchedule [09:37] okay, still enough time to do the experimental upload [09:43] hrw: hmm? [09:44] Rhonda: packages.ubuntu.com question - why it does not list armhf/armel packages? [09:45] Because noone told me it should? [09:45] Rhonda: :) [09:46] Since which release are they to be included? [09:46] Rhonda: armel was lucid->quantal, armhf precise->raring [09:47] Hmm, I don't se a Contents-armel.gz or Contents-armhf.gz in *any* release? [09:47] http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/raring/ [09:47] lives on the ports archive [09:47] ports.ubuntu.com [09:47] Rhonda: http://ports.ubuntu.com/dists/ [09:47] http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/raring/main/ also only lists binary-amd64 and binary-i386 [09:47] Well, if it's ports and not official archs … [09:48] and here we have standard problem ;) [09:48] it's various hysterical raisins - armhf is pretty supported (moreso than powerpc, which packages does already list) [09:48] each time when I ask why arm is still on ports everyone dissapear [09:49] If I would include ports I probably should include armel, armhf, hppa, ia64, lpia, powerpc and sparc, the full suite? [09:49] ah, that was hardy. [09:49] Rhonda: armel, armhf, powerpc only - rest died already [09:49] armel already did too? [09:50] depends how much work you want to do for non-current series [09:50] Laney: in raring yes. [09:50] lucid had sparc but oneiric didn't [09:50] but I have no idea was sparc supported at all [09:51] hi infinity [09:51] So if I could get some sort of "official" statement which archs from ports should be listed … I could try to add them. [09:52] Or if I should just pull all from ports that are available for the releases, that's fine with me too [09:52] Rhonda: The latter. [09:52] Rhonda: It's more useful for people to be able to see everything. Much like packages.d.o shows debian-ports stuff, even if it's "unofficial". [09:52] Yeah, you might as well do that [09:53] Will take me a bit. We have "ports" support in the packages code on packages.debian.org, so there's not too much to do here, I just have to give it a good whack at the right spot to make it work properly. [09:53] We don't actually treat our ports as second-class citizens. [09:53] it must already be working for .u.c somehow because powerpc [09:53] If they can just be mushed together into one, that would be nice. [09:54] (On ftpmaster, it's all one archive, we only split it for mirrors) [09:54] weeeelllll [09:54] And packages.debian.org seemingly only shows ports for unstable [09:54] Laney: Where do you see powerpc listed? [09:54] Search the contents of packages -> architecture [09:55] Right, but there are no packages therein [09:55] perhaps it's listed but doesn't work - i didn't try a search :-) [09:56] packages.ubuntu.com/irssi does list powerpc only at the top as selection (together with armel, FWIW) [09:56] The links at the top seem to have not much to do with functionality of the site. :) [09:57] Ah, wait, it has "arch all" packages for hardy in its list :P [09:57] s/for hardy // [09:57] Rhonda: Just combining dists from archive and ports should DTRT. [09:57] Rhonda: Perhaps even almost magically, though I've never looked at the packages.d.o code. :/ [09:58] (Though, I guess the links to "download this package" would still need love..) [09:58] What was the hostname again, sulfur was the old one :) [09:59] jubany [09:59] * Laney sheds a tear for sulfur [09:59] jubany was quite the upgrade... [09:59] Unless it got stripped down before it was given to you. [09:59] I would have liked to help, but I never heard anything back to my canonical sysadmin application. :P [09:59] That used to launchpad's master postgresql instance. === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away === Tonio_aw is now known as Tonio_ === Tonio__ is now known as Tonio_aw === Tonio_aw is now known as Tonio__ === Tonio__ is now known as Tonio_aw === Tonio_aw is now known as Tonio__ === dholbach_ is now known as dholbach [13:42] Laney, yes, we are already committers in DebianGIS === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan === yofel_ is now known as yofel === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan === jbicha is now known as Guest25887 === Guest25887 is now known as jbicha_ [18:29] * Laney discovers that you can hover over package names in Launchpad bugs and get some useful information === glebihan_ is now known as glebihan [20:33] I am having problems with texlive-base (http://paste.ubuntu.com/1400458/), I am assuming this is a common issue? Saw a few bugs filed about this.. [20:47] Laney: it's less useful than you think, though. last upload is often not what you want to see === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan [21:26] Is this a bug? http://paste.ubuntu.com/1400458/ http://paste.ubuntu.com/1400609/ [21:28] why does this remind me of askubuntu.com? :) [21:29] robottinosino: all we can see is that the last thing executed was /etc/libpaper.d/texlive-base - that's the next thing to investigate [21:30] sounds great. :) if you can guide me, I am here to troubleshoot this :) [21:30] i honestly think this may be common to many machines, not just mine [21:32] dpkg status gives me this: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1400638/ [21:33] robottinosino: set -x in /etc/libpaper.d/texlive-base and run it [21:33] (Status: install ok half-configured) - sure, will do... [21:34] http://paste.ubuntu.com/1400645/ [21:36] I have seen more than one bug related to this (example: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=648278 from askubuntu, which you know - but there are others) [21:36] Debian bug 648278 in texlive-base "texlive-base fails to install" [Serious,Fixed] [21:37] solution does not work for me, is it possible? [21:37] doesn't look related to me [21:38] Well, sorry for steering the issue away from the right path then. I apologise. [21:38] tumbleweed: are you able to reproduce it? the (Status: install ok half-configured) I mean [21:38] robottinosino: no, can't reproduce it [21:38] that last command sholud have returned a4, don't know why it didn't [21:39] does it help to get a list of my installed packages? [21:39] do i do that with a `dpkg --get-selections` ? [21:41] doubt it. I can't see anything obvious, and don't really know much about the tex / papersize bits [21:42] None of these issues/bugs are related? https://www.google.es/search?q="dpkg-query+--status+texlive-base" [21:42] it'd be easy enough to make it install (you can exit 0 early in /etc/libpaper.d/texlive-base ), but I still don't know why it's failing === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away [21:47] very odd. :( [21:59] tumbleweed: thanks for your help anyway === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha [23:13] if a sru depends on another sru do I have to put in versioned (build-) depends? [23:24] If it will FTBFS on the older version no. If it will misbuild, yes. [23:24] b-d versioning shouldn't be about bugs or archive skew, but sometimes you have no choice. [23:24] why not for ftbs? [23:26] Because then you could just retry it [23:26] No harm done. [23:26] If it will misbuild with the older one, then add the version limit to avoid a misbuild. [23:26] so its not like e.g debian exp were it will use unstable unless its versioned? [23:27] Correct.