[06:00] <tjaalton> infinity: lo and behold, I got the gpu hung on my t420s after using it for an hour :)
[06:05] <RAOF> VT-d claims another victim?
[06:06] <tjaalton> not sure
[06:07] <tjaalton> also, xorg resumed after a while, so it wasn't a fatal hang
[06:08] <tjaalton> i mean, not sure if I have vt-d on or not
[06:09] <tjaalton> so, apport doesn't open the lp bug submission page anymore?
[06:10] <tjaalton> no wonder we only have a handful of xorg bugs on raring :)
[09:31] <sil2100> Hello!
[09:31] <sil2100> Is there anyone here who could sponsor a precise unity-2d release for me?
[09:32] <sil2100> It's a re-release of a rejected one, with the offending commit removed
[09:32] <sil2100> Since this version of unity-2d is already waiting for release over 5 months
[09:55] <xnox> sil2100: I don't see unity-2d in http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/sponsoring/ . Where is the source package? =)
[10:10] <sil2100> xnox: in lp:unity-2d ;)
[10:10] <xnox> ah =)
[10:11] <sil2100> xnox: ah, sponsoring bug!
[10:11] <sil2100> There was one for the rejected version, maybe I could re-use that one ;p
[10:12] <sil2100> https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity-2d/+bug/1060262 <- you think I could simply change it back to 'Fix Committed' in Precise?
[12:12] <zykes-> what's the stuff in Contents-<arch>.gz made of ?
[12:13] <cjwatson> it's apt-ftparchive's own format
[12:14] <zykes-> is it required for repositories?
[12:20] <cjwatson> zykes-: no
[12:20] <zykes-> cjwatson: is there a thing that can generate it besides apt-ftparchive ?
[12:20] <zykes-> like python-debian?
[12:21] <cjwatson> Not AFAIK
[12:24] <cjwatson> There are a few parsers around but I don't think any of them are in library form: I can think of apt-file, auto-apt, and http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=webwml/packages.git
[12:35] <zykes-> cjwatson: i'm creating a integration for .deb for Pulp, how does one generate the content stuff ?
[12:35] <cjwatson> apt-ftparchive contents
[12:36] <zykes-> :q
[12:36] <cjwatson> Or it's not that complex, if you have some different needs just do it by hand
[12:36] <menace> reprepro or dpkg-scanpackages perhaps? :)
[12:36] <zykes-> but what info does it use ?
[12:36] <zykes-> reprepo doesn't do it menace ..
[12:36] <cjwatson> dpkg -c
[12:36] <cjwatson> basically.  Please read the source :)
[12:36] <cjwatson> apt/ftparchive/contents.cc
[12:41] <cjwatson> I think it was originally intended just for human consumption / casual grepping and only later retconned into something tools might want to parse properly
[12:42] <cjwatson> so it's not the tidiest of formats
[12:43] <zykes-> darn :O
[13:35] <tjaalton> someone rejected my sssd upload to precise-proposed last friday, without leaving any note on the bugs it was supposed to fix
[13:49] <geser> does somebody know if the "python-config" script is official? can it be used to detect Python configure flags in upstream configure scripts?
[13:51] <jtaylor> why would you need those?
[13:51] <geser> fixing the vim FTBFS in raring
[13:51] <xnox> geser: yes.
[13:52] <geser> vim does some own detection of the Python config dir, include directories and fails now that libpython-dev is multi-arched
[13:52] <jtaylor> that can be done without python-config
[13:52] <jtaylor> get_python_inc(plat_specific=True)
[13:52] <jtaylor> sys.
[13:52] <jtaylor> which is definetely official since 2.4
[13:53] <xnox> python-config, pkg-config, or query plat_specific=True are the 3 ways to get include paths you want.
[13:53] <doko> geser: it's upstream, except for the --configdir option in 2.7
[14:26] <cody-somerville> vanhoof: Happy Birthday! :)
[15:03] <rickspencer3> infinity, do you have a link to the archive probs page for raring?
[15:20] <geser> SpamapS: if you want to review/sponsor bug #1095320 it will fix the vim FTBFS from your last upload
[15:33] <cjwatson> rickspencer3: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/testing/raring_probs.html - that one?
[15:35] <rickspencer3> hey cjwatson that's the one!
[15:35] <rickspencer3> thanks
[15:35] <rickspencer3> and always nice to see beer there :)
[15:36] <rickspencer3> cjwatson, I kind of pair that page with this one:
[15:36] <rickspencer3> http://reports.qa.ubuntu.com/smoke/raring/
[15:36] <rickspencer3> to get a sense of how daily quality is going
[15:36] <rickspencer3> (fwiw)
[15:37]  * cjwatson nods
[16:29] <SpamapS> geser: ACK, looking now
[16:44] <doko> http://wiki.debian.org/Python/MultiArch
[16:46] <micahg> thanks, that's what I was looking for
[16:47] <micahg> doko: are there usertags associated with python multiarch bugs?
[16:50] <doko> micahg, no, not yet. but I would use debian-python@ and multiarch
[16:50] <doko> I think we used that for 3.3
[16:52] <micahg> ok, thanks
[17:27] <hallyn> SpamapS: infinity: could someone pls accept the precise-proposed unapproved upload of qemu-kvm 1.0+noroms-0ubuntu14.6 ?  (sorry to bug you, but im not sure now who it is appropriate to ping)
[17:33] <infinity> hallyn: Looking.
[17:41] <hallyn> (back in awhile)
[17:45] <infinity> hallyn: Accepted (and built).
[17:52] <hallyn> infinity: thanks!  now to finally verify that beast
[18:06] <infinity> geser: Thanks for the vim/python fixes.  Did you forward those to Debian as well?
[18:15] <geser> infinity: I mailed my patch for review to vim's DD
[18:17] <infinity> geser: Yay, thanks.
[18:32] <gotwig> Can I distribute my scope and lenses that I've develop for Ubuntu, for Ubuntu for phones?
[19:28] <RzR> hi
[19:29] <RzR> is there a hidden #ubuntu-mobile place somewhere ?
[19:30] <Pici> If you're looking for somewhere to talk about the announcement, #ubuntu-discuss is the place.
[19:32] <RzR> Pici, thx let's head over there
[19:32] <RzR> btw i already run ubuntu on my phone :)
[20:16] <adam_g> if a package is accepted into, say, quantal-proposed and no branch exists at lp:ubuntu/quantal-proposed/$pkg, how does one get created?
[20:18] <dobey> adam_g: the branch importer magic scripts do it
[20:21] <adam_g> dobey: any common reasons why that would not happen? still waiting on a couple of branches to show up for stuff that was accepted last week
[20:23] <cjwatson> the branch import scripts can be a bit wobbly - TBH I find it best to ignore them for SRUs as the workflow doesn't work all that well there
[20:28] <dobey> cjwatson: seems to work fine for me; at least for raring it will be easier to deal with since everything already has a -proposed
[20:34] <cjwatson> dobey: as a sponsor it's much more of a pain than for dev
[20:34] <dobey> cjwatson: more of a pain if people propose branches, rather than uploading with dput?
[20:34] <sivang> hi all
[20:34] <cjwatson> are they actually working properly for raring?  I'd seen some rumours of brokenness but haven't really looked
[20:35] <cjwatson> dobey: rather than attaching patches
[20:35] <sivang> is ubntu superphone open source and accepting contributors just like other ubuntu projects?
[20:35] <cjwatson> because then I don't have to faff around with faking the branch status as merged
[20:35] <sivang> I have some deb packaging experience from ancient times..;)
[20:36] <dobey> oh, the middleman case. i suppose that's frustrating no matter what though :)
[20:36]  * sivang hi's some familiar faces, g'evning cjwatson :)
[22:17] <jhansonxi> Does apt assume that mirror:// is http?  Is it possible for mirror:// to be a local file (not require a web server)?
[22:18] <sarnold> jhansonxi: there's some kind of funky cd-rom-based apt lines, those may be more amenable to local file storage (this is a wild guess)
[22:19] <jhansonxi> sarnold: I'm specifically referring to automatic mirror fail-over: http://mvogt.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/the-apt-mirror-method/
[22:20] <jhansonxi> I'm trying to come up with a way to deal with potential connectivity problems with the server the mirror list is located on.
[22:21] <jhansonxi> Also for repos that don't have a mirror list (like getdeb.net which has been down for a month).
[22:21] <sarnold> jhansonxi: oh, that's more clever than I expected. :)
[22:57] <hallyn> slangasek: adam_g is running into bug 1092715.  i'm tempted to submit an emergency revert for q and r to go back to manually fixing up the /dev/kvm perms
[22:57] <hallyn> marked it confirmed based on adam_g's sighting
[22:58] <slangasek> hallyn: why does it need an emergency revert?  I thought the previous version of the package didn't work either?
[22:58] <slangasek> (particularly the quantal one)
[22:58] <hallyn> the original version didn't.  the previous version did (which manually did setfacl)
[22:59] <slangasek> I don't believe there was a previous SRUed version
[22:59] <hallyn> previous version pushed to -proposed (which you rejected) that is :0
[22:59] <hallyn> right
[22:59] <slangasek> right, so there's no need for an "emergency revert" AFAICS
[22:59] <hallyn> cool :)
[23:00] <slangasek> however, if you want to submit a (calm, non-emergency :) SRU that does the fix-up by hand like you originally proposed, I think that's acceptable here while we figure out what's wrong with udevadm.
[23:01] <hallyn> adam_g: ^ is that needed for you?  SRu's are slow enough I'd just as soon spend my time looking into the udevamd bug...
[23:26] <adam_g> hallyn: yea. i'm trying to get verification done for some other SRUs that are consumers of qemu. i can work around it in the meantime, assuming thats kosher wrt verification process.
[23:30] <slangasek> adam_g: will those consumers break at install time without the qemu fix, or will they just have the same problem that qemu itself does (have to reboot or manually apply acl to use it)?
[23:34] <adam_g> slangasek: the latter
[23:52] <slangasek> adam_g: in that case I think it's fine to apply whatever workaround is needed during the verification