[02:52] <micahg> achiang: yes, and I'd suggest adding yourself to the sbuild group so you don't have to use sudo to build something
[03:50] <achiang> micahg: is there a way to make it not unpack the *.dsc?
[03:55] <RAOF> achiang: To make sbuild not unpack the .dsc? How would that work?
[03:55] <achiang> RAOF: use a directory that's already unpacked?
[03:56] <RAOF> I don't believe that's possible, no.
[03:57] <RAOF> It's also somewhat against the spirit of what sbuild is trying to do, anyway. The unpacked directory is not necessarily the same as what the .dsc specifies.
[03:58] <achiang> interesting
[04:02] <RAOF> I mean - there's no guarantee that you haven't made extra changes to the unpacked source directory. Not that unpackig a .dsc is non-deterministic.
[07:17] <dholbach> good morning
[07:22] <geser> good morning dholbach
[07:22] <dholbach> hey geser
[07:55] <dholbach> Laney, tumbleweed, <anybody else>: would you be interested in giving a session about working with debian/upstream? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDeveloperWeek/Timetable
[07:55] <dholbach> could anyone imagine demo'ing how to fix a few small bugs?
[07:55] <dholbach> we still have a couple of slots open
[08:22] <astraljava> Hey Daniel, hippo b-day! :)
[08:27] <dholbach> thanks astraljava
[08:32] <tumbleweed> dholbach: signed up for two sessions (I'd put them next to each other, but that won't fit my schedule)
[08:32] <tumbleweed> (also, happy happy)
[08:32] <dholbach> tumbleweed, erm... what about the schedule? anything I should change in the schedule somewhere?
[08:32] <dholbach> thanks tumbleweed :)
[08:33] <tumbleweed> I'd have taken 17 and 17:30 on thursday, but that clashes with my life, so spread them over two days
[08:33] <dholbach> ahhhh ok
[08:33] <dholbach> perfect
[08:33]  * dholbach hugs tumbleweed
[08:34] <tumbleweed> np
[09:02] <Laney> dholbach: wb!
[09:02] <dholbach> hey Laney :)
[09:03] <Laney> good hols?
[09:03] <dholbach> very much so :)
[09:03] <Laney> excellent
[09:03] <dholbach> how about yourself?
[09:04] <Laney> yes, very nice - being in Snowdonia for new years was the highlight :-)
[10:08] <bkerensa> Can someone direct me to info on how to remove patch fuzz from a package I am trying to build?
[10:09] <bkerensa> http://paste.ubuntu.com/1537120/
[10:12] <Laney> quilt refresh it in the source package
[10:13] <Laney> after verifying it applied correctly
[10:53] <dupondje> Somebody around that could help me a bit with autoconf?
[10:54] <dholbach> would anyone be available to demo a small bug fix or two? we have one 30m slot left: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDeveloperWeek/Timetable
[10:54] <dholbach> should be easy to do and much appreciated by new contributors
[11:41] <Rhonda> Hmm, what was the IRC channel of the canonical sysadmin team?
[11:41] <Laney> #canonical-sysadmin ;-)
[11:41] <Rhonda> *blinks*
[11:41] <Rhonda> That's … embarassing. Thanks. :)
[14:06] <hyperair> these days do we still use revu and require two sponsors' ack?
[14:19] <geser> hyperair: I don't think so, though reviews by other (team) members are still recommended
[14:19] <hyperair> hmm, okay.
[14:20] <hyperair> does anyone want to review diodon then?
[14:20] <hyperair> https://launchpad.net/~sao/+archive/ubuntu-testing/+files/diodon_1.0.1-0ubuntu3.dsc
[14:21] <hyperair> oh hang on, i think he's working on another version
[14:21] <hyperair> sao: o/
[14:24] <geser> a cdbs package? any specific reason to not use dh? (or doesn't dh support waf?)
[14:25] <sao> geser: dh does not have waf support as far as I know
[14:25] <geser> sao: ok, you might also check on the requirements for using waf by the archive admins
[14:26] <geser> especially if you want to include the package later also in Debian
[14:26] <sao> geser: have done so. waf source code is included in the orig tarball.
[14:26] <geser> ignore me then :)
[14:30] <sao> geser: hyperair had some comments about unnecessary libdiodon0 deps and missing Multi-Arch field. Updated version is now here: https://code.launchpad.net/~diodon-team/diodon/ubuntu-packaging
[14:30] <sao> can upload it to my ppa again if necessary
[14:36] <cjohnston> Greetings... Question on bug #1022024, I'm thinking it should be marked high and tagged as regression-update, could someone please look and comment if they agree/disagree.
[14:51] <Laney> cjohnston: How's it a regression in -updates? At least roundcube and -plugins-extra have no SRU
[14:51] <tumbleweed> urgh did someone say waf?
[14:57] <geser> tumbleweed: sao is packaging an app using waf
[14:57] <cjohnston> Laney: ok, so update is when its from an sru. the wiki just said stable release, which I figured thiswas as it is, well, released. my misunderstanding
[14:58] <Laney> cjohnston: Nah, that's what regression-release is for
[14:58] <Laney> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/RegressionTracking
[14:58] <Laney> anyway that is worth fixing so I'll look at your patch now
[14:59] <cjohnston> ok
[14:59] <cjohnston> so is it  -release or no?
[14:59] <cjohnston> ty
[15:08] <Laney> bdrung: is sponsor-patch supposed to work out the target release?
[15:08] <bdrung> Laney: yes
[15:09] <Laney> hmm
[15:09] <Laney> could it be that it requires '-proposed'?
[15:09] <bdrung> for stable releases, yes
[15:09] <Laney> I see
[15:10] <Laney> that's not necessary any more
[15:10] <Laney> also it just tried to download the raring package; should have errored out instead or at least warned?
[15:11] <bdrung> it determines the target from the bug series
[15:11] <bdrung> for SRUs, there should be a open bug against the stable series
[15:11] <Laney> ah, doesn't look at the changelog
[15:13] <Laney> now I see the prompt
[15:18] <Laney> bah
[15:19] <Laney> it wasn't signed, so dput failed, so sponsor-patch failed and deleted its working files
[15:19] <bdrung> normally sponsor-patch ask if you want to fix an failure manually instead of exiting
[15:20] <Laney> Error: upload of … failed
[15:20] <Laney> then it exited
[15:20] <bdrung> file a bug
[15:20] <Laney> already doing
[15:21] <Laney> cjohnston: I uploaded it but you'll need to fill in the SRU information in the bug description before it gets accepted
[15:21] <Laney> thanks for the fix
[16:46] <TheLordOfTime> if i created a patch for https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/oidentd/+bug/1094773 that changes its /etc/init.d/ file to add the -l 10 option, would that be acceptable for SRU?  I'm asking here because its a Universe package.
[17:10] <dholbach> all right, who would like to demo fixing a bug in a 30m session at UDW? 31st Jan, 18:30 is the last slot we've got to fill: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDeveloperWeek/Timetable :)
[17:12] <TheLordOfTime> dholbach, can you answer a universe bug question regarding acceptable patching?
[17:12] <TheLordOfTime> unless i missed a response to my prior question.
[17:16] <dholbach> TheLordOfTime, there should be no difference between main and universe in the criteria for SRUs as far as I can see
[17:16] <TheLordOfTime> dholbach, my question was whether changing the default /etc/init.d/ file is a valid solution as a SRU/patch.
[17:17] <TheLordOfTime> because in one sense its a workaround without removing the problem, and in another sense it is the easiest solution to the problem.
[17:25] <dholbach> TheLordOfTime, I don't know - somebody in the server team might know
[17:25] <dholbach> try #ubuntu-server maybe?
[17:25] <TheLordOfTime> yeah well i've got higher-priority bugs, such as an nginx security bug i'm watching closely
[17:25] <TheLordOfTime> which reminds me, i should set that oidentd bug as 'low'...
[17:32] <cjohnston> Laney: could you please look at it again and let me know if that works
[17:33] <Laney> looks good, thanks
[17:34] <cjohnston> Laney: what else do I need to do with it? From the wiki page it looks like I'm done
[17:35] <Laney> yep, a magical SRU team elf should come along and process it at some point soon
[17:36] <cjohnston> an elf.. cool
[17:36] <cjohnston> lol
[17:36] <cjohnston> thanks for your help Laney
[19:49] <achiang> can i find a sponsor for https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/remmina/+bug/1093511 ? it's sat around for a few weeks now...
[22:37] <jtaylor> so many python m-a build failures ...
[22:37] <jtaylor> can someone remind me what we need this for again?
[22:39] <jtaylor> is this also intended for debian?
[22:43] <jtaylor> hm it probably already is, nice