[00:35] infinity: d-i pushed to -updates === doko__ is now known as doko [02:40] cjwatson, infinity: online? [02:51] hm, promoted libcloog-ppl1 for now === henrix_ is now known as henrix === zequence_ is now known as zequence === yofel_ is now known as yofel === mmrazik is now known as mmrazik|lunch === mmrazik|lunch is now known as mmrazik [11:27] there is a brcm-patchram-plus in raring source NEW, it makes (or is supposed to make) BT work on the nexus7, would be great if that could be reviewed soon [11:48] ogra_, seems ok, but shouldn't the source contain the license's text? e.g have a COPYING with the apache license? === mmrazik is now known as mmrazik|afk [11:52] seb128, debian/copyright points to "/usr/share/common-licenses/Apache-2.0" [11:52] i think thats enough, iirc we only need to ship the full license if there is nothing in /usr/share/common-licenses/ === mmrazik|afk is now known as mmrazik [12:20] cjwatson, (or anyone else familiar with sysvinit ) .... i'd like a quick glance over http://paste.ubuntu.com/1589449/ before i upload [12:22] (it is tested and works on the nx7) [12:22] what if /sys/module/cpu_tegra3 doesn't exist? [12:22] this script's architecture-independent [12:23] so i should add tests for every line ? [12:23] * ogra_ does so [12:24] hmpf, that gets bulky [12:24] I think it's OK to assume that the interactive governor entries exist [12:24] I don't know about cpuidle [12:25] "if [ -d /sys/module/cpu_tegra3 ]; then ...; fi" around the two cpu_tegra3 entries seems to make sense to me? [12:25] yup [12:25] You could sort the entries while you're at it [12:27] cjwatson, brcm-patchram-plus in NEW is a simple debian-native style package with one .c file under apache license ... does the source needs to contain the apache license text? [12:28] debian/copyright points to "/usr/share/common-licenses/Apache-2.0" ... [12:28] ogra_, well, my understanding (and what I've applied to far for NEWing) is that the license needs to be distributed with the source [12:29] right, mine always was that this only applies to licenses not in /usr/share/common-licenses [12:29] If it's in common-licenses, and the situation is clear, it's normally fine for it to be referenced in debian/copyright [12:30] We don't need to police upstream's licence distribution practices; we only need to ensure that we're meeting our obligations ourselves [12:30] ogra_, I got uploaded rejected in Debian because the LGPL was not included in the upstream tarball IIRC (and it's in common-licenses) [12:30] And distribution in common-licenses is enough [12:30] uploads* [12:30] seb128: source upstream tarball typically should have a full license text, debian binary packages can simply have a pointer to /usr/share/common-licenses. [12:31] well, anyway, I just wanted to check [12:31] xnox: it is not our job to police the contents of upstream tarballs [12:31] ogra_, NEWed [12:31] cjwatson, thanks [12:31] seb128, well, debian ... [12:31] :) [12:31] seb128: I can't speak for every Debian ftp-master, but that doesn't fall under the various things in REJECT-FAQ [12:31] cjwatson, maybe I remember wrongly or maybe some ftpmaster are picky about that ... anyway, thanks for the clarification! [12:32] seb128: There has to be either an indication in the upstream tarball of the licence that the copyright holder(s) intended, or a description of how we figured out what the licence was [12:32] ("License II" in REJECT-FAQ) [12:33] Of course, it might still be a good idea to contact upstream and get them to spell out the licensing more clearly in their tarball [12:33] I just don't think it's cause for rejection [12:35] noted, thanks [12:37] hmm, how do i pull that into the image now [12:37] i guess a dep from ubuntu-defaults-nexus7 will do [12:40] ogra_, binNEWed as well [12:43] cjwatson, http://paste.ubuntu.com/1589513/ [12:50] ogra_: LGTM [12:50] great, uploading [13:08] I've done a clean install of 12.10, then ran dist-upgrade and rebooted. after that I enabled fglrx and rebooted again, noticing that unity didn't run because the fglrx module wasn't built [13:08] the reason for that was that while linux-headers-generic got upgraded, it didn't pull the new headers package [13:09] so I did 'apt-get --fix-policy install', which did pull the new headers and a bunch of others, like ecryptfs-utils [13:10] also, linux-generic isn't installed on the system, although dpkg.log shows it being installed during image build [13:10] same for the ecryptfs stuff [13:14] so the question is, is it normal? [13:28] tjaalton: there's a known bug in the quantal installer that some of the kernel metapackages were mistakenly uninstalled - bug 1070427 [13:28] Launchpad bug 1070427 in ubiquity (Ubuntu Quantal) "Ubiquity removes kernel headers, fails to build nonfree drivers" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1070427 [13:29] We'll probably have to quirk it in upgrades from quantal, or something [13:29] cjwatson: oh.. [13:29] thanks [13:29] apw: ^ [13:30] tjaalton, ahhh erp, ok that would expalin things === smartboyhw_ is now known as smartboyhw === henrix is now known as henrix_ === henrix_ is now known as henrix [19:39] infinity, so I went to verify this bug -- i don't see a package in -proposed for it. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/empathy/+bug/1018504 [19:39] Ubuntu bug 1018504 in empathy (Fedora) "Empathy doesn't display buddy list" [Undecided,New] [19:41] som the changelog doesn't show that it went in.. however the fix was backported from upstream: http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/e/empathy/empathy_3.4.2.3-0ubuntu1/changelog [19:41] d'oh.. wrong changelog [19:45] hmm.. ok, so telepathy-glib0 never saw an update -- ahh, that's the upgrade [20:15] balloons: It wasn't empathy, it was telepathy. The bug's mistargeted. [20:15] infinity, yes I think it's sorted now [20:32] balloons: Ugh, and if people had just done the right bug paperwork, I wouldn't have had to bug you. There was another bug (without a precise task) that someone has verified months ago. Grr. [20:32] it's ok.. like I said, I thought it had gotten in and everything was taken care of [20:32] I actually looked at that last year again in Nov when it was pinged again [20:33] anyways.. let me know if I can do anything else to help [20:33] balloons: I'm releasing it now, so not much more you can do for that bug. :P [20:33] hehe [20:33] good [20:34] balloons: But we're driving toward 12.04.2, if you want to get together hordes of testers to throw at dailies. [20:34] balloons: Between the new kernel/X enablement stacks and SecureBoot, there's something there to break for everyone. [20:34] I know.. I was thinking about asking.. it's only going to be the dailies then -- no milestone at all? [20:35] I believe slangesk answered me on it a few weeks ago when I asked saying so [20:36] 12.04.2 will be the milestone [20:36] I posted a note to ubuntu-devel-announce a few days ago with the rough schedule for candidate images and such [20:37] balloons: Yeah, the milestone will appear soon enough. But early testing never hurts. Especially in the face of massive changes that we may need last-minute fixes for. [20:37] cjwatson, ahh, ok good [20:37] that's saner, I missed your annouce then [20:37] * balloons goes to look === henrix is now known as henrix_ [21:28] Dear Soyuz, the source isn't NEW when the package is already in -updates, kthx. [22:09] infinity: Ancestry again :-/ [22:10] cjwatson: Yeahp. And well-known. [22:11] cjwatson: Just annoys me occasionally. :) [22:11] Yeah [22:15] anyone know where arges hangs out? [22:15] Dear Soyuz. Oh. Wait. We've had this conversation. [22:16] antarus: #ubuntu-kernel is a fair bet. [22:16] do you know what TZ he is in? [22:17] Something vaguely Americanish. [22:17] He's in Austin. [22:18] ahh yes [22:28] SpamapS: ping [22:45] antarus: pong, sup? [22:45] SpamapS: hi [22:46] SpamapS: looking for a sponsor for eslayer ] [ yofel ] [22:46] ugh [22:46] chromeos screws me again [22:46] eslayer ] [ yofel ] [22:46] sigh [22:46] I give up [22:46] ^^ [22:46] bug 806248 [22:46] Launchpad bug 806248 in unity (Ubuntu Precise) "unity::TimeUtil::TimeDelta returns an int value which overflows after 24 days of uptime" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/806248 [22:46] yofel: sorry :/ [22:47] chromeos + chromoting == crappy copy and paste :/ [22:47] happens ;) [22:47] could be worse, I didn't paste confidential information ;p [23:47] tjaalton: ^