RAOFDoes anyone know what happened here: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/137513813/buildlog.txt.gz ?02:27
RAOFIt's a bzr-builder recipe that works fine locally and exceptions in bzr on Launchpad.02:27
wgrantRAOF: Launchpad doesn't support format 0.4 yet02:40
wgrantYou need to use 0.302:40
RAOFAha. So the build recipe page that talks about 0.4 is a lie. Gotcha :)02:40
wgrantLaunchpad is meant to support it02:40
wgrantBut the buildds still aren't upgraded to something that support it02:40
wgrantMaybe once they're on something more modern than hardy..02:41
ScottKOh my.02:41
ScottKBest hurry up.02:41
RAOFwgrant: When https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/SourceBuilds/Recipes says that {debversion} is available in 0.1, is it lying?03:02
wgrantRAOF: Not sure. But it's certainly available in 0.3, which is what you'd want to use.03:04
RAOFGrr. So why is it throwing ‘bzr: ERROR: Invalid deb-version: {debversion}+xmir2316: Invalid version string '{debversion}+xmir2316'’03:06
wgrantRAOF: Sorry, got debupstream and debversion mixed up03:11
wgrantdebversion is new in 0.403:11
wgrantdebupstream has been around forever03:11
RAOFOk. Where's the right place to report that documentation bug?03:12
RAOFAlso, get Launchpad upgraded, damnit! debversion is super-useful!03:12
wgrantI've been trying for 18 months...03:12
wgrantDocs fixed.03:13
RAOFHm. Next up in the WTF stakes - https://launchpad.net/~mir-team/+archive/staging/+build/4487198 has been building for an *awfully* long time.03:58
ScottKYou could cancel it and retry.03:59
ScottKIf you can't, I can do it for you.03:59
RAOFI should be able to.04:00
george_eIs there a known problem with uploading to PPAs at the moment?05:22
StevenKWhat issue are you having?05:23
george_eStevenK: I backported a package nearly 50 minutes ago and haven't received an "accepted" email yet.05:30
StevenKWas it signed?05:30
george_eI had uploaded one earlier (maybe 30 minutes earlier) without any issues.05:32
george_eBut the last two aren't showing up.05:32
StevenKgeorge_e: Can you tell me what package and PPA?05:33
wgrant2013-04-16 05:05:19 INFO    Upload was rejected:05:33
wgrant2013-04-16 05:05:19 INFO        File nodejs_0.6.19~dfsg1-5ubuntu1~ubuntu12.04.1~ppa1.debian.tar.gz already exists in LESS for Precise, but uploaded version has different contents.05:33
wgrantYou have an email about that.05:33
george_eI'll check my email again.05:34
wgrant2013-04-16 05:05:19 DEBUG     Subject: [PPA george-edison55-less-precise] nodejs_0.6.19~dfsg1-5ubuntu1~ubuntu12.04.1~ppa1_source.changes rejected05:34
george_eOdd.. nothing in my inbox and nothing in spam.05:34
george_eWell, thanks for clearing it up.05:35
=== wedgwood_away is now known as wedgwood
kelkoobenoitrhello: i am new to launchpad, and going through the doc to create my first source package.14:04
kelkoobenoitrso far so good, but i don't understand how we should handle a new upstream version once first version is created14:06
jpdskelkoobenoitr: How do you mean?14:13
kelkoobenoitrlet's say i have locallly a source package named hello-v114:14
kelkoobenoitrthat one is uploaded to launchpad14:14
jpdskelkoobenoitr: Old version: 0.1-0ubuntu1, new upstream release would be: 0.2-0ubuntu1 or whatever upstream release it as.14:14
kelkoobenoitrnow upstream released hello-v214:14
jpdskelkoobenoitr: You wouldn't have the version number in the source package name.14:14
kelkoobenoitrwell upstream is only providing me with a tar.gz14:16
kelkoobenoitrmy question is how to handle it locally14:16
jpdskelkoobenoitr: So there's no 'released' version?14:16
kelkoobenoitrshould i work in the same directory as hello-v114:16
kelkoobenoitris there some bzr commands to handle the new upstream version14:17
kelkoobenoitrsshould i start from scratch again ?14:17
kelkoobenoitrand copy debian/ directory from hello-v114:17
jpdskelkoobenoitr: I would start from scratch and keep bzr out of the picture until you're familiar with the packaging itself.14:17
kelkoobenoitrwell, i think i got the way to build the source package14:18
kelkoobenoitras i said: builddeb -- -us -uc works14:19
* jpds sticks to debuild.14:19
kelkoobenoitrjdbs: i followed this: http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/packaging-new-software.html14:26
kelkoobenoitrand i have to say i am a bit lost now: i don't get the main picture, for the workflow on launchpad14:27
kelkoobenoitrcan you point me to the right doc to start with debuild ?14:27
kelkoobenoitrand tell me what should be the next step once i am ok with debuild ?14:28
kelkoobenoitroops this not jdbs but jpds ;_)14:28
dobeyi think #ubuntu-packaging might be a better channel for you to ask your questions in14:28
=== mbarnett` is now known as mbarnett
semiosishi all, i get uploads rejected from a ppa because it says the orig.tar.gz already exists, but uploaded version has different contents.  how can I delete the existing one, or otherwise resolve this issue?18:13
dobeysemiosis: don't upload the same tarball with different contents in it. you can't. deleting the existing one won't fix it. if the tarball contents are different, the file name must be different. usually this means the version number is different18:21
semiosisdobey: ok i'll try to work around that limitation19:08
semiosisthank you19:08
maxbsemiosis: FWIW, it's a feature by design, rather than an accidental limitation19:09
semiosismaxb: i'm sure it is.  just inconvenient for me because i uploaded an alpha release tarball with the name that the future stable release will have, so now that name is tainted until the next stable rellease comes out19:11
dobeythat would be true regardless of whether you uploaded it to launchpad, or anywhere else19:11
semiosisyes but not being able to delete & start over is what bugs me most19:12
dobeyyes, well, that doesn't help users that might have downloaded the one you deleted and suddenly replaced with different contents; especially if they've got a bug that was fixed by that change in contents, and they think they have the same version already, because the version is the same :)19:13
semiosisyes that would be unfortunate, but not the case here19:13
semiosisi mean, if someone downloaded the orig, then yes, but the packages being built had version modifiers, those modifiers just werent part of the orig filename :(19:14
semiosisnew at this, learning the hard way19:14

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!