=== geser_ is now known as geser
[06:53] <dholbach> good morning
=== GeertJohan|afk is now known as GeertJohan
[10:05] <bdrung> tumbleweed: i think we should do another u-d-t upload.
[10:05] <bdrung> tumbleweed: any progress on bug #878868?
[10:05] <ubottu> bug 878868 in ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu) "[syncpackage] --no-lp picks up to many changelog entries in certain situations" [Low,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/878868
[10:06] <tumbleweed> I'm ignoring that one
[10:06] <tumbleweed> it should be possible now that LP has changelog access, though
[10:08] <tumbleweed> bdrung: we need to review that open merge request
[10:11] <bdrung> tumbleweed: this one: https://code.launchpad.net/~ursinha/ubuntu-dev-tools/fix_getBinaryPackage/+merge/159076 ?
[10:17] <tumbleweed> yes-
[10:38] <bdrung> tumbleweed: and there is https://code.launchpad.net/~brian-murray/ubuntu-dev-tools/fix-params/+merge/125786
[18:44] <alo21> hi... I got an error while running merge-buildpackage -rafekroot -k<GPG_KEY>. this is the error: dpkg-source: info: local changes detected, the modified files are:
[18:44] <alo21>  gramophone2-0.8.13a-2ubuntu1/Makefile
[18:44] <alo21> dpkg-source: info: you can integrate the local changes with dpkg-source --commit
[18:44] <alo21> dpkg-source: error: aborting due to unexpected upstream changes
[18:44] <alo21> it's weird..
[18:48] <alo21> why I got that?
[19:09] <geser> alo21: check what have changed in that file (you might want to run the mentioned command to get a patch file for easier review)
[19:12] <alo21> geser, I run the command, but I got: dpkg-source: info: fuzz is not allowed when applying patches // dpkg-source: error: LC_ALL=C patch -t -F 0 -N -p1 -u -V never -g0 -E -b -B .pc/typoCorrection.patch/ --reject-file=- < gramophone2-0.8.13a-2ubuntu1/debian/patches/typoCorrection.patch gave error exit status 1
[19:13] <alo21> typoCorrection.patch is a debian one...not mine
[19:14] <geser> hmm, I assume this is a normal merge (grab-merge) and not a bzr merge one, right?
[19:14] <alo21> geser, right
[19:16] <geser> did the Ubuntu patch per chance tried to modify the same file as the debian patch?
[19:17] <alo21> geser, the patch which I've just created?
[19:18] <geser> the existing Ubuntu delta which MoM tried to re-apply on the new Debian revision
[19:19] <geser> checking the current delta, it looks like it also modifies Makefile but not using a patch
[19:20] <alo21> geser, the patch which MoM said me to create is the same debdiff in ubuntu repo...the debian patch is in debian folder
[19:21] <geser> MoM took the existing delta, applies it on the new Debian revision and tars everything up for download and review
[19:22] <geser> it doesn't know about patch systems and blindly applies the existing delta
[19:22] <geser> which is probably the reason for this
[19:23] <geser> before you tried to figure out how to fix this to make dpkg-source happy again: just start from the new Debian revision and merge manually (create a new patch which applies cleanly on the existing ones)
[19:23] <geser> which be by faster as the changes are pretty small
[19:27] <alo21> geser, ok.. thanks for the advice
[19:27] <alo21> Do I have to create a .patch or a debdiff?
[19:28] <geser> both, the .patch file (in debian/patches; see how the other are named) is part of the source packages, the debdiff for sponsoring/review of the merge
[19:29] <alo21> so...  I have to upload debdiff only
[19:30] <geser> yes, you only need to attach the debdiff to the sponsoring bug (the debdiff contains all you changes to the package, incl. your newly created patch)
[19:31] <alo21> geser, Can I directly upload the previous debdiff? It contains the same changes I have to do
[19:32] <geser> no, as it misses the new changelog entry
[19:32] <alo21> well
[19:50] <alo21> geser, here is the patch (http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/5707851/). Could you see if there is something to correct, please?
[20:09] <geser> the changelog entry shouldn't be part of the patch file itself (it's still a part of the debdiff and you have to keep the older Ubuntu changelog entries too)
[20:13] <TheLordOfTime> there's a backport in precise and quantal  in universe that is affected by a null pointer dereference bug, is there any easy way to get those backports bugfixed?
[20:13] <alo21> geser, ok... so the patch shouldn't have the entry log, but only the debdiff.... anyway I tried to run debuild -S -sa on the patched source and I got this issue: dpkg-source: error: LC_ALL=C patch -t -F 0 -N -p1 -u -V never -g0 -E -b -B .pc/cflags.diff/ --reject-file=- < gramophone2-0.8.13a.orig.7lQL3u/debian/patches/cflags.diff gave error exit status
[20:13] <TheLordOfTime> the fix isn't in saucy or raring btw
[20:13] <alo21> *status 1
[20:14] <geser> TheLordOfTime: fix saucy, SRU raring, backport the SRU to precise and quantal
[20:15] <TheLordOfTime> geser:  does it need to be fixed in debian first?
[20:16] <TheLordOfTime> or can we just get the fix in saucy, raring, etc.?
[20:17] <geser> TheLordOfTime: it would make fixing saucy easier, just a sync in that case :)
[20:17] <TheLordOfTime> i'll poke debian
[20:17] <TheLordOfTime> although i think they won't update until NextReleaseOfSoftware
[20:17] <TheLordOfTime> :/
[20:17] <alo21> TheLordOfTime, so... It's better to send the patch in debian first, right?
[20:18] <TheLordOfTime> alo21:  you can ignore me talking to geser
[20:18] <TheLordOfTime> separate issue
[20:18] <geser> talk to the DD on how to proceed: wait on Debian or move ahead and fix in Ubuntu first
[20:18] <TheLordOfTime> lrn2readhighlights
[20:18] <TheLordOfTime> geser:  the software is called 'znc'
[20:18] <TheLordOfTime> so tbh i can just go in and erase the installed module and upload a rebuilt one to the production server
[20:18] <geser> TheLordOfTime: if Debian will fix it with a new upstream release, you still have to SRU in raring
[20:18] <TheLordOfTime> geser:  that's a given :P
[20:19] <geser> alo21: no idea right now, what you are doing wrong, sorry
[20:20] <alo21> geser, do not worry
=== ajmitch_ is now known as ajmitch
=== GeertJohan is now known as GeertJohan|afk