/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2014/08/08/#launchpad.txt

=== jelmer_ is now known as jelmer
=== jpds_ is now known as jpds
=== jpds is now known as Guest15370
=== Guest15370 is now known as jpds_
jhobbsHello - a bug i was trying to edit just disappeared09:33
jhobbsWhen I try to use the question feature in launchpad I get an OOPS09:34
jhobbsthe bug is https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/135105409:34
ubot5Error: ubuntu bug 1351054 not found09:34
jhobbsmmhmm09:34
wgrantYou can actually wait for more than five minutes before deciding that nobody is responding.09:44
wgrantDid you try to reassing a private/proprietary bug to Ubuntu?09:45
jhobbsyes09:45
jhobbsi was headed there at least, i didn't think i actually hit submit09:45
wgrantRight, that's not going to go well -- Ubuntu doesn't generally use private bugs except for crash and security reports. It's a community-owned project, so there shouldn't be proprietary information in Ubuntu's bugs.09:47
jhobbsok - that makes sense09:47
jhobbsI suppose it would have been nice to get a warning or error instead of a disappeared bug though09:47
jhobbsis there a way to get it back?09:47
wgrantI will recover it soon.09:48
jhobbscool09:48
cjwatsonIt's unfortunate (as I said in person here) that that kind of reassignment doesn't give you an access grant, the way that making a public bug private does.09:48
=== ndec_ is now known as ndec
dz0nyhi,anyone around?11:34
dz0nythis thing called launchpad is broken, beyond11:35
dz0nydo you guys still develop it or??11:36
cjwatsonIt's still actively developed.  I'd suggest being a bit more specific.11:36
dz0nythen I found a bug. I've used dput to upload package to ppa, however ppa is still empty11:38
cjwatsonDid you get an acknowledgement mail?11:39
dz0nyno11:40
cjwatsonhttps://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/UploadErrors#The_upload_appears_to_work_but_I_don.27t_get_any_email_about_it11:40
dz0nythx11:41
dz0nyI didn't import the key...11:42
wgrantSo broken!11:44
davmor2wgrant: man it must be nice to only have breakages like that right ;)11:46
dpmwgrant, cjwatson, is there any comment perhaps you guys could add to bug 736005 regarding the hardware upgrades in LP that will potentially mitigate the translation timeouts? Many folks are starting to complain on the translators mailing list11:46
ubot5bug 736005 in Launchpad itself "POFile:+translate timeouts" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/73600511:46
dz0nywgrant: well I didn't get the mail11:47
wgrantdz0ny: We can't tell who to send an email to if we can't work out who uploaded it.11:48
wgrantdpm: I'm afraid we're still waiting on IS to bring up the database servers. I'll comment in the bug.11:48
dz0nywgrant: well .changes file contains mail so ...11:49
wgrantdz0ny: But anyone could put your address there and cause us to spam you with endless rejection emails.11:49
dz0nyand if you upload to ppa you also now to which ppa was thing uploaded11:49
cjwatsondpm: I'll reply.11:49
wgrantSure, but it's totally unauthenticated.11:49
cjwatsonOh, wgrant is doing.11:49
wgrantI am :)11:49
dz0nyenforce login for upload?11:50
wgrantdz0ny: That's not really feasible with FTP, as it's unencrypted.11:50
dz0nythen enforce sftp :)11:51
dpmthanks cjwatson, wgrant11:52
dz0nybye11:59
jhobbswgrant: any idea when you will be able to restore that bug?13:31
wgrantjhobbs: Done.13:40
jhobbswgrant: thanks13:48
shadeslayer_btw is it possible to get files from this build? https://launchpadlibrarian.net/179759073/buildlog_ubuntu-utopic-powerpc.kimageformats_5.0.0-0ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz14:20
shadeslayer_specifically rgb-gimp-2.8.10.psd-expected.data  and rgb-gimp-2.8.10.psd-actual.data14:20
cjwatsonshadeslayer_: It's not possible to recover any files after a build completes.14:29
cjwatsonSuccessfully or otherwise.14:29
shadeslayer_cjwatson: what would you recommend? upstream would like to see those files, I reckon I could just cat them14:30
cjwatsonshadeslayer_: IMO packages should generally arrange to cat detailed test suite logs if the test suite fails.14:30
cjwatsonshadeslayer_: dh_auto_test even does that automatically for automake projects nowadays.14:30
cjwatsonSo there's certainly precedent.14:30
shadeslayer_hm14:30
shadeslayer_needs to be extended to cmake thingumns14:30
cjwatsonOh, actually, no, that's for config.log on configure failures14:31
cjwatsonStill, same idea14:31
cjwatsonoverride_dh_auto_test:\n\tdh_auto_test || { cat blah; exit 1; }14:31
cjwatsonor whatever14:31
shadeslayer_yeah14:31
cjwatsonOr have the upstream cmake code do it.  I think what I'm remembering is that automake itself does it sometimes.14:32
cjwatsonYou have to set VERBOSE=1 for that.14:32
shadeslayer_I don't think cmake knows about any files that a test will write14:32
shadeslayer_at run time14:33
=== dpm is now known as dpm-afk
=== Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk
KNROI'm getting Invalid deb-version: {debupstream}+r577.155~ubuntu14.04.1: Invalid version string '{debupstream}+r577.155~ubuntu14.04.1'18:47
KNROanyone knows why {debupstream} isn't being evaluated by launchpad thereby resulting in the above error?18:47
=== DarkPlayer_ is now known as DarkPlayer
=== Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha
KNRO_Anyone_ who has daily packages using debupstream that is building OK?20:13
jelmerKNRO: are you using format version 0.4 ?20:14
KNROjemler: I tried 0.3 and 0.4, same result.20:15
KNROit's related to this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-buildd/+bug/135043020:16
ubot5Ubuntu bug 1350430 in launchpad-buildd "{debupstream} {debversion} not recognised by format 0.4" [Critical,Fix committed]20:16
KNROfix committed, does that mean it's live or not?20:17
tsimpsonlive would be fix released20:23
KNROis there any workaround now? All my daily packages are failing now20:25
cjwatsonWe *think* that {debupstream:packaging} and possibly also {debversion:packaging} will work20:27
cjwatsonWe should be able to get that fix rolled out next week though20:27
AShortRedheadHi, I am wondering if there is anyone here who can help me with a build problem I have been having20:32
jelmerKNRO: you need to specify the branch name if the debian/ branch is not in the root branch20:33
jelmerwhat cjwatson said :)20:33
AShortRedheadI currently am doing some trusty builds at https://launchpad.net/~sandyd/+archive/ubuntu/openlitespeed/+packages20:34
AShortRedheadfor some reason, the i386 builds are fine https://launchpadlibrarian.net/181864935/buildlog_ubuntu-trusty-i386.openlitespeed_1.3.3-1ubuntu%2Bsandydnet~trusty_UPLOADING.txt.gz20:34
AShortRedheadthe amd64 builds are failing https://launchpadlibrarian.net/181864921/buildlog_ubuntu-trusty-amd64.openlitespeed_1.3.3-1ubuntu%2Bsandydnet~trusty_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz20:34
KNROjelmer: this is what I use now {debversion}+r{revno}.{revno:packaging}, so debversion IS for the root branch, let me try debversion:packaging20:34
wgrant /bin/mkdir -p '/usr/modules'20:34
AShortRedheadfor some reason, the amd64 builds are attempting to create files in /usr/modules instead of in20:35
wgrantAShortRedhead: Your package is trying to write to somewhere that needs root privileges.20:35
AShortRedheadthe correct folder20:35
wgrantHave you test-built it on amd64 locally?20:35
AShortRedheadnope20:35
wgrantYou'll see the same problem there, so you can debug it.20:35
AShortRedheadallright, thanks for the tip!20:35
jelmerKNRO: in what branch does your packaging live?20:36
KNROjemler: you can see the recepie here: https://code.launchpad.net/~mutlaqja/+recipe/libindi-daily20:38
KNRObzr: ERROR: Invalid deb-version: {debversion:packaging}+r577.155: Invalid version string '{debversion:packaging}+r577.155'20:39
KNROso now {debversion:packaging} is not working as well with 0.420:39
cjwatsonIt's possible it's not fixable until we roll out.  You could run bzr-builder locally and upload the source package directly to the target PPA in the meantime.20:40
AShortRedheadhuh20:42
AShortRedheadit works locally20:42
wgrantAShortRedhead: How are you building it?20:42
wgrantIt probably only occurs when building only architecture-specific packages.20:43
wgrantBuild with -B rather than -b20:43
AShortRedheadwgrant, would it be possible that after using debuild -S for i386, I would have to re-extract before going to amd64?20:43
KNROcjwatson: I am using bzr dailydeb command now locally and I'm still getting that error. Should I build the latest bzr and bzr-builder for this to work?20:45
cjwatsonI think so, yes20:48
cjwatsonNot bzr, just bzr-builder20:48
jelmerKNRO: hmm, I'm not sure if this will work with nest-part20:51
KNROjelmer: yeah, I just tried with latest bzr-builder and same error, so I give up20:51
AShortRedheadhmm20:53
AShortRedheadstill no dice20:53
wgrantAShortRedhead: You built with -B, not -b, in a clean chroot of the relevant series?20:54
AShortRedheadnvm I found the issue, missing a slash20:56
AShortRedheadin the build rules20:56
=== Guest15101 is now known as nesthib

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