[03:30] <slangasek> @pilot out
=== udevbot changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Wily (15.10) Released! | Archive: open | Devel of Ubuntu (not support or app devel) | build failures: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ | #ubuntu for support and discussion of precise-wily | #ubuntu-app-devel for app development on Ubuntu http://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment | See #ubuntu-bugs for http://bit.ly/lv8soi | Patch Pilots:
=== Trevinho_ is now known as Trevinho
=== mnepton is now known as mneptok
=== beisner- is now known as beisner
=== Logan_ is now known as Logan
=== inaddy is now known as tinoco
=== nelhage_ is now known as nelhage
=== Tribaal_ is now known as Tribaal
[06:46] <Purvik> Hello
[06:46] <Purvik> I am Purvik
[06:46] <Purvik> From India
[06:46] <Purvik> I want to work on opensourse development
[06:48] <Purvik> but i am new because currntly i am in third sem of BE Computer Engg. so i didn't study os now but i self study something.
[06:48] <Purvik> so please guide me
[06:48] <Purvik> i want to join os development
[06:48] <Purvik> my email id is
[06:48] <Purvik> mahetapurvik1210@gmail.com
[06:52] <sladen> Purvik: are there any programs you've used, and spotted a bug that is frustrating/annoying.  Perhaps that would be the place to start
[06:53] <sladen> Purvik: Ubuntu is made of lots of individual pieces, so picking and playing/experimenting with one small area is likely to be easier to get a handle on
[06:54] <sladen> Purvik: if you find a bug on a small program (start small), you can then  apt-get source programnamexyz  and trying poking/recompiling
[06:57] <Purvik> can you please suggest me that how to start
[06:57] <Purvik> means any programme
[06:58] <Purvik> because i am not that much familier with linux
[06:59] <Purvik> so suggest me any program that how can i start for linux development programme
=== sunweave1 is now known as sunweaver
[20:46] <juliank> It seems that merging APT 1.1 will cause PPA building from recipes to fail: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/1520827
[20:46] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1520827 in Launchpad itself "PPAs or recipes incompatible with APT 1.1: Passes -y to a command not supporting it" [Undecided,New]
[20:52] <cjwatson> juliank: buildrecipe uses "apt-get install -y lsb-release" and "apt-get build-dep -y --only-source <package>".  Do you know which it is?
[20:53] <cjwatson> juliank: And that seems like a reasonably alarming incompatibility - I think both those forms are quite commonplace?
[20:53] <juliank> cjwatson: Both work for me, so it must be something else
[20:54] <cjwatson> juliank: From the log, I think it must be the first of those
[20:54] <juliank> Well, install -y must work. It's used by the test suite.
[20:55] <cjwatson> It'll be passed through sudo, but surely that hasn't changed
[20:56] <cjwatson> The full command line will be   /usr/bin/sudo /usr/sbin/chroot <path to chroot> apt-get install -y lsb-release
[20:57] <juliank> cjwatson: And in fact, a previous build worked like that one: https://launchpad.net/~deity/+archive/ubuntu/sid/+build/8350920
[20:57] <juliank> or rather that one: https://launchpad.net/~deity/+archive/ubuntu/sid/+recipebuild/1028125
[20:58] <juliank> cjwatson: Maybe I should try reissuing the build?
[20:58] <juliank> Maybe some bits flipped in memory
[20:58] <cjwatson> I suppose you can try, but it seems like a rather startling coincidence
[20:59] <juliank> Well, there were not many changes in APT between the two builds
[20:59] <cjwatson> The difference is from apt 1.1+2790~ubuntu15.10.1 to 1.1.1+2803~ubuntu16.04.1
[20:59] <cjwatson> Anyway, by all means retry, it's cheap
[21:00]  * cjwatson logs this in the bug
[21:04] <juliank> cjwatson: One of those revisions added some weak symbol trickery for commandline parsing, maybe it causes a failure on Ubuntu because of -O3 vs -O2 on Debian.
[21:04] <juliank> https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~deity/apt/debian-sid/revision/2792
[21:05] <juliank> Previously the symbols were undefined and just defined in the main program
[21:05] <cjwatson> juliank: Where would -O3 come in?
[21:05] <juliank> cjwatson: Isn't that the default?
[21:05] <cjwatson> juliank: Only for ppc64el
[21:05] <cjwatson> For reasons
[21:05] <juliank> Ah
[21:06] <juliank> Hmm
[21:06] <cjwatson> Try in a xenial chroot with the apt that that recipe build is installing, I guess?
[21:06] <juliank> Yes
[21:07] <juliank> I'm glad I set up that PPA
[21:08] <cjwatson> Indeed!
[21:09] <cjwatson> Nice bit of QA
[21:10] <juliank> cjwatson: Yes, it's the install thing
[21:12] <juliank> cjwatson: I can verify that command-line parsing is completely broken now
[21:13] <juliank> Now trying to build
[21:23] <juliank> cjwatson: Hmm, I see that LDFLAGS contains -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions could that cause libapt-private to bind the uses of those weak symbols to the internal weak definitions instead of the strong ones?
[21:33] <juliank> Oh no, mvo was working on exactly the same issue, but is not online anywhere
=== juliank0 is now known as juliank
[23:18] <goddard1> anyone know why a USB device config descriptor would have an array of 38 hex items?
[23:18] <goddard1> most documentation I read only has 8 items
=== goddard1 is now known as goddard
[23:34] <goddard> ?
[23:43] <juliank> goddard: Hey, it might take some time. Especially on a weekend...