| tpham3783 | dobey, yeah, notice that too..... thanks and good bye | 00:00 |
|---|---|---|
| karstensrage | :( wgrant im having a hard time getting my head around this | 04:00 |
| karstensrage | my library depends on libssl and libxml2 and it seems like it shoud be compiled against the distribution its being put on | 04:01 |
| karstensrage | but i dont get really how this is supposed to work with changelog | 04:01 |
| karstensrage | it seems like changelog should be templated... so that you just build multiple .changes and .dsc that have the exact same stuff but different versions | 04:02 |
| karstensrage | but nothing changes in changelog except the version and distribution | 04:02 |
| karstensrage | im kind of curious why launchpad deleted the previous package maybe cause it failed to build? | 04:04 |
| karstensrage | or is always only going to keep the last version if the version changes? | 04:04 |
| karstensrage | http://askubuntu.com/questions/20835/how-do-i-copy-packages-within-a-ppa-from-one-release-to-another-nonsensical-s | 04:14 |
| karstensrage | this seems to reflect that, all you can do i just change the version | 04:14 |
| karstensrage | in changelog | 04:15 |
| karstensrage | has anyone thought of the idea of jinja2 templating changelog and have the build process take a distribution and the ppa/ubuntu thing? | 04:15 |
| wgrant | karstensrage: You need to upload a different source package for each set of binaries that you want to be built. | 04:52 |
| wgrant | Launchpad only keeps the most recent version of each package in each series. | 04:52 |
| karstensrage | wgrant, but nothing is changing for (what's 11.10), 12,04, 13.10, 14,04, etc | 04:59 |
| karstensrage | the docs said something like 1.0-1ubuntu~trusty1 | 05:00 |
| karstensrage | so *ALL* that changes is that damn string in changelog | 05:00 |
| wgrant | karstensrage: That's the only change in the source, yes. | 05:00 |
| wgrant | But different series will build different binaries, and different binaries must have different versions. | 05:01 |
| karstensrage | so if i write some script that templates changelog, debbuild -S and get 7 .changes and 7 .dsc's just upload all of those? | 05:01 |
| karstensrage | does 12.04 (precise) work for 13.10 ? | 05:02 |
| wgrant | Ubuntu 13.10 has been unsupported for nearly two years. | 05:02 |
| wgrant | The only supported series today are 12.04, 14.04, 15.04, 15.10 | 05:03 |
| karstensrage | people still have them | 05:03 |
| wgrant | Their machines are probably part of a botnet by now :) | 05:03 |
| wgrant | Launchpad does not build for EOL Ubuntu series. | 05:03 |
| karstensrage | what im asking is not that | 05:03 |
| karstensrage | do you have to have specific version for everything ubuntu puts out? | 05:04 |
| wgrant | It depends on your package's dependencies. | 05:04 |
| karstensrage | heres the way i think about it | 05:04 |
| wgrant | If, for example, a library that you depend on changes its ABI, you'll have to build a separate version for each ABI. | 05:04 |
| karstensrage | i put up the source, its the source | 05:05 |
| karstensrage | build it for whatever machine asks for it | 05:05 |
| karstensrage | is there someone thats whole life is just chasing ubuntu versions and resubmitting tomcat for every single version? | 05:06 |
| karstensrage | or any package really? | 05:06 |
| wgrant | There is one Ubuntu release every six months; it is not particularly onerous. | 05:06 |
| karstensrage | and what about older versions? | 05:07 |
| wgrant | What do you mean/ | 05:07 |
| karstensrage | 11.10, 12.04, 13.10 | 05:07 |
| karstensrage | 10.04 | 05:07 |
| wgrant | 12.04 is still supported, the others are not. | 05:07 |
| karstensrage | they are still out there | 05:08 |
| wgrant | Anybody running them is reckless, as they have numerous unpatched security vulnerabilities. | 05:08 |
| wgrant | We cannot support them. | 05:08 |
| karstensrage | i want them to be able to install my stuff regardless of what they have | 05:09 |
| karstensrage | just like back then i could install apt-get install tomcat6 | 05:10 |
| karstensrage | today i just apt-get install tomcat7 | 05:10 |
| karstensrage | and later apt-get install tomcat8 | 05:10 |
| karstensrage | for me its all three apt-get install mylib | 05:10 |
| wgrant | Launchpad does not build for obsolete Ubuntu series. | 05:10 |
| wgrant | If you want to support people with vulnerable machines, you'll need to distribute the packages from somewhere else. | 05:11 |
| karstensrage | where does 15.10 get its stuff? | 05:11 |
| karstensrage | from 14.04 packages? | 05:11 |
| wgrant | Which stuff? | 05:11 |
| karstensrage | its tomcat8 | 05:11 |
| wgrant | Some binary packages are copied, others are rebuilt. | 05:11 |
| wgrant | https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tomcat8 shows the version in each supported series. | 05:12 |
| oranged | quick question.. i am logged in however the 'report a bug' link takes me to a wiki.. | 05:12 |
| wgrant | oranged: Ubuntu overrides their Launchpad bug filing link to point to that page. The wiki explains the various avenues for filing an Ubuntu bug. | 05:12 |
| wgrant | karstensrage: 14.04 doesn't have tomcat8, and 15.04, 15.10 and xenial all have different versions. | 05:13 |
| oranged | wgrant; thanks | 05:13 |
| oranged | wgrant; i thought i was nuts. | 05:13 |
| karstensrage | xenial is 16.04? | 05:17 |
| wgrant | xenial will be 16.04, yes. | 05:17 |
| karstensrage | ok hmm | 05:18 |
| karstensrage | maybe i should move all this to 14.04 and just resubmit every 6 months like you said? | 05:18 |
| wgrant | Move all which? | 05:18 |
| karstensrage | all my work so far as been on a 12.04 vm that i use for a lot of development work | 05:18 |
| karstensrage | so everything is built and tested on 12.04 | 05:19 |
| wgrant | 12.04 is only supported for another 14 or so months. It would be unwise to deploy anything new on it at this point. | 05:19 |
| wgrant | 14.04 is the current LTS release, and 16.04 will be the next. | 05:19 |
| karstensrage | i think you underestimate how many old systems are out there | 05:19 |
| wgrant | Oh, I'm well aware, and running 12.04 today is fine. | 05:19 |
| wgrant | But if you are making any significant changes to deployment, it's probably wise to upgrade to something that will last more than a year. | 05:20 |
| wgrant | And if you're running an EOL Ubuntu release, tell me your address so I can come and unplug that machine from the Internet :) | 05:20 |
| karstensrage | i thought botnets were all windows machines | 05:21 |
| StevenK | Nope | 05:21 |
| wgrant | Regrettably not, though there are an awful lot of those. | 05:21 |
| wgrant | I guess you know you've really made it as an OS when there are botnets of your machines! | 05:21 |
| === rbasak_ is now known as rbasak | ||
| sunweaver | good morning (CET) | 09:22 |
| sunweaver | I am unable to log into wiki.ubuntu.com using my Ubuntu ONE account. | 09:22 |
| === axino` is now known as axino | ||
| cjwatson | sunweaver: We can't help you here; we maintain neither of those systems. Try #canonical-sysadmin | 10:30 |
| sunweaver | cjwatson: thanks. | 10:39 |
| === FourDollars_ is now known as FourDollars | ||
| === rvba` is now known as rvba | ||
| === kickinz1|afk is now known as kickinz1 | ||
| xnox | the target must be the path within the targer repository | 12:21 |
| xnox | -> shouldn't that be like preset to :master ? and/or whatever development focus (aka remote HEAD) are? | 12:21 |
| cjwatson | we need a better picker for that in general | 12:22 |
| cjwatson | definitely a known problem | 12:22 |
| tsimonq2 | just curious, If I make a merge proposal and it needs fixing, how do I get that fix to the reviewer? Do I jommit to the branch? what? | 12:22 |
| tsimonq2 | *commit | 12:22 |
| cjwatson | tsimonq2: Just add further commits on top of your branch with your fixes. | 12:23 |
| tsimonq2 | cjwatson: ahh okay thanks :) | 12:23 |
| kamal | I've just gotten ARM builds enabled for a PPA which supplies > 200 packages. How can I make LP rebuild all the existing packages in that PPA for the ARM arches? (And bumping the version numbers and re-uploading all those packages is not a palatable solution!) | 15:58 |
| teward | kamal: select all the packages, copy existing binaries to the same PPA | 15:59 |
| teward | wait an eon | 15:59 |
| teward | though, if you're sending 200 builds to the builders, I think the LP admins will be annoyed | 15:59 |
| teward | s/will be/may be/ | 15:59 |
| kamal | teward, I tried exactly that, but LP doesn't buy it ... | 15:59 |
| kamal | "Launchpad encountered an error during the following operation: copying a package. trustedqsl 2.2-2~kamal~vivid in vivid (same version already has published binaries in the destination archive)" | 15:59 |
| teward | kamal: FWIW vivid went EOL | 16:00 |
| kamal | teward, :-) Launchpad encountered an error during the following operation: copying a package. trustedqsl 2.2-2~kamal~xenial in xenial (same version already has published binaries in the destination archive) | 16:00 |
| kamal | teward, i.e. same result for supported releases as well | 16:00 |
| teward | i can't replicate, but I also can't see what you're selecting | 16:02 |
| teward | My GUESS is you have "Rebuild" ticked... | 16:02 |
| teward | not "copy existing binaries", but don't quote me on that | 16:02 |
| teward | the people who can help are the LP admins; however, again, without knowing the build system fluently, you may want to consider NOT throwing 200 armhf builds into the queues | 16:03 |
| kamal | teward, yes I did tick "Rebuild" (since I wanted it to build something)... "Copy existing binaries" makes no sense here, I think. | 16:03 |
| teward | kamal: actually, 'copy existing binaries' makes more sense | 16:04 |
| teward | it'll sense armhf is misisng, and build | 16:04 |
| teward | it's how i kicked the ZNC and NGINX PPAs I run into rebuilding for missing releases | 16:04 |
| teward | and how i'm getting ppc64el building right now for my nginx ppas :P | 16:04 |
| teward | kamal: missing binaries then get built, I believe | 16:04 |
| teward | sounds counter intuitive, but it apparently works | 16:05 |
| kamal | teward, wow! "Copy existing binaries" does indeed work! ok, I still don't get the logic of that verbiage at all, but . . . THANKS! | 16:05 |
| teward | kamal: note though that if your armhf builds take up all the builders, I think myself, many others, and the LP admins might squish you :P | 16:05 |
| teward | (just saying) | 16:05 |
| kamal | teward, they know where to find me ;-) | 16:05 |
| === cjwatson_ is now known as cjwatson | ||
| cjwatson | kamal: Copy the packages in question over the top of themselves, including binaries | 16:25 |
| cjwatson | kamal: i.e. "Copy packages" in the PPA in question, select the relevant packages, "This PPA", "The same series", "Copy existing binaries" | 16:26 |
| kamal | cjwatson, teward sorted me out ... the magic solution was that I needed to select "Copy existing binaries". | 16:26 |
| teward | cjwatson: wouldn't 200 packages going for armhf builds take up a majority of the builders though? | 16:26 |
| kamal | cjwatson, yup :-) | 16:26 |
| teward | and clog the queue? | 16:26 |
| cjwatson | teward: *shrug* | 16:26 |
| cjwatson | teward: will clear quick enough | 16:26 |
| dobey | teward: no different than 200 different people requesting builds at the same time, of the same priority. | 16:27 |
| cjwatson | teward: (also may not be quite that many sources) | 16:27 |
| cjwatson | teward: anyway, we can deal with abuse if it happens, but the build farm is there to be used | 16:28 |
| teward | indeed | 16:28 |
| * teward just sent all his nginx packages through the ppc64el builds :P | 16:28 | |
| tpham3783 | wgrant, ! | 16:30 |
| dobey | huh | 16:33 |
| tpham3783 | hi dobey, i think i understand why you said packaging information shouldn't be included in the source package... b/c thats just to much to info to maintain as a developer.. | 16:35 |
| tpham3783 | i was just wanting to adopt the way wireshark included the packaging info for debian in their source tree, | 16:36 |
| tpham3783 | to e20... but may not be a good choice | 16:36 |
| tpham3783 | furthermore, packaging info can only support **most likely** the latest flavors .... it wont be able to support old flavors like precise etc.... | 16:37 |
| tpham3783 | that's just too much combination, and overhead for the developer to maintain | 16:38 |
| dobey | packaging can support multiple series easily enough | 16:38 |
| dobey | the main problem is that binaries built on different series, are different, and so should have different versions | 16:38 |
| dobey | this will especially be a problem with the enlightenment stack, because there are many libraries and such | 16:39 |
| tpham3783 | dobey, i ran info this problem the other day, i had a build dependency libjson, and its not available on precise... so pretty much, i would need to write another recipe for precise, particularly | 16:39 |
| dobey | json is available on precise | 16:39 |
| tpham3783 | i think it was lib json,, here: https://code.launchpad.net/~tpham3783/+recipe/edkit-daily | 16:42 |
| tpham3783 | libjson-c-dev | 16:42 |
| tpham3783 | dobey, is the file at debian/<pkg>.install neccessary? what if I do not have it? is it like an install mask? | 16:47 |
| === chrisccoulson_ is now known as chrisccoulson | ||
| dobey | for packages that build a single binary is't not necessary; if you build multiple binaries, you must have .install files because they list the files that go in that package | 16:50 |
| cjwatson | debian/*.install is described in "man dh_install" | 16:52 |
| cjwatson | in general the various debhelper manual pages are excellent and you should consult them | 16:52 |
| tpham3783 | dobey, i have a closed source project but I want to leverage LP to build for all flavors of U., is it possible to write a recipe but yet somehow keep the source closed? | 16:53 |
| cjwatson | Recipes don't yet support builds of private code. | 16:53 |
| cjwatson | (It's hopefully coming in the next few months, although probably only for git) | 16:53 |
| === marcoceppi_ is now known as marcoceppi | ||
| === kiko` is now known as kiko | ||
| === caraka_ is now known as caraka | ||
| tpham3783 | cjwatson, as a developer and a packager of a private software app, what's the best way to create deb installation packages? At one point, i added a debian folder to the root source tree of my project, then install (using DESTDIR) to the debian folder; then used dpkg-deb to create a .deb installable package from it... I am sure its not the right way? can you recommend a correct way please? | 19:29 |
| tpham3783 | cjwatson, i've been researching, i some recommended that I create another branch, say debian-package, and then merge with the master branch if i want to create a deb package.. not sure what is the ideal best solution w/o reverting to LP | 19:30 |
| dobey | debuild/dpkg-buildpackage is "the correct way" to build a debian package | 19:31 |
| tpham3783 | dobey, thanks, i want to know the correct work flow from other people too, also, I would like not to depend on debuild/dpkg-buildpackage if possible | 19:33 |
| dobey | well, if you want to build debian packages, the correct way is to use the supported proper tools for building those packages. trying to do things manually with dpkg-deb will eventually result in problems | 19:36 |
| tpham3783 | dobey, where would you store your packaging info (debian folder), in a upstream git/svn branch, then merge in with the master branch? just want to know common practices? thanks | 19:39 |
| dobey | tpham3783: well, i've set up daily builds of several things, and i typically stick the packaging in a separate bzr branch which i nest into the upstream code as debian/. for git, that could be a separate branch on the upstream repository, or it could be a separate repository or something. | 19:41 |
| tpham3783 | dobey, that makes sense, thanks..... | 19:42 |
| tpham3783 | dobey, do you always rely on LP to make builds for different flavors of U? or u use some kind of jailroot on ur dev machine to build them manually? | 19:45 |
| dobey | i use recipes all the time | 19:47 |
| dobey | i only build things on my machine while developing and to test things out, and pretty much never install directly to / from source | 19:48 |
| tpham3783 | "never install to /", how would you test though? b/c i test E20, and i had to install it to /, bc it would be complicated if not set to /, say /usr/local/e20_install; had to change all kind of env paths just to test E | 19:49 |
| dobey | depends on what i'm working on. i probably wouldn't test the entire enlightenment stack as if it were a single thing, because it's not. and anything i need to install to test, i'd build packages of first | 19:51 |
| cjwatson | tpham3783: I agree with dobey that the correct approach is to use dpkg-buildpackage. I'm sorry but I'm not willing to help you work around that. | 19:53 |
| cjwatson | You can always use chroots if you're building on some other distribution. | 19:53 |
| tpham3783 | cjwatson, thanks, i was just wanting to know of other ways... | 19:53 |
| cjwatson | Obviously it's *possible* to do it by hand (after all dpkg-buildpackage is just a script wrapping debian/rules etc.) but it's not something I'm prepared to help with. | 19:54 |
| cjwatson | Because IME advising people on that just results in them coming back to me with problems they wouldn't have had if they'd used a more standard route. :-) | 19:55 |
| dobey | it's completely open source and an open format, so it's totally possible to manually construct a .deb; it's just not worth the trouble to do it | 19:56 |
| cjwatson | Assuming that the app in question has its own existence independent of packaging, then it likely does make sense for the packaging to be in a separate branch of some kind, not embedded in the upstream tree. | 19:56 |
| tpham3783 | Thanks guys, I will use dpkg-buildpackage from now on.... | 20:02 |
| tpham3783 | for a brand new project, how do i tell dpkg-buildpackage to auto install all dependencies listed in the control file, prior to building? | 20:42 |
| cjwatson | tpham3783: not dpkg-buildpackage's job - that's generally up to higher-level tools, IMO the best of which is sbuild (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SimpleSbuild) | 21:05 |
| karstensrage | i tested my ppa and it seems to have worked | 21:54 |
| karstensrage | how big generally are chroots | 21:54 |
| teward | varies release to release | 21:54 |
| * teward pulls his sbuild schroots sizes | 21:54 | |
| karstensrage | im going to test in natty and saucy but i cant put those on launchpad right? | 21:55 |
| wgrant | I'm going to pretend I didn't hear that. | 21:56 |
| teward | lol | 21:57 |
| teward | these are the filesizes for my chroots... though, I also have Debian chroots 'cause I use them... | 22:05 |
| teward | http://paste.ubuntu.com/14897387/ | 22:05 |
| teward | and yes I have a Vivid chroot there - it's just not been deleted yet :) | 22:07 |
| dobey | but it's so new | 22:08 |
| teward | okay, that made me chuckle | 22:08 |
| teward | heh | 22:08 |
| teward | dobey: thanks for making my day a little better xD | 22:08 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!