[04:48]  * Laif hi :)
=== hikiko is now known as hikiko|ln
=== hikiko|ln is now known as hikiko
=== tinoco is now known as tinocoff
[16:25] <tdaitx> hello! could someone set LP: #1581835 priority to Whishlist for both OpenJDK 8 and 7? thanks! =)
[16:25] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1581835 in openjdk-8 (Ubuntu) "Enable native GTK Look and Feel for non-gnome desktops" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1581835
[16:26] <teward> tdaitx: done
[16:26] <tdaitx> teward: thanks! =)
[16:28] <tdaitx> LP: #1580162 could probably be set as triaged, the fix is available/commited upstream and will be integrated on the next OpenJDK-8 update
[16:28] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1580162 in openjdk-8 (Ubuntu) "My project triggers JDK-8066871" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1580162
[16:28] <teward> tdaitx: importance?
[16:30] <teward> tdaitx: triaged, agreed, but it should probably get an importance set, and I can't get to the KB article they linked heh
[16:31] <tdaitx> teward: high? it does have a severe impact on a small portion of Ubuntu users, but only 1 user so far so I can see how medium could fit
[16:32] <teward> i was steering towards Medium myself, but meh
[16:32] <teward> done
[16:32] <teward> and that's all for me today, lunchtime over, back to work!
[16:32] <tdaitx> teward: many thanks =)
[16:32] <teward> :P
=== tinocoff is now known as tinoco
[18:54] <patcable> Hi there -- I have https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1580952 committed in Xenial, but would also like to get the update tracked for Trusty as well. Would I apply the patch to 1.0.1-ubuntu2.13, up the version and update the changelog then do a debdiff and attach that to the ticket?
[18:54] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1580952 in apt (Ubuntu Xenial) "[SRU] Update apt/xenial to 1.2.12" [Undecided,Fix committed]
[18:57] <nacc> patcable: you'll also need to request someone open a task for trusty itself in that bug
[18:57] <nacc> patcable: and might want to adjust the title as well
[18:57] <patcable> heh, someone else filed that bug
[18:57] <patcable> nacc: so then, would i file another SRU for trusty, then attach a debdiff?
[18:58] <nacc> patcable: no, you can request here (per the sru documentation) that a bugtask be created for trusty in that same bug
[18:58] <nacc> patcable: and then you'd attach your trusty debdiff to that same bug
[19:00] <patcable> alrighty
[19:00] <nacc> patcable: have you made a debdiff before?
[19:00] <patcable> I havent, but I'm working on updating changelog and doing a build now
[19:01] <nacc> patcable: ok
[19:10] <patcable> nacc would i just do a debdiff *changes or debdiff on apt-transport-https?
[19:12] <nacc> patcable: there are probably multiple ways fo doing this, but i use dpkg-buildpackage to generate the .dsc file(s)
[19:12] <nacc> and then debdiff the .dsc files
[19:13] <patcable> hmm, i'll have to do this on a different machine then if i need to sign it with a key of some sort
[19:14] <nacc> patcable: it doesn't need to be signed for the purposes of the debdiff, iirc
[19:14] <patcable> ah ok
[19:14] <nacc> i tend to invoke it with: `dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -S -nc -d`
[19:14] <nacc> that's from a working directory containing the pacakge source
[19:19] <patcable> right, okay
[19:21] <patcable> nacc: should this file be huge? seeing a ton of docs that i didnt change in the diff
[19:22] <nacc> patcable: no it shouldn't, you mean the debdiff?
[19:23] <patcable> yeah
[19:23] <nacc> patcable: no, it should basically look like hte normal code patch, except you've also got a chagnelog change
[19:23] <patcable> thats what i thought. hm. let me try something again
[19:25] <patcable> ah, ok. yep. I ran debuild before running your dpkg-buildpackage
[19:26] <nacc> ah yeah
[20:07] <patcable> cool. So I updated 1575877 with that debdiff file and ask for it to be tracked in trusty. i even made one for precise for laughs
[20:08] <patcable> well... to be clear, I'm asking here for it to be tracked in trusty/precise :)