[05:39] <doko> mitya57: do you know the origin of this python -> python3 suggestion?
[06:05] <decci> Hello
[06:06] <decci> While installing openwsman 2.4.x it points to old openssl 1.1.0 package while I need it to use openssl 1.1.0 which is already installed on my system
[07:19] <decci> Any idea how shall I apply patch https://github.com/Openwsman/openwsman/issues/98
[10:43] <mitya57> doko, no :(
[12:52] <cpaelzer> is the auto-upgrading of dpkg owned conffiled done in some call in #DEBHELPER# or otherwise before/after?
[12:57] <cpaelzer> I know much is in dpkg-mainstcript-helper - I'm interested in the basic (if you have nothing in maintscripts) three way check: if "oldmd5 == storedmd5" then place new conf from pkg
=== alan_g is now known as alan_g|lunch
[13:02] <f_g> cpaelzer: AFAIK dpkg handles that itself when configuring a package, but you might want to wait for someone with more knowledge to confirm (or check dpkg's source yourself)
[13:02] <cpaelzer> I almost assumed it does so by itself, in that case it would be important where in the post/pre calling that comes
[13:02] <cpaelzer> but if it is dpkg itself then it might be in the flowchart on the debian wiki
[13:02] <cpaelzer> thanks f_g
[13:04] <cpaelzer> not that I'd see it clearly on https://wiki.debian.org/MaintainerScripts
[13:06] <f_g> cpaelzer: seems like it's before the call to postinst configure
[13:07] <cpaelzer> f_g: where did you see that?
[13:07] <f_g> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/dpkg/dpkg.git/tree/src/configure.c#n678
[13:07] <f_g> :P
[13:08] <cpaelzer> well that is documentation enough, thanks f_g
[13:08] <f_g> np - was curious myself ;)
[13:23] <cjwatson> cpaelzer: It's also in policy.  https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/#details-of-configuration
[13:24] <cpaelzer> yeah, thanks cjwatson
=== freyes__ is now known as freyes
=== alan_g|lunch is now known as alan_g
=== crogers_ is now known as crogers
=== crogers_ is now known as crogers
[18:36] <AsciiWolf> hi, does anyone have any info about the issue with Ubuntu Software (GNOME Software) not removing dependencies when uninstalling a package (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-software/+bug/1552792)? is there any chance that this bug will be (finally) fixed in 18.04?
[18:36] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1552792 in gnome-software (Ubuntu) "gnome software leaves dependencies installed" [Medium,Triaged]
[18:37] <jbicha> AsciiWolf: I don't think any one is working on that issue. You can file a bug upstream for it if you like
[18:39] <AsciiWolf> jbicha, so it is an upstream (packagekit?) issue?
[18:40] <jbicha> uh, maybe gnome-software?
[18:41] <AsciiWolf> I am not having this issue when using GNOME Software on Fedora
[18:42] <AsciiWolf> so I think it's rather a PackageKit apt backend issue
[18:43] <AsciiWolf> Ubuntu is using PackageKit (not aptdaemon) as GNOME Software backend, right?
[18:43] <jbicha> yes as of 17.10
[18:46] <AsciiWolf> ok... this issue is there since the switch to gnome software in 16.04 so maybe it's really a GNOME Software issue
[18:48] <AsciiWolf> I'll report it upstream, hope it will get fixed, it's really bad and confusing bug for regular users, especially in combination with this one: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-software/+bug/1528028
[18:48] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1528028 in GNOME Software "gnome-software does not report installing a desktop environment as a dependency" [Medium,In progress]
[18:54] <jbicha> AsciiWolf: Fedora 27's GNOME Software does not autoremove dependencies for no-longer-installed apps either
[18:55] <AsciiWolf> jbicha, that's weird, I have tried it before and it worked
[18:55] <AsciiWolf> I will try it again and let you know
[18:56] <jbicha> I just tried it by installing gnome-tweak-tool, gnome-shell-extension-user-theme is still installed
[19:04] <AsciiWolf> oops, looks like you are right!
[19:52] <AsciiWolf> jbicha, I have reported the issue upstream, thanks!
[20:53] <juliank> jbicha: I'd fully expect someone to work on this eventually, given the push for autoremoving stuff automatically in apt, and given that g-s is used by users even less aware of autoremove, it seems even more important to me.
[20:55] <Unit193> tjaalton: Hello!  I'm presuming the offhand remark about SRU'ing -ati wasn't really an offer or anything; however, if you did, I'd be willing to test (as I grabbed the package and added that patch, as well as several of the memleak/etc bug fixes too.)
[20:55] <juliank> I'm not entirely sure why there is such a huge interest in these things _now_, but then I don't really care about such details :)
[20:55] <Unit193> Hmm...Due to the upcoming LTS perhaps?
[20:56] <juliank> I mean, I'd do that directly _after_ the LTS, but not _in_ the LTS cycle :D
[20:57] <juliank> Like, we could have worked on that 2 years ago
[20:57] <Unit193> Hmm...Wasn't I going to try and bug you about another apt thing?
[20:57] <juliank> Maybe
[21:04] <coreycb> bdmurray: i have 2 neutron uploads to the artful queue. would you be able to delete the oldest one (about 10 minutes old now)?
[21:06] <bdmurray> coreycb: done
[21:06] <coreycb> bdmurray: thanks
[22:53] <TJ-> Could someone consider bug #1735014
[22:53] <ubottu> bug 1735014 in debootstrap (Ubuntu) "file:// and ssh:// protocols do not allow for failed gets" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1735014
[23:21] <rbasak> TJ-: looks like this is unrelated to the Ubuntu delta so should be sent up to Debian?
[23:22] <TJ-> rbasak: thanks; I'll do that