[00:36] <nauticalnexus> Trying to build a zsh 5.4.2 package on Ubuntu 17.10, keep getting this https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/ng385dFPT3/ not sure where to go from here
[01:49] <nacc> nauticalnexus: perhaps the zsh you are building needs a newer debhelper than is in artful
[01:49] <nacc> nauticalnexus: it looks like you are trying to backport the one form bionic to artful, but the bionic one is built with debhelper 11
[01:49] <nauticalnexus> I was trying to build it from source :P
[01:50] <nauticalnexus> with bzr dh-make
[01:50] <nacc> nauticalnexus: what source?
[01:50] <nauticalnexus> tarball, hold on
[01:50] <nacc> nauticalnexus: dh-make is presumably invoking debhelper
[01:50] <nauticalnexus> http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Arc/source.html tar xz from here
[01:50] <nacc> nauticalnexus: if you're building from a tarball, why are you using `bzr` ?
[01:51] <nauticalnexus> That's what the wiki says to do >.>
[01:51] <nacc> nauticalnexus: what wiki?
[01:51] <nauticalnexus> http://packaging.ubuntu.com/html/packaging-new-software.html#starting-a-package
[01:54] <nauticalnexus> I have no idea what I'm doing if you can't tell.
[01:54] <nauticalnexus> But I want to learn..
[02:01] <nacc> nauticalnexus: yeah you probably dont' want to follow that guide at all
[02:01] <nacc> and you want #ubuntu-packaging
[02:02] <nacc> nauticalnexus: i need to step away, but i can try and help tmrw
[02:02] <nauticalnexus> Ah, thanks, I'll go there
[08:18] <arunc> Hi, I found the version of OpenCV that will be shipped with Bionic will be a 3 year old version. Is it possible to update it to 3.4.x
[08:18] <arunc> Here is the bug to track https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/opencv/+bug/1753928
[08:19] <sarnold> arunc: there's a small chance; even though it's after feature freeze, opencv is in universe ..
[08:20] <Faux> The link in the bug report says 3.2 is being shipped, which makes more sense as that's what's in Debian since Oct.
[08:21] <sarnold> ah so it is. seems very unlikely then.
[08:22] <arunc> sarnold: sorry, I'm not quite sure what universe means here.
[08:23] <arunc> Faux: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/bionic/+source/opencv shows 3.1 and 3.2, not sure which one will be shipped though :-)
[08:23] <Faux> https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=opencv is more non-developer friendly.
[08:23] <sarnold> arunc: packages in universe are community supported; packages in main are canonical-supported. sometimes the rules around packages in univrese are relaxed occasionally when it makes some sense.
[08:23] <arunc> thanks
[08:24] <rbasak> nacc: slashd just found that the ubiquity usd-import-team repo is missing an ubuntu/devel branch. I can't think of how this might be expected?
[08:24] <sarnold> arunc: but there'd have to be a pretty compelling story to try to update a package in universe to something newer than debian is shipping
[08:27] <arunc> sarnold: I see, there are quite a bit of performance and stability improvements since last year.. FYI https://github.com/opencv/opencv/wiki/ChangeLog
[08:28] <arunc> 3.2 was released 1.5 years ago
[08:30] <sarnold> arunc: yeah, I can imagine it has probably seen a lot of use and refinement :) but I can't speak for why the debian maintainers for opencv are on the schedule they are, or what costs and benefits they weighed when deciding what to upload, when
[08:31] <Faux> The "dsfg" in the version number implies that the package is complicated.
[08:32] <StevenK> Not so much complicated as the source has had some things removed
[08:32] <sarnold> that qualifies for "complicated" in my book :) hehe
[08:33] <sarnold> "
[08:33] <sarnold> High-level API has been modified and is even more convenient now.
[08:34] <sarnold> if they removed or broke existing API that might be a huge roadblock to newer versions
[08:37] <arunc> I'm not familiar with Debian either.. but all I can think of is, Ubuntu 18.04 is going to be a LTS and if it doesn't ship the latest opencv, we will miss out huge benefits by default
[08:38] <arunc> thanks for your help.
[08:39] <StevenK> 3.3 is in experimental, so I guess it's not quite ready yet ...
[08:40] <infinity> arunc: I've always found "if X is an LTS, it must have the shiniest software" a strange argument, since the point of a stable LTS is to have software that doesn't change (modulo bug fixes and security advisories) for 5+ years.
[08:40] <infinity> arunc: I agree that it's nice to start those five years from a pretty shiny base, but that base gets out of date very quickly, compared to the total life of the release.
[08:45] <arunc> infinity: I can understand. In opencv's case with improvements in DNN, performance improvements, bug fixes and so on, it is sad not to see that come by default
[13:51] <rbasak> tjaalton: FYI, I'm looking at bug 1753839. Do you have any opinion (as you last merged)?
[13:52] <rbasak> I'm considering bumping to 1.5.6. Assessing that bump for feature changes/FFe requirement.
[14:52] <tjaalton> rbasak: ah, yes 1.5.6 sounds good to me
[15:28] <coreycb> bdmurray: hi, would you mind rejecting my python-cryptography uploads to xenial and artful?
[15:38] <coreycb> bdmurray: ty
[15:42] <bdmurray> no problem
[16:02] <dx> hey, i found that a bug in the pidgin package is caused by an ubuntu patch. how can i get someone to remove it? as far as i can see the maintainer is nobody in particular
[16:02] <dx> bug is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pidgin/+bug/1245666
[16:03] <bdmurray> coreycb: It looks like there is a test case in bug 1722553 but it isn't explicity called out and other SRU information is missing.
[16:09] <coreycb> bdmurray: sorry about that, it's updated now
[16:14] <sarnold> LocutusOfBorg: hey :) any chance you can take a look at /lastlog dx ? :) thanks
[17:50] <jbicha> pitti: I would like to drop python-volume-key from Debian (like we did with python-blockdev)
[17:51] <pitti> jbicha: ah, python 2 cleanup? sure, I suppose/hope it didn't grow any dependencies by now
[17:52] <jbicha> I don't see any :)
[18:46] <pitti> jbicha: ok,  I'll look into that now
[18:47] <pitti> oh, you did already, thanks
[18:50] <jbicha> pitti: yeah, it was a cleanup task for LP: #1754422 (which might not happen until 18.10 given the backlog)
[19:00] <LocutusOfBorg> sabdfl, ack thanks
[19:00] <LocutusOfBorg> s/sabdfl / sarnold
[19:00] <LocutusOfBorg> :)
[19:00] <LocutusOfBorg> done!
[19:00] <LocutusOfBorg> dx, thanks to you too
[19:02] <dx> oh, neat, thanks
[19:03] <dx> LocutusOfBorg: mind if i ask another thing? the xchat package has too many patches, could you remove the package itself? :P
[19:04] <tsimonq2> Oh boy. :P
[19:08] <pitti> xchat? I thought that was removed ages ago, and replaced with hexchat
[19:09] <pitti> oh really, it came back in artful
[19:11] <dx> yeah, LocutusOfBorg reintroduced it, and is now the new upstream
[19:48] <nacc> LP: #1753169
[19:48] <nacc> already filed by you dx :)
[19:52] <nacc> dx: however, the debian discussion seems more involved
[19:53] <dx> yeah, i figured i'd just wait for them to decide there
[19:53] <nacc> dx: yeah, seems reasonable
[19:56] <dx> of course taking a shortcut and just politely asking LocutusOfBorg to remove it was worth a shot
[19:57] <dx> it worked to remove a buggy patch from the pidgin package!
[19:57] <dx> totally the same thing