=== ErichEickmeyer is now known as Eickmeyer
=== tacocat` is now known as tacocat
=== tedg_ is now known as tedg
=== bluesabre_ is now known as bluesabre
=== coreycb_ is now known as coreycb
=== bashfulrobot_ is now known as bashfulrobot
=== ShibaInu is now known as Shibe
julianktsimonq2: Trying to find hmollercl, you sponsored two software-properties uploads for him, and pushed commits to git, but no tags. I can add some myself, but if possible I'd like to get signed tags from the person who uploaded it.08:30
* juliank just loves signed tags :)08:31
juliankWimpress: Why'd you change ubuntu-mate-welcome in bug 1673258 to "Opinion"? Are you committing to keep maintaining aptdaemon? ;)08:58
ubottubug 1673258 in update-notifier (Ubuntu) "Remove aptdaemon and drop or port its reverse-dependencies" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/167325808:58
juliank"Opinion" being a nicer word for "Won't fix" and all08:59
WimpressWell, we are currently implementing PackageKit support in the new version.09:01
juliankI just don't see how Opinion fits here09:02
Wimpress But vorlon made a comment on that bug last night which suggests we have to choose between two unmaintained options.09:03
juliankWell, that's true-ish09:03
WimpressHence 'Opinion'09:03
juliankPackageKit is still better supported than aptdaemon09:03
juliankIt just does not really get any features :)09:04
WimpressBecause I'm not certain which is the right path forward now, even though we're currently working towards PackageKit09:04
juliankI think the important point is to get rid of aptdaemon for 20.2009:04
juliankWhether we end up with PackageKit + a new apt daemon, or just a new apt daemon is less worrying09:05
juliankI gotta do some more speccing on that and some prototyping09:06
juliankReally I think everything except update-manager can be ported to PackageKit to at least reduce aptdaemon impact09:07
juliankI don't think the changes are really huge09:07
* juliank just ported software-properties to it09:08
juliankI think the blocker for update-manager is that PackageKit can essentially only install _or_ remove packages, but you can't specify both in one transaction.09:09
juliankwell, major blocker anyway09:09
juliankThat said: We use a hybrid approach: Use apt.Cache() to calculate the changes, and then apply them using PackageKit.09:10
juliankIt's a bit racy09:10
juliankBut PackageKit's always racy anway09:10
juliankugh, my port is not done09:12
juliankI gotta translate from apt package names to packagekit package-ids09:12
juliank(which are essentially name;version;arch;repo - I think the flags are optional)09:13
WimpressThanks for the info. We're planning to land the new version of Software Boutique for 19.10 and the current backends are PackageKit and snapd-glib09:13
juliankHuh, I just realized apt.Package.architecture is a function; but it should be a property.09:28
=== amurray` is now known as amurray
tsimonq2juliank: Join #lubuntu-devel and ping him by typing @HMollerCl (via Telegram)11:42
tsimonq2Our channels are bridged.11:43
juliankI see11:45
juliankhow odd11:45
=== ricab is now known as ricab|lunch
=== Unit193 changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Archive: FF, DIF | 19.04 Released! | Devel of Ubuntu (not support) | Build failures: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ | #ubuntu for support and discussion of Trusty-Disco | If you can't send messages here, authenticate to NickServ first | Patch Pilots:
=== ricab|lunch is now known as ricab
Odd_BlokeI'm updating a package to install its bash completion scripts in to /usr/share instead of /etc.  What is the right way to clean up the old /etc file on upgrade?18:17
rbasakOdd_Bloke: rm_conffile? Or are you wondering how to deal with local modifications?18:18
rbasakIf you're looking for rm_conffile, see dh_installdeb(1) on package.maintscript, and also dpkg-maintscript-helper(1), but I'm not sure if that's what you're asking, or already know that and are asking more specifically about the move.18:19
Odd_Blokerbasak: It's not something I've had to deal with before, so that is what I was asking. :)  Thanks!18:20
ahasenackOdd_Bloke: I *think* install the new one in /usr/share, and use rm_conffile on the etc one18:24
ahasenackthere is mv_conffile,18:24
ahasenackbut maybe it's just for renaming18:24
ahasenackand I'm not sure it supports moving to /usr/share18:25
ahasenackbut I would look into that too18:25
Odd_BlokeMy feeling is that rm_conffile is the right move, because it being in /usr/share is pretty much a declaration that we no longer consider bash completions to be conffiles, right?18:27
ahasenackalso moving it from etc to usr/share, and at the same installing the default one in usr/share, looks weird and prone to failure18:28
rbasakThe only thing you're losing is that you're not preserving user modifications to the file in /etc, which is normally the intention.18:30
Odd_BlokeAnd rm_conffile will leave a backup behind in the unlikely event that someone has felt the need to customise their cloud-init bash completions.18:30
rbasakIMHO that's sufficient if the package is reorganising like that.18:31
Odd_BlokeCool, thanks again!18:32
bladernrwas python3-guacamole dropped from Ubuntu for disco, or is it just an oversite that it's missing?19:18
Odd_Blokebladernr: https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2019/04/15/%23ubuntu-devel.html#t12:4219:20
bladernrOdd_Bloke, thanks!  sigh...19:21
seb128cyphermox, bug #1825206 claims to be a SRU regression21:23
ubottubug 1825206 in netplan.io (Ubuntu) "No wifi adapter present in Gnome after upgrade to 0.96-0ubuntu0.18.10.2" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/182520621:23
seb128bdmurray, SRU team, ^21:23
seb128also bug #1825402 claims to be an other SRU regression21:26
ubottubug 1825402 in systemd (Ubuntu) "Regression. Recent updates to cosmic broke hybrid-sleep " [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/182540221:26
seb128ddstreet, ^21:26
seb128vorlon, ^ unsure if people are still around/if tomorrow is off for them/if we should do something about those SRUs before the long w.e?21:27
bdmurrayseb128: its not a long weekend for people in the US21:27
seb128k, I was unsure21:27
seb128bdmurray, thx :)21:27
vorlonseb128: looking at it; I am skeptical that this is a regression introduced by the netplan SRU21:27
vorlonoh he says he verified by re-downgrading21:28
seb128vorlon, the user said that downgrading fixed it though... but yeah21:28
cyphermoxit's odd; I certainly don't expect this to be the case, but I'll have a look21:29
seb128cyphermox, thx21:40
seb128on that note calling it a day here, have a good evening/night :)21:40
gaughencyphermox, create a card please21:43
gaughenor i can21:43
gaughen(just tell me)21:43
vorloncyphermox: there's enough here that I am going to roll back the SRU while investigation continues23:26

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!