[00:47] just noted (forum question), https://manual.lubuntu.me/3/3.1/3.1.9/sddm_configuration.html?highlight=sddm refers to /etc/sddm.conf, but my 19.10 box has /etc/init/sddm.conf ?? lynorian [00:48] I don't know about 19.10 as currently for 19.04 so might need to get added to phab [00:51] ack. [01:41] guiverc: lynorian: i see both actually [01:41] i've never heard the init one referenced, though [01:41] which takes precedence? [01:42] curiously the manpage doesn't even mention init [01:42] I think that is what I used [01:43] sddm installs it [01:43] `apt-file show sddm | grep "sddm.conf` [01:43] Or packages.ubuntu.com [01:43] CLI <3 [01:44] strangely it doesn't provide /etc/sddm.conf [01:44] :) thanks folks [01:44] https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?searchon=contents&keywords=sddm.conf&mode=exactfilename&suite=disco&arch=any [01:44] and apt-file doesn't know where it comes from [01:44] wth [01:44] https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?searchon=contents&keywords=sddm.conf&mode=exactfilename&suite=bionic&arch=any [01:44] Okay wsr. [01:45] *wat [01:45] https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/disco/en/man1/sddm.1.html#files [01:45] Check the XDG properties of the sddm code for recent changes [01:45] 1. Find where the code is that reads the config file. [01:45] 2. History of that file, git blame [01:45] You can do this all via GitHub [01:46] Or CLI <3 [01:47] I say XDG as the "Kleenex" of config files because it usually points me in the right direction [01:47] Obviously season to taste [01:47] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T108: Drop or change pkexec patch in Calamares] kc2bez (Dan Simmons) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T108#2109 [01:47] https://github.com/sddm/sddm/blob/cf4c3caf058ea81d0e61c2087493623faac56a3f/src/common/ConfigReader.cpp#L144 [01:47] nope, no init [01:48] Next step, Debian packaging [01:48] https://tracker.debian.org/sddm [01:48] Top left corner, option to browse Git repo in a browser [01:50] i see they removed /etc/sddm.conf so that one could use /usr/share/doc/sddm/sddm.conf and build from there [01:50] i.e. it ships with default upstream settings [01:50] so that explains why /etc/sddm.conf doesn't come from anywhere [01:50] strange that it's there.... but whatever [01:51] .install doesn't show init https://salsa.debian.org/qt-kde-team/3rdparty/sddm/blob/master/debian/sddm.install [01:52] @RikMills: you know why sddm is installing /etc/init/sddm.conf? [01:53] one thing i should say is that based on the code it should be ignored [01:53] Oh nice, full upstart compatibility [01:53] Well, what I can say is, I do think defaults are loaded into /etc/sddm.conf and SDDM just reads from that [01:54] Otherwise Cala autologin wouldn't work [01:54] still, how it gets there is unknown XD [01:54] Agreed [01:54] Next, as a spot check, it wouldn't hurt to check the Ubuntu delta [01:54] Just In Case. [01:55] there's nothing obvious [01:55] That's just what I personally do, it's optional :P [01:55] oh [01:55] hey [01:55] init IS just an upstart script [01:55] so yeah, we can just ignore that [01:56] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T108: Drop or change pkexec patch in Calamares] tsimonq2 (Simon Quigley) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T108#2110 [01:58] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T108: Drop or change pkexec patch in Calamares] wxl (Walter Lapchynski) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T108#2111 [02:00] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T108: Drop or change pkexec patch in Calamares] kc2bez (Dan Simmons) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T108#2112 [02:01] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T108: Drop or change pkexec patch in Calamares] tsimonq2 (Simon Quigley) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T108#2113 [02:02] this override is driving me crazy, I have one for autotest which works ok, but the one for desktop-command-not-in-package does not. [02:05] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T108: Drop or change pkexec patch in Calamares] kc2bez (Dan Simmons) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T108#2114 [02:05] @HMollerCl [this override is driving me crazy, I have one for autotest which works ok, but t …], Warning vs info? [02:06] I forget if that's a part of it [02:06] info: … I: lubuntu-update-notifier source: unused-override desktop-command-not-in-package [02:06] warning: … W: lubuntu-update-notifier: desktop-command-not-in-package usr/share/applications/upg-apply.desktop lxqt-sudo [02:06] What does the Lintian override say specifically? [02:07] lubuntu-update-notifier source: desktop-command-not-in-package [02:07] that's the line [02:07] 1. Source vs binary package override [02:07] the whole file: … # lxqt-sudo is used to run lubuntu-upgrader with admin privileges … # while lxqt-sudo isn't provided in this package we declare a dependency on it. … lubuntu-update-notifier source: desktop-command-not-in-package … # Whishlist … lubuntu-update-notifier source: testsuite-autopkgtest-missing [02:07] 2. lxqt-sudo at the end? [02:08] 3. s/whishlist/wishlist/ ;) [02:10] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T108: Drop or change pkexec patch in Calamares] wxl (Walter Lapchynski) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T108#2115 [02:10] lubuntu-update-notifier source: desktop-command-not-in-package /usr/share/applications/lupg-apply.desktop lxqt-sudo [02:11] I tried that befiore, will try w/o the .desktop [02:13] @HMollerCl [I tried that befiore, will try w/o the .desktop], No, without the "source" :) [02:13] tried that to. [02:14] Hmmm [02:14] And with binary instead of source. [02:14] This is a fun one [02:14] maybe there is a bug [02:15] Try committing your Lintian overrides file and I'll run it by some peers of mine [02:17] here's a question [02:17] what's the *Exact* lintian error output [02:17] @teward001 [here's a question], no [02:17] *shot* [02:17] shush simon [02:17] *shoots Simon with a taser several hundred times* [02:17] @tsimonq2 [Try committing your Lintian overrides file and I'll run it by some peers of mine], Thanks, I will tell you when ready, I used this to be more general, but it does not work https://sources.debian.org/src/bleachbit/2.2-3/debian/lintian-overrides/ [02:18] where's the lubuntu-update-notifier packaging again? [02:18] @HMollerCl @tsimonq2 [02:18] in a ppa from myself [02:18] no i mean the source code [02:18] i.e. VCS [02:18] generally not your specific overrides file [02:19] https://phab.lubuntu.me/source/lubuntu-update-notifier/repository/master/ [02:19] ^ please commit it, even if it's a WIP [02:19] because depending on the format of the package you MIGHT need a binary.lintian-overrides file in debian/( [02:19] that? [02:19] for the binary name [02:19] yep [02:19] @HMollerCl try this... [02:19] make a file named lubuntu-update-notifier.lintian-overrides [02:19] put `lubuntu-update-notifier binary: desktop-command-not-in-package` in the overrides file [02:20] rerun lintian [02:20] see if that works [02:20] (that's the binary-specific override I"ve seen) [02:20] ASSUMING that the lintian trigger is on the binary not the source [02:20] thanks, will try. Sounds plausible [02:20] but again, I'd need to see the exact lintian run you're working with [02:20] N: Processing binary package lubuntu-update-notifier (version 0.1, arch all) ... … W: lubuntu-update-notifier: desktop-command-not-in-package usr/share/applications/upg-apply.desktop lxqt-sudo [02:21] that's why I think can be binary [02:21] OK so you need the binary level trigger *on* the binary package itself, hence the lubuntu-update-notifier.lintian-overrides attempt [02:21] if *that* fixes it your problem is solved [02:21] i have several such overrides in some packages I have [02:21] for built binaries even though they're `arch: all` [02:21] I put it in debian or in debian/source ? [02:21] (in my own repos) [02:21] in debian/ directly [02:22] same place you would put the postinst, etc. scripts for the binary specifically [02:22] note i'm pulling this approach from several exemplars I pulled of this explicitly being overridden [02:22] from Debain's list 😐 [02:23] @teward001 [from Debain's list 😐], What's a Debain [02:23] :P [02:23] shush [02:33] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T108: Drop or change pkexec patch in Calamares] wxl (Walter Lapchynski) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T108#2116 [02:36] @teward001 [02:36] did it work? [02:36] yesss [02:37] you're welcome. [02:37] but, it isn't documented... [02:37] at least not here https://lintian.debian.org/manual/section-2.4.html [02:37] yeah, lintian overrides aren't nicely documented [02:37] it's crap I learned from #debian-devel [02:37] back when I lurked there [02:37] @teward001 [yeah, lintian overrides aren't nicely documented], Time to document them, chop chop [02:37] speaking of which [02:37] @tsimonq2 it needs to be written at the Debian level [02:37] *dumps a gallon of coffee on teward* [02:37] GO GO GO GO GO [02:38] THAT"S YOUR JOB NOOB [02:38] how does one best deal with script-with-language-extension? [02:38] *shoves @tsimonq2 off the cliff into the Debian sea* [02:38] @wxl [ how does one best deal with script-with-language-extension?], Remove the extension and add a shebang [02:38] you're saying patch it [02:39] Where are you seeing this? [02:39] that compton fork [02:39] The answer I gave was generic, would help to get the exact Lintian output [02:39] W: compton: script-with-language-extension usr/bin/compton-convgen.py [02:40] Heh, yeah, my advice still applies [02:41] but you do mean patching, right? [02:41] Yeah [02:41] quilt add the new file name and the existing file name, mv old new, quilt refresh [02:41] and stuff like binary-without-manpage and desktop-entry-lacks-keywords-entry might be things to leave alone and not override so we don't forget to fix them right? [02:41] Right [02:42] Those are things to tell upstream to look at [02:42] right right [02:42] Or we ship ourselves [02:42] testsuite-autopkgtest-missing too i'm sure [02:42] Yeah [02:42] did you see what i said earlier about copyright? [02:42] testsuite-autopkgtest-missing also isn't a critical error i think, it's somewhat hand-waveable to some extent. [02:43] @wxl [ did you see what i said earlier about copyright?], Unless the file is very very substantially rewritten, keep the old notice there [02:43] And thus the new license [02:43] You can say something like "modifications licensed under X by Foo Bar" [02:43] well a general goal of the project is to refactor everything [02:43] Season to taste [02:43] the project = the new fork [02:43] so chances are we're seeing some big rewrites [02:44] Right, so determine whether most of the file is rewritten. Just because it's their goal doesn't mean they can automatically assume full copyright, unless they do in fact rewrite it [02:44] WHOA [02:44] example: src/compton.c 6727 sloc (old) v 1993 sloc (new) [02:45] Ultimately it's a judgment call. Worst case scenario, it wouldn't hurt to check with someone on the AA team [02:46] AmericanAirlines? [02:46] Archive Administrators :) [02:47] Archive Admins are the people with the ultimate responsibility of accepting new packages into the archive, verifying copyright, and making sure the archive stays relatively sane [02:47] there's a contributors list, so i guess i need to mess with that [02:47] Release Team is similar although they don't process NEW queues and their focus is towards the release [02:47] and AA tries to help newish sponsors catch mistakes they make in reviews ;) [02:47] oh jeeeez it seems that the preferred license for new files is mpl, too [02:47] omg this is a freaking mess [02:48] I'll openly say that I think copyright in packaging is the single worst thing you have to do, hands down [02:48] Even AAs hate it 😆 [02:48] HAH [02:48] Compton is distributed under MIT license, as far as I (richardgv) know. See LICENSE for more info. [02:48] that's from the "original" compton [02:49] Heh [02:49] cuz it's a fork of xcompmgr.dana [02:49] itself a fork of xcompmgr [02:49] Good luck wxl :P [02:49] omg kill me freaking now [02:50] Most time I've spent on copyright for a package is probably... 6 or 7 hours? [02:50] hmmmmm it does use spdx [02:51] so should i make myself the maintainer? [02:51] Oh and don't forget to make sure each license is DFSG compatible [02:52] Nope, Lubuntu Developers [02:52] Unless of course you think this should go into Debian [02:52] In which case, yes [02:52] oh right well i guess that's what i meant.. should we change it [02:52] i think it should go into debian [02:52] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [rUPDATENOTIFIER5b9bdef0b1f2: lxqt-sudo lintian override] Hans P Möller committed: https://phab.lubuntu.me/rUPDATENOTIFIER5b9bdef0b1f2 [02:52] compton proper is deeeeeeeeeeeeeead [02:52] Okay, so set yourself as the maintainer and set me as an "Uploader" [02:53] Please use my Debian address though [02:53] that's a valid control key? [02:54] vim's not highlighting it right [02:54] Er, Uploaders [02:54] thx [02:54] *salts @tsimonq2* [02:54] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T98: Cleanup for lubuntu-update-notifier prior to uploading] hmollercl (Hans P. Möller) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T98#2118 [02:57] wxl: Please file an ITS bug for compton: https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch05.en.html#ps-guidelines [02:57] I can help if needed [02:57] kk [02:57] Obviously we can upload this to Ubuntu first if we want this in before Feature Freeze, and then do a no-change sync before the release [02:57] i need ppl testing first tho! [02:58] True [02:58] Up to you if you want this in for 19.10 [02:58] if worse comes to worst i'm gonna just push it i think [02:58] Otherwise we can totally get this done completely in Debian and spend more time testing [03:00] If you can successfully do this ITS, sort through existing compton bugs in Debian, and give me something sponsorable with no major issues, I'll advocate for you becoming a Debian Maintainer no questions asked [03:00] huh [03:00] Debian Maintainer is basically PPU but for Debian :P [03:01] And DDs get to grant access [03:01] i'm surprised it's that easy [03:01] We've already keysigned [03:01] Debian Maintainer is a lot more handwavey than Debian Developer, believe me [03:02] I trust your packaging ability enough to be able to trust you with an advocation if you can nail these Debian processes [03:02] cool [03:03] aw hell [03:03] renaming the file makes the build fail [03:03] Let me guess, dh_missing/dh_install? [03:03] i'll also mention this dude is all about the fancy. they're using meson to build [03:03] Oooo [03:04] i was *SHOCKED* dh didn't blow up about it [03:04] So what's the build error? XD [03:04] meson.build:69:0: ERROR: File bin/compton-convgen.py does not exist. [03:05] i guess i can patch the build file, too [03:06] yay that was easy [03:07] @tsimonq2: any luck with any of these? https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReviewTools [03:08] i'm not sure wh the manpages don't build [03:08] They're good if the licenses are standard [03:08] Of course, you have to check that out [03:09] both the fork and regular old compton use asciidoc [03:09] The license? [03:09] hm? [03:09] How is asciidoc relevant? [03:10] oh i'm sorry i changed subjects on you [03:10] manpages aren't building [03:10] First instinct is to add an override in debian/rules [03:10]