[04:55] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [rMANUALff0ca2458fa9: Remove uneeded whitespace] lynorian (Lyn Perrine) committed: https://phab.lubuntu.me/rMANUALff0ca2458fa9 [05:01] 20.04 qa-install; i mis-read testing checklist & had half of disk used by prior (custom) install; used 'install alongside' and expected it to use remaining space.. instead of shrank the partition by half & both old & new use half of hdd... is this an issue? (worth of bug report?) no errors & small text does say "alongside .. shrink a partition to make room" where I expected it 'skip' shrink free space... technically not a bug [05:01] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [rMANUAL16976f9c73ed: Add and outputs] lynorian (Lyn Perrine) committed: https://phab.lubuntu.me/rMANUAL16976f9c73ed [12:00] @guiverc [ 20.04 qa-install; i mis-read testing checklist & had half of disk used …], Yeah I'd also expect it to use the free space if it can. Instead of shrinking the earlier one. [12:04] I closed/ignored it. The text did say 'shrink partition to make room', if it did what I expected (used free space) a bug could be raised to say it didn't "shrink & use that space.." Why I always instal with something-else/manual... possibly Thanks @The_LoudSpeaker [12:06] Me too. I also prefer the something else option. [13:07] its time? @wxl @tsimonq2 @kc2bez @RikMills @HMollerCl ? [13:09] oh one hour yet. ain't it? [13:09] I think so [13:09] unless I calculated incorrectly [13:10] but yeah that's what I came up with on the calendar [13:18] I really don't understand Daylight savings time [13:19] It is a horrible creation. [13:19] No time is actually saved. [13:20] No more daylight is created. [13:22] @The_LoudSpeaker [its time? @wxl @tsimonq2 @kc2bez @RikMills @HMollerCl ?], for what? [13:22] Re: merges. [13:23] We fixed a time to together deal with them. [13:24] urgh [13:27] - don't always assume MoM does the best thing. It is a tool to help, that is all. [13:31] - don't always assume MoM does the best thing. It is a tool to help, that is all. … - merge changelogs should always list the kept delta to the debian revision you are merging from. I cannot, stress this enough, as it is the only way sometime in a few weeks/months/years will know what/why you kept a difference over debian. [13:32] - unless there is a good reason not keep a delta, it should be dropped [13:34] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [rCALAPACKAGINGd732ec0dafc3: Bump version for new upstream release.] kc2bez (Dan Simmons) committed: https://phab.lubuntu.me/rCALAPACKAGINGd732ec0dafc3 [13:34] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [rCALAPACKAGINGade23b607573: Upload to focal.] kc2bez (Dan Simmons) committed: https://phab.lubuntu.me/rCALAPACKAGINGade23b607573 [13:45] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [T150: Erase Disk fails with existing partition scheme] kc2bez (Dan Simmons) commented on the task: https://phab.lubuntu.me/T150#3222 [14:02] knock knock [14:03] O/ [14:04] o/ [14:06] * kc2bez needs more coffee [14:11] I'm here too [14:11] here [14:11] kettle's almost ready [14:12] @lubuntu_bot [*kc2bez: needs more coffee*], me tooo. [14:13] * kc2bez feels bad for wxl, it is super early on a Saturday for him. [14:13] @kc2bez I made changes according to your suggestions to D83, running debuild now. will update it in a bit [14:14] @lubuntu_bot [*kc2bez: feels bad for wxl, it is super early on a Saturday for him.*], what time is it wcl? [14:14] *wxl [14:15] 6:15 AM [14:16] Alrighty, we just need @tsimonq2 now [14:16] I am free after a few hours also. if wxl wants to wait sometime. [14:16] Oh sorry ABI BREAK !!! [14:16] XD [14:16] I think @tsimonq2 isn't up yet. for him also 8am na? [14:16] XD [14:17] He suggested the time. XD [14:18] wake up @tsimonq2 ! [14:20] ok guayusa is brewing. soon i'll be among the living [14:21] My next cup will be tea, I drink coffee for effect. [14:24] guayusa/mate (i've been blending the two but ran out of the latter) are both stronger than tea but not necessarily stronger than coffee [14:24] i should see if i can't get some guarana and try that out as it's supposed to be stronger than coffee [14:25] but i can't do coffee; it makes me crash bad [14:26] I usually stick to one cup; no additives (i.e. sugar, creamer). [14:27] well that's the other thing.. one cup is no fun. i like to drink throughout the day [14:27] also coffee kind of has an overwhelming taste [14:27] guayusa? never heard of it. In brazil there is a Guarana drink that competes with coke [14:28] guayusa is actually a member of the holly family which is interesting [14:28] That is why I switch after the first cup, it kills my stomach and is indeed overpowering. [14:28] it's native to the amazon in ecuador, peru, and columbia [14:28] you might want to take a look at https://phab.lubuntu.me/D83 now. @kc2bez [14:28] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [Needs Review] Merge from debian unstable.: https://phab.lubuntu.me/D83 [14:28] it's also found in bolivia [14:29] guarana is common in energy drinks [14:31] lgtm @The_Loudspeaker hopefully @tsimonq2 ABI BREAK stops by to look at it too. [14:31] should we start? [14:32] One sec. Let me finish my laddo first. [14:32] XD [14:32] I haven't have much time this days. [14:32] @HMollerCl [I haven't have much time this days.], +1 [14:33] there's another caffeine containing holly that has been used historically for drinking and supposedly has up to 6x the amount of caffeine of coffee [14:33] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_drink [14:33] i [14:33] 'm getting ready to call him [14:33] okie dokie [14:34] Talking of food and drinks, anyone here has heard of laddos? [14:34] no [14:35] no luck [14:35] you would really like them. have any indian friend nearby? we always have laddoos in the huse. [14:35] he must have his phone off [14:36] lite. We should continue then? [14:36] i guess so [14:36] to start with, have a look at D83 [14:37] if that's good then I will try to deal future merges the same way. [14:37] so first off i'll say i have to agree with @RikMills [14:38] when i've dealt with MoM before, i've ended up struggling. i kind of resolved to just do everything manually. at the very least you know what's going on without question [14:39] you mean using the .patch files from merge-tool? [14:40] i mean just ignoring all that and just generating the diffs and dealing with it [14:40] I did generate diffs and tried to apply but previous ubuntu side tweaks like those one line tweaks in control file are very confusing. [14:40] so your change log actually adds rather than subtracts history. that's always a good thing X'D [14:41] what do you mean by that? [14:41] white space at the end of a file? [14:42] no. [14:42] Nice, I slept through the alarm I set [14:42] Hello [14:42] see the control file at https://phab.lubuntu.me/D83 [14:42] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [Accepted] Merge from debian unstable.: https://phab.lubuntu.me/D83 [14:42] hey there [14:42] hii @tsimonq2! [14:42] good moning [14:42] *morning [14:42] i tried to signal call you but that didn't get anywhere apparently [14:42] I didn't bother answering you there [14:42] :) [14:43] hahaha [14:43] harumph [14:43] Anyway [14:45] ok D83 @tsimonq2 [14:45] https://phab.lubuntu.me/D83 [14:45] -lugito:#lubuntu-devel- [Accepted] Merge from debian unstable.: https://phab.lubuntu.me/D83 [14:45] *cracks knuckles* [14:46] look at the edit history. i don't understand why all the merges have those control file-single-line changes to build recommends. [14:47] i'm digging into that [14:47] my guess: debian fiddling with things unnecessarily [14:47] and even if they are, I don't get why merge-tool didn't use the multi-line changes that came from new debian release? [14:48] for ref: https://phab.lubuntu.me/P72 [14:48] The merge tool didn't try to merge d/control that is what the report indicated [14:49] It was telling you that there were things you needed to manually merge [14:50] no it did. there were diff3 errors at some places. it left those and merged other sections of control file. [14:50] where's that report at? we should link such things in merge differentials in the future just for help [14:50] see the control file obtained directly from erge-tool [14:51] wxl: https://merges.ubuntu.com/l/lxqt-sudo/REPORT [14:51] https://merges.ubuntu.com/l/lxqt-sudo/REPORT [14:51] kc2bez is saying the one conflict (i.e. the one area a manual merge was required) was in d/control https://merges.ubuntu.com/l/lxqt-sudo/REPORT [14:51] holy hell gmta [14:52] yeah there was a manual tweak required in one of the build deps of lxqt-sudo in control file but rest part including those one-liners was done by merge tool [14:53] do you have the diff of the 2 control files? [14:53] i don't rn but can make one. [14:54] D83 has one, is that the latest? [14:55] syntactically one line or multiple it should be the same I guess [14:56] iT IS. [14:56] I think wrap-and-sort woudl solve some of them [14:56] @hmollercl the D83 has the patched one. prepared by me [14:57] yep, but apparently you didn't runw "wrap-and-sort" [14:57] Depends and Recommends conflicts I think could be solved by wrap-and-sort [14:58] OH BEHENCHOD! wrap and sort writes them in one line [14:59] I just ran wrap and sort and it did that [14:59] wrap-and-sort removes uneeded spaces and sort alphabetically [15:00] your Recommends should have now first lxqt-plugin and then lxqt-sudo [15:00] so @kc2bez the points you mentioned in your comments in D83 about things not same as in debian were actually caused by wrap and sort [15:00] so debian doesn't use wrap and sort? [15:00] hmm I stand corrected there I guess. [15:01] if @wxl & @tsimonq2 approve, I can go forward with D83 [15:02] Actually you should revert some of what I told you to do [15:02] yup! one sec [15:03] there you go [15:03] done [15:04] wrap-and-sort is a debian tool; here it is mentioned in the manual https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debmake-doc/ch04.en.html [15:04] i should point out that if you look at the control history in debian, you'll see the formatting was always the way it is in debian.. that was introduced in 0.14.0 [15:04] however, we went straight from 0.13.0-0ubuntu2 to 0.14.0-0ubuntu1 as a new upstream release [15:05] so calling out in the changelog is the right thing to do (you did that) it highlights why it is different. [15:05] the diff was between 0.14.1-2ubuntu1 and 0.14.1-2 [15:05] luckily that has little effect on us but another example of us getting bit kind of badly by a merge of debian after we pulled in an upstream release before debian is bug 1864170 [15:05] Bug 1864170 in qtermwidget (Ubuntu Focal) "dpkg ugrade error - files in qtermwidget5-data also in old qtermwidget-l10n" [Critical, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1864170 [15:06] so you know what the ideal solution to these kind of problems is? get our butts in debian and pull in all the upstreams there and then merges will just happen [15:06] hehehe [15:07] i'm actually serious [15:07] not possible for me [15:07] well, not presently [15:08] wait kc2bez are you suggesting that he revert the changes to match debian? [15:08] No [15:08] ok [15:08] Raman just fixed it. [15:08] btw, how do we fix the bug that you justn pointed out @wxl ? [15:09] *just [15:09] The_LoudSpeaker: Breaks/Replaces [15:09] the cycle goes on! :) [15:09] it will force apt to trash whatever that is before it processes the package [15:09] Someone needs to sync the archive with phab though [15:10] ow you were talking about the bug and not me. :p [15:10] no i was talking about both! [15:10] I don't get that qtermwidget error [15:10] i'll explain that later as i don't want to totally derail this conversation [15:10] ok, thanks wxl [15:10] I can sync that @kc2bez. In a few hours. gtg now. Dinner time. [15:11] so here's the thing: unless alf decides to be a good boy and run wrap-and-sort, debian's going to have depends on their own lines [15:11] and if we DO run wrap-and-sort on our merges, then there's always going to be a conflict [15:11] Yeah. That's true. [15:11] we'll just keep hitting our head on this [15:11] btw, what about standards-version ib lxqt-sudo? [15:11] so i would personally suggest going back to the way you had it, where it matched debian [15:11] We should carry the change though, it is the proper way [15:12] well [15:12] i guess that's two schools of thought. i don't disagree with you [15:12] what would you do, @tsimonq2 ? [15:12] Our control will never match anyway [15:12] @wxl [ what would you do, @tsimonq2 ?], He'd probably run wrap and sort. [15:12] Vcs-Browser: https://phab.lubuntu.me/source/lxqt-sudo/ [15:13] @kc2bez [ Our control will never match anyway], Agreed. We have git changes also. [15:13] well fair point because our control might refer to an ubuntu version number and in that case we absolutely don't want to prefer the debian control [15:13] right that too [15:13] ok, it's decided then [15:14] We bored Simon, he went back to sleep XD [15:14] shouls we raise standards-version too? [15:14] apparently [15:14] Alright, morning. [15:14] you got your crack? :) [15:14] YES [15:14] * tsimonq2 shakes [15:14] alright party time [15:14] Yessir. [15:14] So. [15:14] btw afte rthis is done i have to go do yard work so meh [15:15] I'll look at Raman's merge first. [15:15] Oh, nice. We have too much snow here for that. [15:15] and shouldn't we tell debian packager that they shoudl run wrap-and-sort? [15:15] it should be good to go except for discussion of standards version [15:15] Yeah there is no yard here either. [15:15] @HMollerCl have you ever tried to tell agaida ANYTHING? X''''''D [15:15] ^^^^^^^ [15:15] I have some of my own verification steps I do for merges. [15:15] Give me a quick second to pull everything up. [15:16] maybe if someone spoke to him in german that might help [15:16] jajja, fair point [15:16] i don't think it would, honestly [15:16] Right after this, I will be doing some Phab upgrades. [15:16] he's stubborn and grumpy and silly [15:16] @tsimonq2 [ I'll look at Raman's merge first.], Also have a look at https://phab.lubuntu.me/P72 i also don't understand how the tool merged the rules file. [15:17] what part about it? [15:17] Party where it left the overrides section from debian. [15:18] *part [15:18] This line? https://phab.lubuntu.me/P72$186 [15:18] no [15:19] https://phab.lubuntu.me/P72$181 [15:19] 181 [15:19] Yeah [15:19] so which of those changes is yours? [15:19] None. [15:19] All by merge tool [15:20] My changes are in D83. [15:20] so i mean i guess they're both in question then, ultimately [15:20] The paste has changes are those done by merge tool [15:20] I'm not even looking at Phab, by the way. [15:20] $ debdiff lxqt-sudo_0.14.1-2.dsc lxqt-sudo_0.14.1-2ubuntu1.dsc | pastebinit [15:20] dpkg-source: warning: extracting unsigned source package (/tmp/lxqt-sudo_0.14.1-2ubuntu1.dsc) [15:20] https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/kCkZB2XvpN/ [15:20] This is a merge, from Debian. [15:20] So, I'm looking to see what we still change as compared to Debian. [15:21] pastebinit -f diff btw [15:21] Yeah yeah. [15:21] :P [15:22] @tsimonq2 [ $ debdiff lxqt-sudo_0.14.1-2.dsc lxqt-sudo_0.14.1-2ubuntu1.dsc | past …], You got this 2ubuntu1.dsc from grab-merge? [15:22] how can I see debian version in sid? [15:22] Nope, that's from the Phab diff. [15:22] pull-debian-source lxqt-sudo [15:22] not havinfg to download :P [15:23] @tsimonq2 [ Nope, that's from the Phab diff.], ? [15:23] you just want to know what the version is @HMollerCl? [15:23] @HMollerCl use a DDG bang search [15:23] @wxl [ you just want to know what the version is @HMollerCl?], just want to see debian/rules [15:23] !dpkg binary-package [15:23] Factoid 'dpkg binary-package' not found [15:23] bah [15:24] :) [15:24] ok, found https://salsa.debian.org/lxqt-team/lxqt-sudo [15:24] (!deb PACKAGENAME) [15:25] yeah if you get to packages.d.s, click on the milestone, then the source package, then the git link on the right [15:25] it's kind of a pita. a direct bang would be nice [15:25] true [15:25] so, in https://phab.lubuntu.me/P72 red (or -) is what we don't have, green (or +) is what debian don't have [15:26] @HMollerCl [so, in https://phab.lubuntu.me/P72 red (or -) is what we don't have, green (or + …], Yup! [15:26] Okay, so here's a few things that stand out to me. I'll reference things by line numbers in https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/kCkZB2XvpN/ : [15:26] the problem is it would be all but impossible because the way debian has gitlab organized th emaintaining teams are represented so it's not salsa.d.o/lxqt-sudo but /lxqt-team/lxqt-sudo [15:26] I compiled a list of recent merges here https://notes.lubuntu.me/J9a4EEfATfuWz7tz7bbYIQ# [15:26] It has a link to the debian git too [15:27] @tsimonq2 [ Okay, so here's a few things that stand out to me. I'll reference thi …], Goo. I am listening [15:27] the table gets formatted a little weird but it is all there. [15:30] Line 5 has urgency=low - for Ubuntu, keep all urgencies to medium. Line 81, the newline should NOT be there; that's a MoM bug, but always go back and remove that line. Line 171, that's also an unnecessary newline. Literally the only thing that should be in the changelog for REMAINING changes should be wrap-and-sort and maintainer changes. There aren't any other remaining Ubuntu-only changes as [15:30] compared to Debian. [15:30] I think you were looking at the Phab diff and got confused. We don't list changes from the last Ubuntu change in merges because we should already have Debian changelog entries which are verbose enough. [15:31] re: urgency, mom did that [15:31] I know. [15:31] Someplaces it has medium also. In other packages. [15:32] The purpose of merges is to incorporate new Debian changes as a *given*, and then re-evaluate the Ubuntu-only changes layered on top. That's why we diff against the Debian version, because we want to know how our package is different compared to Debian's. [15:32] About the newlines, yeah i noticed that. Forgot to fix. Will update D83 in a while. [15:32] I know. [15:32] The Phab diffs are always going to be misleading when it comes to Debian merges because they do not correctly evaluate what should be evaluated in a merge. [15:33] tl;dr we want to merge with debian… unless there's something useful to keep in ubuntu [15:33] Right. [15:33] And if all of the Ubuntu changes are garbage when applied to the new Debian revision, then just sync. [15:34] I was looking at debian one only. Check the paste. P72 it is created by debdiff debian-version.dsc ubuntu-version.dsc [15:34] @tsimonq2 ^ [15:35] @tsimonq2 [ https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/kCkZB2XvpN/], But don't understand how you got to this and I didn't [15:35] https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/kCkZB2XvpN/ [15:35] Also , the upstream/metadata changes are missing in here ^ [15:36] he used pull-debian-source [15:36] it provides lxqt-sudo_0.14.1-2.dsc [15:37] How he got the 0.14.1-2ubuntu1.dsc [15:37] ? [15:37] https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/Rhxm6SCznP/ [15:38] I can spot several additional inaccuracies with P72, but that could be an older revision anyway. [15:38] tl;dr he built the source from your patch [15:38] Oh. From D83 only. K. [15:38] @tsimonq2 [ I can spot several additional inaccuracies with P72, but that could b …], Yup! Lite [15:39] What do you think about the rules changes in P72 [15:39] Give me a diff compared to Debian and we can talk. [15:39] I think Debian did those changes. [15:39] Unless you just did. :) [15:39] fwiw grab-merge provides the same as pull-debian-source [15:39] @tsimonq2 [ Give me a diff compared to Debian and we can talk.], P72 is the diff compared to debian. [15:40] Between debian and the merge created by merge tool [15:40] The merge tool can be incorrect at times. [15:40] I don't trust it for some things. [15:40] It can make incorrect assumptions. [15:40] So go fix it. :p [15:40] i hear an echo here (@RikMills, myself) [15:40] Nice. [15:40] Okay. [15:40] So. [15:41] Push your new changes to D83 and we can talk. [15:41] If, of course, you made changes otherwise. [15:41] If those were changes *Debian* made then I have no freaking clue how you got that. [15:41] Perhaps an older Debian revision. [15:41] You mean the newline fixes and wrap sort? [15:42]