Next Session: TBD |
1 [07:00] <@dholbach> ok my friends... the bells are tolling 8 o' clock here, so it's 6:00 UTC - ready to start!
2 [07:00] <@dholbach> who's here for some packaging training action?
3 [07:00] <Pollywog> me
4 [07:00] <balarka> m
5 [07:00] <balarka> me
6 [07:00] <silentsno> me 2
7 [07:01] <hassanibraheem> me too :)
8 [07:01] <sianis> me
9 [07:01] <Adila01> me
10 [07:01] <decumanus_> me
11 [07:01] <akgraner> me
12 [07:01] <brand0con> muah!
13 [07:01] <@dholbach> fantastic
14 [07:02] <@dholbach> ok... so we're going to take a look at a few bugs I selected beforehand
15 [07:02] <@dholbach> and try to see what we can do about them
16 [07:02] <tashuiwuhen_> me
17 [07:03] <@dholbach> a category of bugs that is predestined for doing that is what you get when you click on the "xxxxx bugs fixed elsewhere" link on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu
18 === dave_ is now known as pkpdjh
19 [07:03] <@dholbach> these are bugs that were filed in Ubuntu, our Bug Squad identified they were upstream problems (so no bugs that we introduced ourselves), forwarded those bugs to the upstream bug trackers and they were fixed there
20 [07:03] <@dholbach> before we get started, we need to set up a few things
21 [07:04] <@dholbach> could you please either 1) use the "Software Properties" dialogue to enable Sources or 2) add something like "deb-src http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ jaunty restricted main multiverse universe" to /etc/apt/sources.list and run sudo apt-get update
22 [07:05] <Pollywog> I am running Hardy and Intrepid, not yet Jaunty
23 [07:05] <@dholbach> once you're done with that, please install the following packages:
24 [07:05] <@dholbach> cdbs bzr ubuntu-dev-tools devscripts
25 [07:05] <@dholbach> Pollywog: OK, then please adjust that line
26 [07:06] <Pollywog> k
27 [07:06] <@dholbach> next please add something like this to your ~/.bashrc file
28 [07:06] <@dholbach> export DEBFULLNAME='Daniel Holbach'
29 [07:06] <@dholbach> export DEBEMAIL='daniel.holbach@ubuntu.com'
30 [07:07] <@dholbach> (if you use a different shell, please use whatever config file that shell has, bash should be the default)
31 [07:07] <posingaspopular> where do we ask questions?
32 [07:07] <@dholbach> just in here
33 [07:07] <@dholbach> afterwards either restart your terminal, or run source ~/.bashrc
34 [07:07] <posingaspopular> oh nvm, Pollywog asked it i guess. apt-get complained about dist parse
35 [07:08] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: can you put up the log of that at http://paste.ubuntu.com ?
36 [07:08] <balarka> dholbach, so i put this line deb-src http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy restricted main multiverse
37 [07:09] <balarka> dholbach, is this correct ?
38 [07:09] <balarka> dholbach, i am using hardy
39 [07:09] <@dholbach> balarka: add universe to the end of the line too
40 [07:09] <balarka> dholbach, oh ok
41 [07:09] <balarka> dholbach, done
42 [07:09] <@dholbach> so what we did up until now 1) tell apt where to get source code of packages, 2) install a few tools we're going to need, 3) tell the packaging tools who you are (that simplifies a bunch of things later on)
43 [07:09] <posingaspopular> dholbach: http://pastebin.com/d56816cc
44 [07:10] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: try removing the space in front of the last lines
45 [07:10] <balarka> dholbach, you mean add export lines at the end of bashrc file?
46 [07:10] <@dholbach> balarka: yes
47 [07:10] <posingaspopular> ah no, i didnt add it correctly. didnt add the actual (universe, mulitverse, etc) at the end of the line
48 [07:10] <balarka> dholbach, ok
49 [07:11] <hassanibraheem> dholbach: should the .bashrc changes reflect the launchpad account settings?
50 [07:11] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: I guess " deb...." instead of "deb....." is the problem
51 [07:11] <@dholbach> hassanibraheem: it's generally a good idea to have that email address registered with Launchpad, but not relevant now
52 [07:11] <hassanibraheem> dholbach: ok
53 [07:12] <@dholbach> hassanibraheem: your preferred one will do
54 [07:12] <@dholbach> ok... who's not set yet? :)
55 [07:13] <balarka> dholbach, regarding the 3 point
56 [07:13] <brand0con> uhmm i may be outa luck. running debian and unable to get ubuntu-dev-tools
57 [07:13] <balarka> dholbach, you meant to say we need to put
58 [07:13] <balarka> our name and address
59 [07:13] <@dholbach> brand0con: ignore ubuntu-dev-tools for now then
60 [07:13] <brand0con> ok
61 [07:13] <balarka> in the export lines?
62 [07:13] <brand0con> everything else is good
63 [07:13] <@dholbach> brand0con: rock on
64 [07:13] <@dholbach> balarka: yep
65 [07:13] <@dholbach> just add something like this to the end of the file
66 [07:13] <@dholbach> export DEBFULLNAME='Daniel Holbach'
67 [07:13] <@dholbach> export DEBEMAIL='daniel.holbach@ubuntu.com'
68 [07:13] <balarka> dholbach, so we dont have any @ubuntu.com address
69 [07:14] <balarka> dholbach, so any outside email address should be fine?
70 [07:14] <@dholbach> that's not necessary now
71 [07:14] <@dholbach> yep
72 [07:14] <balarka> dholbach, got it
73 [07:14] <balarka> dholbach, sure
74 [07:14] <@dholbach> super, so let's crack on
75 [07:14] <@dholbach> I thought we'd pick https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/subvertpy/+bug/323270 first
76 [07:15] <@dholbach> the problem is in a python module, when used with python 2.6 (default in jaunty) it emits a warning about the deprecated use of another python module
77 [07:15] <@dholbach> luckily the problem has been solved by upstream already
78 [07:15] * ara reads the bug report
79 [07:16] <@dholbach> everybody who is on jaunty, please run
80 [07:16] <@dholbach> apt-get source subvertpy
81 [07:16] <@dholbach> everybody else, please run
82 [07:16] <@dholbach> dget -xu https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/jaunty/+source/subvertpy/0.6.1-1build1/+files/subvertpy_0.6.1-1build1.dsc
83 [07:16] <@dholbach> this will download the source package for you
84 [07:16] <maco> what does the u do?
85 [07:16] <@dholbach> so what's a source package?
86 [07:16] * sianis is done
87 [07:17] <Pollywog> dget? is that a typo?
88 [07:17] <@dholbach> Pollywog: no
89 [07:17] <Pollywog> k
90 [07:17] <Hobbsee> maco: it allows unauthenticated sources to be downloaded and unpacked
91 [07:17] <maco> Hobbsee: thanks. ive only used -x
92 [07:17] <@dholbach> maco: (if you don't have the GPG key of the person who signed it)
93 [07:17] <balarka> dholbach, it says dget is not installed
94 [07:17] <@dholbach> balarka: install devscripts please
95 [07:17] <balarka> dholbach, sure
96 [07:17] * silentsno downloaded the source for subvertpy.
97 [07:18] <@dholbach> a source package is what we need to build .deb packages
98 [07:18] <silentsno> ls
99 [07:18] <balarka> dholbach, it says unknown option u
100 [07:18] <balarka> when i type dget command
101 [07:18] <balarka> as above
102 [07:18] <silentsno> Question: so is the upstream patch already uploaded into this source package that we just downloaded?
103 [07:18] <@dholbach> it consists of 1) the .orig.tar.gz which is the unmodified tarball the upstream authors released on their homepage, 2) the .diff.gz: the compressed set of changes we need to make to build it "the debian/ubuntu way" and 3) .dsc file which is meta data like md5sums and so on
104 [07:19] <@dholbach> balarka: just use dget -x then
105 [07:19] <@dholbach> silentsno: no, that's our job :)
106 [07:19] <@dholbach> we'll get to that in a sec
107 [07:19] <@dholbach> does everything I said above make sense?
108 [07:19] <@dholbach> any questions right now?
109 [07:19] <PartyBoi2> yes
110 [07:19] * silentsno nods his head.
111 [07:20] <Hobbsee> silentsno: the stuff that's just been unpacked is what ubuntu currently has in jaunty for that package, fyi
112 [07:20] <@dholbach> ok perfect
113 [07:20] <balarka> dholbach, yes.. got the downloaded things
114 [07:20] <@dholbach> the great thing is: this works for every package in Ubuntu
115 [07:20] <Pollywog> I got 404's
116 [07:20] <@dholbach> you have all the source code just seconds away from you
117 [07:20] <balarka> dholbach, quick ques.. so can i treat a package as a class or module?
118 [07:20] <balarka> dholbach, or any spl entity?
119 [07:20] <Pollywog> nvm I think I had a typo
120 [07:20] <@dholbach> Pollywog: can you put up the log at http://paste.ubuntu.com ?
121 [07:21] <Pollywog> looks good now
122 [07:21] <@dholbach> balarka: a package is just a piece of software, it can be an end-user application, a small tool or a library that other tools use
123 [07:21] <balarka> dholbach, ok
124 [07:21] <@dholbach> in our case it's a "python module", so a piece of code that other packages written in python make use of
125 [07:22] <balarka> dholbach, got it
126 [07:22] <@dholbach> super
127 [07:22] <@dholbach> if you run
128 [07:22] <@dholbach> cd subvertpy-0.6.1
129 [07:22] <@dholbach> less debian/copyright
130 [07:22] <tashuiwuhen_> what's the use of the command?
131 [07:22] <@dholbach> you will see information about the copyright and everything - right now we're just interested in "where do we get the sofware from?"
132 [07:23] <@dholbach> tashuiwuhen_: which command do you mean?
133 [07:23] <tashuiwuhen_> less
134 [07:23] <@dholbach> it will display the content of debian/copyright in a "pager"
135 [07:23] <@dholbach> which means you can scroll up and down using arrow keys, etc
136 [07:23] <@dholbach> once you're bored, you can type 'q'
137 [07:24] <@dholbach> "more" or "cat" would have worked too :)
138 [07:24] <tashuiwuhen_> 0,got it,thanks
139 [07:24] <@dholbach> super
140 [07:24] <@dholbach> we're interested in this line
141 [07:24] <@dholbach> It was downloaded from http://launchpad.net/subvertpy.
142 [07:24] <@dholbach> if you don't know where a particular package has its code from, debian/copyright should always tell you
143 [07:25] <@dholbach> so subvertpy is hosted on Launchpad, just like Ubuntu is
144 [07:26] <@dholbach> the great thing is, we can now do something like
145 [07:26] <@dholbach> bzr branch lp:subvertpy
146 [07:26] <@dholbach> to get the source code
147 [07:26] <@dholbach> (maybe run cd .. beforehand)
148 [07:26] <balarka> dholbach, didnt we get the code already?
149 [07:26] <balarka> by dget command?
150 [07:27] <@dholbach> balarka: that's what's in Ubuntu right now
151 [07:27] <cel_> Question: lp is because of "launchapd"?
152 [07:27] <@dholbach> balarka: now we get the current tip of what the upstream developers have been working on
153 [07:27] <@dholbach> cel_: exactly
154 [07:27] <cel_> ok, thanks
155 [07:27] <Pollywog> I get unknown repository format
156 [07:27] <Crusher> me too
157 [07:27] <balarka> dholbach, ques.. who are the upstream developers?
158 [07:28] <@dholbach> balarka: the software authors of "subvertpy"
159 [07:28] <balarka> dholbach, oh ok
160 [07:28] <@dholbach> ok, let's take a different approach then
161 [07:28] <JanC> Pollywog: you need a newer bzr
162 [07:28] <Pollywog> hmmm
163 [07:28] <Pollywog> I am running Intrepid how old could it be
164 [07:28] <balarka> dholbach, it says bzr is not installed
165 [07:28] <pkpdjh> I get the same error (using Intrepid)
166 [07:28] <balarka> dholbach, which version is preferable to install
167 [07:28] <@dholbach> balarka: install the bzr package then please
168 [07:29] <ara> balarka: sudo apt-get install bzr
169 [07:29] <balarka> ok
170 [07:29] <balarka> dholbach, i get parse error at the end
171 [07:29] <balarka> dholbach, for sudo apt-get install bzr
172 [07:29] <balarka> dholbach, command
173 [07:30] <@dholbach> balarka: anything wrong in /etc/apt/sources.list then?
174 [07:30] <balarka> /var/lib/scrollkeeper/C/scrollkeeper_extended_cl.xml:5852: parser error : Extra content at the end of the document
175 [07:30] <JanC> peopel with older distros might need the https://launchpad.net/~bzr/+archive/ppa repository
176 [07:30] <maco> Pollywog: basically anyone not on jaunty needs that ppa
177 [07:30] <@dholbach> balarka: that's an unrelated problem
178 [07:30] <Pollywog> maco: ty
179 [07:30] <spych102> I get Unknown branch format on hardy
180 [07:30] <balarka> dholbach, i dont think so.. as sudo apt-get update went fine
181 [07:30] <balarka> dholbach, without any errors
182 [07:30] <@dholbach> ok... hold off from running bzr branch lp:subvertpy then
183 [07:30] <maco> ***** NON JAUNTY USERS: see the PPA JanC linked
184 [07:30] <@dholbach> we'll use a different approach
185 [07:31] <balarka> dholbach, sure
186 [07:31] <tashuiwuhen_> me,too,spych102
187 [07:31] <@dholbach> no PPA needed then :)
188 [07:31] <@dholbach> so if you head to http://launchpad.net/subvertpy - it takes you a few clicks to get to https://code.launchpad.net/~jelmer/subvertpy/trunk-mirrored
189 [07:31] <@dholbach> which shows the revision history of what the upstream developers of subvertpy been up to
190 [07:32] <@dholbach> if you click on the "Source Code" link, it will show you the source code
191 [07:32] <posingaspopular> dholbach: what is the syntax in /etc/apt/sources.list for the ppa?
192 [07:32] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: forget about the PPA for now
193 [07:33] <silentsno> "Please try again" Sorry, there was a problem connecting to the Launchpad server.
194 [07:33] <Adila01> ha ha, I am having the same problem too
195 [07:33] <balarka> me too
196 [07:33] <silentsno> Thats from clicking on the SourceCode link
197 [07:33] <@dholbach> first packaging training session - everything needs to go wrong now
198 [07:33] <@dholbach> :-))))
199 [07:33] <silentsno> :)
200 [07:33] <balarka> :)
201 [07:33] <balarka> thats the spirit!
202 [07:33] <@dholbach> I just told the developers :)
203 [07:33] <silentsno> it just came up for me
204 [07:33] <@dholbach> ok, so back to https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/subvertpy/+bug/323270 for a minute
205 [07:34] <@dholbach> the first comment says:
206 [07:34] <@dholbach> Using Python 2.6:
207 [07:34] <@dholbach> ...Lib\site-packages\subvertpy\delta.py:21: DeprecationWarning: the md5 module is deprecated; use hashlib instead
208 [07:34] <@dholbach> import md5
209 [07:34] <balarka> we shldnt leave me too!
210 [07:34] <@dholbach> what we need to check out now is subvertpy/delta.py - this seems to be where the problem is right now
211 [07:35] <sianis> dholbach: the source line at line 21
212 [07:35] <@dholbach> exactly
213 [07:35] <@dholbach> I'll fast-forward a bit for now
214 [07:35] <@dholbach> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/%7Ejelmer/subvertpy/trunk-mirrored/changes?filter_file_id=delta.py-20080316001917-xyng7m3jlxvdc4c9-1
215 [07:35] <@dholbach> shows the changes which have been done to the upstream code repository for that file
216 [07:36] <@dholbach> does anyone see which revision number might solve our problem?
217 [07:36] <silentsno> 2016
218 [07:36] <sianis> dholbach: 2016
219 [07:36] <Pollywog> yes 2016
220 [07:36] <@dholbach> does everybody see the connection there? :)
221 [07:36] <@dholbach> ok, so let's head over to http://bazaar.launchpad.net/%7Ejelmer/subvertpy/trunk-mirrored/revision/2016
222 [07:36] <Crusher> yes
223 [07:36] <decumanus_> yes:-)
224 [07:37] <tashuiwuhen_> yes
225 [07:37] <@dholbach> and click on the "Download diff" link
226 [07:38] <balarka> dholbach, i could see someone used a deprecated method i guess
227 [07:38] <balarka> dholbach, i am not good at python
228 [07:38] <balarka> :)
229 [07:38] <@dholbach> in this case we'll trust upstream
230 [07:38] <@dholbach> if you cd into subvertpy-0.6.1/ again
231 [07:38] <@dholbach> and (if you have ubuntu-dev-tools installed) run what-patch
232 [07:39] <@dholbach> can anyone see the message it puts out?
233 [07:39] <silentsno> where should we put the diff file
234 [07:39] <@dholbach> silentsno: just save it somewhere you can find it again :)
235 [07:39] <sianis> dholbach: It says patchless?
236 [07:39] <posingaspopular> command not found?
237 [07:39] <Crusher> dholbach: patchless
238 [07:39] <@dholbach> Crusher, sianis: exactly
239 [07:40] <@dholbach> so what does what-patch do?
240 [07:40] <maco> posingaspopular: you have ubuntu-dev-tools installed?
241 [07:40] <Crusher> tell you patching system its using
242 [07:40] <posingaspopular> oh, the command is 'what-patch' not 'run what-patch' :P
243 [07:40] <@dholbach> it tell us, if the package maintainer decided to store additional patches on top of the regular code
244 [07:40] <tashuiwuhen_> got it
245 [07:40] <@dholbach> err, in which way the maintainer decide to store patches
246 [07:41] <maco> dholbach: you mean as in a patch management system?
247 [07:41] <balarka> dholbach, what are we trying to achieve
248 [07:41] <@dholbach> in our case the maintainer decide to just patch the source directly
249 [07:41] <balarka> here?
250 [07:41] <@dholbach> maco: exactly
251 [07:41] <balarka> dholbach, i am kind of lost
252 [07:41] <@dholbach> balarka: so the packgae in Ubuntu right now is broken
253 [07:41] <balarka> dholbach, ok
254 [07:41] <Pollywog> you mean they patched it rather than give us the patch to use?
255 [07:41] <maco> well that's much cleaner than the grepping in debian/control dtchen told me to do
256 [07:41] <@dholbach> balarka: we found out that it's fixed by the software authors already, we found out what the fix is and downloaded it
257 [07:41] <@dholbach> balarka: now we need to apply it to the package
258 [07:42] <hassanibraheem> dholbach: so, in that case, the ubuntu source is just the upstream code with no additional ubuntu changes... right?
259 [07:42] <balarka> dholbach, so the diff we downloaded has the patch?
260 [07:42] <sianis> dholbach: Deprecation is a warning and not an error, isn't it?
261 [07:42] <@dholbach> hassanibraheem: that we can not tell, you're right "patchless" is a bit misleading there - I'll make a note
262 [07:42] <@dholbach> hassanibraheem: what it means to say is "patches are directly applied on the source and not stored separately"
263 [07:42] <JanC> Pollywog: they can't just send the patch to everybody on the internet ;)
264 [07:43] <Pollywog> k
265 [07:43] <blfgomes> what other valid output could I expect, other than "patchless?"
266 [07:43] <Pollywog> I was not sure if I understood
267 [07:43] <@dholbach> sianis: yes, but may become an error in the future - also the warning might be a bit disturbing if you get it every day :)
268 [07:43] <hassanibraheem> dholbach: oh, ok
269 [07:43] <@dholbach> balarka: yep
270 [07:43] <sianis> dholbach: you got roght :P
271 [07:43] <balarka> ok
272 [07:44] <Pollywog> problem here will be the patch level if we all did not put our patch file in the same place, I think
273 [07:44] <maco> blfgomes: quilt, cdbs, yabba...i assume it just spits out their names directly
274 [07:44] <balarka> dholbach, so how do we know that. .that the patch is seperate and the patch has not already been applied to the code
275 [07:44] <Crusher> blfgomes: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/PatchSystems
276 [07:44] <blfgomes> maco, Crusher: thanks
277 [07:45] <@dholbach> balarka: exactly
278 [07:45] <Hobbsee> balarka: because if it had been applied already, the bug wouldn't exist, right?
279 [07:45] <silentsno> balarka: the code that ubuntu has is older and without this updates that we will apply
280 [07:45] <balarka> Hobbsee, but if the bug is already there.. why dont the devs fix it
281 [07:45] <balarka> and give?
282 [07:46] <Hobbsee> balarka: and you know that the bug still exists, thus, it's not been applied. Also, when you later use patch (or similar tools), it will warn you if it's already been applied, and ask you if you want to revert it
283 [07:46] <maco> balarka: it has been fixed upstream in a new version. we're backporting the fix.
284 [07:46] <Hobbsee> balarka: because you're "the dev" in terms of ubuntu, and you're fixing it.
285 [07:46] <balarka> maco, Hobbsee thanks
286 [07:46] <Pollywog> maco: thanks that answers my puzzlement as well
287 [07:47] <@dholbach> so I just tried applying the patch and this is what I got:
288 [07:47] <@dholbach> patching file subvertpy/delta.py
289 [07:47] <@dholbach> Hunk #2 FAILED at 86.
290 [07:47] <maco> (note: you'll sometimes see pulling commits back into an older version referred to as "cherrypicking")
291 [07:47] <balarka> Hobbsee, so if i am the dev.. why would i put the patch someone else done already?
292 [07:47] <JanC> to say it simple: some people write software, and others make sure it works in their distro ;)
293 [07:47] <balarka> Hobbsee, i am little confused here
294 [07:48] <Hobbsee> balarka: right, so there are two types of developers, right?
295 [07:48] <Hobbsee> balarka: there's the people who write the software, and the people who package the software to get it into ubuntu
296 [07:48] <balarka> Hobbsee, you mean core and MOTU?
297 [07:48] <sianis> dholbach: mee too
298 [07:48] <@dholbach> balarka: what Ubuntu does is integrate software from lots of other projects, subvertpy being one of them
299 [07:48] <Pollywog> am I correct that the upstream authors submitted the patch and it is our job to apply it to the version in Ubuntu?
300 [07:48] <@dholbach> Pollywog: exactly
301 [07:48] <Hobbsee> balarka: like authors who write a book, and librarians, who sort books and organise them in their libraries
302 [07:48] <balarka> Hobbsee, that was perfect example
303 [07:48] <Hobbsee> balarka: but, if an author changes their book, and republishes it, it doesn't mean that the library shelves magically change
304 [07:49] <balarka> Hobbsee, thanks
305 [07:49] <balarka> Hobbsee, got the point
306 [07:49] <Hobbsee> the librarian still has to do the work in finding another book, etc
307 [07:49] <Hobbsee> cool :)
308 [07:49] <@dholbach> ok... cool - are we all clear on where we stand right now
309 [07:49] <nanbanjin> nice explanation Hobbsee, ty
310 [07:49] <Pollywog> I think I have it
311 [07:49] <Hobbsee> nanbanjin: :D
312 [07:49] <@dholbach> great
313 [07:49] <pkpdjh> I'm good. Thanks, Hobbsee for the analogy.
314 [07:50] <balarka> Hobbsee, appreciated!
315 [07:50] <Hobbsee> :)
316 [07:50] <maco> Hobbsee++
317 [07:50] <@dholbach> :-)))
318 [07:50] <@dholbach> ok great
319 [07:50] <brand0con> the dead horse has been beaten
320 [07:50] <@dholbach> I just tried applying the upstream patch, this is what I got:
321 [07:50] <@dholbach> patching file subvertpy/delta.py
322 [07:50] <@dholbach> Hunk #2 FAILED at 86.
323 [07:50] <@dholbach> you get this every now and then when there have been a lot of changes in the upstream code and we didn't catch up yet
324 [07:51] <balarka> dholbach, so how to apply the patch?
325 [07:51] <@dholbach> what we'd need to do is apply the changes manually or at least parts of them
326 [07:51] <@dholbach> balarka: I'll get to that in a sec
327 [07:51] <balarka> dholbach, any specific command?
328 [07:51] <Pollywog> when you patch, is there still a "--dry-run" option in patch?
329 [07:51] <balarka> dholbach, sure..
330 [07:51] <@dholbach> I just updated the patch to work properly :-)
331 [07:51] <@dholbach> so if you run
332 [07:51] <tashuiwuhen_> hehe
333 [07:51] <@dholbach> wget http://people.ubuntu.com/~dholbach/patch
334 [07:52] <@dholbach> you should get the patch file that's going to work for us
335 [07:52] <Hobbsee> Pollywog: yes
336 [07:52] <@dholbach> if you
337 [07:52] <@dholbach> cd into subvertpy-0.6.1 again
338 [07:52] <@dholbach> and run
339 [07:52] <@dholbach> patch -p1 < ~/patch
340 [07:53] <@dholbach> (or wherever you downloaded the "patch" file to)
341 [07:53] <@dholbach> it is going to apply the updated changes
342 [07:53] <@dholbach> you should get something like this as the output
343 [07:53] <@dholbach> patching file subvertpy/delta.py
344 [07:53] <@dholbach> did that work for everybody?
345 [07:53] <PartyBoi2> yes
346 [07:53] <Pollywog> looks like that worked here
347 [07:53] <decumanus_> yes, worked
348 [07:53] <balarka> nope
349 [07:53] <maco> perhaps an explanation of how to figure out and manually update patches would be in order at some point...even just as a blogpost on that packaging howto blog you've got, dholbach?
350 [07:54] <balarka> dholbach, is patch a command?
351 [07:54] * silentsno patched file delta.py
352 [07:54] <@dholbach> maco: definitely
353 [07:54] <@dholbach> balarka: yes
354 [07:54] <@dholbach> it should be in the patch package
355 [07:54] <balarka> it gives No such file or directory
356 [07:54] <Pollywog> does the patch level depend on where we put the patch file?
357 [07:55] <maco> Pollywog: it depends on how deeply into the source package it needs to go
358 [07:55] <@dholbach> sudo apt-get install cdbs bzr ubuntu-dev-tools devscripts (should give you all the tools)
359 [07:55] <maco> Pollywog: i'm told "count the slashes"
360 [07:55] <Pollywog> maco: ty
361 [07:55] <tashuiwuhen_> i'm told "No such file or directory"
362 [07:55] <silentsno> dholbach: what is the difference between the revision we downloaded from LP and your patch we downloaded
363 [07:55] <aladin> I want to package a java-library. It was called xtvd-lib by upstream and was placed at a directory called xtvd-lib. My control-file says "Source: xtvd-lib" and "Package: libxtvd". How can I use the same name for the source- and the binary-package?
364 [07:55] <@dholbach> Pollywog: it depends on from where the "diff" was run
365 [07:55] <@dholbach> aladin: can we please cover that later on?
366 [07:55] <Pollywog> dholbach: ty
367 [07:55] <balarka> dholbach, it gives me No such file or directory
368 [07:56] <@dholbach> aladin: we're in the middle of a session
369 [07:56] <balarka> dholbach, when i try the patch -p1 command
370 [07:56] <maco> silentsno: one will apply cleanly, and one won't
371 [07:56] <balarka> dholbach, as above
372 [07:56] <maco> aladin: #ubuntu-motu maybe better
373 [07:56] <@dholbach> Pollywog: where did you run wget http://people.ubuntu.com/~dholbach/patch ?
374 [07:56] <Pollywog> dholbach: it worked for me, I put the patch in ~
375 [07:56] <maco> silentsno: you can compare the patches visually to see how he changed it and compare to the source to try to figure out why
376 [07:57] <Pollywog> and put in the path in the patch line
377 [07:57] <Pollywog> it worked
378 [07:57] <@dholbach> silentsno: as I said before: the upstream developers put quite a bit of work into subvertpy and we didn't catch up yet, so the revision we downloaded from launchpad did not "apply cleanly on our source" - I updated it to apply cleanly
379 [07:57] <balarka> dholbach, it worked too
380 [07:57] <balarka> now
381 [07:57] <@dholbach> balarka: perfect
382 [07:57] <@dholbach> are we all patched up now?
383 [07:57] <Pollywog> I am patched
384 [07:57] <Adila01> Same with me
385 [07:57] <@dholbach> anyone without the ticket? :)
386 [07:57] <balarka> me too
387 [07:57] <@dholbach> perfect
388 [07:58] <@dholbach> you need devscripts installed for the next step
389 [07:58] <pkpdjh> So, if we run into a situation like this where the patch doesn't apply cleanly, what is usually the next step?
390 [07:58] <balarka> dholbach, can we apply the patch twice?
391 [07:58] <@dholbach> what we'll do now as every good package maintainer in the making is: document what we did
392 [07:58] <@dholbach> balarka: no, it will fail
393 [07:58] <balarka> dholbach, ideally it shoudl suceeed
394 [07:58] <balarka> right?
395 [07:58] <Pollywog> dholbach: that is why we can use --dry-run, right?
396 [07:58] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: review the patch and apply the "hunks" that failed manually
397 [07:58] <@dholbach> balarka: yep
398 [07:58] <balarka> dholbach, if it is a piece of code replacing another one?
399 [07:59] <@dholbach> Pollywog: yes, exactly
400 [07:59] <pkpdjh> I was afraid that was the answer. I hate reading patch files manually.
401 [07:59] <@dholbach> balarka: that's exactly what patches do: replace other code
402 [07:59] <balarka> dholbach, ok
403 [07:59] <Crusher> dholbach: what is a "hunk"?
404 [07:59] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: remind me of that later on and we chat a bit about it
405 [08:00] <pkpdjh> dholbach: ok
406 [08:00] <@dholbach> Crusher: if you take a look at ~/patch (or whever you put it beforehand)
407 [08:00] <maco> Crusher: parts between lines that have @ in them
408 [08:00] <@dholbach> you'll noticed "stanzas" that start with something like "@@ -18,7 +18,16 @@"
409 [08:00] <Crusher> yep
410 [08:00] <balarka> dholbach, where?
411 [08:00] <Crusher> so each one is a different hunk
412 [08:01] <Crusher> didn't know the terminology :)
413 [08:01] <balarka> dholbach, wehre are the stanzas?
414 [08:01] <@dholbach> Crusher: exactly, it basically says "in lines X to Y make these changes"
415 [08:01] <maco> balarka: all those lines that start with @@ either start or end a stanza
416 [08:01] <balarka> maco, you mean in the diff file we downloaded?
417 [08:01] <maco> balarka: yes
418 [08:02] <@dholbach> exactly
419 [08:02] <balarka> oh ok
420 [08:02] <@dholbach> so let's document the changes we did
421 [08:02] <@dholbach> please run (after you've installed devscripts):
422 [08:02] <@dholbach> dch -i
423 [08:02] <@dholbach> (in subvertpy-0.6.1)
424 [08:02] <Pollywog> dch is a new one for me
425 [08:02] <balarka> me too
426 [08:02] <Pollywog> I have used a different command to do this
427 [08:03] <@dholbach> dch is a nice tool which makes editing debian/changelog easy
428 [08:03] <@dholbach> this is where package maintainers document what they do and why
429 [08:03] <@dholbach> this is particularly important where a lot of people work on packages together
430 [08:03] <@dholbach> you don't want others to guess why you made a change
431 [08:03] <@dholbach> ... and you don't want to have to guess half a year later :)
432 [08:04] <cel_> everybody hates documenting, but's it's important to do! :P
433 [08:04] <balarka> dholbach, so what all things we need to put here?
434 [08:04] <@dholbach> so I'll put something like this in there:
435 [08:04] <@dholbach> * subvertpy/delta.py: apply revision 2016 from upstream to fix python2.6
436 [08:04] <@dholbach> deprecation (LP: #323270)
437 [08:05] <@dholbach> note a few things:
438 [08:05] <@dholbach> - I specify exactly which file we changed
439 [08:05] <@dholbach> - we say where the change came from (we didn't invent it ourselves)
440 [08:05] <@dholbach> - we say what exactly it fixes
441 [08:05] <@dholbach> - we say which Launchpad bug it fixes
442 [08:06] <maco> (in cases where the patch is attached to a bug, not from upsteram. the 2nd bit can be "patch by Joe Smith")
443 [08:06] <ara> all that in just one line ;-)
444 [08:06] <@dholbach> if you use something like "(LP: #323270)", it will automatically close the bug report, when the new source package gets uploaded
445 [08:06] <@dholbach> maco: exactly - give credit where it's due :)
446 [08:06] <maco> dholbach: uploaded? or successfully built?
447 [08:07] <@dholbach> maco: uploaded to the build daemons - I'll get to that later if you remind me
448 [08:07] <maco> ok
449 [08:07] <@dholbach> also please replace "0.6.1-1build2" (or whatever changelog version is up there) with "0.6.1-1ubuntu1"
450 [08:07] <balarka> maco, dholbach i didnt understand where the patch is attached to a bug
451 [08:07] <balarka> mean
452 [08:08] <maco> balarka: if instead of grabbing a patch from upstream, someone has written a patch and attached it to the bug report in launchpad, you should give their name
453 [08:08] <balarka> maco, so they have got the patch and give it to the users to apply
454 [08:08] <balarka> right?
455 [08:08] <maco> balarka: yes
456 [08:09] <balarka> oh ok
457 [08:09] <@dholbach> balarka: somebody who proposes a solution on a bug report
458 [08:09] <balarka> users apply themselves and use
459 [08:09] <@dholbach> balarka: in our case we chased up the solution somewhere else
460 [08:09] <Pollywog> Does putting ubuntu1 there mean this patch was not brought here from Debian, that it came from Ubuntu?
461 [08:09] <balarka> ok
462 [08:09] <@dholbach> Pollywog: it means: on top of the debian version 0.6.1-1 we put an Ubuntu change
463 [08:09] <nanbanjin> wouldn't a person that proposes solution and supplies a patch build the package himself?
464 [08:09] <Pollywog> ty
465 [08:10] <balarka> nanbanjin, i guess he can or cannot depening on his interest
466 [08:10] <@dholbach> nanbanjin: they probably do, but as part of the overall bug fix discussion they might propose it to others on the bug report
467 [08:10] <maco> nanbanjin: not necessarily. when i started submitting patches, i didnt know how to package, just how to write C
468 [08:10] <maco> building a package and putting it in your PPA on launchpad is a *great* way to help users who don't know how to or don't want to deal with patching and compiling manually test proposed fixes
469 [08:11] <balarka> maco, what is PPA?
470 [08:11] <@dholbach> balarka: let's get to that later
471 [08:11] <balarka> dholbach, sure..
472 [08:11] <@dholbach> all done editing the changelog? everybody put some text in there? changed the version number?
473 [08:11] <maco> dholbach: sorry :P
474 [08:11] <@dholbach> maco: no worries
475 [08:11] <balarka> dholbach, me too
476 [08:11] <balarka> just few moments
477 [08:12] <Pollywog> I finished editing the changelog
478 [08:12] <@dholbach> now save the file
479 [08:12] <Pollywog> done
480 [08:13] <@dholbach> and for those of you running Ubuntu and having ubuntu-dev-tools installed, please run update-maintainer
481 [08:13] <maco> dholbach: is update-maintainer smart enough to do nothing when the debian version is 0?
482 [08:13] <@dholbach> it will make a change in the packaging indicating "we changed the package for Ubuntu, don't send emails to the Debian maintainers about this please" :-)
483 [08:13] <@dholbach> maco: I think it's so dumb that it doesn't care, but I might be wrong
484 [08:14] <maco> dholbach: heh ok
485 [08:14] <@dholbach> alright
486 [08:14] <balarka> dholbach, after editing i tried dch -i
487 [08:14] <balarka> again
488 [08:14] <posingaspopular> Latest changelog entry has no Ubuntu version number.
489 [08:14] <balarka> it says dch fatal error
490 [08:14] <balarka> the backup file already exists
491 [08:14] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: did you change the version number to 0.6.1-1ubuntu1?
492 [08:14] <balarka> please move it before trying again
493 [08:14] <maco> balarka: you only run dch -i once
494 [08:15] <balarka> oh
495 [08:15] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: just change it in debian/changelog
496 [08:15] <balarka> maco, what exactly is the purpose of it?
497 [08:15] <silentsno> you meant if we are running Jaunty, to run update-maintainer
498 [08:15] <Pollywog> so running dch more than once is like running dh_make more than once?
499 [08:15] <balarka> maco, what if i want to change the log again later?
500 [08:15] <@dholbach> silentsno: should work in intrepid too
501 [08:15] <maco> balarka: well you could manually type a new chunk into debian/changelog if you want, but dch adds the your name, version number, what time it is, your email address junk for you automatically
502 [08:15] <@dholbach> Pollywog: it will introduce a new changelog every time you run it and save the file afterwards
503 [08:16] <maco> balarka: then you do it manually. there should be only 1 changelog entry per package version
504 [08:16] <Pollywog> k
505 [08:16] <posingaspopular> i dont follow dholbach
506 [08:16] <maco> posingaspopular: in debian/changelog, what's the first line?
507 [08:16] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: when you edit debian/changelog - which version number does it say?
508 [08:16] <balarka> maco, got it
509 [08:17] <posingaspopular> subvertpy (0.6.1-1build2) jaunty; urgency=low
510 [08:17] <maco> posingaspopular: see how it says build2? change that to ubuntu1
511 [08:17] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: change it to 0.6.1-1ubuntu1 then, please
512 [08:17] <maco> posingaspopular: "build" is used when ubuntu has not changed anything but the package has been rebuilt anyway
513 [08:17] <maco> posingaspopular: "ubuntu" is used when you make changes
514 [08:19] <@dholbach> save the file and try again
515 [08:19] <posingaspopular> okay now that works
516 [08:19] <posingaspopular> yup thanks maco and dholbach
517 [08:19] <@dholbach> perfect
518 [08:19] <@dholbach> now please run (when you installed devscripts and cdbs):
519 [08:19] <@dholbach> debuild -S -us -uc
520 [08:20] <@dholbach> remember what I said about source packages in the beginning (orig.tar.gz, diff.gz etc)?
521 [08:20] <@dholbach> now we're updating the source package for our new version
522 [08:20] <@dholbach> if you cd .. and run ls
523 [08:20] <@dholbach> you should see a bunch of new files there
524 [08:20] <Pollywog> indeed
525 [08:20] <@dholbach> so not just subvertpy_0.6.1-1build1.dsc and subvertpy_0.6.1-1build1.diff.gz
526 [08:21] <@dholbach> but subvertpy_0.6.1-1ubuntu1.dsc and subvertpy_0.6.1-1ubuntu1.diff.gz too
527 [08:21] <@dholbach> I can't cover it in this session, but if you take a look at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PbuilderHowto you'll learn about a tool that test-builds packages for you
528 [08:21] <@dholbach> it will expect such .dsc files from you
529 [08:21] <@dholbach> ok, let's crack on
530 [08:22] <balarka> dholbach, i didnt find any files there
531 [08:22] <balarka> on debuild command
532 [08:22] <Pollywog> is pbuilder an alternative to chroots for this?
533 [08:22] <@dholbach> Pollywog: it will set up a chroot :)
534 [08:22] <@dholbach> Pollywog: automatically
535 [08:22] <@dholbach> balarka: were you in subvertpy-0.6.1 when you ran debuild?
536 [08:22] <balarka> dholbach, yes
537 [08:23] <blfgomes> I got this warning: "Exception: apr-config not found. Please set APR_CONFIG environment variable"
538 [08:23] <@dholbach> balarka: then cd .. and ls there
539 [08:23] <balarka> oh ok
540 [08:23] <@dholbach> blfgomes: safe to ignore for now
541 [08:23] <blfgomes> ok
542 [08:23] <@dholbach> ok... another handy tool in devscripts is debdiff
543 [08:23] <@dholbach> if you run debdiff subvertpy_0.6.1-1build1.dsc subvertpy_0.6.1-1ubuntu1.dsc
544 [08:24] <@dholbach> debdiff subvertpy_0.6.1-1build1.dsc subvertpy_0.6.1-1ubuntu1.dsc
545 [08:24] <balarka> dholbach, oh got it
546 [08:24] <@dholbach> it will show you the differences between the two source packages
547 [08:24] <maco> and order matters!
548 [08:24] <@dholbach> exactly
549 [08:24] <@dholbach> can you all please put the output into http://paste.ubuntu.com and give us the link here so we can review them together?
550 [08:25] <balarka> dholbach, maco so what is the purpse of this step?
551 [08:25] <balarka> to confirm ourselves abt the change we did?
552 [08:25] <balarka> by generating diff between two versions?
553 [08:25] <@dholbach> balarka: show the differences between the original source package (we downloaded initially) and the new source package
554 [08:25] <maco> balarka: many developers in ubuntu prefer debdiffs for updating packages
555 [08:25] <@dholbach> balarka: it's what you'd attach to a bug report saying "this is how I fixed it"
556 [08:26] <maco> balarka: this includes the debian/* changes as well as the patch
557 [08:26] <balarka> ooh
558 [08:26] <balarka> ok
559 [08:26] <silentsno> http://paste.ubuntu.com/142603/
560 [08:26] <maco> it just cuts a few steps out for the people who can actually upload this stuff
561 [08:26] <maco> namely, all the steps you just did
562 [08:27] <Crusher> http://paste.ubuntu.com/142607/
563 [08:27] <balarka> dholbach, when i run the command it says debdiff: fatal error at line 266:
564 [08:27] <balarka> Can't read file: subvertpy_0.6.1-1ubuntu1.dsc
565 [08:27] <@dholbach> silentsno: "0.6.1-1ubuntu2" -> "0.6.1-1ubuntu1", "intrepid" -> "jaunty", I'd also line wrap the changelog entry - other than that: great work!
566 [08:27] <blfgomes> http://paste.ubuntu.com/142606/
567 [08:27] <Pollywog> http://paste.ubuntu.com/142608/
568 [08:27] <@dholbach> blfgomes: perfect
569 [08:28] <balarka> dholbach, i didnt get the mistake i did
570 [08:28] <@dholbach> Pollywog: "0.6.1-1ubuntu" -> "0.6.1-1ubuntu1", also the linewrap to 80 characters per line would be nice, other than that: GREAT
571 [08:28] <posingaspopular> error http://paste.ubuntu.com/142609/
572 [08:28] <@dholbach> balarka: what's the last 5 lines of output?
573 [08:28] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: just do debdiff subvertpy_0.6.1-1build1.dsc subvertpy_0.6.1-1ubuntu1.dsc
574 [08:29] <balarka> debdiff subvertpy_0.6.1-1build1.dsc subvertpy_0.6.1-1ubuntu1.dsc
575 [08:29] <balarka> debdiff: fatal error at line 266:
576 [08:29] <balarka> Can't read file: subvertpy_0.6.1-1ubuntu1.dsc
577 [08:29] <balarka> 1st line is the comand i typed
578 [08:29] <@dholbach> balarka: is there a file named subvertpy_0.6.1-1ubuntu1.dsc?
579 [08:29] <maco> balarka: did you run debuild -S -us -uc as above?
580 [08:29] <balarka> dholbach, nope
581 [08:30] <balarka> maco, i did
582 [08:30] <balarka> maco, i can do it again
583 [08:30] <@dholbach> balarka: then something must have gone wrong there before
584 [08:30] <maco> balarka: what .dsc's *do* you have?
585 [08:30] <@dholbach> that debdiff output is what you'd attach to the bug report as a solution, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SponsorshipProcess explains how to get your patch uploaded to Ubuntu!
586 [08:30] <@dholbach> (after you test-built the package and tested the package a bit)
587 [08:31] <balarka> maco, i can see only one 1build1.dsc
588 [08:31] <balarka> here
589 [08:31] <maco> then it sounds like debuild failed
590 [08:31] <posingaspopular> right that worked
591 [08:31] <@dholbach> I'd like to invite you all to #ubuntu-motu and ubuntu-motu-mentors@lists.ubuntu.com to ask questions you have about everything related to packaging stuff
592 [08:31] <balarka> maco, so what do i do now?
593 [08:31] <maco> balarka: try it again and see if it errors at all
594 [08:31] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: can you pastebin it?
595 [08:31] <@dholbach> there were a bunch of other questions before
596 [08:31] <balarka> maco, so i try the debuild command inside subverty dir
597 [08:31] <@dholbach> anything you'd like to ask?
598 [08:31] <balarka> ?
599 [08:32] <@dholbach> balarka: yes
600 [08:32] <maco> dholbach: the LP: #123456 syntax, it closes on upload, but what if its a FTBFS?
601 [08:33] <balarka> http://paste.ubuntu.com/142612/
602 [08:33] <@dholbach> maco: the bug will be closed on upload (when the uploaded source package is accepted)
603 [08:33] <Pollywog> is this all different when the sources use cmake instead of automake?
604 [08:33] <balarka> maco, this is what i get http://paste.ubuntu.com/142612/
605 [08:33] <balarka> maco, dholbach after debuild command
606 [08:33] <silentsno> //time
607 [08:33] <@dholbach> balarka: I guess you didn't save the changes you made to debian/changelog
608 [08:34] <posingaspopular> http://paste.ubuntu.com/142613/
609 [08:34] <@dholbach> balarka: I'd suggest reading up in the log again and re-try - sorry
610 [08:34] <balarka> oh
611 [08:34] <balarka> dholbach, sure..
612 [08:34] <@dholbach> Pollywog: that's a great question
613 [08:34] <balarka> dholbach, i will do that
614 [08:34] <@dholbach> balarka: thanks
615 [08:34] <Pollywog> I have had trouble making debs for KDE4 due to cmake
616 [08:34] <@dholbach> Pollywog: the great thing about the way that Ubuntu and Debian packages are built is that we have one build process wrapped around all kinds of upstream software
617 [08:35] <balarka> dholbach, so whats next then?
618 [08:35] <balarka> dholbach, we got the diff generated
619 [08:35] <@dholbach> balarka: we're answering a bunch of questions
620 [08:35] <balarka> oh ok
621 [08:35] <maco> dholbach: ok so the order of things that happen is fuzzy for me. helpful sponsor uploads the debdiff, buildd does stuff, then accept, then close?
622 [08:35] <balarka> dholbach, i mean in the process of sending upstream
623 [08:35] <@dholbach> so no matter if it's a python distutils package, or it uses autotools or cmake, there's always a way to build the package
624 [08:36] <maco> balarka: in this case, the patch came from upstream, so nothing to do
625 [08:36] <@dholbach> Pollywog: I'd suggest taking a look at similar source packages (that use cmake already) and compare
626 [08:36] <balarka> maco, oh ok
627 [08:36] <Pollywog> I will do that, thanks
628 [08:36] <balarka> maco, but if we invent the bug fix
629 [08:36] <balarka> maco, how to proceed from here?
630 [08:36] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: looks great, there's just one thing I'd change a bit:
631 [08:36] <@dholbach> * subvertpy/delta.py apply revision 2016 from upstream to fix python 2.6 depreciation. (LP #323270)
632 [08:36] <@dholbach> * subvertpy/delta.py: apply revision 2016 from upstream to fix python 2.6 depreciation. (LP: #323270)
633 [08:37] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: (note the colons)
634 [08:37] <maco> balarka: in that case, send the patch to upstream (some will want a but + attachment, others want mail on their mailing list, it varies) and give them a link to the LP bug of people saying it works
635 [08:37] <@dholbach> maco: so the way things would work from here would be something like:
636 [08:37] <Pollywog> and the debian/rules seem to be different for KDE4 packages, but I suspect that will be covered in a future session <hint>
637 [08:37] <@dholbach> - test-build the package
638 [08:37] <@dholbach> - test the package
639 [08:37] <posingaspopular> what colons dholbach?
640 [08:37] <maco> posingaspopular: after the filename
641 [08:37] <@dholbach> - attach debdiff to bug report
642 [08:38] <maco> dholbach: yeah the two steps everyone forgets :P
643 [08:38] <@dholbach> - subscribe sponsors team who review the patch
644 [08:38] <@dholbach> - they review it
645 [08:38] <@dholbach> - upload it
646 [08:38] <@dholbach> - bug gets automatically closed
647 [08:38] <@dholbach> - build attempted
648 [08:38] <@dholbach> - fix delivered to the world
649 [08:38] <@dholbach> sure the package could fail to build
650 [08:38] <@dholbach> but that's usually a new bug ;-)
651 [08:38] <maco> ok then
652 [08:38] <balarka> maco, thanks
653 [08:38] <posingaspopular> i dont follow, what is wrong there?
654 [08:38] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: also the colon in (LP: #323270)
655 [08:39] <balarka> maco, what is LP btw..
656 [08:39] <maco> hrm that reminds me that i got a build failure email...
657 [08:39] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: it's the syntax
658 [08:39] <Pollywog> LaunchPad
659 [08:39] <maco> balarka: launchpad in two letters
660 [08:39] <balarka> oh ok :P
661 [08:39] <@dholbach> Pollywog: can you follow up with that suggestion at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Packaging/Training ?
662 [08:39] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: you had a question too?
663 [08:39] <maco> dholbach: if i got a build failure email due to "its beta, the repos were broken when the buildd went through" how do i try to get it rebuilt for that architecture?
664 [08:40] <Crusher> dholbach: did my debdiff look alright? (http://paste.ubuntu.com/142607/)
665 [08:40] <Pollywog> k I thought that was for the ppl who present the trainings
666 [08:40] <@dholbach> maco: ask in #ubuntu-motu for somebody to attempt a rebuild for you
667 [08:40] <Pollywog> I will do that
668 [08:40] <@dholbach> Pollywog: there's a "suggested sessions" or somtehing
669 [08:40] <maco> dholbach: ok thanks
670 [08:40] <@dholbach> Crusher: sorry, must have missed it - checking it out
671 [08:40] <@dholbach> Crusher: that looks perfect
672 [08:40] <Crusher> cool
673 [08:40] <@dholbach> wow... great work everybofy!
674 [08:41] <maco> pbuilder one? please? i have no idea how to make a new pbuilder when i reinstall :(
675 [08:41] <@dholbach> feel yourselves clapped on the shoulder
676 [08:41] <@dholbach> maco: please put it on the wiki page
677 [08:41] <balarka> i did :P
678 [08:41] <@dholbach> ok... any other questions?
679 [08:41] <Pollywog> dholbach and others: thanks for the session. It was great
680 [08:41] <Crusher> great session dholbach, thankyou
681 [08:41] <posingaspopular> what syntax?
682 [08:42] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: (LP: #123456)
683 [08:42] <cel_> dholbach: many thanks for your time
684 [08:42] <silentsno> thanks dholbach.
685 [08:42] <@dholbach> thanks a lot everybody for participating and helping out
686 [08:42] <ara> dholbach: thanks for the session!
687 [08:42] <@dholbach> I hope you found it fun and helpful and I'll see you in the next sessions too
688 [08:42] <brand0con> dholbach: thanks for the session. look forward to more of them
689 [08:42] <cel_> See ya all in the next one!
690 [08:42] <@dholbach> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/GettingStarted has some reading material until the next session!
691 [08:42] <nanbanjin> somebody mentioned some blog of yours dholbach...
692 [08:43] <@dholbach> nanbanjin: you mean http://daniel.holba.ch/blog ?
693 [08:43] <@dholbach> nanbanjin: or http://ubuntupackaging.wordpress.com/ ?
694 [08:43] <maco> the latter
695 [08:43] <maco> that was me that mentioned it
696 [08:44] <@dholbach> ah ok
697 [08:44] <@dholbach> great
698 [08:44] <pkpdjh> My question before was about what to do when patches don't work the first time.
699 [08:44] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: ah yes...
700 [08:44] <pkpdjh> dholbach: I was just curious if there's a way to track changes and find the disconnect. (Sorry, I'm a noob.)
701 [08:45] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: that's where revision control systems are really helpful - they make it much much easier to either merge a complete branch (plus its history) or just cherry-pick a certain change
702 [08:45] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: when you just work with the diff and patch tools, you have to live with their limitations
703 [08:45] <pkpdjh> Sure.
704 [08:46] <pkpdjh> dholbach: I had one other problem. I had some syntax errors or something in my debian/changelog file.
705 [08:46] <@dholbach> patch is quite clever when thing just moved around a few lines or something like that, but if the context around it changed, it simply gives up and you need to merge manually
706 [08:46] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: what happened there?
707 [08:46] <pkpdjh> I got an error that said "unrecognized line"
708 [08:46] <blfgomes> dholbach: Thank you for your time and patience! The whole concept of having a session like this is really incredible.
709 [08:47] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: can you put up the log of it somewhere?
710 [08:47] <@dholbach> blfgomes: I'm very glad you enjoyed it - there's more to come and I hope we'll have a lot of people fixing bugs soon :)
711 [08:49] <pkpdjh> dholbach: In my noobness, I will have to find time to learn how everyone was pasting their logs before I get too deep over my head.
712 [08:49] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: oh, don't worry, just load up http://paste.ubuntu.com and paste the log of the error in there
713 [08:50] <@dholbach> right now I can't tell where the "unrecognized line" error comes from
714 [08:50] <nanbanjin> thank you very much dholbach. I ran all in the sandbox of my imagination but will go through the logs later and try it on my own
715 [08:50] <@dholbach> nanbanjin: awesome... hope you enjoyed it
716 [08:50] <pkpdjh> dholbach: okay it is there.
717 [08:50] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: can you post the link here?
718 [08:51] <pkpdjh> http://paste.ubuntu.com/142622/
719 [08:51] <@dholbach> gracias
720 [08:51] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: can you paste the top entry of debian/changelog ?
721 [08:52] <pkpdjh> http://paste.ubuntu.com/142625/
722 [08:53] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: try putting two spaces instead of one in front of the "*"
723 [08:53] <@dholbach> so " * bla bla bla" instead of " * bla bla bla"
724 [08:53] <@dholbach> (if that makes sense)
725 [08:54] <pkpdjh> damn whitespace!
726 [08:54] <pkpdjh> That fixed it.
727 [08:54] <@dholbach> super
728 [08:54] <@dholbach> it's very picky, I agree :-)
729 [08:54] * maco bets guido van rossum had a hand in this
730 [08:54] <@dholbach> no, I doubt it
731 [08:55] <@dholbach> most of the machinery behind devscripts etc is written in perl
732 [08:55] <pkpdjh> dholbach: Okay. Now I have to play catch up on the rest of the tutorial. I followed along, but I couldn't do the steps.
733 [08:55] <maco> O_O
734 [08:55] * maco hides
735 [08:55] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: just let me know how it goes
736 [08:55] <@dholbach> once you figured out dch, debdiff, debuild, etc. and used them a couple of times, you'll see that that's just "tools"
737 [08:55] <posingaspopular> dholbach: you are going to have to point out this syntax you are talking about, i dont see it
738 [08:56] <@dholbach> and the interesting part is the "detective stuff" like chasing down where to find the patch and so on
739 [08:56] <pkpdjh> dholbach: I'm sure it will go fine, but it will probably go tomorrow. I'm in the western U.S.A. ;)
740 [08:56] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: what I meant is: if you want the bug to be automatically closed, you have to use the "(LP: #123456)" syntax
741 [08:57] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: and can't use "(LP: 123456)" because the build daemons don't understand it
742 [08:57] <@dholbach> posingaspopular: actually it's LP: #<number>
743 [08:57] <maco> as in teh open parenthesis, L, P, colon, space, hash, ....
744 [08:57] * maco slaps self
745 [08:57] <@dholbach> pkpdjh: enjoy it and sleep tight
746 [08:57] <maco> no more lex!
747 [08:57] <@dholbach> I'll put up the logs in a bit
748 [08:57] <@dholbach> have a great day everybody
749 [08:57] <posingaspopular> oh okay, that makes sense :P
750 [08:57] <posingaspopular> # is the bug number
751 [08:58] <@dholbach> yeah
752 [08:58] <@dholbach> or the bug number is after the "#" sign
753 [08:58] <posingaspopular> im sitting here getting all worked up because i couldn't figure out what you were talking about
754 [08:58] <posingaspopular> lol
755 [08:59] <@dholbach> don't get worked up just because of that :-)