Ubuntu Wiki

   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 :-)