[00:11] <wgrant> BlackZ: Do you recall which builder it was repeatedly not-quite-building on?
[00:11] <wgrant> BlackZ: That generally indicates that the builder is subtly broken, and needs a bit of poking.
[00:11] <BlackZ> wgrant: vernadsky
[00:12] <wgrant> OK, that's less likely.
[00:12] <wgrant> Hmm.
[00:12] <BlackZ> wgrant: but IIRC this is happening with other i386 buildd too
[00:13] <wgrant> It'll need someone to look at logs.
[00:14] <wgrant> Since they're real buildds, not virtual ones.
[00:14] <BlackZ> wgrant: it happened with other builds too
[00:14] <BlackZ> but they're succesfully built now
[00:15] <wgrant> Yeah, it'll just take a few tries to dispatch.
[00:16] <BlackZ> wgrant: this is happening with palmer too
[00:17] <wgrant> They're both eventually building something successfully, though.
[00:17] <wgrant> This is concerning.
[00:19] <wgrant> And they're now both looping.
[00:19] <wgrant> I'd expect this from virtual builders, not physical ones.
[00:19] <BlackZ> wgrant: if you want to take a look, it's happening with other packages as well
[00:19] <BlackZ> (right now)
[00:20] <wgrant> Yes...
[00:20] <wgrant> Odd.
[00:22] <BlackZ> wgrant: I will ping someone from the build daemon maintainers team Monday
[00:23] <wgrant> This is pretty much a lamont thing. Or potentially a Soyuz thing, in which case I'll get someone to look at the logs on Monday.
[00:42] <lamont> wgrant: iirc, there's a karmic build (superseded 9+months ago) that's trying to dispatch, and aborting the run
[00:42] <lamont> but I'm not here right now.
[00:42] <lamont> and have nfc how to kill that build either...
[00:43] <lamont> wgrant: and I'm on holiday thru 3 august, only passing through here infrequently
[00:44] <wgrant> lamont: Ah, OK.
[00:44] <wgrant> lamont: I might convince Soyuz people to look at logs on Monday and get that destroyed...
[00:44] <lamont> but yeah, someone should work out the sql to kill that errant build
[00:44] <lamont> please
[00:45] <wgrant> Although it will be irrelevant soon, since the buildd-manager rewrite actually WORKS.
[00:46] <lamont> yay
[00:47] <lamont> this will be a thing most wonderful
[00:47] <wgrant> It's even almost properly asynchronous.
[01:59] <weedar> Do many packages for Ubuntu get automatically fetched from Debian and have no real Ubuntu-maintainer? Also, would lots of "Ubuntu Archive Auto-Sync" changelog entries imply this or is there another reason for such behaviour?
[02:02] <wgrant> weedar: That's more of an #ubuntu-devel question.
[02:02] <wgrant> But yes, most Ubuntu packages are synced without changes from Debian.
[02:03] <weedar> wgrant: Thanks for the tip, and for the answer :)
[04:29] <ripps> what's this? I see two armel ppa builders. Is there any way for us to use them?
[04:38] <wgrant> ripps: No. They're only for internal Canonical projects.
[04:39] <ripps> :)
[04:39] <ripps> woops, I meant :(
[05:05] <wgrant> ripps: They're not actually virtualized, so it's not safe.
[05:05] <wgrant> Plus they're slow.
[09:16] <micahg> lifeless: is oops no longer appropriate as a tag (i.e., I should just use timeout)?
[09:19] <lifeless> micahg: Ursinha told me that its either oops or timeout : oops for oops that are not timeouts, timeout for oops that are timeouts
[09:19] <lifeless> micahg: I lolled a little earlier today when I found a bug she filed tagged oops timeout :)
[09:19] <micahg> lifeless: ah, ok, should I just guess as to which one is correct in my case and you people will fix?
[09:21] <lifeless> if it sits around for 10 seconds and then fails
[09:21] <lifeless> mark it timeout :)
[09:22] <micahg> k
[09:22] <lifeless> if you aren't sure, tag both, or neither. Totally fine any which way.
[11:50] <sjamaan> Does anyone have an idea what could be the cause of this: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/52478681/peter-bex-chamilo-chamilo-classic-hg-mirror.log ?
[12:17] <agruman> i have a source package which produces multiple binary packages, some with Arch: all and some with Arch: i386, amd64. Now when i removed i386 from all "non-all" the all wont be built (did this since the i386 build is broken and i currently only need Arch: all, and Arch: amd64 built). Is "Arch: all" dependent on i386 or something? If so i think it would be a bug when i dont have any "Arch: i386" at all currently.
[12:18] <wgrant> agruman: Arch: all is produced by the i386 build.
[12:18] <agruman> wgrant, ah, but what if there are no i386 at all present? Shouldnt they be built then by some other target>
[12:19] <wgrant> agruman: Possibly. But a lack of an i386 build is probably a bug.
[12:19] <sjamaan> heh!
[12:20] <agruman> well, since my i386 is broken, the all targets wont be built at all untill that is fixed, and even though the amd64 works its unusable since the all targets are missing ...
[12:21] <agruman> i suppose i could replace all with amd64 or something though
[12:21] <wgrant> You could.
[12:21] <wgrant> But it seems odd that the i386 build would be broken, while amd64 would work...
[12:22] <agruman> but how would a target which has some special pkgs for amd64 and the rest as all work? Seems that "all" would not be built?
[12:23] <agruman> wgrant, well there are somewhat large differences between the two, and the problem is upstream.
[12:25] <agruman> wgrant, thanks alot for the help.
[12:47] <winstonw> hey how do i remove an account
[12:48] <wgrant> winstonw: Go to your user page, click 'Change details', and then scroll down to the bottom.
[13:21] <winstonw> I deactivated my account, when will I be able to create a new account with the same email (it keeps on sending me an email suggesting I just forgot my password)
[13:46] <poolie> winstonw, why don't you just reactivate your account?
[13:59] <winstonw> poolie: i don't want that username
[14:05] <lifeless> winstonw: so reclaim it and then rename it ?
[14:06] <winstonw> oh, if i were to reclaim it, how do i go about changing the username
[14:09] <lifeless> in your account page
[14:09] <lifeless> there is an edit icon, you can just change it
[14:10] <winstonw> how do i reclaim an account?
[14:24] <winstonw> i didn't see an option to reclaim an account
[21:07] <micahg> hi, it seems like my project got deleted?
[21:08] <micahg> I created a project to triage Ubuntu Mozilla PPA bugs (ubuntu-mozilla-ppa-bugs), but it no longer exists
[22:05] <drubin> Hi I am trying to get a persons email addresses from the "person" object and I seem to be failing. I must be using the wrong attribute but I can't find which one it should be https://edge.launchpad.net/+apidoc/1.0.html#email_address but how do you get that from  https://edge.launchpad.net/+apidoc/1.0.html#person
[22:06] <mwhudson> drubin: it's person.preferredemail.emailaddress at the python level, not sure about the api
[22:07] <drubin> mwhudson: that is exactly what I want. Thanks.
[22:07] <drubin> on the python level is there a way to get a list of email addresses? I am trying to compare these with out Mailing list.
[22:10] <micahg> mwhudson: I seem to have a project that was deleted, can it be restored?
[22:23] <mwhudson> micahg: what was the project?
[22:23] <micahg> mwhudson: ubuntu-mozilla-ppa-bugs
[22:24] <micahg> mwhudson: I got an email about a license, but I didn't think anyone would do anything based on the content
[22:25] <mwhudson> micahg: i think that's why it was disabled, but it all seems to have happened rather fast
[22:25] <mwhudson> micahg: i can re-enable it for you if you promise to make your mind up soon :)
[22:25] <micahg> mwhudson: about a license?  what do I use?
[22:26] <mwhudson> yes
[22:26] <micahg> mwhudson: k, I'
[22:26] <micahg> ll just use the Ubuntu and Mozilla licenses
[22:27] <mwhudson> micahg: it's back
[22:27] <micahg> mwhudson: thanks
[22:28]  * micahg should've selected other open source not idk