ogasawara | slangasek: which kernel failed to build? I see everything successfully build for 2.6.35-19.26. | 00:27 |
---|---|---|
persia | 19.27 | 00:28 |
ogasawara | there's a there's a 19.27? | 00:28 |
persia | Some large number of udebs got deleted, so a no-change upload was attemtped to restore them... | 00:28 |
ogasawara | so we now need a 19.28? | 00:29 |
persia | https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/2.6.35-19.27 | 00:29 |
persia | Right, and slangasek wanted an explanantion of why 19.27 completely failed to work | 00:29 |
ogasawara | I never uploaded a 19.27 so I 'm not sure where that even came from | 00:30 |
persia | (maybe more stuff ought be automatically calculated from the changelog entry or something) | 00:30 |
persia | Changelog is on that LP page. | 00:30 |
persia | http://launchpadlibrarian.net/54532084/linux_2.6.35-19.26_2.6.35-19.27.diff.gz is the diff | 00:30 |
* persia suspects most of the debian/control changes were unexpected by the uploader | 00:31 | |
ogasawara | ok, gimme a few minutes to get the ABI in order and I'll upload a 19.28 | 00:32 |
persia | Is there any documentation on what needs doing to allow no-change uploads in the future? It's a rare need, but sometimes critical for release milestones (like this time) | 00:34 |
ogasawara | persia: basically the ABI directory within the kernel needed to be bumped to the previous upload, ie 2.6.35-19.26 when 2.6.35-19.27 was uploaded. | 00:35 |
ogasawara | I suspect it was still at 2.6.25-19.25 and thus failed the ABI checks | 00:35 |
ogasawara | s/2.6.25/2.6.35/ | 00:36 |
persia | Right. I think that's the bit of information slangasek was requesting (although cleaning up and uploading -19.28 would be much appreciated) | 00:37 |
ogasawara | yep, just want to get our git tree to match and will upload -19.28 | 00:37 |
persia | Thank you. | 00:38 |
persia | Could someone accept that please? Blocks d-i, which blocks beta for some architectures, | 00:44 |
ogasawara | Ah seems slangasek did a 2.6.25-19.28 as well. So either the one he did or I did should be good to accept. | 01:15 |
persia | His is also ABI clean this time? | 01:17 |
ogasawara | persia: should be, according to his changelog and a quick scan of the diff | 01:18 |
persia | Hm. Wonder why the bot didn't report it. | 01:20 |
ogasawara | looking at the timestamp it seems the bot's reported his, but not mine. | 01:20 |
persia | That makes me all sorts of confused, because if he was preparing that whilst you were discussing it, I'd think he'd have said something :) | 01:21 |
ogasawara | maybe he was head down getting it done. | 01:22 |
ogasawara | no worries either way. | 01:22 |
persia | yeah | 01:23 |
persia | now just needs an archive-admin around quick enough to take advantage of the relatively quiescent buildds. | 01:23 |
* ogasawara is going to cook some dinner. I'll check back in a bit to make sure everything is good. | 01:29 | |
micahg | is anyone available to push firefox through unapproved? | 04:23 |
slangasek | ogasawara: thanks, accepting yours so I don't cause even further skew from git | 07:29 |
slangasek | micahg: I'll have a look | 07:30 |
micahg | slangasek: thanks | 07:31 |
asac | anyone here? is there a linux-meta-linaro package in the queue? | 14:25 |
asac | please let it in if so ... the omap meta package isnt installable atm and linaro images fail ;) | 14:25 |
asac | gratias | 14:26 |
micahg | slangasek: any luck with Firefox? | 16:35 |
stgraber | pushed a new edubuntu-artwork package, we'd appreciate having it for beta but it's not critical (fixes our splash and icon theme) | 18:48 |
stgraber | something that really should go in though is that ltsp package I uploaded yesterday or beta won't have a working LTSP in Ubuntu Alternate | 18:49 |
stgraber | (as in, users will get a d-i red screen during the install) | 18:50 |
ScottK | stgraber: Did you see my question about the po file changes in the ltsp upload? | 23:18 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!