[00:27] <stgraber> skaet: you may want to look at the screenshots I attached to bug 746028
[00:27] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 746028 in gnome-settings-daemon (Ubuntu Natty) (and 1 other project) "Edubuntu: Wallpapers are not updated on upgrade to Natty (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/746028
[00:28] <stgraber> skaet: I just did a clean install of Maverick, made sure it's up to date, took two screenshots before upgrade, then the two same on Natty after upgrade and another of a new clean user.
[00:29] <stgraber> only the new clean user gets the orangier (is that even a word ?) wallpaper
[09:57] <pitti> ScottK, slangasek, any release member: ^ any chance to process this? it's blocking ev's ubiquity fix
[09:57]  * ev hugs pitti 
[09:58] <ev> nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnma/slideshow
[09:58] <pitti> ev: did you do a full end-to-end test with this? I followed up to the PAE bug with a question
[09:58] <ev> whoops
[09:59] <ev> I tested it as far as it installed the right kernel and dpkg didn't error out on installing the nvidia driver
[09:59] <ev> but I don't have the requisite hardware to test that it completely works
[09:59] <ev> I'll have a look at the bug now
[10:09] <pitti> ev: right, I just simulated it here as well, and just checked with dkms status
[10:23] <ogra_> did someone let linux-meta-ti-omap4 out of new already ?
[10:23] <ogra_> (armel images failed due to it)
[10:32] <pitti> ogra_: I think I accepted it from unapproved this morning, was that wrong?
[10:32] <ogra_> pitti, no, perfect :)
[11:06] <ev> can anyone comment on the likelihood of getting a freeze exception for bug 6900926 (adding a "nowhere" option to the bootloader installation)
[11:06] <ubot4> ev: Bug 6900926 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/6900926 is private
[11:06] <ev> whoops
[11:06] <ev> bug 690926
[11:06] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 690926 in ubiquity (Ubuntu Natty) (and 1 other project) "Installer forces you to install grub somewhere (affects: 5) (heat: 28)" [Medium,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/690926
[11:07] <ev> note that maverick had this same behavior of only being able to disable bootloader installation via a flag to ubiquity (ubiquity -b)
[11:13] <ogra_> if someone could let libqtbamf through i would appreciate that, a unity-2d upload is waiting for it
[11:14] <pitti> currently reviewing the queue, will do
[11:15] <pitti> Riddell: any chance you could have a look at apport and jockey?
[11:15] <Riddell> pitti: can do
[11:15] <pitti> cheers
[11:16] <pitti> ogra_: done
[11:16] <ogra_> super, thanks !
[11:21] <Riddell> pitti: "+1.20.2 (UNRELEASED)" in apport NEWS file, accepting though
[11:21] <pitti> Riddell: yes, it's just a merge from trunk, but there's no new upstream release yet
[11:22] <pitti> thanks
[13:26] <mvo> pitti: how is the free space on the cd looking currently? I got a new app-install-data upload with more icons (improvements to the crawler were made) but the result is that it take ~1mb or so more
[13:45] <pitti> mvo: I added back some langpacks, so tomorrow's will be back up to 696 MB or so
[13:46] <pitti> mvo: 1 MB? that's quite a lot of new icons indeed :)
[13:49] <mvo> pitti: yeah, good new code!
[13:49] <mvo> pitti: but to be fair, there are just a lot of icons
[13:50] <pitti> $ du -hs /usr/share/icons
[13:50] <pitti> 95M/usr/share/icons
[13:50] <pitti> you bet
[13:50] <mvo> :)
[13:51] <pitti> mvo: but they are already getting squeezed in the pkgbinarymangler, so I guess there's not a lot we can win on them still
[13:51] <pitti> except remove redundant/unneeded ones
[13:52] <mvo> yeah, I wrote a script to compare that we really take the ones we need (and not duplicate from icon theme) for that, but only tiny win, maybe  ~15 icons or so
[13:52] <mvo> I removed them now
[13:52] <pitti> that's actually a significant potential there, /me shelves that for the next round of CD space fights
[13:52] <pitti> 48M/usr/share/icons/gnome
[13:52] <mvo> you think of something like pngcruncher? scour?
[13:52] <pitti> 19M/usr/share/icons/Humanity
[13:52] <pitti> I'm fairly sure that there's some overlap there
[13:52] <mvo> yeah
[13:52] <pitti> mvo: binarymangler uses optipng and advancecomp
[13:52] <mvo> we do pngcrunch already, right?
[13:53] <mvo> ok, cool
[13:53] <mvo> in this case its quite possible that the result will actually be different as I build it locally and hvaen't factored in this
[13:53] <pitti> ah
[13:53] <mvo> (less additional space)
[13:53] <mvo> *puhhh*
[13:53] <mvo> thanks :)
[13:53] <pitti> mvo: you can try by installing pkgbinarymangler, but don't worry too much
[13:53] <pitti> it'll fit
[13:53] <mvo> cool
[13:54]  * mvo installs
[13:54] <pitti> mvo: it'll probably take what feels like a year to build
[13:54] <mvo> haha
[13:54] <mvo> thats fine, I make a pot of tea in the meantime
[13:54] <pitti> hah, always a good excuse!
[13:54]  * pitti hugs mvo
[13:54] <mvo> we got some nice additional high profile icons (like audacity) that used to be missing
[14:06] <mdeslaur> please reject my isc-dhcp upload ^
[14:06] <mdeslaur> I messed up the changelog
[14:07] <pitti> *flush*
[14:07] <mdeslaur> thanks pitti
[14:07] <pitti> np :)
[14:42]  * apw notes there was a compiler update yesterday, heads up that that may mean a kernel rebuild
[15:31] <kirkland> just uploaded a trivial distcc fix, for a rather old bug
[15:46] <kirkland> thanks
[16:11] <stgraber> skaet: I just talked to didrocks and bug 746028 isn't Edubuntu specific. It affects Ubuntu as well but only for Maverick systems installed after the last ubuntu-wallpaper upload in Natty, thayt'
[16:11] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 746028 in gnome-settings-daemon (Ubuntu Natty) (and 1 other project) "Edubuntu: Wallpapers are not updated on upgrade to Natty (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/746028
[16:11] <stgraber> *that's why it was a bit hard to reproduce for some :)
[16:12] <stgraber> The caching system checks the timestamp of both the current cache and the wallpaper, has in my case my current cache (maverick's wallpaper) is newer than the wallpaper (natty's), it won't get updated and so I'll still have maverick's wallpaper after uprade
[16:17] <skaet> stgraber,  thanks for chasing this down.
[16:18] <skaet> stgraber,  thanks for tracking this down.
[16:32] <bdmurray> skaet: has bug 751018 ever been discussed?
[16:32] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 751018 in ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "i386 installer CDs are named improperly (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/751018
[16:32]  * skaet looking
[16:33] <skaet> bdmurray,   since it doesn't have an importance,  it appears to not have made the radar.
[16:54] <SpamapS> skaet: talking with jhunt about getting bug #728531 fixed and we realized that there's a much bigger problem which has no report yet (he is filing now)...
[16:54] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 728531 in upstart (Ubuntu Natty) (and 2 other projects) "chroot support is not reliable (affects: 2) (heat: 88)" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/728531
[16:56] <SpamapS> skaet: the fix is already completed and has been tested (for both issues) for over a week.. we will probably need to get this new version of upstart in the release
[16:56] <SpamapS> jhunt: ^^
[17:00] <SpamapS> skaet: bug #766206
[17:01] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 766206 in upstart (Ubuntu Natty) (and 1 other project) "user session support allows non-priv users to gain root privileges (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Critical,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/766206
[17:11] <skaet> SpamapS, jhunt,  ack.
[17:11] <skaet> jhunt,  is there anything other than the fix in the new version of upstart?
[17:14] <jhunt> aside from the oom bug and the user escalation issue, there is a fix for bug 707479.
[17:14] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 707479 in upstart (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "service <service> restart does not use an updated job configuration (affects: 1) (heat: 43)" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/707479
[17:15] <jhunt> The final tweak is a change to the init-checkconf script which now checks script sections as well as the upstart config itself. The fact that the original init-checkconf didn't do this check was an oversight.
[17:16] <jhunt> btw - init-checkconf is a script that users can choose to run if they so wish. It doesn't run as root (in fact it purposely disallows it)
[17:29] <slangasek> did someone here reject gcc-4.4-armel-cross from binary NEW on Friday?  hrw says he didn't get an explanation for the reject and I don't see anything posted to ubuntu-archive
[17:31] <ScottK> Not /me.
[17:32] <slangasek> figured out the reason for the reject, we'll get it sorted
[17:46] <skaet> jhunt, can you point me to a diff?
[17:47] <jhunt> skaet: one sec...
[17:49] <jhunt> https://code.launchpad.net/~jamesodhunt/ubuntu/natty/upstart/fix-chroot-sessions/+merge/58249
[17:49] <jhunt> Note - the diff is quite big, but a lot of the changes are actually in the tests (init/tests/* and util/tests/*) which are only run at build time of course.
[17:50]  * skaet looking
[17:51] <jhunt> fwiw, cjwatson is aware of the need for these fixes (although I'm not sure he's looked at the code yet). I think he's back online tomorrow am.
[19:30] <SpamapS> skaet: given the bugs that jhunt's branch fixes.. would you say it would be better to upload that package and let the release team approve it or get more feedback before that?
[19:37] <skaet> SpamapS, after scanning through the changes,  I'd prefer that cjwatson be consulted before it get accepted in.   Feel free to upload, and cjwatson can approve or reject it when he's back tomorrow.
[19:38] <skaet> jhunt, ^^
[19:41] <SpamapS> skaet: thanks, will do
[19:57] <jhunt> skaet: ack - thx.
[19:58] <ScottK> I would appreciate it if some other releast team member would look at Bug 766386.
[19:58] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 766386 in request-tracker3.8 (Ubuntu) "FFe: Sync request-tracker3.8 3.8.10-1 (universe) from Debian unstable (main) (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/766386
[20:00] <kirkland> could someone take a look at and ideally accept rabbitmq-erlang-client?  this fix enable us to rebuilt rabbitmq-stomp and fix its FTBFS
[20:00] <Daviey> ScottK: Do you have a debdiff handy?
[20:00] <kirkland> (all universe)
[20:00] <ScottK> kirkland: Already accepted.
[20:00] <kirkland> ScottK: just saw the mail, thanks!
[20:01] <ScottK> Daviey: I can attach one to the bug.
[20:01] <kirkland> ScottK: any idea how long to wait before sending the build-dependent package for a rebuild?  ie, i'll need to wait for a publisher run, right?
[20:01] <ScottK> kirkland: If you build-dep on the new version you can upload right away.
[20:01] <kirkland> ScottK: duh, good point
[20:01] <kirkland> ScottK: wilco
[20:02] <ScottK> No need to worry about archive skew then either.
[20:06] <ScottK> kirkland: Accepted that one too.
[20:07] <kirkland> ScottK: sorry, that one was a simple copyright change;  the FTBFS one is 1 last more coming
[20:09] <ScottK> OK
[20:21] <jbicha> hi, I'm looking for a sponsor for bug 426215
[20:21] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 426215 in software-center (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "[UIF exception] apt:package-name isn't handled by the Store when appropriate (affects: 5) (heat: 35)" [Wishlist,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/426215
[20:45] <kirkland> ScottK: okay, last two rabbitmq related changes, all to solve the FTBFS, which should be done after accepting and building rabbitmq-server and rabbitmq-stomp
[20:46] <ScottK> Cool.
[20:46] <ScottK> kirkland: Done.
[20:46] <kirkland> ScottK: thanks
[21:02] <stgraber> I'm guessing it's known that language-selector-common in maverick-security is failing in postinst ? breaking upgrade and netboot installs of maverick
[21:02] <stgraber> pitti, jdstrand: ^
[21:03] <jdstrand> stgraber: kees did that update
[21:03]  * jdstrand goes to fetch him
[21:04] <stgraber> language-selector-common's postinst returns exit code 2 (from what I can see in d-i's logs on a fresh maverick netboot install)
[21:05] <pitti> I guess the kill should be || true'd?
[21:07] <stgraber> indeed, redirecting output to /dev/null won't prevent kill from returning !=0 if the process doesn't exist
[21:08]  * stgraber just finished reading the diff
[21:09] <pitti> stgraber: kees is on it
[21:19] <ScottK> stgraber: Did you follow the SRU regression procedure?
[21:19] <ScottK> pitti: ^^^?
[21:19] <jdstrand> ScottK: I don't think so, but kees is preparing updates as we speak
[21:20] <ScottK> I think it's still useful for notification.  We just got questions about the update in #ubuntu-motu and I only knew the answer because I was on this channel.
[21:21] <ScottK> Although I guess this is a security regression, not an SRU regression.
[21:21] <ScottK> So it's a different process.
[21:22] <stgraber> ScottK: as it was security we don't have a SRU bug open on LP. I'll open a bug report for the regression, mark critical and assign to kess (so he can close it with his upload)
[21:22] <ScottK> jdstrand: Is ^^^ reasonable?
[21:22] <jdstrand> fine by me
[21:24] <stgraber> kees: please close bug 766534 in your upload (if you didn't upload already)
[21:24] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 766534 in language-selector (Ubuntu) "Regression on maverick when updating to 0.6.7 (security upload) (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/766534
[21:24] <SpamapS> FYI: upstart package uploaded to natty, awaiting cjwatson's final review.
[21:27] <kees> stgraber: the fix is already built in the security queue. I'll close it manually when it publishes. :)
[23:38] <kees> incoming policykit-1 security update for natty...
[23:38] <kees> (I put today's krb5 update into natty-security since it's not urgent, but policykit-1's update is semi-urgent)
[23:38] <kees> (as in, nothing in the wild yet to exploit it, but is a local root escalation if someone can land it)
[23:40] <genec> quick question (asked before; no answer): is it worth mentioning in the release notes that btrfs is still deemed experimental by kernel.org?
[23:49] <ScottK> kees: Accepted.
[23:49] <ScottK> genec: I'd vote yes.
[23:50] <genec> ScottK: where would the best place be to raise this point?  here, a mailing list, an LP bug?
[23:51] <ScottK> genec: File a bug against the ubuntu-release-notes project.
[23:52] <genec> ScottK: I know support is coming along from all angles but the fsck is the one major point holding it back.  will do.