[08:42] <aviksil> Spads: ping
[08:47] <Spads> er, hello
[09:24] <aviksil> Spads: Is this build error due to QEMU ARM test builder: https://launchpad.net/~linaro-maintainers/+archive/overlay/+build/3285688
[09:26] <Spads> qemu: Unsupported syscall: 336
[09:26] <Spads> ^-- This would suggest it was.
[09:26] <Spads> Do you have a link to the actual build page, rather than just the log?
[09:26] <Spads> oh n'mind, I'm the one who followed the log link :)
[09:28] <aviksil> ok. so what should be the workaround? or is there any way to schedule build on real armel builder?
[09:30] <aviksil> Spads: ^^^
[09:31] <Spads> you'd have to ask IS about access to physical builders, but I'm filing a bug against qemu-linaro now
[09:31] <aviksil> Spads: ok
[09:33] <aviksil> Spads: and also, on a similar note, are these armel build failures due to QEMU builder too: https://code.launchpad.net/~aviksil/+recipe/lttng-ust-daily?
[09:35] <Spads> possibly.  I recommend you file bugs against qemu-linaro about them.
[09:35] <aviksil> Spads: ok, thanks, will do
[09:49] <DNX> hi guys! Do I have any chance to change my username with another already existing but unused?
[09:50] <DNX> here is the account: https://launchpad.net/~dnx
[09:51] <DNX> RoMiONeT is not an active member of any Launchpad teams.
[09:51] <DNX> Karma: 0
[09:51] <DNX> since 2009-09-28
[09:51] <czajkowski> DNX: you could mail them just because they don't have karma doesnt really mean they don't use LP
[09:52] <DNX> of course czajkowski, thank you!
[09:52] <czajkowski> np
[09:52]  * benonsoftware only got benny as the username because he emailed the old benny :P
[15:20] <czajkowski> what would you like hear more about from launchpad? https://www.facebook.com/questions/326779177369296/
[17:02] <cjohnston> so I see that the work items part of BPs is now live.. are they going to be migrated?
[17:06] <czajkowski> cjohnston: yes after the release of 12.04
[17:08] <cjohnston> hrm.. so an email should probably go out to Ubuntu MLs telling them status.u.c won't pick up items that are in the new field
[17:09] <czajkowski> mrevell: can you comment ?
[17:10] <czajkowski> salgado isn't around
[17:10] <mrevell> cjohnston, status.u.c does pick up work items that are in the new field. It picks up the work items whether they're in the whiteboard or the new work items box.
[17:11] <cjohnston> I just found that mrevell.. wasn't aware that it had been updated. must have missed that MP.. thanks
[17:11] <mrevell> np :)
[17:11] <czajkowski> cjohnston: sorted :)
[17:11] <czajkowski> mrevell: thanks
[17:12] <cjohnston> ty czajkowski
[17:35]  * mgedmin got more launchpad email about bug 190848, all without the bug title in the subject
[17:38] <czajkowski> mgedmin: thats the same bug as before right ?
[17:39] <mgedmin> yes
[17:40] <czajkowski> mgedmin: and did you change your bug mail settings,
[17:40] <mgedmin> no
[17:40] <czajkowski> :)
[17:53] <dobey> mgedmin: i'm pretty certain that's a bug in launchpad's upstream bug watcher code. you should file a bug against launchpad itself
[17:55] <mgedmin> oh, it looks like somebody already did: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/138775
[17:55] <dobey> ah, ok
[17:55] <dobey> that is pretty old
[18:10] <bdmurray> czajkowski: I'm trying to file a bug with apport and I'm consistently getting an oops report and I'd like to find out if it is something with apport or Launchpad.
[18:10] <czajkowski> hmm
[18:11] <czajkowski> haev you got a oops number?
[18:11] <bdmurray> Error ID: OOPS-784b24ada04f53ab155d80242075ed70
[18:13] <czajkowski> bdmurray: wondering is it to do with apport as lp is fine
[18:13] <czajkowski> but I'm unsure
[18:14] <czajkowski> rick_h: are you about ?
[18:15] <jokerdino> hello people..
[18:15] <jokerdino> the translation for this template https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/sound-theme-freedesktop/+pots/sound-theme-freedesktop/ta/+translate?show=untranslated does not update for Tamil
[18:16] <jokerdino> it keeps saying one string hasn't been translated when it has already been done with.
[18:16] <rick_h> czajkowski: what's up?
[18:17] <czajkowski> rick_h: could you help bdmurray please as unsure
[18:17] <rick_h> looking at the oops
[18:19] <czajkowski> thanks you
[18:20] <rick_h> bdmurray: so it looks like LP is rejecting it because the description on the bug report is > 50000 characters long
[18:20] <jokerdino> happy weekend then czajkowski
[18:20] <rick_h> I'm guessing apport submitted the description or did you write it out?
[18:20] <rick_h> bdmurray: if it's apport, then probably need to file a bug that they need to keep the descriptoin under that limit
[18:21] <rick_h> bdmurray: if you wrote it, any chance of shortening it up?
[18:21] <bdmurray> rick_h: do you mean field.comment in the oops report?
[18:22] <rick_h> bdmurray: no, that's under 50k characters
[18:23] <rick_h> bdmurray: must be in an attachment or something I guess from apport
[18:23] <rick_h> bdmurray: I can't see it from the oops
[18:25] <bdmurray> rick_h: so if one of the attachments is > 50000 characters this would cause an oops?
[18:26] <rick_h> bdmurray: looking, I don't think so. It's only on the description field. I'm not 100% sure how apport fills in the value
[18:26] <rick_h> deryck: ping, know how apport gets lp the descriptoin field in a bug report?
[18:27] <rick_h> deryck: in this oops I don't see any description value, but guess it submits an attachment perhaps? https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=784b24ada04f53ab155d80242075ed70
[18:27] <deryck> rick_h, no, actually I don't know.  I would have thought bdmurray did. ;)  hi bdmurray :)
[18:27] <rick_h> hah!
[18:27] <bdmurray> hey deryck
[18:28] <deryck> let me look at the OOPS and see what's up.  The issue is bdmurray can't update a bug report?
[18:28] <deryck> oh, oops on filebug.
[18:28] <bdmurray> deryck: I keep getting an oops trying to submit one via apport
[18:28] <rick_h> it's filing a bug from apport right bdmurray ?
[18:28] <bdmurray> rick_h: right
[18:28] <rick_h> right, triggering an sql condition where the description is too long, but I don't see the description set in the oops
[18:29]  * deryck is looking into it....
[18:33] <deryck> so sane_description is meant to block an empty string and a too long description.
[18:34] <rick_h> ah, it could be empty/missing not long...doh
[18:34] <bdmurray> and the description we are referring to here is a combination of comment in the oops report and my attachments right?
[18:35] <deryck> I think it's just the comment.
[18:36] <deryck> I don't see anything to indicate what's going wrong here.  Looks like you filled out the form and hit submit and boom.
[18:36] <deryck> bdmurray, this happens consistently?  Even now, you get the same error?
[18:36] <bdmurray> if you look at an apport bug, bug 956524, you'll see information that is included by apport and doesn't appear in my comment
[18:37] <bdmurray> notice the lines ProblemType ... UpgradeStatus
[18:38] <deryck> ah hmmm
[18:38] <deryck> bdmurray, did you fill out anything in the form when you went to submit it?
[18:38] <deryck> and yeah, trying the link, it doesn't fill out the title as apport filed bugs normally do.
[18:39] <bdmurray> deryck: the information in field.comment and field.title I put in
[18:39] <bdmurray> deryck: apport only prefills the title for crashes or package install failures
[18:39] <deryck> ah ok
[18:41] <deryck> I'm honestly not sure what's wrong.  If I'm reading the constraint correctly, it's just a simple "is it an empty string or too long" check.  And what bdmurray has filed in meets that check....
[18:41] <deryck> though clearly createBug is hitting that error.
[18:41] <deryck> I don't see how what apport does or doesn't do would affect this constraint
[18:42] <bdmurray> I wouldn't be surprised if the information apport was putting in was more than 50k
[18:42] <bdmurray> what happens to the data that apport sends?
[18:43] <deryck> ah
[18:43] <deryck> right, that's it probably.  and it's not reflected in the OOPS.
[18:44] <deryck> bdmurray, so I think we need a bug against apport and lp that apport shouldn't try to append more characters to the description than the description + apport < 50k chars.
[18:45] <deryck> bdmurray, and I think the data goes to the librarian, and is unpacked via the token in the url.
[18:46] <bdmurray> deryck: is this constraint new or changed? and do you have an idea of how many times this has happened?
[18:46] <deryck> bdmurray, I don't know how often we hit this, and I don't think it's new or changed.
[18:48] <bdmurray> deryck: okay, thanks
[18:49] <deryck> bdmurray, that OOPs says past week count was 13.
[18:50] <bdmurray> deryck: oh, I see that now - thats kind of neat
[18:51] <deryck> I forgot about it a lot myself :)
[18:59] <bdmurray> deryck: could you look at bug 957326 and add to it?
[19:00] <deryck> bdmurray, sure.  looking now...
[19:01] <deryck> bdmurray, I don't think I need to add anything.  that seems perfect.
[20:59] <m4n1sh> jelmer: ping
[21:35] <jelmer> m4n1sh: pong