[07:20] <micahg> infinity: are you up for a pocket copỷ
[09:02] <seb128> cjwatson, hey
[09:03] <cjwatson> seb128: hi
[09:03] <seb128> cjwatson, we have a gtk upload to do, should be use proposed to avoid !i386 installability issues?
[09:03] <seb128> be->we
[09:04] <cjwatson> seb128: yes please, although we'll need to be aware that anything else in -proposed that would build-dep on gtk won't build until gtk has finished building
[09:04] <cjwatson> but that's better than the alternative
[09:04] <seb128> right
[09:04] <seb128> thanks
[09:05] <cjwatson> well, won't build in the period between i386 building and the relevant other arch building
[09:05] <seb128> it will create the same issue it would create in precise to precise-proposed basically
[09:05] <cjwatson> yep
[09:05] <seb128> i.e we are just moving the issue
[09:06] <cjwatson> yes, to a safer place
[09:06] <seb128> but well, if proposed is not being used right now for something else I guess it's better ;-)
[10:45]  * tumbleweed cleans out our approved FFes
[10:45] <tumbleweed> we should be doing this more regularly, they are going stale
[12:59] <jdstrand> skaet: hi! where is the release manifest for hardy? trying to figure out if lpia is still supported
[13:01] <cjwatson> jdstrand: architecture lists per release are in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/PackageArchive#Architectures
[13:02]  * cjwatson goes to add armhf to that
[13:02] <cjwatson> we didn't keep release manifests for hardy
[13:03] <cjwatson> I don't *think* hardy lpia was LTS, but we can't stop building any architecture until the entire distroseries is obsolete, MO
[13:03] <cjwatson> IMO
[13:03] <jdstrand> cjwatson: it isn't clear to me that lpia is discontinued or not.
[13:04] <jdstrand> cjwatson: yeah-- but there was a snafu where packages got published before lpia finished building and we're trying to decide to rebuild or not
[13:04] <hggdh> just a question, is there a change of getting bug 961295 in Precise?
[13:04] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 961295 in live-boot "Enable overlayfs (in precise)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/961295
[13:04] <mdeslaur> I think the lpia builder should still exist until hardy goes away so the community can do stuff with it, but I don't think a lpia build failure is something that is supported
[13:04] <cjwatson> hggdh: why're you using live-boot?
[13:05] <cjwatson> anyway:
[13:05] <hggdh> cjwatson: I am not, it was \sh (originally on bugs.d.o) and someone just asked this question in -bugs
[13:05] <cjwatson> live-boot (3.0~a24-1ubuntu1) precise; urgency=low
[13:05] <cjwatson>   * Cherry picking overlayFS patch from
[13:05] <cjwatson>     http://live.debian.net/gitweb?p=live-boot.git;a=commit;h=b981b862888aa4b345e6af8a1af65253378919b7
[13:05] <cjwatson>  -- Stephan Adig <sh@sourcecode.de>  Fri, 03 Feb 2012 14:08:28 +0100
[13:05] <hggdh> cjwatson: heh. I guess I am answered. Want me to close the bug, or will you?
[13:05] <cjwatson> I'm closing it now
[13:06] <cjwatson> jdstrand: I can't say I'd bother rebuilding for it
[13:06] <cjwatson> but like mdeslaur I think the builder should still exist
[13:06] <skaet> jdstrand,  what cjwatson says  ;)  I believe ReleaseManifests started being kept with Karmic onwards.
[13:06] <cjwatson> you could rebuild for it if anyone notices
[13:07] <mdeslaur> cjwatson: we got an email already :)
[13:07] <cjwatson> ah, then I think there's a reasonable argument we should rebuild - but is it something time-consuming?
[13:08] <mdeslaur> cjwatson: no, this time it's a little thing...It's just our lpia builder keeps getting plundered for other tasks :P
[13:14] <brendand> skaet, hi
[13:17] <skaet> hiya brendand
[13:18] <brendand> skaet, is the release meeting called off tomorrow?
[13:18] <cjwatson> mm, I won't be there
[13:19] <skaet> brendand,  no,  those who can attend should be there.
[13:19] <seb128> no desktoper here either (pitti is off, I'm off as well)
[13:19] <brendand> skaet, i can send out the mail but i won't be there to answer questions ;)
[13:20] <skaet> issue is that easter monday is also a holiday, so sliding to then won't work either.
[13:20] <skaet> and we do need a Q&A session.
[13:20] <skaet> cjwatson,  can slangasek rep you?
[13:20] <cjwatson> ask him :)
[13:20] <skaet> :)   will do.
[13:21] <skaet> please have the emails sent out before tomorrow,  since we'll definitely need to do most of this that way.  :)
[13:22] <cjwatson> will do my best but I'll have to leave early (well, on time) today as well so it'll be a bit of a squeeze
[13:22] <skaet> I'm working on the email for the plan for the rest of the month,  pulling in the feedback.
[13:22] <Laney> what are you doing about the universe delegate thing?
[13:22]  * skaet will ignore IRC for next 30 minutes or so,  so I can figure it out.
[13:22] <Laney> I didn't realise that the language was a hangover from the old days, but that does make sense.
[13:23] <stgraber> skaet: I probably won't be there either, got a flight to catch in the afternoon
[13:25] <skaet> Laney,  I'll go change the language and set the expectations that #ubuntu-motu is a where the discussion should go.   Will indicate release team members will be monitoring list for FFe and fix inclusion requests for unseeded universe packages.
[13:27] <brendand> skaet, roadmr will attend and answer any questions directed at certification
[13:27] <Laney> OK
[13:27] <skaet> We'll try it the way suggested in the thread.   If lack of focal turns out to be a problem (ie.  I get pings cause things are being ignored),  we'll revisit and figure out the focal.
[13:28] <skaet> to direct traffic.
[13:28] <Laney> MOTU isn't so active, so I don't expect it to be a problem.
[13:30] <skaet> Instead of daily meeting,  we'll try a combination of 3 changes: 1) http://pad.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-frozen-archive to record things package is in question.   Relying on backscroll doesn't work.
[13:31] <skaet> 2) up until final freeze,  1 ack on fix is sufficient,  after final freeze 2 release team acks in the bug will be needed.
[13:32] <cjwatson> at some point (probably after I've implemented a first pass at the queue API) we should arrange for there to be some facility to leave notes in the queue
[13:32] <cjwatson> a separate scratchpad for that is clearly error-prone
[13:34] <skaet> 3) preset time in channel for Q&A if needed,  1600 UTC for those with questions/concerns to raise.  I'll plan on doing a pass before then,  putting my questions/etc. in scratch pad,  but this way if folks are looking theres a predictable time to aim at for rendezvous without the overhead of a meeting.
[13:35] <skaet> cjwatson,  yeah scratch pad is error prone, and getting better queue API is the right solution.   relying on backscroll was even worse,  so seemed reasonable way to track.
[13:37] <skaet> If anyone has concerns about a package, and wants to make sure its discussed.  Please add it to the pad, and the concern point.  Discussion will happen in next 1600 UTC rendezvous.
[13:37] <skaet> this is not to stop discussion in channel,  just to augment it like we've been doing with using the pad for managing the release.
[13:38]  * skaet will be committing to be in channel at that time unless traveling.
[13:42] <skaet> who accepted esteid-meta?   Could you please signal in the channel or on the pad please.
[13:47] <cjwatson> it's unseeded universe - does it matter?
[13:56] <seb128> cjwatson, can you pocket copy gtk? it built everywhere
[14:03] <cjwatson> seb128: yep, one momet
[14:03] <cjwatson> +n
[14:03] <skaet> http://paste.ubuntu.com/916057/
[14:03] <cjwatson> grr, why's it not on pending-sru
[14:04] <skaet> cjwatson, stgraber, Laney, pitti,  ^ any tweaks/clarifications before I send?   did I miss any points from the discussions?
[14:05] <seb128> skaet, is that pre-release freeze a new concept? it's not on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PrecisePangolin/ReleaseSchedule
[14:05] <cjwatson> seb128: let me just debug pending-sru before I lose my test case for it
[14:06] <seb128> cjwatson, that's ok, there is no hurry to get that in ;-)
[14:06] <skaet> seb128,  we stayed frozen after beta last time.   so we were in pre-freeze then.
[14:06] <skaet> pre-release freeze is what its called launchpad when the archive is frozen.
[14:06] <seb128> skaet, ok, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BetaFreeze might need to be updated then
[14:06] <seb128> "Once the BetaRelease is shipped, we roll back to FeatureFreeze and UserInterfaceFreeze status. " it states
[14:06] <skaet> seb128,  yes it does.
[14:07] <skaet> also comments on reviewers for Unseeded Universe, etc.  have been sorted a bit more
[14:07] <cjwatson> seb128: wait, where's this upload anyway?  I don't see it in either https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gtk%2B2.0 or https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gtk%2B3.0
[14:07] <skaet> I'll do it in a single pass.
[14:07] <seb128> cjwatson, gtk+3.0
[14:07] <cjwatson> oh, not published yet
[14:07] <cjwatson> hmm, that's very odd
[14:07] <seb128> cjwatson, https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gtk+3.0/3.4.0-0ubuntu4
[14:08] <cjwatson> yeah, but why's it not published
[14:08] <seb128> that's surprising indeed
[14:08] <Laney> skaet: clarify that this is for seeded/stuff on images everywhere
[14:08] <skaet> Laney,  will do.
[14:08] <skaet> thank
[14:08] <cjwatson> 2012-04-05 14:03:51 ERROR   Tried to publish gtk+3.0 3.4.0-0ubuntu4 in precise (2365347) into a non-release pocket on unstable series Precise, skipping
[14:08] <cjwatson> f*ck
[14:08] <Laney> erk
[14:09]  * cjwatson drops everything
[14:10] <stgraber> skaet: "explicit acknowledgement of who did review in bugs" is that bit for late FFe or for all uploads? wondering as some uploads may not have bugs linked (thinking of translation updates) or may have several
[14:10] <skaet> stgraber,  was trying to incorporate pitti's suggestion.
[14:11] <Laney> "all fixes reviewed" sounds harsh before finalfreeze?
[14:11] <cjwatson> this is easy enough to fix, but it'll be a day or two
[14:11] <Laney> is that what we did before?
[14:11] <skaet> should be for all uploads with bugs (FFEs and fixes should have).   Pad to be used to fill in the gaps when bugs not appropriated.
[14:11] <cjwatson> quite possibly won't be deployed until after Easter now
[14:12] <cjwatson> because it's absolute minimum tomorrow morning before it'll be even available for QA
[14:12] <cjwatson> and I'll be on holiday
[14:12] <skaet> Laney, yes every fix after beta 2 last cycle was reviewed as part of pushing through archive for the seeded packages.
[14:12] <cjwatson> I can probably copy it anyway, I assume you want it in precise before next week?
[14:13] <seb128> cjwatson, gtk? please
[14:13] <seb128> cjwatson, I plan to do another upload later than I want to stay in proposed for the w.e though
[14:13] <seb128> cjwatson, upstream just came out with http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/commit/?id=917ca6a802af574232f413fdf904e1633d706b52
[14:14] <seb128> which is an optimization for scrolling, but it could lead to missing refreshes
[14:15] <cjwatson> upshot of this for those not familiar with LP: precise-proposed is *only* useful right now for getting builds in sync.  It is no use for testing installability or testing anything else really until I get this fixed.
[14:15] <seb128> cjwatson, do you want my new gtk in there to have a testcase over the w.e or should I use the ubuntu-desktop ppa?
[14:16]  * skaet notes it.
[14:16] <seb128> well "new" = the one I will upload in a bit
[14:16] <cjwatson> seb128: no, I'll arrange for some other test case on dogfood
[14:16] <seb128> cjwatson, ok
[14:16] <seb128> I will use the ppa then
[14:20] <cjwatson> seb128: damn.  I'm sorry, I can't copy these until they're published
[14:20] <cjwatson> I think it's stuck until I get a fix deployed
[14:21] <seb128> cjwatson, ok, which is not before next week right?
[14:21] <seb128> cjwatson, should I do a no change upload as -5 in precise then?
[14:21] <cjwatson> I'm not sure.  There's some chance I might be able to manage something for tomorrow, but I can't promise anything
[14:21] <seb128> cjwatson, I would like some of those patches to get in before the w.e to get a bit of feedback
[14:22] <cjwatson> problem with that is that there's high probability of uninstallability for a time
[14:22] <seb128> do we still have a rebuild running or something that would be hit by uninstallability issues?
[14:23] <cjwatson> I don't know, but users would be, and image builds depending on timing
[14:23] <seb128> cjwatson, ok, don't worry, I planned to do that ppa testing version anyway
[14:23] <seb128> cjwatson, I will do a call for testing in -5 in the desktop ppa
[14:23] <seb128> cjwatson, get -4 moved to precise when you can, next week will do if needed
[14:24] <seb128> cjwatson, just make sure I get a freeze exception for it, it was uploaded before the pre-freeze :p
[14:24] <seb128> cjwatson, sorry for the trouble
[14:24] <cjwatson> is the desktop PPA nonvirt?
[14:24] <seb128> no, it's virtual
[14:24] <cjwatson> so can't copy from it
[14:24] <seb128> but that's ok, we will get enough testers on that
[14:25] <seb128> well I didn't want -5 to go to the archive yet
[14:25] <seb128> it will have the scrolling optimization changes I want testing on
[14:25] <seb128> but it's good enough that I can ask people to test the other patches with that version as well
[14:26] <seb128> cjwatson, just copy -4 when you can, I will get testing from -5 in the ppa for now
[14:26] <seb128> there is nothing urgent in -4
[14:40] <cjwatson> bug 974328
[14:40] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 974328 in launchpad "pre-release uploads to -proposed are accepted but cannot be published" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/974328
[14:58] <cjwatson> seb128: oh, what do you know, the copy of -0ubuntu4 worked after all
[14:59] <seb128> cjwatson, it's just not published?
[14:59] <seb128> cjwatson, oh, it seems it is
[14:59] <seb128> cjwatson, great ;-)
[14:59] <cjwatson> I must have misread the copier code (which isn't hard)
[15:00] <cjwatson> so that's not so bad; I have the LP branch in for review
[15:50] <slangasek> cjwatson, skaet: I can stand in tomorrow, yes.  cjwatson, if you don't get the mail sent to -release today, can you at least send me any notes you have?
[15:50] <slangasek> (by eod that is)
[15:50] <cjwatson> yep, will see what I can do anyway
[15:51] <cjwatson> lost an hour to fixing LP :-/
[15:57] <cjwatson> incidentally, it would really help if http://reports.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/kernel-bugs/reports/rls-p-tracking-bugs.html could be brought up to date
[15:57] <cjwatson> what can be done to make these reports more reliable?  whom do they alert when they fail to update?
[16:00] <bjf> cjwatson, slangasek, w.r.t. release mgr report .. they don't alert anyone when they fail to update
[16:01] <bjf> cjwatson, slangasek, https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-q-arsenal-report-enhancements
[16:01] <cjwatson> Could that be fixed?  I just looked through my logs and this is at least the fourth time this cycle I've complained in this channel about the reports being up to date
[16:02] <cjwatson> (possibly more in other venues; I haven't checked mail, private messages, other channels)
[16:02] <bjf> cjwatson, i can confirm that it has been many more times than that
[16:03] <cjwatson> thanks; I've noted my concern in the whiteboard of that blueprint
[16:07] <jdstrand> skaet: can you review https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/FAQ#Architectures for accuracy? note that the intended audience for this is different than https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/PackageArchive#Architectures (which is particularly confusing wrt lpia and maybe others)
[16:09] <jdstrand> skaet: this is based on what our team has been supporting over the years, and we have been careful to be as accurate as possible (though, obviously an error might have crept in, which is why I am asking you to review it :)
[16:09] <bjf> cjwatson: this last problem was entirely my fault. i disabled the cron while i worked on the last failure and then didn't turn it back on
[16:11] <skaet> jdstrand,  in meeting, will look at it after.  thanks.
[16:11] <jdstrand> skaet: ok, thanks
[16:21] <cjwatson> slangasek: is any part of the fix for bug 876298 likely to land today?  I notice that the FFe approval message was "Please try to land this between March 30 and April 5"
[16:21] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 876298 in update-notifier "[FFe] [MASTER] We need to better handle external payloads (Flash, msttcorefonts) not being available." [Critical,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/876298
[16:22] <slangasek> yes, I can land that today
[16:24] <SpamapS> Don't need anything formal to just update to an upstream bugfix release, right ? (sphinxsearch 2.0.2 beta -> 2.0.4 release)
[16:25] <cjwatson> bjf: hmm, now bugs seem to have disappeared from it though, for example bug 873009
[16:25] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 873009 in grub2 "Unabled to boot degraded RAID-1 array from second disk" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/873009
[16:26] <bjf> cjwatson: looking
[16:27] <cjwatson> the reports.qa page has 23 tasks by my count, while LP (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=rls-p-tracking) lists 63
[17:30] <bjf> cjwatson: i'm still working on it but the current report looks better
[18:03] <jdstrand> would someone mind doing a binary NEW of hamster-indicator (I can't cuase I uploaded it)
[18:03] <slangasek> looking
[18:08] <phillw> hi guys, there seems to be increasing chatter about 3.0.0.18 32-bit kernel - Is there any news?
[18:10] <phillw> bug 972821
[18:10] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 972821 in linux "[oneiric-proposed] linux-image-3.0.0-18-generic makes apport-gtk and chromium-browser segfault on startup" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/972821
[18:11] <phillw> amongst others.
[18:27] <slangasek> phillw: thanks, I've marked bug #965090 (the tracking bug for this update) with the 'verification-failed' tag and pointed to that bug
[18:27] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 965090 in kernel-sru-workflow/verification-testing "linux: 3.0.0-18.31 -proposed tracker" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/965090
[18:28] <phillw> thanks slangasek, I'm sure I saw it mentioned in here yesterday, but/// meh... my memory is not what it used to be :)
[18:29] <bjf> phillw, we have a fix, there is a test kernel in some of the bugs
[18:29] <bjf> phillw, we are currently putting together a new kernel that will go into -proposed
[18:29] <phillw> bjf: thanks, I'll update the email to let the support guys know work is ongoing :)
[19:26] <Laney> did zescrow have FFe?
[19:27] <slangasek> it was an upstream rename
[19:27] <slangasek> no rdeps, so I handled it as an implicit FFe
[19:28] <slangasek> (i.e., I asked the nearest member of the release team if it was ok, and I answered yes, then de-NEWed it)
[19:28] <Laney> hah, OK
[20:21] <seb128> slangasek, there?
[20:58] <seb128> slangasek, not there?
[20:59] <seb128> no skaet either
[21:06] <slangasek> seb128: heya
[21:07] <seb128> slangasek, hey, I've a gtk upload I want in precise, better before the w.e than next week? better in proposed than precise?
[21:07] <slangasek> seb128: yes to both.  what's the new upload, syncing with upstream's stable tree?
[21:08] <seb128> slangasek, https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-desktop/+archive/ppa/+sourcepub/2365705/+listing-archive-extra
[21:09] <seb128> slangasek, I'm not 100% happy about that being late but the other option is sluggish scrolling
[21:09] <seb128> slangasek, I got some #ubuntu-desktop testing from the ppa and it's in the stable serie upstream git
[21:09] <slangasek> seb128: oh; is that related to update-manager's refresh being slow?
[21:09] <seb128> slangasek, "refresh"? that's purely scrolling
[21:09] <slangasek> ok
[21:10] <seb128> if you mean scrolling through the updates list it could be, otherwise no
[21:10] <seb128> slangasek, well in any case what do you recommend? upload now to proposed?
[21:10] <slangasek> the issue with u-m is that after an install, when it refreshes the list of available updates, it repaints the window after each package is removed from the list
[21:10] <slangasek> so that takes a while
[21:10] <slangasek> seb128: yeah, and upload now to -proposed is best
[21:10] <seb128> slangasek, thanks
[21:10] <slangasek> is there additional testing you intend to do before we copy to release?
[21:11] <seb128> slangasek, I will discuss the update-manager stuff with mvo next week, that's new to me
[21:11] <seb128> slangasek, no, I got testing on gwibber etc from ken and others and it's in upstream git, nobody noticed regressions so I think the earlier it reach the archive the better
[21:12] <seb128> i.e limited testing is fine, if we will get a real issue it's going to be a corner one and I prefer to know sooner than later
[21:13] <slangasek> I'm not sure that u-m issue is one that's been raised as a bug report; I've seen it here and I know there were reports of something similar in the installer... I haven't connected the dots between them yet
[21:13] <seb128> slangasek, it's likely -um's fault
[21:14] <slangasek> sure :)
[21:14] <seb128> it should probably block the update signal while it's changing the model
[21:14] <slangasek> ok
[21:15] <seb128> slangasek, well I will discuss it with mvo but I know gtk changed this cycle, they send selection changed signals when the selected row is deleted from the model which it didn't do before
[21:15] <slangasek> aha, yes, that would explain it
[21:19] <seb128> ^ don't NEW that yet, chrisccoulson had issues with it (it broke firefox), I deleted the source, it's a supposed fixed version but it needs to be checked
[21:22] <micahg> it still has the browser ađdons so that should be an auto rejection unless we think Q-FUNK will actually take the burden of keeping these up to date
[21:23] <micahg> and the xul-ext-esteid is still installing in the Firefox dir
[21:23] <micahg> seb128: looks like it should be rejected regardless
[21:24] <seb128> chrisccoulson, ?
[21:24] <chrisccoulson> seb128, micahg, i'm taking this to e-mail :)
[21:24] <seb128> chrisccoulson, yeah, i'm just making sure nobody not in the loop ack it again there
[21:35] <ScottK> Thanks for the warning.
[21:36] <micahg> and it'll FTBFS :)
[21:39]  * skaet noting that its after 2100 time to look at freezing the archive again....
[21:40] <skaet> ScottK, slangasek, any concerns?
[21:40] <ScottK> No.
[21:42] <slangasek> nope
[21:42] <slangasek> though I'll be the first to give you stuff for review, I think ;)
[21:42] <skaet> slangasek, :)  fair 'nuf.
[21:48] <micahg> ^^ will still FTBFS...
[22:01] <cjwatson> slangasek: he can't do significant testing against -proposed until my LP fix is rolled out anyway :-/
[22:01] <slangasek> oh
[22:01] <slangasek> well, good that he didn't want any then :)
[22:01] <cjwatson> (bug 974328)
[22:01] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 974328 in launchpad "pre-release uploads to -proposed are accepted but cannot be published" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/974328
[22:02] <slangasek> does that block us from pocket-copying?
[22:02] <cjwatson> as it turns out, no
[22:02] <cjwatson> (to my surprise)
[22:02] <cjwatson> so we can still use it for build skew avoidance
[22:03] <slangasek> ok
[22:10] <slangasek> skaet: http://pad.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-frozen-archive> (assuming these are your notes?) I would strongly suggest not tracking new binary packages here; to get to that state someone must have accepted the source already, the archive admins should proceed as normal with new binaries
[22:11] <skaet> slangasek,  fair nuf.  delete away.
[22:26] <cjwatson> I've requested a sync of febootstrap after reading a post on ubuntu-devel-discuss that referred to https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2012-April/
[22:27] <cjwatson> er, https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2012-April/msg00028.html
[22:27] <cjwatson> biggish diff but it's almost entirely autotools/gnulib which I have a high degree of trust in; I've read through the rest and see nothing horrible
[22:36] <skaet> cjwatson, slangasek given the kernel has had an abi bump,  have we gotten d-i synched up with it?  (and I didn't notice...)
[22:38] <cjwatson> which one, -22?
[22:38] <skaet> (now version 3.2.0-22.35
[22:38] <skaet> yes
[22:39] <phillw> cjwatson: can you confirm that lubuntu & xubuntu have gone to non-PAE kernel?
[22:39] <phillw> skaet: is 3.0.0.19 anywhere near?
[22:39] <skaet> phillw,  what do you mean by near?   not sure I follow.
[22:40] <skaet> all should be in the archive.
[22:40] <bjf> phillw, it's still building
[22:40] <cjwatson> skaet: yes, I did that yesterday
[22:40] <skaet> ah,  new oneiric drop being waited for... thanks, bjf
[22:40] <cjwatson> phillw: confirmed
[22:41] <skaet> thanks cjwatson.  :)
[22:41] <phillw> skaet: 3.0.0.18 failed.... thanks bjf ; i know I'm a pain at times, but I do get requests of what is going on :)
[22:41] <cjwatson> phillw: did that a few weeks back
[22:41] <infinity> skaet: cjwatson did -22 yesterday, and I did -1602 (armadaxp) today...
[22:41] <bjf> phillw, you can always ping us in the kernel channel, i don't hang out here usually (though maybe i should)
[22:41] <cjwatson> infinity: oh, glad somebody did, I'd noticed that on NBS
[22:41] <skaet> thanks infinity. :)
[22:42] <infinity> cjwatson: Yeah, didn't set up CIA on my ac100, so no commit spam.
[22:42] <infinity> I really need to automate that on all my systems so it doesn't take thought/effort.
[23:00] <cjwatson> ^- purely translation updates; requested in particular by the Uyghur translation team (and I can understand why, as their previous translation was full of placeholder strings)
[23:04] <cjwatson> (if accepted soon enough it should build in time to avoid breaking most image builds ...)
[23:07]  * cjwatson re-promotes gtk2-engines-pixbuf to main (was in main up to natty) to render light-themes and hence ubuntu-desktop installable again
[23:07] <cjwatson> second time this cycle it's been re-added, judging from the changelog ...
[23:08] <tjaalton> I've uploaded a new libwacom to -proposed, fixes bug 934445
[23:08] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 934445 in gnome-settings-daemon "hits g_assert (device->priv->styli) when my Wacom Bamboo 2FG 4x5 is plugged in" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/934445
[23:09] <tjaalton> it's also a "merge", but there were no real changes
[23:09] <tjaalton> other than the patch
[23:27] <cjwatson> whee, bug 873009 fixed for free
[23:27] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 873009 in grub2 "Unable to boot degraded RAID-1 array from second disk" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/873009
[23:27] <bryceh> I have some fixes to upload for xdiagnose, which is on the cd.  fixes a couple issues in the diagnostic gui, and some fixes to the X apport hooks
[23:28] <bryceh> I've been testing it locally (which is why I missed the cut-off).  Is it still ok if I upload, do I need pre-approval, or should I scrap it?
[23:29] <bryceh> skaet, ^^
[23:30] <skaet> bryceh, go ahead if its well tested, and there isn't much chance of regression.
[23:30] <bryceh> skaet, ok will do
[23:31] <infinity> cjwatson: That's a fun accidental fix.
[23:32] <cjwatson> spectacularly unexpected, and just as well since it was going to be an utter nightmare to debug
[23:34] <infinity> cjwatson: Given what fixed it, I'd go so far as to say it might have been nearly undebuggable, at least not without wasting far more time than anyone should have done.
[23:34] <cjwatson> I could probably have plodded through the disk caching code given a few solid days on the problem, though I didn't get far when I tried it at the last release sprint
[23:34] <cjwatson> but yeah, quite
[23:36] <skaet> cjwatson,  ubiquity approved, only seeing the translations, agreed looks pretty straightforward.
[23:36] <cjwatson> great, thanks
[23:38]  * skaet not feeling that comfortable about libwacom though....
[23:40] <skaet> infinity, could you take a look at the libwacom one?
[23:40] <cjwatson> so that's two rls-p-tracking bugs left assigned to me, which I am now cheerfully going to ignore until Tuesday
[23:40] <cjwatson> slangasek: we seem to have forgotten about bug 853679; looks like perhaps a fairly easy cherry-pick?
[23:40] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 853679 in dpkg "dselect has an error in the "Provides: <package>" multiarch case" [Low,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/853679
[23:41] <skaet> cjwatson,  have a good easter weekend.
[23:41] <infinity> skaet: Sure, I'll poke.
[23:41] <skaet> thanks infinity.
[23:41] <cjwatson> slangasek: ae61affca427ed53e33eff589af0356b6e951a21 in dpkg.git; we have the dpkg half already but not the dselect half
[23:41] <cjwatson> skaet: thanks, you too
[23:42] <infinity> cjwatson: Can you mail me about that dselect commit, so I don't forget about IRC backscroll, I'll look at it on the weekend.
[23:43] <cjwatson> infinity: done
[23:43] <infinity> <3
[23:46] <infinity> tjaalton: "remaining changes: none" in libwacom, I assume, doesn't count the new patch just added? :P
[23:47] <tjaalton> infinity: no, it's a new changelog entry :)
[23:47] <tjaalton> adding the patch I mean
[23:48] <tjaalton> it was just to point out that it could just as well be synced, but I skipped the "upload to debian" part this time
[23:48] <infinity> Slack.
[23:48] <infinity> Accepted.
[23:48] <tjaalton> ooh
[23:49] <tjaalton> thanks
[23:50] <infinity> bryceh: Why drop GDM support from xdiagnose?  It seems benign, except in the case where someone actually has GDM installed, in which case you'd still want the logs, surely?
[23:53] <bryceh> infinity, yeah mostly just for the sake of cruft elimination.
[23:54] <infinity> I suppose.  It would make sense to me to test for all known DMs just in case you might want their logs, rather than going the other direction.
[23:55] <bryceh> infinity, anyone who has upgraded from older distros will have gdm.log's hanging around which will be of no interest.  We have to prompt to include the file since it potentially can contain sensitive info (it's only readable by root).  Since it's unlikely we will need it, I figure it's safer to just generally omit it.  If we really need it, we can just ask for it.
[23:55] <infinity> Fair enough.
[23:56] <infinity> I guess you could scan all *dm logs for timestamps, and assume the latest is the one they use.
[23:56] <infinity> But that does sound a bit like effort.
[23:56] <bryceh> infinity, yes you're right that a more proper solution would involve checking the running dm and so on, but for debugging purposes we need them only very occasionally anyway
[23:56]  * infinity nods.
[23:57] <infinity> Want to file a bug to do the above (check for all DMs, and include the most recently-abused?)
[23:57] <infinity> But I'll accept this cruft removal option for now. :P
[23:57] <bryceh> plus I figure given the freeze status, deleting code is safer than adding something more sophisticated.
[23:57] <infinity> Yeahp.
[23:57] <infinity> That bug wouldn't be precise targetted.
[23:57] <bryceh> infinity, certainly, will do