[09:23] <babyface_> anybody knows why there is no new precise build since July 15 ?    http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/precise/daily-live/current/
[09:24] <babyface_> the daily iso test is blocked for this
[09:28] <babyface_>  no new desktop precise build and no new server precise build
[09:30] <cjwatson> it's still running
[09:30] <cjwatson> not sure why it's late today
[09:30] <cjwatson> looks like it's almost there though
[09:33] <babyface_> cjwatson, ok, could you help to check what's wrong ?  we can not stand on this, coz it makes the test result ugly in Jenkins.  thanks!
[09:33] <cjwatson> babyface_: just wait
[09:33] <babyface_> cjwatson, ok
[09:34] <cjwatson> since it's making progress right now there isn't really any point in me investigating anything
[09:34] <cjwatson> and we already know what the underlying problem is, namely that there's only one useful arm livefs builder at the moment
[09:34] <cjwatson> so I don't need to redo that investigation
[09:36] <gema> cjwatson: is there a way to make both builds independent from each other?
[09:36] <cjwatson> gema: get more arm livefs builders
[09:36] <cjwatson> otherwise, no
[09:36] <gema> cjwatson: what does that mean, buying more HW?
[09:36] <cjwatson> this is all already in progress
[09:37] <gema> cjwatson: do you know when we can expect it to be in place?
[09:37] <gema> cjwatson: (to avoid asking you the same questions again and again)
[09:38] <cjwatson> sorry, no, ogra_ might, but AFAIK it is at least partially in IS' hands
[09:38] <cjwatson> anyway, your precise images are there now
[09:38] <gema> cjwatson: thanks
[09:39] <gema> cjwatson: will follow up with ogra_
[09:39]  * ogra_ reads backlog
[09:39] <ogra_> ah, yeah, already in progress, i dont know any exact status though
[09:40] <gema> ogra_: do you have an RT ticket or such?
[09:40] <ogra_> it was discussed at the last release team meeting and several people are on it atm, should be solved "soon"  :)
[09:40] <ogra_> (several people ... including your boss)
[09:41] <ogra_> gema, i dont know if there is an actual RT (if so, i dont know the number), but there is definitely work going on, i'll ping you as soon as something changes
[09:43] <gema> ogra_: thanks a lot !
[09:45] <cjwatson> I couldn't find a ticket for it
[09:46] <gema> cjwatson, ogra_ I will check with pgraner tomorrow, he'll surely know the status of it
[09:46] <cjwatson> I think the (possibly informal) search keyword would be "mandabox"
[09:46] <ogra_> heh, yeah
[13:21] <ScottK> cjwatson: I taught sru-accept to also spit out the invocation for 'queue' in addition to providing the link to the LP page.
[13:21] <cjwatson> ScottK: Cool, thanks.  I was considering having it poll for a minute or two attempting the accept itself.
[13:21] <cjwatson> But that may not be worth it since the fact that it can't be automatically accepted is a filed LP bug.
[13:22] <ScottK> Personally I like the intervening step of thinking about do I really want to accept that into -updats.
[13:23] <ScottK> updates
[13:23] <ScottK> Since I'm just about to make something available to ~every user of that release, it bears an extra moment of thought.
[13:23] <ScottK> I just didn't like having to think through the ./queue syntax each time.
[13:26] <cjwatson> sru-accept could have an extra confirmation prompt, if you like
[13:27] <cjwatson> I don't think the extra moment of thought needs to be quite as cumbersome.
[14:14] <ScottK> That makes sense.
[15:25] <ogra_> gema, RT 54490 (in case pete didnt tell you yet)
[15:26] <gema> ogra_: thanks, he hasn't told me yet
[15:36] <cjwatson> skaet: I'm going to be out this evening at the time when the experimental freeze is due to start; do you think you could deal with asking webops on irc.c.c/#launchpad-ops to set quantal's status to "Pre-release Freeze" at the appropriate time?
[15:47] <ScottK> bdmurray: Who's in charge of the code behind the pending-sru.html page?
[15:48] <ScottK> It looks like there's a bug because the precise SRU for visualvm shows no bugs, but there are two in the changelog.
[15:48] <ScottK> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/visualvm/1.3.2-0ubuntu2.1
[15:49] <ScottK> Both bugs are verification done, but I guess no one noticed because they don't show up.
[15:51] <stgraber> ScottK: I don't think it really has an owner though it's been TIL by cjwatson and bdmurray (sru-report in lp:ubuntu-archive-tools)
[15:51] <ScottK> stgraber: Thanks.
[15:53] <skaet> cjwatson, can do.
[15:54] <bdmurray> ScottK: I happen to be working on it now so will have a peek
[15:54] <ScottK> bdmurray: Great.  I'll hold off accepting the SRU so you have a test case.
[15:56] <stgraber> xkeyboard-config is good to go (I just marked verification-done the last bug), so if someone is doing accepts, would be great to have it included (as some of the fixes have been hitting a lot of users, mostly french users)
[16:13] <cjwatson> So, I'm taking a day off tomorrow, but we have the test freeze; could people keep an eye on unapproved uploads to quantal-release and accept them as quickly as possible, per the discussion on ubuntu-devel@?
[16:13] <cjwatson> The command line to use is typically 'queue -s quantal -Q unapproved -e accept <package name(s)>'
[16:14] <cjwatson> If it times out or otherwise misbehaves, please let me know
[16:14] <cjwatson> If it completely explodes, SMS me
[16:14] <cjwatson> (To the point where development is impeded, I mean)
[16:15] <skaet> cjwatson,  do we want to just hold off for a day then?
[16:15]  * skaet thinking most of the problems are going to be in first 24 hours
[16:15] <cjwatson> Nah, I'm just as happy for more of the attempts to involve people who aren't me
[16:15] <cjwatson> Since I've already used the new client myself quite a bit
[16:16] <cjwatson> If for some bizarre reason there are things that are requesting-user-dependent, I'd like to know
[16:16] <cjwatson> For example I'd certainly like at least one attempt at accepting an upload to main to be from somebody who's in ubuntu-archive but not in ubuntu-core-dev
[16:23] <bdmurray> ScottK: for some reason the changes file has no Launchpad-Bugs-Fixed
[16:23] <bdmurray> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/106865775/visualvm_1.3.2-0ubuntu2.1_source.changes
[16:24] <bdmurray> I maybe shouldn't have accepted it then
[16:25] <Laney> tumbleweed: ^^^^^
[16:25] <seb128> hum
[16:25] <Laney> borked DEB_VENDOR
[16:26] <seb128> do we have a standard way to deal with regression that entered <release>-updates,security?
[16:26] <seb128> we have an xorg segfault bug which is likely a regression from the recent SRU which got included in the recent -security update as well
[16:30] <ScottK> Then it'll have to have a -security update and that'll get propogated to -udpates.
[16:30] <ScottK> I'd talk to the security team.
[16:32] <seb128> sbeattie, ^
[16:32] <sbeattie> seb128: what bug number?
[16:33] <seb128> sbeattie, bug #1021517
[16:33] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1021517 in xorg-server "Xorg-server crashes reproducible with GIMP usage" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1021517
[16:33] <seb128> sbeattie, trying to get the #ubuntu-x guys on it but mlankhorst is not feeling well, cnd said he will have a look
[16:34] <seb128> sbeattie, it's likely a fallout from -0ubuntu10.3
[16:38] <ScottK> bdmurray: Thanks.  I think that makes it not the scripts fault.
[16:39]  * ScottK releases is then.
[16:40] <ScottK> is/it
[16:40] <sbeattie> seb128: are they likely just to revert the -0ubuntu10.3 patch at this point or strictly trying to debug and fix?
[16:41] <seb128> sbeattie, I'm trying to get a sense of that
[17:30] <stgraber> skaet: hmm, I guess I'll have to start to worry about oversizedness of the 12.04.1 images as it's not going to be as trivial to fix when stuff need to be fixed in -proposed/-updates ...
[17:31] <skaet> stgraber, ack.
[17:41] <cjwatson> stgraber: I think there's still an outstanding not-yet-implemented in livecd-rootfs/live-build whereby it doesn't have the thing we used to do in livecd-rootfs to make sure there's only one ABI version of linux-headers in the image
[17:41] <cjwatson> probably doesn't help
[17:51] <stgraber> cjwatson: hmm, indeed. kernel headers should compress pretty well, but that's certainly still not helping
[17:51] <skaet> Daviey,  where should we be picking up arm server image from?   not seeing it: http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-server/daily/20120716/
[17:51] <skaet> and last preinstalled version was 0627
[17:53] <ogra_> skaet, preinstalled fails atm (for unresearched reasons), we were actually waiting for the squashfs switch on x86 to then move on with it
[17:54] <skaet> ogra_,  what's the outlook on the squashfs switch?   and where will the images be going?
[17:54] <skaet> ie.   shouldn't they be picked up with the dailies now,  rather than under pre-installed?
[17:55] <ogra_> like for the switch on desktop from /daily-preinstalled to /daily-live the images will move from server/daily-preinstalled to server/daily
[17:56] <ogra_> arm is not enabled yet for normal daily server builds we're waiting for the switch here
[17:56] <skaet> ok,  had the right mental model at least ;)  who are you waiting on for the switch?
[17:57] <ogra_> some announcement on -release or a ping from either colin or Daviey that it happened on x86
[18:01] <skaet> ogra_, who's been doing the work for the switch?
[18:01]  * skaet figures this needs sorting before we get into next week.
[18:02] <ogra_> skaet, Daviey and cjwatson worked on the squashfs stuff i think
[18:02] <ogra_> not sure where it stands
[18:03]  * ogra_ has to go now ...
[18:09] <infinity> cjwatson: Oh, bah, we didn't port that hack over?  Should be trivial, I guess.
[18:35] <skaet> infinity,  you on the squashfs stuff?
[18:36] <skaet> or know what the plan should be here?
[18:59] <bdmurray> slangasek, infinity, whoever: we'd talked about sorting the pending sru report by days in proposed should it go from 1 -> 1000 or 1000 -> 1
[18:59] <slangasek> bdmurray: I think oldest first makes most sesne
[18:59] <slangasek> sense
[19:00]  * ScottK was going to say 7 -> 1000, 1 - 6.
[19:00] <ScottK> That could just be me being contrary though.
[19:05] <infinity> bdmurray: Oldest first seems sanest to me too.
[19:05] <infinity> bdmurray: Ultimately, direction doesn't matter as much as the sorting, though, we should all be good enough at detecting patterns to figure out where "old" and "new" are, if there's a pattern at all. :P
[19:06] <infinity> skaet: squashfs stuff?  Oh, you mean for server?  No, I've been staying out of that one.
[19:07] <infinity> skaet: But I could look into the multiple kernels issue on precise, since that's a bit of a nasty regression.
[19:08] <skaet> infinity,  thanks.    Please do.    Will wait for cjwatson or Daviey to shed some light then...
[19:18] <stgraber> cjwatson: apparently the parsing of the image name in post-qa for precise doesn't quite work. I "think" the following diff will fix it: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1095401/
[19:19] <stgraber> oh and I still need to change the value of $image to strip the release from the path (or tweak the expressions to match /$dist/ too)
[19:21] <slangasek> Daviey: is there a blueprint which tracks the work you're doing on server squashfs?
[19:55] <Daviey> slangasek: there is not.
[19:57] <slangasek> Daviey: ok
[19:58] <skaet> Daviey,  since there are dependencies on the work emerging,  can it be added to one of the existing blueprints, so we can minimize surprises please.
[20:00] <Daviey> skaet: TBH, i don't /think/ there is anything left.. cjwatson had the baton last, so i'd need to check if there is anything outstanding.
[20:00] <Daviey> ie, i wouln't know what WI's to raise at this stage.
[20:02] <skaet> Daviey,  well,  it does seem to be the blocker on Ubuntu Server images for ARM at this point, so getting this sorted needs to happen.
[20:05] <Daviey> skaet: I'll discuss with cjwatson was is left.. when he next shows.
[20:05] <skaet> thanks Daviey
[20:36] <skaet> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PrecisePangolin/ReleaseManifest/12.04.1 has been posted,  which should contain what is possible target for 12.04.1.
[20:37]  * skaet needs to confirm with the signoff contacts that there will be 12.04.1 participation
[20:45] <infinity> skaet: I think netboot armhf+highbank should probably end up in that list too, but I suppose there's no point until the right bits are actually landed to make it happen.
[20:46] <skaet> infinity,  yes.
[21:16] <tumbleweed> Laney: what are you ^^^ing me for?
[21:17] <Laney> you sponsored the upload in question
[21:23] <infinity> Laney: Wait, the close header is only added if vendor is ubuntu?  That seems silly.
[21:24] <infinity> Laney: Unless DAK actually explodes on the unknown field (which seems unlikely), what's the harm in having it in the .changes?
[21:25] <infinity> (And DAK obviously doesn't explode on it, because http://packages.qa.debian.org/i/initramfs-tools/news/20120709T173229Z.html was accepted just fine)
[21:30] <Riddell> could someone promote libkgapi to main?  bug 1023954
[21:30] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1023954 in libkgapi "[MIR] Please promote libkgapi to main" [Undecided,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1023954
[21:32] <infinity> Riddell: Sure.
[21:32] <infinity> Riddell: Wait.  Why isn't kdepim-runtime in universe?
[21:32] <Laney> infinity: Dunno. I don't make the rules. Ask buxy.
[21:33] <ScottK> infinity: python-kde depends.
[21:33] <ScottK> (which needs to be in Main for a variety of joint Ubunt/Kubuntu infrastructure reasons)
[21:33] <ScottK> Riddell: I think you can promote it anyway if the overrides script.
[21:33] <infinity> ScottK: Ahh, that makes some sense.
[21:34] <Riddell> ScottK: where's that?
[21:34] <infinity> change-override in ubuntu-archive-tools
[21:34] <infinity> But already done.
[21:34] <ScottK> As infinity says.
[21:34] <Riddell> ah hah, I needed a bzr update to get it
[21:35] <Riddell> thanks infinity
[21:39] <bdmurray> why would the udev diff for precise be pending?
[21:40] <infinity> * Rename mahjongg to gnome-mahjongg, following upstream. Provide a
[21:40] <infinity>      transitional package for upgraders.
[21:40] <infinity> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
[21:40] <infinity> Didn't the inverse just happen last cycle?
[21:40]  * infinity head -> desk.
[21:42] <infinity> Laney: Seriously, didn't we just mangle a bunch of seeds for that rename in the other direction, or am I on crack?
[21:42] <Laney> I'm not aware.
[21:42]  * Laney checks le changelog
[21:42] <infinity> ubuntu.oneiric/desktop: * (gnome-mahjongg) [!powerpc]
[21:42] <infinity> ubuntu.precise/desktop: * (mahjongg) [!powerpc]
[21:43] <Laney> haha
[21:43] <infinity> Etc.
[21:43] <infinity> Double-U Tee Eff.
[21:43] <Laney> http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-games/commit/?id=3ff289e78836186b3d6cf91cefe3a6e59e3dc518
[21:43] <Laney> go abuse Robert.
[21:48] <cjwatson> skaet: I'm working on it still on and off in between emergencies.
[21:48] <cjwatson> (server squashfs)
[21:49] <cjwatson> stgraber: post-qa> looks fair
[21:49] <skaet> cjwatson,  it appears to be the blocker reason why we haven't had ARM server images for a couple of weeks now - is there a workaround?
[21:49] <cjwatson> skaet: No.
[21:49] <skaet> so we can get the testing infrastructure working again>?
[21:50] <cjwatson> Not my fault somebody jumped the gun. :-P
[21:50] <skaet> cjwatson,  ahhh,  understood.
[21:50] <cjwatson> I've made no firm promises about dates at any point, as far as I know :-)
[21:50]  * infinity wasn't aware this gun had been jumped.
[21:50] <infinity> Maybe I should be happy that I've been unaware.
[21:50] <cjwatson> If people are suddenly depending on that work ...
[21:51] <skaet> unfortunately,  so it appears.  :P
[21:54] <cjwatson> skaet: No freeze?
[21:56] <skaet> cjwatson,  doing now,  was otp
[22:02]  * skaet appears to have hung her G+ hangout session.  :P
[22:02] <bdmurray> skaet: what is the url for that?
[22:03] <skaet> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/609d0fe5116fe21262bef201b8864cd22c519539?authuser=0&hl=en-US#
[22:04] <skaet> bdmurray,  let me know if that works for you ^
[22:05] <skaet> Slangasek, ScottK ^ can you join?
[22:05] <skaet> slangasek, ^
[22:05] <slangasek> this remains to be determined
[22:05] <skaet> RAOF, ^
[22:05] <slangasek> signs point to yes
[22:05] <skaet> :)
[22:11] <RAOF> skaet: Um, I don't see any url?
[22:12] <skaet> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/609d0fe5116fe21262bef201b8864cd22c519539?authuser=0&hl=en-US#
[22:12] <skaet> ROAF, ^
[22:14] <cjwatson> Well, 'queue -s quantal -Q unapproved accept' worked
[22:15] <cjwatson> Hmm, one thing that occurs to me is that I bet P-a-s won't work properly
[22:16] <cjwatson> Since the appservers don't have a copy of it
[22:16] <cjwatson> I may have to move forward the work to get that into the DB
[22:16] <cjwatson> skaet: ^- want to try that one?
[22:17] <slangasek> skaet: ok, so the hangout exploded my laptop
[22:17] <skaet> cjwatson,  as soon as I get out of the meeting.   will do if noone beats me to it.
[22:18] <slangasek> after two reboots and manually killing the GoogleTalk plugin that took over my desktop, I'm trying again
[22:18] <skaet> slangasek,  ack.  :(
[22:20] <infinity> cjwatson: I thought wgrant (or you?) had done some work to make sure P-a-s was respected everywhere.
[22:25] <cjwatson> infinity: No.  I've made the code changes locally, but wgrant pointed out that in order for it to actually work I was going to have to arrange for appservers to know about the contents of P-a-s, and the preferred way to do that is to write a job to import it into the database.
[22:26] <cjwatson> Then one of the script servers will need to have a bzr checkout but that's it.
[22:27] <cjwatson> Fortunately the side-effects of P-a-s not being respected are generally along the lines of "annoying" rather than "OMG".
[22:28] <cjwatson> (As we know because they already aren't respected for copy archives, manual accepts from the queue, direct copies (i.e. most PackageCopyJobs), and a corner case when initialising new series.)
[22:28] <cjwatson> infinity: bug 564759
[22:28] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 564759 in launchpad "P-a-s ignored when accepting non-sync uploads from queue" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/564759
[22:32] <infinity> cjwatson: Ahh, check.
[22:52] <skaet>  ./queue -s quantal -Q unapproved -e accept gnome-system-log  ^ seems to have worked but it may have been someone else?
[22:52] <skaet> cjwatson, ^
[22:53] <infinity> I think I got there before you did.
[22:54] <infinity> Accepting gnome-system-log/3.5.4-0ubuntu1
[22:54] <skaet> infinity,  I'm spotting kde-runtime in the queue,  let me see what happens when I try that one.
[22:55]  * skaet has permissions like the bot. :/
[22:56] <cjwatson> Well, for upload.  Queue admin should be independent.
[22:57] <skaet> hmm...  got the accepted message on my terminal but not seeing it showing up on the IRC channel.
[22:57] <cjwatson> It takes a minute or two.
[22:58] <skaet> and there we go
[22:58] <cjwatson> Good.  That's the only specific test I wanted to do; I suggest people just shoot on sight for a while when they see unapproved entries.
[22:59] <cjwatson> I'll have a look through -changes at some point and see (a) if there's anything weird there (b) if there've been any accepts with a decent number of bugs.
[23:00] <skaet> cjwatson.  ok.   Let us know if we can turn this off before Thursday.  :)
[23:00] <cjwatson> The P-a-s thing above is a bit annoying but not really much of a regression given that it was the case when people accepted stuff through the web interface.
[23:01] <cjwatson> (This is why there were weird discrepancies before where sometimes P-a-s seemed to work during freezes and sometimes it didn't; it depended on whether the archive admin was using the queue script or the web UI.)
[23:02] <cjwatson> skaet: Yeah, hopefully.  I assume if I decide I have enough data I can just go ask ops for that myself?
[23:02] <cjwatson> It's pot luck what kinds of uploads people do. :-)
[23:03] <infinity> cjwatson: You can flip the bit back yourself.
[23:03] <infinity> cjwatson: (And you could have flipped it on too)
[23:03] <cjwatson> Er, I can?
[23:03] <cjwatson> When did that change?
[23:05] <infinity> cjwatson: Oh, I lied.  I thought you had joined ~launchpad recently.
[23:05] <infinity> cjwatson: (Which, for reasons I don't grok, has that permission)
[23:06] <cjwatson> That was ~canonical-launchpad-committers.
[23:06] <infinity> Ahh.  Yeah, I didn't read the mail closely.
[23:07] <infinity> cjwatson: In that case, you can ask ops, or me. :P
[23:07] <cjwatson> DistroSeries.status requires launchpad.Moderate.  ModerateDistroSeries is ModerateByRegistryExpertsOrAdmins, which is in_admin or in_registry_experts.  ~registry contains ~launchpad.
[23:08] <cjwatson> s/^/Editing /
[23:08] <cjwatson> ~registry confers all kinds of weird god bits.
[23:08] <infinity> It does, yeah.
[23:08] <infinity> Like a slightly gimped duckie.
[23:09] <cjwatson> The justification for status being massively restricted is nonsense, mind
[23:11] <ScottK> skaet: As promised, I was away at the meeting time.
[23:11] <infinity> cjwatson: Wasn't there some waffling about the world exploding if one made a series supported by accident, and then dropped back to devel?
[23:11] <cjwatson> Sounds like handwaving to me ...
[23:11] <infinity> cjwatson: Though, I suspect that if that was ever true, it really shouldn't be anymore.
[23:12] <cjwatson> At one point there was a bit of badness if you have multiple development series, but dogfood's in that state and it works OK.
[23:12] <skaet> ScottK,  I'm going to schedule something for a morning later this week for those who couldn't make the afternoon slot.   Prob on Thursday.   Any times to avoid?
[23:13] <cjwatson> I suppose setting precise to development would be kind of bad, but I think the distribution owner can be trusted not to be that stupid.
[23:13] <ScottK> skaet: After 9AM Eastern any day that's not tomorrow should work.
[23:13] <cjwatson> It could potentially cause the indices to be republished, but it wouldn't be massive mirror churn, just annoying.
[23:13] <skaet> ScottK,  thanks.
[23:16] <ScottK> So what 'plugins' do I need to install to make a hangout work in Chromium?
[23:20] <skaet> ScottK,  not sure,  am using it from Firefox myself.   Let me know if you want to do a test at some point before then.
[23:20] <ScottK> OK.  Will do.
[23:34] <ScottK> So far it's insisting I install some binary blob from Google.
[23:35] <RAOF> Yeah, I think hangouts require that blob.
[23:38] <ScottK> Sigh.
[23:39] <ScottK> Not installing that on the production laptop.  I guess I need to get the netbook fired up.