/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2012/08/03/#ubuntu-release.txt

tumbleweedScottK: that'll require a data format change, but yes, I see it would be useful07:10
ScottKThanks.07:11
cjwatsonSRU team folks will want to update ubuntu-archive-tools; this makes it so that you don't have to manually accept copies to -updates any more08:34
tumbleweedwould it be possible to have the sru copies into -updates show up in -changes with the original uploader?08:36
seb128@SRU team: unity is verified, but 2 of the bugs have been set back from verification-done to verification-needed because software-center used the same bug references08:43
seb128what's the standard way to deal with that? setting them back to -done would make unity green but screw s-c in a symmetric manner08:44
cjwatsontumbleweed: probably - please file an LP bug08:46
tumbleweedcjwatson: sure08:49
infinitytumbleweed: Aww, but I like the inflated stats.09:02
infinityseb128: Just talk to whomever's SRU day it is, and make them aware of the situation.09:03
infinity(And yes, using tags, which aren't task-specific, for this is really annoying)09:03
seb128slangasek, ^ it's your SRU day I think ;-)09:07
infinityseb128: Oh, but it's Friday, we don't release on Fridays.09:08
infinityseb128: So, remind me on Monday. :P09:08
seb128you don't release on fridays? is that a new rule?09:08
infinityYeah, newish.09:09
seb128I had the opposite discussion with slangasek a month ago09:09
infinityI'm not sure slangasek believes in the "no one's around to fix it if you break it" theory.  But many of the rest of us appear to, and overruled him. :P09:10
seb128when I said "can I get a review before thursday evening, I want that SRU out this week and would prefer avoid friday's landing" and he replied "why would friday be an issue for an SRU, they are supposed to be tested"09:10
infinityErm, a "review" implies it was going from unapproved->proposed?09:10
seb128though maybe in my case it was a new SRU to be accepted in proposed09:10
seb128not a move to -updates09:10
infinityWe do that, but not releases to -updates.09:10
seb128ok09:10
seb128slackers!09:10
seb128;-)09:10
infinityYou'll note it's the manager who ended up on the short shift. ;)09:11
infinitySneeeaky.09:11
=== henrix_ is now known as henrix
cjwatsonDaviey: Any chance you could chase down bug 1002248?  The build failures are getting annoying11:02
ubot2Launchpad bug 1002248 in mythbuntu-default-settings "[quantal] xfce4-utils is deprecated in 4.10" [Undecided,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/100224811:02
Davieycjwatson: wilco11:10
cjwatsonthanks11:11
cjwatsonIn https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-q-freeze-use-of-proposed I have a work item as follows: "ensure that builds to CURRENT/SUPPORTED distroseries get a build score bump over DEVELOPMENT/FROZEN DSes"11:48
cjwatsonDoes anyone remember why this was?  I can see arguments either way, and in any event it's surprising that a spec about use of -proposed in the development series would be calling for the development series to be deprioritised11:49
cjwatsonhttps://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-q-buildds-usage "Adjust the score for frozen series" was IIRC calling for the priorities of builds in frozen series to be raised11:49
cjwatsonEither way, I'm confused11:50
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
ScottKGuessing, since I wasn't there, it seems reasonable that -proposed for the development release shouldn't have the same bump as for earlier release as I can't think of any reasons that are applicable.13:17
ScottKFor post-release propose, you want things built quickly since people run with -proposed and and you want to avoid breaking systems and it's the exact opposite for the development release.13:18
ScottKFor post-release you might have an urgent bug that needs to get built and out the door right away.  For the development release, if that was the case you probably wouldn't be in -proposed.13:19
tumbleweedyeah, once everything goes into -proposed, stable's -proposed loses its slight advantage13:20
SpamapShttps://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/php5/13:34
SpamapSCan I get an ACK to go ahead and sponsor that debdiff in (for bug 1014044) for precise-proposed ?13:34
ubot2Launchpad bug 1014044 in php5 "PHP5-FPM not reporting errors to web server (nginx)" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/101404413:34
SpamapSbug 1006738 is the more important fix13:35
ubot2Launchpad bug 1006738 in php5 "php5-fpm segfaults with error 4 in libc-2.15.so" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/100673813:35
stgraberSpamapS: looking13:35
SpamapSboth really straight forward patches13:35
stgraberthe second bug is missing the usual rationale/testcase/regression potential13:36
stgraberalso, are these affecting default installs? (the main criteria for something to be considered for 12.04.1)13:37
ScottKFor server it's part of the lamp task.13:37
ScottKSo it could be default install.13:37
ScottKDepends on exactly what you mean by default.13:38
SpamapSphp5-fpm is not part of that task IIRC13:38
SpamapSIts sort of "the new way" that people are running php13:38
ScottKOh.13:38
stgraberand the first one seems to be nginx specific (based on the title)13:39
SpamapSits not13:39
SpamapSany webserver using php5-fpm for fastcgi serving of php will suffer13:39
SpamapSAs far as the test case/reg potential for the segfault.. I'm working on extracting that from the upstream bug report13:40
babyface_jamespage,  precise-server-ec2-daily are failing .  http://10.98.0.1:8080/view/Precise/view/ISO%20Testing/job/precise-server-ec2-daily/168/14:12
=== arosales1 is now known as arosales
slangasekinfinity: I didn't think I was actually being all that subtle about it ;)16:12
slangasekseb128: but yeah, as infinity says, we'll publish SRUs to -proposed on friday but not release them to -updates16:12
seb128slangasek, ok, makes sense16:12
dpmhi all, I've uploaded the language packs for the upcoming 12.04.1 release, which are now in the unapproved queue. Generally pitti takes care of approving them, but he's away. Could someone help me approving them so that they land in precise-proposed? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+queue?queue_state=117:03
stgraber^ as been approved as an exception, so please review even if it was uploaded after the deadline17:04
stgraber*has17:04
dpmstgraber, sorry, I just jumped into the channel, are you referring to the langpacks, or something else?17:09
stgraberdpm: yeah, that comment was for the langpacks so the SRU team knows that they should review it even if it was uploaded after 21:00 UTC yesterday17:09
dpmanyone around to do the langpacks review?17:22
stgraberslangasek: ^ (according to the schedule, it's your day ;))17:29
slangasekyes17:40
slangasekdpm, stgraber: you're not actually expecting any review of these, right?  since they're quite unreviewable17:40
slangaseki.e., you just need them accepted, yes?17:40
stgraberslangasek: yeah, just having them accepted should be enough. IIRC the common problems with the langpacks are missing packages but we'll have that checked with the first Edubuntu build (as it includes all the langpacks)17:41
* slangasek watches to see what the API client does with 820 langpack accepts in one call17:42
dpmslangasek, pitti generally accepts them after having manually tested one or two of them, which I did as well (running the -ca one now without any noticeable regression)17:43
slangasekdpm: right, I'll consider that good enough17:44
dpmcool, thanks17:44
slangaseknow it's just a matter of seeing whether the api client explodes ;)17:44
stgraberslangasek: I see that one also landed in New, so I guess that one will need accepting + promoting17:55
infinitystgraber: overriding and accepting, you mean. :P17:57
stgraberinfinity: indeed17:59
infinity(I took care of the ones in NEW)17:59
stgraber^ hmm, wondering if something weird happened on LP or if it's just queuebot getting confused ;)18:00
infinitystgraber: Maybe queuebot's having issues with the massive langpack-ridden queue?18:03
slangasekok, langpacks being accepted now, after tweaking the queue script to not be O(n^2)18:04
slangasek(https://code.launchpad.net/~vorlon/ubuntu-archive-tools/queue-item-scaling/+merge/118166)18:04
infinitystgraber: What's the heuristic for "approved"?  Is it actually checking a state, or is it looking for a lack of state (ie: no longer in unapproved, and also not rejected)?18:04
stgraberinfinity: it's returning that if the package is no longer in Unapproved and .status != "Rejected"18:06
stgraberso yeah, if it only gets a partial set out of LP for some reason, it'd mark them as accepted18:06
infinitystgraber: Right, that matches the above behaviour for me, then.18:06
infinitystgraber: I'm guessing it's timing out or otherwise failing to load the massive queue, so things are being "removed", and then "readded" when the next run succeeds.18:06
* ScottK resists the temptation to fix slangasek's grammar in the commit message.18:06
stgraberinfinity: well, if it was actually getting a timeout, it wouldn't do anything and would dump it to the log. The weird thing is that it doesn't seem to timeout.18:07
infinitystgraber: Is this one of those datasets that "pages" in the API, and you're not paging to the end?18:07
infinityScottK: Not a fan of ironic use of poor grammar?18:08
stgraberI'm currently assuming I'm getting all of them in a single call, but it could be that it's not the case18:08
* stgraber checks the doc for series.getPackageUploads(status=queue)18:08
ScottKinfinity: Are you sure it was ironic?18:08
infinityScottK: Knowing slangasek, it almost certainly was.18:08
ScottKSure, but it's more fun to ignore that.18:09
infinityScottK: Well, even if he wasn't a language nut, he's also in PDX, and everyone there does everything ironically.  It's a bylaw.18:10
slangasekScottK: it's not in the commit message, just in the mp ;)18:10
ScottKOK.18:11
ScottKYou know how much I use merge proposals.  I thought they were the same.18:11
stgrabermute queue unapproved precise-proposed18:11
stgraberwill unmute once the langpacks are all gone :)18:11
skaet:)18:12
slangasekScottK: I would of course never do bad grammar somewhere /permanent/18:13
ScottK;-)18:13
infinityI'm pretty sure I've used "don't work so good" in changelogs.18:13
slangasekok, langpacks all accepted18:15
stgraberunmute queue unapproved precise-proposed18:16
slangasekanyone know anything about the firefox in precise-proposed new?18:17
ScottKSimilar to the one in oneiric/natty proposed New as well.18:18
ScottKIIRC micahg  knows about it.18:18
slangasekI'm having trouble finding any binaries that are actually new in those uploads18:20
slangasekso have no idea why they're in the new queue18:20
slangasekmicahg: ^^?18:20
stgraberslangasek: if you have some time to review unapproved, can you start with live-build and debian-installer?18:21
micahgslangasek: it's to fix a regression, it should make it into the point release18:23
infinityslangasek: Anything installed via "apt-get install task^" is considered manual.18:37
slangasekhow unfortunate18:37
infinityslangasek: That's vaguely by design (and why we use tasks instead of installing the metapackages), but it has some drawbacks, like having the initial set of headers be manual, while all subsequent ones are auto.18:37
slangasekthat implies libraries that are part of tasks will never be correctly autoremoved18:38
infinityslangasek: It's also unfortunate for libraries.18:38
infinityslangasek: Yeah.18:38
slangasekand explains behavior I've seen myself in the past :)18:38
slangasekanyway, accepted now18:38
infinityslangasek: The reasoning was that we don't want all of ubuntu-desktop to be autoremoved if you remove the metapackage, but the library behaviour is irksome.18:38
slangasekyeah, I understand18:39
infinity(The real solution is probably to not have transitive dependencies in tasks, but that's a Really Hard Problem to solve)18:39
stgraberinfinity: I pushed the matching seed change now that d-i got in -proposed18:39
infinitystgraber: Danke.18:40
infinitystgraber: You missed one omap4.18:41
infinitystgraber: (I tend to just use "echo supported-installer-common installer | xargs sed -i -e 's/oldabi/newabi/g'" for those changes, since computers are much better at this than my old eyes)18:42
stgraberinfinity: gah... fixed18:42
stgraberslangasek, infinity: cyphermox and I have been trying to get a network-manager upload to the archive (quantal) but it's being silently dropped apparently18:55
stgraberis there some log you can access to check what's going on or should I poke #launchpad-ops?18:55
infinitystgraber: "Silenty dropped" usually implies "so broken that it can't effectively reject it".18:56
stgraberinfinity: debdiff: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1127603/18:56
stgraber.changes: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1127607/18:56
infinityThe diff is less interesting than the actual source and changes.18:56
cyphermoxthere's nothing special about it ;)18:57
infinityIt could also be that poppy is having a hissy fit.  Are you uploading via sftp or ftp?18:58
cyphermoxftp18:58
stgraberftp18:58
cyphermoxstgraber tries too18:58
cyphermoxah18:58
cyphermoxI could try over sftp18:58
infinitysftp goes through an entirely different set of machinery.18:58
cyphermoxalright18:58
infinityThough, it's usually the one that's broken. :P18:58
cyphermoxhehe18:58
cyphermoxfwiw I tried via chinstap too, but that didn't change a thing18:59
infinityI see a bunch in the failed queue.  Sec.18:59
infinityWith zero indication as to why.  Swell.19:00
cyphermoxoh yay19:01
slangasekahhh why is queuediff totem showing me a diff between 3.0.1 (in the queue) and 3.3.4 (nowhere near)?19:01
stgraberslangasek: I also noticed that the LP diff seems to diff against rejected uploads too (like it did with base-files)19:02
slangaseksigh19:04
infinitycyphermox: So, are you sure you used a key that's in the Ubuntu keyring?19:05
infinitycyphermox: (I note you have two keys in LP, you signed the package with the newer one)19:05
cyphermoxyes. the same key as all uploads i've ever done19:06
infinityKay.19:06
cyphermoxjust tried over sftp; we'll see19:06
stgraberinfinity: that was my first guess and why I asked cyphermox for the source so I could try to sign it myself and upload it19:06
cyphermoxinfinity: also, I would have received a rejection message in that case, no?19:07
dpmok, time to call it a day. Thanks slangasek and stgraber for taking care of the language packs19:07
stgraberinfinity: interestingly, the exact same source and changes uploaded to a PPA get accepted just fine19:07
dpmhave a great weekend everyone!19:07
stgrabercyphermox: IIRC, no, invalid GPG key is a silent reject19:07
cyphermoxheh, well, I've been using the same as usual anyway19:07
infinityYeah, I re-signed for kicks, and mine also failed.  Time to take this to lp-ops.19:08
slangaseknetwork-manager hasn't managed to end up in some crazy unusable packageset, has it?19:09
cyphermoxcrazy unusable packageset?19:09
cyphermoxNM is uploadable by core, desktop, and network-manager IIRC19:10
slangasekyes, that's how it's meant to be configured19:11
slangasekI'm asking if something has gone wrong: )19:11
cyphermoxnot that I know of ;)19:11
cyphermoxI wouldn't know where else to look for issues there than edit_acl.py; which reports http://paste.ubuntu.com/1127635/19:12
cyphermoxlooks right19:12
stgraberedit-acl looks happy (in both core and network-manager + generic component upload rights in main)19:12
cyphermoxinfinity: did you already bring it up or should I?19:23
infinitycyphermox: https://oops.canonical.com/?oopsid=OOPS-3ec836710bf79c21af430a2f88cbfc0d19:25
ubot2https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=3ec836710bf79c21af430a2f88cbfc0d19:25
infinitycyphermox: Hope that helps. :P19:25
cyphermoxoh yay19:28
micahgcan someone please deNEW the firefox SRU in natty/oneiric?20:31
=== LordOfTime is now known as TheLordOfTime
slangasekmicahg: done - sorry, it slipped my stack21:08
micahgslangasek: no problem, thanks, now I can comment in the bug :)21:08
cjwatsonyay, copy-report works from lillypilly22:39
cjwatsonhttps://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libapache-mod-security/+publishinghistory22:39
jdstrand\o/22:40
jdstrandyou scared me for a second. I only just pocket copied that a bit ago :)22:40
cjwatsonI trust you didn't copy it to -updates too, and that was indeed a valid test of my machinery22:41
jdstrandindeed22:42
jdstrandregular 'ol copy to -security22:42
jdstrandor is it ol'?22:42
cjwatsondropping the d at the end not some random letter at the start, I trust22:44
cjwatsonanyhow, that means copy-package.py can die die die22:45
jdstrandwoohoo!22:52
cjwatsonthough I get annoying mail about the copies; must fix that ...22:55
cjwatsonMaybe it should not send e-mail when copying between two pockets in the same archive22:59
micahgit's a nice audit trail23:00
micahgat least for -proposed -> -updates23:01
cjwatsonWhich you didn't have before anyway23:01
cjwatsonAt least, copy-package.py never sent mail23:01
cjwatsonYou can see the difference in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/oneiric-changes/2012-August/thread.html23:01
cjwatsonIf you want a proper audit trail, isn't +publishinghistory better?23:01
micahgsure, but that requires more work AIUI23:02
cjwatsonHm?23:02
micahgit shows who copies between proposed and updates?23:02
cjwatsonYes23:02
infinityAnd, some day, +publishinghistory may actually tell me who did what.23:02
cjwatsonOh, no23:02
cjwatsonIt should23:02
micahgheh23:03
cjwatsonPlease file a bug23:03
infinityI think it probably fits in with the queue audit trail bug.23:03
cjwatsonStill, I don't buy that you suddenly need an audit trail that you never had for the -security => -updates autocopies23:03
cjwatsoninfinity: That's more general; I'd prefer a separate one for this23:03
cjwatsonLP already stores this information, so it's just a UI matter of exposing it23:03
micahgcjwatson: oh, for those we don't need it, it's more useful to see who promoted what to updates23:04
infinityWhich is probably just cargo-culting, then, from how it displays who requested deletions?23:04
cjwatson>>> pubs[0]23:05
cjwatson<source_package_publishing_history at https://api.launchpad.net/1.0/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+sourcepub/2595496>23:05
cjwatson>>> pubs[0].creator23:05
cjwatson<person at https://api.launchpad.net/1.0/~ubuntu-archive-robot>23:05
cjwatson^- example23:05
cjwatsoninfinity: I'd need to test, but I rather expect it's about as hard as http://paste.ubuntu.com/1127996/23:07
micahgBug #103285723:08
ubot2Launchpad bug 1032857 in launchpad "+publishinghistory should show who did the copies" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/103285723:08
micahgI think as a side note, it's nice to see on -changes when SRUs are promoted23:09
infinitycjwatson: Looks complicated. :P23:09
* cjwatson wonders also why oneiric-changes got two mails23:10
cjwatsonAnd natty-changes23:10
cjwatsonDoubtless a null copy, but that shouldn't have sent mail23:11
cjwatsonMaybe I should reduce the frequency to hourly as a temp workaround ...23:11
micahgweirdly, one had content and one didn't23:11
cjwatsonOr maybe copy-report can do a better check for that23:11
cjwatsonYes, hence my thesis that the second was a null copy23:11
cjwatsoni.e. there was already a pending SPPH in -updates from the first one23:11
cjwatsonbut the publisher hadn't completed yet23:11
cjwatsonAnd indeed I got an OOPS23:12
infinityYeah, the publisher is dead slow today.  Langpack days hurt.23:12
micahgah23:12
infinityAnd libreoffice translation tarballs too.23:13
infinityAll things translations. :P23:13
cjwatsonAh, it's basically bug 102337223:13
ubot2Launchpad bug 1023372 in launchpad "Direct-copying an already-published package OOPSes" [Critical,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/102337223:13
cjwatsonIsh23:13

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!