[02:08] <babyface> why no precise daily build on  Aug 18, Aug 19, and Aug 20 ?  The latest build number is 20120817.3,   is it frozen for 12.04.1 release?
[02:08] <stgraber> yes
[02:09] <babyface> stgraber, ack. thanks.
[02:19] <phillw> stgraber: any news on http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/230/builds/21391/downloads ?
[02:30] <stgraber> fixed
[08:25] <tkamppeter> ScottK, hi
[08:25] <tkamppeter> Anyone around to do an urgent fix on 12.04.1?
[08:30] <Laney> tkamppeter: you know it's past the final freeze?
[08:32] <tkamppeter> Laney, I did not know that, so should I simply make a normal SRU out of that? The thing is that all Samsung printers (on USB) will not work with current 12.04.1 state and a small patch will fix that.
[08:32] <Laney> You'll have to talk to the .1 team (skaet or stgraber) but I expect you should just do a normal SRU, yes.
[08:33] <Laney> sounds like it could be release noted to me
[08:33] <Laney> anyway the first steps are common so you can file the paperwork and upload to -proposed either way
[08:33] <tkamppeter> RAOF, great that you came back (it is late for you?) I have found out that the fix is a small patch.
[08:34] <tkamppeter> Laney, RAOF, as normal SRU it is not so urgent then. I will ask the user to report a separate bug and as soon as I have the bug number I will do the rest.
[08:35] <tkamppeter> RAOF, I do not know whether you got my last comments, the problem with the last CUPS SRU is that all Samsung printers (on USB) will not work. The patch is small.
[08:39] <tkamppeter> RAOF, did you get my last comments?
[08:47] <RAOF> tkamppeter: No, I didn't get your last message.
[08:47] <RAOF> tkamppeter: Sorry, my IRC bouncer has gone all doolalley.
[08:50] <RAOF> tkamppeter: However, we can't leave cups -0ubuntu3 in -updates, given that it's got a regression from -0ubuntu2. Either we fix the regression in -0ubuntu3 and keep the fix for the Canon printers, or we roll back to -0ubuntu2 and unfix the Canon printers.
[08:54] <cjwatson> bdmurray: could you please rename regression-proposed-bug-search.py to just regression-proposed-bug-search, to match the rest of ubuntu-archive-tools?  I'd do it myself but I don't know if you have a cron job somewhere calling it.
[10:02] <tkamppeter> RAOF, still there?
[10:06] <tkamppeter> RAOF, I hope your connection stays stable now.
[10:09] <tkamppeter> RAOF, 0ubuntu2 breaks all Canons, printing the last page only by half, 0ubuntu3 breaks all Samsungs. I have put up a 0ubuntu4 in my PPA now which fixes all this.
[10:10] <Laney> IMHO you should get it uploaded to proposed and tested ASAP
[10:10] <Laney> but I'm no SRU team member
[10:10] <tkamppeter> RAOF, Laney told me that 12.04.1 is after Final Freeze so I should do 0ubuntu4 as normal SRU.
[10:12] <tkamppeter> Laney, RAOF, I did not start the actual SRU yet because the original reporter (he is in Brazil, it is still 7am there) hijacked an existing bug report instead of creating a new one. Now I am waiting for him to read my comments, test my fix in the PPA, and open a new bug report.
[10:13] <Laney> why can't he test it in proposed?
[10:13] <seb128> tkamppeter, it's end of day where RAOF lives, you should just get it uploaded and get somebody else from the SRU team to ack it
[10:14] <Laney> SRU regressions are pretty important to fix in a timely fashion
[10:14] <Laney> is the bugged version on the .1 isos?
[10:15] <seb128> it's in precise-updates so I guess it's on the candidate .1 iso yes
[10:15] <seb128> we should get the fix uploaded asap
[10:15] <seb128> tkamppeter, get the fix uploaded please and let's wait of stgraber or skaet to be online
[10:16] <tkamppeter> seb128, I will do so,
[10:20] <tkamppeter> seb128, uploaded. How should I do the SRU procedure now? On the existing bug or should I create a new bug?
[10:20] <seb128> tkamppeter, use the bug you listed in the changelog of the upload you did
[10:21] <tkamppeter> seb128, OK, I will reopen the bug and update its description ...
[10:22] <seb128> tkamppeter, ok open a new bug and use that one for the changelog
[10:22] <seb128> tkamppeter, you can reupload cups with the new bug reference if you prefer
[10:51] <tkamppeter> seb128, now I have done everything on bug 1032456.
[10:51] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1032456 in cups "Canon inkjets (and some other printers) print only half of the last page after 20120801 upgrade to v1.5.3-0ubuntu2" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1032456
[11:22] <phillw> Hi folks, could some one please advise as to against what this bug should be reported...http://pastebin.com/SRLnr5fB
[11:25] <cjwatson> phillw: Pick one of linux or nvidia-graphics-drivers.  In my distinctly amateur opinion I'd suspect nvidia-graphics-drivers since it could well be fallout from the new X stack.  If you want an actual expert opinion then try #ubuntu-kernel or #ubuntu-x.
[11:27] <phillw> cjwatson: thanks, I'll go ask there. I don't want to give the wrong information to a tester!
[11:59] <phillw> cjwatson: just FYI, #ubuntu-x asked that it be filed against xorg, (the nvidia-drivers are not present on the LiveCD), at least we have a starting point! :D
[12:08] <cjwatson> phillw: ok
[12:17] <smartboyhw> phillw: How is the Lubuntu testing going for 12.04.1?
[12:18] <smartboyhw> Sorry, wrong channel
[12:18] <phillw> smartboyhw: lubuntu 12.04 is not an LTS, we simply lack enough people to commit
[12:19] <smartboyhw> OK
[12:20] <smartboyhw> phillw: On the extent to your answer, why isn't Lubuntu 12.04 an LTS?
[13:08] <stgraber> tkamppeter: SRU regression fix should probably be included on 12.04.1, assuming it can get accepted into -proposed ASAP and you have testers that can verify it quickly too
[13:11] <stgraber> infinity: if you're already/still around, can you take a look at that cups SRU in the queue? would like it in -proposed for testing ASAP
[13:11] <stgraber> or any SRU team member ^
[13:14] <stgraber> skaet: cups upload is an SRU regression, the package is on the media and it fixes printing on Samsung printers, considering it as a reason for respin, just hoping to have it in -proposed, verified and copied by EOD
[13:43] <tkamppeter> stgraber, seems that the problem now is that no one of the SRU team is in our time zone.
[13:44] <stgraber> ScottK, cjwatson: can one of you review the cups upload in precise proposed?
[13:44] <stgraber> (in the unapproved queue for precise-proposed that's)
[13:58] <skaet> stgraber,   need to understand more details as to whether its a respin reason or not,  since discussion last week pointed to limited scope,  and it can be applied in update.   Depends how much testing has occured at this point.
[13:58] <cjwatson> It's a regression, and I thought we had zero tolerance for those
[13:59] <stgraber> skaet: so far none, that's why I want it in -proposed. Bug description says that it regresses all samsung printers
[13:59]  * xnox has a samsung printer. Is that why I had to readd four times & fiddle with cups to get it to print?
[13:59] <cjwatson> The diff looks fine to me
[14:00] <stgraber> xnox: might be yes, apparently the second printed job gives you garbage
[14:00] <xnox> stgraber: yes!
[14:00] <stgraber> xnox: bug 995111 (relevant part for Samsung is in the testcase section)
[14:00] <skaet> stgraber,  if no testing so far, then +1 on respinning.
[14:00] <ubot2`> stgraber: Error: Could not parse data returned by Launchpad: The read operation timed out (https://launchpad.net/bugs/995111)
[14:00] <skaet> however,  looking at the iso tracker there does seem to be some.
[14:01] <xnox> stgraber: funny thing: test page is fine, next job garbage. Readd: skip test page, print one job. (that was 40minutes of my life 3 days ago)
[14:01] <cjwatson> Aren't we building images from -updates and not -proposed anyway?
[14:01] <stgraber> skaet: I was saying, no testing of the SRU, not no testing of 12.04.1 (though I refrained from doing any testing today as I noticed this one being a respin candidate)
[14:03]  * cjwatson accepts since I'm pretty sure this won't affect images until it goes to -updates
[14:03] <tkamppeter> xnox, you could verify the fix if someone of the SRU people approves the -proposed package.
[14:03] <skaet> stgraber,  am fine with it going in -proposed.  images are being made from -updates at this point.
[14:03] <cjwatson> tkamppeter: I just did
[14:04] <xnox> tkamppeter: sure.
[14:04] <stgraber> right, we build from -updates, so getting it in -proposed is fine in all cases
[14:04] <stgraber> tkamppeter,xnox: can you get this tested as soon as possible?
[14:05] <tkamppeter> xnox, I have subscribed you to the bug now.
[14:05] <skaet> stgraber,   looks like the iso tracker is showing instances of : https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/946718
[14:05] <ubot2`> Ubuntu bug 946718 in update-notifier "backend_helper.py crashed with RuntimeError in add_signal_receiver(): To make asynchronous calls, receive signals or export objects, D-Bus connections must be attached to a main loop by passing mainloop=... to the constructor or calling dbus.set_default_main_loop(...)" [High,Triaged]
[14:06] <xnox> tkamppeter: I only have a samsung printer, not a canon one.
[14:07] <stgraber> xnox: well, you can at least test the samsung part of the fix, which is the SRU regression
[14:07] <stgraber> then we need someone with an affected canon to confirm we don't regress that part with that new SRU
[14:08] <tkamppeter> xnox, please follow the build status on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/cups/1.5.3-0ubuntu4 and getting to your architecture under Builds. Try to install the new package as soon as possible to give us quick feedback.
[14:09] <xnox> stgraber: tkamppeter: just to be clear with package version numbers: 0ubuntu2 & 0ubuntu4 should be good on samsung; 0ubuntu3 is bad on samsung?!
[14:09] <stgraber> that matches my understanding, yes, tkamppeter can confirm for sure
[14:16] <tkamppeter> xnox, you are absolutely right.
[14:17] <tkamppeter> xnox, i386 and amd64 of the package are successfully built by our servers now.
[14:20] <xnox> ok. let me try this
[14:22] <mvo> would someone have time to sru-review the glib-networking diff in precise-proposed? it unbreaks purchases for certain users
[14:29] <stgraber> tkamppeter: can you help me figure out exactly what set of samsung printers are affected by this bug?
[14:29] <stgraber> tkamppeter: does it depend on specific model, the way they're connected to the machine or just the cups driver?
[14:31] <tkamppeter> stgraber, it is notr sure whether all Samsungs are affected, but users reported similar problems for very different Samsungs. So at least all these users suffer the regression. It happens only if the printer is connected via USB. Network-connected Samsungs do not show the problem.
[14:32] <tkamppeter> stgraber, the printer driver (SpliX, gdi, PostScript, ...) has no influence on this.
[14:32] <stgraber> tkamppeter: ok, I did a quick test and couldn't reproduce on my splix samsungs (ML-1520 and ML-1610) but apparently the CPL model at my parent's place is affected (though usually printing over the network so not a big deal)
[14:34] <xnox> I have CLP-325
[14:35] <xnox> and with -0ubuntu3 i printed two different jobs in a row with color, two pages each just fine.
[14:35] <stgraber> the one at my parents' is a CLP-610
[14:35] <seb128> xnox, isn't that the supposed buggy version?
[14:35] <stgraber> xnox: you mean ubuntu4?
[14:35] <xnox> no, I do mean -0ubuntu3, the one that was meant to be buggy.
[14:36] <stgraber> oh
[14:36] <xnox> i can't reproduce the regression =/ so obviously mine is not affected =/
[14:36] <xnox> it is using foo2qpdl thing
[14:39] <stgraber> hmm, quite annoying that we can't get some kind of list of affected hardware...
[14:39] <stgraber> saying "any samsung printer printing garbage after the first job" is really quite a bad way of letting people know whether they're affected or not ;)
[14:39] <xnox> in syslog I can see how usblp0 was removed & handled after each job.
[14:40] <skaet> s/any/some/  is more accurate, at any rate.   But yes agree would be good to identify which samsung printers are affected.
[14:40] <xnox> i "suposedly" have the same series printer as the bug reporter of bug 992982
[14:40] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 992982 in cups "Network printing fails. Worked before upgrade to 12.04 (dup-of: 973270)" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/992982
[14:40] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 973270 in system-config-printer "Printer does not provide REQUIRED job history." [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/973270
[14:40] <skaet> tkamppeter, is there a good way of quantifying the affected printers?
[14:40] <xnox> wait a minute, network printing fails?!
[14:41]  * xnox has a 28 page document i need to print, doing two pages at a time is both productive and useful
[14:44] <xnox> ok, I got a test-page printer error remotely.
[14:44] <xnox> upgrading.
[14:47] <tkamppeter> xnox, network printing is not affected by the transition ubuntu2/3/4. You need to connect your Samsung to USB. The ubuntu2 will work, ubuntu3 not and ubuntu4 should work again.
[14:50] <tkamppeter> skaet, assuming that all Samsungs are affected there will be a lot of users, as Samsung makes good laser printers for a rather cheap price.
[14:51] <skaet> tkamppeter, stgraber's did a test with his home printers,  and 2/3 Samsung's worked fine.
[14:51] <stgraber> tkamppeter: well, quite clearly not all of them, the old ones I have around here have been printing 10 separate jobs in a row using 1.5.3-0ubuntu3
[14:51] <skaet> hypothesis is that its the later models.
[14:51] <skaet> s/later/newer/
[14:52] <tkamppeter> skaet, that is possible, all these bug reports are about rather new models.
[14:52] <tkamppeter> stgraber, your Samsung printers are connected via USB?
[14:53] <stgraber> tkamppeter: yep
[14:53] <stgraber> tkamppeter: ML-1520 and ML-1610 over USB (6-7 years old black&white laser models)
[14:54] <tkamppeter> stgraber, seems that your printers are too old to be affected. Problem are possibly only newer printers and then no matter whether bw or color.
[14:54] <xnox> over the network: 0ubuntu3 _did not_ print test page, 0ubuntu4 _did_ print test page.
[14:55] <xnox> I have CPL-325 similar to the one of the dupes bug 992982
[14:55] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 992982 in cups "Network printing fails. Worked before upgrade to 12.04 (dup-of: 973270)" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/992982
[14:55] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 973270 in system-config-printer "Printer does not provide REQUIRED job history." [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/973270
[14:56] <tkamppeter> xnox, interesting, the difference between ubuntu3 and ubuntu4 is a small patch on the USB backend. So your printer is connected by its ethernet port? Please try it with the printer connected through USB.
[14:56] <xnox> tkamppeter: no. My printer is connected via USB to the server running CUPS. I am printing over the network from a laptop.
[14:57] <tkamppeter> xnox, if you install the test packages ubuntu3 and afterwards ubuntu4 on your server then the test is valid and verifies the SRU.
[14:58] <xnox> I did.
[14:59] <stgraber> xnox: right, so what's you're testing is USB printing (with a remote cups server), not network printing (some Samsung like the CLP-*N* have a builtin web server that supports IPP for real network printing)
[14:59] <tkamppeter> xnox, thenthe Samsung fix in the ubuntu4 SRU is verified.
[14:59] <stgraber> s/'s//
[15:00] <xnox> printing directly on my server worked both with ubuntu3 & ubuntu4
[15:00] <stgraber> xnox: with the same document? (test page)
[15:00]  * xnox mutters something about "network printing, over the network printing, remote cups, etc..."
[15:01] <xnox> stgraber: test page & normal document (2 different pages each time, no repeats so far)
[15:31] <xnox> Simple question: why is https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cmake/2.8.9-0ubuntu1/+build/3727645 not building
[15:32] <xnox> & launchpad.net/builders says 0 packages in i386 queue
[15:36] <tkamppeter> seb128, I am aware of the c2esp problem, as you have already seen, said lib moved to cups-filters
[15:37] <tkamppeter> seb128, I can contact the upstream of the package.
[15:37] <seb128> tkamppeter, that would be good
[15:37] <seb128> tkamppeter, thanks
[15:37] <infinity> xnox: That is kinda curious...
[15:38] <xnox> infinity: no-change reupload? =)
[15:38] <tumbleweed> because the score isn't over 9000?
[15:38] <tumbleweed> :)
[15:38] <ogra_> low score empties the queue ?
[15:39] <skaet> stgraber,  onces the cups fix tests out we'll move it to upgrades and pick it up for any images that choose to respin,  others will get it as a zero day SRU.
[15:39] <xnox> tumbleweed: that only applies if the source package name is longer than 6 characters & it's in the netbook remix package set.
[15:40] <xnox> ogra_: i wouldn't think 2555 is low, for a package in main
[15:40] <ogra_> well, i wouldnt think 5000 is low, depends on the perspective
[15:40] <xnox> infinity: more interesting is how many other packages are like that.
[15:40] <ogra_> though i still dont get the connection with the empty queue
[15:41] <Laney> paging wgrant :P
[15:41] <Laney> ah, already done in -ops
[15:41] <wgrant> Yeah
[15:41] <xnox> ogra_: well at first i386 were busy building what not. now they are doing nothing, yet they could be building cmake...
[15:41] <wgrant> Can it wait until the morning?
[15:41] <Laney> cmake is rather urgent, because skew
[15:41] <wgrant> OK, let me see what I can do now
[15:41] <Laney> hard to know for others due to not being able to see what they are
[15:42] <wgrant> Yeah
[15:42] <wgrant> I might fix cmake now
[15:42] <xnox> wgrant: please make it build =) https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cmake/2.8.9-0ubuntu1/+build/3727645
[15:42] <xnox> wgrant: thanks a *tonne* =)
[15:43] <wgrant> It's fallout from when there were two buildd-managers running simultaneously due to an unfortunate accident before the DC move
[15:45] <stgraber> ogra_: I rescored it when it was mentioned, to check if LP would somehow refresh and re-schedule it
[15:45] <xnox> stgraber: 9000? didn't help =(
[15:46] <stgraber> xnox: yeah, I know, I didn't bother down-scoring it after I saw it didn't help
[15:46] <ogra_> as long as it thinks the queue is empty ...
[16:11] <stgraber> tkamppeter: do you know people you can try to directly ping/email to test on Canon and Samsung printers?
[16:12] <stgraber> we apparently won't respin for it but it'll be included if we need to respin for something else. However we will allow individual product leads to respin if they want and we certainly want the fix for the regression in -updates ASAP
[16:12]  * stgraber -> lunch
[16:13]  * skaet nods
[16:33] <bjf> infinity: feel like accepting my kernel pkgs?
[16:39] <wgrant> xnox, Laney: I've requeued all 9 affected builds
[16:39] <wgrant> And cmake is building on at least i386 now
[16:39] <Laney> cheers, the archive thanks you
[16:39] <xnox> wgrant: thank you very much.
[16:48] <tkamppeter> stgraber, I tried to contact the users per Launchpad message, but as I have only 3 message permission per day I cannot contact 8 users. Can someone raise my permission? Or could it be generally rasied for Canonical employees?
[16:51] <bjf> any AA feel like accepting the kernel pkgs in the queue?
[16:53] <infinity> bjf: I'm on it this morning, yes.
[16:54] <bjf> infinity: thanks
[17:03] <tkamppeter> stgraber, succeeded to contact two more users by e-mail.
[17:45] <tkamppeter> stgraber, ScottK, I got confirmation by one user that the new CUPS SRU still fixes the last-page-not-completely-printed problem, the original problem of bug 1032456.
[17:45] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1032456 in cups "Canon inkjets (and some other printers) print only half of the last page after 20120801 upgrade to v1.5.3-0ubuntu2" [Critical,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1032456
[18:19] <skaet> ScottK, Riddell - if the ducks line up and we get the cups fix moved to -updates today, do you want Kubuntu images respun?
[18:22] <skaet> scott-work, astraljava, knome, ^  how about for your flavors?
[18:22]  * skaet knows that Edubuntu wants respinning.  ;)
[18:28] <stgraber> jibel: any chance you or someone from your team can do a wubi upgrade test? the result on the tracker currently is a bit worrying
[18:29] <jibel> stgraber, I'll do it tonight if my connection is stable for more than 10 minutes
[18:29] <utlemming> who is managing the jenkins instance while Mr. Page is away? I have a job whilst testing the cloud images that seems to have gone to lunch and that means that I can't do any further testing
[18:29] <jibel> utlemming, which job ?
[18:30] <utlemming> jibel: precise-server-ec2
[18:30] <utlemming> it should complete in a few hours, it's been hung for over three days
[18:31] <knome> skaet, what does that fix anyway? :]]
[18:33] <knome> i'd vote for no respin, but i'll let astraljava have the last word.
[18:33] <skaet> knome,  fix so that some of the Samsung printers work.
[18:33] <stgraber> knome: recent samsung printers printing garbage on the second print job
[18:33] <skaet> we had a regression, with the last cups update
[18:33] <stgraber> (where "recent" is sadly an unknown set of printers)
[18:33] <knome> hmh. :|
[18:33] <skaet> it can be zero day SRU though.
[18:34] <knome> what does that mean? :)
[18:34] <skaet> which is what Ubuntu's likely to do.
[18:34] <stgraber> right, which means that if you have users working with a live environment or don't -updates they won't be able to print
[18:34] <stgraber> but everyone else will have an update available right after the 12.04.1 release
[18:34] <knome> that sounds good - but does that still need a respin?
[18:35] <jibel> utlemming, looking
[18:35] <knome> skaet, btw, if there's something i should still sign, please remind me; if not and i missed at least one thing, sorry
[18:35] <utlemming> jibel: thank you kindly
[18:35] <skaet> Once its in -updates,  people will get it applied,  same way other bug fixes.
[18:36] <knome> so no respin now?
[18:36] <stgraber> knome: that's what we're asking you ;) Edubuntu considers that we have enough users using the live media or a usb disk made from the live media that we will respin for this
[18:36] <jibel> utlemming, can I safely kill them all ?
[18:36] <stgraber> but the decision is up to you for xubuntu
[18:36] <jocarter> stgraber: which bug is that?
[18:36] <skaet> knome,  please review the Release Notes,   and once the testing is finished,  will need you (or someone designated from Xubuntu team) to sign off on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PrecisePangolin/ReleaseManifest/12.04.1 that the images are ready to ship.
[18:37] <stgraber> jocarter: bug 1032456
[18:37] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1032456 in cups "Canon inkjets (and some other printers) print only half of the last page after 20120801 upgrade to v1.5.3-0ubuntu2" [Critical,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1032456
[18:37] <knome> aha, right. i'll still say no respin for now, if the update is available later for everybody
[18:37] <skaet> knome - Release Notes to be reviewed for any updates are at: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PrecisePangolin/ReleaseNotes/Xubuntu/
[18:38] <skaet> any key changes between 12.04 and 12.04.1 should be ADDED to the page,  as should any bugs you want to make sure your users are warned of.
[18:38] <stgraber> jocarter: I haven't started validating 12.04.1 yet for Edubuntu, so respinning was an easy decision to make ;)
[18:38] <skaet> :)
[18:39] <jibel> utlemming, I deleted precise-ec2 that was running for 3 days and ec2-daily which was running for 5 days
[18:39] <jocarter> ok, well, I'm busy with really boring work at work this week that I'd like to avoid if possible, so if there's something that needs "urgent testing" at some point then that will be nice.
[18:39] <utlemming> jibel: yikes
[18:39] <knome> skaet, ok, thanks. i'll take care of that
[18:40] <knome> skaet, when's the "testing deadline" ?
[18:40] <stgraber> jocarter: I'll keep that in mind ;) but I tested the images on Saturday so I'm quite confident we won't have anything blow up for Edubuntu at least
[18:40] <skaet> knome,  testing deadline is EOD Wednesday\
[18:40] <knome> skaet, oki :)
[18:40] <skaet> where EOD Wednesday is 2100 UTC.  ;)
[18:40] <knome> hehe
[18:40] <knome> yeah, sounds like EOD for me... (0000 here)
[18:41] <skaet> :)
[18:44]  * skaet --> lunch,  biab
[18:44] <jibel> utlemming, for info they were all blocked on "bzr branch lp:~ubuntu-server-ec2-testing-dev/+junk/ec2-automated-tests tests"
[18:45] <jibel> utlemming, do you want to replay the builds I aborted ?
[18:45] <utlemming> jibel: interesting....no, I'll kick new ones
[18:46] <jibel> utlemming, ok
[18:47] <scott-work> skaet: i'm sorry, i missed the question
[18:48] <scott-work> oh, skaet, if this a fix for samsung printers then i think ubuntu studio can skip the respin/retest
[18:57] <jibel> stgraber, I asked for more info, I'm not even sure he did an upgrade
[19:16] <tkamppeter> stgraber, I have now one user who confirmed Samsung working and another user who confirmed his Canonb continuing to work.
[19:19] <stgraber> infinity: if you consider that good enough as a verification for the cups SRu regression, can you please release it to -updates? ^
[19:30] <infinity> stgraber: I'll have a gander at that in a sec.
[20:22] <infinity> stgraber: Released.
[20:23] <stgraber> infinity: thanks, I'll wait for the publisher and start respinning Edubuntu
[20:29] <tkamppeter> infinity, thank you very much.
[20:31] <infinity> bjf: ^-- You didn't need to copy those again. :P
[20:31] <infinity> bjf: (I was going to batch all of precise together with the arm kernels)
[20:31] <bjf> infinity: my bad. i'll back away from the kbd
[20:53]  * infinity lunches.
[20:54] <skaet> scott-work,  yup that was the question.   How goes testing?  any surprises/concerns?
[20:57] <jibel> stgraber, upgrade from Oneiric in Wubi works fine on bare-metal. 32 and 63bit
[20:57] <jibel> 64bit even
[20:58] <stgraber> jibel: good to hear, so that was a completely unrelated bug reported on the tracker then
[20:58] <skaet> :)
[21:00] <jibel> stgraber, my feeling is that he is talking about an installation not an upgrade. and he's installing Wubi i386 on WindowsXP running in a VM on Windows7
[21:01] <jibel> he can probably embed more OS but he'll reach a limit at some point
[21:14] <scott-work> skaet: i don't think anyone has run into any surprises at this point
[21:23] <skaet> scott-work,  thanks.
[21:28] <skaet> ScottK,  Riddell - do you want the respin to pick up the CUPs fix for Samsung printers or not?
[21:29] <ScottK> Dunno.  I've been offline all day.
[21:32] <skaet> ScottK,  a fix has been move to -updates.   We're not respinning ubuntu for it, but picking it up as 0 day SRU,  Edubuntu's respinning now though, and so wanted to know your preference.
[21:32] <ScottK> skaet: We've got no current results, so I'd say respin.  I'd wait for a bit to see if Riddell  checks in and has a different opinion.
[21:34] <skaet> ScottK,  lets time bound this then,  since its late for Riddell,  and coming up on EOD for North America.   If he doesn't say otherwise in next hour,  we plan on respinning.   Fair?
[21:34] <ScottK> Fair.
[21:34] <ScottK> I'll be offline for about 90 minutes very shortly.
[21:34] <skaet> stgraber, ^    Let me know if you want me to kick the images off.
[21:36] <skaet> ScottK,  ok.   Will let you know outcome when you're back online.
[21:37] <seb128> skaet, ubuntu doesn't respin with that fix? do we have an idea how much of the samsung printers are broken?
[21:37] <stgraber> skaet: I'll do it
[21:38] <stgraber> seb128: that's the problem, we don't really know. I confirmed that old models (6-7 years old) don't seem to be affected, but we don't have a lot of users of the more recent models to get an idea of how many are broken
[21:38] <skaet> seb128,  it will get picked up as 0-day SRU.
[21:38] <skaet> (and we can release note it as such)
[21:38] <seb128> well, lot of people have offline installs
[21:39] <seb128> is a respin really too much extra work at this point?
[21:40] <skaet> its not the respin,  its the retesting.
[21:41] <seb128> well, that's a side effect of the respin
[22:14] <cjwatson> skaet,Daviey: I just happened to look at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QuantalQuetzal/ReleaseManifest and noticed that the server images are described as "livecd".  I think this is misleading.  They aren't live images - they use a squashfs to improve base system installation performance, but that's essentially an implementation detail and not the sort of fundamental change suggested by the "livecd" image type.
[22:15] <cjwatson> We should probably simply call that "server", as before.
[22:16] <Daviey> cjwatson: err, yeah.. i didn't know it had changed
[22:16] <skaet> cjwatson,  if Daviey is fine with changing them back, I'm ok with it.
[22:17] <skaet> Daviey, it was likely me.
[22:17] <Daviey> oh.. ok
[22:17] <Daviey> I don't think i care enough either way TBH :)
[22:19] <cjwatson> I've changed it back to server
[22:19] <Daviey> super
[22:20] <xnox> Now that cmake is build and published (due to previous fallout), can somebody please retry ball powerpc & armel builds?
[22:20] <xnox> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ball/1.4.1+20111206-4/+build/3730436
[22:20] <xnox> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ball/1.4.1+20111206-4/+build/3730433
[22:20] <Daviey> xnox: done
[22:21] <xnox> Daviey: merci =)
[22:21] <Daviey> "Start in 20 hours"
[22:21] <infinity> Yeah, it'll get there.
[22:21] <infinity> The weekend wasn't kind to us.
[22:22] <xnox> infinity: Daviey: well armel & powerpc are busy building gcc & thunderbird.... no surprise the acquired backlog ;-)
[22:22]  * xnox it was empty earlier.... hehe
[22:23] <infinity> xnox: "empty"?
[22:23] <infinity> xnox: You mean "nothing was building because the world was broken".
[22:23] <xnox> infinity: yes, that =)
[22:23] <infinity> xnox: The ARM and PPC queue haven't been empty since the DC move started last week.
[22:23] <Daviey> well, the chances of introducing regressions was smaller.. so it's not all bad.
[22:32] <infinity> cjwatson: Thanks for the override length fixes.
[22:33] <cjwatson> YW
[22:55] <stgraber> no reply from Riddell, starting the Kubuntu respin
[23:01] <stgraber> in progress
[23:09]  * xnox ponders if fixing bug 947107 quickly wil make it into 12.04.1 release....
[23:10] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 947107 in ubiquity "No partition labels in 12.04 partition wizard" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/947107
[23:10] <stgraber> no
[23:12] <xnox> stgraber: =(
[23:12] <stgraber> xnox: unless that's a regression from the 12.04 release, I'd prefer not to have any non-critical installer fix as that'd need rebuild of pretty much everything but core and server and would need full re-testing
[23:12] <stgraber> so we're looking at >24h just for the rebuild+basic re-test time
[23:13] <xnox> i see, that *is* stressful.