[09:47] <bdrung> udev and upstart can be dropped from sync-blacklist (they use propor -0ubnutX Debian revisions for quite some time)
[11:37] <cjwatson> Anyone looking at the Xubuntu build failures?
[11:38] <knome> cjwatson, at least not from the xubuntu side, since i wasn't aware we had those
[11:38] <cjwatson> infinity,slangasek: The above grub2/grub2-signed were from debugging a failure reported by PES, but I have a suspicion that they may fix stgraber's installation failure too
[11:38] <Laney> there's a branch on the im-config bug to switch the seeds
[11:38] <cjwatson> knome: Should you be on the e-mail list for image build failures?
[11:39] <cjwatson> It's currently Cody and Lionel
[11:39] <knome> cjwatson, maybe, but i don't even know what that list is...
[11:39] <knome> cjwatson, right, that should probably be lionel and micahg (if he wants)
[11:39] <Laney> you get mailed when the images fail to build
[11:39] <cjwatson> It's maintained by ubuntu-cdimage - it's not a mailman list or anything
[11:39] <knome> i mean, i'm useless there.
[11:39] <cjwatson> OK, I'm not adding people without their explicit consent so it's up to micahg then
[11:40] <cjwatson> (Also tend not to remove people without their consent)
[11:40] <knome> i can only pass on the message, but if lionel gets those mails anyway, then i'm just an extra hand
[11:40] <knome> cody hasn't been active with xubuntu for a long time, but i'm not complaining if he wants those mails
[11:42] <knome> just a note that i'm not too actively monitoring this channel; only on highlights, which are knome and xubuntu for this channel
[11:42] <knome> so if you want my attention... use either
[11:43] <knome> or if you think i should add more words to highlight, let me know
[11:44]  * cjwatson merges that seed branch
[11:44] <cjwatson> knome: no, that's fine
[11:45] <knome> cjwatson, ok, cheers :) and thanks for all the hard work. i probably should have come and said hi and thanks to you in uds, but somehow that slipped.
[11:45] <cjwatson> no worries :)
[11:46] <knome> mmh, i'm sure you were busy enough without that too :)
[11:46] <knome> anyway, i got to move again, see you later!
[11:47]  * cjwatson runs a xubuntu-meta update
[11:49] <infinity> cjwatson: No bug ref in that grub2{,-signed} upload.
[11:50] <infinity> Oh, you're just piggybacking it on the catch-all SB bug.
[11:50] <infinity> That's fair.
[11:50]  * infinity gets all accepty up in here.
[11:50] <cjwatson> infinity: I was sort of uncomfortable about including FourDollars' bug in it because that bug isn't present in precise{,-updates} right now
[11:50] <cjwatson> including a reference to that bug, that is
[11:51] <cjwatson> I kind of feel that SRU bugs should be present before and absent after
[11:51]  * infinity nods.
[11:52]  * infinity reinstalls bzr first...
[12:05] <cjwatson> infinity: ?!
[12:05] <cjwatson> (reinstall)
[12:06] <infinity> cjwatson: Wiped out my laptop over the weekend.
[12:07] <cjwatson> Ah
[12:32] <infinity> I'm guessing kdegames got split out? :P
[12:37] <xnox> infinity: lolz =) also gnome-games got split upstream as well. I guess splitting games is trending right now =)
[13:37] <ScottK> KDE is splitting ALL the things.
[14:11] <stgraber> cjwatson: I'll retry once we have a build with the new grub2. I was installing from a usb stick onto another usb stick, so problems specific to removable devices may well affect me.
[14:21] <cjwatson> stgraber: Even aside from that, there was a misbackport that wasn't specific to --removable
[14:21] <cjwatson> And, hmm.  Did 12.10 work in that configuration?
[14:22] <stgraber> that's a good question. I did my 12.10 testing on external drives, but with a different one that may not export the removable flag properly (I have a few of those)
[14:22] <cjwatson> Because we have no code to call grub-install --removable if you're doing that, and I'm not sure that it'll work without
[14:22] <cjwatson> It would be more about whether UEFI thinks it's removable
[14:23] <cjwatson> Specifically whether it goes for \EFI\ubuntu\BOOTX64.EFI per efibootmgr, or \EFI\BOOT\BOOTX64.EFI per the defaults for removable devices
[14:24] <cjwatson> I think I mean \EFI\ubuntu\shimx64.efi there
[14:25] <stgraber> I'm 90% sure it was updating the boot list with efibootmgr in 12.10 and I'm 100% sure it did with that last precise install (as I had to fix it manually to boot from my internal disk)
[14:26] <cjwatson> OK, so then it could still be the config_opt(_file) fix
[14:31] <cjwatson> stgraber: running an image build now
[15:01] <micahg> cjwatson: I'd be fine getting Xubuntu image mails
[15:08] <cjwatson> micahg: your wish is my command.  preferred address?
[15:08] <micahg> cjwatson: micahg @ ubuntu
[15:09]  * xnox kind of wants to receive cd image build failures as well for: ubuntu [desktop|server] @ i386, amd64, armhf-any
[15:09] <xnox> ... cause I am usually the last one to find out about stuff.
[15:09] <cjwatson> xnox: I can't make them arch-specific
[15:09] <cjwatson> (right now, anyway)
[15:10] <xnox> cjwatson: ok, then all ubuntu emails please =)
[15:10] <cjwatson> xnox: preferred address?
[15:10] <Laney> poor kde
[15:10] <xnox> cjwatson: launchpad @ surgut.co.uk
[15:11] <cjwatson> micahg,xnox: done
[15:11] <xnox> thanks.
[15:11] <xnox> ... for all the spam =)))))
[15:11] <xnox> cjwatson: I do wonder if it should have an archived mailing list as well. for all fails.
[15:13] <cjwatson> xnox: *shrug* they're all archived in *-build-logs anyway
[15:14] <xnox> fair enough.
[15:15] <micahg> cjwatson: thanks
[15:16] <infinity> Oh crap, is queuebot going nutty again?
[15:17] <stgraber> it seems to be kde-only, so I'm not sure :)
[15:17] <cjwatson> infinity: Those look like genuine rejects/reuploads
[15:17] <stgraber> nope, according to the queue, it's fine, just the kde guys flooding the queue as usual :)
[15:17] <infinity> Oh, indeed.  1m old in the queue.
[15:27] <ScottK> infinity: FYI, one of the two packages holding old libs in raring got fixed yesterday.
[15:27] <ScottK> So we didn't forget.
[15:34] <infinity> ScottK: \o/
[16:35] <stgraber> slangasek: QATracker change landed, we can now enable/disable manifest entries at http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/admin/config/services/qatracker/series/32/manifest
[17:09] <slangasek> stgraber: thanks much
[17:10] <stgraber> slangasek: mumble?
[17:10] <slangasek> oh, I forgot we moved to mumble
[17:10] <slangasek> I've been trying to get into G+!
[17:10] <stgraber> :)
[17:10] <slangasek> (without success)
[17:34] <infinity> cjwatson: So, yeah, following up on mumble, I'm happy to poke at the oversize/duplication madness a bit, though if you want to switch from tasks to metapackages, that might sort of Just Work.  Ish.  Not sure what that does to the autoinstall profile of a .1 versus a .2 install.
[17:35] <cjwatson> Yeah, that would be my concern
[17:36] <cjwatson> I guess the answer is to build two squashfses and diff them
[17:36] <infinity> Yep.
[17:36] <infinity> I have that all set up here anyway, so I can fiddle a bit.
[17:36] <cjwatson> If you want to do that I certainly don't object
[17:36] <infinity> So gracious of you.
[17:37] <cjwatson> :-)
[17:37]  * cjwatson tries to figure out why ubuntu-zh_CN/precise/amd64 has been failing
[17:37]  * infinity tries to figure out why he's depserately craving potato chips.
[17:38] <cjwatson> Because you haven't eaten in 36 hours?
[17:38] <infinity> Oh, yeah.  Could be that.
[17:39] <ScottK> I attempted to copy cups-pk-helper to -security as requested, but got rejected.
[17:39] <ScottK> What's the process for that?
[17:39] <ScottK> Do copy package and let a security person accept it?
[17:39] <micahg> weird, I would think an AA should be able to do that
[17:40] <ScottK> Security is "special"
[17:41] <stgraber> cjwatson: running yet another precise SB install during my lunch break, hopefully this one will work ;)
[17:42] <ScottK> micahg: I copied the over again.  Would you please take care of accepting them?
[17:42] <micahg> ScottK: yeah, let me log into LP, I'm not on my dev machine
[17:42] <ScottK> Thanks.
[17:50] <infinity> Wait.
[17:50] <infinity> ScottK: Was that built in -proposed?
[17:51] <ScottK> infinity: It was.  And the security team said in the bug to copy it to security after it was released.
[17:51]  * ScottK assumed they thought that bit through.
[17:52] <infinity> We don't copy from updates to security for a reason.  I hope they audited the deps closely before they requested that...
[17:52] <ScottK> Err, I think it was.
[17:52] <ScottK> Yeah.  Me too.
[17:52] <infinity> Yeah, it was from proposed. :/
[17:54] <micahg> huh?  I thought it was copied from the security PA
[17:54] <micahg> *PPA
[17:54] <infinity> micahg: No.
[17:54] <infinity> Oh.
[17:54] <infinity> Wait.
[17:54] <infinity> Yeah, it went from the PPA to proposed to updates.
[17:54] <infinity> You're right.
[17:54] <infinity> False alarm, it's all good.
[17:54] <ScottK> Excellent.
[17:54] <ScottK> Sorry for not checking first.
[17:55]  * micahg accepts quantla
[17:55] <infinity> quantla was my favourite release.
[17:56] <micahg> yay, I did something useful...
[17:57] <Laney> you're always useful to me ♥
[18:17] <stgraber> cjwatson: I'm typing this on a shiny new precise install using secureboot ;)
[18:18] <xnox> \o/
[18:18] <cjwatson> stgraber: \o/
[18:18] <cjwatson> Best news I've heard all week
[18:18] <cjwatson> Any problems?
[18:19] <stgraber> not that I can see, media booted fine, install looked good, grub booted directly after reboot
[18:20] <cjwatson> Awesomesauce
[18:21] <cjwatson> So I think the remaining thing I need to do is fix that ubuntu-defaults-image failure visible in zh_CN
[18:21] <cjwatson> And then we call it good
[18:22] <stgraber> cjwatson: ah, one small detail, not sure if we want to bother fixing for .2, memtest86 is listed in grub and shouldn't be on efi systems
[18:22] <cjwatson> Yeah, I fixed that in quantal, I guess we should backport that
[18:22] <cjwatson> Let's make it a separate bug though - this one is big enough
[18:22] <cjwatson> And it's not SB-specific
[18:23] <stgraber> right
[18:23] <infinity> So, wait, do we get to promote this whole mess to -updates soon, is that what I'm hearing?
[18:23] <cjwatson> Hm, in bug 883017 somebody claims to have made it work on EFI
[18:23] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 883017 in memtest86+ (Ubuntu) "memtest86+ fails on efi systems" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/883017
[18:24] <cjwatson> infinity: It's looking close.  I think there are other ubiquity bugs to verify though
[18:25]  * xnox can do most of them. Now that cd's are not going to be respun again.
[18:25] <cjwatson> my hero
[18:26] <cjwatson> well, I mean, they are, they're on daily builds - just not for a new ubiquity
[18:26] <xnox> ack.
[18:26]  * xnox off to argos & back and then'll poke them.
[18:29] <ScottK> micahg: FYI: I got accepts for oneiric and quantal, but not precise.
[18:30] <infinity> cjwatson: Can I get you to review the flash-kernel in q-proposed?
[18:34] <cjwatson> Looking (modulo slow internet due to running ubuntu-defaults-image)
[18:35] <cjwatson> infinity: what guarantees that linux-base is installed
[18:35] <cjwatson> ?
[18:35] <cjwatson> Since I don't seem to have it installed here
[18:36] <infinity> cjwatson: f-k depends on it.
[18:36] <cjwatson> Aha
[18:36] <cjwatson> OK, that'll do :)  I was looking at rdepends on x86
[18:41] <cjwatson> accepted
[18:42] <cjwatson> and fixed queuediff to cope better with you using just quantal there :)
[19:01] <micahg> ScottK: [11:47] -queuebot/#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cups-pk-helper [sync] (precise-security) [0.2.1.2-1ubuntu0.1]
[20:59] <ScottK> micahg: Thanks.
[23:28] <ScottK> If any of the other archive admins feel like reviewing some of the several dozen KDE games packages, that would be lovely.  Riddell did me the favor of being the uploader, so he can't.
[23:28] <jbicha> https://launchpad.net/builders/peryton is pretending to be an armel builder
[23:32] <infinity> ScottK: Gee, I'd really like to, but I have to floss my cat this evening.
[23:33] <ScottK> Is it a big deal if copyright statements lack a date?
[23:33] <ScottK> i.e. copyright (c) foo vice copyright (c) 2012 foo
[23:34] <slangasek> depends on whether reproduction of the copyright notice with date is a requirement of the license, IMHO
[23:35] <infinity> A copyright statement without a date is legally meaningless in many jurisdictions.
[23:35] <ScottK> It's GPL 2+
[23:35] <slangasek> then yeah, I'd say that's a problem
[23:35] <ScottK> Thanks.
[23:36] <ScottK> Riddell: ^^^ look in players/neutralplayer.cpp in konquest and weep.  Rejecting (I did not check to see if it was just the one file or others too).
[23:39]  * Riddell weeps
[23:40] <slangasek> ohwait, this is the upstream copyright notice?
[23:40] <slangasek> I assumed you were looking at debian/copyright; in general, whatever upstream offers as a copyright statement is good
[23:41] <slangasek> because if they don't care enough to make sure copyright is enforceable on their work, who are we to stop them
[23:41] <slangasek> (not that the countries where you still need the copyright statement are particularly relevant, the Berne convention supersedes this)
[23:44] <infinity> slangasek: Hrm, does plymouth really need a dependency on "libdrm-intel1 | libdrm-radeon1 | libdrm-nouveau2"?
[23:45] <slangasek> infinity: I recently wondered that, having seen it in the backport; I don't know why it's there at all
[23:45] <infinity> slangasek: Doesn't seem to make much sense, since that doesn't in any way enforce that you have the plugin for your hardware.
[23:47] <slangasek> infinity: just checked, that predates my involvement in the package
[23:47] <slangasek> infinity: axe it - it's obsolete now anyway, because we're now using the generic kms backend for everything (by accident, but it seems to have held up)
[23:47] <infinity> slangasek: Axing away.
[23:48] <ScottK> slangasek: So it's OK then?
[23:48] <infinity> That'll knock a few more bits out of required.
[23:52] <slangasek> ScottK: it's ok for upstream to put whatever they want for a copyright statement, as long as it's clear to us that they aren't stealing code they can't actually give us a license to.  Debian policy still requires debian/copyright to include proper (i.e., with date) copyright statements; and some licenses, GPL included, require that "an appropriate copyright notice" accompany the work when we distribute it.
[23:53] <slangasek> ScottK: do you want more eyeballs on debian/copyright?
[23:54] <ScottK> I think it needs to be redone in any case as not all the copyright attributions are included in debian/copright.
[23:54] <ScottK> copyright even.
[23:54] <slangasek> ok
[23:55] <ScottK> Thanks for offering.