[08:07] <jamespage> Daviey, ^^ backported dkms/module-assistant packages for openvswitch with 3.8 kernel for 12.04.3 as discussed last week
[08:09] <jamespage> Daviey, includes DEP-8 tests for both packages...:-)
[08:12] <knome> infinity, hey, you around? :)
[08:46] <Daviey> jamespage: Super!  Will look shortly, thanks
[08:46] <jamespage> Daviey, thanks
[09:54] <sil2100> stgraber: hi! Do you have a moment to NEW a package from the queue? ;)
[10:00] <sil2100> stgraber: the mediascanner package is needed in the archive by our developers, which want to push some additional packages that depend on it
[13:04] <smartboyhw> Ubuntu Release Team: Any solutions to solve the consecutively failing Ubuntu Studio saucy images?
[13:09] <ScottK> smartboyhw: Why are they failing?
[13:09] <smartboyhw> ScottK, package conflicts
[13:09] <ScottK> Then fix the conflicts.
[13:09]  * smartboyhw is not familiar with the failing packages..
[13:09] <ScottK> The release team doesn't have any magical powers with regard to fixing packages.
[16:05] <infinity> knome: Am now.
[16:20] <knome> infinity, hey!
[16:20] <knome> infinity, an SRU question... we have 1207493
[16:20] <knome> bug 1207493
[16:20] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1207493 in xubuntu-docs (Ubuntu) "[SRU] Documentation does not match shipped system version (11.10 shipped with 12.04)" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1207493
[16:21] <knome> infinity, it hasn't been uploaded (yet :() and i was wondering if there was any possibility you could make an exception to the 7-day rule with this documentation package.
[16:22] <knome> infinity, as you can see, the bug and docs have been ready for some time already, but for a reason or another our uploaders didn't get to upload it by last thu.
[16:57] <infinity> knome: That's a pretty massive diff.  Was the wholesale backport really necessary?
[16:58] <knome> infinity, the old documentation is from 2010 or something
[16:58] <knome> infinity, yes, it's a complete rewrite but it's so much more accurate and fluent that we'd really like to get that in the LTS
[16:59] <infinity> knome: So, I can already spot one bug in this being a backport.
[16:59] <infinity> +  * debian/preinst: Dropped, not needed after 12.04 LTS
[16:59] <knome> okay, we can fix that :)
[16:59] <knome> skellat, ping ^
[17:00] <knome> infinity, my main question is that is it worth the hassle now to do these fixes: is it possible to get it in .3?
[17:00] <infinity> knome: Given that it's "just docs", I'm okay with being fairly loose on the rules here, expecially if the previous ones were essentially useless.  But definitely don't drop any transitional stuff needed (like that preinst)
[17:01] <knome> sure, i'll make sure that's fixed ASAP :)
[17:01] <knome> (the other argument is that it only concerns xubuntu...)
[17:01] <infinity> knome: If you guys get it uploaded, we'll see.  It's not world-ending if it misses the .3 images, though, as it'd be in the archive shortly after.
[17:02] <infinity> knome: I'm happy to help massage it through if it appears bug-free, though.
[17:02] <knome> sure, but i'm sure you understand why we want it for .3 (we even did the whole re-rewrite to be accurate for 12.04 in a relatively short time just for .3)
[17:03] <infinity> knome: *nod*... Get it uploaded (with the preinst thing fixed), and we'll talk. :)
[17:03] <knome> yep, i'll do that. thanks!
[17:03] <infinity> knome: We can probably push it through in a day or so, if you promise a bunch of people will install it from proposed, make sure it's not broken, browse the docs a bit, whatever.  However you test words.
[17:04] <knome> definitely.
[17:04] <infinity> "Yeahp, those sure look like words".
[17:04] <knome> heh :)
[17:27] <sil2100> infinity: hi!
[17:28] <infinity> sil2100: 'sup?
[17:28] <infinity> sil2100: mediascanner?
[17:28] <sil2100> infinity: are you also doing some SRU stuff? Since I need some validation of some old SRU bug - if it sounds SRUable ;)
[17:29] <sil2100> Since the upstream developer is poking me already since long long what's the status
[17:29] <sil2100> https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/1043627
[17:29] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1043627 in nux (Ubuntu Raring) "[SRU] Add XIM Support to Nux" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[17:30] <sil2100> infinity: mediascanner got in btw. but thanks for asking ;)
[17:31] <infinity> sil2100: Ahh, the Xim thing.  Do you have a patch you can attach to the bug too, so we can have a look at how painfully intrusive it looks?
[17:33] <infinity> sil2100: I'm not opposed to the Xim thing in theory, and it *sounds* like it should be isolated enough to not break other bits if it sucks, but a diff would be nice.
[17:34] <infinity> sil2100: Oh, hah.  Yeah, mediascanner got in but, in a hilarious twist, it builds on arm/powerpc, but not amd64/i386. :P
[17:34] <infinity> That's got to be a first.
[17:34] <sil2100> Ohshit
[17:34] <sil2100> Maybe the unittests are failing?
[17:34] <infinity> Yeahp.
[17:34] <sil2100> Probably a rebuild should work, since those seem flacky ;/ But I thought they disabled the flacky ones
[17:34] <sil2100> Sucks
[17:35] <sil2100> infinity: I'll try finding a diff to attach
[17:35] <infinity> sil2100: I'll give a rebuild a try.  But if it was developed on ARM, you could be the first people ever to have inverse signed char issues? :)
[17:42] <sil2100> infinity: attached
[17:42] <sil2100> infinity: (the branches are attached to the bug btw. but diffs might be easily readable for others)
[17:49] <infinity> sil2100: mediascanner had testsuite hate on the second go too.  You might just want to look into fixing it. :)
[17:52]  * sil2100 sighs
[17:52] <sil2100> Let me inform upstream
[17:52] <sil2100> The sad thing is that PPA's didn't have any problems, local builds too ;)
[19:19] <plars> slangasek: when do you expect we'll have candidate images for 12.04.3?
[19:19] <slangasek> plars: heya - was going to talk to you today about this.  I expect it's going to be first thing tomorrow
[19:20] <plars> slangasek: sounds good :)
[19:20] <slangasek> which given my failure to coordinate with certification up 'til now, I'm not sure means we'll have a release ready to go by Thursday
[19:20] <slangasek> but if that timeline is still ok on the QA side, we can still shoot for it
[19:30] <plars> slangasek: 2 days isn't a lot, and depending on when the image posts, it may be only 1 day or 1.5 days for psivaa who is in the UK, but we'll do what we can as quickly as possible
[19:30] <slangasek> plars: ack
[19:31] <slangasek> if we need an extra day, a Friday release should still be fine
[19:58] <infinity> plars: BTW, I'm letting that precise/omap4 kernel through, despite the QA failure on it, just to clear out the CVE backlog.
[19:58] <infinity> plars: Hopefully people will still look into the test failures.
[21:31] <hggdh> phillw: done
[21:31] <hggdh> bah, wrong channel
[21:36] <phillw> hggdh: close enough :P