[00:11] bdmurray: I'm looking at your whoopsie upload, and am confused. [00:13] RAOF: okay [00:15] RAOF: initialize_logging didn't exist and I thought the other things in the upload were "obviously safe patch"es [00:17] RAOF: I can remove everything but the logging change if you'd prefer [00:17] I'm happy with all of them being in there, but just documented :) [00:18] when you say documented do you want a bug for every issue or just noted in the changelog? [00:18] Noted in the changelog is OK. Does the connection_data.callback() thing want a bug, though? [00:19] I'll remove that bit as its not relevant to fixing the bug at hand [00:19] That's not a trivially obvious change, at least to me :). It looks like a call gets made that previously wouldn't be made. [00:19] Heh. Cool. [06:46] looks like some NBS binaries need to be removed for chef to migrate === doko_ is now known as doko [09:57] RAOF, the ceph i386 ftbfs was something transitory - no error in log - rebuilt OK [09:57] RAOF, uploaded 2.2 again with the 2.1 entry in the changes file as well [10:58] Could someone move strongswan out of trusty-proposed for me? [11:03] Did you see the issues on update_excuses? [11:16] Hm, I guess that's an NBS-in-proposed thing [11:16] Looking [11:18] The uninstallables are genuine afaics [11:20] Yeah [11:20] No strongswan-plugins-fips-prf [11:20] s/plugins/plugin/ [11:20] jpds: ↑ [11:22] sigh. [11:22] tumbleweed: chef> yes, you're right. done [11:23] Laney / cjwatson: Thanks, fixed it. [11:23] I've dealt with the NBS part of it, anyway [11:23] ta [11:24] cjwatson: thanks [11:24] Just uploaded -0ubuntu2. [13:11] ogra_: sil2100: I'm blocking libcolumbus and hud into proposed. Seems that libcolumbus was built and published without any new commit :/ Not sure who checked… [13:11] so it would make the tests refailing [13:12] * sil2100 sighs [13:12] sil2100: it was usermetrics [13:12] So why was it set to ready to release? [13:12] see landing plan [13:12] Aw shit [13:12] not libcolumbus [13:13] didrocks: right, I read your ping on #ubuntu-desktop and published that ;p [13:13] * sil2100 sighs and facepalms on himself [13:13] sil2100: well, I can't remember everything, especially when having 6 pings at the same time, would have been nice as it's written on the spreadsheet to check [13:13] (and the check that things were published :p) [13:13] didrocks: shorry ;< Damn, I feel stupid now [13:14] sil2100: well, no worry, just republish the right one now [13:14] sil2100: no need for a block, both will stay in proposed until alpha2 is done [13:14] (it was just in case we missed a merged branch) [13:45] queuebot Unapproved: partman-crypto (precise-proposed/main) [50ubuntu1 => 50ubuntu2] [13:46] please review ^ as it's wanted for 12.04.4, security team request bug #1263740 [13:46] Launchpad bug 1263740 in partman-crypto (Ubuntu Precise) "12.04.4 alternate installer encryption should default to aes-xts-plain64" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1263740 [13:46] verified to work with dalies against HWE & stock (.0) kernels [13:58] cjwatson, do you know of a way to get more debugging from debootstrap under live-build ? using "lb build --debug" only gets me lb debug output (i still have the "cannot mount /proc" issue even when using BuildLiveCD .. but tracked it down to debootstrap) [13:58] debootstrap.log is sadly pretty empty (a few gpg key messages and the final error line) [14:00] not off the top of my head, sorry, you could try hacking /usr/sbin/debootstrap [14:00] * ogra_ starts to wonder if wrapping the whole thing into a qemu-arm-static chroot probably causes this [15:12] Sorry about the puppet component mismatch. I failed to check. [15:12] * rbasak will sort it out. [15:48] infinity, what will be the status of the arm64 port for 14.04? will it have full 5 year support? [15:49] 5 years is for arm 32bit ... must be 10 years for arm64 indeed [15:49] :P [16:23] jamespage: i have a merge proposal up against launchpad to mark arm64 for a 5 year support. (such that supported: field in packages/arm64 declares that) [16:24] jamespage: as far I remember that hasn't been merged yet. [16:24] hmpf, there seems to be a mirroring issue with cdimage [16:24] jamespage: oh, and that also add armhf to 5y support ;-) [16:25] if i reload http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-touch/daily-preinstalled/ repeatedly, the 20140122.1 dir randomly vanishes and re-appears [16:25] https://code.launchpad.net/~xnox/launchpad/update-maintenance-check-3/+merge/194778 [16:26] ogra_: ask IS [16:26] cjwatson, thks, will do (after my daily meeting marathon) [16:27] stgraber, highvoltage: how's alpha 2 testing going to edubuntu? do you have a release page? [16:28] Riddell: i'm about to upload ubiquity with a few fixes..... =) [16:28] xnox: oh? will that need respins? gtk and kde? [16:29] Riddell: gtk only.... + a few d-i components updates. [16:30] knome: will you want a respin for that ubiquity change? [16:30] bug #1260396 & bug #1260473 [16:30] Launchpad bug 1260396 in gtk+3.0 (Ubuntu Trusty) "Ubiquity window spans width of screen" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1260396 [16:30] Launchpad bug 1260473 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) "The slide bar that allow to rezise the partition does not appear" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1260473 [16:30] knome: can you confirm the release page on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TrustyTahr/Alpha2/ ? [16:30] utlemming: no alpha 2 for cloud? [16:31] Riddell: yeah, most of release pages need text copies from alpha2 notes. [16:31] Riddell: or updated URLs to flavour websites, if that is used. [16:33] Riddell: actually, I can't build ubiquity at the moment =) so no ubiquity update just yet. [16:57] riddel: yes, there will be [16:57] Riddel: the alpha2 is still processing [17:36] Riddell: to be honest, i'm less worried about respins these days, as we have autopilot tests running on a dozen typical configurations doing a "click through as a user" installations. [17:37] xnox: alpha 2 is for flavours which don't have that I think? [17:37] Riddell: i believe it's running against all gtk flavours. [17:37] Riddell: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/search/?q=ubiquity [17:37] ubuntu, lubuntu, xubuntu, edubuntu, gnome === jodh` is now known as jodh [17:38] a (decentish) coverage. No kubuntu, as that's a different frontend / toolkit and needs it's own set of "scripts of button pushing" and asserts. [17:38] I'd just let the flavour guys know and they can pick it up if they want it [17:38] self service ho [17:39] Laney: =) [17:40] Hi everyone! Could we get an unblock from the freeze for webbrowser-app? [17:40] It has a very important fix of a regression for Ubuntu Touch, and we're blocked on promoting a new image without it [17:41] Pretty please :) [17:50] Riddell: Laney: updated ubiquity is uploaded, let release team / flavours judge if they want it in. No strong preference when it lands (e.g. today or on friday) [17:50] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/2.17.4 [17:50] * xnox off to volleyball [18:07] sil2100: xnox: Done [18:07] darkxst: highvoltage: stgraber: knome: New ubiquity might be interesting for you [18:08] if you want to self-service some respins [18:08] * Laney → climbing, see you [18:10] Laney: enjoy, will check a bit later [18:12] Laney, have fun! [18:22] Laney: thank you! [18:32] note that the new ubiquity is curently stuck in proposed due to build failures [18:32] so respins won't pick it up [19:52] cjwatson, in case you are intrested, i found the issue with live-build ... seems i cant run it inside a qemu-arm-static chroot because the build chroot will lack the qemu-arm-static binary in /usr/bin === jackson is now known as Guest4739 === Ursinha_ is now known as Ursinha [20:12] * ogra_ finds LB_BOOTSTRAP_QEMU_STATIC [21:57] stgraber: it already failed in those places ;-) [21:57] was assuming/hoping people would check it was in release before pressing ze button === seb128_ is now known as seb128 [23:34] stgraber: i don't see ubiquity stuck due to build-failures. [23:35] stgraber: it's just arm64 & ppc64el don't have X capable of changing keyboard layouts yet =) [23:35] stgraber: which i guess should be fixed sooner rather than later. [23:39] xnox: hmm, looks like it got copied over, must have been something else slowing down the copy then as last I looked it was still in -proposed hours after upload [23:42] stgraber: yeah. not sure why Laney unblocked ubiquity, I thought the consensus across flavours is needed. I guess Laney expressed it as, "each flavour may choose to push the respin button to get new ubiquity" =) [23:42] yeah, that's fine