[00:11] <slangasek> bdmurray: update-manager -d on trusty fails for me with 'Failed to download repository information' - any idea why?
[00:30] <bdmurray> slangasek: try with DEBUG_UPDATE_MANAGER=1 set
[00:31] <slangasek> bdmurray: seems fairly nondescript: http://paste.ubuntu.com/7455113/
[00:32] <bdmurray> slangasek: edit /etc/update-manager/release-upgrades.conf from lts to normal
[00:33] <slangasek> bdmurray: hmm; surely -d should override that?
[00:33] <slangasek> (so I think that's a bug, even if editing it works around it)
[00:34] <bdmurray> lts sets lts in the url, so -d with lts just means you want the devel version of the next lts
[00:34] <slangasek> ah, that's nonintuitive
[00:35] <slangasek> anyway, same error
[00:35] <slangasek> (assuming that /etc/update-manager/release-upgrades is the right file, since that's the one that exists / is owned by the package)
[00:36] <slangasek> http://paste.ubuntu.com/7455126/
[00:36] <bdmurray> new dist: <UpdateManager.Core.MetaRelease.Dist object at 0x7f68e3e369b0>
[00:36] <bdmurray> so that looks right to me
[00:36] <slangasek> yeah... still gives the error about failing to download repo info
[00:36] <slangasek> and does not offer me an upgrade
[00:37] <slangasek> so that seems to be because I have some repos in sources.list that are not currently accessible
[00:37] <bdmurray> ah yeah that sounds familiar
[00:40] <bdmurray> I can't find the bug right away though
[00:43] <slangasek> hmm
[00:43] <slangasek> but after disabling them, I no longer get the error but I also don't get offered to upgrade
[00:43] <slangasek> possibly because it doesn't like me for continuing to postpone the "you must reboot NOW" dialog :)
[10:31] <cjwatson> doko: Are the powerpc builders just on manual in order to schedule gcc-4.9 on sagari?  If so can they be re-autoed now?  (Guessing as to somebody who might know ...)
[10:31] <doko> cjwatson, yes, reenabled
[10:32] <cjwatson> Thanks
[10:32] <doko> would take 24+h else
[10:33] <cjwatson> Sure, I have no problem with shoving stuff on sagari, just wanted the rest of the queue to clear :)
[12:37] <mlankhorst> so who's going to work on 12.04.5?
[12:52] <Mirv> hi. out of the trusty's unapproved GStreamer updates, if you can work only on one of them, please try to get gst-libav approved which alone fixes a very visible crasher when seeking h.264 files (including any totem thumbnailer usage since it seeks first)
[14:12] <seb128> infinity, SpamapS, Daviey, slangasek, arges: hey, is there any chance some of you could spend some time on the trusty SRU queue this week? We have some important fixes waiting for 3 weeks :/
[14:12] <arges> seb128: sure i'll spend some time today
[14:13] <seb128> arges, thanks!
[14:20] <arges> seb128: so bug 1312305 bumps gst* packages to 1.2.4 from 1.2.3. some of these haven't landed in utopic yet. should we wait until these land there and get some testing before updating trusty?
[14:21] <seb128> arges, well, we can do that, I was expecting those to be approved to proposed and pocket copied to utopic
[14:21] <seb128> which we often do early in the cycle
[14:22] <seb128> Laney, ^ I think the ones with changes are yours
[14:22] <seb128> (gst and base are synced to utopic already)
[14:22] <dpm> hi all, also following up on the previous comment, could someone help with approving the Qt upload in the Unapproved queue? It fixes a Qt regression that affects running and developing the Reminders app on the desktop. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text= - ScottK, perhaps?
[14:38] <Laney> arges: I thought they would be copied up when I did them
[14:38] <Laney> (IIRC)
[14:38] <Laney> I can upload them too at the same time, would appreciate simultaneous verification in proposed though if possible
[14:44] <arges> Laney: I'm just not 100% sure how to handle these, so I'd like to get input from infinity, slangasek, bdmurray, etc about reviewing the gst* packages
[14:45] <Laney> wait
[14:45] <seb128> arges, just because of the utopic upload thing?
[14:45] <seb128> arges, because e.g gstreamer1.0 has 1.2.4-1 in utopics
[14:45] <seb128> same for -base
[14:45] <Laney> didn't I upload them all already?
[14:45] <Laney> to U, that is
[14:46] <arges> Laney: there are some that are fix committed in 1312305
[14:46] <seb128> seems you did
[14:46] <seb128> Laney, you probably didn't update the bug status
[14:46] <Laney> oh I guess because sync
[14:46] <Laney> yep
[14:47] <seb128> those are mine :p
[14:47] <seb128> arges, sorry about the confusion, everything is in utopic, I just failed to set to "fix released" the one that got autosynced from Debian
[14:48] <Laney> done now
[14:49] <seb128> thanks
[14:49] <arges> Laney: seb128 so has any testing been done, or that will be done after it lands in -proposed?
[14:49] <arges> in trusty for 1.2.4
[14:49] <seb128> well, I'm running it locally since it got uploaded
[14:50] <seb128> which is as much testing as we do before sending things to proposed
[14:50] <Laney> not for SRU purposes, that'll be done by people when they test proposed and give feedback to the bug
[14:50] <seb128> that's why we have the "1 week in proposed" to get things tested
[15:43] <rtg> infinity, whats the story on -Werror=cast-align ? libnice started using it, but glib-2.0 is definitely not alignment safe for armhf (and perhaps for other arches I don't care about). https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=743233 - Is it OK to just turn it off and continue take the performance hit for alignment traps ?
[15:45] <infinity> rtg: For arches that do alignment fixups (like armhf), it's just a performance penalty, so safe enough, but still bugs worth fixing.
[15:46] <rtg> infinity, I can fix some, but the glib-2.0 stuff requires deeper thought then I can give it.
[15:46] <rtg> plus, the fixes are probably less performant then just taking the trap
[15:48] <jamespage> bdmurray, just after you accepted my ceph upload for 14.04 upstream released a 0.80.1
[15:49] <jamespage> bdmurry: I'm doing some testing via PPA and I'd like to upload that version in the next day or so if that's OK with you
[15:50] <bdmurray> jamespage: sure, just let me know
[15:50] <jamespage> bdmurray, ta
[15:50] <infinity> rtg: Yeah, if the "fix" is wasting a few hundred thousand cycles on mangling things in C to not misalign, you've lost the game.  But sometimes, it's as simple as padding a struct correctly or something, and you're done.
[15:51] <infinity> rtg: Of course, for libraries, fixing alignment on public structs also breaks ABI, so sometimes it's pretty much unfixable without upstream buy-in and an SOVER bump.
[15:51] <rtg> infinity, thats what I'm thinking is the case for glib-2.0
[15:52] <rtg> infinity, it looks like upstream added tihs test, and then never built with a compiler that implements it.
[15:52] <infinity> rtg: Of course. :P
[15:52] <rtg> doh!
[17:06] <infinity> bdmurray: Hrm.  Why doesn't sru-release have an option to set phasing?  Do I just need to do it manually and hope to avoid override races?
[17:07] <infinity> bdmurray: (Have a tzdata upload to do that's critical because the changed timezone takes effect in two days, so phasing it to 100% pretty much will have to happen)
[17:59] <robru> hey guys, we have another unity8 release that needs a version bump. thanks!
[18:00] <infinity> robru: On it.
[18:00] <robru> infinity, thanks!
[18:00] <infinity> Man, the new colourful adt results in excuses are distracting.
[18:03] <ogra_> haha
[18:07] <robru> infinity, hey. so looking at excuses, we have 4 different things that are blocked by a regression in ubuntu-purchase-service. I just published the fix for that though, so once it lands do I need to do anything special to get those tests to re-run? or will it see he new release, re-run, and then allow those 4 blocked things to migrate?
[18:08] <infinity> robru: The latter, modulo potential bugs in the system.
[18:08] <robru> infinity, sweet, ok thanks, will keep an eye
[18:08] <cjwatson> Yeah, I believe that should work.
[18:32] <michagogo|cloud> infinity: tz change with 2 days notice? o_O
[18:33] <infinity> michagogo|cloud: It's possible I've cursed a little bit this morning.
[18:34] <michagogo|cloud> infinity: reminds me: have you seen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5wpm-gesOY yet?
[18:35] <michagogo|cloud> This specific point seems relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5wpm-gesOY&t=4m18s
[18:35] <infinity> michagogo|cloud: Nope.  But given that (a) he's English, and (b) it's about timezones, I can only assume it'll be full of colourful language. ;)
[18:35] <michagogo|cloud> infinity: nah
[18:35] <infinity> Shame.
[18:35] <michagogo|cloud> Tom's videos are mostly pretty clean
[18:36] <Laney> Be glad that it's not about something which has already happened
[18:36] <michagogo|cloud> He's done a few for Computerphile, but he also does his own videos on his own channel
[18:36] <michagogo|cloud> Laney: hmm?
[18:38] <jpds> infinity: Got the OpenSSL exception in. ↑ :)
[18:38] <infinity> jpds: Snazzy.
[18:38] <infinity> jpds: Did you have problems explaining why that was necessary, or was it a low drama thing?
[18:39] <jpds> infinity: A little bit. Apparently libpam-mount doesn't have the exception.
[18:39] <seb128> infinity, hey, you don't want to do some trusty SRU reviews by any chance? ;-)
[18:40] <infinity> jpds: Fun.  That should be fixed.
[18:41] <seb128> infinity, I guess it's a no? :-(
[18:42] <infinity> seb128: I'll do some, yeah.
[18:42] <seb128> thanks
[18:42] <seb128> sorry for being nagging, but we have important fixes in the queue for almost 3 weeks
[18:42] <infinity> seb128: If this is specifically about gst and webkit, we've been chatting about those internally.
[18:43] <seb128> those are indeed the oldest one
[18:43] <seb128> but gst-libav fixes some of the most reported e.u.c issues
[18:43] <seb128> (totem thumbnailer hitting segfaults on building image for mkv files in nautilus)
[18:45] <infinity> seb128: Right, will have a poke today.
[18:45] <seb128> thanks
[18:49] <infinity> michagogo|cloud: Oh man, I didn't know about the West Bank split timezone.  That's utter madness.
[18:50] <arges> infinity: is it normal to have versions like "1.2.4-1~ubuntu1" (looking at the gst* stuff for trusty) I see 1.2.4-1 is already in utopic...
[18:51] <infinity> arges: Normal?  No.  But it sorts correctly, so it's certainly accetable from the archive's POV.
[18:51] <infinity> acceptable, too.
[18:52] <arges> infinity: ok yea I understand that... wasn't sure if we normally have versions with ~
[18:52] <infinity> The security team (and I) would probably argue that ~ubuntu0.14.04 is easier to understand, but meh.
[18:53] <infinity> arges: We use ~ all over the place.  It literally means "just before the preceding version atom".
[18:53] <michagogo|cloud> infinity: yeah, there's a related darwin award
[18:53] <michagogo|cloud> one sec
[18:53] <infinity> arges: So, -1 is >> -1~ but -0whee is << -1~
[18:53] <arges> infinity: cool. yup I use it as well.. just didn't want ot get the archive all dirty
[18:54] <michagogo|cloud> infinity: http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin1999-38.html
[19:48] <infinity> seb128: And when I said "I will look at it", clearly what I meant was "Chris will beat me to it".  But I'll look at more of the queue later to see if we can empty it (or close).
[19:48] <seb128> infinity, thanks ;-)
[20:06] <cyphermox> infinity: could you please look at urfkill in proposed? I'd like to fix the version number if possible ;)
[20:09] <infinity> cyphermox: Which series?
[20:09] <cyphermox> utopic, sorry
[20:09] <cyphermox> I should just upload a new version on top without the tilda
[20:10] <infinity> cyphermox: Erm, kay.  Nothing for me to look at there, there's no queue involved.
[20:11] <cyphermox> no, there isn't, sorry
[20:35] <rsalveti> trying to understand why dbus-cpp is still not promoted from proposed, and I see a failure at http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_output.txt but don't really know what that means
[20:37] <rsalveti> robru: any idea?
[20:37] <slangasek> rsalveti: well, there's an soname change; have the reverse-dependencies been rebuilt?
[20:38] <rsalveti> slangasek: not the entire rev-dep, no
[20:38] <rsalveti> is that needed for promotion?
[20:38] <slangasek> right, all the revdeps need to be rebuilt first so the packages can transition together
[20:38] <infinity> rsalveti: What's needed is that upgrading it doesn't cause those other packages to become uninstallable.
[20:38] <slangasek> looks like libconnectivity-cpp0 is the only one missing
[20:38] <slangasek> (based on the last error, at the bottom of the file)
[20:39] <rsalveti> right, but would libdbus-cpp2 be removed from the archive after the update?
[20:39] <slangasek> yes
[20:39] <rsalveti> right, got it
[20:39] <rsalveti> thought it'd stay until nobody is depending on it anymore
[20:39] <infinity> It does stay.
[20:40] <slangasek> mmm?  I thought we dealt with NBS in -proposed these days
[20:40] <slangasek> did cjwatson hack britney to do something different?
[20:40] <infinity> Britney assumes it'll be deleted.
[20:40] <infinity> It's still removed manually.
[20:40] <rsalveti> right
[20:41] <infinity> This makes things less painful in some cases.
[20:41] <infinity> But the transitions should mostly still happen in -proposed due to britney testing as if the binary was removed.
[20:41] <infinity> Which is good.
[20:41] <slangasek> ah; yet britney calculates the migrations using the assumption that it will be deleted
[20:41]  * slangasek nods
[20:42] <rsalveti> cool, thanks guys
[20:42] <infinity> Anyhow, just looks like a straight rebuild of connectivity-api is needed.
[20:42] <infinity> Or whatever that was.
[20:42] <rsalveti> yeah, checking that
[20:44] <infinity> rsalveti: In future, the easiest way to read update_output is to search for the source you care about, and then search backwards (so you get the last mention in the file).
[20:44] <rsalveti> yeah, I saw the failure in there, but thought that having the old package around would already be enough
[20:44] <infinity> rsalveti: That'll show the autohinter attempts which, in this case, shows:
[20:44] <infinity> leading: dbus-cpp,media-hub,location-service,platform-api
[20:44] <infinity>     * i386: libconnectivity-cpp-dev, libconnectivity-cpp0
[20:44] <infinity> Much less scary than the first hit you see, that tells you half the distro is broken because of dbus-cpp. ;)
[20:45] <rsalveti> right :-)
[20:56] <cjwatson> slangasek: right, partly this is because -proposed being a partial suite makes it tremendously painful to do anything else; but fortunately we get constrained into something that's roughly sane.  ish
[21:46] <bdmurray> infinity: I could add a phased_update_percentage switch if you want
[21:46] <infinity> bdmurray: Well, for today, I just hacked it for my needs.
[21:47] <bdmurray> slangasek: what do you think about release apport early? It'll mean slightly less database reapir work
[21:47] <infinity> bdmurray: But a switch for either initial-phase or just phased-on/off toggle would work.
[21:47] <bdmurray> slangasek: from trusty-proposed
[21:47] <infinity> bdmurray: That logic could be reused so that when calling with --security, we also don't phase.
[21:47] <infinity> bdmurray: (Since I assume we don't phase security, so it doesn't make sense to phase the updates copy)
[21:47] <bdmurray> infinity: we don't phased when called with security
[21:48] <infinity> bdmurray: Oh, no?  Kay.
[21:48] <infinity> bdmurray: That's not how I read the code.
[21:49] <infinity> bdmurray: The way I read it, it'll phase to -updates, but not -security, which makes less sense.
[21:49] <infinity> Oh, no.
[21:49] <infinity> I missed that if.
[21:49] <bdmurray>                 if (release not in ['lucid', 'precise', 'quantal'] and
[21:49] <bdmurray>                         not options.security):
[21:49] <infinity> Yeah.
[21:49] <infinity> Derp.
[21:49] <infinity> I missed that cause it was also the series check.
[21:51] <slangasek> bdmurray: how well exercised is the fix for bug #1282349?  That's the only one that looks intrusive enough to make me worry about early release
[21:54] <bdmurray> well its been in utopic for a couple of weeks now and the fixed package version doesn't appear in the errors bucket - https://errors.ubuntu.com/bucket/?id=/usr/share/apport/apport-gtk%3AEOFError%3A%3Clambda%3E%3Acollect_info%3Aexc_raise%3Arun%3Athread_collect_info%3Aadd_gdb_info%3Agdb_command%3Awrite%3Aread%3A_read%3A_read_eof%3A_read_exact
[21:55] <slangasek> bdmurray: ok, +1
[23:18] <bdmurray> infinity: https://code.launchpad.net/~brian-murray/ubuntu-archive-tools/set-phased-update-percentage/+merge/219444
[23:42] <darkxst> can bijiben and gnome-boxes be dropped from -proposed? they auto-synced but require gtk 3.12