[00:00] <xnox> "I've stopped using it, once it started to perpetually FTBFS with new monos"
[00:00] <RAOF> Of course, some of this was because the 0.95.1-1 upload which fixed this sat in pkg-cli-apps git for 6 months waiting to be uploaded.
[00:01] <RAOF> I probably responded that I'd fixed that.
[00:01] <RAOF> Just hadn't shepherded it through to the distro :(
[00:04] <xnox> =(((((((((
[00:05]  * RAOF wonders what others think about a 0.95.1 “SRU” :)
[00:06] <slangasek> RAOF: sorry, your project begins with "g" and "o", but there are too many letters in the middle for us to sign off on this SRU exception
[00:06] <slangasek> and ends with "o", I mean
[00:07]  * xnox thinks of no SRUs for odoo -> yes!
[06:20] <infinity> slangasek: ^
[06:55] <infinity> cjwatson: ^--- And this one's for you.
[07:04] <slangasek> infinity: there ya go
[09:01] <ginggs> arges, RAOF: nvidia-graphics-drivers-* have been sitting in Trusty unapproved queue for some time now, would someone take a look, please?
[09:52] <xnox> soyuz rejected https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/llvm-toolchain-snapshot/1:3.5~svn213451-1ubuntu1/+build/6211716 and i don't understand why =(
[09:53] <cjwatson> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/utopic/i386/clang-3.5
[09:53] <xnox> oh.
[09:53] <xnox> right.
[09:53] <wgrant> Yeah, that.
[09:54] <cjwatson> looks like doko synced over the top of your change
[09:54] <cjwatson> so then retrying wouldn't have worked
[09:56] <xnox> i think llvm-toolchain-snapshot should be removed then, no?
[09:56] <xnox> (until at least a 3.6 snapshot is available)
[09:58] <cjwatson> oh a different source is it
[09:58] <cjwatson> dunno
[10:07] <xnox> i guess it will just end up in nbs, cause llvm-toolchain-3.5 package version are >> llvm-toolchain-snapshot.
[10:14] <xnox> here it comes!
[10:27] <doko> xnox, are you working on llvm-toolchain-3.5?
[10:27] <xnox> doko: yes, i'm compiling one on porter now.
[10:28] <doko> xnox, please disable lldb on ppc64el
[10:28] <xnox> enabled gold, disabled lldb since clearly broken.
[10:28] <xnox> doko: yes =)
[10:45] <xnox> built, tests running & docs building
[12:34] <doko> ^^^ please could somebody review this?
[13:54] <arges> ginggs: i can take a look
[13:58] <cjwatson> infinity: ^-
[13:59] <infinity> Ta.
[14:20] <ginggs> arges: thanks!
[14:21] <arges> ginggs: so i actually started taking a look at it, I'm not much of an expert on nvidia packaging etc. Reading up there was some concern about multi-arch aware issues, is that still a problem?
[14:22] <arges> ginggs: and also should bug 1317528 be a duplicate of 1247736 ?
[14:24] <ginggs> arges: no, we need to add libopencl1-1.1-1 at some point, but right now there is nothing in the archive that needs libopencl-1.1-1 to be installable
[14:26] <doko> arges, ginggs: while you are at it ... there is acomponent mismatch in this package, bumblebee
[14:30] <ginggs> doku: i don't follow
[14:36] <arges> doko: i wish i knew more about nvidia/bumblebee stuff, but I was merely reviewing the nvidia-graphics-drivers-* update in the SRU queue : )
[15:18] <jamespage> can someone explain to me why the mongodb upload I did for utopic is still in proposed? it looks OK from the migration_excuses report...
[15:18] <cjwatson> excuses is just stage one
[15:18] <cjwatson> update_output.txt says:
[15:18] <cjwatson> trying: mongodb
[15:18] <cjwatson> skipped: mongodb (30 <- 34)
[15:18] <cjwatson>     got: 39+0: i-39
[15:18] <cjwatson>     * i386: mongodb, python-loofah
[15:19] <cjwatson> meaning "the new version is uninstallable" (and so is python-loofah, but that's probably just because it Depends: mongodb)
[15:20] <cjwatson> Quite why that is I'm not completely certain
[15:22] <jamespage> cjwatson, ah
[15:26] <rbasak> jamespage: mongodb 1:2.6.3-0ubuntu3 depends on mongodb-dev, which was built by mongodb but is no longer, and doesn't exist in utopic-proposed. I'm not sure if that's intended; could that be your problem?
[15:27] <rbasak> Or would mongodb-dev end up NBS but still in Utopic?
[15:28] <cjwatson> Oh, mongodb-dev went away?  Right, that would explain it
[15:28] <cjwatson> While a migration would cause NBS to remain until manually cleared, proposed-migration defaults to assuming that all NBS are cleared when calculating its answers
[15:29] <rbasak> Useful to know - thanks
[15:29] <cjwatson> Occasionally we'd override that.  Generally I prefer not to
[16:02] <arges> cjwatson: hey, how does the urgency field affect uploads in Ubuntu? i'm reviewing a package (nova) where the patch modifies the urgency from medium to high... should i reject and ask for it to remain the same?
[16:06] <cjwatson> arges: negligible
[16:06] <xnox> arges: it gives a tiny build score bump. Each urgency is per upload, so only the top one matters. The default these days is medium.
[16:06] <cjwatson> it makes like a tiny difference to the build priority
[16:06] <cjwatson> I don't see why you'd patch this, though
[16:07] <cjwatson> The urgency is per-changelog-entry
[16:07] <cjwatson> You wouldn't patch an old one
[16:07] <arges> i guess from an SRU perspective should I ask that it be changed back to 'medium' before accepting?
[16:07] <cjwatson> no
[16:07] <cjwatson> as long as it's an entirely new changelog with urgency=high, who cares
[16:07] <cjwatson> I might whinge about patching an existing changelog entry
[16:07] <arges> yea, its only in the new entry
[16:07] <infinity> I've uploaded SRUs with urgency=critical
[16:08] <infinity> arges: So, if it's in the new entry, it's not being "changed", that's just the urgency set for that specific upload.
[16:08] <infinity> arges: Nothing wrong with that, even if it's a feature LP users almost never use.
[16:08] <arges> Ok
[16:08] <arges> thanks!
[16:35] <Laney> I'm pushing the freeze block a bit earlier than I said because I'm going out for dinner here at GUADEC
[16:35] <cjwatson> no skin off my nose, we got libav in ;-)
[16:36] <Laney> I got the migration emails - good work :-)
[16:38] <cjwatson> update_output is in danger of making sense again
[16:40] <Laney> respins going
[16:40] <Laney> stgraber: I forgot if I have to update the manifest or not
[16:40] <cjwatson> looks like rebuild-requests does everything in parallel - good
[16:42] <Laney> stgraber: Would you be able to do that for me if so? Nobody replied so assuming the same as A1
[16:42]  * Laney is off, ttyl
[16:57] <stgraber> Laney: if it's the same as a1, no changes are needed to the manifest
[17:44] <slangasek> that's some rapid-fire NEWing
[17:44] <slangasek> is that intentional?
[17:45] <cjwatson> I don't know about qtmir/qtmir-gles.  For binaries I routinely wave through new binaries from Debian syncs
[17:45] <cjwatson> With basically just a cursory override check and a bit of automation to ensure they're really from Debian
[17:45] <slangasek> right
[17:46] <slangasek> baloo-kf5, python-idna, qtmir were accepted near-simultaneously though
[17:46] <slangasek> and were not Debian syncs
[18:31] <phanimahesh> Any idea why http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/meta-release-lts hasn't been updated with 14.04.1?
[18:33] <phanimahesh> Prolly everyone's asleep, hoping someone will pick the message.
[18:37] <phanimahesh> teward, mhall119: Pinging you to make sure someone gets the message, you're one of the few faces familiar to me here. Please look at it when you guys wake up.
[19:07] <mhall119> thanks phanimahesh, I'll poke somebody about it
[19:10] <robru> is anybody around to force unity-system-settings through despite the arch regression?
[19:14] <Saviq> ubuntu-system-settings
[19:14] <Saviq> FWIW ↑ this only worked before because there was a missing Depends that would have caused this to happen some time ago already
[19:15] <Saviq> and the reason is it depends (indirectly) on Mir, which is not available on the other arches
[19:15] <phanimahesh> mhall119: nm, was doing routine sysadm tasks planning to upgrade and found that my servers aren't detecting new lts release. That led me there.
[19:15] <phanimahesh> Thanks. :)
[19:19] <Saviq> kgunn, our hands are tied, we need someone here to pick this up, /me logs off for dinner, back later to a hopefully resolved situation
[19:22] <kgunn> Saviq: ta
[19:22] <kgunn> and thanks for pointing out
[19:30] <robru> stgraber, slangasek: anybody around? ^^
[19:36] <slangasek> phanimahesh, mhall119: http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/meta-release-lts hasn't been updated because we're awaiting infinity's confirmation that we're ready to enable the upgrades