[06:02] <Mirv> jamesh: publishing mediascanner2
[06:02] <jamesh> Mirv: thanks.
[07:34] <jgdx> Mirv, any idea why [1] wasn't merged/published? I usually don't do that, but should I? [1] https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/611
[07:38] <Mirv> jgdx: you could, but I would have published it if it would have showed at https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/#/publishable
[07:38] <Mirv> I'm not sure right away why it's not shown like that, there's no error state either (or dirty flag)
[07:39] <Mirv> jgdx: ok, it's published! merging after xenial migrates from proposed to release pocket.
[07:45] <jgdx> Mirv, thanks :)
[07:57] <oSoMoN> trainguards: good morning! can the xenial armhf build of webbrowser-app be retried in silo 39 please?
[08:29] <oSoMoN> trainguards: nevermind my previous request, I’ve added a branch to the silo and am rebuilding it
[08:57] <Mirv> oSoMoN: ok :)
[09:07] <Davmor2> jibel our isp is completely down, no TV internet or phone line 😞
[09:08] <Davmor2> jibel could you let Tao know please
[09:08] <Davmor2> trying to rig something up
[09:15] <jibel> Davmor2, okay, good luck with that
[09:50] <oSoMoN> trainguards: can the xenial armhf build of webbrowser-app be retried in silo 39 please?
[10:14] <sil2100> oSoMoN: done
[10:15] <oSoMoN> sil2100, thanks
[10:22] <rvr> popey: ping
[10:22] <popey> rvr, pong!
[10:22] <rvr> popey: I found some issues while testing reminders https://trello.com/c/NljolsaY/2457-342-reminders-popey
[10:23] <popey> oh, thanks rvr, I'll take a look
[11:48] <Mirv> oSoMoN: seems the currently running armhf builds are again both successful (both past the failure points)?
[11:48] <Mirv> oSoMoN: happened to notice you kicked yet another build
[11:49] <oSoMoN> Mirv, yes, I removed a branch from the silo which I suspected triggered the failure, and indeed the builds are successful now, so now I know which branch to blame
[11:49] <Mirv> oSoMoN: ok
[11:51] <jibel> rvr, I don't see  any update on silo 1, didyou get any feedback?
[11:51] <rvr> jibel: Nope
[11:52] <rvr> mardy: Did you see this? https://trello.com/c/vijFD6JO/2439-591-ubuntu-landing-001-online-accounts-api-dbarth
[12:23] <mardy> rvr: yes, it's because I actually added a workaround to the click package not to crash, let me reupload a non-patched click
[12:23] <rvr> mardy: Ah
[12:27] <mardy> rvr: ok, can you try redownloading the click now?
[12:28] <rvr> mardy: Same URL? http://mardy.it/archivos/it.mardy.uploader_0.3_armhf.click
[12:29] <mardy> rvr: yes
[12:30] <rvr> Downloaded
[13:54] <kgunn> sil2100: hey, so who on the team would you talk to if you needed to make sure you had the right kernel for a device (flo/n7 in this case) in order to rebuild for debug ?
[13:54] <kgunn> sil2100: is it just the aosp kernel? or do we have patches somewhere (i suspect)
[13:55] <sil2100> kgunn: hmmm, flo you say...
[13:55] <kgunn> sil2100: yep
[13:56] <sil2100> kgunn: I think the best and quickest bet is john-mcaleely, as he would at least know who to poke further - I think he also did the flo/mako device tarballs
[13:56] <john-mcaleely> flo/mako? morphis :-)
[13:58] <kgunn> ah...
[14:00] <sil2100> Ah, right, morphis is working on that now :)
[14:23] <morphis> kgunn: the source is on http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git/ubuntu/ubuntu-vivid.git/log/?h=flo
[16:12] <rvr> dbarth: mardy: Approving silo 2 (location service)
[16:13] <mardy> rvr: \o/
[16:16] <jibel> AlbertA, kgunn silo 18 approved
[16:16] <AlbertA> jibel: thanks!
[16:17] <kgunn> cool
[16:17] <kgunn> trainguards is there going to be any issue with silo 18 migrating ? has arm64/ppcel fails for Xenial only
[16:21] <dbarth> rvr: \o/
[16:42] <jibel> dbarth, are you publishing silo 2?
[17:00] <dbarth> jibel: just finishing my call, and yes, publishing now
[18:23] <robru> slangasek: would you consider bumping the priority of this rt? https://rt.admin.canonical.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=86240 staging deployment is horribly broken and this time not blocked by something I can back out.
[18:26] <slangasek> robru: done
[18:26] <robru> slangasek: thanks
[18:44] <rvr> kgunn: Silo 44 is approved, needs someone to publish it
[18:50] <kgunn> rvr: ta
[18:52] <kgunn> trainguards we have silo 18 approved...but it had Xenial ppc/arm64 failures (see the comments)
[18:52] <kgunn> i noticed it doens't appear as publishable
[18:52] <kgunn> but can i ask that still be published ?
[19:20] <robru> kgunn: well if those failures are regressions on those arches then it won't make it through proposed, no
[19:21] <robru> kgunn: I don't understand why qa would even look at a silo that's in a failed state.
[19:27] <robru> kgunn: I'm afraid you're going to either have to fix those failures & rebuild & re-qa, or ask #ubuntu-release really, really nicely if they'll let you regress on those arches.
[19:27] <AlbertA> robru: arm64 has a linker bug we can't do anything about at the moment: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/binutils/+bug/1511542
[19:28] <robru> AlbertA: ok. so I'm saying if this gets published as-is it'll just sit in -proposed until that gets fixed.
[19:28] <AlbertA> robru: could we publish the vivid+overlay part? I guess that's more pressing than xenial
[19:29] <robru> AlbertA: I'm finding this "let's break xenial because we only care about vivid" attitude really troubling.
[19:30] <AlbertA> robru: newsflash xenial is broken
[19:30] <AlbertA> robru: in arm64
[19:30] <robru> AlbertA: ok well if you can get a core dev to publish the silo, I can force merge it and we can just let the xenial packages sit in proposed then.
[19:32] <robru> AlbertA: remember trainguards don't publish anymore, so just try publishing it yourself and then if you're not allowed (because there's a packaging diff), then find a core dev.
[19:32] <AlbertA> robru: ok sounds good
[19:53] <robru> slangasek: want to skip 1:1 because we just had the sprint?
[19:57] <slangasek> robru: if you don't have anything for today, we can skip
[19:58] <robru> slangasek: yep, let's skip
[20:01] <kgunn> network fun
[20:01] <kgunn> robru: it's my understanding from AlbertA we were victims on those, arm64
[20:02] <slangasek> I see "xenial is broken on arm64" in scrollback; what does this refer to?
[20:02] <robru> kgunn: right, while you were off I said you could publish & then I'd force-merge to ignore the packages getting stuck in proposed
[20:02] <AlbertA> slangasek: https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/634
[20:02] <robru> slangasek: mir fails to build in xenial on arm64
[20:02] <AlbertA> slangasek: sorry, this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/binutils/+bug/1511542
[20:02] <robru> slangasek: and they want to publish this anyway because they claim it's not their fault
[20:03] <slangasek> if it's a binutils bug, it's indeed not their fault
[20:03] <slangasek> however, that bug is fixed in xenial
[20:03] <kgunn> ...."allegedly" :)
[20:03] <kgunn> slangasek: probably just lag in the landing pipe
[20:03] <AlbertA> slangasek: recently? so just rebuild again?
[20:03] <slangasek> AlbertA: it was fixed on Friday IIRC
[20:03] <kgunn> yep
[20:03] <kgunn> makes sense
[20:03] <robru> AlbertA: ok but don't do a build in the train, I'll retry the arch
[20:03] <slangasek> and the bug state in LP shows all of this
[20:06] <AlbertA> robru: thanks!
[20:06] <robru> AlbertA: you're welcome
[20:07] <robru> AlbertA: kgunn: I noticed there was also a failure on ppc64el, is that the same issue?
[20:07] <kgunn> that was a timeout afiak
[20:07] <kgunn> afaik even
[20:08] <robru> kgunn: so should work on a rebuild? I tried it, we'll se
[20:08] <slangasek> +1 :)
[20:08] <AlbertA> robru: kgunn: right
[20:11]  * robru --> lunch
[22:49] <sil2100> ogra_: hey! Could you review and approve/merge https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/livecd-rootfs/fix-apt-lists-rm-hook/+merge/273117 ?
[22:49] <sil2100> ogra_: it's already present and working on our vivid images
[22:49] <robru> sil2100: good got how are you awake?
[22:50] <sil2100> robru: still doing some clean up ;) It's not so late here, wanted to finish up some things as we have a holiday tomorrow
[22:52] <robru> kenvandine: are content-hub's autopkgtests new in xenial?
[22:53] <robru> kenvandine: or atleast new since vivid