[02:36] <stgraber> infinity: that's the change which switches everyone to lxdbr0 and removes the dependency on old lxc and its bridge ^
[02:37] <stgraber> I'll tag and upload a new usptream rc soon but figured it'd be easier to have the packaging bits uploaded separately as they are pretty complex on their own
[02:37] <stgraber> (not as horrific as some of that stuff slangasek has been working on lately though :))
[02:38] <stgraber> I tested upgrade from current version and clean installs on both xenial and trusty, then doing a subsequent upgrade to confirm that things don't needlessly re-trigger, then tried a reconfigure and confirmed that everything does re-trigger in that case
[08:58] <flexiondotorg> Laney, Any chance I can get a release team ack on this? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-mate-meta/+bug/1565709
[08:58] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 1565709 in ubuntu-mate-meta (Ubuntu) "FFe: Please updated ubuntu-mate-meta to add ubuntu-snappy-cli" [Undecided,New]
[09:02] <Laney> flexiondotorg: looks fine
[09:02] <flexiondotorg> Laney, Thanks.
[09:05] <xnox> Laney, any idea which go/juju people to bug about bug #1566200
[09:05] <ubot5`> bug 1566200 in golang-github-juju-loggo (Ubuntu) "package golang-github-juju-loggo-dev (not installed) failed to install/upgrade: trying to overwrite '/usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/juju/loggo/package_test.go', which is also in package golang-juju-loggo-dev 0.0~git20150318-0ubuntu1" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1566200
[09:08] <Laney> xnox: I would try this person https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang-juju-loggo/0.0~git20150318-0ubuntu1
[09:08] <Laney> ;-)
[09:08] <xnox> Laney, that's old working package, something else is uploaded as a conflict of that.
[09:09] <infinity> Kinda looks like it's a rename without Conflicts/Replaces.
[09:09] <Laney> the old package was Ubuntu only
[09:09] <infinity> Yeahp, so we need an Ubuntu delta for 3 weeks with a C/R, then we can drop it in 16.10
[09:10] <Laney> xnox: or this guy https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/xenial-changes/2016-March/010537.html
[09:10] <Laney> or you could probably JFDI
[09:10] <xnox> lol
[09:11] <xnox> i was hoping to punt it on some other team.... not like my manager or the ex-team member
[09:11] <xnox> *sigh*
[09:11] <Laney> haha
[09:20] <infinity> xnox: A Conflict/Replace takes 5 seconds, JFDI. :P
[09:20] <infinity> xnox: And you can sync over it the next time Debian revs (post-release, that is).
[09:32] <mwhudson> yay for multiple packagings of go libraries
[12:58] <doko> infinity, powerpc-utils ftbfs, did you intend to sync/merge?
[14:37] <tyhicks> hello!/win 35
[14:37] <tyhicks> bah
[14:38] <tyhicks> I was wanting to ask if the apparmor FFe is on anyone's list to be looked at?
[14:38] <tyhicks> https://launchpad.net/bugs/1561762
[14:38] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 1561762 in apparmor (Ubuntu) "[FFe] AppArmor 2.11 Beta 1 for policy namespace stacking and bug fixes" [Critical,New]
[14:42] <davmor2> tyhicks: let me guess you use irssi
[14:43] <tyhicks> you are correct :)
[14:45] <Ukikie> One could always link http://niklas.laxstrom.name/page/eng/irssi >_>
[15:14] <awe> I was wondering if anyone could comment on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/1552424
[15:14] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 1552424 in network-manager-vpnc (Ubuntu) "[FFE] NetworkManager 1.2-beta" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[15:14] <awe> seb128, ^^
[15:14] <seb128> awe, thanks
[15:15] <seb128> cyphermox got busy with other things and nobody picked up the ball to push that one forward
[15:15] <seb128> but it would be really good to get in xenial
[15:15] <cyphermox> that's why he's asking ;)
[15:16] <seb128> unsure what was missing to get it reviewed
[15:16] <cyphermox> seb128: I suppose we just need to make sure it's ok with the release team to land so late
[15:16] <seb128> stgraber and pitti commented on it but it didn't get acked (yet)
[15:16] <cyphermox> right
[15:16] <seb128> cyphermox, right, I've been talking to awe about it
[15:16] <awe> I confirmed that there are applet icon issues with vpn
[15:16] <seb128> just trying to get people from here to re-review it and +1
[15:16] <awe> and that openvpn is currently broken
[15:16] <awe> trying to verify whether it's also broken on the touch images
[15:16] <cyphermox> awe: well, needs to be fixed before landing, obviously
[15:17] <awe> cyphermox, sure... just mentioning what I found out yesterday, as it wasn't super clear from the FFe bug what the current status was
[15:32] <stgraber> seb128: looks like the release team isn't subscribed to the bug, so that's probably why I didn't see the rest of that discussion
[15:32] <seb128> oh, that would explain why :p
[15:33] <seb128> stgraber, do you think it's still realistic to get that in?
[15:37] <stgraber> I'm a bit torn, on the one hand I know that getting us to 1.2 will make maintenance of 16.04 massively easier and it will fix a bunch of things people have been complaining about for a long time (multiple vpns and the like). On the other hand, NM version upgrades haven't gone so well in the past and I don't like shipping non-final versions of critical infrastructure bits in a LTS.
[15:37] <stgraber> the obvious problem being that if there is a bad bug affecting some set of hardware, which say, crashes NM immediately, those folks will have no way to get the fix, seeing how they need NM to work to connect to the network in the first place
[15:40] <seb128> stgraber, the 1.2 stable should be out this week or next if I remember correct what awe said
[15:41] <seb128> also LTS users mostly upgrade on .1
[15:41] <seb128> so it gives some bugfixing cycles
[15:43] <stgraber> seb128: I'm more concerned about the release iso image that users upgrading
[15:43] <seb128> yeah, I can understand that
[15:44] <seb128> we still have some weeks to fix bugs though, and then SRU to .1 which gets a new iso
[15:44] <seb128> but yeah, agreed, it would have been better done earlier
[15:44] <seb128> would it be more practical to do 1.2 as a SRU?
[15:46]  * awe is listening, but is participating in another mtg
[15:56] <stgraber> seb128: haha, no
[15:56] <stgraber> if we do 1.2 for 16.04, it's got to be before release, there are so many moving pieces and dbus changes that we really can't do that post-release
[15:57] <stgraber> seb128: ok, so has that VPN bug mentioned in the FFe been fixed? and if so, when would we have packages ready for upload?
[15:57] <awe> no it hasn't been fixed
[15:57] <awe> I will try and reproduce today on the phone
[15:58] <stgraber> if we are doing this, we're going to need that stuff uploaded ASAP so we have maximum user exposure before release
[15:58] <awe> cyphermox's packages aren't up-to-date w/upstream
[15:58] <seb128> awe, why on the phone? wouldn't be easier to do on desktop?
[15:58] <stgraber> I would have really liked to have it before the beta but it's too late for that now
[15:58] <awe> I've verified it's broken on desktop
[15:58] <awe> I have a later verison on the phone
[15:58] <seb128> stgraber, right, which is sort of why I'm rebooting the discussion while awe is looking at the update/issues
[15:58] <seb128> yeah, me too
[15:58] <awe> and want to see if it's fixed in my version or not
[15:58] <seb128> I though cyphermox was going to do
[15:58] <seb128> awe, k
[15:59] <seb128> the first step might be to update the ppa to beta3
[15:59] <awe> yes, that would be a good step
[15:59] <awe> I'm current with beta3 for the phone, which is why I was going to try and test the vpn issue on the phone
[16:00] <awe> although I don't yet have the openvpn package built for the phone yet, and will need to work with cyphermox on that
[16:14] <utlemming> hey...could I get an archive admin to ack in walinuxagent for -proposed for p and t?
[16:34] <ypwong> Laney, ping
[16:34] <slangasek> utlemming: well, you want the SRU team, not the archive admins for that?https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Publishing says it's RAOF on Tuesday, but it's no longer Tuesday where he is, whoops.  I can try to take a look a bit later
[16:35] <utlemming> slangasek: thanks, most appreciated :)
[16:35] <utlemming> I was told to pop in here to make the ask by SRU team member
[16:35] <slangasek> uhm
[16:36] <slangasek> utlemming: it's not a new package, it's a package in the SRU queue, so I'm not sure why you would've been directed to the archive admins
[16:36] <utlemming> slangasek: not sure either
[16:46] <ypwong> slangasek, hi steve, is it still okay to accept these packages to xenial? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1546967
[16:46] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 1546967 in Linux Backports "[FFe] [needs-packaging] linux backports and related meta packages" [High,New]
[18:08] <infinity> doko: Yeah, powerpc-utils is being futzed with here.
[21:48] <tjaalton> if someone's wondering about the new mesa version on the queue, it has a ffe and it's been tested via x-staging ppa for weeks
[21:54] <stgraber> that lxd upload is a super-trivial packaging change
[21:57] <stgraber> doko: why do you have a .dsc file inside that unbound upload? :)
[21:59] <doko> stgraber, because dpkg leaves temporary files when you cancel the signing