[02:51] <slangasek> infinity: should casper and livecd-rootfs be using xz-utils instead of lzma?
[02:55] <infinity> slangasek: And dell-recovery probably, yeah.
[06:33] <doko> pitti, unable to give back autopkg tests, timing out
[07:02] <pitti> doko: yes, autopkgtests.u.c. seems to be down, looking
[07:02] <pitti> i. e. just the debci frontend, the machinery works
[07:02] <pitti> doko: as soon as the queue settles, I'm going to mass-retry all the failures, though
[07:08] <pitti> oh, OOM killer
[09:25] <Odd_Bloke> Why is Vivid still listed as Supported (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/vivid/)?  (Snappy?)
[09:28] <apw> Odd_Bloke, yes, that is snappy related, not sure if that status can change or not and keep that side working
[09:29] <xnox> Odd_Bloke, and because Ubuntu Touch is on vivid too
[09:29] <xnox> Odd_Bloke, note how vivid is not gone from the mirrors.
[09:29] <Laney> vivid was a vintage release
[09:30] <Laney> top quality packages
[09:30] <Laney> good sun that year
[09:30] <xnox> Odd_Bloke, use distro-info / distro-info-data, don't trust launchpad. it's supported to keep PPAs working for phone landings.
[09:30] <xnox> Laney, approved by all hipsters in Hoxton
[10:43] <pitti> I'm sure to the kernel team it feels more like venomous viper by now ;)
[10:43] <apw> pitti, :)
[10:44]  * ogra_ thought lag moved to linaro ... 
[10:45] <ogra_> (oh, wait, he colletc cobras, not vipers)
[10:45] <ogra_> *collects
[12:15] <flexiondotorg> Laney or infinity Now I have PPU for some Ubuntu MATE packages, what does the SRU process look like?
[12:15] <flexiondotorg> Do I file an SRU and get a release team ack and then upload? Or can upload directly?
[12:17] <pitti> flexiondotorg: file an SRU bug and upload
[12:17] <flexiondotorg> pitti, So file SRU and then upload without ack?
[12:17] <pitti> flexiondotorg: yes, it'll be held in the unapproved queue anyway, where the sru team will review it
[12:18] <flexiondotorg> pitti, Thanks.
[13:42] <flexiondotorg> infinity, I tried upload ubuntu-mate-welcome to xenial for an SRU and I was rejected.
[13:45] <rbasak> flexiondotorg: when I first got upload rights, I discovered that packagesets are per-release. Which I agree is a pain :-/
[13:46] <rbasak> Unless there's some reason not to, it would make sense to add you to those packages for Xenial as well, since that's what we agreed. I don't know how though.
[13:46]  * rbasak should probably learn that.
[13:47] <flexiondotorg> rbasak, I was informed during the DMB meeting that the PPU would be applied to Xenial and Yakkety.
[13:47] <flexiondotorg> SO I can maintain Xenial.
[13:48] <rbasak> flexiondotorg: agreed, that's what I mean.
[14:50] <infinity> flexiondotorg: My bad, I haven't set up the packageset yet.  I'll get to that right after my morning meeting.
[14:51] <infinity> flexiondotorg: I'll ping you when it's done so you can try again.
[15:20] <bzoltan_> infinity: would you pleas re-trigget the autopkg test for this https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/static/britney/vivid/landing-047/excuses.html
[15:22] <flexiondotorg> infinity, Cheers.
[15:25] <infinity> pitti: Remind me of the syntax for nudging the non-archive autopkgtests? ^^
[15:27] <pitti> infinity: retry-autopkgtest-regressions --ci-train landing-047 -s vivid
[15:27] <pitti> infinity: that'll generate the commands to stdout
[15:29] <infinity> pitti: Shiny.
[15:29] <infinity> bzoltan_: Done.
[15:30] <bzoltan_> infinity:  thank you
[15:33] <slangasek> grah.  what is pulling ocl-icd into main?  seeded-in-ubuntu claims it's 'supported' and grep of the seeds disagrees
[15:38] <slangasek> oh. not in main, but in restricted, right
[15:39] <infinity> nvidia-opencl-icd-304 might belong in multiverse.
[15:39] <infinity> Oh, but nvidia-XXX recommends nvidia-opencl-icd-XXX
[15:40] <infinity> So that would need fixing if we wanted to demote.
[15:41] <ginggs> infinity, slangasek: we need the icd from nvidia, but the icd loader from ocl-icd
[15:41] <slangasek> infinity: I don't have a specific reason to demote, I was just being confused when analyzing unowned packages in "main" because restricted != main
[15:41] <infinity> ginggs: No one's questioning the package selection, just the supported status. :)
[15:42] <slangasek> though I see it's pulling more dependencies now
[15:42] <infinity> slangasek: Ahh, fair enough.
[15:42] <slangasek> (c-m, this morning)
[15:42] <infinity> slangasek: c-m could try to be a bit more clear about the non-free components, I suspect.
[15:42] <slangasek> infinity: and my local why-in-main script could be smarter ;)
[15:42] <infinity> (As could other tools)
[15:43] <slangasek> 'reverse-depends -c main src:ocl-icd' <nothing> Whhhhyyyyyyy
[15:43] <ginggs> infinity: sure, i just know that the naming of these packages is terrible and I've worked with them a bit, so i might be able to clarify what goes with what
[15:44] <infinity> slangasek: Maybe we should simplify your script by proposing a GR to drop non-free.
[15:44] <slangasek> infinity: I am submitting an amendment to this GR to replace the word "non-free" with "acid"
[15:45] <infinity> Duuuuuuuuuude.
[16:34] <infinity> flexiondotorg: Try that SRU upload again.
[16:51] <infinity> flexiondotorg: http://paste.ubuntu.com/16102589/ <-- Double-check that for me?  If it looks sane, I'll copy it forward to yakkety.
[16:53] <infinity> flexiondotorg: Looks like it matches your list, I just re-checked myself.  So, copying.
[16:54] <infinity> flexiondotorg: And done.
[18:14] <bzoltan_> folks, I got a little problem :) Vivid is removed from the http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-core/releases/
[18:15] <bzoltan_> but I still need a core image of Vivid
[18:15] <nacc> bzoltan_: why? vivid is EOL?
[18:16] <bzoltan_> nacc: I know, but the Ubuntu Phone is still based on Vivid
[18:16] <bzoltan_> nacc: and I need to create an SDK image for it, what is based on a core image
[18:17] <bzoltan_> is this any good? http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-core/vivid/daily-preinstalled/current/vivid-preinstalled-core-amd64.tar.gz
[18:19] <infinity> bzoltan_: Lemme slap vivid core on old-releases, that should sort you out.
[18:19] <nacc> bzoltan_: or maybe it's at: http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-touch/vivid/daily-preinstalled/ ?
[18:19] <bzoltan_> infinity: that would be great
[18:19] <nacc> (-touch rather -core)
[18:20] <bzoltan_> nacc:  good hint, I will try the touch too
[18:20] <infinity> bzoltan_: If you use the ubuntu-core tarball, the touch images won't be much use.
[18:21] <bzoltan_> infinity: I used to use the core image to patch it with all the SDK API and toolchain pckages.
[18:22] <infinity> bzoltan_: Yeah, sec.  Resurrecting.
[18:22] <infinity> http://old-releases.ubuntu.com/releases/vivid/
[18:22] <infinity> bzoltan_: ^
[18:22] <bzoltan_> infinity:  thank you!
[18:23]  * infinity notes upon seeing them in the same directory for the first time that his core naming is inconsistent with other products... Oops.
[19:14] <bzoltan_> infinity:  sorry to bug you with my problems today :) You might now apt better then me... How is it possible that a package fails to install due to a  strange dependency problem, but the dependency can indeed be installed ->http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/16118469/
[19:14] <bzoltan_> That happens when a developer tries to bootstrap a click chroot for the phone
[19:15] <bzoltan_> cjwatson: you might have some idea ^
[19:17] <nacc> bzoltan_: maybe try `apt-get install ubuntu-sdk-libs:armhf ubuntu-html5-container:armhf` as it might be further down the chain
[19:17] <nacc> that is the conflict is if it installed the latter, the former becomes uninstallable or something
[19:17] <nacc> bzoltan_: as you haven't yet installed the original package in that pastebin :)
[19:43] <infinity> bzoltan_: Indeed, as nacc suggests, try installing both together.
[20:03] <bzoltan_> infinity: nacc: no problem when I install both
[20:05] <nacc> bzoltan_: ok, it's hard to say what apt thought, can you get back to the original state (with the second package not installed)? and see if apt will let you specify both? not sure why it's happening otherwise
[21:46] <lamont> infinity: since you are my favoritest one.... can you help me understand how xenial has not come to live in http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/meta-release-lts
[21:48] <nacc> lamont: i assume it won't until 16.04.1
[21:48] <nacc> so as to avoid suggesting LTS -> LTS upgrades before then?
[21:48] <lamont> oh, right.
[21:49] <lamont> now all is clear... I'll just go crawl back into my corner and pretend I didn't forget that feature of LTS
[21:50] <lamont> and it's so sad that dapper never got a .1 :D
[21:50] <nacc> heh
[21:50] <ogra_> it had a .6 !
[21:50] <ogra_> (well, .06 technically)
[21:57] <pitti> see, not bigger than .1 :)