| Trevinho | tjaalton, slangasek: hey, could you please publish compiz and unity SRUs that have just hit the queue: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/xenial/+queue?queue_state=1 ? | 12:52 |
|---|---|---|
| tjaalton | Trevinho: it's too fresh for sru-review | 13:00 |
| tjaalton | and I'm about to EOD | 13:01 |
| seb128 | tjaalton, you mean? | 13:01 |
| tjaalton | ERROR: queue does not have a debdiff | 13:01 |
| Trevinho | tjaalton: it won't have it, since it's a ppa sync | 13:01 |
| seb128 | it's not going to | 13:01 |
| seb128 | what Trevinho said | 13:01 |
| tjaalton | what's the rush? | 13:01 |
| seb128 | none I guess | 13:02 |
| Trevinho | tjaalton: various xenial fixes | 13:02 |
| Trevinho | but, ok... I just wanted to clear the queu | 13:02 |
| seb128 | would be nice to see it approved today | 13:02 |
| seb128 | it's overdue from our side | 13:02 |
| tjaalton | fine, acked | 13:02 |
| Trevinho | tjaalton: debdiffs are at https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/landing-036/+packages though | 13:02 |
| seb128 | Trevinho is being a big eager now :p | 13:02 |
| tjaalton | my shift is tomorrow btw, don't mind the queue being a bit shorter then ;) | 13:02 |
| Trevinho | tjaalton: thanks then | 13:03 |
| seb128 | queue is fairly short thanks to p_itti rounds ;-) | 13:03 |
| Trevinho | indeed... :) | 13:05 |
| coreycb | hello, can an archive admin please promote python3-ply and python3-dateutil to main? python-ply and python-dateutil are already in main. this will help us with our MIR for bug 1586061 | 14:51 |
| ubot5` | bug 1586061 in python-microversion-parse (Ubuntu) "[MIR] python-microversion-parse" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1586061 | 14:51 |
| coreycb | apologies, that bug is not related ^ , however we'd like to have these promoted for an upcoming MIR | 14:53 |
| cjwatson | coreycb: Would prefer them to show up in one of the component-mismatches reports first. | 15:03 |
| cjwatson | coreycb: You don't need them to be promoted in advance of an MIR. | 15:03 |
| coreycb | cjwatson, ok | 15:03 |
| Trevinho | seb128: do you know why, although unity/compiz are in xenial-proposed now, there have been no bug comments for verification requests? | 15:41 |
| seb128 | Trevinho, I guess because tjaalton didn't use the tool right | 15:41 |
| Trevinho | seb128: oh... you know who could trigger that? | 15:42 |
| * Trevinho can send them too, in case... But, it's a little annoying | 15:43 | |
| seb128 | Trevinho, sru team probably knows, try to see if bdmurray or arges can help you | 15:43 |
| bdmurray | slangasek: https://code.launchpad.net/~brian-murray/britney/britney2-ubuntu/+merge/295847 - I couldn't JFDI | 15:50 |
| arges | Trevinho: looks like https://launchpadlibrarian.net/261667453/unity_7.4.0+16.04.20160526.1-0ubuntu1_source.changes shows the correct Launchpad-Bugs-Fixed . maybe 'sru-review' script didn't append those correctly. | 15:50 |
| Trevinho | arges: yeah, it's weird... same for compiz | 15:51 |
| Trevinho | arges: or maybe because it was a ppa sync? | 15:51 |
| bdmurray | Its worked in the past with PPA syncs | 15:51 |
| bdmurray | I got some cronmail about LP timeouts over my night | 15:52 |
| arges | I've had this happen to me due to Launchpad timeouts. I had to manually copy and paste the call for testing message | 15:52 |
| arges | yea | 15:52 |
| bdmurray | As an example bug 1491913 from a previous SRU was commented on | 15:52 |
| ubot5` | bug 1491913 in Unity 7.2 "Force high gfx mode with UNITY_LOW_GFX_MODE == 0" [Low,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1491913 | 15:52 |
| Trevinho | also in previous release we didn't get the "fix released" msg for all the bugs, it will be another script, but maybe it's the same issue? | 15:53 |
| bdmurray | Launchpad itself does the Fix Released change e.g. https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/1491913/comments/4 so that shouldn't time out. | 15:56 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1491913 in Unity 7.2 "Force high gfx mode with UNITY_LOW_GFX_MODE == 0" [Low,Fix committed] | 15:56 |
| bdmurray | The "Update Released" message is an SRU team tool. | 15:57 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: ah, ok... that didn't happen for some recent changes though | 15:57 |
| bdmurray | Trevinho: if you show me something I could have a look | 15:58 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: for example https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/compiz/1:0.9.12.2+16.04.20160526-0ubuntu1 fixed bugs #1521302 and #1574866, but nothing was updated there | 15:58 |
| ubot5` | bug 1521302 in unity (Ubuntu Xenial) "gnome-terminal maximize than un-maximize behaves odd" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1521302 | 15:58 |
| ubot5` | bug 1574866 in Compiz "Compiz does not paint background" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1574866 | 15:58 |
| Trevinho | (and other bugs either, but I don't recall them all since I've set them as fix released manually) | 15:58 |
| bdmurray | Trevinho: that's the one that was published 2 hours and arges and I were just talking about possible LP timeouts | 15:59 |
| stgraber | infinity: someone just did the whole reverting SRU thing again in the archive... | 15:59 |
| stgraber | infinity: this time with eglibc in trusty (at least) | 15:59 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: I'm speaking of the fix in yakkety, not the SRU msg | 16:00 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: well, both in fact | 16:00 |
| Trevinho | none of them arrived there | 16:00 |
| stgraber | infinity: got all my machines reporting that they're running a version of eglibc which doesn't exist in the archive (2.19-0ubuntu6.8) | 16:00 |
| stgraber | infinity: according to LP, wgrant is to blame this time around for doing a straight delete and not uploading a revert | 16:00 |
| bdmurray | Trevinho: I don't see any bug numbers in the changelog for yaketty | 16:00 |
| cjwatson | that was an emergency, it was killing lots of DC machines; there was discussion in #security I believe | 16:00 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: oh, sorry I pasted the wrong link | 16:01 |
| stgraber | cjwatson: yeah, I figured it was, but usually part of dealing with the emergency is to upload the old thing as a newer version immediately to -updates, so people can actually downgrade to the non-broken version | 16:01 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: here it is https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/compiz/1:0.9.12.2+16.10.20160517-0ubuntu1 | 16:01 |
| cjwatson | yeah but given the nature of the problem I think that might actually have caused similar problems in reverse | 16:01 |
| cjwatson | it was a subtle thing to do with binaries that have one version of libc in memory and try to dynamically load something involving the other version of libm, I believe | 16:02 |
| stgraber | ah right, so if someone fixed those services (by bouncing them I guess), then uploading the revert will break them again | 16:03 |
| cjwatson | this is speculation but it seems at least plausible | 16:04 |
| cjwatson | somebody was working on a proper fix | 16:04 |
| bdmurray | Trevinho: bug 1521302 doesn't have a compiz bug task, only unity. The janitor looks at source package name and bug number. | 16:05 |
| ubot5` | bug 1521302 in unity (Ubuntu Xenial) "gnome-terminal maximize than un-maximize behaves odd" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1521302 | 16:05 |
| bdmurray | Trevinho: and it looks like bug 1574866 had the ubuntu compiz task added after the yakkety upload | 16:06 |
| ubot5` | bug 1574866 in Compiz "Compiz does not paint background" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1574866 | 16:06 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: yeah, i just added that... | 16:07 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: it wasn't there before. But generally in these cases LP added the tasks | 16:07 |
| bdmurray | Trevinho: I don't think Launchpad automatically adds tasks to bugs | 16:08 |
| Trevinho | mh, weird... I think it did. Although i used to run a script to keep downstream and upstream bugs in sync | 16:08 |
| bdmurray | Trevinho: with the Xenial SRU it looks like there are similar issues https://launchpadlibrarian.net/261667453/unity_7.4.0+16.04.20160526.1-0ubuntu1_source.changes is a unity upload referencing a bug with only a compiz task 1580212 | 16:14 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: mh, I've fixed some of them, but still we didn't get messages either for the bugs that had proper tasks | 16:16 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: there were no Xenial tasks, maybe... but that used to be added automatically (i've not the powers for doing that I can only suggest series) | 16:17 |
| bdmurray | Trevinho: Could you show me a bug with a proper task? | 16:19 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/1574689 | 16:23 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1574689 in unity (Ubuntu) "Middle-clicking application icon in switcher, doesn't close it" [Low,Fix released] | 16:23 |
| bdmurray | Trevinho: okay, that one doesn't have a Xenial task and iirc the tool won't add one. I've personally just been manually adding tasks when they are missing but will look at improving the tools. | 16:26 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: it would be nice if you could add distro tasks automatically, since only few people can do that (/me excluded), so it just makes the process longer | 16:27 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: though you could JFDI consolidate the files in the hints branch into 'freeze' :) | 16:30 |
| slangasek | (though it indeed seems we would need to adjust the perms on the 'freeze' file then) | 16:35 |
| slangasek | Laney: do you have any idea why http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/l/linux-keystone/trusty/armhf/ didn't find the linux-keystone package in trusty-updates when I tried to manually trigger this? AFAICS from the logs the adt-run invocation is materially the same between the latest run and the previous run | 16:48 |
| Laney | slangasek / bdmurray: consolidating> It's useful to be able to see who added a hint on excuses.html, IMO | 16:50 |
| Laney | linux-keystone> looking, but I'm not sure I'll know | 16:50 |
| tjaalton | Trevinho, seb128, arges: i didn't use sru-review because there was no debdiff | 16:51 |
| slangasek | Laney: useful, but IMHO this doesn't outweigh the annoyance of a) having to manage hints across a stack of files, b) having to manually update permissions in the britney branch if the team membership changes | 16:51 |
| slangasek | there's a hint -> bzr blame, works just as well for me, YMMV | 16:51 |
| slangasek | Laney: and for reference, my full command was 'run-autopkgtest -s trusty -a armhf --trigger eglibc/2.19-0ubunt6.8 linux-keystone' | 16:51 |
| bdmurray | tjaalton: there's a --no-diff switch | 16:51 |
| slangasek | -s trusty-updates doesn't work | 16:51 |
| slangasek | this is a package that didn't exist in the trusty release pocket; previous runs somehow managed to get it right | 16:52 |
| Trevinho | tjaalton: not sure if you can use it with that tool, but the ppa generates one | 16:52 |
| Laney | It's annoying for a smaller set of people than those that look at excuses | 16:52 |
| tjaalton | bdmurray: oh, ok | 16:53 |
| slangasek | people who look at excuses but aren't part of the team usually don't need to directly care which member of the release team added a hint :) | 16:53 |
| tjaalton | Trevinho: point was that sru-review didn't work, because i didn't use --no-diff | 16:54 |
| Trevinho | tjaalton: ah I see... bdmurray what's the way to fix it? | 16:54 |
| Trevinho | I mean, can we just post the msg from sru-tool, or should I hack it to do that? | 16:54 |
| bdmurray | tjaalton, Trevinho: sru-accept could be used to comment on the bugs after the fact, just need to pass it a whole mess of options | 16:56 |
| bdmurray | tjaalton, Trevinho: actually let me do that as I can work on adding the release tasks w/ it too | 16:57 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray: ok, thanks a lot then | 16:57 |
| Trevinho | bdmurray, tjaalton: I'm sorry to create such annoyance with Ci-train based SRUs, but I'd like the proces to be as smooth as possible, since I expect quite a lot of SRU for xenial. And it would be nice if we can get it done both quickly and properly. | 16:59 |
| slangasek | yes, it's really a launchpad bug (feature request) that the queue can't give us diffs | 17:00 |
| slangasek | these are always going to lag a bit so long as we don't have diffs to review | 17:00 |
| slangasek | s/lag a bit/require more effort from the SRU team/ | 17:00 |
| Laney | slangasek: sorry, I don't see immediately what's wrong with linux-keystone - perhaps some delicate problem with the pinning | 17:02 |
| Laney | apw might be able to help if he's around | 17:03 |
| Laney | and I've got to go, o/ | 17:03 |
| apw | slangasek, linux-keystone might be in a mess, as in linux-meta does not match linux for that ... | 17:04 |
| slangasek | apw: it indeed might be - but none of that should cause autopkgtest to fail to find the source package :) | 17:04 |
| apw | slangasek, well linux-meta is in general a bit magical, there is a lot of implying tests up from linux -> linux-meta and the like going on, having missmatched linux/linnux-meta pairs might well find new bugs | 17:05 |
| * apw goes see if he can make the missmatch go away yet | 17:06 | |
| infinity | stgraber: A revert would be as harmful as the upgrade was. | 17:13 |
| infinity | stgraber: A new version will be coming, but it can't be a straight and simple revert. | 17:13 |
| === georgelorch2 is now known as georgelorch | ||
| slangasek | Laney, apw: not sure why it should have mattered, but I just noticed I typoed the version of the eglibc trigger for the linux-keystone test; retrying now with the right version to see if it makes a difference | 18:32 |
| slangasek | Laney, apw: right, using a real eglibc package version in the trigger somehow sorted it | 18:51 |
| slangasek | (test is running now) | 18:52 |
| ginggs | any archive admins around to remove some packages please? | 20:13 |
| bdmurray | slangasek: Looking at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SnapdUpdates I would have expected bug 1583085 to have the "Packaging QA" section done. | 20:41 |
| ubot5` | bug 1583085 in snapd (Ubuntu) "[SRU] New stable micro release" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1583085 | 20:41 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: hmm indeed | 20:46 |
| slangasek | ginggs: possibly - what do you have for us? | 20:46 |
| ginggs | hi slangasek! | 20:47 |
| bdmurray | slangasek: Okay, I wanted to make sure I was understanding things | 20:47 |
| ginggs | for starters here's LP: #1580039 , LP: #1580041 and LP: #1580047 | 20:48 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1580039 in syfi (Ubuntu) "Please remove syfi - obsolete" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1580039 | 20:48 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1580041 in ufc (Ubuntu) "Please remove ufc - superceded by ffc" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1580041 | 20:48 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1580047 in swig2.0 (Ubuntu) "swig2.0 removal" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1580047 | 20:48 |
| ginggs | and then there's LP: #1584717 LP: #1585795 LP: #1586043 LP: #1586047 | 20:52 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1584717 in pion-net (Ubuntu) "Please remove pion-net" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1584717 | 20:52 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1585795 in python-glpk (Ubuntu) "Please remove python-glpk" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1585795 | 20:52 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1586043 in elmerfem (Ubuntu) "Please remove elmerfem" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1586043 | 20:52 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1586047 in pyviennacl (Ubuntu) "Please remove pyviennacl" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1586047 | 20:52 |
| ginggs | and lastly (for now) there's LP: #1586038 where the maintainer asked that we just remove the binaries | 20:53 |
| ubot5` | Launchpad bug 1586038 in faumachine (Ubuntu) "Please demote faumachine to -proposed" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1586038 | 20:53 |
| slangasek | ginggs: is someone racing me to these? syfi isn't in yakkety | 20:54 |
| slangasek | nor ufc | 20:54 |
| slangasek | ginggs: looks like cjwatson has processed some of these via process-removals, not seeing your bugs :) | 20:55 |
| ginggs | ah, and that was only yesterday | 20:55 |
| slangasek | ginggs: in the case of ufc, this package was in sync - there's usually no need to file a removal request for such a package as it will be semi-automatically removed by an AA | 20:56 |
| ginggs | great, so swig2.0 can go now, the merge of subversion has just landed | 20:57 |
| slangasek | (unless there are revdeps that aren't sorted, but then, sort those and the AA will do the rest) | 20:57 |
| slangasek | ginggs: heh, these bug reports suggest there was a dead spot in 2013 when we failed to do process-removals :/ | 21:05 |
| slangasek | how does a pyviennacl compare to a posixacl | 21:06 |
| ginggs | thanks slangasek. so that swig2.0 has a -1ubuntu4 version, so does that mean it has to be removed manually (or were you still getting to that one?) | 21:14 |
| slangasek | ginggs: | 21:14 |
| slangasek | ginggs: it's a manual removal, and I'm looking at it still | 21:15 |
| ginggs | sorry, carry on then :) | 21:15 |
| slangasek | ginggs: if someone were to improve http://qa.ubuntuwire.org/rdepends to report alternate dependencies, it would be easier to process these ;) | 21:18 |
| slangasek | (less manual review of the output of reverse-depends) | 21:18 |
| ginggs | tumbleweed: ^^^ | 21:19 |
| slangasek | I've mentioned this to tumbleweed before and he was ENOTIME | 21:20 |
| ginggs | yeah, and he's organizing a debconf now | 21:20 |
| tumbleweed | erm, IIRC it does report alternate dependencies, but doesn't resolve virtual ones | 21:21 |
| tumbleweed | I seem to remember some people wanting it to *not* report alternate dependencies | 21:21 |
| slangasek | tumbleweed: well, for my purposes it would be very useful *to* report alternate dependencies | 21:24 |
| slangasek | who are these other people and how can I bribe them to agree with me ;) | 21:24 |
| cjwatson | slangasek: yeah, one of these days we should beef up the removal tools to deal with bugs better | 21:53 |
| cjwatson | it's kind of deeply annoying to deal with the two worlds in parallel | 21:54 |
| bdmurray | slangasek: so fpc seems to be a bad test (http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/f/fpc/xenial/amd64/) and its listed as a regression for binutils. It deserves a hint then? | 21:56 |
| cyphermox | hmm, perhaps that version number for ipmitool for xenial isn't so great | 22:20 |
| bdmurray | I'm happy to reject it for you ;-) | 22:26 |
| cyphermox | please :) | 22:26 |
| wgrant | stgraber: As Colin says, there was no other option. Uploading a newer package with the patches reverted would have caused problems too. It took several hours for the security team to devise and validate a proper fix that could safely upgrade from both. | 23:22 |
| wgrant | We had dozens of dead apaches, so it was pretty important to pull it ASAP. | 23:22 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: hint> only question is, why does it show up as a regression given that this test never succeeded on xenial | 23:33 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: so, fine to hint, but please also talk to pitti about why it's a "regression" | 23:34 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!