/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2016/05/26/#ubuntu-release.txt

Trevinhotjaalton, 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
tjaaltonTrevinho: it's too fresh for sru-review13:00
tjaaltonand I'm about to EOD13:01
seb128tjaalton, you mean?13:01
tjaaltonERROR: queue does not have a debdiff13:01
Trevinhotjaalton: it won't have it, since it's a ppa sync13:01
seb128it's not going to13:01
seb128what Trevinho said13:01
tjaaltonwhat's the rush?13:01
seb128none I guess13:02
Trevinhotjaalton: various xenial fixes13:02
Trevinhobut, ok... I just wanted to clear the queu13:02
seb128would be nice to see it approved today13:02
seb128it's overdue from our side13:02
tjaaltonfine, acked13:02
Trevinhotjaalton: debdiffs are at https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/landing-036/+packages though13:02
seb128Trevinho is being a big eager now :p13:02
tjaaltonmy shift is tomorrow btw, don't mind the queue being a bit shorter then ;)13:02
Trevinhotjaalton: thanks then13:03
seb128queue is fairly short thanks to p_itti rounds ;-)13:03
Trevinhoindeed... :)13:05
coreycbhello, 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 158606114:51
ubot5`bug 1586061 in python-microversion-parse (Ubuntu) "[MIR] python-microversion-parse" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/158606114:51
coreycbapologies, that bug is not related ^ , however we'd like to have these promoted for an upcoming MIR14:53
cjwatsoncoreycb: Would prefer them to show up in one of the component-mismatches reports first.15:03
cjwatsoncoreycb: You don't need them to be promoted in advance of an MIR.15:03
coreycbcjwatson, ok15:03
Trevinhoseb128: do you know why, although unity/compiz are in xenial-proposed now, there have been no bug comments for verification requests?15:41
seb128Trevinho, I guess because tjaalton didn't use the tool right15:41
Trevinhoseb128: oh... you know who could trigger that?15:42
* Trevinho can send them too, in case... But, it's a little annoying15:43
seb128Trevinho, sru team probably knows, try to see if bdmurray or arges can help you15:43
bdmurrayslangasek: https://code.launchpad.net/~brian-murray/britney/britney2-ubuntu/+merge/295847 - I couldn't JFDI15:50
argesTrevinho: 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
Trevinhoarges: yeah, it's weird... same for compiz15:51
Trevinhoarges: or maybe because it was a ppa sync?15:51
bdmurrayIts worked in the past with PPA syncs15:51
bdmurrayI got some cronmail about LP timeouts over my night15:52
argesI've had this happen to me due to Launchpad timeouts. I had to manually copy and paste the call for testing message15:52
argesyea15:52
bdmurrayAs an example bug 1491913 from a previous SRU was commented on15:52
ubot5`bug 1491913 in Unity 7.2 "Force high gfx mode with UNITY_LOW_GFX_MODE == 0" [Low,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/149191315:52
Trevinhoalso 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
bdmurrayLaunchpad 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
bdmurrayThe "Update Released" message is an SRU team tool.15:57
Trevinhobdmurray: ah, ok... that didn't happen for some recent changes though15:57
bdmurrayTrevinho: if you show me something I could have a look15:58
Trevinhobdmurray: 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 there15:58
ubot5`bug 1521302 in unity (Ubuntu Xenial) "gnome-terminal maximize than un-maximize behaves odd" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/152130215:58
ubot5`bug 1574866 in Compiz "Compiz does not paint background" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/157486615:58
Trevinho(and other bugs either, but I don't recall them all since I've set them as fix released manually)15:58
bdmurrayTrevinho: that's the one that was published 2 hours and arges and I were just talking about possible LP timeouts15:59
stgraberinfinity: someone just did the whole reverting SRU thing again in the archive...15:59
stgraberinfinity: this time with eglibc in trusty (at least)15:59
Trevinhobdmurray: I'm speaking of the fix in yakkety, not the SRU msg16:00
Trevinhobdmurray: well, both in fact16:00
Trevinhonone of them arrived there16:00
stgraberinfinity: 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
stgraberinfinity: according to LP, wgrant is to blame this time around for doing a straight delete and not uploading a revert16:00
bdmurrayTrevinho: I don't see any bug numbers in the changelog for yaketty16:00
cjwatsonthat was an emergency, it was killing lots of DC machines; there was discussion in #security I believe16:00
Trevinhobdmurray: oh, sorry I pasted the wrong link16:01
stgrabercjwatson: 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 version16:01
Trevinhobdmurray: here it is https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/compiz/1:0.9.12.2+16.10.20160517-0ubuntu116:01
cjwatsonyeah but given the nature of the problem I think that might actually have caused similar problems in reverse16:01
cjwatsonit 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 believe16:02
stgraberah right, so if someone fixed those services (by bouncing them I guess), then uploading the revert will break them again16:03
cjwatsonthis is speculation but it seems at least plausible16:04
cjwatsonsomebody was working on a proper fix16:04
bdmurrayTrevinho: 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/152130216:05
bdmurrayTrevinho: and it looks like bug 1574866 had the ubuntu compiz task added after the yakkety upload16:06
ubot5`bug 1574866 in Compiz "Compiz does not paint background" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/157486616:06
Trevinhobdmurray: yeah, i just added that...16:07
Trevinhobdmurray: it wasn't there before. But generally in these cases LP added the tasks16:07
bdmurrayTrevinho: I don't think Launchpad automatically adds tasks to bugs16:08
Trevinhomh, weird... I think it did. Although i used to run a script to keep downstream and upstream bugs in sync16:08
bdmurrayTrevinho: 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 158021216:14
Trevinhobdmurray: mh, I've fixed some of them, but still we didn't get messages either for the bugs that had proper tasks16:16
Trevinhobdmurray: 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
bdmurrayTrevinho: Could you show me a bug with a proper task?16:19
Trevinhobdmurray: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/157468916:23
ubot5`Launchpad bug 1574689 in unity (Ubuntu) "Middle-clicking application icon in switcher, doesn't close it" [Low,Fix released]16:23
bdmurrayTrevinho: 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
Trevinhobdmurray: 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 longer16:27
slangasekbdmurray: 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
slangasekLaney: 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 run16:48
Laneyslangasek / bdmurray: consolidating> It's useful to be able to see who added a hint on excuses.html, IMO16:50
Laneylinux-keystone> looking, but I'm not sure I'll know16:50
tjaaltonTrevinho, seb128, arges: i didn't use sru-review because there was no debdiff16:51
slangasekLaney: 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 changes16:51
slangasekthere's a hint -> bzr blame, works just as well for me, YMMV16:51
slangasekLaney: and for reference, my full command was 'run-autopkgtest -s trusty -a armhf --trigger eglibc/2.19-0ubunt6.8 linux-keystone'16:51
bdmurraytjaalton: there's a --no-diff switch16:51
slangasek-s trusty-updates doesn't work16:51
slangasekthis is a package that didn't exist in the trusty release pocket; previous runs somehow managed to get it right16:52
Trevinhotjaalton: not sure if you can use it with that tool, but the ppa generates one16:52
LaneyIt's annoying for a smaller set of people than those that look at excuses16:52
tjaaltonbdmurray: oh, ok16:53
slangasekpeople 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
tjaaltonTrevinho: point was that sru-review didn't work, because i didn't use --no-diff16:54
Trevinhotjaalton: ah I see... bdmurray what's the way to fix it?16:54
TrevinhoI mean, can we just post the msg from sru-tool, or should I hack it to do that?16:54
bdmurraytjaalton, Trevinho: sru-accept could be used to comment on the bugs after the fact, just need to pass it a whole mess of options16:56
bdmurraytjaalton, Trevinho: actually let me do that as I can work on adding the release tasks w/ it too16:57
Trevinhobdmurray: ok, thanks a lot then16:57
Trevinhobdmurray, 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
slangasekyes, it's really a launchpad bug (feature request) that the queue can't give us diffs17:00
slangasekthese are always going to lag a bit so long as we don't have diffs to review17:00
slangaseks/lag a bit/require more effort from the SRU team/17:00
Laneyslangasek: sorry, I don't see immediately what's wrong with linux-keystone - perhaps some delicate problem with the pinning17:02
Laneyapw might be able to help if he's around17:03
Laneyand I've got to go, o/17:03
apwslangasek, linux-keystone might be in a mess, as in linux-meta does not match linux for that ...17:04
slangasekapw: it indeed might be - but none of that should cause autopkgtest to fail to find the source package :)17:04
apwslangasek, 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 bugs17:05
* apw goes see if he can make the missmatch go away yet17:06
infinitystgraber: A revert would be as harmful as the upgrade was.17:13
infinitystgraber: A new version will be coming, but it can't be a straight and simple revert.17:13
=== georgelorch2 is now known as georgelorch
slangasekLaney, 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 difference18:32
slangasekLaney, apw: right, using a real eglibc package version in the trigger somehow sorted it18:51
slangasek(test is running now)18:52
ginggsany archive admins around to remove some packages please?20:13
bdmurrayslangasek: 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/158308520:41
slangasekbdmurray: hmm indeed20:46
slangasekginggs: possibly - what do you have for us?20:46
ginggshi slangasek!20:47
bdmurrayslangasek: Okay, I wanted to make sure I was understanding things20:47
ginggsfor starters here's LP: #1580039 ,  LP: #1580041 and LP: #158004720:48
ubot5`Launchpad bug 1580039 in syfi (Ubuntu) "Please remove syfi - obsolete" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/158003920:48
ubot5`Launchpad bug 1580041 in ufc (Ubuntu) "Please remove ufc - superceded by ffc" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/158004120:48
ubot5`Launchpad bug 1580047 in swig2.0 (Ubuntu) "swig2.0 removal" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/158004720:48
ginggsand then there's LP: #1584717 LP: #1585795 LP: #1586043  LP: #158604720:52
ubot5`Launchpad bug 1584717 in pion-net (Ubuntu) "Please remove pion-net" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/158471720:52
ubot5`Launchpad bug 1585795 in python-glpk (Ubuntu) "Please remove python-glpk" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/158579520:52
ubot5`Launchpad bug 1586043 in elmerfem (Ubuntu) "Please remove elmerfem" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/158604320:52
ubot5`Launchpad bug 1586047 in pyviennacl (Ubuntu) "Please remove pyviennacl" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/158604720:52
ginggsand lastly (for now) there's LP: #1586038 where the maintainer asked that we just remove the binaries20:53
ubot5`Launchpad bug 1586038 in faumachine (Ubuntu) "Please demote faumachine to -proposed" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/158603820:53
slangasekginggs: is someone racing me to these? syfi isn't in yakkety20:54
slangaseknor ufc20:54
slangasekginggs: looks like cjwatson has processed some of these via process-removals, not seeing your bugs :)20:55
ginggsah, and that was only yesterday20:55
slangasekginggs: 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 AA20:56
ginggsgreat, so swig2.0 can go now, the merge of subversion has just landed20:57
slangasek(unless there are revdeps that aren't sorted, but then, sort those and the AA will do the rest)20:57
slangasekginggs: heh, these bug reports suggest there was a dead spot in 2013 when we failed to do process-removals :/21:05
slangasekhow does a pyviennacl compare to a posixacl21:06
ginggsthanks 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
slangasekginggs:21:14
slangasekginggs: it's a manual removal, and I'm looking at it still21:15
ginggssorry, carry on then :)21:15
slangasekginggs: 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
ginggstumbleweed: ^^^21:19
slangasekI've mentioned this to tumbleweed before and he was ENOTIME21:20
ginggsyeah, and he's organizing a debconf now21:20
tumbleweederm, IIRC it does report alternate dependencies, but doesn't resolve virtual ones21:21
tumbleweedI seem to remember some people wanting it to *not* report alternate dependencies21:21
slangasektumbleweed: well, for my purposes it would be very useful *to* report alternate dependencies21:24
slangasekwho are these other people and how can I bribe them to agree with me ;)21:24
cjwatsonslangasek: yeah, one of these days we should beef up the removal tools to deal with bugs better21:53
cjwatsonit's kind of deeply annoying to deal with the two worlds in parallel21:54
bdmurrayslangasek: 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
cyphermoxhmm, perhaps that version number for ipmitool for xenial isn't so great22:20
bdmurrayI'm happy to reject it for you ;-)22:26
cyphermoxplease :)22:26
wgrantstgraber: 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
wgrantWe had dozens of dead apaches, so it was pretty important to pull it ASAP.23:22
slangasekbdmurray: hint> only question is, why does it show up as a regression given that this test never succeeded on xenial23:33
slangasekbdmurray: 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!