[00:12] <ogasawara> slangasek, infinity: so where has 4.8.0-16 gone?  I'm not seeing it in proposed or the release pocket.
[00:18] <tsimonq2> !info linux-generic
[00:18] <ubot5`> linux-generic (source: linux-meta): Complete Generic Linux kernel and headers. In component main, is optional. Version 4.4.0.38.40 (xenial), package size 1 kB, installed size 12 kB
[00:19] <tsimonq2> !info linux-generic yakkety
[00:19] <ubot5`> linux-generic (source: linux-meta): Complete Generic Linux kernel and headers. In component main, is optional. Version 4.8.0.15.24 (yakkety), package size 1 kB, installed size 12 kB
[00:19] <tsimonq2> !info linux-generic yakkety-proposed
[00:19] <ubot5`> linux-generic (source: linux-meta): Complete Generic Linux kernel and headers. In component main, is optional. Version 4.8.0.16.26 (yakkety-proposed), package size 1 kB, installed size 12 kB
[00:19] <tsimonq2> ogasawara: you sure ^
[00:19] <tsimonq2> ?
[00:26] <infinity> ogasawara: It's migrating.
[00:27] <infinity> ogasawara: There's a weird limbo between the copy and delete where it doesn't list as "published" anywhere.
[00:27] <ogasawara> tsimonq2, infinity: thanks, am seeing it now
[00:38] <cyphermox> slangasek: indeed, I'll remove that
[00:48] <lamont> slangasek: not sure how I would write a test case that was anything like a unit-test.  Regression risk analysis all comes down to initramfs-tools changes (everything else is just accepting the new ENV vars from it)
[00:49] <lamont> cyphermox: I think you're the best (only?) one to do the regression analysis on initramfs-tools
[00:49] <lamont> slangasek: uh, yeah... I should drop the set -x
[00:49]  * lamont gives cyphermox an odd look
[01:03] <lamont> slangasek: new initramfs in bound.
[01:04]  * lamont is starting to regret jumping on this handgrenade.
[01:04]  * lamont goes to read up on the SRU process so that he can comply
[01:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: initramfs-tools (xenial-proposed/main) [0.122ubuntu8.1 => 0.122ubuntu8.2] (core)
[01:06] <lamont> slangasek: for other hilarity, it turns out that the target for testing is "enlist, commission, and then deploy yakkety"  which means needing working ivp6 netboot in initramfs in images for both xenial (enlist, commission), and yakkety (deploy)

[01:07] <lamont> so what I'm saying is, don't let me slow down the beta!
[01:07] <slangasek> :-)
[01:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected initramfs-tools [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.122ubuntu8.2]
[01:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted isc-dhcp [source] (xenial-proposed) [4.3.3-5ubuntu12.3]
[01:22] <lamont> slangasek: cyphermox 1621507 updated.  any comments/changets welcome
[01:24] <lamont> slangasek: I promise to pester smoser until one of us does a full writeup for his cloud-init upload
[01:26] <lamont> and I think that klibc/ubuntu (xenial and yakkety) wants to be 'wontfix' on bug 1621507, but I'll leave that to cyphermox next week
[01:26] <ubot5`> bug 1621507 in isc-dhcp (Ubuntu) "initramfs-tools configure_networking() fails to dhcp ipv6 addresses" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1621507
[01:28] <lamont> slangasek: I'll plan on rolling new xenial stuff from -proposed first thing in the morning, assuming all 4 packages are waiting for me there.
[01:28] <lamont> xenial that is.. the ones in yakkety-proposed were decidedly yummy when I tested them earlier today
[01:29] <lamont> with that, I'm gone for a while
[01:42] <slangasek> I think klibc wants to be "let's figure out how to ditch this from the initramfs"
[01:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted initramfs-tools [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.122ubuntu8.2]
[01:45] <slangasek> ogasawara, apw: linux published, ubuntu-server now respinning; ETA 50 minutes for images
[01:46] <ogasawara> slangasek: thanks, I've got the troops on standby
[01:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted open-iscsi [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.0.873+git0.3b4b4500-14ubuntu3.1]
[02:22] <slangasek> lamont: hmm, looking at the cloud-init SRU now, and I see that it's "New upstream snapshot" with changes for which we have no SRU bugs
[02:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server amd64 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160924)
[02:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server arm64 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160924)
[02:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server i386 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160924)
[02:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server powerpc [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160924)
[02:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server ppc64el [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160924)
[02:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server s390x [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160924)
[02:29] <slangasek> bdmurray: dkms> you mention that 'apport version 2.5.3 returns the package name', does that mean we don't need to maintain support for the old string because it's obsolete since before trusty?
[02:29] <slangasek> ogasawara: ^^ ubuntu server builds
[02:29] <ogasawara> slangasek: thanks, will start testing
[02:30] <ogasawara> slangasek: just to confirm, we only need testing for Ubuntu Server respins?  or do we expect others.
[02:32] <slangasek> ogasawara: server only
[02:32] <ogasawara> slangasek: ack
[02:36] <slangasek> bdmurray: (right, that's exactly what the bug log says - accepting)
[02:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dkms [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.2.0.3-2ubuntu11.3]
[02:38] <ogasawara> slangasek: fyi...bjf and I are grabbing amd64 and i386 ubuntu server
[02:40] <slangasek> ogasawara: ok. were you expecting to smoke test the other architectures also?  I'm not sure if infinity intended -16 for all archs, I guess I neglected to ask
[02:40] <slangasek> but we certainly don't want to release them as beta without at least a minimal re-test
[02:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dkms [source] (trusty-proposed) [2.2.0.3-1.1ubuntu5.14.04.9]
[02:42] <ogasawara> slangasek: I don't think we have access to the other arches, at least I don't here.  I was actually hoping Foundations did?
[02:43] <slangasek> ogasawara: doesn't bjf have a stable of machines? can they be borrowed for smoketesting?
[02:44] <slangasek> I have access to ppc64el and s390x, but I'm also the only one around right now AFAIK :)  and I don't think I have any arm64
[02:49] <lamont> slangasek: if you're more inclined, I can give you a minimal change from what's currently in -proposed
[02:50] <slangasek> lamont: yeah, the one currently in the queue isn't being accepted by me as-is without explanations (see my ping of smoser on -devel), so if you can give me one without all the extras that'd be keen
[02:51] <lamont> yeah
[02:51] <lamont> sure
[02:57] <lamont> cloud-init_0.7.8-1-g3705bb5-0ubuntu1~16.04.2_source.changes <-- slangasek
[02:58] <slangasek> ogasawara, infinity: on reflection, it's *only* amd64 and i386 that are gated by the smoketests anyway; if we had good manual tests of previous images on the other archs, I think we should withdraw the 20160924 images there in favor of the already-tested ones
[02:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cloud-init (xenial-proposed/main) [0.7.8-1-g3705bb5-0ubuntu1~16.04.1 => 0.7.8-1-g3705bb5-0ubuntu1~16.04.2] (edubuntu, ubuntu-cloud, ubuntu-server)
[02:59] <slangasek> hmmm except
[02:59] <ogasawara> slangasek: did we have good manual tests of the previous images?
[02:59] <slangasek> the images have been garbage collected already
[02:59] <slangasek> grr
[03:00] <slangasek> so much for that idea
[03:01] <slangasek> ogasawara: it does seem retesting is necessary
[04:14] <ogasawara> slangasek: bug filed here https://launchpad.net/bugs/1627233
[04:14] <ubot5`> Ubuntu bug 1627233 in linux (Ubuntu Yakkety) "Missing cdrom drivers in debian installer" [Critical,Confirmed]
[04:53] <slangasek> FYI, with the latest ubuntu-server respin still not being installable, we are not going to be able to release final beta today.  Things are more or less on hold until Monday
[04:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kparts [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[04:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected cloud-init [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.7.8-1-g3705bb5-0ubuntu1~16.04.2]
[04:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected cloud-init [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.7.8-8-g0439d8a-0ubuntu1~16.04.1]
[05:00] <slangasek> lamont: reuploaded cloud-init because no bug in changelog; LP: #1621615 now also needs SRU template
[05:00] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 1621615 in cloud-init "network not configured when ipv6 netbooted into cloud-init" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1621615
[05:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cloud-init (xenial-proposed/main) [0.7.8-1-g3705bb5-0ubuntu1~16.04.1 => 0.7.8-1-g3705bb5-0ubuntu1~16.04.2] (edubuntu, ubuntu-cloud, ubuntu-server)
[05:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kpeople [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[05:13] <slangasek> wxl: so as far as lubuntu being marked 'ready', it appears that somehow the alternate CDs were never respun against the 4.8 kernel.  So while they have not been plagued by the installation failures that the ubuntu-server images have, they also do not have the release kernel on them and I don't think are appropriate to release as final beta
[05:13] <slangasek> wxl: (those installation failures are still being worked out, and thus there's no point in respinning lubuntu alternate yet - but I expect we will need to do that before releasing them)
[05:14] <wxl> slangasek: i am literally on my way to dreamland, but come tomorrow i'm sure we can work something out :)
[05:15] <slangasek> wxl: righty-o.  I don't know that we'll have a fixed kernel tomorrow either (I don't believe we will), so that may rather be a "monday" thing
[05:15] <wxl> slangasek: sounds good. talk soon!
[05:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cloud-init [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.7.8-1-g3705bb5-0ubuntu1~16.04.2]
[05:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kplotting [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[05:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kpty [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[05:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kross [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[05:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted snapcraft [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.18.1]
[05:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted krunner [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[05:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kservice [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[06:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ktexteditor [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[06:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ktextwidgets [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[06:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kunitconversion [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[06:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted xdg-desktop-portal [arm64] (yakkety-proposed) [0.3-1]
[06:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted xdg-desktop-portal [ppc64el] (yakkety-proposed) [0.3-1]
[06:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted xdg-desktop-portal [amd64] (yakkety-proposed) [0.3-1]
[06:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted xdg-desktop-portal [i386] (yakkety-proposed) [0.3-1]
[06:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted xdg-desktop-portal [s390x] (yakkety-proposed) [0.3-1]
[06:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted xdg-desktop-portal [armhf] (yakkety-proposed) [0.3-1]
[06:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted xdg-desktop-portal [powerpc] (yakkety-proposed) [0.3-1]
[06:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kwallet-kf5 [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[07:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: xdg-desktop-portal-gtk (yakkety-proposed/primary) [0.3-1]
[08:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: easytag (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2.4.2-1 => 2.4.2-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[08:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted easytag [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [2.4.2-2]
[08:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kwindowsystem [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[08:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kxmlgui [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[08:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: seahorse-nautilus (yakkety-proposed/universe) [3.11.92-1 => 3.11.92-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[08:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted seahorse-nautilus [source] (yakkety-proposed) [3.11.92-1ubuntu1]
[12:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-shell-extension-mediaplayer (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0~git20160509-3 => 0~git20160830-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[12:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-shell-extension-mediaplayer [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0~git20160830-1]
[12:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-shell-extension-top-icons-plus (yakkety-proposed/universe) [15-3 => 17-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[12:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-shell-extension-top-icons-plus [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [17-1]
[12:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: seahorse-sharing (yakkety-proposed/universe) [3.8.0-0ubuntu1 => 3.8.0-0ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[12:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted seahorse-sharing [source] (yakkety-proposed) [3.8.0-0ubuntu2]
[14:07] <lamont> slangasek: adding thetemplate now
[14:16] <lamont> slangasek: 1621615 now has SRU template
[14:24] <lamont> slangasek: (or whoever is AA and awake..) my needs: cloud-initramfs-tools 0.29ubuntu1 in yakkety-proposed.  Rolling xenial images now (for testing when I get back in 2-3 hours), unsure if I need a newer-than-xenial-proposed grub2, but we'll see.  <-- cyphermox?
[14:25] <lamont> slangasek: thanks for fixing the cloud-init changelog for me.  sigh. :/
[14:26] <lamont> bbl
[16:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openscenegraph-3.4 (yakkety-proposed/universe) [3.4.0+dfsg1-1ubuntu1 => 3.4.0+dfsg1-4] (no packageset) (sync)
[16:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openscenegraph-3.4 [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [3.4.0+dfsg1-4]
[16:49] <acheronuk> slangasek: you asked about kio symbols yesterday. the guy who dropped them is still offline, but I note our debian upstream kde packaging has the as optional=depreciated. does that help?
[18:57] <slangasek> acheronuk: 'optional=depreciated' - no, that doesn't explain why it's ok to drop the symbol without an soname change
[19:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kxmlrpcclient [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1]
[20:11] <lamont> I hate it whne the internet connection dies