[00:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-lts-vivid [amd64] (trusty-proposed/main) [3.19.0-70.78~14.04.1] (kernel)
[00:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-lts-xenial [amd64] (trusty-proposed/main) [4.4.0-40.60~14.04.1] (kernel)
[00:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcalcli (yakkety-proposed/universe) [3.3.2-2 => 3.4.0-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[00:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcalcli [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [3.4.0-1]
[00:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: vkeybd (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1:0.1.18d-2 => 1:0.1.18d-2.1] (ubuntustudio) (sync)
[00:30] <slangasek> apw: it gated the kernel this time, we just overrode the gate in our haste, heh.
[00:30] <tsimonq2> slangasek: any way I can help get final beta out the door?
[00:31] <slangasek> tsimonq2: well, if you can tell me that the -17 ppa kernel works with a d-i-based installer... :)
[00:31] <tsimonq2> slangasek: what PPA?
[00:32] <slangasek> tsimonq2: the kernel team ppa
[00:32] <slangasek> I don't have the link handy, sorry
[00:32] <slangasek> mwhudson: accepted
[00:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected docker.io [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [1.12.1-0ubuntu7~16.04]
[00:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted docker.io [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [1.12.1-0ubuntu12~16.04.1]
[00:34] <tsimonq2> slangasek: oh, you mean ppa:canonical-kernel-team/ppa that I've had enabled on my production system for a month now? :P
[00:34]  * tsimonq2 runs
[00:35] <slangasek> so what you're saying is, you're dogfooding it but found none of the critical bugs that blocked the beta ;)
[00:35] <slangasek> (which is understandable, they were mostly installer-critical only)
[00:35] <tsimonq2> well I wasn't looking for any bugs...
[00:35] <tsimonq2> lol ok
[00:36] <tsimonq2> slangasek: define "works," any specific bugs I should hunt for?
[00:36] <slangasek> tsimonq2: if you can install Ubuntu Server from an image built using that kernel, it works
[00:37] <tsimonq2> slangasek: you have instructions for either building a d-i image using that PPA or adding that PPA and upgrading the image handy?
[00:38] <slangasek> tsimonq2: heh... nope
[00:38] <tsimonq2> fun, ok, I'll mess around
[00:39] <mwhudson> slangasek: thanks
[00:39] <slangasek> tsimonq2: or you can wait until that kernel is in -proposed, at which point I'll probably build a PROPOSED=1 image so we can test in parallel to autopkgtest
[00:39] <tsimonq2> slangasek: what would the ETA be on that?
[00:45] <mwhudson> slangasek: thanks
[00:47] <slangasek> tsimonq2: "Monday"
[00:48] <tsimonq2> good stuff, ok
[00:49] <mwhudson> slangasek: did we talk about deleting containerd from xenial-updates already?
[00:49] <slangasek> uh... I don't think so
[00:49] <mwhudson> slangasek: *powerpc
[00:51] <mwhudson> slangasek: according to my email i got you to delete it from yakkety, but not clear if we talked about xenial-updates too ...
[00:56] <slangasek> mwhudson: ok, removing
[00:56] <mwhudson> slangasek: thanks!
[01:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted hplip [source] (yakkety-proposed) [3.16.7+repack0-1ubuntu1]
[04:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cowdancer (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.80ubuntu1 => 0.81] (no packageset) (sync)
[04:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cowdancer [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.81]
[06:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cowdancer (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.81 => 0.81ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[06:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cowdancer [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.81ubuntu1]
[06:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Xubuntu Desktop amd64 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160921)
[06:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Xubuntu Desktop i386 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160921)
[06:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ruby-sys-filesystem (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.1.7-1ubuntu1 => 1.1.7-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[06:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ruby-sys-filesystem [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.1.7-2]
[06:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntuone-credentials (yakkety-proposed/universe) [15.11+16.10.20160805.2 => 15.11+16.10.20160920] (ubuntuone) (sync)
[06:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntuone-credentials [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [15.11+16.10.20160920]
[07:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tor (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.2.8.7-1ubuntu1 => 0.2.8.8-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[07:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tor [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.2.8.8-1ubuntu1]
[07:27] <LocutusOfBorg> good morning, cjwatson_ I don't remember how I can get PAGE_SIZE on ppc64el, I remember you told me "look at this build log", but I don't remember which package was it
[07:28] <LocutusOfBorg> procenv
[07:28] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks :)
[07:34] <LocutusOfBorg> having a search box for irclogs.ubuntu.com would be awesome, they seems to be not completely indexed by google?
[08:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-markdown (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2.6.6-1 => 2.6.7-1] (edubuntu) (sync)
[08:06] <mardy> pitti: hi! Can you use your magic powers on https://bileto.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/1497 ?
[08:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: blends (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.6.93ubuntu1 => 0.6.94ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[08:08] <pitti> mardy: err, I added some magic glow to it and the page is now 10% more magical
[08:08] <pitti> mardy: what do you want me to do? :-)
[08:08] <pitti> (tests seem alright)
[08:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted blends [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.6.94ubuntu1]
[08:09] <mardy> pitti: make it 20% ;-) I just wonder if I should be quietly waiting for the UNAPPROVED packages to be approved, or if I should ping here and there :-)
[08:10] <pitti> mardy: oh, that; yakkety is frozen, I cannot circumvent that
[08:10] <pitti> mardy: well, *technically* I can, but infinity1 would rightfully get very angry :)
[08:11] <pitti> I might even still approve them from the queue, but they still won't land in y-release until after the beta release
[08:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-llfuse (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.1.1+dfsg-2 => 1.1.1+dfsg-3] (no packageset) (sync)
[08:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-llfuse [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.1.1+dfsg-3]
[10:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-lts-vivid [amd64] (trusty-proposed) [3.19.0-70.78~14.04.1]
[10:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-lts-xenial [amd64] (trusty-proposed) [4.4.0-40.60~14.04.1]
[10:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: debian-games (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.4ubuntu1 => 1.5ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[10:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted debian-games [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.5ubuntu1]
[10:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: debian-games [amd64] (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.5ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[10:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-llfuse (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.1.1+dfsg-3 => 1.1.1+dfsg-3ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[10:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-llfuse [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.1.1+dfsg-3ubuntu1]
[10:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: thermald (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.5.3-3 => 1.5.3-4] (core) (sync)
[11:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: psi4 (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1:1.0~rc-3 => 1:1.0-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[11:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted psi4 [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1:1.0-1]
[11:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: espresso (yakkety-proposed/universe) [5.4.0+dfsg-1 => 5.4.0+dfsg-5] (no packageset) (sync)
[11:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted espresso [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [5.4.0+dfsg-5]
[11:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: arc-theme (yakkety-proposed/universe) [20160605-2build1 => 20160923-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[11:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted arc-theme [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [20160923-1]
[11:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: networking-odl (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1:2.0.0+git20160906.d6c362d-0ubuntu1 => 1:2.0.1~git20160926.416a5c7-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[11:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted networking-odl [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1:2.0.1~git20160926.416a5c7-0ubuntu1]
[12:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron-taas (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.0.0+git20160808.c612a729-1 => 0.0.0+git20160926.675af77-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[12:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted neutron-taas [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.0.0+git20160926.675af77-0ubuntu1]
[12:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fityk (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.2.1-0.1ubuntu4 => 1.2.1-0.1ubuntu5] (no packageset)
[12:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fityk [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.2.1-0.1ubuntu5]
[12:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: console-setup (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.142ubuntu4 => 1.142ubuntu5] (core)
[13:10] <dobey> hi, can someone prod unity-scopes-api and unity-scopes-shell through UNAPPROVED queue in yakkety? not sure why they got picked up there, as it seems they're still in universe
[13:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: btrfs-progs (yakkety-proposed/main) [4.7-1 => 4.7.3-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[13:14] <apw> dobey, they do show up in seeded-in-ubuntu output which i beleive is what is stopping them auto accepting
[13:17] <dobey> apw: right but i think they haven't been pulled in the ISO yet. the fixes in the queue are for the MIR
[13:27] <pitti> dobey: I'll do a round of unapproved review now
[13:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-chess [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1:3.22.0-1]
[13:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted quadrapassel [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1:3.22.0-1]
[13:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-tetravex [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1:3.22.0-1]
[13:29] <dobey> pitti: ok thanks
[13:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected account-plugins [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.13+16.10.20160831-0ubuntu1]
[13:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted console-setup [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.142ubuntu5]
[13:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kactivities-kf5 (yakkety-proposed/universe) [5.24.0-0ubuntu1 => 5.26.0-0ubuntu1] (kubuntu)
[15:37] <slangasek> apw, ogasawara: hi, what do we need to do to get linux 4.8.0-17.18 into yakkety-proposed ASAP?
[15:37] <slangasek> apw, ogasawara: I can spin a PROPOSED=1 Ubuntu Server image for testing (assuming the rest of the archive is adequately coherent) so we can do that in parallel with the autopkgtests this time
[15:38] <slangasek> we'll need linux-signed, we'll need d-i - are those staged/uploaded/todo?
[15:38] <ogasawara> slangasek: yes, I've staged those in the ppa as well, so I can copy all 3 out to proposed
[15:38] <ogasawara> slangasek: just wanted to make sure you were +1 before I did so
[15:38] <slangasek> ogasawara: ok; +1 :)
[15:39] <apw> ogasawara, there is no d-i in there
[15:39] <apw> ogasawara, i can sort that out, once we can upload again
[15:39] <ogasawara> apw: argh
[15:39] <apw> ogasawara, and you can't copy them out ... without launchpad
[15:39] <ogra_> just send USB sticks by mail
[15:39] <ogasawara> apw: ass, right
[15:39] <apw> but i will sort out d-i ready to go
[15:40] <apw> _if_ i can get to the branch
[15:40] <ogasawara> apw: I don't think you can
[15:40] <ogasawara> apw: I couldn't get to our kernel git repo's earlier
[15:40] <apw> *assume*lots*of*swearing*
[15:42] <slangasek> apw: the "P" part of "ASAP"
[15:42] <infinity> apw: I'm unconvinced that copying d-i from a PPA will dtrt (though, it probably might?), uploading to the archive after the kernel is copied seems less scary.
[15:42] <apw> infinity, will do
[15:43] <apw> infinity, i was assuming i would copy it sans -b though
[15:43] <infinity> apw: And whoever copies linux-signed, make sure to not copy with binaries. :P
[15:43] <ogasawara> copy-package --from ppa:canonical-kernel-team/ubuntu/unstable --suite yakkety --to ubuntu --to-suite yakkety-proposed -b linux linux-meta
[15:43] <ogasawara> that is what I was going to run ^^
[15:43] <infinity> (I know you know that, I'm less convinced about everyone else)
[15:43] <apw> infinity, i have shouted that bit just recently :)
[15:43] <infinity> ogasawara: That would do, and then the same for linux-signed, minus the -b
[15:44] <infinity> apw: Heh.
[15:44] <ogasawara> copy-package --from ppa:canonical-kernel-team/ubuntu/unstable --suite yakkety --to ubuntu --to-suite yakkety-proposed linux-signed
[15:44] <ogasawara> yes, and then that for linux-signed
[15:46] <rtg> is there a way to make ISO images in a PPA ? (once LP comes back up)
[15:48] <infinity> rtg: No.
[15:48] <rtg> infinity, how about locally ? It would sure speed testing of boot essential issues.
[15:49] <infinity> rtg: Not easily.
[15:49] <infinity> rtg: Though, for issues that aren't specific to "the CD", mini.iso from d-i works, and is easily built locally.
[15:49] <slangasek> rtg: locally, it's step 1) create a local mirror of the Ubuntu archive, step 2) modify the mirror to inject your kernel, step 3) run debian-cd machinery; so it's going to be quicker for us to iterate through yakkety-proposed
[15:50] <rtg> if I can select what kernel to build in, then that would do it
[15:50] <infinity> rtg: Would it (in this case)?  I thought the issues were related to accessing the ISO filesystem, not booting.
[15:50] <rtg> slangasek,  this time, yes. I'm looking out to the next cycle
[15:50] <infinity> Which mini.iso certainly tests less well.
[15:51] <slangasek> the blocking issues we've had have been with the alternate CDs, so yeah, mini.iso doesn't really help
[15:51] <infinity> But yes, for strictly boot issues, you can do a local d-i quite easily.
[15:51] <rtg> infinity, boot issues were the ones killing us on the kernel
[15:52] <slangasek> rtg: that's not what was killing /us/
[15:53] <infinity> rtg: Honestly, the best way to test boot issues is to have a VM kicking around that you install your kernel in and reboot...
[15:53] <infinity> rtg: Installers seem a silly way to test that.
[15:53] <infinity> Unless you need a lightweigh way to toss something around to boot test specific hardware, I guess.
[15:54] <infinity> rtg: Anyhow, yes, you can build d-i in a PPA or locally, and it spits out both a kernel/initrd pair to use raw, and a mini.iso, just nothing as fancy as a full server ISO.
[15:55] <rtg> infinity, I can live with that. I was just looking back through our config changes to see what would _really_ require an install image.
[16:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux (yakkety-proposed/main) [4.8.0-16.17 => 4.8.0-17.19] (core, kernel) (sync)
[16:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-meta (yakkety-proposed/main) [4.8.0.16.26 => 4.8.0.17.27] (core, kernel) (sync)
[16:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-signed (yakkety-proposed/main) [4.8.0-16.17 => 4.8.0-17.19] (core, kernel) (sync)
[16:08] <ogasawara> slangasek, infinity, apw, rtg: ^^ linux, linux-meta, and linux-signed are copied out
[16:09] <pitti> ooh
[16:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: debian-installer (yakkety-proposed/main) [20101020ubuntu477 => 20101020ubuntu478] (core)
[16:09]  * pitti accepts
[16:09] <apw> pitti, hold the d-i though
[16:09] <pitti> now that I actually can again :)
[16:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted account-plugins [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.13+16.10.20160831-0ubuntu1]
[16:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted signon-plugin-oauth2 [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.24+16.10.20160818-0ubuntu1]
[16:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-system-settings-online-accounts [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.7+16.10.20160830.2-0ubuntu1]
[16:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libertine [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.4.1+16.10.20160914-0ubuntu1]
[16:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tali [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1:3.22.0-1]
[16:10] <pitti> apw: hold or reject?
[16:10] <apw> pitti, leave it in the queue
[16:10] <pitti> ack
[16:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted linux-meta [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [4.8.0.17.27]
[16:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted linux [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [4.8.0-17.19]
[16:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted linux-signed [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [4.8.0-17.19]
[16:10]  * apw will handle that once the other bits make it to the right places
[16:10] <pitti> apw: why, OOI? needs to wait for kernel to publish? (that should be a build-dep?)
[16:10] <apw> it shoudl be, but its definatly not :)
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted btrfs-progs [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [4.7.3-1]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted thermald [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.5.3-4]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vkeybd [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1:0.1.18d-2.1]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-markdown [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [2.6.7-1]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-mate-welcome [source] (yakkety-proposed) [16.10.9]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted signon-plugin-oauth2 [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.24+16.10.20160818-0ubuntu1]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected unity-scopes-api [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.0.7+16.10.20160921-0ubuntu1]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-system-settings-online-accounts [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.7+16.10.20160830.2-0ubuntu1]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: debian-installer (yakkety-proposed/main) [20101020ubuntu477 => 20101020ubuntu478] (core)
[16:12] <pitti> apw: a second d-i with the same version just hit the queue; I take it I shuld kill the older one?
[16:13] <apw> pitti, they are identicle, pain from the outage and us retrying
[16:13] <pitti> ah, ok
[16:13] <apw> wack either
[16:13] <apw> (and thanks for all that)
[16:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected debian-installer [source] (yakkety-proposed) [20101020ubuntu478]
[16:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-backgrounds [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [3.22.0-2]
[16:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted unity-scopes-shell [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.5.8+16.10.20160921-0ubuntu1]
[16:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted unity-scopes-api [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.0.7+16.10.20160921-0ubuntu2]
[16:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted atomix [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [3.22.0-1]
[16:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gsfonts [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1:8.11+urwcyr1.0.7~pre44-4.3]
[16:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gpsd [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [3.16-3]
[16:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted postgresql-common [source] (yakkety-proposed) [176+git1]
[16:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted qtquickcontrols-opensource-src [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [5.6.1-3]
[16:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected thermald [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.5.3-4]
[16:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tickcount [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.1-0ubuntu18]
[16:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted zeromq3 [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [4.1.5+git20160811+2fc86bc-0ubuntu2]
[16:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted zmqpp [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [4.1.2-0ubuntu1]
[16:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cloud-init [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.7.8-8-g0439d8a-0ubuntu1]
[16:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ghostscript [source] (yakkety-proposed) [9.19~dfsg+1-0ubuntu5]
[16:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pacemaker [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.1.15-1ubuntu2]
[16:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: systemd (xenial-proposed/main) [229-4ubuntu8 => 229-4ubuntu9] (core)
[16:36] <dobey> huh
[16:37] <apw> dobey, ?
[16:39] <dobey> apw: saw unity-scopes-api rejected, but then saw it was accepted
[16:40] <dobey> apw: but ci train shows rejected still. hopefully it fixes itself soon
[16:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt (trusty-proposed/main) [1.0.1ubuntu2.14 => 1.0.1ubuntu2.15] (core)
[16:43] <apw> dobey, ubuntu2 got accepted, ubuntu1 was superceeded, which is the silo waiting for
[16:44] <dobey> apw: ugh, there was a manual re-upload then?
[16:44] <dobey> ah
[16:44] <apw> dobey, that i don't know, there was cirtainly two versions and the newer one got accepted the previous one rejected
[16:45] <dobey> yes, sil2100 did it
[16:45] <dobey> thanks
[16:45] <apw> ahh yes, a no-change rebuild for a transition
[16:54] <slangasek> apw: so the sequence here is: linux and linux-meta publish to yakkety-proposed; linux-signed builds and publishes to yakkety-proposed; you release d-i from unapproved; it builds and publishes; and I trigger a cdimage build with PROPOSED=1 ?
[16:54] <apw> slangasek, yes
[16:54] <slangasek> ok
[16:56] <slangasek> apw: trigger set on nusakan, ubuntu-server image build will start as soon as the new d-i hits the archive
[16:56] <apw> slangasek, nice thanks
[16:58] <balloons> good morning infinity. Can you review this SRU for landing into xenial? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/juju-mongodb3.2/+bug/1605976.
[17:00] <slangasek> balloons: infinity is at Linaro Connect this week, so probably has only intermittent availability
[17:01] <slangasek> (just setting expectations, not offering to do it in his stead, sorry - Final Beta takes precedence today)
[17:01] <balloons> slangasek, ack ty :-) No worries, I assume it wasn't picked up because of the failing builds
[17:02] <balloons> bdmurray, might you have a moment today to have a look at bug 1605976 for landing into xenial?
[17:07] <bdmurray> balloons: bug 1564500 is mentioned as making it hard to do a full CI run, yet there is a comment about using your own apt mirror.  Has that been considered to test the mongod in -proposed?
[17:09] <balloons> bdmurray, I prodded the core team for some way we could do this, hence the comment I left on the bug about using an apt mirror. To my knowledge, it has not been tried.
[17:10] <bdmurray> balloons: Would it require much effort / would it be worth testing that?
[17:10] <apw> linux-signed
[17:11] <ChrisTownsend> Ok, now I think libertine has been completely rejected for Yakkety, but I have no idea why: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/yakkety/+queue?queue_state=4&queue_text=libertine
[17:11] <apw> 17:10:04*           -- | Notice(queuebot): Unapproved: accepted libertine [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.4.1+16.10.20160914-0ubuntu1]
[17:12] <apw> looks to have been accepted to me
[17:12] <ChrisTownsend> apw: Why is this so hard for me to figure out??:)
[17:12] <apw> (it is 18:10 for reference in my client)
[17:13] <ChrisTownsend> apw: So are we blocked on something to get it out of unapproved?
[17:14] <ChrisTownsend> apw: LP is very misleading on the states of packages.  I get this for unapproved: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/yakkety/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=libertine
[17:14] <balloons> bdmurray, I'm not sure an apt mirror would work, but I wanted to note it in the bug in case we needed an option before juju-core made updates to allow testing with -proposed properly. Speaking personally my thought was to make use of it if I didn't feel confident or we wanted to jump releases (like 3.2 -> 3.3 or 4). Given this is a point release, I'm satisfied with the testing done
[17:15] <apw> ChrisTownsend, right that queuebot message says that became accepted in the unapproved queue, from there it should go into the archive, but as you say i do not see it in the +source page
[17:15] <ChrisTownsend> apw: Ok, so I'm not totally bonkers on this:)
[17:16] <bdmurray> balloons: If I were to release it, could you test it after the fact to be extra satisfied? ;-)
[17:16] <balloons> bdmurray, absolutely. Part of my desire for it to go in is so we get full CI testing and field testing before juju goes to final
[17:18] <balloons> the field testing bit is the bigger piece; people won't get it for real deploys until it's in. From a CI perspective, I expect no surprises. In the field, I also don't expect any surprises to be fair; instead I'm rather hoping to see the promised improvements
[17:21] <bdmurray> balloons: okay, done
[17:22] <cjwatson> libertine> That's not within the usual scope of "misleading", though ...
[17:23] <cjwatson> +source isn't affected by publishing
[17:23] <cjwatson> I mean, not in terms of existing at all
[17:24] <ChrisTownsend> cjwatson: Well, I meant what LP was telling me conflicted with what apw was telling me.  I guess it would have been more accurate to say, "this makes no sense to me." :)
[17:24] <ChrisTownsend> All I know is that libertine is not updated in the Yakkety archive I have no idea why.
[17:25] <cjwatson> ChrisTownsend: Right, just saying that this isn't a routine thing.  Still trying to work it out.
[17:25] <cjwatson> I don't know why queuebot said what it did.
[17:25] <ChrisTownsend> cjwatson: Ok, thanks for your help.
[17:26] <cjwatson> Oh, I found an OOPS
[17:27] <cjwatson> "Proxy Error" from the librarian
[17:27] <cjwatson> signon-plugin-oauth2 and ubuntu-system-settings-online-accounts were similarly affected
[17:28] <cjwatson> But it looks like they were re-copied
[17:29] <cjwatson> ChrisTownsend: Can you try just republishing (not rebuilding) libertine?
[17:29] <cjwatson> from bileto
[17:29] <ChrisTownsend> cjwatson: I'll get someone with permission too since there are packaging changes.
[17:29] <ChrisTownsend> *to
[17:30] <cjwatson> The OOPSes were all around 16:11-16:13 UTC, which is a bit after the network outage ended
[17:30] <cjwatson> Mysterious
[17:30] <nacc> would this also be affecting, e.g., my uploads to pacemaker, gsfonts, tickcount ? That are all in 'done', and i got an e-mail, but i don't see them published in -proposed
[17:31] <nacc> i'm also willing to attribute it to my own misunderstanding(s)
[17:31] <cjwatson> nacc: That's just the publisher being a bit backlogged/slow, I imagine
[17:31] <cjwatson> nacc: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pacemaker/+publishinghistory looks OK
[17:31] <nacc> cjwatson: ah ok, thanks!
[17:31] <nacc> cjwatson: yep, you're right
[17:32] <ChrisTownsend> cjwatson: I'm asking if anyone on #ubuntu-ci-eng can help.  My go-to guy is out right now:)
[17:36] <slangasek> ChrisTownsend: generally the people in this channel will have permission, if you want to just post the link (for a "republish" it's trivial)
[17:37] <ChrisTownsend> slangasek: Ok, here's the link: https://bileto.ubuntu.com/log/1947/publish/  The package is already in the overlay, so I'm not sure what this will do.
[17:38] <slangasek> ChrisTownsend: if it breaks, we can let robru know the button isn't idempotent :)
[17:38] <ChrisTownsend> slangasek: lol, ok, works for me:)
[17:39] <dobey> i don't think republishing will help
[17:39] <ChrisTownsend> dobey: On #ubuntu-release, they think so.
[17:39] <slangasek> dobey: libertine didn't make it to the Ubuntu archive, so it ought to
[17:39] <slangasek> (unless the publish button is not idempotent, in which case that is a bug)
[17:40] <slangasek> anyway, button has been pushed
[17:40] <robru> slangasek: ChrisTownsend: publication will skip any packages if the version number isn't higher than destination. Rebuilding & republishing a ticket after it gets stuck in proposed is an officially supported workflow
[17:40] <dobey> hmm, ok
[17:40] <slangasek> robru: it should not be rebuilt, this was a launchpad copying failure only
[17:40] <dobey> yeah, republishing shouldn't make things worse anyway
[17:40] <ChrisTownsend> lol, I thought I was on a different channel when I said that
[17:40] <ChrisTownsend> Hopefully it will work.
[17:40] <ChrisTownsend> slangasek: Thanks
[17:41] <ChrisTownsend> cjwatson: And thanks to you too
[17:41] <robru> slangasek: well then republishing will safely only publish things that didn't already publish
[17:41] <dobey> slangasek: ah ok, if it was just lp going bonkers earlier, then yeah that should hopefully get it resynced and hopefully it can be accepted
[17:41] <slangasek> robru: good, that's what I like to hear :)
[17:41] <ChrisTownsend> It was on Sept. 22 that this occured.
[17:41] <cjwatson> No
[17:42] <cjwatson> The initial copy request was then, but it was held in a queue and only attempted-to-be-accepted earlier today
[17:42] <ChrisTownsend> cjwatson: Ah, ok, that makes sense.
[17:43] <slangasek> mterry: there's a stack of Fix Committed MIRs listed under (unsubscribed) on http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches; can you help sort some of these subscribers out?
[17:43] <slangasek> mterry: (I can subscribe teams as necessary if the correct subscriber is known)
[17:43] <slangasek> e.g. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qtsystems-opensource-src/+bug/1552860
[17:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted software-properties [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.96.24.7]
[17:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libertine (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.4+16.10.20160908-0ubuntu1 => 1.4.1+16.10.20160914-0ubuntu1] (no packageset) (sync)
[17:48] <robru> slangasek: there's your copy
[17:49] <mterry> slangasek: OK here're my guesses: indicator-transfer gets dx-packages (like other indicators).  location-service, zeromq3, and network-manager-openvpn get desktop-packages (they have desktop-bugs instead -- this is my fault for confusing those two during MIRs I suppose).  unity-notifications gets unity-ui-team.  qtsystems-opensource-src gets ubuntu-sdk-bugs.
[17:49] <slangasek> robru: yup :)
[17:50] <slangasek> mterry: are these "guesses" that you're willing to put those teams on the hook for? :)
[17:50] <mterry> slangasek: I haven't talked to the teams, but they are all reasonable picks with similar packages under their belts
[17:51] <mterry> The only one I'm even a little iffy on is the last sdk one
[17:51] <mterry> But it makes sense to me...
[17:51] <slangasek> mterry: ok.  subscribing, and if someone balks we can sort it out later
[17:52] <slangasek> mterry: thanks :)
[17:52] <mterry> yw, my bad in the first place for most  :)
[17:52] <tsimonq2> slangasek: how's "Monday" coming along? ;)
[17:55] <slangasek> tsimonq2: kernel publication to -proposed is in progress; apw needs to upload debian-installer once that's finished; then we will build an ubuntu-server test image (not a release candidate) against proposed.
[17:56] <tsimonq2> awesome!
[17:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (yakkety-proposed/main) [4.8.0-17.19] (core, kernel)
[17:57] <tsimonq2> slangasek: *slides Lubuntu hat on* are we getting a respin of alternate images then?
[17:57] <slangasek> tsimonq2: we will, but I was going to stick with ubuntu-server for testing
[17:58] <tsimonq2> ok, good stuff
[17:58] <tsimonq2> (right acheronuk? :P)
[17:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (yakkety-proposed) [4.8.0-17.19]
[17:59] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I assume that's what is coming in now? ^^^^^
[18:03] <acheronuk> tsimonq2: cosas buenas
[18:03] <slangasek> tsimonq2: still working its way through, yes
[18:03] <tsimonq2> acheronuk: XD
[18:03] <tsimonq2> slangasek: awesome, if you shoot me a ping when the Ubuntu Server testing images are ready, I'll help test :)
[18:11] <wxl> we respinning lubuntu alternates too slangasek ?
[18:11] <infinity> wxl: Once this is proven to work for server, I assume that's the plan.
[18:12] <wxl> infinity: k cool, keep me up to date, thx :)
[18:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-heatclient (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.4.0-0ubuntu1 => 1.5.0-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[18:40] <slangasek> apw: I see linux-signed-image-4.8.0-17-generic 4.8.0-17.19 published now, if you want to upload d-i
[18:45] <doko> slangasek, infinity: why is migration to release pocket still blocked, when the package is built in proposed?
[18:46] <slangasek> doko: we're in beta freeze, if that's what you mean
[18:47] <doko> right, but afaicr we never stop migration of already built and tested packages ...
[18:47] <doko> stopped even
[18:47] <slangasek> the freeze is rather indiscriminate
[18:47] <slangasek> my opinion is that we should never have both an archive freeze and a p-m freeze, we should pick one or the other
[18:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ceilometer [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1:7.0.0~rc2-0ubuntu1]
[18:47] <slangasek> but that's not current practice
[18:48] <doko> so whoever accepted ldb and libunwind should accept the binary builds too, and the binaries built using these
[18:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted debian-installer [source] (yakkety-proposed) [20101020ubuntu478]
[18:50] <slangasek> oh right, that wasn't "upload d-i", that was "hey dummy AA, you should accept it from unapproved now" - sorry
[18:51] <doko> sorry, I don't understand ...
[18:51] <slangasek> doko: that's me responding to the message from queuebot, and me telling apw earlier to upload a package that already was uploaded
[18:51] <doko> ahh
[18:51] <nacc> heh
[18:52] <doko> slangasek: so what's the way forward with these binaries wailting in -proposed?
[18:54] <slangasek> doko: I guess I'm not sure what you're talking about.  I don't see any binary builds held anywhere for ldb or libunwind, and this is not part of the explanation on people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#libunwind
[18:55] <apw> slangasek: d-i accepted
[18:55] <slangasek> apw: thanks ;)
[18:55] <doko> ldb (2:1.1.26-1ubuntu3 to 2:1.1.26-1ubuntu5)
[18:55] <doko> Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers
[18:55] <doko> 4 days old
[18:55] <doko> autopkgtest for samba/2:4.4.5+dfsg-2ubuntu3: amd64: Pass, armhf: Pass, i386: Pass, ppc64el: Pass, s390x: Pass
[18:55] <doko> Not touching package due to block request by freeze (contact #ubuntu-release if update is needed)
[18:55] <doko> Not considered
[18:56] <slangasek> ok, that has nothing to do with "binary" packages being blocked
[18:56] <infinity> doko: Yes, freezes have always stopped binaries that are on images from migrating.
[18:56] <infinity> s/binaries/packages/
[18:56] <infinity> This is nothing new.  What's new is that this beta has been a bit of a cluster#$%@!.
[18:57] <doko> even after the source was accepted into -proposed?
[18:57] <infinity> Yes...
[18:57] <infinity> We build from the release pocket.
[18:57] <slangasek> yes, see my comment above about having both an archive freeze and a p-m freeze
[18:57] <infinity> Accepting to proposed doesn't affect images.  Promoting does.
[18:58] <coreycb> infinity, can you reject python-heatclient from the yakkety queue?  we don't need that version.
[18:58] <infinity> slangasek: As for the double-freeze, we can discuss the impact on velocity and such some time, but we've been doing the "hard freeze from final beta to GA" for a couple of years now, and I'm a big fan.  Honestly, if we had the manpower to handle the reviews, I'd be in hard freeze all year.
[18:59] <infinity> coreycb: Done.
[18:59] <coreycb> infinity, thanks
[18:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected python-heatclient [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.5.0-0ubuntu1]
[18:59] <slangasek> infinity: hard freeze, vs. double hard freeze; twice the effort, minimal additional benefit
[19:00] <infinity> slangasek: Well, the "double" freeze is only during the RC-building process, to gate what is and isn't on the images, while the archive freeze is to review and gate the archive, including post-milestone state.
[19:00] <infinity> slangasek: They serve very different purposes.
[19:00] <doko> it's quiet unfortunate that binaries we had in -proposed for a long time, and were used to build other packages, won't migrate before the release
[19:01] <doko> but anyway, that's server stuff, I shouldn't care about
[19:01] <infinity> doko: If they were beta-critical, no one indicated such.  They'll move long before final release.
[19:02] <doko> apw: ^^^ just in case you build your kernel in the release pocket, or in the later release: the libunwind fix isn't in the release pocket, and probably won't be there
[19:04] <slangasek> doko: er, nobody said it won't be there for release
[19:10] <apw> doko, yep aware of libunwind, i am sure we are not building against it yet, least of our problems (tm)
[19:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-swiftclient (yakkety-proposed/main) [1:3.0.0-3 => 1:3.1.0-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[19:18] <doko> slangasek: well, I asked for the route forward ...
[19:18] <slangasek> doko: wait for us to be done with beta
[19:19] <doko> ok
[19:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: dolfin (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2016.1.0-3 => 2016.1.0-5] (no packageset) (sync)
[19:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dolfin [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [2016.1.0-5]
[19:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-os-client-config (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.18.0-0ubuntu3 => 1.21.1-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[19:35] <doko> slangasek: ahh, so beta is not yet released? sorry was offline for three days
[19:41] <slangasek> doko: right, we ran into kernel problems
[19:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mozjs (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.8.5-1.0.0+dfsg-4.5 => 1.8.5-1.0.0+dfsg-5] (mozilla) (sync)
[20:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: moka-icon-theme (yakkety-proposed/universe) [5.3.2-1 => 5.3.2-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[20:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted moka-icon-theme [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [5.3.2-2]
[20:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnote (yakkety-proposed/universe) [3.20.1-1 => 3.22.0-1] (desktop-extra) (sync)
[20:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: partimage (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.6.9-3~build1 => 0.6.9-3] (no packageset) (sync)
[20:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted partimage [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.6.9-3]
[20:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: z3 (yakkety-proposed/universe) [4.4.1-0.2 => 4.4.1-0.3] (no packageset) (sync)
[20:12] <ogasawara> slangasek: apw notes that d-i should be published now...so I think we're ready for you to hit the button for the images
[20:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted z3 [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [4.4.1-0.3]
[20:15] <slangasek> ogasawara: I'm set up to auto-run the image build as soon as d-i is visible from nusakan
[20:16] <slangasek> (there's "published" and then there's "published")
[20:16] <ogasawara> heh, ok :)
[20:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: maxima (yakkety-proposed/universe) [5.38.0-3build1 => 5.38.0-3build2] (no packageset)
[20:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted maxima [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.38.0-3build2]
[20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot amd64 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20101020ubuntu478)
[20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot arm64 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20101020ubuntu478)
[20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot armhf [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20101020ubuntu478)
[20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot i386 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20101020ubuntu478)
[20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot powerpc [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20101020ubuntu478)
[20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot ppc64el [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20101020ubuntu478)
[20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot s390x [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20101020ubuntu478)
[20:34] <slangasek> apw, ogasawara: image build has begun
[20:35] <ogasawara> slangasek: sweet, thanks.  eta ~1hr?
[20:35] <slangasek> ogasawara: probably 45m
[20:35] <ogasawara> slangasek: even better, thanks
[20:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted brasero [source] (yakkety-proposed) [3.12.1-1ubuntu5]
[20:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libertine [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.4.1+16.10.20160914-0ubuntu1]
[20:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnote [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [3.22.0-1]
[20:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted mozjs [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.8.5-1.0.0+dfsg-5]
[20:46] <pitti> slangasek: image builds already? doesn't 4.8.0-17 need to land in y-release first?
[20:47] <pitti> or do we have some magic to build images with selected -proposed packages?
[20:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: hol88 (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2.02.19940316-31build1 => 2.02.19940316-31build2] (no packageset)
[20:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted hol88 [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.02.19940316-31build2]
[20:48] <santa_> slangasek: hello, I have re-checked the kio issue more calmly and it seems it's indeed an ABI break, this is a possible solution https://git.launchpad.net/~kubuntu-packagers/kubuntu-packaging/+git/kio/commit/?id=4728eb39ef470dca1f2536719ea69c50fe989c19
[20:58] <slangasek> pitti: I'm trying a build with PROPOSED=1; this should at least be enough to smoke test the kernel, *if* it manages to build at all
[20:59] <pitti> ah, bold :)
[20:59] <slangasek> santa_: looks sane to me
[20:59] <tsimonq2> \\o//
[20:59] <slangasek> pitti: it either builds or it doesn't; either way, no time lost
[21:00] <pitti> slangasek: right, I just thought these would already be "the" beta candiates
[21:02]  * pitti bids good night
[21:02] <tsimonq2> o/ pitti
[21:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server amd64 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160926)
[21:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server arm64 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160926)
[21:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server i386 [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160926)
[21:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server powerpc [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160926)
[21:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server ppc64el [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160926)
[21:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server s390x [Yakkety Beta 2] has been updated (20160926)
[21:16] <slangasek> apw, ogasawara, jgrimm, powersj: ^^
[21:16] <jgrimm> slangasek, \o/
[21:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: acl2 (yakkety-proposed/universe) [7.2dfsg-2build1 => 7.2dfsg-2build2] (no packageset)
[21:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted acl2 [source] (yakkety-proposed) [7.2dfsg-2build2]
[21:19] <ogasawara> slangasek: wheee, will tell the team to start testing.  thanks!
[21:19] <wxl> still only working on server right now, correct?
[21:24] <slangasek> wxl: yes
[21:24] <slangasek> this is a smoketest only
[21:26] <wxl> kk thx slangasek
[21:35] <powersj> slangasek, this is looking a lot better :)
[21:37] <tsimonq2> slangasek: is the image done somewhere or is it still spinning up?
[21:40] <slangasek> tsimonq2: it's up, see queuebot above - the 20160926 ubuntu-server image is the smoketest image
[21:41] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I'll smoketest in a min, currently getting a decent response to the email that just popped up in ubuntu-devel-discuss ;)
[21:41] <ogasawara> slangasek: testing is showing much more promising this time around
[21:43] <slangasek> ogasawara: coolio. it also looks like it's passed the automated smoketest on amd64, I don't know if i386 has failed or is still pending ( powersj ?)
[21:43] <powersj> slangasek, i386 just finished
[21:43] <slangasek> excellent
[21:44] <slangasek> and we have some positive test results coming in on autopkgtest, which is an improvement over "this kernel makes the testbed disappear"
[21:45] <tsimonq2> we have autopkgtests for the kernel?!?
[21:45] <tsimonq2> huh
[21:45] <tsimonq2> cool! :D
[21:46] <slangasek> apw, ogasawara: so I'm good with dropping the blocking bugs and respinning again as soon as the kernel hits yakkety
[21:46] <slangasek> tsimonq2: we get quite extensive testing via autopkgtest, when we aren't skipping it in our haste
[21:51] <smb> slangasek, I am trying the s390 KVM install but I think this has a problem due to pulling most things from the archive. IOW it boots but after ssh into the installer it mentions to find no matching kernel modules which usually ends with no dasd
[21:52] <ogasawara> slangasek: +1
[21:55] <slangasek> smb: the things are in the archive to be pulled, but I think you have to twiddle the boot options to get it to use -proposed... I don't remember the option name, sorry
[21:56] <smb> hm lets see
[22:14] <sergiusens> is http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html stuck?
[22:28] <cjwatson> looks like it, let me prod with flamethrower
[22:29] <smb> slangasek, found the twiddle. testing...
[22:29] <cjwatson> done, should unstick next time it feels like running
[22:29] <cjwatson> which should be soon enough as it's cronned for twice an hour
[22:33] <tsimonq2> rtg: I just saw bug 1627875, are you testing using the server ISO slangasek just spun up?
[22:34] <tsimonq2> rtg: I'm using virt-manager to test with 1 GB of RAM and 1 CPU core
[22:35] <rtg> tsimonq2, I am
[22:36] <tsimonq2> ok
[22:36] <tsimonq2> rtg: it fails to boot, but could you be more specific? and how did you do a UEFI BIOS, I want to learn how to do that ;)
[22:37] <rtg> tsimonq2, I'll add instructions into the bug, gimme a couple mins
[22:37] <tsimonq2> ok no problem rtg
[22:42] <rtg> tsimonq2, updated
[22:43] <tsimonq2> thanks rtg
[22:56] <mwhudson> slangasek: would you be ok with the fixed (hopefully) docker autopkgtest going straight to xenial or would you want to see it succeed in yakkety first?
[22:57] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Yakkety amd64 Ubuntu Server image with BIOS is good to go
[22:58]  * tsimonq2 tries to reproduce rtg's bug
[23:04] <apw> tsimonq2, is that a secure boot setup?  is that the shim 0.9 issue with vms and efi ?
[23:05] <tsimonq2> the host system is BIOS
[23:06] <rtg> tsimonq2, apw tells me there is a known bug with shim in a VM
[23:07] <tsimonq2> gah 3 letter usernames, I mixed y'all up
[23:07] <tsimonq2> I'm not sure what SHIM is
[23:07] <rtg> tsimonq2, it is part of the boot loader stack that is installed to support UEFI
[23:08] <rtg> tsimonq2, I've just verified that -17.19 boot in Xenial (UEFI), so taht squarly points at a shim problem in Yakkety
[23:09] <tsimonq2> I can confirm your bug rtg
[23:09] <rtg> tsimonq2, confirm taht it won't boot ?
[23:09] <tsimonq2> correct
[23:09] <rtg> tsimonq2, ok
[23:09] <apw> cyphermox, ^
[23:10] <apw> i am pretty sure there is intended to be release note about the shim thing, but i do not know the bug number to confirm
[23:11] <tsimonq2> http://img.ctrlv.in/img/16/09/27/57e9aae61a86d.png <- that's the screen that I'm getting
[23:12] <tsimonq2> powersj: good call re bug 1627875
[23:13] <tsimonq2> shouldn't it be marked as also affecting shim then?
[23:13] <powersj> what is the other bug #? We can then figure out if we should dup
[23:14] <tsimonq2> good question
[23:15] <powersj> Is this it? bug 1624096
[23:16] <cyphermox> correct
[23:17] <tsimonq2> I think so
[23:17] <tsimonq2> so bug 1627875 should be marked as a dup of bug 1624096 then ?
[23:19] <slangasek> mwhudson: autopkgtest in parallel to {xenial,yakkety}-proposed is fine with me
[23:20] <mwhudson> slangasek: ok
[23:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: docker.io (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.12.1-0ubuntu12 => 1.12.1-0ubuntu13] (no packageset)
[23:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted docker.io [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.12.1-0ubuntu13]
[23:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: docker.io (xenial-proposed/universe) [1.12.1-0ubuntu12~16.04.1 => 1.12.1-0ubuntu13~16.04.1] (no packageset)
[23:29] <mwhudson> slangasek: can i get a quick approve for that one?
[23:30] <slangasek> mwhudson: looking now
[23:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted docker.io [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.12.1-0ubuntu13~16.04.1]
[23:32] <slangasek> mwhudson: ^^
[23:32] <mwhudson> slangasek: thanks!
[23:33] <mwhudson> now i wait for the publisher, britney, autopkgtest ...
[23:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libecap (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.0.1-3ubuntu3 => 1.0.1-3ubuntu4] (ubuntu-server)
[23:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libpam-radius-auth (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.3.17-0ubuntu4 => 1.3.17-0ubuntu5] (ubuntu-server)
[23:46] <mwhudson> slangasek: is there some record for how many times "Please test proposed package" has been posted to the same bug?
[23:51] <slangasek> mwhudson: no idea :)
[23:52] <mwhudson> i guess it's probably more than 3
[23:52]  * nacc still appreciates when bugproxy gets asked to test
[23:52] <mwhudson> yeah
[23:54] <lynorian> that makes more sense than someone coming up to a confrence booth and asking if bugproxy is attending
[23:56] <nacc> heh
[23:56] <nacc> why did bugproxy remove all those tags from LP: #1602243?
[23:58] <mwhudson> uh yeah that makes no sense
[23:58]  * mwhudson puts verification-needed back at least
[23:59] <nacc> yeah
[23:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: dia-shapes (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.6.0-2 => 0.6.0-3] (edubuntu) (sync)