[00:07] <infinity> slangasek: Okay.  We're uncronned now.  I'll see how things settle over the next few hours and spin a full set before the end of the day.
[00:08] <infinity> slangasek: And toss out a call for testing when that's in progress.
[00:11] <santa_> slangasek: hi, we got a fix by ktp-call-ui, it was uploaded to the archive but it got rejected because apparently ktp-call-ui isn't part of the kubuntu packageset, who should we ask to correct the packageset and put it under our 'protection'?
[00:11] <santa_> s/we got a fix by ktp-call-ui/we got a fix for ktp-call-ui/
[01:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kdepim (yakkety-proposed/universe) [4:16.04.3-0ubuntu1 => 4:16.04.3-0ubuntu2] (kubuntu)
[03:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: juju-core (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.0~rc2-0ubuntu1.16.10.1 => 2.0~rc3-0ubuntu1.16.10.1] (ubuntu-server)
[03:47] <slangasek> santa_: hmm I believe the DMB has the authority to decide on packagesets.  ktp-call-ui doesn't currently appear to be seeded in kubuntu, though, so I'm not sure whether it's truly a "mismatch" currently?
[03:51] <santa_> slangasek: well it's clearly a mismatch since it's a package which is part of the "KDE Applications" collection and it's maintained by us, how can I contact the DMB?
[03:52] <santa_> slangasek: oh btw. trivial fix for kdepim in the upload queue
[03:52] <slangasek> santa_: official contact address, developer-membership-board@lists.ubuntu.com.  Maybe this is something that infinity could help with quickly, if it's that simple (since he's on the DMB)
[03:53] <santa_> ok, if we don't get it sorted out quickly I guess you could upload it, right?
[03:53] <slangasek> yes
[03:54] <santa_> ok, I'm working on the remaining issues reported by mrs spears
[03:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kdepim [source] (yakkety-proposed) [4:16.04.3-0ubuntu2]
[06:01] <santa_> slangasek: still awake? if not I will come up with some stuff tomorrow, I will go to bed soon
[06:03] <acheronuk> santa_: you were not kidding about a personal timezone!
[06:04] <santa_> NO
[06:04] <santa_> "fortunately" I don't have a job yet
[06:05] <acheronuk> even still, I am grateful for your effort
[06:05] <santa_> thank you :)
[07:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted juju-core [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.0~rc3-0ubuntu1.16.10.1]
[07:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-django-openstack-auth (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.4.0-0ubuntu1 => 2.4.1-2] (ubuntu-server) (sync)
[07:36] <acheronuk> morning. can the s390x test on kde-cli-tools be retried? http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#kde-cli-tools
[07:37] <acheronuk> looks like maybe a builder error?
[07:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nautilus [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1:3.20.3-1ubuntu3]
[07:40] <slangasek> acheronuk: it already failed twice in a row the same way; doesn't seem likely that a third retry will matter
[07:41] <slangasek> acheronuk: but the previous version had failing tests on all archs, so I'll override
[07:42] <acheronuk> slangasek: ok. thank you
[07:45] <acheronuk> hmmm. kcoreaddons looks distinctly unhappy :/
[07:47] <slangasek> those may be testbed issues
[07:47] <slangasek> and there are a number of waiting tests
[07:47] <acheronuk> yes, I just saw the running ones. for later then
[10:06] <infinity> pitti: Did we get fresh langpacks for release?
[10:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: base-files (yakkety-proposed/main) [9.6ubuntu4 => 9.6ubuntu5] (core)
[10:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted base-files [source] (yakkety-proposed) [9.6ubuntu5]
[10:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: llvm-toolchain-3.7 (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1:3.7.1-3ubuntu3 => 1:3.7.1-3ubuntu4] (no packageset)
[10:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted llvm-toolchain-3.7 [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1:3.7.1-3ubuntu4]
[10:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-boxes (yakkety-proposed/universe) [3.22.0-1 => 3.22.1-0ubuntu1] (desktop-extra)
[10:48] <santa_> good morning
[10:53] <santa_> slangasek: I see modemmanager-qt had an acc failing test, but passed trough britney, have you override it?
[10:53] <santa_> in any case, https://paste.kde.org/pfjnlxv5f does this look sane to fix the issue)
[10:53] <santa_> ?
[10:57] <acheronuk> santa_: I think slangasek is on the US west coast, so may be asleep now
[10:58] <santa_> no prob I can rest/work on the remaining issues
[11:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: aspectc++ (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1:2.1-1 => 1:2.1-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[11:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted aspectc++ [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1:2.1-2]
[11:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: freemat (yakkety-proposed/universe) [4.2+dfsg1-1ubuntu1 => 4.2+dfsg1-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[11:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: oclgrind (yakkety-proposed/universe) [15.5-4build2 => 15.5-5] (no packageset) (sync)
[11:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: afl (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2.33b-4 => 2.34b-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[11:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: irony-mode (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.1.2-2 => 0.2.0-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[11:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted afl [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [2.34b-2]
[11:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted irony-mode [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [0.2.0-1]
[11:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted freemat [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [4.2+dfsg1-2]
[11:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted oclgrind [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [15.5-5]
[11:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ostree (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2016.10-1 => 2016.11-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[11:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ostree [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [2016.11-1]
[13:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[13:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base arm64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[13:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base armhf [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[13:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[13:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base powerpc [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[13:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base ppc64el [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[13:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base s390x [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Alternate amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Alternate powerpc [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Alternate i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server arm64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server powerpc [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server ppc64el [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server s390x [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[14:51] <acheronuk> cw
[14:51] <acheronuk> whoops
[14:53] <acheronuk> release team: krunner armhf test on libqapt has been 'test in progress' for a least the last 7hrs  http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#krunner
[14:58] <acheronuk> kcmutils is failing a test against kde-cli-tools 5.7.2 when there is a new version 5.7.5 now
[14:58] <acheronuk> kcmutils also seems to have a hung test on amd64 kleopatra
[15:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Xubuntu Desktop amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:00] <acheronuk> slangasek said this morning that remaining kcoreaddons test regressions were likely test bed issues. if you concur can you please hint through or override etc
[15:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Xubuntu Desktop i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph (yakkety-proposed/main) [10.2.3-0ubuntu1 => 10.2.3-0ubuntu2] (kubuntu, ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server)
[15:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu GNOME Desktop amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu GNOME Desktop i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:22] <jamespage> slangasek, ^^ ceph with pre-depends rather that post-inst reload of udev
[15:22] <jamespage> tested ok in ppa
[15:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Kylin Desktop amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Kylin Desktop i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Desktop amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Desktop i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop powerpc [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[15:45] <tsimonq2> infinity: nice last paragraph of that email :D :P
[15:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kdepim-runtime (yakkety-proposed/universe) [4:16.04.3-0ubuntu2 => 4:16.04.3-0ubuntu3] (kubuntu)
[16:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Studio DVD amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[16:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Studio DVD i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[16:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu MATE Desktop amd64 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[16:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu MATE Desktop i386 [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[16:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu MATE Desktop powerpc [Yakkety Final] (20161008) has been added
[16:55] <slangasek> santa_: modemmanager-qt was overridden because it was not a regression, yes. I don't know if your fix is reasonable as I know roughly nothing about the acc tests
[16:58] <slangasek> acheronuk: as of last night, the test failures shown for kcoreaddons were testbed issues; now, there are new test results, including new failures that should be investigated
[16:58] <santa_> slangasek: ok. aabout the remaining things: 1st of all, we got a fix for kdepim-runtime
[16:59] <santa_> it was a problem in the test itself, so I just applied an upstream commit
[16:59] <slangasek> jamespage: so what about the issue that the newly-unpacked ceph udev rules are not applied to existing device nodes? Is that not important?
[17:00] <slangasek> jamespage: (accepting, but the fix looks incomplete to me)
[17:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ceph [source] (yakkety-proposed) [10.2.3-0ubuntu2]
[17:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kdepim-runtime [source] (yakkety-proposed) [4:16.04.3-0ubuntu3]
[17:03] <acheronuk> slangasek: can the tests I mentioned earlier that seem to be stuck running be budged?
[17:03] <slangasek> santa_: kdepim-runtime accepted, and since we know it's a bad test I've also hinted it through in case that works out better
[17:04] <slangasek> acheronuk: looking now
[17:05] <santa_> slangasek: ok, thank you very much, and I think this might be one the last real problems: kdelibs4support; it has 2 problems
[17:05] <santa_> 1. the testsuite is failing consistently
[17:05] <santa_> 2. the acc test is failing consistently
[17:06] <santa_> to fix the acc test I already commited something to our git
[17:06] <slangasek> acheronuk: retried
[17:07] <acheronuk> slangasek: thx :)
[17:07] <santa_> however I don't have a fix for the testsuite, and I checked the upstream git + executing the tests in a vm (not in the autopkgtest environment) with my kde developer hat on. I still got them failing
[17:07] <santa_> to good news is that this is not a regression compared with 5.24
[17:08] <slangasek> santa_: yes, if the conclusion is the kdelibs4support testsuite is bad, I have no problem hinting that in
[17:09] <santa_> slangasek: not exactly, I don't have a conclusion yet about the failure, however it was failing in 524 as well so I see no point in keeping 5.26 in -proposed
[17:10] <santa_> slangasek: so yes, my proposal is: let us upload a fix for the acc test, the testsuite is going to fail, but hint it to get it out of -proposed
[17:10] <slangasek> ok
[17:11] <slangasek> santa_: hint added
[17:11] <santa_> thank you very much
[17:13] <santa_> slangasek: so regarding the remaining issues I think it's just a matter of retrying unless I'm missing something, for instance I would retry the akonadi tests http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#akonadi
[17:15] <santa_> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#kdepim
[17:15] <santa_> ↑ kdepim too
[17:29] <acheronuk> santa_: any idea on the kcmutils failing test? just one on i386 :/ http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#kcmutils
[17:31] <santa_> acheronuk: it's kde-cli-tools what's failing, not kcmutils
[17:32] <acheronuk> santa_: yes, that's what I mean. blocking kcmutils to be more accurate
[17:32] <santa_> I would retry it
[17:34] <acheronuk> I think slangasek just did and it failed
[17:43] <ginggs_> hi, would someone in ubuntu-release look at a wine-development merge FFe please? LP: #1630763
[18:00] <slangasek> santa_: the akonadi test has been retried on !amd64 and failed three consecutive times with the same error (and takes 6h+ to time out while doing so); I'm not going to retry those anymore
[18:01] <tsimonq2> santa_: I'll do that locally to confirm then
[18:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kdelibs4support (yakkety-proposed/universe) [5.26.0-0ubuntu1 => 5.26.0-0ubuntu2] (kubuntu)
[18:01] <clivejo> santa_: ^
[18:02] <slangasek> santa_: kdepim is also failing on multiple architectures with the same problem (sqlite test failures), why do you expect this to work on a retry?
[18:03] <slangasek> ginggs_: not me; we have a backlog of KDE stuff to get through -proposed for image mastering, so I'm personally considering the FFe queue closed
[18:05] <ginggs_> slangasek: np
[18:07] <slangasek> stokachu, cyphermox: autopkgtest results for juju-core 2.0~rc3 seem worse now?
[18:10] <santa_> slangasek: ack, so any suggestion? both kdepim and akonadi autopkgtests work fine here locally
[18:10] <santa_> clivejo: thanks
[18:11] <clivejo> you're very welcome
[18:14] <stokachu> slangasek: it failed? we ran tests in their lab and i ran the autopkgtests locally as well
[18:15] <stokachu> ugh wth
[18:18] <slangasek> santa_: you probably need to test them on other archs to reproduce; if that's not tractable for release, then we'll have to override
[18:19] <stokachu> slangasek: autopkgtest -U ../juju-core_2.0~rc3-0ubuntu1.16.10.1.dsc -- qemu ~/autopkgtest/autopkgtest-yakkety-amd64.img  --ram-size 6000 this is what i ran
[18:19] <stokachu> and it passed for me and in their qa lab
[18:19] <slangasek> stokachu: ok, looking at the errors
[18:20] <slangasek> stokachu: Fetching Juju agent version 2.0-rc3 for amd64 // autopkgtest [11:40:04]: ERROR: timed out - if that's accurate, we may be looking at a regression in the testbed's firewall?  or in the support for the proxy environment variables?
[18:22] <slangasek> stokachu: I'm guessing you probably don't test with firewall + squid proxy (see top of log for proxy settings)?
[18:23] <stokachu> slangasek: yea this was without any firewall/proxy setup
[18:23] <stokachu> slangasek: does the test runner have access to squid.internal:3128?
[18:25] <stokachu> i can try to find a machine on that network to re-run the test with, im not sure where the juju qa lab sits either
[18:25] <santa_> slangasek: ack, I'm going to try an i386 lxc
[18:26] <stokachu> doesn't look like any of those proxy settings exist in their ci setup scripts
[18:27] <stokachu> also im getting hit with the hurricane so if i don't respond the power went out
[18:29] <jamespage> slangasek, my take is that is unrelated to the bug fixed - this is not a new udev rule for yakkety (already in xenial, where we don't have the same udev loading rules without groups race issue)
[18:29] <jamespage> thanks for accepting the upload
[18:32] <stokachu> slangasek: odd because fomr of the other tests pass when attempting to bootstrap, see 14:34:24
[18:32] <stokachu> some*
[18:49] <slangasek> stokachu: do those bootstraps both pull from the same server? I would guess that the lxd bootstrap pulls the standard lxd image from the normal place
[18:50] <slangasek> stokachu: who should I talk to about this if your power does go out?
[19:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mandos (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.7.11-1 => 1.7.12-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[19:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted mandos [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.7.12-1]
[19:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pidgin (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1:2.10.12-0ubuntu8 => 1:2.10.12-0ubuntu9] (kubuntu)
[19:56] <tsimonq2> slangasek: could we please get eyes on kdelibs4support?
[19:58] <tsimonq2> (going off of this:)
[19:58] <tsimonq2> 12:10:19 PM < santa_> slangasek: so yes, my proposal is: let us upload a fix for the acc test, the testsuite is going to fail, but hint it to get it out of  -proposed
[20:21] <santa_> tsimonq2: it's already overriden, as we agreed, no need to poke people about that
[20:38] <santa_> tsimonq2: to be more specific, if you look here: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#kdelibs4support you will see this line:
[20:38] <santa_> autopkgtest for kdelibs4support/5.26.0-0ubuntu1: amd64: Ignored failure, armhf: Ignored failure, i386: Ignored failure, ppc64el: Ignored failure, s390x: Always failed
[20:39] <santa_> says "Ignored failure" because steve hinted it
[20:41] <santa_> the upload we have in the queue just fixes the acc tests, but kdelibs4support failures are already overriden, so even if that upload gets rejected, nobody is going to be harmed :)
[21:50] <tsimonq2> santa_: sorry, I read that wrong
[21:51] <santa_> np
[22:00] <santa_> slangasek: I could reproduce the test failure of akonadi @ i386, I'm trying to get the kdepim one built on quemu/armhf. in any case I doubt very much I will be able or have time to fix those failures. would you consider to override them? if we find it's an actual problem in akonadi I think we could allways fix it later
[22:01] <santa_> oh, also note:
[22:02] <santa_> both in akonadi and kdepim the failures are related (I think) to the sqlite akonadi backend which is not the default backend, the default and recommended is mysql
[22:04] <santa_> so the only thing somewhat concerning I see there is the "tagmodeltest" failure of akonadi/i386