[00:12] <mwhudson> tsimonq2: ah ok, seems like it's getting there
[00:21] <tsimonq2> I want things synced too... :P
[00:28] <TheMuso> Of course if you want something badly enough and its not part of the transition, you could sync it yourself or get it synced.
[00:30] <tsimonq2> Yeah.
[00:30] <tsimonq2> That makes me want to be a MOTU. :P
[06:29] <cpaelzer> good morning
[11:31] <hammed> anyone here has root
[11:33] <ikonia> hammed: this is not the channel for htis
[11:33] <ikonia> hammed: you've already done this in #ubuntu - if you need help, please ask in #ubuntu
[11:33] <dax> (and #kubuntu)
[11:33] <dax> oh, you noticed, nvm
[11:33] <hammed> ok
[11:36] <hammed> anyone here help me with ubuntu root
[11:38] <Nafallo> hammed: please read the conversation you just had one more time.
[11:39] <hammed> ok
[13:27] <smoser> anyone have a easy way to do
[13:27] <smoser>  source_package_for_binary_package(binpkg_name, release)
[13:28] <smoser> i'd like to avoid chdist or the like , and need to deal with binpkg_name that is not the same arch i'm running
[13:31] <smoser> rbasak, maybe ^ ?
[13:32] <rbasak> smoser: how are you expecting it to do that? By asking Launchpad, or consulting an apt repository? The latter requires chdist or the like. I don't see any other way.
[13:33] <smoser> i dont care how
[13:34] <smoser> chdist could work, but just seems really heavy
[13:35] <persia> grep-dctrl, maybe?
[13:37] <smoser> i've been surprised before that this is so difficult.
[13:39] <smoser> persia, i dont follow.
[13:43] <Laney> smoser: The Packages file paragraphs contain a Source field if the source package name is different to the binary package name, and you can use grep-dctrl to get it
[13:44] <Laney> -sSource:Package -P binarypackagename or similar
[13:44] <smoser> right.
[13:44] <smoser> i thoguht persia was impliying something more.  that'd require chdist and getting each release i wanted to query about
[13:44] <smoser> and also each arch
[13:44] <Laney> You can get the packages files some other way
[13:45] <Laney> Doesn't /have/ to be chdist
[13:45] <smoser> sure.
[13:45] <Laney> ok, so that's not easy for you but I'm afraid I don't know of a way that I would consider easier
[13:45] <smoser> it just seems so reasonable a question... i have a list of packages that are installed (or in an image) what source did they come from.
[13:46] <smoser> yes, i can most certainly write that. and fix the edge cases, but it just seems like it shoudl exist.
[13:47] <Laney> Use one of the dctrl-tools programs if you are inside the environment, otherwise look at the Packages files if you want to know about some random archive
[13:47] <Laney> (Well, you'd use grep-dctrl in the second case too)
[13:48] <smoser> again, i can write this. its not "hard".  but my initial want was a list of all source packages that have been included in an ubuntu cloud image for any arch in any (recent) release.
[13:49] <persia> I can't find my script, but I remember having one that mirrored the sources for each release into a set of directories, and then consumed that to get this information.  There aren't very many interesting corner cases.
[14:41] <juliank> If someone wants to look at the (unfortunately huge, as it's been four months since the last one) apt 1.2.15 xenial SRU today or tomorrow: I'll be around these two days (from 0900-2200 CET, roughly); maybe on Thursday too
[14:41] <juliank> I hope to bring this down to monthly SRUs from now on, that should really make things easier to review.
[14:42] <juliank> (That is, whenever 1.3 gets a new release, there'll be a corresponding bugfix-only release in the 1.2 series within a month)
[14:43] <juliank> I directly uploaded the changes file this time as people were not that happy about the sync with 1.2.14 :)
[18:04] <jderose> cyphermox: FYI, Zesty desktop daily ISO isn't installable - https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1638086
[18:30] <xnox> jderose, needs logs, responded on the bug report.
[18:35] <jbicha> jderose: xnox: see bug 1637985
[18:37] <xnox> Timeout error, please try again in a few minutes.
[18:39] <Laney> xnox: if parcimonie passes its autopkgtests, can I sync it?
[18:39] <xnox> sure
[18:39] <xnox> jderose, i cannot comment because lp times out.
[18:39] <Laney> thx
[18:39] <xnox> will fix this. Need to drop 1k signatures from cdimage building.
[18:39] <xnox> jbicha, ^
[18:40]  * Laney is trying to make red things go green
[19:13] <Laney> xnox: libgnupg-interface-perl/s390x might be up your street
[19:13] <Laney> (autopkgtest)
[19:13] <coreycb> bdmurray, hi, would you by any chance have some time to review the openstack packages in xenial review queue this week?
[19:18] <xnox> Laney, in a way it is not. It passes in KVM & bare metal, but not inside LXD
[19:18] <xnox> Laney, as gnupg goes something rather, namespace, something rather
[19:18] <xnox> it was ignored failure before for the gnupg2 transition.
[19:19] <xnox> however, not sure, how good/bad it actually is. General usage seems to work inside lxd containers
[19:19] <Laney> xnox: I thought the intersection of gpg and s390x would make you happy
[19:19] <Laney> if it was skipped already, happy to do so again if that's your desire
[19:19] <bdmurray> coreycb: the existing ones got verified?
[19:20] <bdmurray> coreycb: also there seem to be 2 novas in the queue w/ the same version
[19:20] <coreycb> bdmurray, checking..  mind rejecting the latest nova?  that's a mistake.
[19:24] <coreycb> bdmurray, nova and nova-lxd should be ready for review.  neutron is blocked by a package that I need to verify in  -proposed.
[19:24] <bdmurray> coreycb: rejected
[19:24] <coreycb> bdmurray, thanks
[19:25] <bdmurray> coreycb: yes, I'll have a look in the next couple of days
[19:25] <coreycb> bdmurray, thanks. I'll try to get neutron verified before then.
[20:01] <jderose> cyphermox: okay, thanks! i attached a tarbal of /var/log to the bug
[20:01] <cyphermox> thanks, I will look
[20:01] <cyphermox> would you happen to have time to try out some new initramfs-tools/isc-dhcp crack?
[20:02] <jderose> cyphermox: sure... for Zesty or what?
[20:02] <cyphermox> yep, all in zesty
[20:02] <jderose> (actually, Zesty would take me a bit more work to test, but i can)
[20:02] <cyphermox> oh
[20:03] <cyphermox> well, I can get you the similar stuff for Y for tomorrow, too
[20:03] <jderose> cyphermox: so is this testing the same initramfs issue (newer iteration thereof)?
[20:03] <cyphermox> yep
[20:03] <cyphermox> I'd put it all in my ppa:cyphermox/maas
[20:03] <jderose> cyphermox: high level, how does this differ from what's being done in Xenial currently?
[20:04] <cyphermox> well, we reverted all the ipv6 stuff, so it does IPv6
[20:04] <jderose> cyphermox: let me get my environment setup... assuming i don't hit other issues along the way, i'll give it a go
[20:04] <cyphermox> it normally does dhcp via ipconfig if you set ip=dhcp, or dhcp via dhclient if you don't give it enough info -- ie. ip=(nothing) or ip=:::::::::::whatever
[20:05] <cyphermox> jderose: thanks.
[20:05] <jderose> er, hmm, but i don't know if zesty server is currently installable. you happen to know whether it is?
[20:05] <cyphermox> sorry, I don't
[20:05] <cyphermox> I expect it should be
[20:05] <jderose> np, i'll find out soon enough :)
[20:06] <cyphermox> It's early a bit, I haven't really spun up VMs with zesty dailies, only reinstalled my laptop
[20:06] <cyphermox> I know you use the netboot stuff so it so it's interesting to have your opinion.
[20:20] <mwhudson> morning
[20:24] <jderose> cyphermox: yeah, thanks for pinging me on this. i'm keen to keep PXE booting working, so always happy to test :)
[20:33] <jderose> cyphermox: Zesty server daily ISO is also broken, so don't think I can test this today... but I will soon, thanks again!
[20:37] <cyphermox> ok
[20:38] <cyphermox> I will kick off a download of the server iso then, and look at that tonight
[20:42] <jderose> cyphermox: seems to be the same problem currently present in the desktop ISO
[20:48] <xnox> jderose, it's the same signature bug as above
[20:49] <xnox> cyphermox, i removed 1024DSA key from ubuntu-keyring, yet both the archive and cd-roms are signed with both.
[20:49] <xnox> apt is fine with just one valid signature.
[20:49] <xnox> cdrom appears to want both.
[20:49] <cyphermox> ah, I didn't see
[20:49] <xnox> apt-setup or some such.
[20:49] <xnox> jderose, please don't open more bug reports.
[20:50] <xnox> jderose, no need to reproduce with every single flavour either. They are all broken =)
[20:50] <xnox> cyphermox, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1637985
[20:50] <cyphermox> xnox: so you're not working on a fix in d-i then?
[20:50] <xnox> and my comment there.
[20:50] <cyphermox> (trying to understand if you say that because you're expecting me to fix it)
[20:50] <xnox> cyphermox, i was going to fix ubuntu-cdimage to sign cdroms with just one key.
[20:50] <cyphermox> ok
[20:50] <xnox> cyphermox, i am expecting me to fix it =)
[20:51] <xnox> tomorrow, as it's night time =)
[20:51] <cyphermox> ok, just making sure we don't double the work
[21:06] <nacc> slangasek: let's say i had a src pkg (e.g. spamassassin) with multiple orig tarballs. Can `gbp-import-orig` not be used for such a package? It seems like I would need to use `dpkg-source -x --skip-debianization` and import that directory, but then (it seems) `gbp import-orig` needs to run interactively (which of course I'm trying to avoid for the importer)
[21:07] <slangasek> nacc: don't know if gbp import-orig works with multiple-tarball, sorry
[21:07] <nacc> slangasek: np, it doesn't seem to, afaict :)
[21:08] <nacc> trying to figure out the easiest way for me to support pristine-tar in the importer