| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: supertux (xenial-proposed/universe) [0.4.0-1 => 0.4.0-1ubuntu1] (no packageset) | 00:32 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2 [amd64] (yakkety-proposed) [2.02~beta2-36ubuntu11.1] | 09:16 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2 [arm64] (yakkety-proposed) [2.02~beta2-36ubuntu11.1] | 09:16 | |
| Laney | if anyone is good at alignment issues | 09:23 |
|---|---|---|
| Laney | pdl/armhf... | 09:23 |
| Laney | xnox: could you look at libterm-readline-gnu-perl and libtext-bibtex-perl which both fail on s390x please? | 09:27 |
| Laney | even if to decide if they should be removed | 09:27 |
| cjwatson | robru,oSoMoN: you don't need to ask me whether it's in production yet, just watch the status of the Launchpad task on https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/1633608 (though I don't recall whether this will apply to copies) | 09:34 |
| ubot5` | Ubuntu bug 1633608 in Launchpad itself "Bileto PPA upload rejections are lost to the ether" [High,In progress] | 09:34 |
| oSoMoN | cjwatson, thanks, I subscribed to the bug | 09:35 |
| * cjwatson blacklists the GHC 8 transition for now | 09:54 | |
| cjwatson | (this time in a less hacky way) | 09:54 |
| xnox | Laney, i want to say that those failures are normal, because terminals are weird on s390x. Let try building it on a possibly slightly more conventional installation, to see if e.g. the launchpad builder's configuration can be tweaked. | 10:03 |
| xnox | however these things did build before. somehow. | 10:03 |
| apw | cjwatson, is there any way we could get the rejection messages to queuebot ? | 10:22 |
| apw | cjwatson, or perhaps cc: the emails to -changes or something | 10:23 |
| cjwatson | a few years ago there was a bunch of work to store them for later auditing | 10:28 |
| cjwatson | but it was never quite completed | 10:28 |
| cjwatson | probably better to finish that than to add hacks | 10:28 |
| xnox | Laney, https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libtext-bibtex-perl/0.76-1ubuntu1 | 10:35 |
| xnox | and https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=96593 | 10:35 |
| Laney | xnox: nice, that's a handy find | 10:36 |
| * Laney might have a patch for pdl | 10:43 | |
| * Laney is new to this alignment shizzle though | 10:43 | |
| * Laney test builds | 10:43 | |
| xnox | Laney, somehow readline state ends up as NONE(0) instead of INITIALIZED(2), there is INITIALIZING(1) in between as well. | 10:49 |
| xnox | enoclue at the moment why =) | 10:49 |
| xnox | found it, https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840689 will get a better fix for it, but first coffee. | 10:51 |
| ubot5` | Debian bug 840689 in libterm-readline-gnu-perl "libterm-readline-gnu-perl: FTBFS on 64-bit big endian architectures" [Serious,Open] | 10:51 |
| Laney | xnox: yeah, saw that - the upstream dude says he will do a proper fix, whatever that means :-) | 11:09 |
| xnox | it means use unsigned, when unsigned is due | 11:10 |
| apw | xnox, hopefully it means use long when long is due | 11:15 |
| Laney | always long your longs | 11:15 |
| xnox | yeah. | 11:16 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: webbrowser-app (xenial-proposed/main) [0.23+16.04.20160413-0ubuntu1 => 0.23+16.04.20161028-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-qt-packages) (sync) | 11:16 | |
| xnox | Gnu.xs:539:5: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types] horum. I fail this morning | 11:16 |
| apw | it was broken then moment they had a cast in there to anything other than void* | 11:16 |
| xnox | needs patching perl code as well. and magic bridge functions to/from C | 11:23 |
| xnox | argh | 11:23 |
| apw | xnox, if there is a proper upstream fix coming ... could we not use the dirty hack until it comes ? | 11:33 |
| xnox | apw, well dirty hack is scary to me =) if 64 bit, and if big endian, point randomly to the next memory address, as that will be the "right" half of long. | 11:34 |
| xnox | I think i have it properly in a second. And if not, will upload dirty hack. | 11:34 |
| apw | xnox, the layout of a long in BE is pretty well defined | 11:34 |
| xnox | true | 11:34 |
| apw | what they are doing makes me physically sick, but it likely is "safe" | 11:35 |
| xnox | there is handing for charp vs pint, adding pulong there. | 11:35 |
| xnox | to keep up with their sickness | 11:36 |
| xnox | Laney, apw - https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=118371#txn-1679838 | 11:50 |
| xnox | uploaded | 11:50 |
| xnox | all is good https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libterm-readline-gnu-perl/1.34-1ubuntu1 | 11:52 |
| Laney | xnox: Ta | 11:53 |
| Laney | and my pdl seems to build so I'll copy that | 11:54 |
| xnox | apw, wanna shed some light into bus errors that started to appear on armhf in the galera-3 icinga2 and percona-galera-3 packages? http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/html/boost1.61.html | 11:55 |
| xnox | i have a theory that the new arm64 builders are better at emitting bus errors, and they simply were there the whole time. | 11:55 |
| xnox | i.e. unaligned access or some such. | 11:56 |
| Laney | unaligned access indeed | 11:56 |
| xnox | also have you ever seen this before: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/291194249/buildlog_ubuntu-zesty-s390x.libbitcoin_2.11.0-1ubuntu1_BUILDING.txt.gz | 11:56 |
| xnox | devlibs error: There is no package matching [ld64-1-dev] and noone provides it, please report bug to d-shlibs maintainer | 11:56 |
| xnox | ah https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2016/06/msg00648.html | 11:57 |
| doko | xnox: the change to 64bit kernels triggered a few unaligned accesses for armhf, but I'm not aware of any triggered on arm64 | 12:00 |
| xnox | doko, right, i see three new failures / unagligned accesses triggered on armhf. | 12:00 |
| xnox | =( | 12:00 |
| * xnox is reading https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2016/06/msg00652.html and does not understand | 12:01 | |
| cjwatson | We're intentionally not putting any effort into that because it brings us closer to where we wanted to be anyway for phones | 12:01 |
| cjwatson | (Because the Android kernel does much the same thing; there was previously a problem whereby stuff would succeed on builders and then fail on devices) | 12:01 |
| cjwatson | So the unaligned accesses should be fixed in packages | 12:02 |
| xnox | yeah, i understand that the right thing to do is to fix the packages. | 12:02 |
| === Pici is now known as ZarroBoogs | ||
| Laney | slangasek: I don't understand https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-release/britney/hints-ubuntu/revision/2074 - doesn't look like they were gone from proposed to me? | 12:51 |
| Laney | and they've moved back to release now | 12:51 |
| xnox | Laney, slangasek - i wonder if we can remove remaining broken / untransitioned binaries for perl to get it migrate. =) or are they non-leaf packages? | 12:55 |
| xnox | as in is all of uwsgi, or just the perl uwsgi? | 12:55 |
| Laney | xnox: They were demoted | 12:59 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: metacity (xenial-proposed/main) [1:3.18.7-0ubuntu0.1 => 1:3.18.7-0ubuntu0.2] (ubuntu-desktop) | 12:59 | |
| Laney | I guess we'll see what britney has to say about it (if it's only these packages or if there are other problems too) | 13:00 |
| xnox | Laney, but you should remove binaries & demote src to -proposed. That way it will be stuck with failure to build and will not migrate by virtue of miracles. | 13:00 |
| xnox | or keep a block-proposed bug against them. | 13:00 |
| Laney | They were blocked | 13:01 |
| xnox | ok. /me goes back to finishing boost1.61 transition laggers =) | 13:01 |
| Laney | there's a few random failures @ proposed-migration | 13:02 |
| apw | Laney, there appear to be a coulple of cases where the armhf builds are missing too | 13:23 |
| apw | Laney, and indeed similarly for s390x, which is oddness | 13:24 |
| Laney | apw: I think those are ones that just got uploaded | 13:24 |
| apw | Laney, ahh ok, then i'll wait a bit ... before listing them | 13:25 |
| Laney | pdl, some readline thing | 13:26 |
| Laney | and something else | 13:26 |
| apw | pdl yay | 13:26 |
| xnox | slangasek, powerpc dropped as release arch in debian | 13:37 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ido (xenial-proposed/main) [13.10.0+15.10.20151002-0ubuntu1 => 13.10.0+16.04.20161028-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop) (sync) | 14:01 | |
| Laney | Just those few (re)removals and autopkgtest failures then | 14:16 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt (xenial-proposed/main) [1.2.14 => 1.2.15] (core) | 14:36 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nova-lxd (xenial-proposed/main) [13.0.0-0ubuntu3 => 13.0.0-0ubuntu3.1] (ubuntu-server) | 15:32 | |
| slangasek | Laney: I did remove those packages from zesty-proposed; which ones do you see still there, at the perl 5.22 versions? | 15:57 |
| slangasek | Laney: regardless, demoting them to -proposed was the wrong thing in the first place | 15:58 |
| slangasek | Laney: it's possible there was a race between my removal being processed, and p-m re-copying them from -proposed after I dropped the hints but before the publisher had finished making them disappear from -proposed; this was all done during the window when publishing was really slow | 16:00 |
| slangasek | Laney: (re-removed now from zesty) | 16:00 |
| Laney | slangasek: Riiiight - so what's your rule of thumb for demotion vs removal then? | 16:00 |
| slangasek | Laney: the only time we ought to demote a package is if it depends on something else that's being removed, but itself is not buggy and requires no changes to become installable | 16:01 |
| Laney | slangasek: If you remove them, they won't come back via autosync, right? | 16:02 |
| slangasek | Laney: they absolutely will | 16:02 |
| Laney | I thought it checked for an explicit removal | 16:03 |
| slangasek | which is what we want to happen, if the package has gotten an upload in Debian that (hopefully) fixes the RC bug that got it removed from testing | 16:03 |
| slangasek | if it does, that's news to me and behavior that I think should be corrected | 16:03 |
| slangasek | it won't try to re-autosync at the same /version/ | 16:03 |
| Laney | I certainly see entries that look like that in http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/auto-sync/current.log | 16:04 |
| cjwatson | Uh | 16:04 |
| Laney | salmon, sga | 16:04 |
| cjwatson | slangasek: Checking for removals was absolutely deliberate and not something I think should be corrected | 16:04 |
| Laney | (So that's why I was asking for demotion rather than removal) | 16:04 |
| slangasek | cjwatson: really? I thought we had the sync-blacklist for things we were removing and didn't want back | 16:05 |
| cjwatson | slangasek: That was a nightmare | 16:05 |
| slangasek | hmm | 16:05 |
| slangasek | well, I didn't get the memo that this behavior had ever changed ;) | 16:05 |
| cjwatson | slangasek: It was around the time auto-sync moved to client side, and I banged on about it for a while :) | 16:05 |
| slangasek | and, as I commented on ubuntu-release, leaving stuff in -proposed is also a bit of a nightmare | 16:05 |
| cjwatson | IMO and IME auto-syncing stuff that's been removed is just too error-prone | 16:06 |
| slangasek | I'd much rather require AAs to maintain the sync-blacklist (which I still was!) than to bump stuff in -proposed and make update_excuses unusable | 16:06 |
| slangasek | :/ | 16:06 |
| cjwatson | The auto-sync log shows what hasn't been synced due to a previous removal | 16:07 |
| cjwatson | I think it's sufficient to just take a brief glance through that from time to time | 16:07 |
| slangasek | ok | 16:07 |
| cjwatson | (I used to do that) | 16:07 |
| slangasek | but if my first inclination, when glancing at what's not been synced for this reason, is to sync them all and see what sticks? :) | 16:08 |
| slangasek | anyway | 16:08 |
| slangasek | gotta go chase dinner on the streets of Bucharest now | 16:08 |
| cjwatson | slangasek: the auto-sync log tries to give you an indication of why things were removed | 16:08 |
| cjwatson | IME it's a mix of short-term and long-term reasons | 16:09 |
| cjwatson | I don't at all object to things being added to the sync-blacklist when the decision is that they should never be shipped in Ubuntu | 16:09 |
| Laney | apw: Could you take care of my 4 new requests on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kvirc/+bug/1636804 please? | 16:10 |
| ubot5` | Ubuntu bug 1636804 in nama (Ubuntu) "perl 5.24 demotions" [Undecided,New] | 16:10 |
| cjwatson | But quite often the next Debian upload after a removal doesn't in fact address the reason it was removed in Ubuntu, e.g. due to stricter build requirements; or the last version in Ubuntu had a delta that should be reapplied if the package is reintroduced | 16:10 |
| Laney | I don't know if this conversation establishes a new rule about whether you should remove or demote, sorry :( | 16:10 |
| cjwatson | And there was an antipattern I observed where people added stuff to the sync-blacklist that wasn't actually for a long-term reason | 16:10 |
| cjwatson | For instance, people were blacklisting things that were removed because they currently failed to build | 16:11 |
| cjwatson | That was really undiscoverable and so a bunch of packages were inadvertently not shipped when they could have been | 16:11 |
| cjwatson | So I tried to push for blacklisting only for long-term reasons | 16:11 |
| Laney | I like(d) using demotion of in-sync things to mean "this will probably be fixed by the next autosync" | 16:12 |
| Laney | I grant that it does cause excuses to become cluttered if that takes a while | 16:12 |
| cjwatson | I think it would be good to surface auto-sync's log output in a less plaintexty way | 16:12 |
| xnox | slangasek, imho removing binaries + demote src to -proposed is fine. and let those things stuck failing to build. | 16:33 |
| xnox | and auto-sync back in, if and when debian fixes things. | 16:33 |
| xnox | we need to mimic "removed from testing, broken in sid" somehow on our side. | 16:34 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1~build1] (no packageset) | 16:40 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [amd64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1~build1] (no packageset) | 16:40 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [armhf] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1~build1] (no packageset) | 16:40 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [arm64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1~build1] (no packageset) | 16:40 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [i386] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1~build1] (no packageset) | 16:42 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [powerpc] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1~build1] (no packageset) | 16:43 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [s390x] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1~build1] (no packageset) | 16:43 | |
| wxl | so ppc has been dropped as a release architecture from debian. does that mean we're going to be canning the support in ubuntu? (note this does NOT apply to ppc64el) https://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2016/10/msg00125.html | 17:26 |
| mdeslaur | wxl: infinity's main workstation is a powerpc ;) | 17:30 |
| wxl | mdeslaur: so i guess i shouldn't expect a response from him any time soon XD | 17:39 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fwupd [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [0.7.4-2] | 17:44 | |
| balloons | cyphermox, slangasek, I have confirmed $DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_ARCH is blank during initial installation. This causes the debconf message about invalid arch to appear on valid architecture systems. How would you like to fix the logic? | 17:46 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: isc-dhcp (precise-proposed/main) [4.1.ESV-R4-0ubuntu5.11 => 4.1.ESV-R4-0ubuntu5.12] (core) | 19:02 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: isc-dhcp (trusty-proposed/main) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.7 => 4.2.4-7ubuntu12.8] (core) | 19:03 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: isc-dhcp (xenial-proposed/main) [4.3.3-5ubuntu12.3 => 4.3.3-5ubuntu12.4] (core) | 19:04 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: isc-dhcp (yakkety-proposed/main) [4.3.3-5ubuntu15 => 4.3.3-5ubuntu15.1] (core) | 19:04 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nova (xenial-proposed/main) [2:13.1.1-0ubuntu1.1 => 2:13.1.2-0ubuntu2] (openstack, ubuntu-server) | 19:06 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected nova [source] (xenial-proposed) [2:13.1.2-0ubuntu2] | 19:25 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openstack-trove (xenial-proposed/universe) [1:5.1.1-0ubuntu1 => 1:5.1.1-0ubuntu2] (no packageset) | 19:38 | |
| cyphermox | balloons: I think we want not DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_ARCH in the .config file; I shipped an attempt at fixing this in my PPA friday, I will look in a few seconds | 19:48 |
| cyphermox | can someone please reject shim-signed in yakkety queue? | 19:48 |
| balloons | cyphermox, ack. I switched it out to replace the arch by using deb_host_arch in rules, and writing out the config.in file | 19:48 |
| balloons | what do you think of that approach? | 19:49 |
| cyphermox | yuck | 19:49 |
| cyphermox | but hey, if it works... | 19:49 |
| cyphermox | I'd need to see the diff | 19:49 |
| balloons | cyphermox, heh. Well I can say just pushing back the dpkg --print-architecture version does work | 19:52 |
| balloons | would you prefer that? | 19:52 |
| cyphermox | yea, I would | 19:53 |
| cyphermox | want to get me a debdiff against the juju currently in proposed, I could sponsor that now? :) | 19:54 |
| balloons | sure thing. I have one for yak/zest too | 19:54 |
| cyphermox | what for? that one wouldn't prompt | 19:58 |
| cyphermox | but we also need the xenial | 19:58 |
| balloons | cyphermox, ohh, for the missing dh_install and missing dependency in the first upload | 19:59 |
| cyphermox | oh, right | 19:59 |
| cyphermox | jderose: hey | 20:01 |
| jderose | cyphermox: hey back :) | 20:01 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nova [source] (xenial-proposed) [2:13.1.2-0ubuntu2] | 20:16 | |
| balloons | cyphermox, xenial: http://paste.ubuntu.com/23408418/ | 20:19 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nova-lxd [source] (xenial-proposed) [13.0.0-0ubuntu3.1] | 20:20 | |
| balloons | cyphermox, I hope this works for yakkety/zesty: http://paste.ubuntu.com/23408442/ | 20:26 |
| cyphermox | can we close a bug that describes the regression on yakkety/zesty please? | 20:31 |
| cyphermox | and is there one for the prompting on xenial? | 20:32 |
| balloons | cyphermox, ohh, new bugs? This is follow-up imho on the current SRU bugs | 20:34 |
| balloons | I need to put verification failed in there, or however you wish | 20:35 |
| cyphermox | I think we might want to track them separately on account of having to upload on top of something already in proposed | 20:35 |
| cyphermox | or maybe re-close, yeah, | 20:35 |
| balloons | I would typically see it as verification failed, new upload, re-verify | 20:36 |
| cyphermox | wfm | 20:36 |
| balloons | I guess we should re-mention the specific bugs? | 20:36 |
| cyphermox | yes | 20:36 |
| balloons | cyphermox, bug 1631038 for sysctl. We don't technically have a bug for the arch issues in the conf script. I guess I would use bug 1617440 | 20:37 |
| ubot5` | bug 1631038 in juju-release-tools "Need /etc/sysctl.d/10-juju.conf" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1631038 | 20:37 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: shim-signed (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.21.3 => 1.21.4] (core) | 20:37 | |
| ubot5` | bug 1617440 in juju-core (Ubuntu Yakkety) "[SRU] Juju 2 GA" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1617440 | 20:37 |
| cyphermox | isn't there something for the no-longer-supports-32bit? | 20:38 |
| slangasek | cjwatson: +1 for only blacklisting due to long-term issues; -1 for pushing to -proposed, which leaves the bottom of update_excuses full of things that are not actionable :) | 20:39 |
| balloons | cyphermox, bug 1614969 | 20:39 |
| ubot5` | bug 1614969 in juju-core-1 (Ubuntu) "Juju packaging allows builds for unsupported architectures" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1614969 | 20:39 |
| slangasek | balloons: "blank during initial installation" - er it should always be set, whether initial install or upgrade.... oh, are you checking this variable from the .config script? | 20:40 |
| slangasek | right, cyphermox responded. ok | 20:40 |
| balloons | slangasek, yep. Absolutely confirmed nothing is set when run during install | 20:40 |
| slangasek | balloons: it's not 'during install', it's "when used from the .config script" | 20:41 |
| slangasek | because the .config script is called from apt initially, /not/ via dpkg | 20:41 |
| balloons | slangasek, it IS set if I run a dpkg-reconfigure. sure ... | 20:41 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected shim-signed [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.21.4] | 20:43 | |
| balloons | slangasek, are you comfortable then just using dpkg --print-architecture for the config? | 20:43 |
| balloons | I converted the config file to use a .in file, and set it based on DEB_HOST_ARCH in debian rules and was playing with that, but it wasn't as desired, so, we're back to as it was | 20:43 |
| slangasek | balloons: yes, in that context it's probably better | 20:44 |
| cyphermox | slangasek: all good, I'll do the sponsorings for balloons now | 20:56 |
| cyphermox | slangasek: could you please also review that new shim-singed? :) | 21:05 |
| ginggs | shim-singed as in sung or slightly burnt? | 21:07 |
| slangasek | cyphermox: probably not tonight yet, sorry | 21:08 |
| cyphermox | ginggs: as in slightly burnt | 21:08 |
| cyphermox | permanently-renamed, too | 21:08 |
| cyphermox | maybe I'll consider shim-sung for the next upload | 21:08 |
| cyphermox | slangasek: ack | 21:09 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: juju-core (xenial-proposed/main) [2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.04.1 => 2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.04.2] (ubuntu-server) | 21:24 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: juju-core (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.1 => 1:2.0.0-0ubuntu1.16.10.2] (ubuntu-server) | 21:24 | |
| cyphermox | please reject juju-core in yakkety | 21:24 |
| cyphermox | crap :/ | 21:24 |
| cyphermox | ^ epoch is very bad, shouldn't have been in that debdiff | 21:26 |
| cyphermox | bad ballons ;) | 21:26 |
| * tsimonq2 gives balloons the epoch hat | 21:26 | |
| stgraber | done | 21:26 |
| * balloons feels ashamed | 21:26 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected juju-core [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1:2.0.0-0ubuntu1.16.10.2] | 21:27 | |
| cyphermox | stgraber: ta | 21:27 |
| tsimonq2 | balloons: Don't worry, you don't have to wear it as long as the Ducky Tie. :P | 21:27 |
| stgraber | balloons: we'll find you a corner to sit in next week :) | 21:28 |
| cyphermox | balloons: there was another subtle issue too, see if you can spot it ;) | 21:28 |
| balloons | yea. I wonder how many minutes (days?!) I'll have to do that | 21:28 |
| tsimonq2 | stgraber: You guys going to a sprint next week? Make him an actual physical epoch hat. XD | 21:28 |
| tsimonq2 | heheheheheheheheh ;) | 21:29 |
| stgraber | yeah, bunch of us sprinting in Budapest next week :) | 21:29 |
| cyphermox | balloons: that would be scary, if there were seconds involved. | 21:29 |
| tsimonq2 | stgraber: Oh nice! :D | 21:29 |
| stgraber | cyphermox: already in Santa Fe I take it? | 21:29 |
| stgraber | cyphermox: I'm on a plane to Denver here | 21:29 |
| cyphermox | yes, already there, about to leave for dinner | 21:30 |
| stgraber | isn't 3pm a bit early for dinner? :) | 21:30 |
| balloons | he's stuck fixing my epochs | 21:30 |
| cyphermox | (basically, as soon as I'm done with this, then I'll be back after) | 21:30 |
| tsimonq2 | balloons: XD | 21:30 |
| cyphermox | 3pm US dinner. | 21:30 |
| cyphermox | wait wat | 21:31 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: juju-core (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.1 => 2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.2] (ubuntu-server) | 21:31 | |
| cyphermox | annoying clocks. | 21:31 |
| tsimonq2 | I'm handing out halloween candy, so I can munch on that. :P | 21:31 |
| cyphermox | stgraber: feels like it's way beyond 3pm here, and even way past 5pm cyphermox-standard-time. perhaps I've been up for too long. | 21:34 |
| stgraber | that's why I booked late flights, get to sleep in before leaving and not see the timezone change :) | 21:36 |
| stgraber | though that's just 2 hours west, the 9 hours east I'll have next weekend will be a bit harder to deal with I suspect ;) | 21:36 |
| cyphermox | pfft | 21:36 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [amd64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1] (no packageset) | 23:53 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1] (no packageset) | 23:53 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [arm64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1] (no packageset) | 23:54 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [i386] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1] (no packageset) | 23:54 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [armhf] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1] (no packageset) | 23:54 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [s390x] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1] (no packageset) | 23:54 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcgicc [powerpc] (zesty-proposed/universe) [3.2.16-0.1] (no packageset) | 23:54 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!