| cjwatson | fossfreedom: approved - let me know when you've done those minor tweaks and I can merge it for you | 00:49 |
|---|---|---|
| nacc | rbasak: dumb q, re: qemu failing to import orig, do you have git-buildpackage installed in that env? | 00:49 |
| === juliank is now known as Guest55965 | ||
| Mirv | acheronuk: no, and actually there is not much point since it is not needed to land Qt 5.7.1 anyway - once Qt lands, it would automatically get built once dependencies are satisfied | 05:59 |
| Mirv | meanwhile, nothing seemingly happened in autopkgtest x86 queues overnight, so it's not really Qt dossing the infra, more like those linux uploads I guess :) | 06:00 |
| rbasak | nacc: good question, but yes it is. 0.7.2, on Xenial. | 08:52 |
| rbasak | juliank: so I just hit some variation of bug 1522675. But I can reproduce with "apt-get --reinstall flashplugin-installer" and that results in: | 09:10 |
| ubottu | bug 1522675 in apt (Ubuntu) "Needless scary warning: Download is performed unsandboxed as root: _apt user not allowed" [Medium,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1522675 | 09:10 |
| rbasak | flashplugin-installer: processing... | 09:10 |
| rbasak | flashplugin-installer: downloading http://archive.canonical.com/pool/partner/a/adobe-flashplugin/adobe-flashplugin_20161213.1.orig.tar.gz | 09:10 |
| rbasak | Err:1 http://archive.canonical.com/pool/partner/a/adobe-flashplugin/adobe-flashplugin_20161213.1.orig.tar.gz | 09:10 |
| rbasak | 404 Not Found | 09:10 |
| rbasak | W: Can't drop privileges for downloading as file '/var/lib/update-notifier/package-data-downloads/partial/adobe-flashplugin_20161213.1.orig.tar.gz' couldn't be accessed by user '_apt'. - pkgAcquire::Run (13: Permission denied) | 09:10 |
| rbasak | E: Failed to fetch http://archive.canonical.com/pool/partner/a/adobe-flashplugin/adobe-flashplugin_20161213.1.orig.tar.gz 404 Not Found | 09:10 |
| rbasak | E: Download Failed | 09:10 |
| rbasak | juliank: AFAICT, that's a real failure, rather than a spurious error, no? | 09:10 |
| rbasak | Sorry, I should've pastebinned that. Longer than I thought. | 09:11 |
| fossfreedom | cjwatson: much appreciated. Have revised and tested the ubiquity amendments - https://code.launchpad.net/~fossfreedom/ubiquity/fix_add_ubuntu_budgie_support | 10:13 |
| cjwatson | fossfreedom: thanks, uploaded | 14:27 |
| === bdrung_ is now known as bdrung | ||
| === bdrung_ is now known as bdrung | ||
| tomreyn | hey pitti. a couple months ago, we talked about the need for a utility which is able to precisely state which of your installed packages are supported / unsupported, or which support policy applies to them (if it can be determined) on > 12.04 LTS (since on 12.04 there is a legacy mechanism present for this purpose). back then, i think you said it was high (or not low) on your to do list (if everyday work allowed for it). i'm wondering | 17:33 |
| tomreyn | whether you had a chance to work on it since? | 17:33 |
| tomreyn | uuh sorry, i think i mixed you up with mdeslaur there | 17:35 |
| tomreyn | https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-manager/+bug/1574670 | 17:35 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 1574670 in update-manager (Ubuntu Xenial) "ubuntu-support-status returns inaccurate information" [Undecided,Confirmed] | 17:35 |
| === JanC is now known as Guest36383 | ||
| === JanC_ is now known as JanC | ||
| tomreyn | since it's marked 'fixed' in yakkety, where "the Supported field [..] is correct", should we expect that 18.04 will again be able to use the 'Äubuntu-support-status' utility, so that there will again be a way to realiably tell whether your system has only supported packages installed ( which IMHO isn't the case for the current LTS release)? | 17:39 |
| === shuduo_ is now known as shuduo | ||
| mdeslaur | tomreyn: assuming nothing breaks again before 18.04 comes out, yes | 18:46 |
| mdeslaur | tomreyn: actually, I believe it's the lts support field logic that is broken, so it needs to get fixed before 18.04 comes out | 18:47 |
| mdeslaur | tomreyn: I haven't had time to look into that yet, but will do soon | 18:47 |
| tomreyn | thanks, including for responding during the weekend. ;) | 18:54 |
| Bluefoxicy | https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/zram-config/+bug/1654777 this is intended for Ubuntu+1 so | 19:14 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 1654777 in zram-config (Ubuntu) "zram-config control by maximum amount of RAM usage" [Undecided,New] | 19:14 |
| === Bluefoxicy_ is now known as Bluefoxicy | ||
| valbr | is there someone here working for Canonical? | 21:14 |
| fossfreedom | quick question all - our seeds for our meta package contains a blacklist file - despite blacklisting a package it still appears to be installed on our ISO. Its not a dependency - just a recommendation. Is the blacklist file in seeds ignored? | 21:35 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!