[00:04] <tjaalton> could debhelper 10 be backported to xenial?
[00:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ubiquity-slideshow-ubuntu [amd64] (zesty-proposed/main) [119] (kubuntu, ubuntu-desktop)
[00:19] <jbicha> tjaalton: it's in xenial-backports: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/debhelper
[01:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-keyring (yakkety-proposed/main) [3.20.0-2ubuntu4 => 3.20.0-2ubuntu4.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[01:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-keyring (xenial-proposed/main) [3.18.3-0ubuntu2 => 3.18.3-0ubuntu2.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[03:01] <tsimonq2> New fancy debhelper? :O
[05:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fifechan [i386] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.1.3-2] (no packageset)
[05:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fifechan [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.1.3-2] (no packageset)
[05:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fifechan [amd64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.1.3-2] (no packageset)
[05:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fifechan [arm64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.1.3-2] (no packageset)
[05:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fifechan [armhf] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.1.3-2] (no packageset)
[05:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fifechan [powerpc] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.1.3-2] (no packageset)
[05:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fifechan [s390x] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.1.3-2] (no packageset)
[05:18] <tjaalton> jbicha: oh.. thx
[05:27] <valorie> weee, it's so good to see some of our KDE packages appear
[05:30] <tsimonq2> tjaalton: But the work there might not be done, actually.
[05:30] <tsimonq2> tjaalton: https://nthykier.wordpress.com/2016/09/11/debhelper-10-is-now-available/ - seems it doesn't recognize 10 as a stable release yet.
[05:30] <tjaalton> tsimonq2: yeah and I'd need it in -updates but doubt that'll happen.. best to just modify pkgs to not need 10
[05:37] <tsimonq2> tjaalton: Hmm, why is that?
[05:37] <tjaalton> mesa migrated to it
[05:37] <tsimonq2> tjaalton: Why can't mp up one? Just curious what breaks...
[05:37] <tsimonq2> *we bump
[05:37] <tjaalton> dunno, just not gonna happen anytime soon
[05:38] <tsimonq2> O_o
[05:39] <tjaalton> actually, since backports has it it's good enough for me for now
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted dropwizard-metrics [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [3.1.2-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fifechan [arm64] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3-2]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fifechan [i386] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3-2]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fifechan [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3-2]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted seafile [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [6.0.1+git20161227.5f030ac-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted seafile [s390x] (zesty-proposed) [6.0.1+git20161227.5f030ac-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted simgrid [armhf] (zesty-proposed) [3.14.159-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted simgrid [powerpc] (zesty-proposed) [3.14.159-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted simgrid [s390x] (zesty-proposed) [3.14.159-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fifechan [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3-2]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fifechan [powerpc] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3-2]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted seafile [powerpc] (zesty-proposed) [6.0.1+git20161227.5f030ac-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted simgrid [i386] (zesty-proposed) [3.14.159-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fifechan [armhf] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3-2]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted simgrid [arm64] (zesty-proposed) [3.14.159-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fifechan [s390x] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3-2]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted simgrid [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed) [3.14.159-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted seafile [arm64] (zesty-proposed) [6.0.1+git20161227.5f030ac-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted seafile [i386] (zesty-proposed) [6.0.1+git20161227.5f030ac-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted seafile [armhf] (zesty-proposed) [6.0.1+git20161227.5f030ac-1]
[06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted seafile [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed) [6.0.1+git20161227.5f030ac-1]
[07:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted initramfs-tools [source] (trusty-proposed) [0.103ubuntu4.7]
[09:35] <xnox> mwhudson, the updated runc in 1.12.3 docker.io appears to be no worky on s390x at all.
[10:12] <apw> xnox, you are sure it is the runc which causes the issue here ?  the delta from what was there before is very small
[10:17] <xnox> apw, pretty sure.
[10:17] <xnox> apw, will test in a bit. Let me show the pastebin.
[10:19] <apw> xnox, i am saying that downgrading docker.io itself and leaving runc upgraded is also a fail
[10:20] <xnox> correct
[10:20] <xnox> docker.io is irrelevant, as it execs containerd, which execs runc, which bubbles up the error
[10:20] <xnox> apw, http://paste.ubuntu.com/23832610/
[10:20] <apw> xnox, most unexpected, what version of runc works ?
[10:20] <xnox> is the update to libseccomp which is present in docker.io & containerd, but not in runc.
[10:21] <xnox> runc from zesty-proposed is all good
[10:21] <xnox> currently triggered ADT tests to get that to migrate.
[10:21] <xnox> after that will take this seccomp_internal.go vendorized update, rebuild runc with just that, and hopefully push that out as SRU to yakkety & xenial asap.
[10:21] <apw> xnox, that does seem like a good idea, if we can get that migrated, we can get it backported :)
[10:22] <xnox> yeap =) backporting everything may be easier ;-)
[10:22] <apw> xnox, as the versio in zesty release and those are the same
[10:22] <apw> currently, so it seems reasonable to continue to do that
[10:26] <xnox> apw, however docker-in-lxd is failing
[10:26] <xnox> adt test (did rerun now) maybe i need to add "&trigger=lxd" or some such.
[10:27] <xnox> nope, there is no new lxd..... i wonder if lxd does not let the new docker do seccomp =(
[10:33] <xnox> apw, if the ADT fails for zesty, i'll start a silo with SRU for seccomp via bileto - such that we have a PPA for yakkety/xenial and can see ADT test results before shoving it in.....
[11:01] <apw> xnox, sounds plausible, and the plan too
[11:04] <xnox> ticket for yakkety https://bileto.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/2388
[11:04] <xnox> ticket for xenial https://bileto.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/2389
[11:04] <xnox> apw, cherrypick of the seccomp patch, upgrading runc on yakkety results in container to start, when previously it did not.
[11:05] <xnox> no need to restart docker.service or anything like that. Will upload things into tickets shortly.
[11:15] <apw> xnox, ack
[11:35] <xnox> https://bileto.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/2388 built and validated on yakkety that it is all good; adt tests / automated signoff is now pending
[11:35] <xnox> for the 2389 waiting for packages to be published
[11:36] <xnox> actually they look to be published too
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xf86-input-mtrack-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [0.3.1-1build1~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-input-evdev-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:2.10.2-1ubuntu1~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-input-libinput-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [0.19.0-1~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-input-vmmouse-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:13.1.0-1ubuntu2~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-amdgpu-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1.1.2-1~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-cirrus-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.5.3-1ubuntu3~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-fbdev-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:0.4.4-1build5~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-geode-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [2.11.18-2~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-mach64-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [6.9.5-1build2~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xf86-input-wacom-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:0.33.0-0ubuntu1~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-input-synaptics-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1.8.3-1ubuntu1~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-ati-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:7.7.1-1~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-freedreno-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1.4.0-1build1~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-mga-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.6.4-1build2~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-input-joystick-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.6.2-1build4~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-dummy-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:0.3.7-1build5~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-input-void-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.4.1-1build2~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-intel-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [2:2.99.917+git20160706-1ubuntu1~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-neomagic-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.2.9-1build2~16.04.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-openchrome-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:0.3.3+git20160310-1~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-r128-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [6.10.1-1~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-siliconmotion-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.7.8-1ubuntu6~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-tdfx-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.4.6-1build2~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-vesa-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:2.3.4-1build2~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.0.12-2~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-savage-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:2.3.8-1ubuntu3~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-trident-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.3.7-1build2~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-qxl-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [0.1.4-3ubuntu3~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-vmware-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:13.1.0-2ubuntu3~16.04.1]
[12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xserver-xorg-video-sisusb-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:0.9.6-2build5~16.04.1]
[12:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xorg-server-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [2:1.18.4-1ubuntu6.1~16.04.1]
[12:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xorg-hwe-16.04 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:7.7+13ubuntu4~16.04.1]
[12:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: vulkan (xenial-proposed/universe) [1.0.8.0+dfsg1-0ubuntu1 => 1.0.21.0+dfsg1-1~16.04.1] (no packageset)
[14:10] <slangasek> tseliot: I can cover the nusakan side next week if alpha2 is happening
[14:11] <slangasek> er, sorry
[14:11] <slangasek> tsimonq2: I can cover the nusakan side next week if alpha2 is happening
[14:24] <clivejo> for security updates to xenial and yakkety, is it only the security team can do that?
[14:25] <acheronuk> upload?
[14:25] <clivejo> yes, upload
[14:39] <apw> clivejo, normally they are built in the security PPA so they are only built against that pocket
[14:39] <apw> tyhicks, ^ i assume they need to come through one of your sponsors
[14:51] <tyhicks> apw: that's correct
[14:51] <tyhicks> clivejo: hey - is there something you need the security team to sponsor?
[14:52] <tyhicks> clivejo: my spidey sense tells me that you may be asking about sponsoring the ark upload - is that right?
[14:52] <clivejo> yes
[14:53] <tyhicks> clivejo: it is in our sponsoring queue and we'll get to it soon
[14:53] <clivejo> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ark/+bug/1655507
[14:53] <tyhicks> clivejo: I'll see if we can bump it up in the queue
[14:54] <clivejo> can you backport the same patch to xenial?
[14:54] <clivejo> can I upload those packages or does it have to go via your team?
[15:03] <tyhicks> clivejo: it has to go via our team
[15:04] <tyhicks> clivejo: we won't be able to do the xenial backport - can you provide a debdiff in the bug?
[15:05] <tyhicks> clivejo: hmm, now I'm confused because you already attached a xenial debdiff in the bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ark/+bug/1655507/comments/2)
[15:06] <clivejo> mine hasnt got a compliant changelog entry
[15:07] <clivejo> and I'm just about to go out the door
[15:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sosreport (yakkety-proposed/main) [3.3-1 => 3.3+git50-g3c0349b-2~ubuntu16.10.1] (ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server)
[15:08] <tyhicks> clivejo: ratliff can probably fix up the changelog entry when sponsoring
[15:09] <tyhicks> ratliff: it looks like you can steal the changelog from the yakkety debdiff
[15:09] <tyhicks> clivejo: going forward, please make sure that the debdiffs are ready to be sponsored when attaching them to the bug
[15:10] <xnox> apw, automated testing passed (docker.io tests) and manual looks good too. I will sync runc into yakkety-proposed and xenial-proposed unaproved queues.
[15:10] <xnox> the bug template should be correct, please accept them =)
[15:11] <xnox> the diff will not be in the queue, but one can access the content.diff at https://bileto.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/2388 and https://bileto.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/2389
[15:11] <xnox> e.g. https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_39a8dbb93caf4ec889f8a1b7f69885db/bileto-2389/2017-01-20_11:36:03/xenial_runc_content.diff
[15:11] <xnox> https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_39a8dbb93caf4ec889f8a1b7f69885db/bileto-2388/2017-01-20_11:31:44/yakkety_runc_content.diff
[15:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: runc (xenial-proposed/universe) [1.0.0~rc1-0ubuntu2~16.04.1 => 1.0.0~rc1-0ubuntu2~16.04.1.1] (no packageset) (sync)
[15:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: runc (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.0.0~rc1-0ubuntu2~16.10.1 => 1.0.0~rc1-0ubuntu2~16.10.1.1] (no packageset) (sync)
[15:16]  * apw will review those ^
[15:17] <apw> and hate on launchpad for a bit because diffs
[15:19] <xnox> tah.
[15:20] <apw> your versions are a bit odd, 1.1 rather than .2, but meh
[15:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted runc [sync] (yakkety-proposed) [1.0.0~rc1-0ubuntu2~16.10.1.1]
[15:28] <ratliff> tyhicks, clivejo: ack, will start work on ark sponsorship in about an hour
[15:28] <tyhicks> thank you!
[15:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted runc [sync] (xenial-proposed) [1.0.0~rc1-0ubuntu2~16.04.1.1]
[15:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (xenial-proposed/universe) [0.12+16.04ubuntu1 => 0.14+16.04ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[15:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.12+16.10ubuntu1 => 0.14+16.10ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[15:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cloud-init (xenial-proposed/main) [0.7.8-49-g9e904bb-0ubuntu1~16.04.4 => 0.7.9-0ubuntu1~16.04.1] (edubuntu, ubuntu-cloud, ubuntu-server)
[15:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted sudo [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.8.16-0ubuntu1.3]
[15:55] <sil2100> barry: hey! You could have re-uploaded as ubuntu1 again, since I'm just rejecting the previous upload anyway - but ubuntu2 is fine as well
[15:55] <sil2100> Handling it now ;)
[15:55] <barry> sil2100: yep, but i like moving forward.  better for tagging and tracking.  thanks for approving!
[15:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ubuntu-image [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.14+16.04ubuntu1]
[15:56] <sil2100> (rejecting the old ones first)
[15:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ubuntu-image [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.14+16.10ubuntu1]
[16:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-image [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.14+16.04ubuntu2]
[16:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-image [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.14+16.10ubuntu2]
[16:36] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Ok, could you please put your name on the wiki if you haven't already?
[16:43] <acheronuk> hi release team. could you please force-badtest baloo-widgets5/4:16.12.1-0ubuntu1 please?
[16:44] <acheronuk> upstream KDE developers are telling us that is safe to ignore
[16:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected crash [source] (xenial-proposed) [7.1.4-1ubuntu5]
[16:50] <apw> acheronuk, looking
[16:56] <apw> acheronuk, done
[16:56] <acheronuk> apw: thank you :)
[17:03] <slangasek> tsimonq2: I haven't done so yet and my browser is somewhat occupied at the moment, feel free to put my name in for me :)
[17:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: crash (xenial-proposed/main) [7.1.4-1ubuntu4 => 7.1.4-1ubuntu4.1] (core)
[17:11] <xnox> internet on diamond is so slow......
[17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted crash [source] (xenial-proposed) [7.1.4-1ubuntu4.1]
[17:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: golang-glide [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.12.3-2] (no packageset)
[17:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: instant [amd64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [2016.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[17:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: golang-glide [armhf] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.12.3-2] (no packageset)
[17:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: golang-glide [i386] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.12.3-2] (no packageset)
[17:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fiat [amd64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [2016.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[17:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: golang-glide [amd64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.12.3-2] (no packageset)
[17:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: git-annex-el [amd64] (zesty-proposed/none) [1.0+git20160215.e61ef24-1] (no packageset)
[17:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: php-geos [amd64] (zesty-proposed/none) [1.0.0-1] (no packageset)
[17:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: php-geos [i386] (zesty-proposed/none) [1.0.0-1] (no packageset)
[17:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ufl [amd64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [2016.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[17:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: golang-glide [arm64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.12.3-2] (no packageset)
[17:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: golang-glide [s390x] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.12.3-2] (no packageset)
[17:23] <xnox> slangasek, we have a regression-updates and a fix in -proposed. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/runc/+bug/1658009 could you please consider releasing it into -updates expedited? e.g. today or on monday?
[17:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: golang-glide [powerpc] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.12.3-2] (no packageset)
[17:27] <slangasek> xnox: targeted fix? +1; looking now
[17:33] <xnox> slangasek, an update to a vendorised library that did not include if nativearch=s390x return s390x.
[17:33] <xnox> slangasek, in normal world we would have updated golang-libseccomp once, instead of have that update in docker.io; in containerd; and missed in runc.
[17:34] <xnox> slangasek, also I have not yet investigated how did runc sru got published in yakkety and xenial; when it did not at all was capable to launch any container.
[17:34] <xnox> this has been fixed in runc rc2 in zesty-proposed; stuck because docker-in-lxd test is currently failing in zesty at the moment.
[17:35] <slangasek> xnox: not capable on any architecture, or on !x86?
[17:36] <xnox> not capable on s390x
[17:36] <xnox> it was fine on amd64
[17:36] <slangasek> ok
[17:37] <slangasek> I don't imagine cross-arch testing is part of the SRU test plan
[17:37] <xnox> not sure if somebody else !x86 is also bad, as ppc64el appears to be working.
[17:37] <slangasek> did it fail autopkgtests?
[17:38] <bdmurray> cjwatson: Could you set a driver or bug supervisor for ubuntu-archive-tools?
[17:38] <xnox> based on http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/docker.io/yakkety/s390x the docker.io test, with bad runc as a trigger passed on s390x
[17:38] <xnox> slangasek, ^ clearly adt test is insufficient then; opening a bug for me to look at in two weeks time after vac.
[17:39] <slangasek> xnox: ack
[17:40] <xnox> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/runc/+bug/1658150
[17:40] <xnox> 17.02
[17:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected vlc [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.2.4-4ubuntu0.16.10.1]
[17:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: vlc (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2.2.4-4 => 2.2.4-4ubuntu0.16.10.1] (mozilla, mythbuntu)
[17:50] <cjwatson> bdmurray: I've just changed the maintainer to ~ubuntu-archive
[17:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vlc [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.2.4-4ubuntu0.16.10.1]
[18:48] <slangasek> xnox: oh right, the autopkgtest passing for docker is because s390x is autopkgtest in lxd
[19:05] <rtg> can someone tell me why linux 4.9.0-12.16 isn't promoting ? I'm not getting much out of brittny update excuses
[19:07] <rtg> or linux-meta 4.9.0-12.16, rather
[19:26] <infinity> rtg: Because of 3 blocking bugs.
[19:26] <infinity> apw: ^-- Who's currently on the hook for checking your autopkgtest matrix and then clearing blocking bugs?
[19:27] <rtg> those are just tracking bugs
[19:28] <rtg> do I have to clear the block-proposed tag on all of them ?
[19:29] <infinity> rtg: Yes, but we don't generally do that until we're happy with the testing matrix (which is a manual review process, since britney's view of kernel testing is wrong).
[19:30] <rtg> infinity, the ADT test matrix, or the bjf SRU tests ?
[19:30] <infinity> rtg: The adt matrix, ie: http://people.canonical.com/~kernel/status/adt-matrix/zesty-linux-meta.html
[19:32] <rtg> infinity, I'm mostly happy with the ADT test matrix (if you ignore systemd and glibc test failures)
[19:39] <infinity> rtg: The glibc one is a false negative.
[19:44] <rtg> infinity, last time you checked you said the same thing about systemd
[19:48] <infinity> rtg: I'm not sure I was ever convinced that the systemd failure isn't the kernel's fault, but I think by the time I looked, it was no longer a regression between release and proposed. :P
[19:48] <infinity> rtg: And it needs Real Debugging to figure out WTF is actually wrong.
[19:48] <infinity> Which none of us have done.
[19:49] <infinity> (By that same metric, it's still not a regression, but I do think we need to understand it before release)
[19:50] <apw> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/systemd/+bug/1658178
[19:50] <apw> i've filed a bug ...
[19:50] <rtg> infinity, so, should it hold up this promotion ? I'm not seeing any problems that look like systemd with the previous release
[19:50] <infinity> apw: Last I looked, it was a bit of a weird one.  It didn't seem like tests were failing, but that the mid-test reboot was failing.
[19:50] <rtg> previous release of the Zesty 4.9 kernel
[19:50] <infinity> apw: Which is... Special.
[19:51] <apw> infinity, whats special ?
[19:51] <infinity> rtg: This looks fine to release from the "not regressed from previous zesty" POV.  Just saying we want to double back on any red in that matrix between now and final release (by feature freeze would be better).
[19:51] <infinity> apw: The line above? :P
[19:52] <rtg> infinity, ok
[19:52] <apw> infinity, i'll get some bugs filed for all the red and get them on our lists
[19:52] <rtg> apw, is it just the block-proposed tags holding up brittny ?
[19:53] <infinity> rtg: And I realise it'll all go topsy-turby again when 4.10 lands (when is that?), but yeah.  We need to drive that matrix to green by release, so it's useful for SRUs (and so we don't have obvious regressions from the previous release).
[19:53] <infinity> rtg: block-proposed is what's causing it to hate you right now.
[19:53] <infinity> rtg: Then it'll be d-i, which I'll fix right now.
[19:55] <acheronuk> release team: could you please force-badtest another for us? libkdegames/4:16.12.1-0ubuntu1
[19:55] <rtg> infinity, 4.10 is a couple weeks out yet.
[19:56] <acheronuk> this one has been failing in debian since august, and on ours for some time as well I believe
[19:57] <rtg> infinity, alright, tags are cleared
[19:57] <acheronuk> I plan to either try and fix it with debian by the time we have a 16.12.2 to upload, or disable the test if it is not actually useful or fixable
[20:00] <infinity> rtg: You'll want to add it back for the unreleased kernel once it happens.
[20:01] <infinity> Err, once this migrates.
[20:01] <rtg> infinity, not sure what you mean. I'm creating new tracking bugs for each upload.
[20:02] <infinity> rtg: I assume you cleared the tag from all the bugs that britney was referencing?
[20:02] <infinity> rtg: If so, some of those bugs are for future kernels you haven't uploaded yet. :P
[20:02] <rtg> infinity, I did, and now see that -15.16 was one of those.
[20:02] <apw> rtg, you have bugs for the ones in CKT PPA which are also incorrectly blocking britney, once that migrates you need to put it back before it gets out to -proposed
[20:03] <rtg> apw, will do.
[20:03] <rtg> I'm surprised that brittny pays attention to the ckt PPA
[20:03] <infinity> It doesn't.
[20:03] <infinity> It pays attention to bugs.
[20:04] <infinity> And LP bugs don't have version info.
[20:04] <rtg> makes sense
[20:04] <infinity> So, it pays attention to *all* open bugs against "linux" in "zesty" with the block tags.
[20:07] <infinity> rtg: d-i uploaded, once that's built, it should all sail through.
[20:07] <rtg> infinity, cool, thanks for your help.
[20:26] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Ok.
[20:31] <tsimonq2> infinity: Just out of curiosity, is there a page explaining why we have a 493 long delta on debian-installer?
[20:31] <tsimonq2> I'm curious. :P
[20:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: indicator-application (xenial-proposed/main) [12.10.1+15.04.20150128-0ubuntu1 => 12.10.1+16.04.20170120-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop) (sync)
[20:58] <infinity> tsimonq2: Nope.
[21:02] <tsimonq2> infinity: So then why? :) *puppy eyes*
[21:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: indicator-application (yakkety-proposed/main) [12.10.1+15.04.20150128-0ubuntu1 => 12.10.1+16.10.20170120-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop) (sync)
[23:05] <clivejo> how long does it usually take to get NEW packages processed?
[23:05] <clivejo> new binary I mean
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fiat [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [2016.2.0-2]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-glide [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [0.12.3-2]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-glide [armhf] (zesty-proposed) [0.12.3-2]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-glide [powerpc] (zesty-proposed) [0.12.3-2]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-glide [s390x] (zesty-proposed) [0.12.3-2]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted php-geos [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [1.0.0-1]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ufl [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [2016.2.0-2]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted git-annex-el [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [1.0+git20160215.e61ef24-1]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-glide [i386] (zesty-proposed) [0.12.3-2]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted instant [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [2016.2.0-2]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-glide [arm64] (zesty-proposed) [0.12.3-2]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted php-geos [i386] (zesty-proposed) [1.0.0-1]
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-glide [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed) [0.12.3-2]
[23:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-lts-vivid [amd64] (trusty-proposed) [3.19.0-80.88~14.04.1]
[23:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-lts-xenial [amd64] (trusty-proposed) [4.4.0-62.83~14.04.1]