[00:41] Could someome please approve my message in the ubuntu-devel-announce mailing list queue? [00:41] *someone [01:46] tsimonq2: done [01:48] cjwatson: kthx === maxb_ is now known as maxb === maclin1 is now known as maclin [04:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: chrome-gnome-shell (yakkety-proposed/universe) [8-2ubuntu3~ubuntu16.10.1 => 8-2ubuntu3~ubuntu16.10.2] (no packageset) [04:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: chrome-gnome-shell (xenial-proposed/primary) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.04.0] [04:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: chrome-gnome-shell (trusty-proposed/primary) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu14.04.1] [05:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: chrome-gnome-shell (yakkety-proposed/universe) [8-2ubuntu3~ubuntu16.10.1 => 8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.10.1] (no packageset) [06:39] I don't know quite how to explain the i386 only camitk autopkgtest failure at http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#qtbase-opensource-src but also it seems unlikely the tray icon patches would cause the error of detecting unknown CamiTK version.. [06:39] anyway, that one would be the only one blocking the migration of that patch update [06:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected chrome-gnome-shell [source] (yakkety-proposed) [8-2ubuntu3~ubuntu16.10.2] [06:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected chrome-gnome-shell [source] (xenial-proposed) [8-2ubuntu3~ubuntu16.04.0] [07:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected chrome-gnome-shell [source] (trusty-proposed) [8-2ubuntu3~ubuntu14.04.1] [07:05] jbicha, chrome-gnome-shell ... i think these backports look reasonable, but can you explain the odd numbering on xenial please [07:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted chrome-gnome-shell [source] (yakkety-proposed) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.10.1] [08:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-lts-trusty [amd64] (precise-proposed) [3.13.0-111.158~precise1] [09:09] oops, probably didn't mean to uncomment edubuntu :-) === marcusto_ is now known as marcustomlinson_ === marcustomlinson_ is now known as marcustomlinson [09:34] jbicha: thanks - was aware of that issue for the yakkety gnome-control-center. Little surprised the GTK+3.24 gnome-control-center/libinput still having the same issues :/ [11:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.4.0-65.86] (core, kernel) [11:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.4.0-65.86] [12:19] can someone let snapd out of the unapproved queue on xenial ? [12:22] ogra_, right now it is holding for a potential regression between it and apparmor [12:22] apw, thanks for the info [12:22] apw, any info what that regression is ? [12:23] ogra_, hopefully the comment from me on the SRU bug says which bug we are waiting on [12:23] ah [12:25] ogra_, oh yeah i even included the bug # [12:25] apw, yeah, i see it ... zyga has concerns though [12:25] apw: hey, I'm interested in the kernel regression and snapd [12:26] apw: jjohansen has informed me (also in the bug report) that this is not a regression but a feature [12:26] ogra_, it looks from the last two comments he was happy [12:26] apw: and that snapd should be updated to cope [12:26] zyga, are you happy :) [12:26] apw: not sure [12:26] apw: it's raining, my mother in law is coming today and we have medium fire in snapd all over ;-) [12:26] apw: seriously, not sure what to do yet [12:26] apw: if the bug just affects classic + jailmode snaps the this is irrelevant [12:26] with my "SRU member dealing with these snapd updates" hat on i think i am waiting for updates to snapd for all series z down [12:26] apw: if it affects more then we need to fix it in snapd and push this out ASAP [12:27] zyga, well it is affecting your tests :) [12:27] apw: one specific test that checks a very niche usecase [12:27] apw: we also have a wide-spread problem that .6 is addressing [12:27] zyga: it potentially affects more, I can't say where it will surface [12:27] apw: I'd trade the wide spread problem for the niche one any day [12:27] jjohansen: I see [12:27] jjohansen: so the rule you mentioned should land to the base template [12:28] jjohansen: is it sufficient for libc or should we open up 'm' to all the thnigs in core? [12:28] jjohansen, that is the one jamie suggests in comment #1 right ? [12:28] zyga: I am not sure, I would just go libc but I tend to be conservative [12:29] jjohansen: I see [12:29] jjohansen: I'll prepare a patch but we will also need to refresh all the profiles in snapd on startup [12:29] (like we do with seccomp now) [12:32] jjohansen, have those changes been submitted for Y/X/T yet ? [12:33] apw: yes [12:33] apw: well not trusty, I need to look at its kernel more [12:44] so i am reading that to say the current pending snapd in y/x/y are all only "as bad" as the one in -updates [12:45] sounds right [13:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: chrome-gnome-shell (xenial-proposed/primary) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.04.1] [13:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected chrome-gnome-shell [source] (xenial-proposed) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.04.0] [13:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted chrome-gnome-shell [source] (xenial-proposed) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.04.1] [13:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: chrome-gnome-shell [amd64] (xenial-proposed/universe) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.04.1] (no packageset) [13:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted chrome-gnome-shell [source] (trusty-proposed) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu14.04.1] [13:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted chrome-gnome-shell [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.04.1] [13:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: chrome-gnome-shell [i386] (trusty-proposed/none) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu14.04.1] (no packageset) [13:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted chrome-gnome-shell [i386] (trusty-proposed) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu14.04.1] [13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted snapd [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.22.6] [13:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted snapd [source] (trusty-proposed) [2.22.6~14.04] [13:23] ogra_, ok the old and new snapd will be equally affected by the incoming apparmor changes so i have accepted those snapd updates [13:24] zyga, ^^^ [13:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pepperflashplugin-nonfree (yakkety-proposed/multiverse) [1.8.2+nmu1ubuntu1 => 1.8.2+nmu1ubuntu1.1] (no packageset) === jamespage_ is now known as jamespage [13:57] apw: thank you [13:57] apw: I'm sure we'll work on 2.22.7 with a reaction to kernel changes [14:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pepperflashplugin-nonfree (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [1.8.2ubuntu1 => 1.8.2ubuntu1.1] (no packageset) [16:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gce-compute-image-packages [source] (trusty-proposed) [20160930-0ubuntu3~14.04.1] [19:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (yakkety-proposed/main) [4.8.0-40.43] (core, kernel) [19:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected thermald [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.5.3-5] [19:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (yakkety-proposed) [4.8.0-40.43] [19:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: thermald (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.5.3-4 => 1.5.3-4ubuntu1] (core) [20:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: wget (xenial-proposed/main) [1.17.1-1ubuntu1.1 => 1.17.1-1ubuntu1.2] (core) [21:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kexec-tools (yakkety-proposed/main) [1:2.0.10-2ubuntu1 => 1:2.0.10-2ubuntu1.1] (core) [21:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kexec-tools (xenial-proposed/main) [1:2.0.10-1ubuntu2 => 1:2.0.10-1ubuntu2.1] (core)