[01:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-7-cross-ports [i386] (artful-proposed/universe) [0ubuntu3] (no packageset) === lynxorian is now known as lyn||ian === cpaelzer_ is now known as cpaelzer [06:26] nacc: php7.x-xml should be fixed to not Provide: php-xml, that's what was still holding php7.0 in main [07:21] contact SRU team in here, or somewhere else? [07:30] anyway... got an email about this on phased updates https://errors.ubuntu.com/?release=Ubuntu%2017.04&package=k3b&period=day&version=17.04.0-0ubuntu1 [07:30] can't see anything in the build and changes that would account for any increased crash rate there. [07:32] I suspect is it more a case of, "oooh, and update to something I don't normally use. I'll launch it and have a look". Then managing to trigger a crash I can't replicate, which they may well have got with the previous build had the bothered to do the same with that [07:50] oh, and if I look at a timescale of a week or more on that report page and look at all versions (i.e. from before the start of the update phasing or that version was uploaded), I see more occurrences or exactly the same reports [07:56] so if there is a crash (that I can't track or reproduce) evidence is very strong that it is not the SRU update build itself [08:06] acheronuk, yes SRU is "here" [08:07] apw: thanks. glad I wasn't talking pointlessly into the void there :) [08:07] both things could be true :) [08:09] acheronuk, there also is "a major uptick" but htat is from 1 to 3 reports if i am reading this right [08:10] acheronuk, and i assuem that is because you had none in 17.04 before it released, and then got some users, who are hitting these rare bugs [08:10] acheronuk, is it telling you the thing has been stopped ? [08:11] apw: agreed [08:11] or at least that is the way it seems to me [08:11] 2 secs [08:11] apw: email "Further phasing of this update has been stopped until the errors have either been fixed or determined to not be a result of this Stable Release Update." [08:12] Laney, do you know one determines that ? [08:13] or indicates one has .... [08:15] ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm [08:15] on a case by case basis AFAIK [08:15] acheronuk: You're reading it wrong. The double free is definitely new. [08:15] A few of these are new. [08:16] https://errors.ubuntu.com/problem/ccf29ca2fc3a7fd8440f77fb469260998c2725bc is new. [08:17] link does not work for me ^^^ [08:17] acheronuk: And I'm not sure how you can confidently say that you see nothing in a 6MB diff to account for that. :P [08:21] infinity: the double free says 1 occurrence for version 17.04.0-0ubuntu1, but checking over all versions (which must be pre-SRU builds) it is 3 occurrences [08:22] infinity: and the other error certainly has occurrences prior to the SRU build [08:23] I may be having windowing issues indeed. [08:23] And also just diffed the sources to see it was pretty much all po updates. [08:24] Well, and some XML, which could cause random crashes in an XML parser, I suppose, but meh. [08:24] infinity: not saying I discount these crashes. I will be keeping an eye on bug reports to see if we get anything concrete to work with and that shows the affect users adversly [08:27] FWIW, one of these double-frees is "new", in that the identical signature hasn't been seen on a previous version, but this software seems to just randomly vomit double-frees all over the place, in many versions, so I don't think this is so much new as just a slightly different codepath with the same bug. :P [08:28] infinity: right. this is the 1st time I have really had to use that crash data pages, and can't log in anyway, so may have missed that :/ [08:28] Yeah, I'm not sure who you ask to get access, but you should ask nicely for access for things you can upload. [08:29] (It's locked down by default because stack traces of random user cores are potentially very sensitive, so I suspect there's some interview process where you have to promise to be a good person) [08:29] infinity: agreed. already submitted the canonical for asking for permission to view them on packages in the kubuntu set [08:30] Anyhow, I think I'm okay with phasing this back up. [08:30] After looking at the mess in more detail. [08:30] *canonical online form I mean [08:31] acheronuk: And done. [08:32] infinity: thank you. :) As said, will keep an eye on bug reports, forum posts etc. [08:48] interesting, with windows style line endings the #!/bin/sh is not correctly interpreted [08:49] is this a regression? http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/v/vtk6/artful/amd64 [08:50] LocutusOfBorg: /bin/sh^M is very much not a valid interpreter. :P [08:50] well, it is the windows style line ending 0a0d, we might check it and use it anyway? [08:51] in the meanwhile I'll ask anton to stop using that stuff, and I uploaded a fixed one [08:51] I was just curious [08:51] LocutusOfBorg: Or, don't write shell scripts in notepad. [08:52] LocutusOfBorg: Pretty sure you won't convince the kernel folks to parse DOS magic. [08:52] LocutusOfBorg, right that is a windows line ending, linux uses unix line endings [08:53] windows is of course wrong :) [08:53] Can't fathom how or why that upload changed ALL those line endings. [08:53] The diff is a mess. [08:53] I'm not saying windows is right, of course :) [08:53] infinity, yes, I don't even find such changes in git [08:54] I'm cloning the repo right now [08:56] LocutusOfBorg: He somehow did a unix2dos number on pretty much all of debian/patches and debian/tests. [08:56] derp [08:56] just on the patch headers, of course [08:56] this seems intentional [08:56] and intentionally wrong [08:57] LocutusOfBorg: Some headers. A few complete patches. [08:57] LocutusOfBorg: It's weird. [08:57] I think quilt complains [08:57] or maybe they are not applied [08:57] nice to see how science team can screw up things [08:57] Absolutely bizarre, at any rate. [08:58] Applying patch 10_allpatches.patch [08:58] (Stripping trailing CRs from patch; use --binary to disable.) [08:59] he did that because the source is probably wrong [09:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected gcc-7-cross-ports [i386] (artful-proposed) [0ubuntu3] [09:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected gcc-7-cross-ports [ppc64el] (artful-proposed) [0ubuntu3] [09:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: x11proto-core (xenial-proposed/main) [7.0.28-2ubuntu1 => 7.0.31-1~ubuntu16.04.1] (core, xorg) [09:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libdrm (xenial-proposed/main) [2.4.70-1~ubuntu16.04.1 => 2.4.76-1~ubuntu16.04.1] (core, xorg) [09:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libxfont (xenial-proposed/main) [1:1.5.1-1 => 1:2.0.1-3~ubuntu16.04.1] (core, xorg) [09:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: libxfont1 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:1.5.2-4~ubuntu16.04.1] [09:23] apw, please accept virtualbox-* in yakkety and zesty unapproved queues? :) [09:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libwacom (xenial-proposed/main) [0.18-1 => 0.22-1~ubuntu16.04.1] (kubuntu, ubuntu-desktop) [09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: llvm-toolchain-4.0 (xenial-proposed/primary) [1:4.0-1ubuntu1~16.04.1] [09:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: wayland (xenial-proposed/main) [1.9.0-1 => 1.12.0-1~ubuntu16.04.1] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server, xorg) [09:29] LocutusOfBorg, the SRU bug you have used for the zesty one is the same as for xenial, can you some how say the version pairs for the other srus which apply [09:29] LocutusOfBorg, perhaps right at the top "Zesty affects version X and fixed in Y" [09:36] infinity: ^ uploaded the first batch of hwe-16.04 refresh. have a look when you're back from holidays [09:42] apw, will do shortly (meeting now) [09:42] can we please know what is the plan with src:location-service and boost-1.61^ [09:53] xnox, ^ ? [09:58] Do we use location-service for anything besides the now-deprecated touch? [09:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted virtualbox [source] (zesty-proposed) [5.1.22-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.04.1] [10:02] sil2100: Probably not, but following the rdep trail tears out basically all of touch. :P [10:02] sil2100: So, someone should either fix it, unentangle it, or decide WTF to do with the whole stack. [10:03] hah, I guess we might really start considering just thrashing touch altogether [10:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-ext-pack [source] (zesty-proposed) [5.1.22-2ubuntu1.17.04.1] [10:04] xn_ox is looking at the removals alreaady [10:05] Laney: Unless he's started on a second round, he was originally just looking at a shallow set that directly involved upstart. [10:06] Second round is correct. [10:06] Oh, shiny. [10:06] ok I will disentangle location-service by making it build agasint boost-1.62 [10:06] and then ask removal of boost1.61 [10:06] Well, I won't lose sleep over it if it all gets torn out. [10:06] https://code.launchpad.net/~xnox/ubuntu-seeds/unity8-removals/+merge/323615 [10:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-guest-additions-iso [source] (zesty-proposed) [5.1.22-1ubuntu1.17.04.1] [10:07] reject? :( [10:09] LocutusOfBorg, version numbers of the support packages are newer than artful [10:11] LocutusOfBorg: I suspect the version you were looking for there was 5.1.22-1~17.04.1 (or, if there really are Ubuntu changes and it's not just a straight backport, 5.1.22-1~ubuntu17.04.1) [10:12] the first one is good, reuploading [10:14] apw, please accept virtualbox/yakkety and reject the other two :) [10:14] LocutusOfBorg: The verb you're looking for is "review", not "accept". ;) [10:15] infinity, i've nearly correct that a couple of times too :) [10:16] s/accept/review/g :) [10:16] I forgot, -i irclogs.ubuntu.com/* :D [10:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-ext-pack [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.1.22-2ubuntu1.16.10.1] [10:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-guest-additions-iso [source] (yakkety-proposed) [5.1.22-1ubuntu1.16.10.1] [10:19] and reuploaded :) [10:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-ext-pack (zesty-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.18-1 => 5.1.22-2~17.04.1] (no packageset) [10:20] fortunately the virtualbox-* don't suffer from strange versioning schemes [10:20] (they don't suffer anymore) [10:20] They do, however, still suffer from being virtualbox. [10:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-ext-pack (yakkety-proposed/universe) [5.1.6-2ubuntu1 => 5.1.22-2~16.10.1] (no packageset) [10:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-guest-additions-iso (zesty-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.18-1 => 5.1.22-1~17.04.1] (no packageset) [10:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-guest-additions-iso (yakkety-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.6-1 => 5.1.22-1~16.10.1] (no packageset) [10:21] would someone please bump the pysam hint to 'force-badtest python-pysam/0.10.0+ds-2/armhf python-pysam/0.10.0+ds-2/i386' ? [10:22] and please rm deepnano:armhf from artful-proposed - it built where it is not installable [10:22] infinity, I meant, there was a automatically-evaluated version check in ext-pack against the same virtualbox minor release, but I fixed it [10:22] Laney: ^-- Can we make britney/autopkgtest/whoever forget those arches had results? Hinting them forever because they're no longer built isn't super sane. [10:23] i seem to remeber we have to remove the results in-toto from swift to do that currently (or something) [10:23] ginggs: Removal done. [10:23] infinity: thanks [10:24] infinity: No, but you can use 'all' for the version [10:24] Laney: Sure, but then if it *does* build on those arches in the future, we'll continue ignoring it until someone notices. [10:24] Laney: Which is why I didn't use /all [10:24] It's that or go hack swift and delete the results === darkxst_ is now known as darkxst [10:25] Laney: would one have to delete all the past results, or just for the current series? [10:25] i wonder if there is something we can do outside to extract the /all/ hints and verify them [10:26] Seems like a bit of a weird bug that we request tests on an arch that has no binaries. [10:27] i assume it has some via _all [10:27] Oh, indeed, python-pysam-tests is arch:all. [10:29] Though, that's not the bug. [10:29] ginggs: You would delete all passed results for the series in question so it's alwaysfailed, and then I think there's a cache in britney to remove too. [10:29] I've ignored other stuff that has no arch:all bits. [10:29] We seem to just keep requesting tests on all arches forever. [10:30] Though, it also looks like I used foo/all/arch for lots of those, so not sure why python-pysam is special in my mind. [10:30] I'll /all it for now. [10:30] Write a test for it: tests/test_autopkgtest.py [10:31] Assuming this bug exists and therefore it's not tested for [10:31] infinity, i think in the short term we should perioducally check the /all/ for good and rip them, i recon we could that prgramtically pretty easy [10:32] Anyhow, updated the hint for now. That's all the energy I have for it at 4:30am. [10:33] infinity: thanks [10:37] I filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/auto-package-testing/+bug/1688516 [10:37] Ubuntu bug 1688516 in Auto Package Testing "No way to mark a test as 'accepted regression'" [Undecided,New] [10:40] Laney: That sounds like a reasonable feature. I'd bikeshed the key as "force-failtest" to match badtest and skiptest, though. [10:41] Makes sense === chrisccoulson_ is now known as chrisccoulson [10:59] infinity, that was the name i came up with too [11:01] apw: Fools seldom differ. [11:01] so very true, and we are that :) [12:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron-lbaas (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2:9.0.0-0ubuntu1 => 2:9.0.0-0ubuntu2] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [12:29] location-service has migrated, can src:boost1.61 be removed from artful please? [12:36] won't that show up automatically on the nbs report if you are right it is no longer needed [12:37] no i am mixing my metaphors, ignore me [12:38] (it is not the same source) [12:38] ginggs: Be a bit more patient for it to stop showing up in reverse-depends. [12:38] that [12:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (trusty-proposed) [3.13.0-119.166] [12:46] * ginggs waits patiently [12:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected cgroup-lite [source] (trusty-backports) [1.11~ubuntu14.04.3] [12:56] ^ duplicate in the queue [13:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted virtualbox-ext-pack [source] (zesty-proposed) [5.1.22-2~17.04.1] [13:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted virtualbox-guest-additions-iso [source] (zesty-proposed) [5.1.22-1~17.04.1] [13:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: chrome-gnome-shell (xenial-proposed/universe) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.04.1 => 9-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.04.2] (no packageset) [13:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: chrome-gnome-shell (yakkety-proposed/universe) [8-2ubuntu4~ubuntu16.10.1 => 9-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.10] (no packageset) [13:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: chrome-gnome-shell (zesty-proposed/universe) [8.2.1-1ubuntu1 => 9-0ubuntu1~ubuntu17.04] (ubuntugnome) [13:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt (xenial-proposed/main) [1.2.20 => 1.2.22] (core) [13:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt (zesty-proposed/main) [1.4 => 1.4.2~17.04.1] (core) [13:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.3.5 => 1.3.7] (core) [14:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nova (yakkety-proposed/main) [2:14.0.4-0ubuntu1.2 => 2:14.0.5-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [14:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: google-perftools (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.4-0ubuntu5 => 2.4-0ubuntu5.16.10.1] (ubuntu-server) [14:34] soooo somebody please kick boost1.61 out from Ubuntu? :) [14:35] LocutusOfBorg, still showing up in reverse-depends [14:35] nah [14:35] location-service is fixed and migrated one hour ago [14:36] ubuntu-location-service-bin | 3.0.0+16.10.20160912-0ubuntu3 | artful/universe | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el [14:36] and it is still showing up in reverse speends [14:36] presuambly because it is out of date, and one wants it to be in date [14:36] a mistake in my upload or I just need to wait? [14:37] ah ok :( [14:37] s/:(/:) [14:37] (dear, isn't this a fork bomb?) [14:37] till the location poop goes away one cannot tell what all else in there is a lie [14:37] seems legit [14:38] http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/html/boost1.62.html [14:38] this page is good now [14:38] this is why I requested it [14:38] but I'll prod again when reverse-depends is happy [14:39] LocutusOfBorg, right i am sure it is good, but either i have to work it out myself, or i can ignore it for an hour and let reverse-depends sort it out [14:39] I prefer the latter [14:39] :) [14:54] o/ [14:54] the MIR for vine is blocking quite a large number of packages in artful-proposed related to OpenStack [14:54] via http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#python-amqp [14:55] if soneone in the MIR team has cycles to review that would be awesome: [14:55] http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#python-amqp [14:55] bug 1688091 [14:55] bug 1688091 in vine (Ubuntu) "[MIR] vine" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1688091 [14:57] infinity, when you are back from VAC, something for you :) LP: #1669578 your opinion is needed :p [14:57] Launchpad bug 1669578 in screen (Ubuntu) "Get ttyname() to work properly in containers" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1669578 [15:08] slangasek: i think that's intentional, in case someone does remove php-defaults, php7.1-xml, e.g., will still satisfy php-xml depends? I'll ask ondrej though [15:30] slangasek: fwiw, I see trusty's shim update is still in the queue for review, not even in proposed. === didrocks1 is now known as didrocks [15:57] nacc: it may be intentional but it's still busted (and inconsistent across different modules built from php7.x) [15:58] slangasek: ack, do you have handy an example of a binpkg that doesn't do that? the few i looked at did it like php7.1-xml [15:59] nacc: uh... ok maybe they all do it but germinate walked a different path in some cases. I was assuming the bins we did successfully demote didn't have this problem but spot check says they do also [15:59] nacc: anyway, it's super confusing to have a metapackage that depends on a real package that provides the metapackage [15:59] cyphermox: is the shim in trusty queue current wrt the last round of xenial+ changes? [16:00] slangasek: yeah it's confusing, i agree :) [16:00] slangasek: i'll work with ondrej on it in debian [16:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kexec-tools [source] (xenial-proposed) [1:2.0.10-1ubuntu2.2] [16:13] please also review vbox* yakkety? I just setup my VM to test [16:13] qpga [16:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted iproute2 [source] (xenial-proposed) [4.3.0-1ubuntu3.16.04.1] [16:23] * apw looks at vbox [16:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted iproute2 [source] (yakkety-proposed) [4.3.0-1ubuntu3.16.10.1] [16:33] slangasek: as far as I know, only missing your extra apport changes. [16:36] cyphermox: ok [16:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted google-perftools [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.4-0ubuntu5.16.10.1] [16:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted google-perftools [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.4-0ubuntu5.16.04.1] [16:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted neutron-lbaas [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2:9.0.0-0ubuntu2] [17:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: e-mem [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.0+20160706-1] (no packageset) [17:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: node-create-hash [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [1.1.2+20170429gitd433cd382e6-1] (no packageset) [17:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: node-verror [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [1.10.0-1] (no packageset) [17:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: e-mem [i386] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.0+20160706-1] (no packageset) [17:23] hi [17:24] dear release managers, [17:24] may I poke you about the kdepim new reviews? [17:24] http://gpul.grupos.udc.es/ka-iron-hand_reports/applications_archive/16.12.3_artful_retry_builds.pdf [17:24] ↑ it would be nice if we could get this flying spaggheti monster built [17:25] if we need to correct something in our packaging, just let us know, so we will correct it [17:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-software [source] (zesty-proposed) [3.22.7-0ubuntu3.17.04.2] [17:30] ^ oh, I guess that's going to clobber the other gnome-software/zesty SRU :( [17:31] is it too late now to promote the older verified one? [17:39] slangasek: ^ [17:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted e-mem [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.0+20160706-1] [17:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted node-create-hash [amd64] (artful-proposed) [1.1.2+20170429gitd433cd382e6-1] [17:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted e-mem [i386] (artful-proposed) [0.0+20160706-1] [17:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted node-verror [amd64] (artful-proposed) [1.10.0-1] [17:56] Laney, did you review that removals package list? I will start working on filing removal bugs. [18:01] that's a lot of bugs… [18:20] jbicha: it's technically not too late, but AIUI this is a high-priority regression for the desktop team and so I'm ok with also pushing out both SRUs on Monday-ish [18:21] jbicha: (I don't really want to release an SRU on Friday, so...) [18:22] ok, that's fine with me [18:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted keystone [source] (xenial-proposed) [2:9.3.0-0ubuntu1] [19:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: aodh (yakkety-proposed/main) [3.0.1-0ubuntu0.16.10.1 => 3.0.2-0ubuntu1] (openstack) [19:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceilometer (yakkety-proposed/main) [1:7.0.2-0ubuntu1 => 1:7.0.3-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [19:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cinder (yakkety-proposed/main) [2:9.1.2-0ubuntu2 => 2:9.1.4-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [19:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: horizon (yakkety-proposed/main) [3:10.0.2-0ubuntu1 => 3:10.0.3-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [19:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: heat (yakkety-proposed/main) [1:7.0.2-0ubuntu1 => 1:7.0.3-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [19:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron-fwaas (yakkety-proposed/main) [1:9.0.0-0ubuntu1 => 1:9.0.1-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [20:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron (yakkety-proposed/main) [2:9.2.0-0ubuntu2 => 2:9.3.1-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [20:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron-lbaas (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2:9.0.0-0ubuntu2 => 2:9.2.0-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [21:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: x265 [s390x] (artful-proposed/universe) [2.4-1] (kubuntu) [21:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: x265 [i386] (artful-proposed/universe) [2.4-1] (kubuntu) [21:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: x265 [arm64] (artful-proposed/universe) [2.4-1] (kubuntu) [21:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: x265 [ppc64el] (artful-proposed/universe) [2.4-1] (kubuntu) [21:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: x265 [armhf] (artful-proposed/universe) [2.4-1] (kubuntu) [21:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: x265 [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [2.4-1] (kubuntu) [21:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cloud-initramfs-tools (trusty-proposed/main) [0.25ubuntu1.14.04.1 => 0.25ubuntu1.14.04.2] (ubuntu-server) [21:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cloud-initramfs-tools (xenial-proposed/main) [0.27ubuntu1.3 => 0.27ubuntu1.4] (edubuntu, ubuntu-server) [21:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cloud-initramfs-tools (yakkety-proposed/main) [0.30ubuntu1.1 => 0.30ubuntu1.2] (edubuntu, ubuntu-server)