[01:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-7-cross-ports [i386] (artful-proposed/universe) [0ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[06:26] <slangasek> nacc: php7.x-xml should be fixed to not Provide: php-xml, that's what was still holding php7.0 in main
[07:21] <acheronuk> contact SRU team in here, or somewhere else?
[07:30] <acheronuk> 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] <acheronuk> can't see anything in the build and changes that would account for any increased crash rate there.
[07:32] <acheronuk> 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] <acheronuk> 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] <acheronuk> 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] <apw> acheronuk, yes SRU is "here"
[08:07] <acheronuk> apw: thanks. glad I wasn't talking pointlessly into the void there :)
[08:07] <Laney> both things could be true :)
[08:09] <apw> acheronuk, there also is "a major uptick" but htat is from 1 to 3 reports if i am reading this right
[08:10] <apw> 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] <apw> acheronuk, is it telling you the thing has been stopped ?
[08:11] <acheronuk> apw: agreed
[08:11] <acheronuk> or at least that is the way it seems to me
[08:11] <acheronuk> 2 secs
[08:11] <acheronuk> 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] <apw> Laney, do you know one determines that ?
[08:13] <apw> or indicates one has ....
[08:15] <Laney> ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
[08:15] <Laney> on a case by case basis AFAIK
[08:15] <infinity> acheronuk: You're reading it wrong.  The double free is definitely new.
[08:15] <infinity> A few of these are new.
[08:16] <infinity> https://errors.ubuntu.com/problem/ccf29ca2fc3a7fd8440f77fb469260998c2725bc is new.
[08:17] <acheronuk> link does not work for me ^^^
[08:17] <infinity> 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] <acheronuk> 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] <acheronuk> infinity: and the other error certainly has occurrences prior to the SRU build
[08:23] <infinity> I may be having windowing issues indeed.
[08:23] <infinity> And also just diffed the sources to see it was pretty much all po updates.
[08:24] <infinity> Well, and some XML, which could cause random crashes in an XML parser, I suppose, but meh.
[08:24] <acheronuk> 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] <infinity> 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] <acheronuk> 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] <infinity> 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] <infinity> (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] <acheronuk> infinity: agreed. already submitted the canonical for asking for permission to view them on packages in the kubuntu set
[08:30] <infinity> Anyhow, I think I'm okay with phasing this back up.
[08:30] <infinity> After looking at the mess in more detail.
[08:30] <acheronuk> *canonical online form I mean
[08:31] <infinity> acheronuk: And done.
[08:32] <acheronuk> infinity: thank you. :) As said, will keep an eye on bug reports, forum posts etc.
[08:48] <LocutusOfBorg> interesting, with windows style line endings the #!/bin/sh is not correctly interpreted
[08:49] <LocutusOfBorg> is this a regression? http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/v/vtk6/artful/amd64
[08:50] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: /bin/sh^M is very much not a valid interpreter. :P
[08:50] <LocutusOfBorg> well, it is the windows style line ending 0a0d, we might check it and use it anyway?
[08:51] <LocutusOfBorg> in the meanwhile I'll ask anton to stop using that stuff, and I uploaded a fixed one
[08:51] <LocutusOfBorg> I was just curious
[08:51] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Or, don't write shell scripts in notepad.
[08:52] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Pretty sure you won't convince the kernel folks to parse DOS magic.
[08:52] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, right that is a windows line ending, linux uses unix line endings
[08:53] <apw> windows is of course wrong :)
[08:53] <infinity> Can't fathom how or why that upload changed ALL those line endings.
[08:53] <infinity> The diff is a mess.
[08:53] <LocutusOfBorg> I'm not saying windows is right, of course :)
[08:53] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, yes, I don't even find such changes in git
[08:54] <LocutusOfBorg> I'm cloning the repo right now
[08:56] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: He somehow did a unix2dos number on pretty much all of debian/patches and debian/tests.
[08:56] <apw> derp
[08:56] <LocutusOfBorg> just on the patch headers, of course
[08:56] <LocutusOfBorg> this seems intentional
[08:56] <LocutusOfBorg> and intentionally wrong
[08:57] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Some headers.  A few complete patches.
[08:57] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: It's weird.
[08:57] <LocutusOfBorg> I think quilt complains
[08:57] <LocutusOfBorg> or maybe they are not applied
[08:57] <LocutusOfBorg> nice to see how science team can screw up things
[08:57] <infinity> Absolutely bizarre, at any rate.
[08:58] <LocutusOfBorg> Applying patch 10_allpatches.patch
[08:58] <LocutusOfBorg> (Stripping trailing CRs from patch; use --binary to disable.)
[08:59] <LocutusOfBorg> 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] <LocutusOfBorg> 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] <apw> 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] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, perhaps right at the top "Zesty affects version X and fixed in Y"
[09:36] <tjaalton> infinity: ^ uploaded the first batch of hwe-16.04 refresh. have a look when you're back from holidays
[09:42] <LocutusOfBorg> apw, will do shortly (meeting now)
[09:42] <LocutusOfBorg> can we please know what is the plan with src:location-service and boost-1.61^
[09:53] <apw> xnox, ^ ?
[09:58] <sil2100> 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] <infinity> sil2100: Probably not, but following the rdep trail tears out basically all of touch. :P
[10:02] <infinity> sil2100: So, someone should either fix it, unentangle it, or decide WTF to do with the whole stack.
[10:03] <sil2100> 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] <Laney> xn_ox is looking at the removals alreaady
[10:05] <infinity> Laney: Unless he's started on a second round, he was originally just looking at a shallow set that directly involved upstart.
[10:06] <Laney> Second round is correct.
[10:06] <infinity> Oh, shiny.
[10:06] <LocutusOfBorg> ok I will disentangle location-service by making it build agasint boost-1.62
[10:06] <LocutusOfBorg> and then ask removal of boost1.61
[10:06] <infinity> Well, I won't lose sleep over it if it all gets torn out.
[10:06] <Laney> 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] <LocutusOfBorg> reject? :(
[10:09] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, version numbers of the support packages are newer than artful
[10:11] <infinity> 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] <LocutusOfBorg> the first one is good, reuploading
[10:14] <LocutusOfBorg> apw, please accept virtualbox/yakkety and reject the other two :)
[10:14] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: The verb you're looking for is "review", not "accept". ;)
[10:15] <apw> infinity, i've nearly correct that a couple of times too :)
[10:16] <LocutusOfBorg> s/accept/review/g :)
[10:16] <LocutusOfBorg> 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] <LocutusOfBorg> 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] <LocutusOfBorg> fortunately the virtualbox-* don't suffer from strange versioning schemes
[10:20] <LocutusOfBorg> (they don't suffer anymore)
[10:20] <infinity> 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] <ginggs> 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] <ginggs> and please rm deepnano:armhf from artful-proposed - it built where it is not installable
[10:22] <LocutusOfBorg> 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] <infinity> 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] <apw> i seem to remeber we have to remove the results in-toto from swift to do that currently (or something)
[10:23] <infinity> ginggs: Removal done.
[10:23] <ginggs> infinity: thanks
[10:24] <Laney> infinity: No, but you can use 'all' for the version
[10:24] <infinity> Laney: Sure, but then if it *does* build on those arches in the future, we'll continue ignoring it until someone notices.
[10:24] <infinity> Laney: Which is why I didn't use /all
[10:24] <Laney> It's that or go hack swift and delete the results
[10:25] <ginggs> Laney: would one have to delete all the past results, or just for the current series?
[10:25] <apw> i wonder if there is something we can do outside to extract the /all/ hints and verify them
[10:26] <infinity> Seems like a bit of a weird bug that we request tests on an arch that has no binaries.
[10:27] <apw> i assume it has some via _all
[10:27] <infinity> Oh, indeed, python-pysam-tests is arch:all.
[10:29] <infinity> Though, that's not the bug.
[10:29] <Laney> 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] <infinity> I've ignored other stuff that has no arch:all bits.
[10:29] <infinity> We seem to just keep requesting tests on all arches forever.
[10:30] <infinity> 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] <infinity> I'll /all it for now.
[10:30] <Laney> Write a test for it: tests/test_autopkgtest.py
[10:31] <Laney> Assuming this bug exists and therefore it's not tested for
[10:31] <apw> 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] <infinity> Anyhow, updated the hint for now.  That's all the energy I have for it at 4:30am.
[10:33] <ginggs> infinity: thanks
[10:37] <Laney> I filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/auto-package-testing/+bug/1688516
[10:37] <ubot5`> Ubuntu bug 1688516 in Auto Package Testing "No way to mark a test as 'accepted regression'" [Undecided,New]
[10:40] <infinity> Laney: That sounds like a reasonable feature.  I'd bikeshed the key as "force-failtest" to match badtest and skiptest, though.
[10:41] <Laney> Makes sense
[10:59] <apw> infinity, that was the name i came up with too
[11:01] <infinity> apw: Fools seldom differ.
[11:01] <apw> 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] <ginggs> location-service has migrated, can src:boost1.61 be removed from artful please?
[12:36] <apw> won't that show up automatically on the nbs report if you are right it is no longer needed
[12:37] <apw> no i am mixing my metaphors, ignore me
[12:38] <apw> (it is not the same source)
[12:38] <infinity> ginggs: Be a bit more patient for it to stop showing up in reverse-depends.
[12:38] <apw> 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] <apw> ^ 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] <LocutusOfBorg> soooo somebody please kick boost1.61 out from Ubuntu? :)
[14:35] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, still showing up in reverse-depends
[14:35] <LocutusOfBorg> nah
[14:35] <LocutusOfBorg> location-service is fixed and migrated one hour ago
[14:36] <LocutusOfBorg>  ubuntu-location-service-bin | 3.0.0+16.10.20160912-0ubuntu3 | artful/universe  | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el
[14:36] <apw> and it is still showing up in reverse speends
[14:36] <apw> presuambly because it is out of date, and one wants it to be in date
[14:36] <LocutusOfBorg> a mistake in my upload or I just need to wait?
[14:37] <LocutusOfBorg> ah ok :(
[14:37] <LocutusOfBorg> s/:(/:)
[14:37] <LocutusOfBorg> (dear, isn't this a fork bomb?)
[14:37] <apw> till the location poop goes away one cannot tell what all else in there is a lie
[14:37] <LocutusOfBorg> seems legit
[14:38] <LocutusOfBorg> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/html/boost1.62.html
[14:38] <LocutusOfBorg> this page is good now
[14:38] <LocutusOfBorg> this is why I requested it
[14:38] <LocutusOfBorg> but I'll prod again when reverse-depends is happy
[14:39] <apw> 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] <LocutusOfBorg> I prefer the latter
[14:39] <LocutusOfBorg> :)
[14:54] <jamespage> o/
[14:54] <jamespage> the MIR for vine is blocking quite a large number of packages in artful-proposed related to OpenStack
[14:54] <jamespage> via http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#python-amqp
[14:55] <jamespage> if soneone in the MIR team has cycles to review that would be awesome:
[14:55] <jamespage> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#python-amqp
[14:55] <jamespage> bug 1688091
[14:55] <ubot5`> bug 1688091 in vine (Ubuntu) "[MIR] vine" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1688091
[14:57] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, when you are back from VAC, something for you :) LP: #1669578 your opinion is needed :p
[14:57] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 1669578 in screen (Ubuntu) "Get ttyname() to work properly in containers" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1669578
[15:08] <nacc> 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] <cyphermox> slangasek: fwiw, I see trusty's shim update is still in the queue for review, not even in proposed.
[15:57] <slangasek> nacc: it may be intentional but it's still busted (and inconsistent across different modules built from php7.x)
[15:58] <nacc> 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] <slangasek> 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] <slangasek> nacc: anyway, it's super confusing to have a metapackage that depends on a real package that provides the metapackage
[15:59] <slangasek> cyphermox: is the shim in trusty queue current wrt the last round of xenial+ changes?
[16:00] <nacc> slangasek: yeah it's confusing, i agree :)
[16:00] <nacc> 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] <LocutusOfBorg> please also review vbox* yakkety? I just setup my VM to test
[16:13] <LocutusOfBorg> 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] <cyphermox> slangasek: as far as I know, only missing your extra apport changes.
[16:36] <slangasek> 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] <santa_> hi
[17:24] <santa_> dear release managers,
[17:24] <santa_> may I poke you about the kdepim new reviews?
[17:24] <santa_> http://gpul.grupos.udc.es/ka-iron-hand_reports/applications_archive/16.12.3_artful_retry_builds.pdf
[17:24] <santa_> ↑ it would be nice if we could get this flying spaggheti monster built
[17:25] <santa_> 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] <jbicha> ^ oh, I guess that's going to clobber the other gnome-software/zesty SRU :(
[17:31] <jbicha> is it too late now to promote the older verified one?
[17:39] <jbicha> 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] <xnox> Laney, did you review that removals package list? I will start working on filing removal bugs.
[18:01] <jbicha> that's a lot of bugs…
[18:20] <slangasek> 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] <slangasek> jbicha: (I don't really want to release an SRU on Friday, so...)
[18:22] <jbicha> 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)