[00:02] cyphermox: Totally unsure >_< [00:02] cyphermox: I'll find that out... [00:04] cyphermox: Also, I'm going to have to have a look at getting us a Qt slideshow that isn't completely Kubuntu branded >_< [00:04] cyphermox: s/slideshow/ubiquity/ [00:05] tsimonq2: Qt shouldn't mean that the slideshow is kubuntu branded [00:07] in any case, that would be in ubiquity [00:08] cyphermox: Hm, let's see which packages are in the seed for lubuntu-next live... [00:09] bbl, it's an ice cream break. [00:11] !info ubiquity-frontend-kde [00:11] ubiquity-frontend-kde (source: ubiquity): KDE frontend for Ubiquity live installer. In component universe, is optional. Version 17.04.9 (zesty), package size 66 kB, installed size 536 kB [00:11] Ah, ok, so it is part of ubiquity. Got it. [00:12] yep tsimonq2 [00:12] blaze and I fixed it a release or two ago [00:13] when PyQt4 dropped webkit [00:13] so we moved it to PyQt5 [00:13] ahoneybun: Mind if I fork? [00:13] it's not mine [00:13] fork what? [00:13] ahoneybun: Or maybe move to a common base that Kubuntu and Lubuntu Next can just share? [00:13] The Qt part of the ubiquity frontend. [00:13] I'm not sure what you mean [00:13] ohhh [00:13] Yeah :) [00:14] fork it I guess [00:14] but ubiquity provides the main UI on the side with the progress [00:14] Yeah [00:14] the progress bar on the bottom is that -kde frontend [00:14] the slides are ubiquity-slideshow-ubuntu [00:15] ahoneybun: Are there KDE Frameworks libraries used? [00:15] Oh, doesn't look like it? [00:15] In that case we can make something work. [00:16] it's just python I think [00:16] Yay! [00:16] /ubiquity/artful/ubiquity/frontend [00:17] kep [00:17] kde_ui.py [00:17] Oh bah, there is KDE frameworks in there... [00:17] Ugh [00:17] where? [00:17] from ubiquity.frontend.kde_components import ProgressDialog [00:17] from ubiquity.frontend.kde_components.Breadcrumb import Breadcrumb [00:17] from ubiquity.frontend.kde_components import qssutils [00:17] In kde_ui.py [00:17] most likely KDE4 stuff [00:18] nah [00:18] Qt5 now [00:18] I mean you should just need to hook inot the kde qt frontend [00:19] I'll try getting a minimal LXD container and just installing that package and seeing what mess it pulls in. [00:19] If it pulls in three quarters of all KDE Frameworks then I'm noping out and rewriting it :P [00:19] well the frameworks should be small now [00:20] well in small pieces lol [00:20] just be happy your not the first Qt based distro tsimonq2 [00:20] then it would be worse [00:20] Yeah lol [00:21] * ahoneybun has a new domain [00:22] :D [00:22] and they gave me a long IP for this new linode [00:22] damn it [00:23] I want an .xyz domain [01:03] tsimonq2: all you really should have to do is remove obvious branding that is directly in ubiquity for the "KDE UI" which is really just a pretty standard Qt GUI, and in doing so no fork but just making things customizable (there should be plenty of examples of generic stuff in the Gtk sections) [01:04] also, might I suggest not using the Qt GUI if possible, unless you plan on spending a lot of time on it, it's definitely not as well tested as the rest (fewer users, it needs some work for other issues that were noticed) [01:05] cyphermox: Then what would we use if not the Qt GUI? [01:05] I don't want to include a bunch of GTK libraries just to run Ubiquity... [01:05] I mean, it's *important* that it works, for whomever wants to use it, but there are few people looking at ubiquity regularly... and by few I mean mostly just me, maybe xnox, and possibly infinity? [01:06] if you have time to hack on the Qt GUI to make it real solid, by all means :) [01:06] yes, i do. [01:06] xnox: yeah, but it's not your main focus [01:06] tsimonq2, did you fall into the trap of not specifying which frontend you want? [01:06] xnox: no, they actually want Qt. [01:07] I'm just expressing my concern for the Qt GUI not being as well tested so far, because it's only used by Kubuntu [01:07] tsimonq2, i believe there is qt4, qt5 frontends, but both are /kde/ frameworks based. I believe there was a QML frontend in progress, not sure if it is merged or not. [01:07] xnox: :/ [01:07] there is? [01:07] a pure QML kdeframeworkless frontend would be nice. [01:07] afaik it's all only Qt5. [01:08] xnox: none of ubiquity requires KDE really, AFAIK [01:08] there was a branch by somebody either on launchpad, or something werid like a tarball import on github. [01:08] xnox: That would be my end goal, here. [01:08] taking kde frontend as a starting point and moving that to qml would be a way forward. [01:08] unless you somehow can google up previous efforts of the same. [01:09] a QML subiquity frontend would be awesome too ;-) [01:09] xnox: You mean sub-iquity? [01:09] * tsimonq2 is a "super big fan" of the naming choice on that one :P [01:10] yeah, new iteration of installer tech, based on cloud/maas experience. subiquity = server ubiquity [01:10] xnox: But yeah, I'll probably use that as my starting point though. [01:10] xnox: that would probably be a major undertaking, it's *not at all* the same thing as the usual desktop installer. [01:11] sure. [01:11] Soooo it's sub-iquity then? :D [01:11] tsimonq2, so looking at ubiquity kde frontend it is pure qt so far. [01:12] xnox: Excellent! But does it depend on KDE Frameworks? [01:12] the bits that say from ubiquity.frontend.kde_components are the custom /ubiquity/ widgets for Qt. [01:12] so should not need any KDE frameworks. [01:12] nope. [01:12] maybe ksmserver, whatever that is [01:13] probably easy enough to make optional. [01:13] * xnox wonders if i'm looking at old xenial qt4 build though, one second [01:13] xnox: don't worry, there isn't much to look at; I have an up to date branch here. [01:13] curently requires kde-window-manager but that's probably because the ubiquity-dm is not ported to not use that. [01:13] tsimonq2, you may want to fix that ^ [01:14] there are no dependeinds declared on kdeframework anything [01:14] ubiquity-dm is the only thing that call into kde, and should be ported to support whatever LXQT wants. [01:15] xnox: Yeah, it was recently ported to Qt 5. [01:15] tsimonq2: short story, don't hesitate to ask on #ubuntu-installer if you have questions [01:15] cyphermox: OK :) [01:16] xnox or I can answer :) [01:16] I wonder how easy it would be to have some common Qt libraries between Lubuntu LXQt and Kubuntu and just have some elements customized... [01:17] tsimonq2: at first glance you have almost nothing to do; but I haven't seen your new image, you mentioned there was some stray branding from kubuntu. [01:18] tbf, there probably should not be any branding in ubiquity directly, that belongs to the theming, $flavour-default-settings, u-slideshow-$flavour and whatnot [01:20] cyphermox: tl;dr, on a system with a wired connection, boot the image into "Try Without Installing," Click OK when it gets to the X error, then right-click and select the terminal emulator. Then run ubiquity from there, and you'll see what I'm talking about irt. [01:20] s/irt/irt this/ [01:21] ok [01:21] I did it in virt-manager, but ymmv [01:22] oh boy, this is doing to take a while to download [01:22] Yeeeah, hopefully in the future we'll slim that down... :P [01:22] it's not about that, somehow my tubes are slow [01:23] I will let it download, and catch up on it / on scrollback tomorrow morning. [01:24] tsimonq2: if you figure it in the meantime I'll be happy to review and merge a MP. [01:25] cyphermox: ack :) [01:53] any branding is done with a kubuntu.svg file in ubiquity [01:53] just add the lubuntu one, make a change to one line and done [01:53] tsimonq2: ^ [01:54] ahoneybun: ack :P [02:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: thunar (zesty-proposed/universe) [1.6.11-1 => 1.6.11-1ubuntu0.17.04.1] (mythbuntu, xubuntu) [02:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: thunar (yakkety-proposed/universe) [1.6.11-0ubuntu0.16.10.1 => 1.6.11-0ubuntu0.16.10.2] (mythbuntu, xubuntu) [02:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: thunar (xenial-proposed/universe) [1.6.11-0ubuntu0.16.04.1 => 1.6.11-0ubuntu0.16.04.2] (mythbuntu, xubuntu) [02:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xfce4-weather-plugin (xenial-proposed/universe) [0.8.6-1 => 0.8.9-0ubuntu0.16.04.1] (ubuntustudio, xubuntu) [10:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: python-pypowervm (artful-proposed/primary) [1.1.4-0ubuntu1] [10:50] r-base is ready to migrate except for r-cran-spatstat on armhf and s390x http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#r-base i tried running it in lxc on amd64 locally, and it failed the first time, but not the 2nd time when i added -s . any ideas please? [10:53] I'm trying to update the version of mir in 16.04 (SRU bug 1685186): it's reached minimum age in -proposed. Can we please proceed to -updates? [10:53] bug 1685186 in mir (Ubuntu) "[SRU] Mir needs to be updated to 0.26 in 16.04LTS" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1685186 [11:10] alan_g, this seems to leave xenial with a newer version than in well everything after, thats not good for an upgrade perspective [11:12] apw: next on my list is 0.27 for artful. You're concerned with zesty though? [11:13] alan_g, the rules are concerned with all releases, they say you can't have a version in xenial that is higher than yakkety etc [11:13] alan_g, not actually sure how this got accepted into -proposed as things stand [11:14] tjaalton, ^^ ? [11:19] So, we'd need to release a 0.26.4 version on yakkety and zenial? (0.26.3 has been tweaked to build for xenial, so that would need reverting) [11:22] ginggs: Let's skip those [11:23] alan_g, well something with a version number higher than that in xenial would be the norm yes; for y z and a. unless you have some kind of exception i am unaware of (and i could be) [11:23] Laney: thanks [11:38] How would I go about justifying an exception? [11:39] The way we get here is that the 0.26 series was used for xenial+overlay and that was used for IoT projects on Ubuntu Core. We want to drop "overlay" now but maintain the same Mir support. [11:40] alan_g, it is not clear how this would be possible without truly breaking updates, but you are LTS oriented; slangasek ^ ? [11:47] Updating zesty from 0.26.2 to 0.26.4 would be simple enough. Yakkety was on an earlier series, so that would cause some issues. [11:49] But the only people I think might care are UbuntuCore users that need "kiosk", or developers who I don't expect to be targeting yakkety. [11:50] alan_g: technically, if you are not in a hurry and don't want to update Yakkety, then you could just wait until July when Yakkety is EOL [11:51] but I think all that's being asked for now is that Yakkety has a higher version number than Xenial so that upgraders don't have a package newer than what is available in the archives === alan_g is now known as alan_g|lunch [12:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected isc-dhcp [source] (trusty-proposed) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] [12:24] rbasak, uploaded [12:24] ack [12:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: isc-dhcp (trusty-proposed/main) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.9 => 4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] (core) [12:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted isc-dhcp [source] (trusty-proposed) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] [12:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted isc-dhcp [source] (xenial-proposed) [4.3.3-5ubuntu12.7] [12:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: isc-dhcp [i386] (trusty-proposed/main) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] (core) [12:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: isc-dhcp [ppc64el] (trusty-proposed/main) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] (core) [12:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: isc-dhcp [powerpc] (trusty-proposed/main) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] (core) [12:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: isc-dhcp [amd64] (trusty-proposed/main) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] (core) [12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: isc-dhcp [armhf] (trusty-proposed/main) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] (core) [12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: isc-dhcp [arm64] (trusty-proposed/main) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] (core) [12:44] slashd: ^ you may need to track down an archive admin to accept from NEW. [12:45] rbasak, https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-archive ??? [12:45] Yep [12:46] rbasak, ack will do [12:46] slashd: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+queue [12:48] sil2100, the SRU that rbasak just approved is introducing ^ a new binary pkg --> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/trusty/+queue. Could you please accept the new binary in the archive ? [12:49] slashd: hey! Sadly my AA privilages only allow to take care of kernel related packages - I guess you'd have to poke a real AA like apw ^ [12:50] apw ^^ could you please have a look at this request ^ ? [12:50] tks sil2100 === alan_g|lunch is now known as alan_g [13:00] rbasak: could you please reject my nplan from the xenial queue? I just realized it's missing -v [13:08] ack [13:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected nplan [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.22~16.04.1] [13:27] rbasak: ta [13:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted isc-dhcp [amd64] (trusty-proposed) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] [13:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted isc-dhcp [armhf] (trusty-proposed) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] [13:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted isc-dhcp [powerpc] (trusty-proposed) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] [13:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted isc-dhcp [arm64] (trusty-proposed) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] [13:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted isc-dhcp [ppc64el] (trusty-proposed) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] [13:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted isc-dhcp [i386] (trusty-proposed) [4.2.4-7ubuntu12.10] [13:30] slashd, ^ [13:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nplan (xenial-proposed/universe) [0.21~16.04.1 => 0.22~16.04.1] (no packageset) [14:09] apw, thanks [15:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted linux-firmware [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.157.11] [16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: util-linux (zesty-proposed/main) [2.29-1ubuntu2 => 2.29-1ubuntu2.1] (core) [16:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: util-linux (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.28.2-1ubuntu1.1 => 2.28.2-1ubuntu1.2] (core) [16:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: util-linux (xenial-proposed/main) [2.27.1-6ubuntu3.2 => 2.27.1-6ubuntu3.3] (core) [16:37] cyphermox: How did you verify bug 1680279? [16:37] bug 1680279 in shim-signed (Ubuntu Yakkety) "attach secureboot state files to shim-signed apport reports" [Undecided,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1680279 [16:37] cyphermox: specifically how did you review the report? [17:31] bdmurray: I can generate a crash file, and look in to see if we have a value for the two variables (SecureBoot-* and MokSBStateRT-*) [17:32] the fact that the value is an unprintable character isn't too much an issue (we can "decipher" that, but just knowing that the files are there or not helps a lot already) [17:34] cyphermox: You viewed the .crash in /var/crash with a text editor or something? Was it not apport-gtk's dialog? [17:34] as I remember I went to vi the .crash file in /var/crash. [17:38] Maybe we should let slangasek decide since he did the SRU work [17:39] cyphermox: Also might these files not exist? there is attach_file_if_exists() instead of attach_file() [17:39] yes, at least MokSBStateRT can be absent [17:41] fwiw when I was testing this I used apport-gtk's dialog [17:43] And did you choose not to use attach_file_if_exists()? [17:47] It won't cause a problem as apport will carry on, it'll just be extra baggage with the bug. [18:00] Oh, I guess its okay [18:01] Error: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/sys/firmware/efi/efivars/MokSBStateRT-605dab50-e046-4300-abb6-3dd810dd8b23' [18:09] slangasek: is the fact that its an unprintable character an issue? [18:21] bdmurray: the 'no such file or directory' messages are actually useful information to me, it shows a recent enough version of the hook was run and found nothing [18:21] bdmurray: the unprintable character is an issue, but IMHO having unprintable character is better than nothing [18:22] and I told cyphermox I wasn't going to be working on the unprintable character problem any time soon, which was why he switched from v-failed to v-done [18:23] slangasek: okay, cool [18:25] ^that. unprintable character is better than nothing, as just existence already give you all you need for the MokSBStateRT case anyway (it's either there or not) [18:27] Sure it just seems like you could store this information as a boolean e.g. MokSBStateRtExists: True and it'd be cleaner. [18:28] bdmurray: for most of them we do care about the content, and it is possible if inconvenient to extract that info from the unprintable character IIRC [18:28] ultimately I want the content [18:42] slangasek: Understood. [18:44] Bug 1659618 mentions a kexec-tools SRU ftbfs on armhf but that's not showing up on the pending-sru report... [18:44] bug 1659618 in kexec-tools (Ubuntu Yakkety) "Enable ARM64 support in kexec-tools" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1659618 [18:44] I see some other ftbfs on the report. [18:54] bdmurray: under yakkety I see 'kexec-tools armhf: Failed to build', is that not what you're talking about? [18:59] slangasek: I'm talking about 1:2.0.10-1ubuntu2.1 for xenial which FTBFS but come to find out there is an even newer version in xenial which isn't in the bug comments at all. [19:00] ok [19:01] So while I was looking at the wrong package version an SRU team member didn't comment on the bug when accepting the new version in. [19:02] That should have flipped the tags for xenial too. === mcasadevall is now known as NCommander [20:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2 (artful-proposed/main) [2.02~beta3-4ubuntu4 => 2.02~beta3-4ubuntu4] (core) [20:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2 (artful-proposed/main) [2.02~beta3-4ubuntu4 => 2.02~beta3-4ubuntu4] (core) [21:40] cyphermox, would you have a look at this MIR request please - https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vine/+bug/1688091 [21:40] Ubuntu bug 1688091 in vine (Ubuntu) "[MIR] vine" [High,New] [21:40] sure [21:43] thank you cyphermox! [21:44] cyphermox: and LP: #1686726 too? [21:44] Launchpad bug 1686726 in gnome-getting-started-docs (Ubuntu) "[MIR] gnome-getting-started-docs" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1686726 [21:54] tjaalton: Why was mir accepted in xenial-proposed when it doesn't seem to be fixed in Artful and the version number will be greater than any other release?