| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ebtables [source] (zesty-proposed) [2.0.10.4-3.5ubuntu1.17.04.1] | 10:28 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ebtables [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.0.10.4-3.5ubuntu1.16.10.1] | 10:31 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ebtables [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.0.10.4-3.4ubuntu2] | 10:34 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ebtables [source] (trusty-proposed) [2.0.10.4-3ubuntu1.14.04.1] | 10:36 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vlan [source] (zesty-proposed) [1.9-3.2ubuntu2.17.04.2] | 10:44 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vlan [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.9-3.2ubuntu2.16.10.2] | 10:45 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vlan [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.9-3.2ubuntu1.16.04.3] | 10:46 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vlan [source] (trusty-proposed) [1.9-3ubuntu10.3] | 10:48 | |
| slashd | thanks sil2100 for the ebtables and vlan | 11:47 |
|---|---|---|
| slashd | bdmurray, Good morning, sil2100 if you have some time today could you please look at the following -proposed Green packages (verified) -- https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html) for "sssd" (Trusty) & "openssl" (Zesty/Yakkety/Xenial) ? | 11:54 |
| jbicha | also, could you look at the chrome-gnome-shell unapproved SRUs today to fix a regression-proposed issue? | 12:45 |
| infinity | jbicha: X and Y? | 12:50 |
| jbicha | yes | 12:53 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted chrome-gnome-shell [source] (xenial-proposed) [9-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.04.3] | 12:54 | |
| infinity | jbicha: Done and done. | 12:55 |
| jbicha | thank you | 12:55 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted chrome-gnome-shell [source] (yakkety-proposed) [9-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.10.1] | 12:55 | |
| sil2100 | slashd: will look in a minute :) | 13:29 |
| sil2100 | slashd: hmmm, I'm looking at the openssl bits and I'm a bit concerned | 14:06 |
| sil2100 | slashd: two things: | 14:06 |
| sil2100 | slashd: 1) I see autopkgtest regressions in xenial and yakkety - are those documented somehow on the bug? If those are expected to fail, could you mention that in the bug? | 14:07 |
| sil2100 | slashd: 2) There was an automated 'verification-failed' posted to the bug as per reports from the version in -proposed but the tags are getting removed - what's the reason for those auto-failures being reported? Is it unrelated? Not an issue? | 14:10 |
| sil2100 | slashd: also, woudl be nice if someone included some info about the tests performed and version numbers - our new SRU procedures require/recommend putting test details during verification | 14:11 |
| LocutusOfBorg | Laney, https://code.launchpad.net/~costamagnagianfranco/+recipe/boinc-upstream-daily | 14:21 |
| LocutusOfBorg | seems your latest debhelper upload is to blame? | 14:21 |
| LocutusOfBorg | I don't see the automatic autoreconf being run, and the difference is just in toolchain | 14:22 |
| jbicha | LocutusOfBorg: as a workaround, try updating debian/compat to 10 ? | 14:25 |
| LocutusOfBorg | it would probably break older builds :) | 14:26 |
| jbicha | LocutusOfBorg: how far back are you building for? yakkety has dh 10 and xenial-backports does too | 14:27 |
| LocutusOfBorg | yeah probably time to move to compat 10, but parallel builds are broken, so I'm forced to add some --no-parallel | 14:28 |
| LocutusOfBorg | anyhow, I don't care about artful, as long as Laney knows about the issue :) | 14:28 |
| Laney | sec | 14:28 |
| Laney | if you've got time, please try it on Debian too, and report a bug there? | 14:28 |
| jbicha | I think it would be more important for you to tell Debian's dh maintainers about the issue :) | 14:28 |
| LocutusOfBorg | Laney, sure, experimental ongoing | 14:29 |
| LocutusOfBorg | sigh, I can't blame Laney anymore :p http://debomatic-amd64.debian.net/distribution#experimental/boinc/7.6.33+dfsg-12/buildlog | 14:41 |
| LocutusOfBorg | so... RC bug? | 14:42 |
| slashd | sil2100, the regression are recurring failure for quite some time. wgrant can you document the testing you have made in bug (LP: #1674399) the new SRU procedures require/recommend putting test details during verification. (see sil2100 comment above) | 14:46 |
| ubot5 | Launchpad bug 1674399 in openssl (Ubuntu Zesty) "OpenSSL CPU detection for AMD Ryzen CPUs" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1674399 | 14:46 |
| slashd | sil2100, most of them, I'll review them one by one to make sure | 14:48 |
| rbasak | sil2100, slashd: IMHO, the procedures haven't changed; we just started pushing people to actually follow them :) | 14:49 |
| sil2100 | rbasak: sure, right | 14:49 |
| slashd | rbasak, which is good | 14:49 |
| slashd | rbasak, I normally do it, I haven't notice for that particular one that the details wasn't there. | 14:50 |
| sil2100 | Indeed, your bugs usually are very detailed in regards to testing | 14:51 |
| sil2100 | A +1 on that | 14:51 |
| slashd | sil2100, thanks, so I'll have another look at openssl, and will get back to you. what about "sssd" ? | 14:55 |
| sil2100 | slashd: I released it before moving on to openssl :) | 14:55 |
| slashd | sil2100, thanks you very much | 14:56 |
| sil2100 | yw! | 14:56 |
| slashd | sil2100, do you know how can I find the test before two versions if not listed in here : http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/p/postgresql-9.5/xenial/armhf. For instance, I see it passed for "openssl/1.0.2g-1ubuntu4.3" and failed for "openssl/1.0.2g-1ubuntu4.7", but it seems like I don't have the test inbetween | 15:14 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (xenial-proposed/universe) [2.29 => 2.29.2] (no packageset) | 15:29 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2.29+16.10 => 2.29.2+16.10] (no packageset) | 15:30 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (zesty-proposed/universe) [2.29+17.04 => 2.29.2+17.04] (no packageset) | 15:31 | |
| LocutusOfBorg | debian bug: #863887 opened | 15:34 |
| ubot5 | Debian bug 863887 in src:debhelper "debhelper: not running autoreconf anymore with compat level 9" [Normal,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/863887 | 15:34 |
| Laney | thx | 15:38 |
| Laney | I know what the bad commit is | 15:38 |
| kyrofa | apw, snapcraft 2.29.2 is up | 15:50 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupdate (xenial-proposed/main) [0.5-2ubuntu4 => 9-1ubuntu0.16.04.1] (core) | 15:50 | |
| LocutusOfBorg | Laney, would you mind sharing it in the bug report? :p | 15:53 |
| Laney | NO I'm keeping it to myself. :P | 15:54 |
| LocutusOfBorg | https://anonscm.debian.org/git/debhelper/debhelper.git/commit/?id=cb5054c507c0c76d1c47ce5f55605586e57405bf ? | 15:56 |
| Laney | ok, ok, I posted | 15:56 |
| LocutusOfBorg | thanks! | 16:03 |
| kyrofa | slangasek, upstream setuptools busted all python2 and 3 projects using snapcraft. The fix is in snapcraft 2.29.2. Could you accept that into proposed for x y and z, please? | 16:05 |
| sergiusens_ | btw, this might not be as urgent anymore -> [16:16] <jamespage> "python-setuptools 36.0.1 has been released and now making its way into jobs" | 16:06 |
| sergiusens_ | kyrofa: ^ | 16:06 |
| kyrofa | sergiusens_, ... | 16:06 |
| jamespage | that pretty much broke the world ;) | 16:07 |
| kyrofa | It was awful, yeah | 16:07 |
| slangasek | ok, so is this fixed upstream and no urgency on the SRU? | 16:08 |
| kyrofa | And they seemingly did it with full knowledge of what they were doing | 16:08 |
| kyrofa | slangasek, hold off for a sec, verifying | 16:09 |
| cjwatson | https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/pull/1043 was the upstream fix | 16:12 |
| cjwatson | I'd tend to agree that that shouldn't be separately worked around unless snapcraft independently requires six (which I don't think it does) | 16:12 |
| cjwatson | looks not so much like "no urgency" as "reject" to me? | 16:13 |
| sergiusens_ | slangasek: yeah, let's hold off on the SRU, I just checked the diff and reverted the `import six` they had in there ... https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/pull/1043/files | 16:13 |
| slangasek | ok | 16:13 |
| sergiusens_ | cjwatson: it doesn't... I was under the impression they wouldn't fix it (sorry, I wasn't on top of this one) | 16:14 |
| slangasek | kyrofa, sergiusens_: are we agreed that I can reject these? | 16:14 |
| sergiusens_ | I am +1 for not doing this if not needed | 16:14 |
| sergiusens_ | slangasek: yeah, please | 16:14 |
| sergiusens_ | to be specific, please reject | 16:17 |
| === sergiusens_ is now known as sergiusens | ||
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapcraft [source] (zesty-proposed) [2.29.2+17.04] | 16:18 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapcraft [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.29.2+16.10] | 16:19 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapcraft [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.29.2] | 16:19 | |
| Laney | LocutusOfBorg: try 'deb https://swift.canonistack.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_e8074875467b46b7ab3c41ac60ccfbe7/ubuntu artful main'? | 16:23 |
| kyrofa | Indeed, tests pass without the patch. sergiusens, jamespage: good catch, thank you | 16:24 |
| LocutusOfBorg | looking | 16:26 |
| Laney | signed with my key, you can find that in keyring.d.o | 16:26 |
| LocutusOfBorg | Laney, [trusted=yes] for your repo :p | 16:27 |
| LocutusOfBorg | works | 16:28 |
| LocutusOfBorg | at least it is autoreconfiguring | 16:28 |
| LocutusOfBorg | ta | 16:28 |
| Laney | shocking | 16:28 |
| LocutusOfBorg | thanks, the build is good, I will kill it | 16:30 |
| Laney | k, guess I'll upload that revert then | 16:31 |
| LocutusOfBorg | ta | 16:31 |
| Laney | . | 16:33 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ubuntu-settings [amd64] (artful-proposed/main) [17.10.2] (ubuntu-desktop) | 17:25 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected ubuntu-settings [amd64] (artful-proposed) [17.10.2] | 17:26 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: thunderbird [ppc64el] (artful-proposed/main) [1:52.1.1+build1-0ubuntu1] (mozilla, ubuntu-desktop) | 18:56 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (xenial-proposed/main) [2.26.1 => 2.26.4] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 19:21 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.26.1+16.10 => 2.26.4+16.10] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 19:21 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (zesty-proposed/main) [2.26.1+17.04 => 2.26.4+17.04] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 19:23 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (trusty-proposed/universe) [2.26.1~14.04 => 2.26.4~14.04] (no packageset) | 19:23 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected nplan [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.22~16.04.1] | 19:27 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected nplan [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.22~16.10.1] | 19:27 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected nplan [source] (zesty-proposed) [0.22~17.04.1] | 19:27 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: thunderbird [amd64] (artful-proposed/main) [1:52.1.1+build1-0ubuntu1] (mozilla, ubuntu-desktop) | 19:28 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: thunderbird [i386] (artful-proposed/main) [1:52.1.1+build1-0ubuntu1] (mozilla, ubuntu-desktop) | 20:23 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: live-build (trusty-proposed/main) [3.0~a57-1ubuntu11.3 => 3.0~a57-1ubuntu11.4] (desktop-core) | 20:35 | |
| * cyphermox pokes queuebot | 20:41 | |
| cyphermox | where's my livecd-rootfs upload? | 20:41 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (trusty-proposed/main) [2.208.13 => 2.208.14] (desktop-core) | 20:43 | |
| cyphermox | ah, there we go | 20:44 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: thunderbird [arm64] (artful-proposed/main) [1:52.1.1+build1-0ubuntu1] (mozilla, ubuntu-desktop) | 21:04 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!