[03:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libwebp [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.6.0-3]
[03:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libwebp [armhf] (artful-proposed) [0.6.0-3]
[03:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libwebp [ppc64el] (artful-proposed) [0.6.0-3]
[03:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-transitions [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.5.3-1]
[03:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libwebp [arm64] (artful-proposed) [0.6.0-3]
[03:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libwebp [s390x] (artful-proposed) [0.6.0-3]
[03:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libwebp [i386] (artful-proposed) [0.6.0-3]
[05:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: golang-github-kurin-blazer [amd64] (artful-proposed/none) [0.0~git20170711.0.612082e-1] (no packageset)
[05:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-agate-dbf [amd64] (artful-proposed/none) [0.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[05:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-agate-sql [amd64] (artful-proposed/none) [0.5.2-2] (no packageset)
[05:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-agate-excel [amd64] (artful-proposed/none) [0.2.1-3] (no packageset)
[05:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Budgie Desktop amd64 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[05:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Budgie Desktop i386 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[06:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-github-kurin-blazer [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.0~git20170711.0.612082e-1]
[06:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-agate-excel [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.2.1-3]
[06:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-agate-dbf [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.2.0-2]
[06:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-agate-sql [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.5.2-2]
[06:58] <ginggs> would someone please update 'force-badtest winff/1.5.5-2/armhf' ?
[08:16] <sil2100> apw: hey! Would you have some free cycles to do some gce-compute-image-packages SRU reviews today? ;) Those are the standard ugly straight-backports from artful
[08:29] <apw> sil2100, lovely
[08:48] <apw> ginggs, done
[08:50] <ginggs> apw: thanks!
[09:11] <apw> sil2100, there is a gce-compute-image-packages | 20170622-0ubuntu1~14.04.1 sitting in trusty-proposed, what do you want doing with that
[09:12] <apw> sil2100, and is that fix included in the updates ?
[09:13] <sil2100> apw: yeah, I took the -proposed version and rebased on top of it - both changes are now in the upstream tarball actually
[09:17] <apw> sil2100, for next time, the trusty one has delta, it would be nice to enumerate the retained delta in the changelog
[09:17] <apw> python -> python3 etc
[09:17] <apw> or the opposite
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gce-compute-image-packages [source] (zesty-proposed) [20170718-0ubuntu1~17.04.0]
[09:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gce-compute-image-packages [source] (xenial-proposed) [20170718-0ubuntu1~16.04.0]
[09:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gce-compute-image-packages [source] (trusty-proposed) [20170718-0ubuntu1~14.04.0]
[09:28] <sil2100> apw: ok, noted! Thanks :)
[09:28] <apw> sil2100, ^ all yours ...
[09:28] <sil2100> I was always going ekhm, the easy way
[09:28] <sil2100> But the easy way isn't the best way of course
[10:05] <xnox> slangasek, next batch of u8rm https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=u8rm
[10:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Kylin Desktop amd64 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[10:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Kylin Desktop i386 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[10:56] <jamespage> please could the nova upload waiting for review in the zesty queue be rejected - I have another fix I need to include with that
[10:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected nova [source] (zesty-proposed) [2:15.0.6-0ubuntu1]
[10:58] <apw> jamespage, ^
[10:59] <jamespage> apw: ta
[11:14] <doko> does retrying autopkg tests with -a include s390x these days?
[11:15] <xnox> doko, huh? i'm confused what you mean by "-a" using all of proposed, usually is not a good idea.
[11:15] <xnox> doko, also, there has not been a day when s390x did not have autopkgtests.
[11:16] <xnox> doko, i only click on hand crafted urls, and usually retry individual arches/builds with hand picked trigger combinations.
[11:16] <xnox> doko, note the huge backlog of autopkg tests, anything you retry will be done in only a few days time.
[11:17] <xnox> http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/running look at queue lengths
[11:17] <doko> xnox: at some time, autopkg tests were not triggered on s390x when not specifiying any arch
[11:17] <xnox> doko, using what?
[11:17] <doko> no arch option
[11:18] <xnox> no arch option... to what script?
[11:18] <xnox> britney triggers s390x adt tests all the time correctly, and retry urls are available and do work on s390x
[11:18] <apw> jez ... that is some backlog, 13k pending tests
[11:18]  * xnox clicks on recycle icons on http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html
[11:18] <xnox> doko, how do you retry adt tests?
[11:19] <xnox> doko, or what/which api call?
[11:19] <xnox> maybe something needs fixing, if you tell me, what you do to cause such a question from you =)
[11:21] <doko> searching the wiki page ...
[11:21] <doko> xnox: pitti's run-something alias, sshing into some machine
[11:22] <xnox> doko, that is long gone; and has been replaced by a cgi script that people can trigger from urls on the status pages on autopkgtest.ubuntu.com or on the proposed_updates.sh
[11:22] <xnox> doko, ssh access should have been removed.
[11:22] <xnox> doko, also checkout lp:ubuntu-archive-tools retry-autopkgtest-regressions
[11:22] <doko> xnox: clicking on the recycle icon doesn't run against proposed
[11:23] <xnox> doko, it runs against a collection of packages from triggers. you can tweak the URL with &all-proposed=1 if you need all proposed.
[11:23] <xnox> and the triggered by, are pulled from -proposed.
[11:24] <xnox> doko, so it's best to add &trigger=foo/version&trigger=bar/version -> if you know that something needs to test with both foo and bar from proposed.
[11:24] <xnox> alternatively add &all-proposed=1
[11:24] <xnox> to the url.
[11:24] <doko> so I have to do that for all failing perl tests? with explicit triggers?
[11:25] <xnox> doko, look at the retry-autopkgtest-regressions script in the ubuntu-archive-tools, that automates retrying stuff.....
[11:25] <xnox> doko, you can run everything with all-proposed if you feel that is the right thing to do for perl*
[11:25] <xnox> doko, but i'd rather you _not_ retry _any_ perl yet. and let it do the first pass of 13k tests.
[11:25] <xnox> doko, and wait for the automatic cron to retry failing tests with proposed.
[11:26] <Laney> what automatic cron?
[11:26] <doko> when will that happen?
[11:26] <xnox> doko, you do know there is bot running that retries things with all-proposed apportunistically?
[11:26] <Laney> ...
[11:26] <Laney> who is running this bot?
[11:26]  * apw suspects the cron job is actually Laney
[11:26] <doko> it's fun to see who knows about that job ...
[11:26] <xnox> Laney, maybe i am imagining things, but somebody or soemthing does run retry-autopkgtest-regressions with all-proposed all the time. As e.g. systemd tests keep being retried over, and over, and over again.
[11:27] <Laney> Not me
[11:27] <Laney> I think some people learned about it and now abuse it
[11:27] <Laney> "this test fails, let's just try it with all-proposed"
[11:27] <cjwatson> Might be worth a bit of access.log analysis
[11:27] <apw> we should update that script to exit 1 at the top and see if it stops
[11:28] <xnox> logs should have the requester field recorded with the launchpad id.
[11:28] <Laney> I can see a lot of all-proposed in the queue at the minute with no requester
[11:28] <Laney> That means they got inserted into the queue without going through request.cgi
[11:28] <apw> there arn't many people who can do that are there ?
[11:29] <Laney> It's that script doko was just talking about
[11:29] <xnox> http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/running ctrl+f for "requester" there are a couple, but those look legit.
[11:29] <Laney> run-autopkgtest on snakefruit
[11:29] <xnox> wow....
[11:29] <apw> Laney, right, so lets change that script to add a requester of $SUDO something
[11:29] <xnox> Laney, given that we have cgi script that records launchpad id requestor, run-autopkgtest from snakefruit should be removed.
[11:30] <xnox> imho.
[11:30] <Laney> It's actually what britney uses to queue the tests
[11:30] <xnox> hm
[11:30] <xnox> well, the snakefruit club of people should sort it out then.
[11:30] <Laney> I think...
[11:30]  * Laney checks
[11:30] <apw> the equivalent of ${SUDO_USER:-$USER}
[11:31] <xnox> ideally - humans should use the cgi script, rather than ssh into snakefruit.
[11:31] <Laney> no, I lie
[11:31] <Laney> right
[11:31] <apw> xnox, that isn't very sensible for a bulk put back
[11:32] <xnox> apw, ./retry-all-proposed | xargs parallel xdg-open -- ? very bulk friendly
[11:32] <xnox> or whatever that script is that generates the retry urls, retry-autopkgtest-regressions
[11:33] <xnox> apw, i can see snakefruit used to rerun all of the release, to get the baseline results on open and some such.
[11:33] <apw> xnox, not that friendly when it opens 2000 tabs in your firefox
[11:33] <xnox> but that too whould record who requested all of that.
[11:33] <Laney> I don't really mind archive admins being able to do it
[11:33] <apw> xnox, right which is what i am suggesting
[11:33] <Laney> just....
[11:33] <Laney> ...don't abuse it
[11:33] <Laney> is there a good reason for these all-proposed requests or should I kill them off?
[11:34]  * Laney is in favour of logging the user though and hopes apw investigates doing that :-)
[11:34] <doko> well, having the perl tests not running against all-proposed will fail with uninstallabilities ...
[11:34] <xnox> Laney, i am guessing all of perl is fail, or e.g. the triggers should include perl from proposed.
[11:34] <Laney> they will do, no?
[11:34] <apw> Laney, carding self
[11:34] <Laney> dh-make-perl {"triggers": ["perl/5.26.0-4"], "all-proposed": true}
[11:35] <xnox> but e.g. not:
[11:35] <xnox> libanyevent-dbi-perl {"triggers": ["libanyevent-perl/7.130-2build1"]}
[11:35] <apw> Laney, that looks fun to cull
[11:35] <xnox> it should be and perl from proposed too..... although i hope that depends are right and things work.
[11:36] <xnox> doko, do you have failed logs with uninstallability in them?
[11:36] <doko> anyway, the uninstallability issues for perl are all resolved, so I'd appreciate a simple way of giving back all failed tests triggered by perl
[11:36] <xnox> such that we can look what triggers were used.
[11:36] <xnox> doko, but is all of perl installable in proposed?
[11:37] <doko> yes, except for one package on amd64
[11:37] <xnox> ack.
[11:37] <doko> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/html/perl5.26.html
[11:38] <Laney> retry-autopkgtest-regressions is the way to generate commands
[11:38] <Laney> | grep perl or similar
[11:39] <doko> xnox: example: https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-artful/artful/amd64/a/apt-file/20170726_202230_26588@/log.gz
[12:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nova (zesty-proposed/main) [2:15.0.5-0ubuntu1 => 2:15.0.6-0ubuntu1] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[13:04] <LocutusOfBorg> the failed package is now good (TM)
[13:04] <LocutusOfBorg> needs a publisher run
[13:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted intel-microcode [source] (xenial-proposed) [3.20170707.1~ubuntu16.04.0]
[13:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted intel-microcode [source] (zesty-proposed) [3.20170707.1~ubuntu17.04.0]
[13:43] <slashd> bdmurray, sil2100, morning do you have a moment to release rsyslog for LP: #1429427 in -updates ? It reaches the minimum aging of 7 days today, and it's all green. Thanks in advance.
[13:44] <sil2100> slashd: hey!
[13:44] <sil2100> slashd: let me take a look in a moment
[13:46] <slashd> sil2100, tks
[14:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libapache2-mod-auth-pgsql (trusty-proposed/main) [2.0.3-6 => 2.0.3-6ubuntu0.1] (no packageset)
[14:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libapache2-mod-auth-pgsql (zesty-proposed/main) [2.0.3-6.1 => 2.0.3-6.1ubuntu0.17.04.1] (ubuntu-server)
[14:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libapache2-mod-auth-pgsql (xenial-proposed/main) [2.0.3-6.1 => 2.0.3-6.1ubuntu0.16.04.1] (ubuntu-server)
[14:17] <sil2100> Ok, finally can go to my SRU duties
[14:17] <sil2100> slashd: done!
[14:19] <slashd> sil2100, thanks ;)
[16:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gtk+2.0 (zesty-proposed/main) [2.24.31-1ubuntu1 => 2.24.31-1ubuntu1.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[16:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gtk+2.0 (xenial-proposed/main) [2.24.30-1ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 2.24.30-1ubuntu1.16.04.2] (ubuntu-desktop)
[16:12] <slangasek> xnox: and it looks like my all-proposed retests for perl have disappeared from the queue, hmm
[16:14] <ginggs> ah, slangasek was the bot!
[16:14] <xnox> slangasek, yes, because we identified that as the abuse of the queue!
[16:14] <xnox> slangasek, you should add requester "slangasek" when hogging the queue like that.
[16:14] <xnox> apw, Laney ^^^^^
[16:14] <slangasek> xnox: it was hardly hogging the queue, it was a couple of dozen requests
[16:15] <xnox> ah, we had duplicates of everything i think.
[16:15] <slangasek> if there were duplicates, then why are there zero in now?
[16:15] <xnox> not sure.
[16:15] <slangasek> I only requested one retest per package
[16:15] <slangasek> and there was no requester because it used the admin interface
[16:15] <slangasek> (snakefruit)
[16:16] <slangasek> which should be a clue who the bot is, since the REST API doesn't let you do that :)
[16:16] <xnox> i think at this point we need to wait for the queue to drain, see the follow out, and retry things via api.
[16:16] <slangasek> these are already-failed tests which I know need to be retried
[16:16] <slangasek> and they're blockers for perl, which is at the heart of the mess
[16:16] <xnox> slangasek, why not use the api generator? to request things? also can we add in the snakefruit script to demand requester and it should be "britney" or "slangasek" etc.?
[16:16] <xnox> horum sad.
[16:16] <slangasek> because the API generator is a PITA to script
[16:17] <slangasek> run-autopkgtest on the commandline is saner
[16:17] <slangasek> if there is a run-autopkgtest that will work with the API the way retry-autopkgtest-regressions does, I would be willing to transition
[16:18] <xnox> ./retry-autopkgtest-regressions | xargs parallel xdg-open -- ? very bulk friendly
[16:18] <slangasek> retry-autopkgtest-regressions does not let me specify which packages
[16:18] <slangasek> or specify trigger arguments
[16:18] <xnox> slangasek, also you can in google chrome, right click on the retry button to copy as cURL command (it includes the cookies) and even execute the lot via curl, without opening 2000 pages in firefox.
[16:19] <xnox> slangasek, it does have all-proposed option, and i guess we should add options for extra triggers and/or subset of packages, or feed a package list.
[16:19] <xnox> create a card for tooling work?
[16:20] <slangasek> xnox: the tooling work is not a priority for me; the only thing that gets you is attribution of the requests
[16:20] <slangasek> which you already have in the sense of "someone with snakefruit access"
[16:20] <xnox> slangasek, i think for us was priority to modify the snakefruit script, to e.g. include the SUDO user name into the requestor field.
[16:21] <xnox> that was disccuess, but i'm not part of the snakefruit gang.
[16:23] <slangasek> if there were a way to tag these requests to the 'huge' queue, /that/ would be a useful enhancement
[16:24] <xnox> hm, yes.
[16:24] <xnox> i forgot to eat today, going out to find food.
[16:35] <slangasek> xnox: and now I've read scrollback, and if there were duplicates it was probably because doko and I were both retrying tests (and both via snakefruit).  However, that still doesn't account for all of the test requests being removed instead of half of them ;)
[16:35] <slangasek> (would be really great if autopkgtest merged duplicate requests...)
[16:40] <slangasek> xnox, Laney, doko: as for someone regularly retrying systemd tests with --all-proposed, that is definitely *not* me; --all-proposed should almost never be used, it's appropriate for perl specifically because of it being a large transition but otherwise it is offensive.  AFAIK we don't keep a record of the requester anywhere useful after the test has completed?
[17:25] <tsimonq2> infinity, slangasek: Would one of you happen to be around?
[17:37] <slangasek> tsimonq2: hi
[17:38] <tsimonq2> slangasek: So I have figured out the root cause for bug 1633913 I believe.
[17:39] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Since the split of the Lubuntu seed into GTK and Qt parts, ship-live is empty, but we have ship-live-{gtk,qt} and ship-live-share.
[17:39] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I'll have a patch for lp:ubuntu-cdimage soon that should allow these to be picked up.
[17:40] <slangasek> tsimonq2: why would that belong to lp:ubuntu-cdimage, as opposed to changing the seed?
[17:42] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Maybe that's an option, but from what I can see, we can fix the problem by adding the appropriate seeds here: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-cdimage/ubuntu-cdimage/mainline/view/head:/lib/cdimage/germinate.py#L296
[17:43] <slangasek> tsimonq2: or you can fix the structure of your seeds so that ship-live depends on whatever it actually is that you want included
[17:43] <tsimonq2> i.e. if mode is ship-live, see if project is lubuntu or lubuntu-next, if it is, yield ship-live-share, if it's lubuntu yield ship-live-gtk, and if it's lubuntu-next yield ship-live-qt
[17:43] <slangasek> ah
[17:44] <slangasek> you shouldn't need to yield ship-live-share either, surely that's a dependency of ship-live-{qt,gtk} in the STRUCTURE
[17:44] <tsimonq2> Welp, let me check
[17:44] <tsimonq2> yep, you're right
[17:44] <slangasek> but ok, yes if you have two different images with disjoint requirements for ship, you're right to change ubuntu-cdimage
[17:45] <tsimonq2> Ok cool
[17:45] <slangasek> tsimonq2: assuming this is also a new change post-xenial, please be sure to include a version guard so as to not break point release builds
[17:46] <tsimonq2> slangasek: wfm
[17:55] <tsimonq2> slangasek: How does this look? https://code.launchpad.net/~tsimonq2/ubuntu-cdimage/different-ship-live-names-lubuntu/+merge/328182
[17:59] <slangasek> Laney, xnox: ftr I consider rerunning the perl-triggered autopkgtests a high priority because this is a major version bump and the likelihood of this introducing some regressions is high - in which case there is human effort required to finish this transition which can only begin once we have the signal in the results of what's actually regressed
[17:59] <slangasek> tsimonq2: looking
[18:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: stawk (artful-proposed/primary) [1.1-0ubuntu1]
[18:08] <tsimonq2> slangasek: ack
[18:10] <slangasek> tsimonq2: you want a respin, I assume?
[18:10] <slangasek> (branch landed)
[18:10] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I can take care of it :)
[18:11] <slangasek> tsimonq2: I'd rather do it here so if there are issues on the deploy I can notice and track
[18:11] <slangasek> (running now)
[18:11] <tsimonq2> slangasek: ack
[18:12] <tsimonq2> slangasek: In that case, please do.
[18:30] <LocutusOfBorg> and doko wants to do gcc in some days, so better find regressions quickly if possible :)
[18:32] <tsimonq2> Oh, thanks for reminding me LocutusOfBorg
[18:32] <tsimonq2> xnox: What's the status of the Ubuntu Touch removals in the archive? As soon as that's done, we can land a new Qt. :)
[18:33] <xnox> tsimonq2, i filed a bunch of removal bugs.
[18:33] <xnox> there are a lot more to do.
[18:33] <xnox> but i'm not an archive admin.
[18:34] <tsimonq2> xnox: Oh, thought you were. Do you have any sort of ETA?
[18:34] <xnox> http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=u8rm -> this is hardly a complete list, just the currently leaf packages to remove.
[18:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop amd64 [Artful Alpha 2] has been updated (20170727)
[18:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop i386 [Artful Alpha 2] has been updated (20170727)
[18:34] <xnox> just the current round of pending removals.
[18:34] <tsimonq2> Oh, ok.
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop amd64 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop i386 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[18:51] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Uh oh, alternate images are failing...
[18:51] <tsimonq2> slangasek: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/cd-build-logs/lubuntu/artful/daily-20170727.log
[18:52] <tsimonq2> Missing debootstrap-required libpython3.5-minimal
[18:52] <tsimonq2> Missing debootstrap-required libpython3.5-stdlib
[18:52] <tsimonq2> Missing debootstrap-required python3.5
[18:52] <tsimonq2> Missing debootstrap-required python3.5-minimal
[18:52] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Erm, it's related to the Python transition, but... wat?
[18:54] <cjwatson> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/priority-mismatches.txt
[18:55]  * cjwatson fixes
[18:55] <tsimonq2> cjwatson: Thank you.
[19:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Next Desktop amd64 [Artful Alpha 2] has been updated (20170727)
[19:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Next Desktop i386 [Artful Alpha 2] has been updated (20170727)
[19:17] <slangasek> tsimonq2: ^^
[19:17] <tsimonq2> slangasek: ack
[19:18] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Right now the next step is to get priority mismatches sorted out (cjwatson was doing that). But for the time being, I'll see if I can get these new images tested.
[19:27] <slashd> bdmurray, Good day, do you have a moment to release "kexec-tools" in -updates for LP: #1705054 ? Thanks in advance.
[19:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected statistics [source] (artful-proposed) [1.0-0ubuntu1]
[19:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected stawk [source] (artful-proposed) [1.1-0ubuntu1]
[19:38] <tsimonq2> cjwatson: Out of curiosity, what's involved in sorting out priority matches?
[19:39] <cjwatson> change-override by an AA (with discretion)
[19:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: calc-stats (artful-proposed/primary) [1.2-0ubuntu1]
[19:40] <cjwatson> takes a publisher cycle, so should be done around now, though I haven't checked
[19:40] <tsimonq2> Ok.
[19:41] <tsimonq2> cjwatson: Am I safe to rebuild Lubuntu Alternate images now?
[20:13] <cjwatson> tsimonq2: looks like it
[20:14] <tsimonq2> cjwatson: Thanks!
[20:14] <cjwatson> np
[20:29] <bdmurray> slashd: done
[20:30] <slashd> bdmurray, thanks
[20:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted apt [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.2.24]
[20:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted apt [source] (zesty-proposed) [1.4.6~17.04.1]
[20:37] <flexiondotorg> tsimonq2 What is the current status?
[20:38] <tsimonq2> flexiondotorg: Testing Lubuntu images.,
[20:38] <flexiondotorg> ETA?
[20:38] <tsimonq2> 2-3 hours.
[20:39]  * flexiondotorg sighs
[20:39] <tsimonq2> flexiondotorg: Sorry. I know it's getting late for you :/
[20:39] <tsimonq2> flexiondotorg: If you want to help speed it along, help us test ;)
[20:40] <flexiondotorg> I'm packing.
[20:40] <tsimonq2> Ok.
[20:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Alternate i386 [Artful Alpha 2] has been updated (20170727.1)
[21:05] <tsimonq2> :/ why would amd64 not build?
[21:06] <doko> ohh no, now I get emails for all 500 perl packages stuck in -proposed .... \o/
[21:07] <Ukikie> ...RIP inbox.
[21:13] <tsimonq2> cjwatson, slangasek: *scratches head* why wouldn't Lubuntu Alternate amd64 build? O__o
[21:14] <tsimonq2> From the log it looks like it didn't even detect that the amd64 image was supposed to build as well...
[21:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop amd64 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[21:30] <tsimonq2> 1 down, 5 to go
[21:34] <slangasek> tsimonq2: which log are you looking at?
[21:36] <tsimonq2> slangasek: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/cd-build-logs/lubuntu/artful/daily-20170727.1.log
[21:37] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Am I correct in saying that?
[21:37] <slangasek> tsimonq2: it does look like that log did not include amd64, yes. Was this a rebuild triggered via the iso tracker?
[21:38] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Yes it was, I rebuilt it for both amd64 and i386...
[21:39] <slangasek> tsimonq2: if so, and if you triggered them both at the same time, I would speculate that they were queued separately; but that wouldn't explain why a log has shown up for only one of the builds
[21:40] <slangasek> tsimonq2: try triggering amd64 again?
[21:41] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I did a little bit ago, want me to do it again?
[21:41] <slangasek> tsimonq2: so you tried to trigger them together, then you tried to trigger just amd64?
[21:42] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Correct.
[21:43] <slangasek> ok
[21:43] <slangasek> let me see what I can see
[21:50] <slangasek> tsimonq2: I could see your rebuild request but I couldn't act on it through the script, nor could I cancel it through the web ui; I've cancelled it now by hand and re-triggered, let's see what happens
[21:52] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Alright.
[21:53] <slangasek> tsimonq2: I don't see any obvious bugs, I'm not going to try to debug it further.  If the problem recurs I'll dig deeper
[21:54] <tsimonq2> slangasek: ack
[21:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Alternate amd64 [Artful Alpha 2] has been updated (20170727.2)
[21:59] <tsimonq2> slangasek: ^ \o/
[22:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop i386 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[22:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Next Desktop i386 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[22:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Next Desktop amd64 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[22:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Alternate amd64 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[22:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Alternate i386 [Artful Alpha 2] has been marked as ready
[22:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-applets [source] (zesty-proposed) [3.22.0-2ubuntu0.1]
[22:51] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Ship It, please.
[22:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libvirt [source] (zesty-proposed) [2.5.0-3ubuntu5.4]
[22:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libvirt [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.3.1-1ubuntu10.12]
[22:59] <slangasek> tsimonq2: looking
[23:00] <slangasek> tsimonq2: lp:ubuntu-archive-tools / publish-image-set doesn't know what to do with Lubuntu Next yet
[23:00] <slangasek> so there'll be a short delay in publishing while I address that
[23:01] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I think when stgraber did Alpha 1, he might have fixed that but not pushed it.
[23:01] <tsimonq2> I could be wrong.
[23:01] <stgraber> oh
[23:01] <stgraber> quite possible
[23:01] <stgraber> let me check
[23:01] <slangasek> tsk :)
[23:02] <slangasek> ARCHES='amd64 i386' for-project lubuntu-next publish-release daily-live 20170727 desktop no alpha-2
[23:02] <slangasek> that looks right
[23:02] <slangasek> stgraber: are you pushing?
[23:02] <stgraber> yeah
[23:03] <stgraber> trying to remember how to bzr :)
[23:03] <slangasek> tsimonq2: lubuntu-next images are oversized?
[23:03] <slangasek> (do you need to pick a different size?)
[23:04] <stgraber> slangasek: pushed
[23:04] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Didn't get an answer when I pinged about it :P
[23:04] <tsimonq2> slangasek: But yes
[23:04] <slangasek> stgraber: I don't see your push?
[23:05] <tsimonq2> slangasek: 1.5 GB sounds sane to me until we (Lubuntu) can look at reducing it
[23:05] <flexiondotorg> I just pulled
[23:05] <slangasek> stgraber: n/m, it applied without conflicts so bzr didn't bother telling me ;)
[23:05] <tsimonq2> flexiondotorg: hello!
[23:05] <flexiondotorg> o/
[23:08] <slangasek> tsimonq2: "sounds sane" == "you'd like me to commit that"?
[23:08] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Yes.
[23:08] <tsimonq2> :P
[23:09] <slangasek> k, I'm down with having zero nag emails and zero manual steps in the publishing
[23:10] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I'll be around for the next 30 mins (work needs me to come in) but since I'm signed up with bashfulrobot, he's agreed to just publish the announcement, if that's OK with you.
[23:10] <tsimonq2> Yes, zero nag emails :P
[23:10] <slangasek> tsimonq2: I'll be hitting the final 'publish' button here in about 5m
[23:10] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Alright, I just didn't know what your timing was. Works for me.
[23:11] <tsimonq2> slangasek: (i.e. please ping both me and bashfulrobot when it's ready for announcement publishing, if you could)
[23:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: node-tty-browserify [amd64] (artful-proposed/none) [0.0.0-2] (no packageset)
[23:18] <slangasek> tsimonq2: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-cdimage/ubuntu-cdimage/mainline/revision/1672
[23:18] <tsimonq2> slangasek: ack, thanks
[23:20] <slangasek> hmph, 12 CPU threads and we block on a single-threaded checksumming operation
[23:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted aodh [source] (zesty-proposed) [4.0.1-0ubuntu0.17.04.1]
[23:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ceilometer [source] (zesty-proposed) [1:8.0.2-0ubuntu0.17.04.1]
[23:23] <cjwatson> valid point on lack of multiprocessing, but it's supposed to copy the checksums from the dailies it's publishing, and if it doesn't do that then it's a bug worth looking into
[23:25] <slangasek> cjwatson: I noticed the delay on the src images
[23:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cinder [source] (zesty-proposed) [2:10.0.4-0ubuntu1]
[23:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted heat [source] (zesty-proposed) [1:8.0.2-0ubuntu1]
[23:28] <slangasek> ...which also don't appear to have been regenerated since alpha-1
[23:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted horizon [source] (zesty-proposed) [3:11.0.3-0ubuntu1]
[23:30] <slangasek> tsimonq2 bashfulrobot: alpha-2 mirroring in progress
[23:30] <tsimonq2> slangasek: ack
[23:31] <slangasek> infinity, cjwatson, stgraber: how are the src images meant to be built, since they don't appear to be happening automatically by cron and aren't listed on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MilestoneProcess ?
[23:31] <stgraber> slangasek: I usually call cron.source manually (takes quite a long time), make sure to set the right env so it only generates for the participating flavors (bash history should help)
[23:31] <cjwatson> I fear it is manual but I have long forgotten the details
[23:32] <slangasek> artful milestone marked as released; crontab reset
[23:32] <stgraber> slangasek: you will also have to move them around a bit so that the publish process works, otherwise it's going to be looking for them at the wrong place
[23:32]  * stgraber -> out for a bit
[23:32] <cjwatson> it's probably the buggiest bit of cdimage
[23:34] <slangasek> k, regenerating, and added to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MilestoneProcess
[23:34]  * tsimonq2 -> AFK for the next two hours, bashfulrobot should be around any minute (spoke with him on Telegram) to publish the announcement. o/
[23:35] <tsimonq2> s/two/three/ - that's more realistic
[23:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted neutron [source] (zesty-proposed) [2:10.0.2-0ubuntu1.1]
[23:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted neutron [source] (xenial-proposed) [2:8.4.0-0ubuntu4]
[23:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted neutron-fwaas [source] (zesty-proposed) [1:10.0.1-0ubuntu1]
[23:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted neutron-lbaas [source] (zesty-proposed) [2:10.0.1-0ubuntu1]
[23:48] <infinity> stgraber: The "wrong place" thing is fixable with a symlink.  I do it every release. :/
[23:48] <slangasek> which symlink is this?
[23:49] <infinity> Well, I say that, but now I can't find weird symlinks.  It is possible I fixed the source instead?
[23:49] <infinity> That sounds less likely.
[23:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted google-cloud-sdk [source] (zesty-proposed) [163.0.0-0ubuntu1~17.04.0]
[23:50] <infinity> slangasek: Anyhow, not sure if I fixed something, or someone unfixed filesystem hacks, but if it spits out source in someplace other than where the current/pending/20170630 live, just shuffle it around.
[23:51] <slangasek> groovy
[23:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted google-cloud-sdk [source] (xenial-proposed) [163.0.0-0ubuntu1~16.04.0]
[23:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted google-cloud-sdk [source] (trusty-proposed) [163.0.0-0ubuntu1~14.04.0]