[00:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: mythtv [s390x] (artful-proposed/multiverse) [2:29.0+fixes.20170728.696806310a-0ubuntu1] (mythbuntu)
[00:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: mythtv [i386] (artful-proposed/multiverse) [2:29.0+fixes.20170728.696806310a-0ubuntu1] (mythbuntu)
[00:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: mythtv [amd64] (artful-proposed/multiverse) [2:29.0+fixes.20170728.696806310a-0ubuntu1] (mythbuntu)
[02:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: mythtv [arm64] (artful-proposed/multiverse) [2:29.0+fixes.20170728.696806310a-0ubuntu1] (mythbuntu)
[02:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: mythtv [armhf] (artful-proposed/multiverse) [2:29.0+fixes.20170728.696806310a-0ubuntu1] (mythbuntu)
[02:45] <flocculant> infinity: hi - not often I shout out, but we've now been trying to sort out our 'simple' Xubuntu since 16.04.1 https://code.launchpad.net/~xubuntu-dev/livecd-rootfs/xubuntu-base https://code.launchpad.net/~xubuntu-dev/debian-cd/xubuntu-base https://code.launchpad.net/~xubuntu-dev/ubuntu-cdimage/xubuntu-base
[02:46] <flocculant> not sure what we really need to be doing but, we would really like to see this sorted in one way or the other for the next lts
[02:47] <tsimonq2> flocculant: Why don't you add something to the official infra (like with Kubuntu's (deprecated) other images and Lubuntu Next, for example)? Just curious.
[02:49] <flocculant> tsimonq2: iirc we tried all that 2 years ago - really just want offical answers here now thanks
[02:50] <tsimonq2> flocculant: Sure, I just know Adam's a busy guy, wanted to see if I could give you a hand, but if you'd like to wait for him, that's your choice :)
[03:20] <tsimonq2> Had a discussion in another channel, forget I said anything here.
[03:27] <flocculant> but you had to comment ...
[03:27] <flocculant> sigh
[07:04] <LocutusOfBorg> can you please remove libldap-2.4-2-dbg, slapd-dbg?
[08:21] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Wrong question.
[08:21] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Or rather, you wanted to add "in artful-proposed".
[08:22] <infinity> (done)
[09:18] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks, but the dbg package exists in release, not in proposed... sorry if I wasn't clear, but I don't get it :)
[09:18] <LocutusOfBorg> btw do you have any clue for my notmuch debug logs? with strace and valgrind
[09:47] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: You were asking me to remove them because britney was listing them as "old binaries left..."
[09:47] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: "old binaries left on amd64: libldap-2.4-2-dbg, slapd-dbg (from 2.4.44+dfsg-8ubuntu2)"
[09:47] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Note the version there.  That's not the version in the release pocket, it was a previous upload that never made it out of proposed.
[09:48] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: (Yes, they exist in the release pocket too, but they SHOULD, until migration happens)
[10:03] <LocutusOfBorg> ok thanks
[11:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: farmhash [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1] (no packageset)
[11:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: farmhash [s390x] (artful-proposed/universe) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1] (no packageset)
[11:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: farmhash [ppc64el] (artful-proposed/universe) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1] (no packageset)
[11:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: farmhash [arm64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1] (no packageset)
[11:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: farmhash [i386] (artful-proposed/universe) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1] (no packageset)
[11:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: farmhash [armhf] (artful-proposed/universe) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1] (no packageset)
[11:25] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, sorry for  being pesty, but an hint for notmuch will be so much appreciated, I'm really worried about miscompilation of our toolchain on armhf
[11:26] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Sorry, I haven't really been paying attention.  What have you tried, and what have you managed to discover?  Logs, notes?
[11:27] <LocutusOfBorg> I did a run of the test under strace gdb and another with valgrind gdb
[11:27] <LocutusOfBorg> I see SIGKILL being started
[11:27] <LocutusOfBorg> this one with valgrind https://launchpad.net/~costamagnagianfranco/+archive/ubuntu/locutusofborg-ppa/+build/13166232
[11:28] <LocutusOfBorg> the valgrind output is between BEGIN LOG and END LOG
[11:30] <LocutusOfBorg> https://launchpad.net/~costamagnagianfranco/+archive/ubuntu/locutusofborg-ppa/+build/13161434 this one is with strace
[11:30] <LocutusOfBorg> (keyword is BEGIN OUTPUT=
[11:33] <LocutusOfBorg> 	+==15994== Invalid read of size 4
[11:33] <LocutusOfBorg> 	+==15994==    at 0x499D362: ??? (in /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libpython3.6m.so.1.0)
[11:33] <LocutusOfBorg> this in particular looks scary to me
[11:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted farmhash [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1]
[11:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted farmhash [armhf] (artful-proposed) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1]
[11:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted farmhash [ppc64el] (artful-proposed) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1]
[11:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted farmhash [arm64] (artful-proposed) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1]
[11:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted farmhash [s390x] (artful-proposed) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1]
[11:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted farmhash [i386] (artful-proposed) [0~20170626-g23eecfb-1]
[11:50] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, if you want I did both logs in a single run https://launchpadlibrarian.net/331134898/buildlog_ubuntu-artful-armhf.notmuch_0.25-2ubuntu1_BUILDING.txt.gz
[12:05] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: So, this is curious.  I just ran the build (with testsuite) on a machine basically identical to the builders, and it passed.
[12:05] <infinity> The only exception is that I didn't run it under linux32.  I'll try that now.
[12:11] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Aaaand, went fine under linux32 as well.  So, uhm.  Wat.
[12:11] <infinity> I wonder if this is a qemu/kvm bug. :/
[12:20] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: I think it's fair to say that notmuch itself isn't being miscompiled here.  However, that leaves open the question of WTF *is* going wrong with the testsuite on the buildds.
[12:36] <LocutusOfBorg> the question now is: did the qemu/kvm got upgraded in the meanwhile?
[12:37] <LocutusOfBorg> the latest successful build is here  created on 2016-03-13  https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/notmuch/0.21-3ubuntu2/+build/9344826
[12:37] <LocutusOfBorg> and the first bad is this one:  Started on 2016-08-31  https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/notmuch/0.22.1-2ubuntu1/+build/10600002
[12:37] <LocutusOfBorg> Kernel version: Linux kishi10 3.2.0-98-highbank #138-Ubuntu SMP PREEMPT Mon Jan 11 13:24:41 UTC 2016 armv7l
[12:37] <LocutusOfBorg> Kernel version: Linux bos01-arm64-024 4.2.0-42-generic #49-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jun 28 21:24:20 UTC 2016 aarch64
[12:38] <LocutusOfBorg> so, in the first case armhf was ran on top of an armv7 kernel, in the other case it became an arm64 one
[12:38] <LocutusOfBorg> this might not even be a regression in qemu/kvm, but rather a change in buildd system that spot a new bug
[12:40] <LocutusOfBorg> I'm doing a xenial build here https://launchpad.net/%7Ecostamagnagianfranco/+archive/ubuntu/costamagnagianfranco-ppa/+delete-packages
[12:40] <LocutusOfBorg> just to see if this is still building on xenial toolchain
[14:21] <LocutusOfBorg> something strange is happening on autopkgtest builders
[14:21] <LocutusOfBorg> nplan is building since days, being retried continuously (according to the webpage)
[14:22] <LocutusOfBorg> Triggers:	['python3-defaults/3.6.1-0ubuntu2']
[14:22] <LocutusOfBorg> Requester:	costamagnagianfranco
[14:22] <LocutusOfBorg> the log seems to be however not showing it
[14:23] <LocutusOfBorg> Laney, can you please have a quick look? :)
[14:28] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: The successful build you pointed at wasn't done under qemu.
[14:30] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: kishi was bare metal armv7, bos01* are qemu/kvm instances on armv8 hardware.
[14:30] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: My local test was on hardware nearly identical to bos01*, but not under qemu/kvm.
[14:30] <LocutusOfBorg> in fact, I retried a xenial build, and it failed now
[14:30] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Hence my blaming qemu/kvm, for now.
[14:30] <LocutusOfBorg> now, I tried a xenial build with strace, so I can see if the SIGILL is the same
[14:31] <LocutusOfBorg> in case, how to report such qemu/kvm issues?
[14:31] <infinity> Might take some more digging to make it a useful bug report.
[14:32] <LocutusOfBorg> yep, but I don't know how to easily reproduce, and I don't have access to the infra
[14:32] <infinity> But for now, "fails the testsuite under qemu/kvm, works fine on real hardware" filed against qemu *and* linux (could be kernel or qemu) would be a start.
[14:32]  * infinity goes to get some sleep.
[14:33]  * LocutusOfBorg just woke up :p
[14:33] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks infinity I will, and maybe subscribe you for knowledge if you want
[15:26] <LocutusOfBorg> since armhf is fine, can we please have a rebuild of perl stuff against proposed pocket?
[17:17] <LocutusOfBorg> can anybody please remove libjaxp1.3-java-gcj? it seems to be NBS libjaxp1.3-java (1.3.05-2ubuntu3 to 1.3.05-3)
[17:24] <slangasek> doko, apw: looks like binutils 2.29 is blocked for a bit in artful-proposed because linux-tools still has a dep on binutils (< 2.29); what would be the timeline for 4.11.0-12?
[17:29] <slangasek> LocutusOfBorg: buh, how does proposed-migration not get that case right?  sorting
[17:30] <LocutusOfBorg> I don't know, sorry :) sometimes I'm not sure about what is automagic and what needs hammer
[17:31] <slangasek> LocutusOfBorg: yeah, my griping here is that this seems like something we *ought* to have made automagic before now but it clearly isn't
[17:31] <slangasek> this is the "source package previously did arch: any builds, now is arch: all only"
[17:32] <LocutusOfBorg> mmm I don't fully get it
[17:32] <LocutusOfBorg> ok the any-> all move, but two binaries disappeared too
[17:33] <LocutusOfBorg> (well, one  because the dbgsym is not a real binary I guess for your system)
[17:33] <slangasek> something in the code assumes that if there are no arch-specific binaries and it previously saw some, this means the package isn't yet built :P
[17:34] <LocutusOfBorg> oh, interesting :)
[17:34] <LocutusOfBorg> meh, as long as you are around, my minions are happy to do more work
[17:42] <apw> slangasek, it ought to be copyable out to -proposed on monday
[17:43] <apw> slangasek, possibly before if we decide we don't care about the one that is there
[17:44] <slangasek> apw: Monday sounds fine to me. how long from copy-to-proposed to ready-to-migrate?
[17:44] <apw> normally testing is a day assuming it is good
[17:48]  * slangasek hits a bunch more perl autopkgtests with a hammer, then goes afk
[17:48] <slangasek> apw: yeah, a couple more days is fine, thanks.  I just wanted to understand whether we were looking at 3 weeks of blockage or something, given that the gcc-7 transition is due to start next week
[17:49] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks slangasek for perl :D
[17:55] <LocutusOfBorg> I did a no-change rebuild of src:stacks because of armhf and s390 were in some "new queue", before they were not built, and after they appeared after the package migrated
[17:56] <LocutusOfBorg> for this reason they ended up in some "limbo" in artful-proposed
[17:56] <LocutusOfBorg>  stacks | 1.46-1        | artful/universe          | source, amd64, arm64, i386, ppc64el
[17:56] <LocutusOfBorg>  stacks | 1.46-1        | artful-proposed/universe | armhf, s390x
[17:56] <LocutusOfBorg> hopefully rebuilding should work
[17:56]  * LocutusOfBorg goes AFK, have a nice saturday to everybody
[19:05] <slangasek> LocutusOfBorg: I don't know why you reuploaded samtools.  samtools was already built against libhts2 and was already a candidate for migration; now the libhts transition is delayed further
[19:07] <slangasek> LocutusOfBorg: and stacks was also fine, the new binaries simply depended on the newer samtools migrating first because the samtools in artful had no s390x or armhf builds
[19:46] <slangasek> LocutusOfBorg: in fact, it looks like you reuploaded all the revdeps of htslib without checking whether this was required
[21:31] <LocutusOfBorg> I didn't get the stacks issue, I thought this was a "migrating in different timelines" issue
[21:32] <LocutusOfBorg> I saw that all of them were already built, and I even looked at build logs, but I thouth britney wasn't able to let them migrate because of same versions already in archive or something similar
[21:32] <LocutusOfBorg> I remember in the past some race-condition caused similar issues, and no-change rebuilding was the fix
[21:32] <LocutusOfBorg> sorry!
[22:02] <slangasek> LocutusOfBorg: did you look at update_output.txt?
[22:03] <slangasek> it should have shown that all of these packages were ready to migrate and that only blasr was holding up - they literally would've migrated in the next p-m run :)
[22:03] <slangasek> anyway, they've migrated now, with a bit of skiptesting of the redundant test runs
[22:08] <LocutusOfBorg> yes, I looked at it, and I saw samtools on s390x
[22:08] <LocutusOfBorg> I looked at runtime dependencies of samtools, to see if some perl was holding it
[22:08] <LocutusOfBorg> and I found nothing, literally nothing
[22:09] <LocutusOfBorg> and then I though about a race condition, nice to see it fixed :)
[22:09] <LocutusOfBorg> probably britney was showing s390x because it is the first architecture tested?
[22:10] <LocutusOfBorg> starting by amd64 would be better, at least "testable" in my pbuilder environment
[22:14] <LocutusOfBorg> and auto-trackers will save me for badly understanding britney!
[22:14] <LocutusOfBorg> anyway, g'night!
[22:15] <LocutusOfBorg> doko, lots of qt stuff will fail with gcc-7, so I presume I will upload 5.9 after gcc-7 switch, to avoid useless bug fixing
[22:16] <LocutusOfBorg> qt is already mostly ready-to-land in silo
[22:16] <LocutusOfBorg> tsimonq2, ^^
[22:17] <tsimonq2> Works for me.