[01:07] <acheronuk> https://launchpad.net/builders/
[01:07] <acheronuk> many of those running builds appear to have actually done nothing for an hr or so
[01:08] <acheronuk> and I had 2 builds with a 'failed to upload'
[01:08] <acheronuk> seems something has dropped off it's perch?
[01:13] <acheronuk> hmmm. typically, as soon as I say that there seems to be some movement, though still some x86 stuff in odd states. e.g. jobs shown as running, but build logs there
[01:14] <wgrant> acheronuk: Looking.
[01:14] <wgrant> There's an issue with the librarian.
[01:15] <acheronuk> that would make sense
[01:40] <wgrant> acheronuk: Should be good now.
[01:41] <acheronuk> wgrant: thank you :)
[04:54] <miika> I'm having trouble uploading to launchpad. The PGP keys seem to be set up properly, the package is signed with the correct key, yet no email about the successful upload
[04:54] <miika> RSA key ID 4EC34898
[10:08] <cjwatson> miika: The copy of that key on keyserver.ubuntu.com expired on 2017-04-26.
[10:08] <cjwatson> miika: (I have a branch in progress to arrange that Launchpad notifies you in this case rather than failing silently)
[14:18] <teward_school> hey Launchpad gurus, anyone got any answer for this user?  https://askubuntu.com/questions/958702/launchpad-eddsa-key
[14:38] <miika> cjwatson: that explains, even though gpg shows the expiration date as 2018-08-20 for me, gotta upload new key anyways
[15:19] <m_hampl> What has to be done to get https://launchpad.net/~fanfictioncoll89 banned? There are already >140 spam messages in launchapd answers for ubuntu from that user. Please see also https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/658276
[16:48] <teward> cjwatson: thanks for replying to that Ask Ubuntu question
[16:49] <cjwatson> teward: NP
[16:49] <cjwatson> m_hampl: processing now
[16:49] <cjwatson> miika: I *suspect* the keyserver will accept it if you just upload a new self-signature with a newer expiration date, but you can try
[16:51] <miika> cjwatson: I already uploaded a new key and that is working fine
[16:52] <cjwatson> OK, good
[17:14] <teward> cjwatson: do you know offhand what algorithms Launchpad *does* accept for PGP keys?
[17:14] <teward> i'd assume standard RSA, ECDSA, but...
[17:17] <cjwatson> RSA, DSA, ElGamal
[17:17] <cjwatson> I don't believe anyone's so far complained about the lack of ECDSA
[17:17] <cjwatson> (I'm just going from what's in lp.services.gpg.interfaces.GPGKeyAlgorithm
[17:17] <cjwatson> )
[17:18] <teward> well i'd be complaining about ECDSA because my newer keys are all ECDSA because reasons.
[17:18] <teward> but my actual LP / Packaging key is still RSA4096
[17:18] <teward> :P
[17:20] <teward> cjwatson: thanks, hope you don't mind that I've added to your answer to expand it a little then, to indicate the supported key algos.
[17:20] <cjwatson> And if you were you'd be the first to complain :)
[17:20] <cjwatson> I imagine if somebody files a bug then we'd just do all the newer ones at once
[17:20] <cjwatson> Sure
[17:20] <teward> cjwatson: actually that brings up a question...
[17:20] <teward> what gpg version does LP use as its backend
[17:21] <cjwatson> Launchpad, not "LaunchPad", BTW
[17:21] <teward> because only certain versions support Ed and such
[17:21] <teward> cjwatson: autocorrect is a pain isn't it.
[17:21] <teward> (using a bloody Mac right now >.<)
[17:22] <cjwatson> The relevant systems run xenial and call gpg via gpgme; I'm not offhand certain whether that ends up on gpg or gpg2
[17:22] <cjwatson> so either 1.4.20 or 2.1.11 right now
[17:22] <cjwatson> Oh yeah, we deliberately stick to gpg1
[17:22] <cjwatson> 1.4.20, then
[17:23] <teward> that wouldn't support Ed, etc. then. IIRC
[17:23] <cjwatson> Plausible
[17:23] <teward> so you'd have to rejigger the infrastructure to use gpg2
[17:23] <cjwatson> Yes, which is non-trivial
[17:23] <teward> and that's a massive project.
[17:23] <cjwatson> I wouldn't say massive
[17:23] <cjwatson> Just not a simple switch
[17:23] <teward> anything nontrivial becomes a massive project on its own
[17:23] <teward> because when you THINK it's working
[17:23] <teward> it explodes
[17:23] <teward> and then you have to fix the evils.
[17:24] <cjwatson> No point overstating matters either
[17:24] <cjwatson> https://code.launchpad.net/~cjwatson/launchpad/force-gpg1/+merge/314632 has some brief commentary
[17:24] <cjwatson> (noting that we did that before upgrading to xenial)
[17:24] <teward> cjwatson: I do know I had to switch to `gpg2` to support the one key I took from my work laptop - an ECDSA based key - to work on my laptop - so I basically had to rewrite `gpg` -> `gpg2` with symlinks
[17:24] <teward> cjwatson: ah, indeed.
[17:25] <cjwatson> We don't have to do that kind of thing, but we need to persuade gpg2 to not leave a load of persistent processes around during tests.
[17:25] <teward> heheh
[17:25] <teward> indeed.
[17:25] <cjwatson> Totally doable if there's actually a compelling reason.
[17:26] <teward> cjwatson: IIRC RSA/RSA is still the default gpg algo in gpg2 because it's widely accepted, but I haven't tested that recently
[17:26] <teward> yep gpg2 is still RSA/RSA for its defaults
[17:27] <cjwatson> (SSH keys are an entirely different complicated kettle of fish.)
[17:27] <teward> oh geez don't get me started XD
[17:27] <teward> but for reference, `gpg2` in Xenial supports at least the following for keygen - http://paste.ubuntu.com/25600876/
[17:28] <teward> ... in extreme expert mode...
[17:28] <teward> (EC isn't even offered outside of expert mode)
[17:28] <teward> cjwatson: so I don't think EdDSA would even be an option for xenial
[17:29] <cjwatson> Key generation is of course not the important thing
[17:29] <teward> true
[17:29] <cjwatson> And we do have the option of backporting if necessary
[17:38] <teward> true
[17:38] <teward> meh in any case, it's all solved and answered :)
[17:38] <teward> thank you
[23:56] <mehrlich> I'm getting "Unable to identify 'Anonymous':<root@runner-4e4528ca-project-2887717-concurrent-0> in launchpad" in my upload which is built by CI and I found I should ask here about what it means