=== BrAsS_mOnKeY is now known as william [05:44] nacc: are you handling php and the 7.2 transition? if not. please point somebody else to it ... looking at component mismatches proposed: libsodium needs a bug subscriber, dh-php a MIR, argon2 as well [05:47] plus xml2 [05:49] rbalint: flash-kernel merge: mtd-utils probably needs a MIR [05:51] jamespage: pycryptodome and pysmi need a MIR (dep of python-pysnmp4, openstack maintained) [05:53] juliank: lvm2 merge: thin-provisioning-tools needs a MIR, or recommends dropped to suggests [05:55] xnox: libzstd needs a MIR (for new btrfs-progs) [06:20] juliank: please see http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html for cryptsetup (unsatisfiable Depends) [06:46] tsimonq2: libindi is stuck in proposed [06:50] doko: I'd presume you saw Debian #888531 and https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/ruby2.5? (Including the test rebuild results.) [06:50] Debian bug 888531 in release.debian.org "transition: ruby2.5" [Normal,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/888531 [06:51] Unit193: and? [06:52] You expressed interest. Good then. [06:58] Unit193: it's scheduled for demotion [06:58] Ah, that works too. [07:10] ginggs: gazebo ftbfs (unstable as well) [07:14] doko: lvm2 ok, well, britney does not care, so I did not see that. cryptsetup hopefully sorts itself out once argon2 is MIRed and lvm2 is migrated. [07:15] juliank: you see that in component mismatches proposed [07:15] somebody has to write the argon2 MIR, either foundations, or server [07:16] doko: The argon2 MIR is at security review already :) [07:16] ahh, ok. do they know? ubuntu-mir is not subscribed to the bug [07:17] Sure they are [07:17] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/argon2/+bug/1746047 [07:17] Launchpad bug 1746047 in argon2 (Ubuntu) "[MIR] argon2" [Undecided,In progress] [07:17] "Notified of all changes MIR approval team" [07:18] hmm, http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.txt doesn't show the subscription [07:18] and cyphermox did the review and reassigned to ubuntu-security [07:18] doko: It's older than the MIR I think [07:20] bug is 17:16, mismatches 12:24 [07:20] looks like it's out-of-date [07:35] doko: ok, i'll look [07:40] doko: fixed lvm2. (I think it might be worth considering MIRing thin-provisioning-tools given that missing it could make your system unbootable if you use a cache LV, but um, let's worry about that later) [07:43] maybe it should just be made a bit smarter and refuse to generate cache LVs without them installed. [08:24] xnox: we talked about lp 1744328 / debian 888764 - I'm kind of blocked on this, but unless Debian says yes I'd at least have a 2nd opinion to take it as Ubuntu Delta [08:24] Launchpad bug 1744328 in nss (Ubuntu) "libfreebl3.so should be public, not in the nss subdir" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1744328 [08:24] Debian bug 888764 in nss "libfreebl3.so should be public, not in the nss subdir" [Normal,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/888764 [08:28] doko, tah [08:35] cpaelzer: mike won't accept anything that upstream hasn't marked public :/ [08:35] i've fought things like https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=855879 for years [08:35] Debian bug 855879 in libnss3-dev "Please add blapi.h to libnss3-dev" [Normal,Open] [08:36] which I need for nss-pam which is needed for certmonger to be useful [08:36] thanks for the info tjaalton [08:36] even looped in redhat folks [08:36] I'm leaning towards adding that as a delta then, but would be pleased if a few people could ack on it [08:37] I might prepare a proper MP for an Ubuntu Delta on it and add you and xnox to comment there [08:37] * cpaelzer is fully reading tjaalton's example bug now ... [08:38] was thinking if bringing this up on CTTE would be warranted or not [08:42] sorry tjaalton - abbreviation overload - CTTE ? [08:42] debian technical committee [08:43] I like your patch to 855879 [08:44] although reading all that makes me feel bad [08:44] crickets.. [08:46] maybe a combined version that would make the .so's accesible (for cases like mine) and the .a files (as suggested by you) would be the best [08:59] cpaelzer, hm..... surely all you need is a one line to create a symlink in like debian/libfoo.links and that's it, no? [08:59] cpaelzer, and just upload that into ubuntu direct. [08:59] I know what I need :-) I just want to have a few acks on the way I do it :-) [08:59] cpaelzer, (possibly with dh-exec if you need DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH location) [09:00] and after reading into all of tjaalton it might be the time to do a more generic overhaul [09:00] xnox: but I hear you are not opposed to making the libs accessible - that was the important pre-check [09:00] slangasek: pointed me to "talk to xnox on this" - that is what I'm doing :-) [09:01] the new pkg for nss-pem can be added later [09:02] tjaalton: ok so you have time to escalate this to Debian and back for nss-pem then? [09:02] ok then I might really only change the .so's being a less invasive change [09:02] yes [09:02] filed the ITP for nss-pem [09:02] see what happens [09:03] thanks, it still was very very sueful to get all that context on this [09:03] useful even [09:03] cpaelzer, i don't think it is a good idea to create a new package, i don't think changing library location is ok, i think symlink is fine to satisfy everything you want, there is no need for new source or binary packages. [09:04] yep, after the last few minutes of discussion here I'm agreeing to that xnox [09:44] tsimonq2, i made a huge mistake of uploading nodejs tweak =/ the amount of autopkgtests is humongous [09:48] tsimonq2: does kubuntu care about qdigidoc? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qdigidoc/0.4.1-0ubuntu2 [09:48] that seems to be out-of-date since 2012 [09:50] cjwatson: are you ok with temoting tickcount? [09:51] doko: yes [09:51] doko: I have a todo item to remove our use of it entirely (we need a sort of partial replacement, but can't continue using interpreter ticks) [09:52] ok, unseeding then [09:53] doko: in general it doesn't make sense for python-* to be seeded on Launchpad's behalf any more. Since ~2009 we've only used a relatively small number of system-packaged Python packages, and mostly use buildout (until end of last year) / pip (now) [09:54] doko: python-tickcount was an exception to that, but as I think I mentioned on the bug, if necessary we could keep it in our deployment PPA anyway [09:59] ok. I'll just demote, don't remove it yet [10:03] doko, do we have a place to document / record 32-bit only issues that I have to dig/hunt to solve? e.g. I'm currently looking at i386 and i386+armhf only adt failures triggered by openssl upload. [10:04] xnox: no, not afaik [10:04] besides the i386 float stuff probably [11:40] links/dh-exec doesn't like me :-/ [11:40] has someone an example of dh-exec in .links to create multiarch links? === zyga-ubu1tu is now known as zyga [11:43] cpaelzer, is the .links file executable? [11:43] cpaelzer, does it have dh-exec shebang? [11:44] cpaelzer, or can you push your repository somewhere for me to check it? [11:44] it is just me never using it that way - I iterated a bit but it keeps failing with [11:44] dh_link: symlink(nss/libfreebl3.so, debian/libnss3/usr/lib/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/) failed: No such file or directory [11:45] I'm sure I do something wrong, but without an example to check against it is stupid iterating through trial-and-error [11:45] I'm in a chroot of an sbuild and can tweak it [11:45] atm it is like [11:46] http://paste.ubuntu.com/26488822/ [11:46] and files relative to the build are like [11:46] http://paste.ubuntu.com/26488823/ [11:46] I (currently) assume it doesn't have the variable exported or something like it [11:46] cpaelzer, there should never be leading '/' in any of these files [11:46] it should be executable [11:46] I tihnk I had all variations of this :-/ [11:46] thus something like: [11:47] horum =/ [11:48] cpaelzer, and it should be full paths before and after.... [11:48] oh that I never tried [11:48] .. [11:48] usr/lib/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/nss/libfreebl3.so usr/lib/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/libfreebl3.so [11:48] i think, yet manual has leading slashes in examples. [11:48] it also is the variable [11:49] only when I drop the var I get to the "is a directory" error [11:49] which is about the filename on the second argument as you just said [11:49] fun [11:50] so "usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/nss/libfreebl3.so usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfreebl3.so" works [11:50] now I need to find what I miss to get the variable resolved [11:50] I had $() and ${} and tried on exporting the variable [11:50] include /usr/share/dpkg/default.mk on top of debian/rules? [11:51] have it working now [11:51] interesting [11:51] it was the full path incl file on the second argument [11:51] just when variables are used the error without it is way off [11:51] whoop whoop [11:51] thanks xnox, now all that back into proper packaging for another full try :-) [11:52] xnox++ [11:52] (we should have more of you) [11:54] ohh no, I can't stand more noise ;p [12:15] xnox: grml - we only made it 75% - it now links to a literal ./debian/libnss3/usr/lib/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/libfreebl3.so :-) [12:17] cpaelzer, as per $ man dh-exec-subst it says ${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH} will be substituited.... [12:18] yes, but it is not :-/ [12:18] mabye it only calls plain dh-links in my case [12:18] that is how it seems to me atm [12:19] cpaelzer: what's your debhelper compat level? [12:19] 9 [12:19] ok, 9 should work [12:19] cpaelzer: how about your source format? [12:19] 3.0 (quilt) [12:20] nothing too special on any of that [12:20] can I see the source package? [12:21] sure it is essentially pull-lp-source nss + experimenting with debian/libnss3.links as http://paste.ubuntu.com/26488955/ [12:21] cpaelzer, you have dh-exec as build-dependency right? [12:21] I've had it [12:21] ideally I'd like to see your actual .dsc + extra files [12:21] especially the .debian.tar.* [12:22] cpaelzer, scp it to people.canonical.com? [12:22] the file is executable? [12:22] executable - yes [12:22] I'll upload and share a link [12:29] I put all in a tarball at http://people.canonical.com/~paelzer/nss-links-multiarch.tgz [12:30] I realized I had it not executable in the packaging yet (only per chmod in the sbuild chroot) [12:30] so I cahnged that as well and am currently rebuilding [12:30] I'll ping if this (as in the tarball) is still failing me on the rebuild [12:39] nice - it really was the +x permissions before buildpackage [12:39] I'll save all that as big learning experience [12:39] thanks for your patience Laney, cjwatson and xnox [12:40] it now worked (breaking things post dh_link due to that, but worked) [12:40] executable in the packaging> yep, that was why I wanted to check the .debian.tar.* :-) [12:42] the follow on fallout is interesting [12:42] dh-exec creates debian/tmp (as th emanpages tells me) [12:42] * Laney has been there before [12:42] and until now the d/rules had mkdir debian/tmp (without -p) [12:42] forgetting to commit the mode change and being surprised when it didn't survive gbp buildpackage -S or something like that [13:21] doko: LP: #1745634 would make it easier for me to try to demote xterm to universe [13:21] Launchpad bug 1745634 in ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "Demote idle to universe" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1745634 [13:28] jbicha: yeah, probably worth doing that [13:45] doko: cool. Could you unseed it or comment on the bug if you'd prefer I do it? [13:51] slangasek: hi, finally wrote a small patch to pam-auth-update to fix https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pam/+bug/1192719 [13:51] Launchpad bug 1192719 in pam (Ubuntu) "[pam-auth-update] add support for enabling non-default configs" [Wishlist,Confirmed] [15:00] xnox: are you undoing my libp11 no-change uploads? [15:01] doko, ..... libp11 was not rebuild against openssl1.1.0 because we don't have that... thus p11 3 abi is a lie. [15:02] doko, we need to redo those uploads, properly, to rebuild that 3 abi, against the right openssl. [15:05] yes, seen that now. will you do, or should I? [15:08] doko, either or. as you wish. I was planning to do the unwind. [15:08] xnox: ok, please do === zyga_ is now known as zyga [16:19] doko: yes [16:22] doko: (re: php7.2) [16:23] doko: i'll be promoting it to main once i get it all fixed up, just like we did 7.1 previously, and removing 7.1 from the archive [16:24] ta [16:24] nacc: well, write the MIRs first ... [16:25] doko: yep [16:28] doko: to be clear the dh-php one is already resolved, just hasn't been caught up it seems (dh-php is only a suggests) [17:22] doko: I'm aware. [17:23] xnox: nodejs> ack :( thanks for telling me [17:27] doko: afaict, argon2 is not related to php? [17:27] doko: I think at this point if it's KDE 4 or Qt 4 and you can handle rdeps, take it out [17:53] I wonder if Bileto access could be reconsidered now that all PPA arches are unblocked. [17:53] Maybe allow ~ubuntu-dev access or something :) [17:54] I have access to do Qt transitions but I know it would be really useful to use with other Ubuntu Developers (with upload access) [17:56] I might start a discussion on ubuntu-devel unless it's decided here :) [17:57] doko: ok, we've subscribed ubuntu-server to libsodium; is that enough to re-main it, once necessary? [17:57] doko: gazebo and cyphesis-cpp uploaded, i think tinyxml2 will migrate if you rm openmw:arm64 [18:43] mwhudson: why is golang-1.8-go still in main? [18:47] ginggs: done [18:49] flexiondotorg: would you add Conflicts: telegram-desktop to your telegram PPA packages please? It would prevent future bugs like LP: #1740708 [18:49] Launchpad bug 1740708 in telegram-desktop (Ubuntu) "package telegram-desktop 1.1.23-1 failed to install/upgrade: trying to overwrite '/usr/share/applications/telegramdesktop.desktop', which is also in package telegram 1.1.23-1~artful1.0" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1740708 [18:49] doko: ta! [18:49] ginggs: OK [18:50] flexiondotorg: ta! [19:53] infinity, kees, mdeslaur, stgraber: TB meeting in 7? [19:53] ack [20:04] doko: dunno, shouldn't be afaik [20:16] cjwatson: I'm looking at archivepublisher now to see where changes would be needed for valid-until support. It does not seem _that_ difficult. Basically we add the field for all -updates, -security releases; and add the release files to the set that needs updates if it's older than a week. [20:17] (and make validity 2 weeks) [20:18] old releases might be tricky [20:18] not sure [20:19] or, rather then looking at the age of the release file, we open it and check that valid-until does not expire for more than a week [20:20] I guess it needs a flag in the model somewhere that tells it "Valid-Until" is allowed [20:21] well "needs" [20:50] LP takes a while to branch :D [21:17] cjwatson: That is, https://paste.ubuntu.com/26491551/ or https://code.launchpad.net/~juliank/launchpad/valid-until [21:17] I have not run any tests yet... [21:22] update: http://paste.ubuntu.com/26491574/ [21:25] forgot initialize...: http://paste.ubuntu.com/26491591/ [21:26] now it needs tests and some testing [21:26] but I think the idea is clear. [21:26] ugh, should have posted in #launchpad [21:27] * juliank moves to #launchpad-dev [21:32] * tsimonq2 is curious about what Valid-Until support means and what the use case would be [21:40] juliank: something like that is probably a good start (note that when the bug was just filed it would have been a *lot* harder, because the ability to write just the Release file wasn't really there), but it'll need extensive tests [21:40] yeah [21:41] cjwatson: I also posted in #launchpad-dev now, so we can follow up there if needed :) [22:18] tsimonq2: if you know that your archive is periodically republished, then including in the signed data that a given archive state is invalid after a given date prevents a silent replay attack [22:23] (assuming reasonably synced clocks etc.) [22:36] tsimonq2: To further comment, you can prevent what you could call update starvation. That is, for -updates, currently you can feed apt an old archive state all the time, and it says "oh fine, no updates". [22:42] slangasek: Hm ok, interesting. [22:42] juliank: So then what will apt do in the case of an old archive state? [22:43] tsimonq2: If the archive is not valid anymore it will give you an error if you update [22:43] tsimonq2: You can easily try that yourself in a Debian chroot, just set the clock backward :D [22:43] juliank: heh OK :) [22:44] juliank: What if I just have an outdated archive mirror that's *purposely* set that way for some reason? (obviously not in prod but for testing) Will I be able to override this in sources.list the same sort of way I override untrusted entries? [22:45] tsimonq2: You can set check-valid-until to no [22:45] you can also configure valid-until-{min,max} [22:46] these are in seconds, BTW [22:46] Could you give an example (or a manual I can RTFM on)? [22:47] tsimonq2: It's all documented in sources.list, but no excamples in there I guess [22:47] tsimonq2: in the manpage, that is [22:47] tsimonq2: This feature is over 6 years old already [22:47] juliank: oh hah, TIL [22:48] tsimonq2: Here's the LP bug from 2011: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/716535 [22:48] Launchpad bug 716535 in Launchpad itself "Please support Valid-Until in release files for security.ubuntu.com" [Low,In progress] [22:49] juliank: subbed, thanks [22:50] http://snapshot.debian.org/ also notes the use of check-valid-until. [22:54] Oh, right. Interesting. [23:03] tsimonq2: It's a bit inconvenient in some use cases with historical distros, but it's a huge security improvement IMO [23:03] :D [23:15] :D right