[06:26] <tsimonq2> kees: Since you're chairing the TB meeting later, you're welcome to skip my agenda item (well, a review of an action item I had); I didn't quite get the time to follow through with that but I will have something before the next TB meeting.
[06:28] <tsimonq2> kees: Oh, and I totally misread the calendar, so unless I ping you after doing it tonight (which is possible, heh) then skip it...
[06:49] <_Marek_> hi
[06:50] <_Marek_> id like to ask about mdadm and ubuntu live install - i had 4 disks as raid5 starting with sda
[06:50] <_Marek_> sda sdb sdc sdd
[06:50] <_Marek_> during installation ubuntu accidentally picked sda instead of sdf
[06:51] <_Marek_> does ubuntu automatically recognize its a raid disk or did it just wipe one disk?
[07:44] <doko> LocutusOfBorg: any update on the llvm sanitizer issues?
[10:18] <juliank> LocutusOfBorg: gnutls28 merged
[10:24] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks juliank!
[11:02] <doko> xnox: could you have a look at https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-bionic/bionic/amd64/c/cmake-extras/20180312_104032_b3956@/log.gz ?
[11:06] <juliank> mvo: If I run command-not-found petname, it shows me "snap petname" (OK) and "deb petname ()" - the () are confusing, should there be something in there?
[11:06] <mvo> juliank: its a bug, sorry for that
[11:07] <mvo> juliank: let me upload a fixed version right now. I was holding the upload back because there is some further output discussion
[11:07] <xnox> doko, thanks....
[11:10] <juliank> mvo: not a big deal, I was just wondering
[11:10] <mvo> juliank: its uploaded now
[11:11] <mvo> juliank: most likely the output will be tweaked but at least the most glaring bugs are fixed now (and tests are much much better too)
[12:21] <tsimonq2> mvo: If snapd isn't installed (like with Lubuntu), the snap output for command-not-found isn't shown, correct?
[12:22] <tsimonq2> If not, I consider that a regression which I'll happily submit a patch for.
[12:59] <mvo> tsimonq2: without snapd it should simply skip snaps - if that that is a bug
[13:23] <tsimonq2> mvo: ack
[13:30] <mvo> tsimonq2: if you notice any issues, please do let me know and I will fix
[14:15] <xnox> infinity, back to our conversation about "auto-bumping d-i netinst size". Imho to catch the "crazy, d-i should not have grown by 2x" it should be an autopkgtest that compares sizes of new d-i, versus previous upload and/or versus release pocket of the last LTS.
[14:15] <xnox> infinity, such that it would be an autopkgtest force-bad test, to say "nah, this is all good we really want to ship 10 MiB of network cards firmwares" vs "no this is dumb, somebody upload a fixed d-i"
[14:16] <xnox> infinity, because the current feedback loop of FTBFS, re-upload to bump d-i by 10 KiB is not fun at all.
[14:16] <xnox> and our current d-i sizings are not as tight as they could be.
[14:16] <xnox> infinity, thoughts?
[15:04] <sil2100> !dmb-ping
[18:29] <infinity> xnox: I think you're spending way to much time thinking about overengineering a solution for something you've had to commit *once* for in two years.