[01:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted dh-runit [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [2.7.1]
[01:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted prison-kf5 [arm64] (bionic-proposed) [5.44.0-0ubuntu1]
[01:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted prison-kf5 [i386] (bionic-proposed) [5.44.0-0ubuntu1]
[01:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted prison-kf5 [s390x] (bionic-proposed) [5.44.0-0ubuntu1]
[01:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted prison-kf5 [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [5.44.0-0ubuntu1]
[01:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted prison-kf5 [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed) [5.44.0-0ubuntu1]
[01:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted prison-kf5 [armhf] (bionic-proposed) [5.44.0-0ubuntu1]
[07:15] <estan> nacc: finally got around to reporting that bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/c-blosc/+bug/1755380
[07:15] <ubot5`> Ubuntu bug 1755380 in c-blosc (Ubuntu) "Please sync c-blosc 1.14.0+ds1-1 from debian unstable to bionic (1.11.1 has format incompat bug!)" [Undecided,New]
[07:16] <estan> would be great if this could be sneaked through, infinity (?) ^
[07:39] <ginggs_> estan: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess#FeatureFreeze_for_new_upstream_versions
[08:02] <estan> ginggs_: ah thanks, i'll make sure to go through those steps.
[08:08] <infinity> estan: Don't worry about jumping through hoops, FFe approved and I'll sync it.
[08:11] <estan> infinity: many thanks!
[10:13] <Laney> apw: looking at that loop thing now
[10:14] <Laney> if you want a sneak peek, https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/JBHVsV9SsZ/
[10:14] <Laney> but I'll make it turn into a real failure
[10:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-guest-additions-iso (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-0ubuntu1.16.04.2] (no packageset)
[10:34] <apw> Laney, that is really not anything at all is it .. hrm
[10:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-meta (xenial-proposed/main) [1.361.1 => 1.413] (core)
[10:39] <apw> ^ that seems unlikely
[10:40] <Laney> :D
[10:40] <apw> cpaelzer, ^^ ??
[10:40] <apw> and some !!s too
[10:42] <cpaelzer> apw: Laney: what's up
[10:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ubuntu-meta [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.413]
[10:43] <apw> cpaelzer, ^
[10:43] <cpaelzer> the test linked above?
[10:43] <cpaelzer> or the ubuntu-meta
[10:43] <cpaelzer> ?
[10:43] <cpaelzer> UUUH
[10:43] <cpaelzer> I see
[10:43] <cpaelzer> I see ++
[10:43] <cpaelzer> please reject
[10:43] <cpaelzer> of course not xenial
[10:43] <apw> alerady gone
[10:43] <cpaelzer> WTF could that happen
[10:44]  * cpaelzer takes all ! needed for this
[10:44] <apw> wrong branch perhaps ?
[10:44] <cpaelzer> need to check in detail
[10:44] <cpaelzer> didn't feel wrong while doing
[10:45] <Laney> how did you enter the release into the changelog?
[10:45] <apw> cpaelzer, yeah it was based on bionic so that part is right ...
[10:49] <doko> apw: linux autopkg test override ping
[10:49] <cpaelzer> Found the path that lead to this xenial in the CL
[10:50] <cpaelzer> I built in a container to have the correct env /e.g. debootstrap version) which makes it an UNRELEASED entry, then on my system applied the change and ran dch --release to set the mail right
[10:50] <cpaelzer> on the latter it defaulted to xenial (systems version)
[10:50] <cpaelzer> after that neither myself nor on the review it was found
[10:50] <cpaelzer> thanks to SRU queue to catch it
[10:50] <cpaelzer> :q
[10:51] <apw> it is the last line of defence
[10:51] <cpaelzer> almost right window
[10:51] <Laney> nah, proposed would have done too
[10:51] <Laney> xenial switched to gnome shell(!)
[10:51] <apw> well i'd prefer to avoid polluting -proposed with 'forward' versions
[10:52] <cpaelzer> also in proposed my shame would have been around forever in publishing history - now it at least diminishes from this log and your minds :-)
[10:52] <Laney> not the cleanest, but for sure you would have heard some screams
[10:52] <Laney> cpaelzer: it's OK, https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/xenial/+queue?queue_state=4&queue_text=ubuntu-meta doesn't forget :D
[10:52] <cpaelzer> hehe
[10:52] <apw> heh yeah, it is never forgotten :)
[10:53] <apw> and it makes diffs sad mostly
[10:53] <apw> (if it has published)
[10:55] <apw> doko, soz, sorted
[11:43] <cjwatson> infinity,slangasek: Would one of you care to review https://code.launchpad.net/~cjwatson/ubuntu-archive-publishing/sign-parts/+merge/336347 ?  This is in service of https://code.launchpad.net/~cjwatson/launchpad/archive-signing-run-parts/+merge/336373, which is part of the work to add InRelease to by-hash directories
[11:44] <cjwatson> (Remaining MPs in the arc are https://code.launchpad.net/~cjwatson/launchpad/refactor-archive-signing/+merge/336377 and https://code.launchpad.net/~cjwatson/launchpad/inrelease-by-hash/+merge/336675)
[11:49] <cpaelzer> Laney: a while ago you cleaned up a case where all ppc64el builders where hanigng on clean up - I think it is happening again
[11:50] <cpaelzer> test and build queues also match that
[11:50] <cpaelzer> whatever you did back then, could you repeat that - or is it s a different case this time?
=== ginggs_ is now known as ginggs
[11:50] <cjwatson> cpaelzer: Builders or autopkgtest instances?
[11:51] <Laney> cpaelzer: for buildds that can't have been me
[11:51] <Laney> This person right here
[11:52] <cjwatson> For builders it's being investigated at the moment
[12:05] <cpaelzer> it was builders, but since it is investigated already I'll just wait
[12:05] <cpaelzer> Laney: maybe you just knew who to ping to resolve back then, it was builders as well
[12:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-7-cross [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [17ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[12:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gcc-7-cross [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [17ubuntu1]
[12:42] <Odd_Bloke> nacc: rbasak: o/ It looks like my pending uploads from https://gist.github.com/OddBloke/08f68c18f2f3d63a002f2c1a26a765ac are still pending.
[12:42] <Odd_Bloke> As I haven't seen any messages to suggest that they haven't passed a review or anything I assume they just dropped off the radar, so I'm popping them back on. :)
[12:57] <rbasak> Oh, sorry.
[12:57] <rbasak> I thought nacc was going to take over?
[13:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: javabeans-activation-framework (bionic-proposed/primary) [1.2.0-1]
[13:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted javabeans-activation-framework [sync] (bionic-proposed) [1.2.0-1]
[13:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-8-cross [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [6ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[13:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gcc-8-cross [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [6ubuntu1]
[13:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: javabeans-activation-framework [amd64] (bionic-proposed/none) [1.2.0-1] (no packageset)
[13:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted javabeans-activation-framework [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [1.2.0-1]
=== tdaitx_ is now known as tdaitx
[13:46] <cyphermox> Laney: I'm not sure if I had shared with you the result of my test w/ britney's update_output.txt outputting json?  https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/c53gXp2hRg/
[13:46] <cyphermox> err
[13:46] <cyphermox> yaml, I mean
[13:47] <apw> cyphermox, what is intending to consume that
[13:51] <cyphermox> I'm writing a script that can already parse excuses.yaml; it would be nice to continue on with parsing update_output for the rebuilds/whatnot that need to happen to fully unblock a transition.
[13:54] <cyphermox> I have yet to talk about it with Debian people
[13:59] <apw> cyphermox, sounds like a laudible goal to me
[14:02] <cyphermox> scratch that last message, I have left a comment on a relevant open issue on Debian's britney2
[14:03]  * tsimonq2 wonders if Ben could pick that up somehow
[14:19] <cyphermox> tsimonq2: already started convo, so we're good for now I think
[14:21] <tsimonq2> cyphermox: Cool cool
[14:24] <Laney> cyphermox: nice
[14:24] <Laney> I wonder if the format could be rationalised a bit
[14:24] <Laney> there's probably more structure that could be introduced
[14:25] <Laney> but I guess this is more or less directly spat out from the code now
[14:25] <cyphermox> Laney: of course, I just did that by hand, to see if it was feasible without changing any of the output code
[14:25] <Laney> ♥
[14:27] <xnox> cyphermox, does https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libzstd/+bug/1755310 look roughly right? e.g. is it in the correct state to be noticed by MIR team?
[14:27] <ubot5`> Ubuntu bug 1755310 in libzstd (Ubuntu) "MIR libzstd" [High,Confirmed]
[14:28] <xnox> i see the link is up, on the components-missmatches-proposed.html page, but I'm not sure if i got the state / assignees / subscribers right, to "submit" the MIR for review.
[14:29] <cyphermox> xnox: it's in the correct state, but you don't need to assign
[14:29] <xnox> cyphermox, ack.
[14:41] <juliank> xnox: oh, we can use it for initramfs too?
[14:42] <juliank> xnox: Are you confusing that with lz4?
[14:42] <xnox> juliank, with bionic's kernel, i believe you can, yes.
[14:42] <juliank> hmm no, it's advertised
[14:42] <xnox> $ cat config-4.15.0-10-generic  | grep ZSTD
[14:42] <xnox> CONFIG_SQUASHFS_ZSTD=y
[14:42] <xnox> CONFIG_ZSTD_COMPRESS=m
[14:42] <xnox> CONFIG_ZSTD_DECOMPRESS=y
[14:42] <juliank> there's just no announcement anywhere...
[14:42] <xnox> decompress is built in, thus eligible for initramfs i believe....
[14:43] <xnox> juliank, do you expect a CONFIG_RD_ZSTD or some such?
[14:43] <xnox> squashfs is definately there.
[14:43] <juliank> I just searched for zstd initramfs and did not find anything concrete
[14:43] <xnox> so maybe we can speeding up live-installer, for reals.
[14:45] <Odd_Bloke> rbasak: Yeah, I wasn't sure if I'd missed some discussion that you might have been privy to.
[14:46] <xnox> juliank, grepping for e.g. RD_LZ4 i don't see if anything new gets compiled, apart from enabling kernel decompression as a built it.
[14:46] <xnox> juliank, to me it looks like one can totally use zstd initramfs...
[14:46] <juliank> xnox: I think I built one, though initramfs-tools does not advertise it yet
[14:46] <juliank> took 16 seconds isntead of 23
[14:49] <juliank> xnox: It definitely built, let's see if we can boot it
[14:51] <juliank> xnox: seems to work in qemu. It's a bit too fast to read "Unpacking initramfs" now, though :D
[14:51] <xnox> juliank, well, check dmesg?
[14:52] <juliank> I only booted the kernel with initramfs, and did not have a rootfs :D
[14:52] <juliank> both crashed not finding root, so that's good :D
[14:52] <juliank> will reboot in real shortly
[14:55] <juliank> rbalint: seems like zstd is a good choice for initramfs, too. compresses in same time as lz4, but smaller than gzip. probably not much slower than lz4 when decompressing for boot
[15:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (artful-proposed/partner) [1:20180206.1-0ubuntu0.17.10.1 => 1:20180313.1-0ubuntu0.17.10.1] (no packageset)
[15:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (xenial-proposed/partner) [1:20180206.1-0ubuntu0.16.04.1 => 1:20180313.1-0ubuntu0.16.04.1] (no packageset)
[15:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (trusty-proposed/partner) [1:20180206.1-0ubuntu0.14.04.1 => 1:20180313.1-0ubuntu0.14.04.1] (no packageset)
[15:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-hwe (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2] (no packageset)
[15:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox (artful-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.10.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.10.2] (ubuntu-cloud)
[15:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2] (ubuntu-cloud)
[15:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox (artful-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.10.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.10.3] (ubuntu-cloud)
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.3] (ubuntu-cloud)
[15:17] <LocutusOfBorg> sil2100, can you please review the above packages?
[15:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-hwe (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.3] (no packageset)
[15:18] <LocutusOfBorg> I just added a fix from bionic, the systemd startup script for the guest package
[15:18] <LocutusOfBorg> it calls the init script, but I prefer the systemd wrapper right now
[15:26] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: sure
[15:27] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: hm, I'm confused, why .3 for artful?
[15:27] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: I see two uploads there, one with version .2 and one with .3
[15:27] <LocutusOfBorg> yes, I did a copy-paste issue, so I changed in -3
[15:28] <LocutusOfBorg> if you want to reject all, I can reupload as -2 the three vbox and vbox-hwe
[15:28] <LocutusOfBorg> otherwise accept all the .3 and you are fine, also for versionig
[15:28] <LocutusOfBorg> same number makes my brain happy
[15:28] <LocutusOfBorg> (the guest-additions-package needed a debhelper compat level change, sigh)
[15:29] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: I don't think I understand, if you did a typo in the upload that went to the queue a version bump is not needed, you should have just kept .2
[15:30] <sil2100> As long as they're still in Unapproved version numbers don't get used up
[15:30] <LocutusOfBorg> seriously? I can override the queue? this is awesome
[15:30] <sil2100> Yeah ;)
[15:30] <LocutusOfBorg> wow :)
[15:31] <sil2100> It's a neat safety net, I can basically accept the .3's if you as the maintainer don't care about the version jump
[15:31] <LocutusOfBorg> if you want to reject, this is fine, I have the new -2 ready to go
[15:31] <LocutusOfBorg> just accept guest-additions-iso
[15:32] <chrisccoulson> hi, can someone please approve my flashplayer uploads? (and copy them to the release pocket later too)
[15:32] <LocutusOfBorg> BTW I spent the whole morning testing it
[15:32] <LocutusOfBorg> in the meanwhile we already got ~4 positive feedbacks
[15:32] <LocutusOfBorg> :D
[15:32] <sil2100> Ok, if they're ready then please upload, I'll reject the older ones (+ the guest-additions)
[15:32] <sil2100> (I mean, approve guest-additions)
[15:32] <sil2100> Or review first, even
[15:32] <sil2100> ;)
[15:33] <LocutusOfBorg> already uploading, don't forget to reject .3 and accept .2 then :p
[15:34] <LocutusOfBorg> oops I dputted -f also the guest-additions with exactly the same changes file, meh :)
[15:34] <LocutusOfBorg> sad, I did a looong post about all the tests I have done, and f5 on chrome lost it
[15:34] <LocutusOfBorg> :/
[15:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox (artful-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.10.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.10.2] (ubuntu-cloud)
[15:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2] (ubuntu-cloud)
[15:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-guest-additions-iso (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-0ubuntu1.16.04.2] (no packageset)
[15:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-hwe (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2] (no packageset)
[15:39] <LocutusOfBorg> fine now ^^
[15:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-guest-additions-iso [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-0ubuntu1.16.04.2]
[15:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-hwe [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.3]
[15:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.3]
[15:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-hwe [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2]
[15:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2]
[15:40] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: thanks! Rejected what had to be rejected and will review those in a moment, just need to finish something quick
[15:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox [source] (artful-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.10.2]
[15:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox [source] (artful-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.10.3]
[15:40] <LocutusOfBorg> sure thanks
[16:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: patchelf (xenial-proposed/universe) [0.8-4 => 0.9-1~ubuntu16.04.1] (no packageset)
[16:18] <Odd_Bloke> Can someone remind me how I would go about getting packages added to a packageset?  (Specifically, I'd like the other packages under https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#vagrant added to the ubuntu-cloud packageset, so I can more effectively maintain vagrant.)
[16:21] <rbasak> Odd_Bloke: email devel-permissions@ with the request.
[16:23] <Odd_Bloke> On a related note, could someone with The Power please hit the retry URLs in here for me: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/R5x8RykbTC/
[16:23] <nacc> Odd_Bloke: doing so now
[16:24] <Odd_Bloke> Thanks!
[16:25] <Odd_Bloke> nacc: Oh, actually, never mind!
[16:25] <Odd_Bloke> I just noticed that I have an i386 regression on Vagrant itself. >.<
[16:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-guest-additions-iso (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-0ubuntu1.16.04.2] (no packageset)
[16:31] <xnox> Odd_Bloke, /usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby/spring/application.rb:156:in `fork': undefined method `reject!' for nil:NilClass
[16:32] <xnox> so i think spring is b0rked, no?
[16:33] <Odd_Bloke> xnox: <shrug asciimoji>
[16:33]  * xnox loves this audio description
[16:34] <xnox> is this alexa typing?
[16:34] <Odd_Bloke> (My intent is to shepherd the things I was working on last week through, but I can't invest time in any new Ruby packages this week.)
[16:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: horizon (xenial-proposed/main) [2:9.1.2-0ubuntu4 => 2:9.1.2-0ubuntu6] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[16:37] <sergiusens> RAOF mind (please) taking a look at  patchelf (xenial-proposed/universe) ?
[16:38] <Odd_Bloke> So I think https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=bionic&arch=amd64&package=ruby-mustermann19&trigger=ruby-defaults%2F1%3A2.5%7E1000grauubuntu1 (and other arches) should clear that from blocking ruby-defaults.
[16:39] <Odd_Bloke> xnox: ruby-turbolinks itself is blocked by an autopkgtest that's failing on the debug_inspector thing; are you still fixing that?
[16:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: horizon (trusty-proposed/main) [1:2014.1.5-0ubuntu2.1 => 1:2015.1.4-0ubuntu4] (ubuntu-server)
[16:40] <xnox> Odd_Bloke, i believe i fixed that bit; but rails newapp test still fails, but now with this ruby-spring issue, upon trying to "boot" the brand new rails app.
[16:40] <xnox> Odd_Bloke, at least it manages to create a brand new rails app now.
[16:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: horizon (trusty-proposed/main) [1:2014.1.5-0ubuntu2.1 => 1:2014.1.5-0ubuntu2.2] (ubuntu-server)
[16:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: xorg-lts-transitional (bionic-proposed/primary) [3:14]
[17:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected horizon [source] (xenial-proposed) [2:9.1.2-0ubuntu6]
[17:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected horizon [source] (trusty-proposed) [1:2014.1.5-0ubuntu2.2]
[17:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected horizon [source] (xenial-proposed) [2:9.1.2-0ubuntu5]
[17:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted virtualbox [source] (artful-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.17.10.2]
[17:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-guest-additions-iso [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-0ubuntu1.16.04.2]
[17:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected horizon [source] (trusty-proposed) [1:2015.1.4-0ubuntu4]
[17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted virtualbox-guest-additions-iso [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-0ubuntu1.16.04.2]
[17:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted virtualbox [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2]
[17:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: horizon (trusty-proposed/main) [1:2014.1.5-0ubuntu2.1 => 1:2014.1.5-0ubuntu2.2] (ubuntu-server)
[17:25] <Odd_Bloke> xnox: Aha, good!  In that case, could you retrigger the failing tests under https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#ruby-turbolinks for me, please?
[17:26] <Odd_Bloke> I _think_ they only rely on newapp running, not on the part of the rails test that is now failing.
[17:26] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: eh, I just reviewed and accepted most virtualbox SRUs, but the virtualbox-hwe has an ugly changelog
[17:26] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: for others you were overwriting the old changelog, here it's duplicated (and with the same version number actually)
[17:27] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: could you fix that?
[17:27] <xnox> Odd_Bloke, hm, we shall see then
[17:32] <LocutusOfBorg> sil2100, I prefer to avoid a new changelog entry, but I can fix it, yes
[17:32] <LocutusOfBorg> and... hwe is just to match the version numbers, to avoid useless diffs in case of subsequent uploads
[17:33] <sil2100> Yeah, thanks!
[17:33] <LocutusOfBorg> ack
[17:33] <LocutusOfBorg> just one sec, wildo in 20min
[17:34] <doko> LocutusOfBorg: did the gdbm maintainer explain, why gdbm needs linking with dietlibc?
[17:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-hwe [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2]
[17:37] <slangasek> dietlibc? >_<
[17:44] <LocutusOfBorg> yes doko, in the RFS bug
[17:45] <LocutusOfBorg> but this solution should make everybody happy
[17:45] <doko> LocutusOfBorg: what is the RFS bug?
[17:45] <LocutusOfBorg> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=891005
[17:45] <ubot5`> Debian bug 891005 in sponsorship-requests "RFS: gdbm/1.14.1-5 " [Wishlist,Open]
[17:45]  * LocutusOfBorg goes afk for some minutes
[17:49] <Odd_Bloke> rbasak: Thanks for the packageset update!
[17:50] <rbasak> yw
[17:50] <rbasak> Non-automatic packagesets are the easiest type :)
[17:51] <Odd_Bloke> :)
[17:53] <nacc> Odd_Bloke: ruby-parslet is already fixed, afaict (1.8.2-2)
[17:54] <Odd_Bloke> nacc: Yep, agreed.
[17:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added vagrant-cachier to ubuntu-cloud in bionic
[17:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added vagrant-libvirt to ubuntu-cloud in bionic
[17:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added vagrant-lxc to ubuntu-cloud in bionic
[17:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added vagrant-mutate to ubuntu-cloud in bionic
[17:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added vagrant-sshfs to ubuntu-cloud in bionic
[18:06] <nacc> Odd_Bloke: sigh, ruby-rgen has CRLF line endings
[18:06] <nacc> Odd_Bloke: so your patch fails to apply on its own (afaict0
[18:08] <LocutusOfBorg> sil2100, reuploaded, with an added entry "build only guest packages with hwe stack"
[18:08] <LocutusOfBorg> so we know that this is the same as virtualbox/proposed, plus the new stack packages
[18:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-hwe (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2] (no packageset)
[18:12] <Odd_Bloke> nacc: My patch seems to have the right line endings; are you losing them when you download it?
[18:12] <nacc> Odd_Bloke: yeah possibly
[18:13] <Odd_Bloke> nacc: Try https://gist.githubusercontent.com/OddBloke/08f68c18f2f3d63a002f2c1a26a765ac/raw/ce49b7ec843dccf26da4e749214a43f0fc18ec21/ruby-rgen.debdiff
[18:13] <nacc> Odd_Bloke: since it's in a paste? can you .. yeah that
[18:13] <nacc> Odd_Bloke: thanks
[18:14] <Odd_Bloke> FWIW, "download as text" from paste.u.c seemed to WFM.
[18:14] <nacc> Odd_Bloke: ack, i see that now
[18:21] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: hmm, ok, this still looks a bit strange - before you were just overwriting the latest changelog entry, now the strange thing is that you have 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2 with almost the same changelog entries as 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2
[18:22] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: normally what people do is, if they want to leave the previous version in the changelog, add a new one with just the entry they want (so the 'build only...' thing) + build the source package with -v
[18:22] <sil2100> To get the previous changelog entry in .changes
[18:22] <LocutusOfBorg> yes, but one refers to virtualbox, the other to virtualbox-hwe
[18:23] <LocutusOfBorg> ack ok
[18:23] <LocutusOfBorg> Indeed
[18:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-hwe (xenial-proposed/multiverse) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 => 5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2] (no packageset)
[18:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted patchelf [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.9-1~ubuntu16.04.1]
[18:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-hwe [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2]
[18:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted virtualbox-hwe [source] (xenial-proposed) [5.1.34-dfsg-0ubuntu1.16.04.2]
[20:26] <estan> infinity: i tested the c-blosc 1.14.0+ds1-1 you synced (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/c-blosc/+bug/1755380/comments/2). looks good! many thanks for dealing with it so quickly.
[20:26] <ubot5`> Ubuntu bug 1755380 in c-blosc (Ubuntu) "[FFe] Please sync c-blosc 1.14.0+ds1-1 from debian unstable to bionic (1.11.1 has format incompat bug!)" [Undecided,Fix released]
[20:28] <estan> (would be nice to have in artful too, but not too important)
[23:37] <infinity> estan: Except that it segfaults on ARM, so won't migrate.
[23:42] <slangasek> tjaalton: we seem to still be no closer to a resolution on freeipa.  What are our options for un-sticking it for 18.04?  Are the autopkgtest failures in 4.6.3-1 something that need resolving, vs. skipping?  Is the resolution of those failures blocked on the nss stuff whose name I've forgotten?
[23:46] <slangasek> jbicha: did you want Debian bug #866659 (zekr removal) actioned in Ubuntu to unblock swt-gtk?
[23:46] <ubot5`> Debian bug 866659 in src:zekr "zekr: depends on libwebkitgtk-3.0-0 which is deprecated" [Serious,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/866659
[23:48] <jbicha> slangasek: yes I filed Debian bug 892650 too
[23:48] <ubot5`> Debian bug 892650 in src:zekr "zekr: Intent to request removal from Debian" [Serious,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/892650
[23:49] <slangasek> removed
[23:50] <jbicha> I assume we won't be trying to remove libgnomeui from Ubuntu this cycle -- it would kill shutter for instance (admittedly unmaintained but still…)
[23:51] <jbicha> oh and sugar too
[23:53] <slangasek> I wonder if there's anything in sugar that should still be kept in Ubuntu; last time it had a reason to be on my radar it was because of packages removed from Debian several years ago that we're still keeping in Ubuntu because there was an Ubuntu delta, but the Ubuntu delta is by now quite stale
[23:55] <jbicha> sugar-toolkit doesn't look very important so removing gnome-python and gnome-python-desktop looks ok to me