[00:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: openmpi [arm64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [3.0.1.real-4] (kubuntu)
[00:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: openmpi [armhf] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [3.0.1.real-4] (kubuntu)
[00:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: openmpi [amd64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [3.0.1.real-4] (kubuntu)
[01:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted openmpi [amd64] (cosmic-proposed) [3.0.1.real-4]
[01:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted openmpi [armhf] (cosmic-proposed) [3.0.1.real-4]
[01:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted openmpi [ppc64el] (cosmic-proposed) [3.0.1.real-4]
[01:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted openmpi [arm64] (cosmic-proposed) [3.0.1.real-4]
[01:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted openmpi [s390x] (cosmic-proposed) [3.0.1.real-4]
[01:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted openmpi [i386] (cosmic-proposed) [3.0.1.real-4]
[03:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: clipper [s390x] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1.20160809-1] (no packageset)
[03:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: clipper [ppc64el] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1.20160809-1] (no packageset)
[03:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: clipper [amd64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1.20160809-1] (no packageset)
[03:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: clipper [i386] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1.20160809-1] (no packageset)
[03:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: clipper [arm64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1.20160809-1] (no packageset)
[03:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: clipper [armhf] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1.20160809-1] (no packageset)
[03:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: weechat [s390x] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1-2] (no packageset)
[03:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: weechat [i386] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1-2] (no packageset)
[03:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: weechat [ppc64el] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1-2] (no packageset)
[03:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: weechat [amd64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1-2] (no packageset)
[03:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: weechat [armhf] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1-2] (no packageset)
[03:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: weechat [arm64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [2.1-2] (no packageset)
=== tacobat` is now known as tacobat
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clipper [amd64] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1.20160809-1]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clipper [armhf] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1.20160809-1]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clipper [ppc64el] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1.20160809-1]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted weechat [amd64] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1-2]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted weechat [armhf] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1-2]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted weechat [ppc64el] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1-2]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clipper [arm64] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1.20160809-1]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clipper [s390x] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1.20160809-1]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted weechat [i386] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1-2]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clipper [i386] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1.20160809-1]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted weechat [s390x] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1-2]
[07:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted weechat [arm64] (cosmic-proposed) [2.1-2]
[08:05] <Laney> juliank: nice
[08:11] <LocutusOfBorg> Release Team, the Debian haskell transition should be mostly over, and I would like to drop llvm 3.7 from our world...
[08:12] <LocutusOfBorg> can you please tell me when it is convenient to do my manual syncs? (please don't whitelist it right now, I prefer to sync in the right order to avoid useless rebuilds and infra time)
[08:40] <Laney> juliank: fixed the image script too
[08:45] <juliank> Laney: nice
[09:26] <Laney> copied sil2100's email typo again :D
[09:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: debhelper (bionic-proposed/main) [11.1.6ubuntu1 => 11.1.6ubuntu2] (core)
[09:52] <sil2100> E-mail typo?
[09:52] <sil2100> Which one ;p?
[09:52]  * sil2100 does a lot of typos
[09:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted debhelper [source] (bionic-proposed) [11.1.6ubuntu2]
[09:57] <Laney> sil2100: I typoed your email address in a ticket the other day
[09:57] <Laney> and then juliank copied and pasted that
[09:57] <Laney> and today I just copied it again
[09:57] <Laney> /o\
[09:58] <apw> Laney, if that is the worst thing that happens today, you should grab it with both hands
[09:59] <Laney> haha
[09:59] <Laney> apw feeling particularly upbeat today
[09:59] <juliank> apw: at least all those pesky germans have a holiday today, so no trouble from that country...
[10:00] <apw> juliank, always on the day you need one of course ...
[10:01] <Laney> getting good service on my SRUs
[10:01] <Laney> high five to the team!
[10:01]  * juliank doesn't really feel like holiday today
[10:01] <apw> Laney, that is because you make them small and easy to review :)
[10:01] <Laney> Niels pinged me and said "take this commit plz"
[10:01] <Laney> it was easy through and through
[10:03] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, in bionic we have a sync of virtualbox-ext-pack at 5.2.10-4 and an upload (after that) at 5.2.10-3ubuntu18.04.1 -- i assume you only want the latter ?
[10:05] <Laney> can you do syncs as SRUs?
[10:05] <Laney> if the dsc has LP-Bugs-Fixed maybe?
[10:05] <Laney> s/dsc/changes/ but then it won't have one...
[10:06] <apw> you can technically, they tend to make people very sad; they would be a sync-from-ppa in that case often
[10:32] <LocutusOfBorg> apw, I would appreciate the sync, but if infra/policy disallows that, SRU versioning is fine
[10:32] <LocutusOfBorg> they are technically the same
[10:42] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, oh that version hit cosmic already, so that makes the answer simple
[10:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-ext-pack [sync] (bionic-proposed) [5.2.10-4]
[11:22] <ddstreet> sil2100 i uploaded t/x/a for lp #1701023, if you have time to review/approve them, then we can let that sit in -proposed for enough time to get it widely tested
[11:22] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1701023 in vlan (Ubuntu Artful) "(on trusty) version 1.9-3ubuntu10.4 regression blocking boot completion" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1701023
[11:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: faumachine [amd64] (cosmic-proposed/none) [20180503-1] (no packageset)
[11:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (trusty-proposed/main) [3.13.0-148.197] (core, kernel)
[12:35] <ahasenack> hi, should we mark the dovecot dep8 armhf tests as flaky, https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/dovecot/cosmic/armhf, or cam someone hand me an armhf box to further debug this?
[12:37] <LocutusOfBorg> apw, since this is a downloader, a copy-back of the binary from cosmic to bionic works too :)
[12:37] <LocutusOfBorg> it is binary identical I would say
[12:37] <LocutusOfBorg> anyhow, let me know what is your best way
[12:38] <LocutusOfBorg> in the meanwhile the new vbox is out, so cosmic will have an higher version in 12h
[12:50] <enyc> LocutusOfBorg: all virtualbox versions will be harmonized, resistance is futile????
[12:51] <LocutusOfBorg> enyc, you will be assimilated.
[12:51]  * enyc thwarts LocutusOfBorg with a fatal memory protection violation
[12:52] <enyc> Last I checked, virtualbox 5.1 was being a pain, audio/microphone nonsense, etc etc...
[12:52]  * LocutusOfBorg borg have improved their NPE handling, after assimilating M$
[12:52] <enyc> maye thats' all fine now in -5.1, and its' now virtualbox-5.2 being a pain
[12:53] <LocutusOfBorg> who knows? :)
[12:53] <LocutusOfBorg> seriously, it should be work correctly now
[12:58] <slashd> o/ sil2100, could you please approve the bionic upload of 'ubiquity' for LP: #1751252, if you have a moment ?
[12:58] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1751252 in ubiquity (Ubuntu Bionic) "[regression] ubiquity crashed in debconf.py:104 with ValueError: invalid literal for int() with base 10: ''" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1751252
[13:27] <sil2100> slashd: hey! Sure
[13:29] <slashd> sil2100, thanks
[13:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubiquity [source] (bionic-proposed) [18.04.14.1]
[13:56] <ddstreet> sil2100 o/ if you have time could you review/approve the t/x/a uploads for lp #1701023
[13:56] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1701023 in vlan (Ubuntu Artful) "(on trusty) version 1.9-3ubuntu10.4 regression blocking boot completion" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1701023
[13:58] <sil2100> ddstreet: on it! Will just finish this one pyvmomi
[13:58] <ddstreet> thnx!
[14:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vlan [source] (artful-proposed) [1.9-3.2ubuntu5.17.10.1]
[14:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ifupdown [source] (artful-proposed) [0.8.16ubuntu2.1]
[14:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vlan [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.9-3.2ubuntu1.16.04.5]
[14:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ifupdown [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.8.10ubuntu1.4]
[14:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vlan [source] (trusty-proposed) [1.9-3ubuntu10.6]
[14:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (trusty-proposed) [3.13.0-148.197]
[14:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.13.0-42.47~16.04.1] (kernel)
[14:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (artful-proposed/main) [4.13.0-42.47] (core, kernel)
[15:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ifupdown [source] (trusty-proposed) [0.7.47.2ubuntu4.5]
[15:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (artful-proposed) [4.13.0-42.47]
[15:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-hwe [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.13.0-42.47~16.04.1]
[16:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1011.11] (kernel)
[16:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.13.0-1017.20] (no packageset)
[16:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.4.0-125.150] (core, kernel)
[16:50] <bdmurray> cyphermox: Do you think bug 1437353 has been verified?
[16:50] <ubot5> bug 1437353 in maas-images "UEFI network boot hangs at grub for adapter 82599ES 10-Gigabit SFI/SFP+" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1437353
[16:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-lts-xenial [amd64] (trusty-proposed/main) [4.4.0-125.150~14.04.1] (kernel)
[16:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.13.0-1017.20]
[16:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.4.0-125.150]
[16:53] <tsimonq2> infinity: Hi. Want to do that seed conversion?
[16:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1011.11]
[16:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-lts-xenial [amd64] (trusty-proposed) [4.4.0-125.150~14.04.1]
=== blackboxsw is now known as blackboxs
=== blackboxs is now known as blackboxsw
[17:15] <bdmurray> rbalint: Could you SRU verify bug 1758963?
[17:15] <ubot5> bug 1758963 in update-manager (Ubuntu Artful) "Please don't ship empty directories in the source package" [Undecided,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1758963
[17:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kbackup [s390x] (cosmic-proposed/none) [18.04.0-1] (no packageset)
[17:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kbackup [ppc64el] (cosmic-proposed/none) [18.04.0-1] (no packageset)
[17:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pal2nal [amd64] (cosmic-proposed/none) [14.1-1] (no packageset)
[17:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kbackup [amd64] (cosmic-proposed/none) [18.04.0-1] (no packageset)
[17:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kbackup [i386] (cosmic-proposed/none) [18.04.0-1] (no packageset)
[17:51] <bdrung> tumbleweed, thanks for taking care of distro-info-data
[17:52] <tumbleweed> bdrung: np. infinity did the heavy lifting anyway
[17:53] <tumbleweed> hope you're ok with the debian relase date guessing bit...
[17:57] <bdrung> yes
[18:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kbackup [arm64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [18.04.0-1] (no packageset)
[18:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kbackup [armhf] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [18.04.0-1] (no packageset)
[18:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kbackup [amd64] (cosmic-proposed) [18.04.0-1]
[18:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kbackup [armhf] (cosmic-proposed) [18.04.0-1]
[18:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kbackup [ppc64el] (cosmic-proposed) [18.04.0-1]
[18:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kbackup [arm64] (cosmic-proposed) [18.04.0-1]
[18:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kbackup [s390x] (cosmic-proposed) [18.04.0-1]
[18:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kbackup [i386] (cosmic-proposed) [18.04.0-1]
[18:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted faumachine [amd64] (cosmic-proposed) [20180503-1]
[18:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pal2nal [amd64] (cosmic-proposed) [14.1-1]
[18:22] <cascardo> can someone help get s390-tools from xenial-proposed to xenial-updates (and xenial-security)?
[19:00] <infinity> cascardo: Releasing.
[19:23] <cascardo> infinity: thanks
[19:37] <tsimonq2> infinity: I finally got around to creating the CosmicCuttlefish wiki page. Do you have a draft release schedule somewhere, or should I copy over the one we were working on a few months ago?
[19:38] <infinity> tsimonq2: I'll put one up.
[19:39] <tsimonq2> infinity: OK.
[19:39] <infinity> tsimonq2: If we're doing ReleaseTaskSignup again, maybe we should replace A1/A2/B1 with lines asking for community volunteers to advocate testing weeks.
[19:39] <infinity> tsimonq2: Which should be much more lightweight.  Just sending mails to all the lists, making sure project leads are awake, that sort of thing.
[19:40] <tsimonq2> infinity: I agreed to do that for this cycle to get a process going.
[19:40] <infinity> tsimonq2: Then you can sign up for all of them! ;)
[19:40] <tsimonq2> infinity: But for next cycle though.
[19:40] <tsimonq2> infinity: OK. :D
[19:40] <infinity> tsimonq2: And sign me up for Beta and Final, obviously.
[19:40] <tsimonq2> infinity: Yep. It's now just "Beta", aye?
[19:40] <infinity> Yeah.
[19:40] <tsimonq2> OK. On it.
[19:40] <infinity> "Final Beta" was a silly name anyway.
[19:40] <flocculant> tsimonq2: I#ll take a week later in the cycle
[19:41] <infinity> Just the only way to communicate that is was B2 for some and B1 for others.
[19:41] <tsimonq2> flocculant: Let's see how it plays out.
[19:41] <infinity> Really, B1 should have just been A3.  That would have been less dumb.
[19:41] <tsimonq2> Yeah.
[19:41] <infinity> But it's in the past now, so yay.
[19:42] <tsimonq2> I agree.
[19:42] <flocculant> well - we'll unlikely participate early in the cycle
[19:42] <tsimonq2> flocculant: So, you aren't alive at the beginning of the cycle?
[19:42] <tsimonq2> That's pretty much what's needed.
[19:43] <infinity> "Requirements to drive testing week: Breathing; access to email."?
[19:43] <flocculant> tsimonq2: actually it depends on how soon we land gtk3 xfce stuffs
[19:43] <tsimonq2> infinity: That. :P
[19:43] <tsimonq2> flocculant: Then tell us that.
[19:44] <tsimonq2> It'll be pretty lax, I think.
[19:44] <flocculant> tsimonq2: tell who? and why?
[19:45] <tsimonq2> flocculant: I'll put out an email to ubuntu-release at the end of May with details ahbout the testing week, buut it'd be good to check in  with flavors too.
[19:45]  * tsimonq2 grrs at ConnectBot.
[19:46] <flocculant> maybe we should try and set up some sort of frequent inter-flavour session/contact
[19:46] <flocculant> perhaps on https://community.ubuntu.com
[19:46] <tsimonq2> That's the idea here, ish.
[19:46] <flocculant> I'd say irc - but timezones ...
[19:47] <flocculant> nothing to onerous - but at least a talking shop
[19:47] <tsimonq2> Yeah.
[19:47] <tsimonq2> Of course.
[19:48] <flocculant> up to now - the only time we talk is at set times in the 6 months
[19:48] <tsimonq2> And that's not good, in my opinion.
[19:48] <flocculant> and that's ' you doing this milestone or not'
[19:49] <flocculant> yup - agree, I'm all for us talking to each other more
[19:49] <tsimonq2> Speaking of cross-flavor things...
[19:49] <flocculant> about the only people I regularly talk to are you, wxl and random people from studio
[19:49] <tsimonq2> infinity: Where were we at irt seed things?
[19:49] <flocculant> oh - and valerie :)
[19:49] <tsimonq2> flocculant: Right. It's a mess, I agree.
[19:50] <wxl> tsimonq2: p.s. congrats on the DMB election btw
[19:50] <flocculant> hi wxl
[19:50] <tsimonq2> wxl: Thanks.
[19:50] <wxl> hey-o flocculant :)
[19:51] <flocculant> tsimonq2: I'll mail -release about ^^ nowish
[19:51] <tsimonq2> flocculant: Go right ahead.
[19:52] <flocculant> I will ;)
[19:53] <tsimonq2> infinity: I'll put Beta at 09/27 and Release at 10/18 for now. Season to taste.
[19:54] <tsimonq2> (On the release task signup page, which is pretty much done, by the way.)
[19:55] <tsimonq2> flocculant: What are Xubuntu's thoughts on axing i386, by the way?
[19:56] <flocculant> no real thoughts currently - people take time away in the week(s) post-release
[19:56] <tsimonq2> OK.
[19:57] <teward> tsimonq2: very real consideration: flavor-agnostic, Wine 64-bit sometimes *just doesn't work* for some Windows apps, and Wine i386 is needed for the 32-bit wineprefixes.
[19:57] <teward> while that's not justification to totally destroy i386 globally, it's one consideration point
[19:58] <teward> (since it was brought up in the email chains)
[19:58] <wxl> i think someone already brought that up on the maililng list, teward
[19:59] <wxl> steam is apparently an issue, too
[19:59] <teward> wxl: Wine was mentioned, but not specifically detailed
[19:59]  * wxl nods
[19:59] <teward> the rest of the discussions spun off to flavors, download/install ratios, etc.
[20:00] <teward> the core part of *my* concern is, if we axe i386, we need to axe wine, since IIRC their 64bit version has an immediate dependency on the i386 version as well
[20:00] <wxl> given bug 1 that might be an issue :)
[20:00] <ubot5> bug 1 in Ubuntu Malaysia LoCo Team "Microsoft has a majority market share" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1
[20:00] <teward> mmm
[20:00] <tsimonq2> Is there any hope for amd64 support upstream?
[20:01] <wxl> it's an issue with windows apps, tsimonq2
[20:01] <teward> tsimonq2: less an "upstream support" question more a "Windows Apps Are Cosmic Pains In The..."
[20:01] <teward> i could finish that sentence but you know me well enough to complete the phrase your self.
[20:01] <tsimonq2> Pain in the Cuttlefish?
[20:01] <tsimonq2> :P
[20:04] <Bashing-om> i386 media attention: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Ubuntu-i386-Dropping-Discussion .
[20:04] <tsimonq2> Softpedia was first.
[20:04] <tsimonq2> And, technically, they're more accurate on this one.
[20:04] <Bashing-om> tsimonq2: Noted :)
[20:05] <tsimonq2> https://buff.ly/2KOVOzL
[20:06] <teward> tsimonq2: wxl: I don't disagree with 32bit support being that much harder to maintain, but I disagree in theory about dropping i386 in the short/mid term
[20:06] <teward> I haven't replied yet because my email is being screwy, but my opinion is if we *don't* cut i386 immediately, we cut it out sometime between now and next LTS
[20:06] <flocculant> tsimonq2: except for the blog title which include xubuntu ...
[20:07] <teward> even if the next 2 releases have i386, and the remaining ones don't, that'd at least give a year for some 32-bit-only things to be done.
[20:07] <wxl> tbh i'm split about whether or not to remove it
[20:07] <tsimonq2> flocculant: Right, that's kinda clickbait. :P
[20:07] <wxl> the meltdown issue is a big concern, imho
[20:08] <flocculant> teward: at the moment flavours are really only talking about stopping images building - nothing else
[20:08] <infinity> teward: Dropping 32-bit *installers* has no bearing on wine32, since you can (I certainly do) run wine64 and wine32 on a 64-bit install.
[20:08] <teward> flocculant: infinity: one of you want to clarify on the chain about that?
[20:08] <teward> I'm for dropping 32bit installer images.
[20:08] <teward> i'm against droppping x86 as a repository arch
[20:09] <teward> and i don't see the clear distinction in the thread
[20:09] <tsimonq2> teward: We either do it now or at the beginning of the 20.10 cycle.
[20:09] <teward> (which is a repeat problem of the prior discussion of 32bit support way back when in the Server team's discussions)
[20:09] <infinity> I haven't been following the thread, but yes, it should be about dropping installers first.  Then a second discussion about dropping the arch.
[20:09] <teward> tsimonq2: clarify *your* intentions then: do you mean *total* x86 dropping, or just installer dropping, over the next cycle or two?
[20:09] <infinity> Personally, I'd like to drop both armhf and i386 on the floor before 20.04, but I might not win that argument.
[20:10] <teward> because this is something we need to clarify in the thread to focus the discussion
[20:10] <teward> and as soon as I unscrew my email (your email might be screwed too I didn't check) i'll drop a note to the list for clarification
[20:11] <teward> tsimonq2: i think you meant 20.04 cycle there, because 20.04 is (probably?) going to be an LTS, and it doesn't make sense to drop i386 *after* an LTS if it's going to be supported for 3-5 years anyways
[20:11] <teward> I'm all in favor of a phaseout if we and upstreams can resolve the remaining dependency issues
[20:12] <teward> (again, in the thread, clarification required)
[20:14] <tsimonq2> infinity: I agree with i386. I disagree with armhf because I Like Pie. (Or Pi, whatever, but Pie is good too. :P)
[20:15] <tsimonq2> teward: No, after 20.04. I don't want to abandon users on unavailable upgrade paths.
[20:15] <teward> infinity: if you had a say, would you want to drop i386 *after* 20.04, or before?
[20:15] <teward> on the premise that we'd have to support i386 for an additional 5 years if we kept it in 20.04
[20:15] <infinity> tsimonq2: The Pi1 can't run Ubuntu anyway and the Pi3 is arm64-capable, so armhf-versus-Pi only matters for the Pi2.
[20:16] <Odd_Bloke> It would only be an additional 2 years; we're on the hook for 18.04 anyway.
[20:16] <tsimonq2> infinity: Ah.
[20:16] <teward> Odd_Bloke: s/2 years/3 years/ ?
[20:16] <teward> (not sure your math works out as stated?)
[20:16] <infinity> teward: If it was entirely up to me, I'd drop all 32-bit before 20.04.  It's getting harder and harder to shoehorn modern bloaty software on 32-bit systems.  And i386 has other awful things going for it, most notably a lack of upstream kernel interest in actually fixing security bugs.
[20:17] <infinity> Odd_Bloke: You can make that same argument every 2 years. :P
[20:17] <Odd_Bloke> Doesn't make it any less valid. ;)
[20:18] <Odd_Bloke> teward: 18.04 will be supported until 2023, 20.04 would (presumably) be supported until 2025.  It's only an extra 2 years.
[20:18] <teward> Odd_Bloke: I think we'd have to loop in the security team on this for their viewpoint, especially if it gets harder and harder to get viable security patches in.
[20:18] <teward> oh, i have a question to ask you too infinity, but it's more to gauge opinion on something, and can be done after our discussion here.
[20:19] <Odd_Bloke> "only" is perhaps a little too diminutive. :p
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: horizon (bionic-proposed/main) [3:13.0.0-0ubuntu1 => 3:13.0.0-0ubuntu1.1] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[20:19] <tsimonq2> sarnold: Hi. ;)
[20:19] <teward> Odd_Bloke: i could make the same argument then, but at some point we have to kill it, and if come 2 years from now the same argument is used again to support not dropping it, you're in a cycle of "Yeah we'll just continually support this"
[20:20] <teward> which is AFAICT what we're running into now?
[20:20] <Odd_Bloke> From a cloud images POV, we already don't produce images for i386.
[20:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: horizon (artful-proposed/main) [3:12.0.2-0ubuntu1 => 3:12.0.2-0ubuntu1.1] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[20:21] <tsimonq2> sarnold: You responded on the mailing list in 2016; what do you think about u32-bit from a security team POV?
[20:21] <tsimonq2> s/u3/3/
[20:21] <Odd_Bloke> (Well, we do for Openstack and LXD, but not for the clouds themselves.)
[20:26] <teward> infinity: do you have the power to unhold my message to -devel-discuss?  Apparently I forgot to select my @ubuntu.com address in my send aliases, so it sent as my bare email :/
[20:39] <cjwatson> wxl: KPTI on i386 is being worked on, FWIW - it's true that it's been later than x86-64, but I don't expect that particular thing to be a long-term problem
[20:39] <cjwatson> (I don't have the links right now, but I saw them floating around in some thread on LWN)
[20:40] <wxl> cjwatson: that's good to know. that was the one thing that concerned me the most.
[20:40] <wxl> tbh i don't really use i386 anymore (i do have some testing machines, but not for production), so i often just don't pay attention.
[20:40] <cjwatson> One of my other concerns is that nobody has ever put the effort into productising sidegrades, so it's something of a screw-you to continuous upgraders (on 64-bit-capable hardware, anyway).
[20:41] <cjwatson> I mean, it *can* be done; I've done it I think three times.  But it's an expert manoeuvre right now, and it doesn't have to be.
[21:13] <sarnold> at some point Very Important Pacakges like firefox and chromium just plain won't build on 32 bit systems
[21:14] <sarnold> and we'll find out in the middle of two and a half LTS releases that we can't support e.g. firefox armhf or firefox i386 any more
[21:15] <sarnold> I think the *politest* thing for the users is to stop i386 at an LTS boundary -- e.g., don't do 18.10 i386 or armhf, so that people can't accidentally step beyond the support curtain
[21:16] <sarnold> of course people *love* their raspi and similar, and it'd be shame to say goodbye to those users, but it's getting hardr to fit in the address spaces available, and *far* harder to build on them
[21:28] <Ukikie> Mmmm, sidegrades.  I did one earlier this year on a headless system, the thought of doing it on my netbook (at the time of installation was unaware it did 64bit) with xorg/xfce and a whole lot more packages isn't very appealing.
[22:02] <cjwatson> It's certainly harder with a pile of desktop packages installed, yes
[23:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libpam-x2go [ppc64el] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [0.0.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[23:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libpam-x2go [s390x] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [0.0.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[23:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libpam-x2go [amd64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [0.0.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[23:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: mpl-scatter-density [amd64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [0.3-2] (no packageset)
[23:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libpam-x2go [i386] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [0.0.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[23:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libpam-x2go [arm64] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [0.0.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[23:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libpam-x2go [armhf] (cosmic-proposed/universe) [0.0.2.0-2] (no packageset)