[09:29] <diegorusso> Hello, my build script is having issues downloading cgroup-lite from launchpad. There are intermittent timeouts. The full command is: wget -t 10 -T 90 -nv --passive-ftp --no-check-certificate -P /tmp 'https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+files/cgroup-lite_1.11.tar.xz' --progress=dot -v
[09:30] <wgrant> diegorusso: How do the timeouts manifest?
[09:30] <wgrant> Have you tried from another network?
[09:32] <diegorusso> I had in two occasions: "Unable to establish SSL connection" straightaway, hence no timeout.
[09:33] <diegorusso> Yes, I'm trying from another network and it gets stuck on "Connecting to launchpad.net (launchpad.net)|91.189.89.223|:443... connected."
[09:35] <wgrant> diegorusso: Roughly what fraction of requests are you seeing fail? I don't see anything in our metrics or my own testing that shows any trouble.
[09:35] <diegorusso> ok, it has just failed with the same error "Unable to establish SSL connection."
[09:37] <wgrant> diegorusso: That's from a non-ARM network?
[09:37] <diegorusso> I would say 3 out of 10 are failing
[09:37] <diegorusso> wgrant: yes
[09:38] <diegorusso> I'm testing on a pi zero at home as well (virgin broadband)
[09:38] <wgrant> Hmm I just downloaded that file from two different European and one American host a total of 600 times with zero failures. Can you grab a tcpdump of a failed attempt?
[09:45] <diegorusso> let me see
[09:48] <diegor> I've joined with irssi and my real username :)
[09:52] <wgrant> diegor: Also interesting is whether https://launchpadlibrarian.net/244903887/cgroup-lite_1.11.tar.xz shows the same issue.
[10:00] <diegor> wgrant: yes, same problem on both arm and non-arm networks
[14:14] <diegor> wgrant: the problem seems gone now. If you don't hear anything from me, it means it's all good. Thanks for checking out earlier, we really appreciate it. Cheers
[20:21] <masterpiece> Is there any problem in sending email of pushing package via dput ?
[20:24] <masterpiece> ??
[20:26] <cjwatson> masterpiece: Not as far as I know.  What's the name of the package you tried to upload, or some other identifying feature so that I can look in our logs?
[20:29] <masterpiece> cjwatson, here it is : https://launchpad.net/~salehi/+archive/ubuntu/flex
[20:29] <masterpiece> I'm trying to upload new revision named : flex_2.6.0-11ubuntu2
[20:30] <cjwatson> masterpiece: Either you didn't sign your upload, or there's some other similar problem with the signature.
[20:30] <cjwatson> Maybe signed with a key not registered in Launchpad.
[20:31] <masterpiece> no, I uploaded last week!
[20:31] <masterpiece> Good signature on /home/s4/robocup/salehi/flex_2.6.0-11ubuntu2.dsc.
[20:32] <masterpiece> gpg: Signature made Sat 26 May 2018 12:47:11 AM +0430 using RSA key ID FC1175A1
[20:32] <cjwatson> masterpiece: Show us the output of "gpg --verify /home/s4/robocup/salehi/flex_2.6.0-11ubuntu2_source.changes"?  (Preferably on paste.ubuntu.com)
[20:32] <cjwatson> Not so interested in the signature on the .dsc for now
[20:33] <masterpiece> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/qPthmzSmDr/
[20:33] <masterpiece> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/YjPF5BbcWr/
[20:34] <cjwatson> Hmm.  It looks OK, but:
[20:34] <cjwatson> 2018-05-25 20:18:13 INFO        GPG verification of /srv/launchpad.net/ppa-queue/incoming/upload-ftp-20180525-201748-026541/~salehi/flex/flex_2.6.0-11ubuntu2_source.changes failed: Verification failed 3 times: ["(7, 58, u'No data')", "(7, 58, u'No data')", "(7, 58, u'No data')"]
[20:34] <cjwatson> But other people's uploads are working
[20:34] <masterpiece> !!!!
[20:35] <masterpiece> What can I do ?!
[20:35] <cjwatson> Did you construct this upload manually in any way?
[20:35] <masterpiece> no, I used dput for upload a changes file constructed with debuild -S
[20:36] <cjwatson> So it's well after 9pm on a Friday for me.  It'd be best to file a ticket on https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+addquestion, and put the entire source package somewhere where we can inspect it and see if there's anything odd
[20:38] <masterpiece> Thank you cjwatson :)
[20:57] <wxl> part of me wonders if it isn't an issue with the GPG version
[20:58] <wxl> cuz the short ID in your verification suggests v1 masterpiece
[20:58] <wxl> however i know on launchpad we're at least showing long IDs
[20:58] <wxl> ..which suggests v2
[20:58] <wxl> of course that doesn't necessarily explain why it worked in recent time
[20:59] <cjwatson> Launchpad uses GnuPG v1.
[21:00] <wxl> ah, well, nevermind that. also: ew. :)
[21:00] <cjwatson> We make sure to show fingerprints, but that has nothing particular to do with the GPG version.
[21:00] <cjwatson> v2 is pretty hard to get to work in headless contexts (at least last time I tried).
[21:00] <cjwatson> It might be workable now we're on xenial.
[21:01] <wxl> oh wow i hadn't realized that. unfortunate.
[21:01] <cjwatson> It likes to start its own daemons and not clean them up.
[21:20] <masterpiece> cjwatson, wxl I found the reason
[21:20] <masterpiece> in the debian/changelog
[21:20] <masterpiece> I specified revision like this : flex (2.6.0-11bionic1) bionic; urgency=medium
[21:20] <masterpiece> if I raise bionic1 to bionic2 or bionic1ubuntu1
[21:21] <masterpiece> and the main part of version and revision remains as 2.6.0-11
[21:21] <masterpiece> It will be failed with that gpg signature error
[21:22] <masterpiece> I changed the debian/changelog to flex (2.6.0-12bionic1) bionic; urgency=medium
[21:22] <masterpiece>  and the package was uploaded a few minutes ago
[21:31] <masterpiece> I need to specify flex 2.6.0 as the dependency for a ppa build, How can I do this?
[21:42] <nacc> i wonder why you are downreving flex in bionic?
[21:42] <nacc> if you actually want it to be used, in you need something like 2.6.4-6+is+actually+2.6.0-11 in your changelog
[23:46] <masterpiece> https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/669667
[23:46] <masterpiece> cjwatson, This error appears randomly ! I created the question here