[06:21] <slangasek> mfo: libuv1> a very thorough patch explanation.  Please file this patch upstream in the Debian BTS and adjust the patch header to include Bug-Ubuntu: and Bug-Debian: references (in accordance with https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep3/) and I will gladly sponsor
[06:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cross-toolchain-base (bionic-proposed/main) [25ubuntu6 => 25ubuntu7] (ubuntu-desktop)
[07:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-7-cross (bionic-proposed/main) [20ubuntu4 => 21ubuntu0.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[07:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-8-cross (bionic-proposed/main) [9ubuntu2 => 18ubuntu0.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[07:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-8-cross-ports (bionic-proposed/universe) [6ubuntu3 => 9ubuntu0.1] (no packageset)
[07:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-defaults (bionic-proposed/main) [1.176ubuntu2 => 1.176ubuntu2.1] (core)
[07:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-defaults-ports (bionic-proposed/universe) [1.176ubuntu1 => 1.176ubuntu1.1] (no packageset)
[07:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libreoffice [source] (bionic-proposed) [1:6.0.6-0ubuntu0.18.04.1]
[08:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libreoffice-l10n [source] (bionic-proposed) [1:6.0.6-0ubuntu0.18.04.1]
[08:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cross-toolchain-base-ports (bionic-proposed/universe) [21ubuntu3 => 22ubuntu0.1] (no packageset)
[09:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-7-cross (bionic-proposed/main) [20ubuntu4 => 21ubuntu0.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[09:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected gcc-7-cross [source] (bionic-proposed) [21ubuntu0.1]
[09:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-7-cross [source] (bionic-proposed) [21ubuntu0.1]
[10:09] <sbeattie> why did golang-1.7 come back into cosmic?
[10:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-8-cross [source] (bionic-proposed) [18ubuntu0.1]
[10:20] <doko> synced?
[10:21] <cjwatson> odd auto-sync / proposed-migration race possibly?
[10:21] <cjwatson> auto-sync doesn't sync previously-removed packages of its own volition
[10:21] <LocutusOfBorg> I think doko did the remove while autosync was running?
[10:22] <cjwatson> could be, should be discoverable from auto-sync logs
[10:24] <LocutusOfBorg> nack, logs seems to be it didn't get autosyncd?
[10:24] <LocutusOfBorg> *say
[10:31] <cjwatson> the LP publication history seems to think auto-sync did it, but I haven't checked in detail
[11:24] <LocutusOfBorg> I see what LP says, but I can't find references here http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/auto-sync/2018-05-05/
[11:27] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, that publishing history says it was removed from proposed by britney, removed from release by doko, and copied into release by britney in that order; so think that is an overlap
[11:27] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, the autosync would not necessarily have been that day
[11:34] <LocutusOfBorg> oh... ok
[11:35] <LocutusOfBorg> but I don't get how the same version can be in both pockets at the same time, but I'm not AA and I don't want to know probably :)
[11:35] <apw> a version can be in multiple pockets, that is pretty normal
[11:36] <apw> look at anything in -security and -updates
[11:38] <LocutusOfBorg> yes, but this shouldn't be normal for -proposed and -release, modulo when brintey and publisher are running...
[11:39] <cjwatson> could be while it was running, or could be that the post-move removal failed
[11:39] <cjwatson> *post-copy
[11:39] <cjwatson> the proposed-migration logs should make that clear
[11:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-8-cross-ports (bionic-proposed/universe) [6ubuntu3 => 9ubuntu0.1] (no packageset)
[11:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected gcc-8-cross-ports [source] (bionic-proposed) [9ubuntu0.1]
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2 (cosmic-proposed/main) [2.02+dfsg1-5ubuntu4 => 2.02+dfsg1-5ubuntu4] (core)
[12:07] <mfo> slangasek, thanks for reviewing. sure, the new debdiff in LP now has both Bug-Ubuntu and Bug-Debian tags. o/
[12:08] <mfo> LP #1792647
[12:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-7-cross-ports (bionic-proposed/universe) [16ubuntu4 => 17ubuntu0.1] (no packageset)
[12:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-8-cross-ports [source] (bionic-proposed) [9ubuntu0.1]
[12:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-7-cross-ports [source] (bionic-proposed) [17ubuntu0.1]
[13:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gce-compute-image-packages (trusty-proposed/universe) [20180510+dfsg1-0ubuntu3~14.04.3 => 20180905+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~14.04.0] (ubuntu-cloud)
[13:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gce-compute-image-packages (xenial-proposed/universe) [20180510+dfsg1-0ubuntu3~16.04.1 => 20180905+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~16.04.0] (ubuntu-cloud)
[13:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cross-toolchain-base (bionic-proposed/main) [25ubuntu6 => 26ubuntu0.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[13:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected cross-toolchain-base [source] (bionic-proposed) [25ubuntu7]
[13:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cross-toolchain-base [source] (bionic-proposed) [26ubuntu0.1]
[14:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cross-toolchain-base-ports [source] (bionic-proposed) [22ubuntu0.1]
[14:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-defaults [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.176ubuntu2.1]
[14:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-defaults-ports [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.176ubuntu1.1]
[14:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cross-toolchain-base-ports (bionic-proposed/universe) [22ubuntu0.1 => 22ubuntu0.2] (no packageset)
[14:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gce-compute-image-packages (bionic-proposed/universe) [20180510+dfsg1-0ubuntu4~18.04.1 => 20180905+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~18.04.0] (ubuntu-cloud)
[14:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gce-compute-image-packages (xenial-proposed/universe) [20180510+dfsg1-0ubuntu3~16.04.1 => 20180905+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~16.04.0] (ubuntu-cloud)
[14:18] <mdeslaur> doesn't look like the publisher ran in the past 5 hours, is something wrong? (ie: privoxy in trusty-security isn't showing up...)
[14:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cross-toolchain-base-ports [source] (bionic-proposed) [22ubuntu0.2]
[14:19] <mdeslaur> (showing up in http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/universe/p/privoxy/ , for example)
[14:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected gce-compute-image-packages [source] (bionic-proposed) [20180905+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~18.04.0]
[14:37] <infinity> mdeslaur: Publisher has definitely been running.
[14:37] <mdeslaur> infinity: any idea why the binaries aren't showing up?
[14:37] <infinity> mdeslaur: Mirrors could be broken.
[14:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gce-compute-image-packages [source] (bionic-proposed) [20180905+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~18.04.0]
[14:39] <infinity> mdeslaur: Looks like archive frontends haven't updated since 7am UTC.
[14:39] <mdeslaur> hrm
[14:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected gce-compute-image-packages [source] (xenial-proposed) [20180905+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~16.04.0]
[14:40] <mdeslaur> infinity: who do I bug about that?
[14:40] <infinity> mdeslaur: Wait, are you in Belgium?
[14:40] <mdeslaur> was just thinking there may be a transparent proxy here
[14:40] <mdeslaur> one sec, looking
[14:40] <infinity> (base)adconrad@nosferatu:~$ host archive.ubuntu.com
[14:40] <infinity> archive.ubuntu.com has address 10.155.0.2
[14:40] <infinity> mdeslaur: ^
[14:40] <infinity> mdeslaur: That's not the real archive. :P
[14:40] <mdeslaur> ARGH
[14:41] <mdeslaur> infinity: sorry for the trouble
[14:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-gcp [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1020.21~16.04.1] (no packageset)
[14:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-gcp [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.15.0-1020.21~16.04.1]
[15:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gce-compute-image-packages [source] (xenial-proposed) [20180905+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~16.04.0]
[15:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gce-compute-image-packages [source] (trusty-proposed) [20180905+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~14.04.0]
[15:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2 (cosmic-proposed/main) [2.02+dfsg1-5ubuntu4 => 2.02+dfsg1-5ubuntu4] (core)
[20:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2 [amd64] (cosmic-proposed) [2.02+dfsg1-5ubuntu4]
[20:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2 [arm64] (cosmic-proposed) [2.02+dfsg1-5ubuntu4]
[21:06] <wxl> can anyone explain to me why xfsprogs is not in the lubuntu images? it's in our seeds..
[21:08] <wxl> https://git.launchpad.net/~lubuntu-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/lubuntu/tree/live#n32
[21:25] <jbicha> wxl: it's already in https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/platform/tree/live-common#n3
[21:37] <jbicha> you're missing jfsutils too
[21:57] <tsimonq2> Wat. I just looked in debian-cd, ubuntu-cdimage, and livecd-rootfs and I can't find anything.
[21:57] <tsimonq2> infinity, slangasek: Either of you have any ideas? ^
[21:58] <slangasek> have you walked germinate output?
[21:59] <slangasek> and compared build logs?
[22:00] <tsimonq2> I have compared build logs, but I'll look at Germinate now. It seems to be including the live-common seed but for some reason not the packages inside. Peeking at Germinate.
[22:01] <tsimonq2> It's in here: https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/germinate-output/lubuntu.cosmic/all
[22:03] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Perhaps there's another log file that I'm missing?
[22:06] <slangasek> tsimonq2: the image build logs?
[22:06] <slangasek> those are the ones I meant
[22:10] <tsimonq2> slangasek: There's no output when "Resolving live-common dependencies ..." is outputted, but I also see xfsprogs as being in the "d-i-requirements" file, and with the line "! Duplicated seed: xfsprogs".
[22:10] <tsimonq2> There is no other relevant output it seems.
[22:10] <tsimonq2> (I'm looking at https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/cd-build-logs/lubuntu/cosmic/daily-live-20180917.log )
[22:11] <slangasek> isn't this a question of the livefs contents, since it's in the live-common seed
[22:11] <slangasek> ?
[22:11] <slangasek> so you'd need to drill down into the livefs log
[22:11] <slangasek> otherwise I'm afraid I won't be able to help with this now, it's after midnight in local TZ
[22:12] <tsimonq2> Alright.
[22:17] <tsimonq2> slangasek: There doesn't seem to be anything relevant in there either; it would be good to get your thoughts when you wake up.
[22:19] <slangasek> the next thing I would tend to suggest is to look at STRUCTURE to make sure there aren't any differences relative to other flavors that don't have this problem
[22:20] <slangasek> and also probably check if lubuntu-meta needs updating
[22:20] <slangasek> I do see that jfsutils has a task header for all the other live tasks but not for lubuntu
[22:20] <tsimonq2> Already there, and I'll do a quick lubuntu-meta update now to confirm.
[22:20] <slangasek> so archive metadata is wrong, so why
[22:21] <tsimonq2> Which is why my first instinct was to check the tooling for Lubuntu-specific hacks. :P
[22:21] <jbicha> um, check the tasksel package
[22:22] <tsimonq2> Good idea.
[22:28] <jbicha> wxl: I think tasksel not being updated for the new lubuntu is the problem
[23:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ibm-java80 [source] (xenial-proposed) [8.0.5.20-0ubuntu1]