[10:52] Hi, can someone point me to the procedure to request a package rebuild (from the same source) in an Ubuntu LTS (Ubuntu bionic)? [10:55] thopre01: the process is to upload it with increased version number [10:56] there's no difference to any other upload [10:56] except, if the version does not contain ubuntu, it will be build1 (build2, ..., and so on) [10:58] I see [10:59] How to request such an upload for a universe package then? [10:59] (I am not the maintainer, just one of the upstream developer) [10:59] thopre01: what do you want rebuild and why? [11:02] I want the newlib package in Ubuntu bionic rebuild because it was built using an earlier version of gcc-arm-none-eabi than the one currently in bionic and this causes bug LP#1767223 [11:02] Usual procedure for sponsored uploads would be to file a bug, attach a debdiff, and subscribe ubuntu-sponsors. But maybe it's fine to subscribe sponsors for a no-change rebuild? [11:02] Ok, thanks [11:04] thopre01: Here it's obviously more complex, as it involves SRU paperwork. If you believe that a rebuild fixes that, write impact, test case, and regression potential sections in that bug, assign it to the correct package [11:05] Ok, on it, thanks juliank! [11:19] Done === ricab is now known as ricab|lunch [14:22] vorlon, hi, there are 3 MPs for layered images waiting for a review, could someone from foundations have a look? [14:22] https://code.launchpad.net/~jibel/livecd-rootfs/+git/add_multi_layered_squashfses_support/+merge/360878 [14:22] https://code.launchpad.net/~jibel/debian-cd/support_for_multilayer_images/+merge/359228 [14:22] https://code.launchpad.net/~jibel/ubuntu-cdimage/support_for_multilayer/+merge/359512 [14:36] jbicha: FYI, patching PHP back to pcre3 seems more difficult than it initially seemed and I don't think it'll be practical. [14:36] So we'll have to hold on switching to php 7.3 until pcre2 in main is decided. [14:38] rbasak: I'm sorry to hear that (ok, I'm honestly a bit happy too 😉 ) === ricab|lunch is now known as ricab [14:58] bdmurray, hey. The apport autopkgtests seem quite buggy/flakky nowadays, is that a known issue/something you are looking at (e.g https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-disco/disco/amd64/a/apport/20181215_031628_603b6@/log.gz) [15:27] seb128: I think they are failing now because of bug 1808508 [15:27] bug 1808508 in valgrind (Ubuntu) "Valgrind doesn't work in disco [Fatal error at startup: a function redirection which is mandatory for this platform-tool combination cannot be set up.]" [Critical,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1808508 [15:28] bdmurray, which is being worked on? [15:29] seb128: not quite yet [15:29] k, thx bdmurray [16:33] cjwatson: iucode-tool> hmm indeed, what should be done about this now given that bionic and cosmic both released this way? Do you think it's worth copying to -updates to update the source component? [16:34] jibel: I am EOY; if you need reviews before then, please escalate to gaughen [16:45] vorlon: IMO we can live with it for stable releases but should fix it going forward [17:47] vorlon, okay, enjoy EOY break! [19:02] smoser: Does https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-keyring/+bug/1809027 appropriately capture what we would need for mfdiff? [19:02] Launchpad bug 1809027 in ubuntu-keyring (Ubuntu) "Make retired Ubuntu keyrings available from the archive" [Undecided,New] [19:07] Odd_Bloke: i think that summarizes it well. good job. [19:07] i might add that it isn't a "one time only" problem. [19:08] at some point 18.04 will also be in such a scenario. [19:09] smoser: Yep, great point; added. [19:13] Odd_Bloke: i guess if we were over engineering things... it might be nice to have that package provide you with a mapping of signing-key to release [19:14] * smoser comments on bug