=== led_dark_2 is now known as led_dark_1
dokotsimonq2: https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1121214 seen in libqt09:59
ubottubugzilla.opensuse.org bug 1121214 in Basesystem "GCC 9: libqt4 build fails" [Normal,New]09:59
dokojamespage: murano-agent fails autopkg tests (with python 3.7.2)10:17
rbasakjuliank: why the dnsmasq upload? I thought Laney was sorting it in the network-manager autopkgtests?12:01
juliankrbasak: i don't know, Laney asked me if I'd upload it12:02
LaneyThe dnsmasq upload was the failure; my changes to n-m fixed some other ones, but not those which were failing on autopkgtest.u.c12:03
rbasakI feel that this just kicks the can down the road, and I'm not keen on having to maintain this patch :-/12:04
rbasak(based on my current and rather incomplete knowledge of the actual problem; but I suspect that's the case with everyone else involved too)12:05
LaneySecond best approach that I could see given that we don't know how to fix it12:07
LaneyChanging the tests in network-manager to work around a bug in dnsmasq would not have been right, IMO12:08
Laneyand I *did* do some analysis and post on the upstream list, which I still hope/expect to result in a proper fix12:08
rbasakI agree with the general principle of not having to change the tests in N-M to work around a bug in dnsmasq.12:10
rbasakBut it seemed to me that n-m tests weren't actually testing the right thing?12:11
rbasakIn that the failure couldn't identify a specific buggy use case in dnsmasq?12:11
rbasakIn that case narrowing down the n-m tests seems like a good idea.12:11
Laneywhat do you mean?12:12
LaneyIt was always a specific few tests that were failing in the same way12:12
rbasakBut AIUI we haven't been able to say to dnsmasq upstream "here's a bug: when we do <valid use case> it results in <incorrect behaviour> instead of <expected behaviour>"12:13
LaneyI think my thread was fine in that sense12:15
LaneyUpstream attempted to come up with a patch but it didn't work12:16
rbasakI appreciate your work in analysis and talking to upstream btw. Hopefully that'll lead to a proper fix and we'll be able to drop the patch. I'm just concerned in case that doesn't happen, we'll end up stuck.12:16
LaneyIf someone else wants to help out and create a more minimal reproducer, that would be welcome. I was suffering from a lack of knowledge.12:16
rbasakI got the impression that upstream haven't identified a specific bug either. We only have your successful bisection, and we're all still blind to the underlying cause.12:16
rbasak(and blind to even what the bug actually is)12:17
LaneyThat's... why you post a bug report?12:18
rbasakWe know that an upstream commit caused a change in behaviour that broke us.12:19
rbasakWe don't know that there's actually a bug in upstream dnsmasq...do we?12:19
LaneyI'm confident enough.12:19
LaneyBut if you're unhappy with my call, it's your team's package.12:19
rbasakI'm not sure I agree. But anyway, I appreciate your time on this. It's probably not worth us spending more time on discussing this more unless something further happens.12:20
LaneyPut the change back in, it'll get blocked in proposed because of breaking network-manager's tests.12:20
LaneyAnd then, well, we can argue about who gets to debug it.12:21
juliankThat seems reasonable12:25
juliankWe really need to have a convention for changes we made that we do not want to stop syncing. So something between ubuntu and build12:26
juliankSo that I could have uploaded that hack with that version, and then a later sync would still happen and we'd see it being broken again (or it's fixed and migrates)12:27
rbasakSomething that starts with 'l' or 'm' then :-P12:27
juliankWell, it could be any string lower than ubuntu12:28
julianklike buntu12:28
juliankthat was my silly string12:28
LaneyI should mail the person who wrote the patch in question in the first place and see what they think12:28
juliankubuntmp sorts well, but is not entirely obvious12:29
Amnesiaquestion, I'm trying to create a cosmic chroot, but debootstrap is stating that the InRelease file has expired: E: InRelease file http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/cosmic/InRelease is expired since (Wed, 09 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0100)12:38
Amnesiadoes anyone have a clue what's goin on?12:38
juliankSo, haproxy and wget are stuck in proposed as they built against pcre2. I patched wget to use pcre3 again12:40
juliankNot sure about haproxy12:40
juliankAmnesia: What do you see when you open http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/cosmic/InRelease (wget, curl, or browser, whatever)12:40
Amnesiajuliank: Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:17:19 UTC12:41
juliankAmnesia: Right, but no valid-until line, right?12:41
juliankAmnesia: so, it works for me in disco, which release are you trying that on? Also, I think you can check in the target directory you specified and look at release files there12:43
AmnesiaI'm trying it on arch..12:44
juliankAmnesia: ok, that's trickier12:44
juliankAmnesia: that's debootstrap 1.0.113?12:44
juliankAmnesia: So, I don't see how this happens12:46
juliankAmnesia: I think you can run debootstrap as sh -x <path to>/debootstrap12:46
juliankthat should give you a verbose log12:47
Amnesiayep, going through it atm..12:48
juliankAmnesia: No, I see how this happens12:48
Amnesiayou do?12:48
juliankAmnesia: Passing --no-check-valid-until should make it work12:49
juliankThe code assumes that Valid-Until is in the release file, which it is not for ubuntu12:49
Amnesiahm seems to work indeed12:50
Amnesialooks like you're right yes12:51
juliankThat's https://bugs.debian.org/91872212:52
ubottuDebian bug 918722 in debootstrap "debootstrap: says InRelease file expired" [Normal,Open]12:52
* Amnesia facepalms12:53
AmnesiaI should've checked the bug tracker12:53
Amnesiasorry for the hassle juliank12:53
=== Serge is now known as hallyn
seb128bdmurray, hey. Could you help with https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gvfs/1.38.1-0ubuntu1.1 ? It includes 3 fixes, 2 have been verified and the 3rd one isn't working because it's relying on a samba change which we don't have in our version. The non-verified one is basically equivalent of no-change, can we validate the SRU as it? or do you want another upload with that change removed? (but then we need to revalidate the other fix/delay?)17:01
seb128vorlon, how did you manage to get a SRU in without bug reference? ;) (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/livecd-rootfs/2.542.1)17:03
seb128bdmurray, https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fontconfig/2.12.6-0ubuntu2.3 should also probably be deleted from bionic-proposed, it failed verification and it was decided that SRU was not needed after all so no fixed version has been uploaded17:04
vorlonseb128: well, I didn't accept it, ask whoever did :)17:05
vorlonseb128: (livecd-rootfs is a special case, but having an SRU with no linked bugs at all risks foundering on the process)17:05
seb128vorlon, right, unsure if the "who accepted" info is available somewhere? anyway, I mentioned it in case that was an overlook because it looks like the sort of isse that could lead the SRU to be stucked because ti's never marked as green/verified on the report page17:15
vorlonseb128: nope, we record that information in comments on the linked bugs ;-)17:15
seb128k, well that usually doesn't work for me :p17:16
vorlonwell in this case there's no linked bug, hence the ';-)'17:16
seb128thx for the reply :)17:16
vorlonbdmurray: ^^ does that happen to have been your accept?17:22
bdmurrayvorlon: Yeah, it was I who accepted the package. I imagine you or Cody will nag about getting it released.18:09
vorlonbdmurray: ok :)18:09
bdmurrayalthough I guess I misremembered what you'd added to the SRU page about it.18:11
bdmurrayI blame Santa for that.18:12
bdmurrayseb128: fontconfig will require an AA which I am not18:15
bdmurrayseb128: I'm fine with letting gvfs into cosmic-updates.18:20
seb128bdmurray, thx, I can do fontconfig, I was just unsure if that needed some sort of SRU team ack first18:35
bdmurrayseb128: Well I'll ack it just in case18:37

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!