[04:44] <valorie> https://twitter.com/kubuntu/status/1087208863147806720
[04:44] <valorie> RT plz
[05:17] <rbalint> ginggs, :-\ updating the hint for now then
[05:17] <ginggs> rbalint: thanks
[11:17] <ahasenack> tjaalton: hi, 'morning
[11:18] <ahasenack> tjaalton: are dogtag-pki dep8 tests broken in disco? Should it be hinted?
[11:24] <tjaalton> ahasenack: dogtag itself is broken.. needs upstream to port it to tls1.3/java11
[11:26] <ahasenack> it's one of the failures holding back openldap in disco-proposed
[11:26] <ahasenack> but only failed on amd64, weird
[11:28] <tjaalton> probably best to remove and blacklist for now
[12:06] <juliank> jdstrand: Still affected by https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1801338`
[12:06] <juliank> ?
[12:08] <juliank> i have not seen this, nor have i had any other reports, so it might be something unique to your situation
[13:17] <ahasenack> hi, what's the difference between the "platform" and "ubuntu" repositories here?
[13:17] <ahasenack> I've seen seed changes done to both
[13:25] <cjwatson> ahasenack: platform is common to ubuntu and other flavours
[13:26] <xnox> ahasenack, platform is sourced by all flavours; ubuntu is for the ubuntu flavours; kubuntu is for kubuntu flavours; xubuntu is for xubuntu flavours and so on.
[13:26] <ahasenack> hm
[13:26] <ahasenack> thanks
[14:02] <superm1> bdmurray, regarding that SRU it still hasn't released for testing, can you check?
[14:02] <superm1> the 1785165 one
[14:12] <rbasak> cjwatson, xnox: how does that apply to supported-misc-servers in platform?
[14:12] <rbasak> That's AIUI server "flavour" only?
[14:13] <cjwatson> Probably historical reasons
[14:13] <cjwatson> Whether server has had separate seeds has varied over time
[14:13] <cjwatson> And there may have been fiddly germinate issues which I understood ten years ago but have forgotten
[14:15] <cjwatson> I don't know of a fundamental reason why those couldn't be moved, but somebody would have to think moderately hard about the various STRUCTURE files
[14:16] <cjwatson> And whether moving them is actually worth it
[14:16] <rbasak> Thanks
[14:16] <rbasak> The background is that ahasenack is reviewing https://code.launchpad.net/~racb/ubuntu-seeds/+git/platform/+merge/361874 for me
[14:16] <rbasak> Based on that I think the location of the change is acceptable?
[14:19] <cjwatson> I think so
[15:24] <ahasenack> why are there sometimes no build logs when the build failed? Like with https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ruby2.5/2.5.3-3ubuntu3/+build/16305257
[15:24] <ahasenack> is that still fallout from the incident a while back when files were owned by the incorrect user in the build infrastructure?
[15:30] <xnox> rbasak, cjwatson - if i recall correctly edubuntu server was a server flavour. and like possibly mythbuntu was inheriting some of server things too. but both are now dead.
[15:34] <cjwatson> ahasenack: you've retried so I can't see when that build finished
[15:34] <cjwatson> ahasenack: do you know?
[15:34] <ahasenack> cjwatson: I haven't
[15:34] <cjwatson> somebody has
[15:39] <cjwatson> ahasenack: unexpected out-of-disk on buildd-manager, apparently.  working on it
[15:44] <ahasenack> cjwatson: ah, cool, thanks for checking
[15:44] <ahasenack> cjwatson: is that the cause of the build error, or the cause of the missing build log?
[15:46] <cjwatson> ahasenack: dunno
[15:46] <ahasenack> k
[16:11] <ahasenack> cjwatson: can I retry the failed builds already?
[16:12] <cjwatson> ahasenack: you can do what you like; I have no idea if it'll work yet
[16:12] <ahasenack> ok
[16:33] <doko> ahasenack: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/407262137/buildlog_ubuntu-disco-amd64.ruby2.5_2.5.3-3ubuntu3_BUILDING.txt.gz
[16:33] <doko> this one has a build log
[16:33] <ahasenack> I'll check
[16:34] <ahasenack> it built fine in a ppa
[17:05] <ahasenack> did someone click retry? It's showing green now
[17:05] <ahasenack> just armhf isn't, which I just retried
[17:05]  * ahasenack haunted by armhf build or test failures
[17:38] <cjwatson> ahasenack: given buildd-manager restarting frequently it's possible that it retried itself
[17:38] <ahasenack> ok
[17:39] <cjwatson> I have a theory (it could be bunnies)
[17:41] <ahasenack> or gremlins
[17:42] <cjwatson> (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gISEekxuEgk)
[17:47] <ahasenack> yay, armhf built
[17:47] <ahasenack> doko: ruby2.5 built now
[20:22] <juliank> Is there a chance WiFi (iwlwifi) got a lot more laggy recently?
[20:22] <juliank> I'm experiencing ping times to my ap from 5 to 200ms
[20:27] <juliank> hmm early impression is that 4.19 improves things
[20:27] <juliank> hmm no
[20:28] <juliank> WiFi only gets 30 MB/s, wired gets 48/50
[20:28]  * juliank is trying to figure out if the problem is laptop, router, or interference
[21:34] <valorie> cjwatson: <3 for the youtube link
[22:00] <TJ-> juliank: we've been getting a lot of reports of problems with various iwlwifi devices recently, including possibly causing complete system lock-ups. It seems to depend on the age of the chipset and whether firmware updates are still being provided for it
[22:05] <juliank> TJ-: In my case, it's a 8265 / 8275 (rev 78), I don't think there's a lot newer stuff than that?
[22:06] <juliank> TJ-: I should try 4.15 again and see how WiFi performance is there
[22:06] <juliank> I was away over christmas, and when I came back new neighbours moved in; so it's either them causing interference, something else causing interference, a bug in the router, or a kernel bug
[22:06] <TJ-> juliank: I was deep-diving into all this earlier today. I noticed there are some newer firmware files in the linux-firmware repo which might help you.   https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/users/drivers/iwlwifi
[22:08] <TJ-> juliank: one was "Add new versions of the firmwares for 8000C, 8265." on Dec  16th
[22:09] <TJ-> juliank: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git
[22:10] <juliank> TJ-: hmm, those are in disco, and maybe they are the culprit, I should revert to the previous one
[22:11] <TJ-> juliank: what channels/bandwidth is 'iw' reporting the device using?
[22:11] <juliank> I just hope 4.19 + older firmware is working
[22:12] <juliank>         channel 36 (5180 MHz), width: 80 MHz, center1: 5210 MHz
[22:13] <juliank> hmm no difference
[22:13] <juliank> well, potentially worse
[22:13] <juliank> just down to 5 MB/s
[22:13] <TJ-> juliank: can you poke the AP to move channel?
[22:13] <juliank> TJ-: I've been on channels 36,40,48,64,100, and 116, and all behaved the same
[22:14] <TJ-> juliank: You're ahead of my thought process then :)
[22:14] <juliank> I shall try restarting the router again
[22:14] <juliank> see what that brings
[22:14] <TJ-> Have you tried 2.4GHz too, in case there's a difference?
[22:15] <TJ-> juliank: and as a very unlikely, but possible, scenario... could the u.fl connectors on the wifi device have been dislodged so you've lost use of an antenna? Before you shake your head... I had that happen over the last few months and only figured it out when I got real agitated and opened the device (in this case it was the AP not the PC)!
[22:16] <juliank> TJ-: no precise ping measurements, and throughput is about 25 Mbit/s
[22:16] <juliank> TJ-: I think the AP fell down once
[22:16] <TJ-> juliank: same here!
[22:16] <TJ-> juliank: do all devices see the same throughput, or just the PC?
[22:17] <juliank> Phone is generally slower, so can't really compare I think
[22:17] <juliank> Other laptop is slower too, so
[22:18] <juliank> Waiting for reboot
[22:18] <TJ-> juliank: I found it only started to be noticable when the PC was some way away from the AP, particularly behind obstacles
[22:18] <juliank> I could adb to the TV and see what that does I guess
[22:18] <TJ-> juliank: but sitting under the AP it seemed relatively fine but, as you've observed, felt slow
[22:19] <juliank> TJ-: they are like 4 meters away from each other, but even when I was right next to it, it had issues
[22:20] <juliank> TJ-: phone reports 420 Mbps on fast.com, laptop 220 Mbps
[22:20] <TJ-> juliank: my 'noticable' was stuttering connections and long delays, sometimes losing and regaining the association
[22:21] <juliank> second run 340 Mbit/s
[22:21] <juliank> third run 290
[22:21] <juliank> laptop starts of at 10 Mbit/s, then increases upto 180
[22:23] <TJ-> juliank: there's some trace-cmd debugging you can enable to capture firmware interactions. I've currently got it running in the background to try to capture clues if/when this PC hits the lock-up
[22:24] <juliank> that's with old firmware, with new firmware I get 270 Mbit/s
[22:24] <juliank> now I got 340
[22:25] <TJ-> juliank: in case it helps, "Tracing", "...more switches..." command, at https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/users/drivers/iwlwifi/debugging
[22:25] <TJ-> juliank: that's logged ~1GB in the last 10 hours for this PC so it is quite busy
[22:27] <juliank> I sometimes think I should get a docking station
[22:27] <juliank> and use cables
[22:28] <juliank> generally what I see is WiFi topping out at 30 MB/s
[22:29] <juliank> which is not really bad
[22:29] <juliank> but it's still a long cry from the 50 I'm paying my ISP for
[22:31] <juliank> I need to test this somewhere outside without interference, and potentially get lenovo to check / replace parts
[22:42] <TJ-> juliank: if it's using NetworkManager, what bitrate does 'nmcli dev wifi list' and 'iwlist bitrate' report maximum link rates ?
[23:42] <cjwatson> valorie: :-) accidentally earwormed myself of course ...
[23:42] <valorie> can't go wrong with Buffy earworms though!