[00:09] <JanC> for me "buffy" refers to Buffy Sainte-Marie instead  :)
[00:09] <JanC> but then, there is a link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hP-Gak9vTYU&t=513s
[00:19] <JanC> Canadian native-American who became somewhat famous in the late 1960s as a folky singer-songwriter/protest-singer; but she often was ahead of her time in some ways, like starting to use computers for music recording & artwork in 1981 or so
[00:21] <valorie> of course, Buffy Sainte-Marie
[00:21] <JanC> already used synths in the late 1960s too
[00:21] <valorie> a voice from my young teen years
[00:21] <JanC> :)
[00:22] <JanC> I only know her since the 1990s or so, to be fair
[00:22] <JanC> early 1990s
[00:23] <JanC> it's funny that she had this song “The Vampire”  :)
[00:23] <valorie> I always noticed the Canadians
[00:23] <JanC> on an album from 1969
[00:23] <valorie> since my mother was raised in Alberta, and my grandfather (father's father) was born and raised in Ontario
[00:25] <JanC> IIRC she released the first or one of the first music albums that was digitally recorded
[00:34] <JanC> valorie: I already liked her music/songs when I first heard them in the early 1990s, but got really fascinated when I learned how she was a forerunner with electronic music--and that without obviously sounding like electronic music  :)
[11:35] <TJ-> When building systemd (locally) how does one disable tests that fail (test-boot-timestamps & test-execute) ?
[12:40] <cjwatson> ahasenack,doko,sil2100: OK, I think the particular issue that caused failed builds without logs from yesterday should be fixed now.  (Thread-safety bug, as far as I can make out)
[12:43] <doko> cjwatson: are builds given back for test rebuilds?
[12:53] <cjwatson> doko: I'm looking for builds that it's possible to retry.  Do you have an example of such a current failure that you haven't retried yet?
[12:54] <cjwatson> Unfortunately the nature of the failure prevented me from using my usual log-scanning technique for this
[12:55] <cjwatson> doko: So far my scans didn't find any, but I'm wondering if I made a mistake somewhere
[13:26] <cjwatson> doko: ?
[13:33] <doko> cjwatson: I didn't check myself yet. just wanted to ask. and I only want to retry after all were tried at least once. then I can give you the list ...
[13:36] <cjwatson> doko: OK, well, if you find one that's in a failed-without-logs state, please don't retry it and instead let me know so I can figure out how to fix my scanning code.  I don't need a list as such
[13:38] <doko> ok
[13:51] <jdstrand> juliank: you asked if I was still affected by https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/1801338 ?
[13:51] <juliank> jdstrand: yes
[13:51] <juliank> it's just you, I have not heard about that from anyone else
[13:52] <jdstrand> that's weird since I'm not really doing anything all that weird
[13:53] <jdstrand> let me check my notes to remember the issue
[14:26] <smoser> xnox or rharper or Odd_Bloke , bug 1812411 should probably receive some attention.
[15:18] <juliank> TJ-: It does seem there is a regression in 4.18 and 4.19 compared to 4.15 with regards to iwlwifi - I just installed the 4.15 kernel from bionic on disco, and I get full WiFi speed now
[15:19] <juliank> fast.com reports 450 Mbit/s
[15:19] <TJ-> juliank: glad you've managed to confirm it
[15:19] <juliank> with 4.19 it reported 80 Mbit/s
[15:19] <TJ-> juliank: I've been running 5.0-rc2 and it seems OK there; might be worth testing that too?
[15:19] <juliank> ah no, I'm on wired
[15:19] <juliank> ah no, I'm on wired
[15:20] <TJ-> juliank: hehehe did it catch you out?
[15:21] <juliank> though I just unplugged wired and got 360 Mbit/s
[15:24]  * juliank goes try 5.0-rc2
[15:24]  * juliank has to turn of secure boot first, hope he remembers bios password
[15:26] <sladen> juliank: 'admin'
[15:28] <juliank> sladen: nah, it's standard passowrd #2
[15:29] <juliank> so, in 5.0-rc2 it starts out at 45 MB/s, then slowly reduces to 18 MB/s
[15:29] <juliank> I think it's network interference or antenna issues in the laptop
[15:29] <juliank> now it's back up at 40 MB/s
[15:30] <TJ-> juliank: did you manage to check for loose connectors on that end?
[15:30] <juliank> I can't take apart a less than 1y old T480s...
[15:32] <doko> LocutusOfBorg: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/insighttoolkit4/4.12.2-dfsg1-4ubuntu4 ?
[15:34] <doko> hmm, just gave that back
[15:37] <juliank> checking laptop 2
[15:37] <TJ-> juliank: I guess if the v4.15 is good then it's not hardware
[15:37] <juliank> (Acer Chromebook 13)
[15:39] <juliank> chromebook: 100, 86, 96
[15:39] <juliank> that's a useless comparison :D
[15:40] <juliank> Mbit/s
[15:40] <juliank> Now I got 440 Mbit/s on 5.0
[15:40] <juliank> ah no
[15:40] <juliank> on wired again
[15:45] <juliank> I should probably just get a nice long cat6e cable and forget about WiFi
[15:52] <LocutusOfBorg> doko, it sucks, we should remove everything that is not supported upstream
[15:53] <LocutusOfBorg> we should *not* ignore testsuite results for insighttoolkit4, that is all
[15:57] <LocutusOfBorg> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/insighttoolkit4/+bug/1812874
[16:06] <jbicha> bdmurray: is the SRU team interested in bionic autopkgtest fixes like if I were able to fix bug 1763628?
[16:07] <bdmurray> jbicha: it depends on the package's install base etc, making a whole bunch of people update to only fix an autopkgtest is somewhat rude
[16:08] <jbicha> thanks, I'll go ahead and close the bug since it's fixed in disco where we're more interested (and the bionic failures started before bionic's release)
[16:31] <smoser> mwhudson: i'm curious  why 'go' snap is classic
[16:31] <smoser> (low priority ping)
[16:35] <juliank> sladen: so I think I agree w/ hardware is ok, I can consistently get 52-54 MB/s on 4.15
[16:36] <juliank> not on later kernels
[16:36] <juliank> probably on some 4.18 ones
[16:36] <juliank> as disco was fine back in the day
[16:36] <juliank> um, cosmic
[16:37] <juliank> so there must be a regression in 4.18.y point releases
[16:44] <TJ-> juliank: When I did my tests I narrowed down one issue to 4.16-4.17
[16:48] <juliank> now 4.18 is fine too
[16:48] <juliank> what is wrong
[16:51] <jdstrand> juliank: ok, I read the irc backlog between us and tried a few things and did not reproduce. I suspect that it has to do with a particular state of the archive that is not present (at least in what I tested)...
[18:00] <seb128> bdmurray, hey, thanks for the SRU reviews! could you review the new gnome-shell-extension-ubuntu-dock upload in the bionic queue? there was a change which was in the upload accepted earlier than we decide to not include after all so I bumped the version and remove that patches/entry from the changelog
[18:03] <bdmurray> seb128: sure
[18:03] <seb128> bdmurray, thx!
[20:04] <seb128> doko, could you have a look to https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/freetype/+bug/1799014 ? there is patch for openjdk which has been commited upstream in 12 which could be useful to backport to our version
[20:09] <tdaitx> seb128: thanks for the heads up, I will take a look at that
[20:11] <seb128> tdaitx, thx
[20:14] <bdmurray> seb128: It seems to me like the patch in update-notifier for bionic would be useful for cosmic since it helps with cleaning up other zombie processes
[20:15] <seb128> bdmurray, yeah, in practice we didn't get reports from cosmic and it's not a big issue so I'm trying to not spend too much enery on that non LTS serie, but I can upload there if you feel strongly about it
[20:21] <bdmurray> seb128: looking at the code my concern would be leftovers from calling software-properties-gtk from the applet. Do you recall which desktops show the update-notifier applet?
[20:22] <seb128> bdmurray, no I don't, but that code is no new/a regression from the previous SRU, we didn't even had a SRU in cosmic
[20:22] <seb128> I wouldn't bother SRUed a fix to cosmic, which is a non LTS, for an issue that got 0 user report
[20:25] <bdmurray> Okay yeah I don't see any obvious bug reports about it.
[20:30] <mwhudson> smoser: toolchain snaps more or less have to be in practice, it needs to e.g. invoke gcc
[20:33] <seb128> bdmurray, anyway, let me know if you want a cosmic upload and I can do one but I think it's a waste of time
[20:38] <smoser> mwhudson: why would that imply classic?
[20:39] <smoser> i guess you're not putting gcc inside the snap then? you could though, no?
[20:40] <smoser> oh. but i see.  the invoked thing will ultimately read files in /usr/include/ and such and you want (it seems) those to be read
[20:40] <smoser> so the user can 'apt-get install libfoo-dev' and get those used.
[20:40] <mwhudson> smoser: tbh i forget the details
[20:40] <mwhudson> but roughly yes, you could in theory pack the entire world into the snap (gcc, dev packages) but where do you stop
[20:41] <mwhudson> also presumably you are going to run the binaries the snap produces so there's a pretty strong trust relationship there
[21:49] <juliank> mwhudson: also, how'd go run work properly in a non-classic snap
[21:49] <mwhudson> juliank: well you shouldn't use that anyway :)
[22:02] <juliank> mwhudson: but... My .go scripts in ~/bin :(