[10:12] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, since you asked me about the testsuite on marc-perl* sadness, I want to give you what I found
[10:12] <LocutusOfBorg> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libmarc-charset-perl/1.35-2build1
[10:13] <LocutusOfBorg> for some reasons, gdbm transition, broke the 32bit testsuite, and a no-change rebuild of marc-charset works, even if I don't really know why
[10:13] <LocutusOfBorg> I'm not sure how worth investigating this is...
[10:17] <LocutusOfBorg> ./usr-old/lib/libmarc-charset-perl/Table is just a different file in lots of places
[10:19] <LocutusOfBorg> not even sure why britney let it migrate, probably some timing issue
[10:19] <LocutusOfBorg> anyway, rebuilding should be ok now
[10:19] <LocutusOfBorg> diffing a 5.4MB binary file is not that easy
[10:24]  * LocutusOfBorg opens an RC bug in Debian
[11:02] <LocutusOfBorg>  https://bugs.debian.org/923238
[19:01] <slashd> !dmb-ping
[20:21] <bgmccollum> greetings...there seems to be a problem with the xenial netboot mini.iso. there is a segfault during detest disks, as libc6-udev failed for unknown reasons. this has been observed consistently in two different environments. my understanding is that the mini.iso may beed to be rebuilt to accommodate an updated libc6-udeb that is being fetched...
[20:24] <CarlFK> bgmccollum: note: im not a dev - just a user.  do you have the URL to the mini iso handy?
[20:25] <bgmccollum> CarlFK -- http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/xenial/main/installer-amd64/current/images/netboot/mini.iso
[20:26] <bgmccollum> Just found this -- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/1816846
[20:26] <CarlFK> bgmccollum: you have a pxe server right?
[20:26] <bgmccollum> yes
[20:26] <CarlFK> do you boot this file:  http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/xenial/main/installer-amd64/current/images/netboot/ubuntu-installer/amd64/linux
[20:26] <bgmccollum> well, packer driven preseed, not PXE
[20:27] <bgmccollum> sorry...i just boot the ISO
[20:27] <bgmccollum> then packer edits the boot args and specifies a preseed
[20:27] <bgmccollum> but if you just boot the ISO and step through the installer, it segfaults
[20:28] <CarlFK> actually.. looking at that bug report:             ...             3 hours ago
[20:29] <CarlFK> It seems it is being actively worked on, and is some dependency or publishing problems that will be worked out in at most a day or two
[20:29] <CarlFK> what's packer ?
[20:29] <bgmccollum> skimming the bug report
[20:29] <bgmccollum> http://packer.io
[20:29] <CarlFK> I skimmed too, then jumped to the bottom
[20:29] <bgmccollum> i have a series of jenkins pipelines to build base images for use in openstack environments
[20:30] <bgmccollum> the first pipeline uses back to do a base OS install
[20:30] <bgmccollum> *user packer*
[20:31] <CarlFK> from a quick skim, sounds like what I built: https://salsa.debian.org/carlfk-guest/ansible/blob/usb-reorg1/usbinst/mk_usb_installer.sh
[20:32] <CarlFK> which uses hd-image instead of netboot: http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/xenial/main/installer-amd64/current/images/  hd-image or netboot
[20:33] <bgmccollum> whats the difference between the two?
[20:34] <CarlFK> https://salsa.debian.org/carlfk-guest/ansible/blob/usb-reorg1/docs/usb.rst#step-by-step-details
[20:34] <CarlFK> hd-media fs can be mounted read/write
[20:35] <bgmccollum> hence the name...hd-media...makes sense
[20:36] <CarlFK> well, it had an iso9660? fs once.  and the fs isn't big enough to put the files it needs to work.
[20:37] <CarlFK> which is being debated in my own bug report :p
[20:37] <CarlFK> im going to run it for xenial and see what happenes
[20:38] <tsimonq2> cyphermox, rbasak, et. al: earlier DMB meeting> bug 1817621 filed. I'm not sure what an edit-acl command would be, as I can't seem to find a case where permissions are set for an existing packageset and an existing team; teams like ~kubuntu-dev seem to have had their ACLs set prior to the usage of the ubuntu-community project for bugs.
[20:40] <tsimonq2> The closest I can get is an edit-acl command done per-series, which I don't know is right for seed-based packageset upload permissions. I don't recall seeing edit-acl commands anywhere in the new release process.
[20:43] <tsimonq2> My current theory after looking over docs is that when seed creation is done for a new release and packagesets are created from those, it's a copy-over process with ACLs. I also believe I'm going down a rabbit hole. :P
[20:47] <bgmccollum> CarlFK i switched to using the mini.iso published to xenial-updates, and that seems to have done the trick.
[20:47] <CarlFK> oh right.. -updates.. my favorite thing to rant about :p
[20:47] <mwhudson> i don't at all understand why anna is trying to update libc
[20:48] <bgmccollum> when "current" isn't current, cause you're in xenial, not xenial-updates :P
[20:48] <CarlFK> yeah
[21:02] <CarlFK> http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/16.04.5/release/  Where is x86 or amd64 ?
[21:03] <CarlFK> or where is ubuntu-16.04.4-server-amd64.iso
[21:05] <CarlFK> http://old-releases.ubuntu.com/releases/16.04.4/ says "16.04.1" >:
[21:10] <cyphermox> tsimonq2: the person who will make the changes should be able to figure it out :)
[21:11] <tsimonq2> cyphermox: I guess so :)
[21:45] <infinity> CarlFK: releases.ubuntu.com
[23:10] <rbasak> tsimonq2: I believe you're right.
[23:11] <rbasak> tsimonq2: but doesn't the ownership/adminship of ~lubuntu-dev need sorting first?
[23:11] <rbasak> Sorry I didn't make the DMB meeting earlier. I was driving (a long way), and failed to send apologies in advance :-/
[23:21] <CarlFK> infinity: I'm trying to find a pattern for -server.iso - like ubuntu-16.04.5-server-amd64.iso    and ubuntu-18.04.2-server-arm64.iso
[23:24] <CarlFK>    http://releases.ubuntu.com/16.04.5 has it, but  http://releases.ubuntu.com/18.10/  has ubuntu-18.10-live-server-amd64.iso
[23:24] <CarlFK> not -live is under http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/18.04.2/release/
[23:31] <tsimonq2> rbasak: The RT is filed, I'm waiting on a Launchpad admin.