=== cpaelzer__ is now known as cpaelzer [10:12] infinity, since you asked me about the testsuite on marc-perl* sadness, I want to give you what I found [10:12] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libmarc-charset-perl/1.35-2build1 [10:13] 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] I'm not sure how worth investigating this is... [10:17] ./usr-old/lib/libmarc-charset-perl/Table is just a different file in lots of places [10:19] not even sure why britney let it migrate, probably some timing issue [10:19] anyway, rebuilding should be ok now [10:19] diffing a 5.4MB binary file is not that easy [10:24] * LocutusOfBorg opens an RC bug in Debian [11:02] https://bugs.debian.org/923238 [11:02] Debian bug 923238 in libmarc-charset-perl "libmarc-charset-perl: needs a rebuild on 32bit architectures?" [Serious,Open] === cpaelzer__ is now known as cpaelzer === velix_inuse is now known as velix === ldelgado__ is now known as yikoru [19:01] !dmb-ping [19:01] cyphermox, jbicha, micahg, rbasak, sil2100, slashd, tsimonq2: DMB ping. [20:21] 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] bgmccollum: note: im not a dev - just a user. do you have the URL to the mini iso handy? [20:25] CarlFK -- http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/xenial/main/installer-amd64/current/images/netboot/mini.iso [20:26] Just found this -- https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/1816846 [20:26] Launchpad bug 1816846 in glibc (Ubuntu) "segfault in libc-2.23.so netinstall installation pxe" [Undecided,Confirmed] [20:26] bgmccollum: you have a pxe server right? [20:26] yes [20:26] 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] well, packer driven preseed, not PXE [20:27] sorry...i just boot the ISO [20:27] then packer edits the boot args and specifies a preseed [20:27] but if you just boot the ISO and step through the installer, it segfaults [20:28] actually.. looking at that bug report: ... 3 hours ago [20:29] 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] what's packer ? [20:29] skimming the bug report [20:29] http://packer.io [20:29] I skimmed too, then jumped to the bottom [20:29] i have a series of jenkins pipelines to build base images for use in openstack environments [20:30] the first pipeline uses back to do a base OS install [20:30] *user packer* [20:31] 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] 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] whats the difference between the two? [20:34] https://salsa.debian.org/carlfk-guest/ansible/blob/usb-reorg1/docs/usb.rst#step-by-step-details [20:34] hd-media fs can be mounted read/write [20:35] hence the name...hd-media...makes sense [20:36] well, it had an iso9660? fs once. and the fs isn't big enough to put the files it needs to work. [20:37] which is being debated in my own bug report :p [20:37] im going to run it for xenial and see what happenes [20:38] 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. [20:38] bug 1817621 in ubuntu-community "[TB/DMB] Grant ~lubuntu-dev upload permissions to the lubuntu packageset" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1817621 [20:40] 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] 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] CarlFK i switched to using the mini.iso published to xenial-updates, and that seems to have done the trick. [20:47] oh right.. -updates.. my favorite thing to rant about :p [20:47] i don't at all understand why anna is trying to update libc [20:48] when "current" isn't current, cause you're in xenial, not xenial-updates :P [20:48] yeah [21:02] http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/16.04.5/release/ Where is x86 or amd64 ? [21:03] or where is ubuntu-16.04.4-server-amd64.iso [21:05] http://old-releases.ubuntu.com/releases/16.04.4/ says "16.04.1" >: [21:10] tsimonq2: the person who will make the changes should be able to figure it out :) [21:11] cyphermox: I guess so :) [21:45] CarlFK: releases.ubuntu.com [23:10] tsimonq2: I believe you're right. [23:11] tsimonq2: but doesn't the ownership/adminship of ~lubuntu-dev need sorting first? [23:11] Sorry I didn't make the DMB meeting earlier. I was driving (a long way), and failed to send apologies in advance :-/ [23:21] 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] 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] not -live is under http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/18.04.2/release/ [23:31] rbasak: The RT is filed, I'm waiting on a Launchpad admin.