[07:49] <LocutusOfBorg> tjaalton, https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-llvm-team/llvm-toolchain/tree/8 merge request here please?
[07:49] <LocutusOfBorg> if they are in llvm-toolchain-snapshot, nice, so we don't have to keep them around on more branches
[07:50] <tjaalton> LocutusOfBorg: ok, will do
[07:50] <LocutusOfBorg> tjaalton, if you have them, please double check if they aren't in the one that is going uploaded probably today
[07:50] <LocutusOfBorg> https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-llvm-team/llvm-toolchain/commit/42b7383d1a6f8b5df0a7e960a17bb5230ffec61f
[07:50] <LocutusOfBorg> 8.0 stable is out...
[07:51] <LocutusOfBorg> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/releases/tag/llvmorg-8.0.0 maybe your patches are already there
[07:51] <LocutusOfBorg> so we can just sync
[07:58] <tjaalton> LocutusOfBorg: they are these https://github.com/intel/opencl-clang/tree/ocl-open-80/patches/clang
[07:58] <tjaalton> I was told they were not queued for 8
[08:27] <tjaalton> LocutusOfBorg: where do I get the tarball?
[09:00] <LocutusOfBorg> tjaalton, I guess when sylvestre uploads it
[09:00] <LocutusOfBorg> let me ask
[09:46] <doko> oSoMoN: could you have a look at the libreoffice/s390x autopkg test failure? triggered by openjdk-8 (which isn't even installed in the test)
[09:47] <oSoMoN> doko, looking
[09:49] <seb128> jdstrand, iptables still looks like it's unhapy, firewalld tests with 1.8.2-4ubuntu1
[09:49] <seb128> autopkgtest firewalld[1362]: ERROR: '/usr/sbin/iptables-restore -w -n' failed: iptables-restore v1.8.2 (nf_tables):
[09:49] <seb128>                                              line 4: RULE_REPLACE failed (No such file or directory): rule in chain INPUT
[09:49] <seb128>                                              line 4: RULE_REPLACE failed (No such file or directory): rule in chain OUTPUT
[10:10] <oSoMoN> doko, that looks like a flaky test, it previously failed with the same error on 2019-03-12 02:37:15 UTC, and was then retried by j_bicha and passed, I will need to look into that more closely but for now I just retried it
[10:12] <doko> oSoMoN: I already did, but maybe you have better luck ;p
[10:19] <oSoMoN> doko, yeah, I saw you had retried already, fingers crossed this time it passes
[11:39] <tjaalton> LocutusOfBorg: they applied on top of rc5, so I sent the merge request already
[11:52] <LocutusOfBorg> merged thanks
[12:14] <tjaalton> cool, thanks!
[13:39] <rbalint> juliank, seb128: i finalized the switch of lp:software-properties to git
[13:39] <rbalint> i'm in the process of updating the precise and trusty git branches with synthetic commits
[13:40] <LocutusOfBorg> tjaalton, uploading right now
[13:44] <tjaalton> LocutusOfBorg: sweet
[13:45] <LocutusOfBorg> let me know if it works, next upload in debian will be syncable thanks to you :)
[13:46] <LocutusOfBorg> I think you should join the team, llvm and graphic people have a lot in common!
[13:46] <LocutusOfBorg> (I mean, you need patches mostly each llvm release)
[13:46] <LocutusOfBorg> btw next time please also update changelog in the merge request
[13:49] <tjaalton> well actually I rarely need patches, this was an exception :)
[13:49] <tjaalton> llvm upstream is a mystery, would be nice to have relnotes for point-releases for starters
[14:02] <seb128> rbalint, great, thx
[14:05] <juliank> thanks rbalint
[14:24] <ahasenack> rbasak: does debian's ci also trigger dep8 tests on reverse dependencies, like we do? Do you know?
[14:26] <rbasak> I think so, but am not sure.
[14:32] <ahasenack> https://ci.debian.net/status/ is nice
[15:29] <rbasak> rharper: have you ever seen anything like https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=925126 on Ubuntu?
[15:29] <rbasak> Apparently RUN{builtin} and RUN are separate lists in udev and ordering isn't guaranteed; the reporter is hitting the wrong ordering.
[15:29] <rharper> rbasak: I've not seen that before
[15:31] <rharper> I suspect that the normal path is that the initramfs will load the bcache module (even if the race still exists)
[15:32] <rharper> rbasak: I would be interested in confirmation of the run order
[15:32] <rharper> that does seem like lots of things could break (not just bcache)
[15:34] <coreycb> rbasak: hello, if you have a chance today we'd like to see if we can get nova and swift into bionic-proposed for bug 1818069
[16:18] <ahasenack> doko: hi, does this ring a bell?
[16:18] <ahasenack> doko: Can't exec "gcc": No such file or directory at /usr/share/perl5/Dpkg/Arch.pm line 126.
[16:18] <ahasenack> doko: -: warning: cannot determine CC system type, falling back to default (native compilation)
[16:18] <ahasenack> started happening in a test
[16:19] <ahasenack> https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/H55y8JcMVw/
[16:22] <ahasenack> it's not what failed the test, though
[16:31] <doko> ahasenack: probably gcc is not installed
[19:55] <Wimpress> Snapcraft Live! starts in about 5 minutes - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_U-pcvBFrU
[23:08] <RAOF> tjaalton: intel-mediasdk appears to use the embedded googletest/googlemock source.
[23:19] <RAOF> tjaalton: debian/copyright is incorrect; a bunch of files under samples/ are 3-clause BSD (copyright claims them as MIT), a handful of files (eg: wayland-drm-client-protocol.h) are neither BSD nor MIT and don't have their licence recorded in debian/copyright.
[23:37] <RAOF> tjaalton: Possibly we should split contrib/ipp out and have an actual intel-performance-primitives library, but we don't currently have one.
[23:37] <RAOF> tjaalton: A quick codesearch shows that there are at least 6 packages in Debian that would use an ipp library if it existed, so maybe it's time to bite that particular bullet?
[23:40] <teward> if a package is 3.0 native format do you still use quilt patches to patch it, or is there a different mechanism for making changes?
[23:40] <teward> (package in question is in universe but still a valid question)