[04:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ibm-java80 [source] (xenial-proposed) [8.0.5.35-0ubuntu1]
[10:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-shell (disco-proposed/main) [3.32.0+git20190410-1ubuntu1 => 3.32.1-1ubuntu1~19.04.1] (desktop-core, desktop-extra, mozilla)
[10:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mutter (disco-proposed/main) [3.32.0+git20190410-1ubuntu1 => 3.32.1-2ubuntu1~19.04.1] (desktop-core, desktop-extra)
[12:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: vte2.91 (disco-proposed/main) [0.56.1-1ubuntu1 => 0.56.2-1ubuntu1~19.04.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[12:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected subversion [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.9.3-2ubuntu1.2]
[12:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: subversion (xenial-proposed/main) [1.9.3-2ubuntu1.1 => 1.9.3-2ubuntu1.2] (ubuntu-desktop)
[12:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted subversion [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.9.3-2ubuntu1.2]
[13:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sssd (disco-proposed/main) [1.16.3-3ubuntu1 => 1.16.3-3ubuntu1.1] (ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server)
[13:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sssd (bionic-proposed/main) [1.16.1-1ubuntu1.1 => 1.16.1-1ubuntu1.2] (kubuntu, ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server)
[13:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sssd (xenial-proposed/main) [1.13.4-1ubuntu1.13 => 1.13.4-1ubuntu1.14] (kubuntu, ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server)
[13:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sssd (cosmic-proposed/main) [1.16.3-1ubuntu2 => 1.16.3-1ubuntu2.1] (kubuntu, ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server)
[13:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pam [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.1.8-3.2ubuntu2.2]
[16:41] <vorlon> doko: do we need to remove gcc-6 to let the other gccs in?
[16:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clamav [amd64] (eoan-proposed) [0.101.2+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[16:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clamav [armhf] (eoan-proposed) [0.101.2+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[16:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clamav [ppc64el] (eoan-proposed) [0.101.2+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[16:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clamav [arm64] (eoan-proposed) [0.101.2+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[16:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clamav [s390x] (eoan-proposed) [0.101.2+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[16:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted clamav [i386] (eoan-proposed) [0.101.2+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[17:04] <vorlon> doko: gcc-6 removal sorted, it's axed now
[19:45] <tsimonq2> infinity: Is util-linux 2.33.2 on your radar at all? kpmcore (the partitioning backend for Calamares) has it as a dependency starting with 4.0.
[19:46] <tsimonq2> kpmcore hasn't been updated in a few years, so it would be cool to get that thos cycle if possible.
[19:46] <tsimonq2> *this
[19:47] <infinity> tsimonq2: It wasn't.  It could be.
[19:49] <tsimonq2> infinity: It probably needs to happen in Debian first (hint hint, co-maintainer ;) ), but I doubt that's totally feasible with Debian being frozen.
[19:50] <infinity> Experimental exists for a reason.
[19:50] <infinity> I've not uploaded util-linux in Debian in ages due to, uhh, differences of opinion about maintenance methods.
[19:51] <infinity> But now all the people who said they wanted to maintain it have decided to stop doing so officially.
[19:51] <infinity> So maybe I should look into it again. :/
[19:51] <tsimonq2> Syncing core packages from Experimental sounds fun.
[19:52] <infinity> *cough* glibc *cough*
[19:52] <infinity> We're almost always ahead of Debian by 3-6 months with glibc.
[19:52] <infinity> The trick is working together, instead of in a vacuum, so it can all merge back.
[19:53] <tsimonq2> Yeah, that's what I was poking fun at. :P
[19:53] <tsimonq2> It's a core package I could touch if *needed* but very much prefer not to.
[19:54] <infinity> Knowing when not to upload is a skill more core-devs need.
[19:54] <infinity> Anyhow, I think we could look at util-linux 2.33.2 ... And yeah, I'd probably want to push it to experimental if for no other reason than to avoid a later orig tarball mismatch.
[19:55] <tsimonq2> p
[19:55] <tsimonq2> Oops.
[19:55] <tsimonq2> Thanks.
[19:55] <vorlon> speaking of which, no one touch the initramfs-tools merge right now ;)
[19:55] <vorlon> the keymap script needs rejiggering between console-setup and initramfs-tools because Debian changed how it's being done
[19:56] <tsimonq2> Maybe merging debian-installer would help with that somehow.
[19:56]  * tsimonq2 runs
[19:57]  * teward trips tsimonq2
[19:57] <teward> oops
[19:58] <infinity> Thats's not going to happen.
[20:00] <tsimonq2> Another package I don't touch. :P
[20:01] <tsimonq2> !info debian-installer
[20:01] <ubot5`> debian-installer (source: debian-installer): Debian Installer documentation. In component main, is optional. Version 20101020ubuntu543.7 (bionic), package size 658 kB, installed size 1289 kB
[20:01] <tsimonq2> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[20:57] <vorlon> xnox: new upstream release of scikit-learn...?
[20:58] <xnox> vorlon, i know, chatting with upstream about it. trying to migrate atlas and got caught up.
[20:58] <vorlon> xnox: is the autopkgtest failure likely to be an OOM?
[20:58] <xnox> vorlon, please promote golangs' 1.11 to main? https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.html
[20:58] <LocutusOfBorg> some AA, can you please remove if possible golang-1.10 and promote golang-1.11 to main?
[20:58] <xnox> vorlon, yes, but it didn't OOM before.
[20:58] <LocutusOfBorg> oh nice
[20:58] <LocutusOfBorg> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang-1.10/+bug/1827180
[20:58] <ubot5`> Ubuntu bug 1827180 in golang-1.10 (Ubuntu) "Remove golang-1.10 from EOAN" [Undecided,New]
[20:58] <LocutusOfBorg> xnox, thanks for asking it!
[20:58] <vorlon> xnox: sure it did; did you look at the history of disco results?
[20:59] <vorlon> xnox, LocutusOfBorg: golang-1.11 promoted
[21:01] <xnox> vorlon, ah, well. I also question the sanity of the test. it's ententially tries to allocate and memorymap 1MB and then do stuff. Let's see if the test is insane, or our vms are tiny....
[21:01] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, I think golang-1.10 has no reverse-dependencies in main, but can we also remove it? I don't quite understand if we can...
[21:01] <vorlon> not so tiny that it'd be unable to mmap 1MB
[21:01] <LocutusOfBorg> there is something I don't understand about the built-using tag...
[21:01] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: Reverse-Depends: golang, you kind of at least need to wait for that to migrate
[21:01] <vorlon> what don't you understand about it?
[21:02] <LocutusOfBorg> how can we have only two packages using golang...
[21:02] <LocutusOfBorg> I did this: reverse-depends -s src:golang-defaults -r eoan
[21:03] <vorlon> you're expecting built-using to show up in reverse-depends output?
[21:03] <LocutusOfBorg> nope I'm not
[21:03] <LocutusOfBorg> but should we rebuild them to bump the "built-using" tag?
[21:03] <vorlon> no
[21:03] <vorlon> we should set up a report, to track built-using mismatches
[21:03] <LocutusOfBorg> at least I had to no-change rebuild snapd to kick out the old dependency
[21:04] <vorlon> and then drive that report to 0 at the end of the cycle
[21:04] <LocutusOfBorg> that would be nice, if reverse-depends could also list them
[21:04] <vorlon> no
[21:04] <vorlon> I mean, yes
[21:04] <vorlon> but that's orthogonal to having a report
[21:05] <vorlon> also I see lots of reverse-depends for src:golang-defaults so I don't know what you're seeing
[21:06] <LocutusOfBorg> I see them too, and I don't know if I should rebuild or not
[21:06] <LocutusOfBorg> at least debian didn't
[21:06] <vorlon> then I don't understand the comment about "only two packages" using golang
[21:07] <LocutusOfBorg> reverse-depends -b src:golang-1.10 -r eoan
[21:07] <LocutusOfBorg> this one
[21:08] <LocutusOfBorg> I had to rebuild them, and also debian did that... https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ncbi-entrez-direct&suite=unstable
[21:08] <vorlon> well, yes
[21:08] <LocutusOfBorg> god, alternative dependency listed in control file...
[21:09] <vorlon> but those happen to be the only two packages that mention golang-1.10 in their build-dependencies, which is expected to be a small number of packages
[21:09] <LocutusOfBorg> why did debian rebuild only some of them is still unclear
[21:09] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, yes, but it is the | golang-1.10 one, so we could just don't care about it
[21:09] <LocutusOfBorg> and your shiny new tool will bring the need to rebuild for new built-using tagt
[21:09] <vorlon> sorry, I don't know what conversation we're having
[21:10] <vorlon> I *don't* care about the | golang-1.10 build-dependency, for removal
[21:10] <LocutusOfBorg> debian removed the golang-1.10, but only one package I found being rebuilt for that
[21:10] <LocutusOfBorg> I thought it was because of the build using, and discovered only now that is an alternate dependency
[21:11] <vorlon> and we *should* be rebuilding everything with stale references in Built-Using prior to release, as part of archive hygiene, but we currently do not
[21:11] <LocutusOfBorg> so, ok it is clear (still I don't get why debian rebuilt only some of the packages, not all, but I don't care if you say we will eventually detect such mismatches about built using and missing source)
[21:11] <LocutusOfBorg> yes its clear now! thanks
[21:11] <LocutusOfBorg> I based the reasoning on a false assumption that this built-using was more important for britney than it is now :)
[21:11] <LocutusOfBorg> reason was the alternative dependency
[21:12]  * LocutusOfBorg goes to sleep, it has been a looooong day
[21:12] <LocutusOfBorg> cheers!
[21:12] <vorlon> g'night
[21:13] <LocutusOfBorg> golang migrated :)
[21:13] <LocutusOfBorg> I mean has been published
[22:28] <Eickmeyer> Anybody wanna throw-on a MOTU hat and look at bug 1827288? This would be my third sponsored package.
[22:28] <ubot5`> bug 1827288 in Ubuntu Studio "[Needs Packaging] LSP-Plugins for Eoan" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1827288
[23:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-release-upgrader (trusty-proposed/main) [1:0.220.10 => 1:0.220.11] (core)
[23:46] <vorlon> why is there a kdesudo.mo in language-pack-*-base?