[08:02] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks ahasenack!
[08:03] <LocutusOfBorg> and thanks mwhudson :)
[08:06] <LocutusOfBorg> stgraber, hello, I'm trying to merge/sync some packages around lxc with Debian... e.g. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc-templates/3.0.3-1ubuntu2 is that one ok now? its sad to have such lxc "version checks" delta...
[08:07] <Unit193> LocutusOfBorg: Hah, lastlog.  I already asked that. :P
[08:07] <LocutusOfBorg> nice!
[08:08] <LocutusOfBorg> Unit193, do you have a telegram account btw?
[08:08] <Unit193> "yeah, assuming it's packaged in a similar way, no reason it couldn't.  I didn't know they had it now"
[08:08] <Unit193> LocutusOfBorg: Not for Ubuntu stuff, no.
[08:11] <stgraber> LocutusOfBorg: we can do a gratuitous bump of the epoch on lxc in Ubuntu to avoid that part of the delta, but I don't expect us to rename our binary packages unfortunately, so if we can't get Debian to call the tools lxc-utils, it's going to be a problem
[08:15] <LocutusOfBorg> the lxc soname bump will resolve almost all the delta issues
[08:15] <LocutusOfBorg> and yes, did you try to ask debian about creating an lxc-utils package? this seems a good idea, right?
[08:16] <LocutusOfBorg> also the liblxc-dev package creation...
[08:17] <LocutusOfBorg> handsome_feng, please, please please do not upload tarballs for the same package in Debian and Ubuntu, same version and different content (wrt kylin-burner_3.0.6.orig.tar.gz)
[08:18] <LocutusOfBorg> extract patches on top of the same orig tarballs instead, so we don't have to fakesync or similar
[08:18] <LocutusOfBorg> and we don't break the archive
[08:25] <LocutusOfBorg> stgraber, python3-lxc is now merged! :)
[08:38] <handsome_feng> LocutusOfBorg, Sorry, something changed that I didn't noticed when I upload it to Debian last year, It won't happen again!
[08:40] <mwhudson> ricotz, oSoMoN: what's the relative priority of rustc 1.34 vs cargo 0.35?
[08:41] <mwhudson> ricotz, oSoMoN: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-mozilla-security/+archive/ubuntu/rust-updates/+packages has rustc 1.33 and cargo 0.34 now btw, if you could kick the tyres of those packages it would be great
[08:42] <mwhudson> i have 1.34.1 building in another ppa but it would be good to know if those packages work
[08:45] <ricotz> mwhudson, rustc 1.34 *and* cargo 0.35 must be updated in sync, note that the internal version of cargo 0.35 is actually 1.34
[08:46] <ricotz> mwhudson, thanks, I will make the next 68 builds use those packages
[08:47] <mwhudson> ricotz: cool, let me know how it goes
[08:48] <oSoMoN> thanks mwhudson
[08:48] <ricotz> mwhudson, you can delete the trusty packages from that ppa
[08:48] <oSoMoN> ricotz, I'm preparing 67.0+build1, btw
[08:48] <mwhudson> ricotz: i was just wondering about that :)
[08:49] <ricotz> oSoMoN, thumbs up
[09:19] <LocutusOfBorg> handsome_feng, no real problem :) it was a suggestion, nothing to worry about, now the package will be seen in http://merges.ubuntu.com/ next time you upload in Debian :)
[09:30] <handsome_feng> LocutusOfBorg, Thanks for your kind reminder! :*
[10:01] <LocutusOfBorg> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dleyna-renderer/+bug/1828792 seb128 can we close it?
[10:02] <LocutusOfBorg> it shouldn't migrate now that release pocket has the new gupnp, right?
[10:11] <seb128> LocutusOfBorg, those needs to be fixed/ported so no it can't be closed
[10:11] <seb128> LocutusOfBorg, I untagged the block-proposed though
[10:11] <LocutusOfBorg> so you think it will migrate?
[10:11] <LocutusOfBorg> oh exactly that was the point...
[10:11] <LocutusOfBorg> probably the fix will come from Debian when its time, so this is why maybe we can close it
[10:12] <seb128> I think it's work that needs to be done so the bug is valid/should stay open
[10:13] <LocutusOfBorg> this makes sense, removing block proposed is enough for me, in case the fix comes from auto sync :(
[10:13] <LocutusOfBorg> :)
[10:15] <seb128> yeah
[10:15] <seb128> bbl, lucnh
[11:46] <LocutusOfBorg> jamespage, python-murano-pkg-check was syncable, I did it, can you please double check? I tried to build the Ubuntu and Debian versions, results looks mostly the same, except for some additional deps in Debian, and the documentation not being installed in the -doc package...
[11:47] <LocutusOfBorg> also, now the python3 version has an higher installation priority wrt the python2 one, and this looks correct to me
[11:48] <LocutusOfBorg> not sure who did put that "complex, leave alone" on merge page, but this is the second package with "complex" that can be just syncd
[11:51] <Unit193> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=928975 might be important to follow?
[12:50] <jamespage> LocutusOfBorg: ack thankyou
[13:13] <coreycb> sil2100: hi, thanks for reviewing bug 1805332. the [Test Case] section is updated now with a better test and gnuoy responded to your query in comment #13. do you think that's enough to accept the upload?
[13:14] <sil2100> coreycb: excellent, looking!
[13:17] <coreycb> sil2100: note i haven't re-uploaded yet
[13:30] <sil2100> coreycb: yeah, please re-upload, the explaination is sufficient
[13:31] <sil2100> coreycb: and I see the test case is more senseful now
[13:32] <coreycb> sil2100: great, thanks. it's uploaded now.
[13:54] <sil2100> coreycb: hm, I don't see it in the queue yet though
[13:54] <sil2100> coreycb: should I take it from Rejected?
[13:55] <coreycb> sil2100: hmm, yes i guess so. there's no change.
[14:00] <sil2100> coreycb: ok, doing that
[14:02] <sil2100> coreycb: accepted o/
[14:09] <coreycb> sil2100: thanks!
[15:52] <acheronuk> cjwatson: hi, I was suggested to ask you a question
[15:53] <acheronuk> this a a section from a patch in abi-compliance-checker https://i.imgur.com/ZqSeBCO.png
[15:54] <acheronuk> https://perldoc.perl.org/functions/do.html
[15:54] <acheronuk> says "do BLOCK does not count as a loop, so the loop control statements next, last, or redo cannot be used to leave or restart the block. See perlsyn for alternative strategies."
[15:55] <acheronuk> which seems to tally with some autotest fails with "Can't "next" outside a loop block at /usr/bin/abi-compliance-checker line 10171"
[15:55] <acheronuk> which is the sub patched in there
[15:57] <cjwatson> acheronuk: I guess?  Not sure why you were pointed to me
[15:57] <acheronuk> cjwatson: just someone suggested you. ah, the patch is vorlon's. I'll ask him. thanks
[15:59] <acheronuk> vorlon: that was yours from this I believe? http://launchpadlibrarian.net/385954640/abi-compliance-checker_2.3-0.1_2.3-0.1ubuntu1.diff.gz
[16:10] <coreycb> bdmurray: hello, if you have cycles in your sru rotation would you be able to take a look at bug 1822129 ?
[16:12] <bdmurray> coreycb: review something in unapproved or release something to -updates?
[16:13] <coreycb> bdmurray: sorry, i wasn't clear. this is for the horizon packages that are in the unapproved queues.
[16:16] <bdmurray> coreycb: no problem, I'll try and have a look today
[16:16] <coreycb> bdmurray: thank you
[21:41] <bdmurray> coreycb: There are two uploads of horizion in the cosmic queue...