| RAOF | blackboxsw: The curtin update appears to add a new dependency on probert? | 00:38 |
|---|---|---|
| RAOF | blackboxsw: ...which is in Universe, so you'll need to get that into Main before we could release the SRU? | 00:38 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: u-boot (xenial-proposed/main) [2016.01+dfsg1-2ubuntu4 => 2016.01+dfsg1-2ubuntu5] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 09:27 | |
| apw | ^ intended as a fix for the u-boot in xenial-proposed | 09:31 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: glib-networking (disco-proposed/main) [2.60.1-1 => 2.60.3-1~ubuntu19.04.1] (ubuntu-desktop) | 09:40 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: glib2.0 (disco-proposed/main) [2.60.0-1ubuntu0.1 => 2.60.4-0ubuntu0.19.04.1] (core) | 09:41 | |
| rbasak | apw: by fixed in later versions, do you mean that you've confirmed that "return ret" is present in the newer series including the development release? | 09:41 |
| rbasak | apw: if so, then +1 for your u-boot one line quilt patch upload - do you want me to accept? | 09:43 |
| apw | rbasak, exactly that, i traced it to making that change, then confirmed that the next series version was fixed in that way already | 09:43 |
| apw | rbasak, yes please | 09:44 |
| rbasak | done | 09:44 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted u-boot [source] (xenial-proposed) [2016.01+dfsg1-2ubuntu5] | 09:45 | |
| apw | rbasak, thanks | 09:46 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: vaultlocker (bionic-backports/universe) [1.0.3-0ubuntu1~ubuntu18.04.1 => 1.0.3-0ubuntu1.18.10.1~ubuntu18.04.1] (no packageset) | 10:00 | |
| jibel | cking, Hi, do you plan to fix the failing tests of zfs-linux 0.7.12-1ubuntu6 / spl-linux 0.7.12-1ubuntu4. It seems that they must depend on each other to build. | 10:01 |
| cking | jibel, yep, i keep on getting distracted by other issues, I will get around to it today | 10:03 |
| jibel | cking, thanks | 10:03 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph (bionic-proposed/main) [12.2.11-0ubuntu0.18.04.2 => 12.2.12-0ubuntu0.18.04.1] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 10:09 | |
| cking | https://appletonwildlifediary.wordpress.com/ | 10:54 |
| cking | oops, that was not meant to be pasted there | 10:55 |
| jamespage | vorlon: hey - did you have any feedback on the binary packaging changes for https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ceph/14.2.1-0ubuntu1 ? | 10:58 |
| jamespage | the one that cast doubt in my mind was the libradospp-dev package - trying to get to the bottom of why upstream ceph thought that was needed | 10:58 |
| jamespage | cking: nice post all the same - love a bee orchid :-) | 10:59 |
| cking | ah, serendipity | 10:59 |
| === ogra is now known as Guest43551 | ||
| coreycb | hello, can an archive admin please remove the binary package for python-oslo.log 3.44.0-0ubuntu2 from eoan-proposed? this was partially done yesterday i think but it seems the binary is still there. | 13:31 |
| coreycb | python3-oslo.log is the binary | 13:32 |
| cjwatson | It is not still there | 13:34 |
| cjwatson | Where are you seeing it? | 13:34 |
| cjwatson | "rmadison -s eoan,eoan-proposed -S python-oslo.log" does not show it, and https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/eoan/amd64/python3-oslo.log shows that binary as deleted | 13:35 |
| jamespage | coreycb: I guess you hit rebuild again :) | 13:37 |
| cjwatson | I hit retry on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-oslo.log/3.44.0-0ubuntu3/+build/16934603 to make sure I'm looking at something current | 13:38 |
| jamespage | ah right-oh | 13:39 |
| cjwatson | That built | 13:40 |
| cjwatson | I didn't make a careful note of the time before retrying, but buildd-manager logs say nobody had retried it since the removal | 13:41 |
| xnox | rbasak: do you have capacity to process an openssl sru for bionic to fix up the 1.1.1 landing. | 13:42 |
| rbasak | xnox: I suspect that's non-trivial? If so, sorry, I don't this week (and probably not next week). | 13:42 |
| rbasak | I'm a bit behind on things I'd like to have finished two weeks ago, and am blocking people :-/ | 13:43 |
| xnox | rbasak: it actually is a trivial diff. | 13:43 |
| coreycb | jamespage: nope | 13:43 |
| rbasak | xnox: but does that make it a trivial review? :) | 13:43 |
| coreycb | jamespage: ah you got a response | 13:43 |
| coreycb | jamespage: well that was easy :) | 13:44 |
| xnox | rbasak: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/56WzxXCSnt/ the bit that are slightly more time sensitive is the postinst ;-) | 13:44 |
| xnox | rbasak: there is more comments then code changes? =) | 13:44 |
| xnox | rbasak: basically we forgot to restart services upon upgrade from 1.1.0 to 1.1.1 and we must do that.... | 13:45 |
| rbasak | xnox: for me that's a non-trivial review, sorry. It'll take me time to understand the context. | 13:47 |
| coreycb | cjwatson: thanks and sorry for the noise. i assumed the new python-oslo.log was uploaded this morning. | 13:50 |
| xnox | rbasak: ack | 13:55 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fetchmail (bionic-proposed/main) [6.3.26-3build1 => 6.3.26-3ubuntu0.1~18.04.1] (ubuntu-server) | 14:45 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fetchmail [source] (bionic-proposed) [6.3.26-3ubuntu0.1~18.04.1] | 14:47 | |
| vorlon | jamespage: sorry, infinity had asked about the ceph binaries and I said I hadn't gone far enough to be holding a lock on the review, I thought he was going to take a look | 14:58 |
| xnox | vorlon: can you please review this openssl bionic SRU hotfix? https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/FxNnWp2d4F/ it has a regression fix, a low CVE, and an upgrade maintainer script to actually trigger restarting services...... | 15:08 |
| xnox | (the last bit makes many things not-worky until restarted, or the machine reboots) | 15:08 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openssl (bionic-proposed/main) [1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.1 => 1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.2] (core) (sync) | 15:10 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openssl (disco-proposed/main) [1.1.1b-1ubuntu2.1 => 1.1.1b-1ubuntu2.2] (core) (sync) | 15:11 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openssl (cosmic-proposed/main) [1.1.1-1ubuntu2.2 => 1.1.1-1ubuntu2.3] (core) (sync) | 15:11 | |
| xnox | vorlon: the srus for other releases do not have maintainer script thing, as well, not needed / too late. | 15:11 |
| xnox | vorlon: and they are syncs, because built in security pocket, to be copyable into -security as requested by the security team. | 15:12 |
| vorlon | xnox: I don't love seeing adjustments to the behavior of the service-checking code in an SRU hotfix... | 15:29 |
| xnox | vorlon: i can get away with just changing the version numbers in those hunks. | 15:29 |
| vorlon | xnox: that would reduce friction | 15:30 |
| xnox | vorlon: meaning only services that still have matching initd scripts will be restarted by invoke-rc.d => which should be true for most/all the ones listed. | 15:30 |
| xnox | vorlon: what about the other two patches cherrypicked from upstream. Are those ok, or not? | 15:30 |
| * xnox prepares reupload. | 15:31 | |
| vorlon | xnox: ah, because we do a literal check for /etc/init.d/foo there... hmm | 15:31 |
| vorlon | so rbalint was right ;) | 15:31 |
| * vorlon checks to see if this is still buggy in libpam | 15:32 | |
| xnox | vorlon: and invoke-rc.d internally redirects to systemctl. Thus the right thing to check is with systemctl is-active => cause only those will be restartable..... | 15:33 |
| xnox | i can quickly pull all of the packages mentioned, to double check that they still ship init.d/ scripts or not. | 15:34 |
| vorlon | xnox: yeah considering we've never agreed to drop init scripts and it's still required by Debian policy, I think we should just go with the version-check-only change for now | 15:37 |
| xnox | vorlon: uploading | 15:37 |
| xnox | vorlon: please reject the current sync then. | 15:40 |
| vorlon | ack | 15:40 |
| xnox | (the bionic one only) | 15:40 |
| vorlon | done | 15:41 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected openssl [sync] (bionic-proposed) [1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.2] | 15:42 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openssl (bionic-proposed/main) [1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.1 => 1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.2] (core) (sync) | 16:25 | |
| xnox | vorlon: updated sru ^ | 16:26 |
| vorlon | xnox: test case on LP: #1828215 appears to depend on files not included in the test case, where should they be sourced? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1828215/comments/6 ? | 16:53 |
| ubot5 | Launchpad bug 1828215 in openssl (Ubuntu Disco) "openssl ca -spkac output regressed" [High,Confirmed] | 16:53 |
| xnox | vorlon: in the comments of the bug. | 16:53 |
| vorlon | xnox: can you please extract that into a recipe in the description that can be followed without reference to the comments | 16:54 |
| xnox | vorlon: i.e. it is just /etc/ssl/openssl.cnf with more stanzas added to them. | 16:54 |
| vorlon | and without "assumes you've already generated a CA key" which most SRU testers aren't going to have just lying around | 16:54 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: erlang (bionic-proposed/main) [1:20.2.2+dfsg-1ubuntu2 => 1:20.2.2+dfsg-1ubuntu2.1] (ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server) | 16:54 | |
| xnox | vorlon: updated will all step by step instructions from scratch. creates CA, creates CA key, creates cert request, spkac request, and signs it | 17:10 |
| xnox | could be made more non-interactive, and quicker, but this is all step by step and works. just redid it from scratch in a chroot. | 17:11 |
| vorlon | xnox: thank you | 17:11 |
| vorlon | xnox: unrelated, any idea why the apache2 autopkgtests broke again? they were broken for a while by libfoo-ssl-perl, now they're broken differently | 17:12 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openssl [sync] (bionic-proposed) [1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.2] | 17:13 | |
| xnox | vorlon: in which releases? they are a bit fragile and i was monitoring it.... it's only arm64 at the moment, no? | 17:14 |
| xnox | (in eoan, unless you mean some other release) | 17:14 |
| vorlon | xnox: arm64/eoan yes | 17:50 |
| vorlon | infinity: I notice that the Debian release team has announced a buster target release date of July 6; and eoan DIF is set to August 22. Should we consider moving up DIF to match buster release, so we don't import the first month's worth of crazy from unstable? | 17:59 |
| cjwatson | Better get it in eoan than in F, IMO | 18:18 |
| cjwatson | I'm sure there'll be some new upstreams and such that we want to have in 20.04 and where it'd be better for them to have a cycle to shake out | 18:19 |
| cjwatson | ICBW | 18:19 |
| xnox | vorlon: both openssl bugs verified; i guess wait for autopkgtests results and release? | 18:39 |
| xnox | (autopkgtests to confirm it's not a complete toast) | 18:39 |
| vorlon | cjwatson: fair point, if we're going to get a logjam it may be better to have it sooner | 18:47 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openssl [sync] (cosmic-proposed) [1.1.1-1ubuntu2.3] | 19:36 | |
| vorlon | xnox: to be clear, this SRU is slated to be released to -security and that's why there's a CVE ref with no bug #, right? | 19:39 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openssl [sync] (disco-proposed) [1.1.1b-1ubuntu2.2] | 19:40 | |
| juliank | vorlon: I think we should probably look at experimental now and start merging from there if possible to reduce a jam | 20:54 |
| juliank | Also, is anything crazy going on that would interfere with an apt ABI+API break? | 20:54 |
| juliank | I guess I'll do rebuilds in PPA first | 20:55 |
| juliank | but still | 20:55 |
| juliank | I don't think I see anything | 20:56 |
| vorlon | juliank: I consider merging from experimental something to only be done if the merger is making a committment to field bugs in lieu of the Debian maintainer if that version doesn't make it to unstable before the next Ubuntu release | 20:56 |
| juliank | Well, I guess if you know that they're planning to upload to unstable | 20:56 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: scilab (disco-updates/universe) [6.0.2-0ubuntu1 => 6.0.2-0ubuntu2~19.04] (no packageset) (sync) | 20:57 | |
| juliank | Oh I guess I'll just add an apt transition tracker for planned transitions to make sure I get a good overview? | 20:59 |
| juliank | like bad is libapt-pkg5.0|libapt-inst2.0, good is libapt-pkg5.90 | 21:00 |
| juliank | but with proper quoting | 21:00 |
| juliank | or rather escaping | 21:00 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: scilab (cosmic-updates/universe) [6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.10 => 6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.10.1] (no packageset) (sync) | 21:05 | |
| juliank | This seems about right: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/3mqHtv7Nc5/ | 21:06 |
| juliank | Note that we're dropping libapt-inst, as it's folded into libapt-pkg | 21:06 |
| juliank | (and the combined library is smaller than an older libapt-pkg thanks to removal of deprecated code :D) | 21:06 |
| vorlon | in which case the last regexp can be shortened to /libapt-pkg5\.0|libapt-inst/ | 21:07 |
| juliank | true | 21:07 |
| vorlon | and don't forget your \b around words | 21:07 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: scilab (bionic-updates/universe) [6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.04 => 6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.04.1] (no packageset) (sync) | 21:07 | |
| vorlon | (maybe not necessary in this case, but we have a history of overbroad regexps in the tracker) | 21:07 |
| juliank | it's fine here | 21:07 |
| vorlon | yes but it sets a bad example for others who cargo-cult you later ;) | 21:08 |
| juliank | vorlon: Is .depends ~ /\b(libapt-pkg5\.90)\b/ equivalent to .depends ~ "libapt-pkg5.90"? | 21:08 |
| vorlon | does the tracker support a non-regexp form? I'm not familiar with that | 21:09 |
| juliank | there are some examples in there that use it | 21:09 |
| juliank | but I'm not sure if it's whole words | 21:10 |
| juliank | with \b and shortened a bit, I have https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/nKGGS4Yyz8/ | 21:12 |
| juliank | hmm, why do I have () in is_good, not necessary there | 21:13 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: scilab (disco-proposed/universe) [6.0.2-0ubuntu1 => 6.0.2-0ubuntu2~19.04] (no packageset) (sync) | 21:14 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: scilab (bionic-proposed/universe) [6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.04 => 6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.04.1] (no packageset) (sync) | 21:15 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: scilab (cosmic-proposed/universe) [6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.10 => 6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.10.1] (no packageset) (sync) | 21:15 | |
| cjwatson | AFAICS, ben implements ~ "..." by splitting the string on |, regex-quoting each piece, joining with | again, and then matching using /\b(%s)\b/ | 21:22 |
| cjwatson | Also damnit you made me try to read ocaml | 21:22 |
| juliank | cjwatson: heh | 21:23 |
| juliank | I quite like ocaml | 21:23 |
| juliank | Not that I've ever used it | 21:23 |
| cjwatson | You can work out any remaining fine details then :) | 21:23 |
| juliank | but I did provide like two patches or so | 21:24 |
| juliank | for edos something I think | 21:24 |
| juliank | but really never had the chance to actually invest more like a few mins in it, or compile any ocaml program | 21:24 |
| * juliank committed the regex version fwiw, with the \b added in the useful places | 21:25 | |
| juliank | But I'm going to sleep, so I hope I did not break it | 21:25 |
| cjwatson | I'm pretty sure the answer to your equivalence question is yes BTW, in case that wasn't clear from what I wrote | 21:26 |
| juliank | it was perfectly clear | 21:26 |
| cjwatson | Good | 21:26 |
| bdmurray | tjaalton: Could address https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xkeyboard-config/+bug/1740894/comments/42 since you changed the tag from failed to done? | 21:31 |
| ubot5 | Launchpad bug 1740894 in xkeyboard-config (Ubuntu Bionic) "KEY_RFKILL is not passed to userspace" [Low,Fix committed] | 21:31 |
| tdaitx | I mistankenly uploaded scilab to bionic/cosmic/disco -updates (should have been -proposed, which I did shortly after), could someone please take care of rejecting the ones for -updates? | 21:54 |
| tdaitx | s/uploaded/copied/ | 21:56 |
| === s8321414_ is now known as s8321414 | ||
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: utf8.h [amd64] (eoan-proposed/none) [0~git20190120.2a7c5bf-1] (no packageset) | 23:10 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!