[00:38] <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?
[09:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: u-boot (xenial-proposed/main) [2016.01+dfsg1-2ubuntu4 => 2016.01+dfsg1-2ubuntu5] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server)
[09:31] <apw> ^ intended as a fix for the u-boot in xenial-proposed
[09:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: glib-networking (disco-proposed/main) [2.60.1-1 => 2.60.3-1~ubuntu19.04.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[09:41] -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?
[09:43] <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
[09:44] <apw> rbasak, yes please
[09:44] <rbasak> done
[09:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted u-boot [source] (xenial-proposed) [2016.01+dfsg1-2ubuntu5]
[09:46] <apw> rbasak, thanks
[10:00] -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)
[10:01] <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.
[10:03] <cking> jibel, yep, i keep on getting distracted by other issues, I will get around to it today
[10:03] <jibel> cking, thanks
[10:09] -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)
[10:54] <cking> https://appletonwildlifediary.wordpress.com/
[10:55] <cking> oops, that was not meant to be pasted there
[10:58] <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
[10:59] <jamespage> cking: nice post all the same - love a bee orchid :-)
[10:59] <cking> ah, serendipity
[13:31] <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.
[13:32] <coreycb> python3-oslo.log is the binary
[13:34] <cjwatson> It is not still there
[13:34] <cjwatson> Where are you seeing it?
[13:35] <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
[13:37] <jamespage> coreycb: I guess you hit rebuild again :)
[13:38] <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
[13:39] <jamespage> ah right-oh
[13:40] <cjwatson> That built
[13:41] <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
[13:42] <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).
[13:43] <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
[13:44] <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? =)
[13:45] <xnox> rbasak:  basically we forgot to restart services upon upgrade from 1.1.0 to 1.1.1 and we must do that....
[13:47] <rbasak> xnox: for me that's a non-trivial review, sorry. It'll take me time to understand the context.
[13:50] <coreycb> cjwatson: thanks and sorry for the noise. i assumed the new python-oslo.log was uploaded this morning.
[13:55] <xnox> rbasak:  ack
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fetchmail (bionic-proposed/main) [6.3.26-3build1 => 6.3.26-3ubuntu0.1~18.04.1] (ubuntu-server)
[14:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fetchmail [source] (bionic-proposed) [6.3.26-3ubuntu0.1~18.04.1]
[14:58] <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
[15:08] <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)
[15:10] -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)
[15:11] -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.
[15:12] <xnox> vorlon:  and they are syncs, because built in security pocket, to be copyable into -security as requested by the security team.
[15:29] <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.
[15:30] <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?
[15:31]  * 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 ;)
[15:32]  * vorlon checks to see if this is still buggy in libpam
[15:33] <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.....
[15:34] <xnox> i can quickly pull all of the packages mentioned, to double check that they still ship init.d/ scripts or not.
[15:37] <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
[15:40] <xnox> vorlon:  please reject the current sync then.
[15:40] <vorlon> ack
[15:40] <xnox> (the bionic one only)
[15:41] <vorlon> done
[15:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected openssl [sync] (bionic-proposed) [1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.2]
[16:25] -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)
[16:26] <xnox> vorlon:  updated sru ^
[16:53] <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] <xnox> vorlon:  in the comments of the bug.
[16:54] <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)
[17:10] <xnox> vorlon:  updated will all step by step instructions from scratch. creates CA, creates CA key, creates cert request, spkac request, and signs it
[17:11] <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
[17:12] <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
[17:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openssl [sync] (bionic-proposed) [1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.2]
[17:14] <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)
[17:50] <vorlon> xnox: arm64/eoan yes
[17:59] <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?
[18:18] <cjwatson> Better get it in eoan than in F, IMO
[18:19] <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
[18:39] <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)
[18:47] <vorlon> cjwatson: fair point, if we're going to get a logjam it may be better to have it sooner
[19:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openssl [sync] (cosmic-proposed) [1.1.1-1ubuntu2.3]
[19:39] <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?
[19:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openssl [sync] (disco-proposed) [1.1.1b-1ubuntu2.2]
[20:54] <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?
[20:55] <juliank> I guess I'll do rebuilds in PPA first
[20:55] <juliank> but still
[20:56] <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
[20:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: scilab (disco-updates/universe) [6.0.2-0ubuntu1 => 6.0.2-0ubuntu2~19.04] (no packageset) (sync)
[20:59] <juliank> Oh I guess I'll just add an apt transition tracker for planned transitions to make sure I get a good overview?
[21:00] <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
[21:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: scilab (cosmic-updates/universe) [6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.10 => 6.0.1-7ubuntu1~18.10.1] (no packageset) (sync)
[21:06] <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)
[21:07] <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
[21:08] <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"?
[21:09] <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
[21:10] <juliank> but I'm not sure if it's whole words
[21:12] <juliank> with \b and shortened a bit, I have https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/nKGGS4Yyz8/
[21:13] <juliank> hmm, why do I have () in is_good, not necessary there
[21:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: scilab (disco-proposed/universe) [6.0.2-0ubuntu1 => 6.0.2-0ubuntu2~19.04] (no packageset) (sync)
[21:15] -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)
[21:22] <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
[21:23] <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 :)
[21:24] <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
[21:25]  * 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
[21:26] <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
[21:31] <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?
[21:54] <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?
[21:56] <tdaitx> s/uploaded/copied/
[23:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: utf8.h [amd64] (eoan-proposed/none) [0~git20190120.2a7c5bf-1] (no packageset)