[00:25] mwhudson: autopkgtest retries needed with all-proposed=1? [00:26] ah, no, the package is dep-wait [01:18] vorlon: yeah it's build-side [01:19] vorlon: i think someone must have uploaded things in a very careful order to debian while we weren't importing, or something like that [07:18] cyphermox, hey, did you get anywhere with ffmpeg/armhf? [07:32] what's wrong with my sbuilder.. it refuses to install libudev-dev/libsystemd-dev [07:33] eoan [07:33] proposed enabled or not doesn't matter [07:36] tjaalton, what's the error? [07:44] Depends: libsystemd-dev but it is not going to be installed [07:45] is libudev-dev gone? [07:46] libudev-dev : Depends: libudev1 (= 240-6ubuntu9) but 243~rc1-0ubuntu2 is to be installed [07:46] ah [07:47] proposed had that version for a while it seems [07:47] but no longer [07:47] 243~rc1 had been deleted from proposed because not ready [07:47] yeah [07:47] has* [07:52] had to downgrade libudev1, libsystemd0 that's all [08:42] Hi, what is a procedure to import pkg to Ubuntu bionic. This pkg exists in debian (https://packages.debian.org/search?searchon=sourcenames&keywords=networking-mlnx ) [10:19] lennyb: that depends. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates or https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBackports. I suggest you start with a PPA though. [10:20] lennyb: looks like it was removed from Bionic because of an incompatiblity with neutron [10:20] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/networking-mlnx/+publishinghistory [11:59] cpaelzer, hello, nspr sync? [12:02] I haven't looked at nspr for a while Locutusofborg [12:02] I'm trying a sync on my ppa... lets see [12:03] I'm not sure if the fix was about a build failure or something else... debian might have fixed it differently [12:03] yeah [12:03] I'm not 100% sure that "Set LD_LIBRARY_PATH when running tests. Closes: #925790" covers what we had to do [12:04] if it builds fine in your ppa then you should be good to go [12:04] at least it is the same debian bug that our delta was created for [12:05] and LD_LIBRARY_PATH should be cleaner than relying on --disable-new-dtags implicitly changing the rpaths [12:05] * cpaelzer would never have thought LD_LIBRARY_PATH could be the cleaner solution than anything else [12:10] LOL [12:10] that one was good! [12:15] and it works LOL [12:25] rbasak, thanks. We have some bug fixes that we would like to backport into Debian. how can I know on which debian version this failed pkg was based on? Are there any logs [12:27] lennyb: examine debian/changelog, and you might find my writeup at http://www.justgohome.co.uk/blog/2015/01/ubuntu-package-versions.html helpful === ricab is now known as ricab|lunch [14:10] Hi Locutusofborg, do you possibly have time to sponsor bug #1731459? Only upstream patch. Pre-verified via PPA. [14:10] bug 1731459 in sane-backends (Ubuntu Disco) "genesys_gl847 scanners produce a black band in scanned images on Ubuntu 17.10+, 18.04 LTS and 18.10 Cosmic cuttlefish" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1731459 === ricab|lunch is now known as ricab === cpaelzer__ is now known as cpaelzer [14:58] GunnarHj, ack [15:24] Locutusofborg: Thanks a lot! [17:02] vorlon: thanks for the suggestion on cloud-init use of debconfig-loadtemplate for ubuntu-drivers work. The only wrinkle here is that cloud-init doesn't currently have a dependency on debconf-utils package. I'd like to avoid adding that new strict package dependency if we can to avoid bloat (57K) on most cloud-init deployments which don't try to configure ubuntu-drivers. one option is for cloud-init to [17:02] install debconf-utils if we are already processing ubuntu-drivers in cloud-config. Are there any other alternatives you would suggest? [17:07] blackboxsw: oh, sorry, I overlooked that the command was in the non-default debconf-utils. You can also use the X_LOADTEMPLATE debconf protocol extension to load it without having to install other packages [17:08] ahh /me rtfms now thanks [17:08] so then you just have to talk the debconf protocol, no big deal :P [17:08] SMOP :) [17:15] vorlon: looks like we'll have db_x_loadtemplatefile in /usr/share/debconf/confmodule so that should be a big help as it's delivered by debconf proper [17:16] ok we can work with this [17:16] thanks again [17:16] blackboxsw: yeah, you're just then subjected to implementing in shell in order to use /usr/share/debconf/confmodule but otherwise ok :) [17:22] vorlon: or maybe I could push a patch back to python3-debconf to support x_loadtemplatefile as it seems like that would be a trivial upstream commit as it seems the only command not supported by the python library [17:22] maybe I'll try both routes, and cloud-init can adopt the python3-debconf library in the future [17:23] ah, given that python3-debconf is already in the server task (which I hadn't realized), that seems like the better approach IMHO [17:23] though we'd then have to SRU it back [17:24] yeah and we'd need to MIR in xenial : / [17:24] as it looks like it's only back to bionic [17:24] * blackboxsw checks state of /usr/share/debconf/confmodule in xenial too [17:25] db_x_loadtemplatefile exists in xenial /usr/share/debconf/confmodule [17:26] hrm, ok so need to weigh using subp shell to source db_x_loadtemplatefile /usr/share/debconf/confmodule vesus just installing debconf-utils if ubuntu-drivers cloud-config is specified [17:26] vs. rolling our own simple wire write of debconf cmds for X_LOADTEMPLATEFILE support [19:02] blackboxsw: there's no expectation that we'll have these drivers on xenial fwiw [22:30] Is there any way to change the make target that dh_auto_test will run, or should I just override it and run `make not_quite_test_but_so_close` myself? [22:31] (`make test` runs both Py2 and Py3 tests, I'm looking at dropping the python2 binary packages produced, so don't want to install the Python 2 build deps to make the tests run.) [22:54] https://sources.debian.org/src/debhelper/12.5.3/lib/Debian/Debhelper/Buildsystem/makefile.pm/#L167 [22:54] Doesn't look like it - not for the "make" buildsystem implementation [22:56] Assuming you're using the make buildsystem and not one of the Python ones [22:56] So overriding it seems like the appropriate mechanism to use [23:23] Locutusofborg: um how many rebuilds is this golang-google stuff going to take? :) [23:23] Locutusofborg: fwiw it seems the grpc failure is real