[03:32] <doko> mwhudson, vorlon: yes, already poked
[03:32] <doko> <sforshee> doko, apw: this is perf failing to build because it implemented its own gettid call, and in glibc 2.30 unistd.h also has a gettid declaration
[03:32] <doko> <sforshee> apw: so it's not a toolchain issue, you can hint that and we'll need to apply a fix to the kernel
[03:32] <doko> but no action yet ...
[03:58] <doko> zodb removal bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/zope.error/+bug/1842807
[03:58] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1842807 in zope.session (Ubuntu) "RM: zodb and rdeps" [Undecided,New]
[04:58] <doko> so the only one to investigate is the wcc autopkg test failure
[06:20] <vorlon> rbalint: marking unattended-upgrades/amd64 badtest, it's running a test dependent on snapshot.debian.org and getting 503s
[06:23] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, easy one please? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qtwebkit-source/+bug/1840190
[06:23] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1840190 in qtwebkit-source (Ubuntu) "Remove from eoan archive" [Undecided,New]
[06:23] <LocutusOfBorg> also, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/newsbeuter/+bug/1839465
[06:23] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1839465 in newsbeuter (Ubuntu) "newsbeutrer: remove from eoan (removed from unstable)" [Undecided,New]
[06:23] <LocutusOfBorg> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nlohmann-json/+bug/1838701
[06:23] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1838701 in nlohmann-json (Ubuntu) "nlohmann-json: remove from eoan" [Undecided,New]
[06:24] <LocutusOfBorg> actually only the first one is needed
[06:25] <LocutusOfBorg> qtwebkit-source is now a source-only package FWICS...
[06:25] <LocutusOfBorg> also this one, is it possible? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mopidy-scrobbler/+bug/1838275
[06:25] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1838275 in mopidy-scrobbler (Ubuntu) "mopidy-scrobbler: kick out from release" [Undecided,New]
[06:30] <LocutusOfBorg> so, just qtwebkit-source and mopidy-scrobbler seems still needed
[08:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [source] (eoan-proposed) [435.21-0ubuntu1]
[08:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [i386] (eoan-proposed/none) [435.21-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[08:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [amd64] (eoan-proposed/none) [435.21-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[08:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oem [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1052.61] (kernel)
[08:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oem [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1052.61]
[08:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [amd64] (eoan-proposed) [435.21-0ubuntu1]
[08:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [i386] (eoan-proposed) [435.21-0ubuntu1]
[08:58] <doko> sforshee, apw: ping again on the linux autopkg tests
[08:58] <apw> doko, i already hinted gcc-7
[08:58] <apw> doko, nothing else was only waiting on linux
[08:59] <doko> apw: glibc and gcc-9, and why should linux be the only blocker?
[08:59] <apw> doko, because i am not hinting our testing bad, i am hinting the testing to be ignored
[08:59] <doko> well, then please hint glibc
[09:00] <apw> it has another failure; which is not the kernle
[09:00] <doko> with this attitude you are delaying migration once anthing else is fixed
[09:00] <apw> doko, if i hinted my kernel package good it would not migrate
[09:00] <doko> and no, for gcc-9 linux was the only thing
[09:01] <doko> but anyway, now re-uploaded
[09:01] <apw> autopkgtest for wcc/0.0.2+dfsg-3ubuntu1: amd64: Regression ♻
[09:01] <apw> autopkgtest for zodb/1:3.10.7-1build1: amd64: Ignored failure, arm64: Regression ♻ , armhf: Regression ♻ , i386: Ignored failure, ppc64el: Ignored failure, s390x: Ignored failure
[09:01] <apw> both of those also are holding glibc, so hinting over those is not appropriate
[09:02] <doko> this is glibc, not gcc-9
[09:02] <apw> i think you had uploaded gcc-9 before i checked as i searched for all linux failures holding packages
[09:02] <apw> and for packages which had no other failurs i hinted them out, gcc-7 was hte only one
[09:02] <doko> not according to https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses_by_team.html
[09:03] <apw> that page indeed says the kernel is blocking glibc
[09:03] <apw> but i cannot hint all kernle testing as to be ignore in this context; that is too risky
[09:03] <doko> I only uploaded 9.2.1-7ubuntu1 this morning, so your comment seems to be wrong
[09:03] <apw> gcc is blocked by three thing
[09:03] <apw> i only checked this morning and hinted the ones which can go; so it is not wrong
[09:04] <apw> anyhow, glibc; i am happy to hint over the kenrel fialures; once the others are either good or hinted
[09:04] <apw> but as there are three i think it was other failures, it is not appropraite to hint glibc out (for me)
[09:05] <doko> well, then fix the linux package to pass the test instead
[09:05] <apw> my attitude it to not hint out a glibc with known issues as it is ever so slightly critical
[09:05] <tseliot> apw: hi, can you move nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 to restricted, please?
[09:05] <xnox> doko:  we do not have ability to have a hint for "ignore linux when triggered by glibc"
[09:05] <apw> and that will NOT make that package release
[09:05] <xnox> doko:  we only have "ignore linux everywhere" or "skip all testing triggered by glibc"
[09:05] <doko> apw: then FIX linux
[09:06] <apw> and it wont help, seth is fixing the kernel; it takes a day to build etc etc
[09:06] <apw> we have a lever, which is poor which i used on gcc-7
[09:06] <apw> because it WAS appropriate
[09:06] <apw> it is NOT appropriate to use that lever on glibc; it has _OTHER_ fialures that need fixing
[09:07] <apw> gcc-9 was missed and that is on me, but it was gone by the time i got to it; you can slam on me for the delay leading to that
[09:07] <apw> all you like
[09:12] <xnox> doko:  tracker & bugs look operational to me now, so i think the tls stuff is now fixed. Does it work for you now?
[09:14] <doko> yes
[10:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: systemd (bionic-proposed/main) [237-3ubuntu10.28 => 237-3ubuntu10.29] (core)
[10:46] <rbalint> sil2100, could you please release  LP: #1840909 today, one day early?
[10:46] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1840909 in ec2-hibinit-agent (Ubuntu Disco) "ec2-hibinit-agent-ignore-powerkey.conf prevents EC2 Nitro instances from stopping normally" [Undecided,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1840909
[11:01] <sil2100> rbalint: looking
[11:12] <sil2100> rbalint: done o/
[11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted apt [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.6.12]
[12:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ceph [source] (disco-proposed) [13.2.6-0ubuntu0.19.04.4]
[12:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ceph [source] (bionic-proposed) [12.2.12-0ubuntu0.18.04.3]
[13:04] <rbalint> sil2100, thanks!
[13:13] <doko> apw: please override the linux autopkg test failure triggered by binutils (after verifying that it's unrelated to binutils)
[14:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-62.69] (core, kernel)
[14:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-62.69] (core, kernel)
[14:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-62.69]
[14:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-62.69]
[16:31] <RikMills> vorlon: after all this time I am still unsure. can I sync a new source package (elisa music player) that has just been accepted by debian ftp masters without a FFE?
[16:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-github [amd64] (eoan-proposed/universe) [0.20-1build2] (no packageset)
[16:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-github [i386] (eoan-proposed/universe) [0.20-1build2] (no packageset)
[16:36] <vorlon> RikMills: you can but you need to convince an AA to process it
[16:37] <RikMills> vorlon: ok. thanks. I think it is worth trying
[16:39] <RikMills> I don't intend to seed it for this release
[16:41] <ginggs> vorlon: I created a MR adding mkl-dnn to big_packages; tests pass for me locally
[16:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-github [ppc64el] (eoan-proposed/universe) [0.20-1build2] (no packageset)
[16:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-github [s390x] (eoan-proposed/universe) [0.20-1build2] (no packageset)
[16:51] <doko> sforshee, apw: is there a ppa with linux 5.3 which I could use for the test rebuild? really only interested in linux-libc-dev
[16:55] <doko> vorlon: it looks like there is one link-grammar override missing, triggered by python3.7
[17:19] <vorlon> apw: I have badtest'ed linux/5.2.0-15.16; if we have agreed that it's acceptable for the autopkgtest for this version of the package to be allowed to regress in the release pocket due to glibc header changes, then other packages should not be caught in the crossfire when they also trigger the test and it fails
[17:19] <vorlon> doko: I had only overridden armhf and i386, those were where I saw it failing before.  have you confirmed that it now fails on all archs in release pocket?
[17:20] <vorlon> doko: it actually looks like a retry of those tests should pass with link-grammar 5.6.2-1ubuntu1 now in release pocket, or else there is a separate regression that needs analyzed
[17:22] <vorlon> ginggs: link to MR, please?
[17:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-github [arm64] (eoan-proposed/universe) [0.20-1build2] (no packageset)
[17:37] <ginggs> vorlon: https://code.launchpad.net/~ginggs/autopkgtest-cloud/+git/autopkgtest-cloud/+merge/372338
[18:03] <doko> vorlon: gave back link-grammar tests
[18:04] <vorlon> doko: so did I; but there's also a queue right now :/
[18:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-github [armhf] (eoan-proposed/universe) [0.20-1build2] (no packageset)
[18:04] <doko> vorlon: can you skip the autopkg tests triggered by gcc-9, or do you want to wait?
[18:05] <vorlon> I don't understand how all the packages triggering autopkgtests have all been uploaded just today when the queue was empty all week until now
[18:05] <vorlon> doko: I'd like at least some test results in order to smoke test the gcc-9 upload
[18:06] <doko> ok
[18:43] <sforshee> doko: canonical-kernel-team/bootstrap has a 5.3 build
[19:23] <doko> vorlon, Laney: which ben version are we running for the transition tracker?
[19:23] <doko> sforshee: ta
[19:24] <vorlon> doko: ENOCLUE
[19:30] <infinity> doko: Looks like it's still the trusty version.
[19:30] <infinity> There was work done to move to bionic, but seems it quit halfway.
[19:30] <ginggs> i think our ben is at least older than 0.8.1, because it misses the fix for debian #900627
[19:30] <ubot5> Debian bug 900627 in src:ben "ben: please show [build logs] link for arch:all packages as well" [Wishlist,Fixed] http://bugs.debian.org/900627
[19:30] <infinity> ginggs: It's a lot older.  See above.
[19:30] <doko> infinity: would be nice if we could priotize that
[19:31] <ginggs> infinity: thanks
[19:31] <infinity> We should probably run it from a VCS checkout instead of a package, if the tool is actively being worked on.
[19:31] <infinity> (And if that work matters to us)
[19:32] <doko> yes, it does, because the version we are using, doesn't match against Build-depends-indep
[19:32] <infinity> Or if it's regularly updated in sid, we could pin the sid version, since it doesn't have any compiled code, IIRC.
[19:33] <infinity> doko: Fair enough.  I'll see if Laney has anything to add to this, since it's been mostly his domain, and we'll figure out how to get something newer.
[19:33] <doko> it's not urgent, but I see deficiencies with the py2-removal tracker.
[19:33] <doko> we can discuss this at the sprint
[19:35] <vorlon> infinity: "from a vcs checkout" means getting to build ocaml binaries from source, I think?
[19:35] <vorlon> well, you say no compiled code; I didn't think that was true
=== msalvatore_ is now known as msalvatore
[19:45] <coreycb> vorlon: I'd like to see if we can remove python-django 2:2.2.4-1 from eoan-proposed. I just took a scan through the openstack horizon patches for 2.2.4 support and they look to be backward compatible. I don't think they're going to merge this cycle anyway but I checked in case they do.
[19:46] <vorlon> infinity, cjwatson: I'm struggling to figure out why archive-reports is not regenerating the component-mismatches reports; could we revisit the fact that the script more or less suppresses all output, making it impossible to figure out what wrong in previous runs?
[19:48] <vorlon> coreycb: and you've determined that's necessary, rather than just disabling build-time tests that require django?
[19:50] <coreycb> vorlon: that's right we discussed that..  if we went that route would there be a chance of a horizon that doesn't support 2.2.4 + django 2.2.4 both landing in eoan-release?
[19:51] <vorlon> coreycb: you should not disable testing of django in the autopkgtests; those will gate python-django 2.2.4 as long as they fail
[19:51] <vorlon> coreycb: but also the python-django revdeps are a mess right now wrt compatibility, see https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#python-django
[19:51] <vorlon> oh actually
[19:52] <vorlon> the horizon autopkgtests *pass* with the new django
[19:52] <vorlon> so that doesn't help you ;P
[19:52] <vorlon> but I'm pretty confident in saying that's not landing for 19.10
[19:52] <vorlon> we could add a block-proposed bug to be sure
[19:53] <coreycb> vorlon: ok, that may be the way to go then. disable any tests that fail for 2.2.4 and open a block-proposed bug.
[19:54] <vorlon> coreycb: LP: #1842969
[19:54] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1842969 in python-django (Ubuntu) "python-django 2.2.4 not for eoan" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1842969
[19:55] <coreycb> vorlon: ah, thanks for opening that
[19:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nplan (xenial-proposed/universe) [0.32~16.04.6 => 0.32~16.04.7] (no packageset)
[21:12] <cjwatson> vorlon: I have no opinion on that
[21:12] <infinity> The number one reason reports don't run is because the archive didn't actually change.  I've changed both release and proposed, let's see if it magically runs. :P
[21:12] <cjwatson> vorlon: I thought it went to stderr and hence to snakefruit:/var/mail/ubuntu-archive though
[21:13] <infinity> But we could certainly have some logging (other than stderr to cron to mailbox) to checkpoint some of the report actions, etc.
[21:14] <cjwatson> There was some problem with ben in bionic.  I think I described it on IRC maybe?
[21:14] <vorlon> infinity: the archive absolutely did change, per the synced germinate.output timestamp that's being checked
[21:15] <infinity> Kay.
[21:15] <cjwatson> https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2019/02/20/%23ubuntu-release.html and https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2019/02/21/%23ubuntu-release.html#t11:19
[21:15] <cjwatson> AFAIK nobody ever followed up on that
[21:15] <cjwatson> I suggest following up on that if you want it fixed
[21:16] <infinity> cjwatson: Ah-ha.
[21:16] <cjwatson> doko: ^-
[21:16] <cjwatson> If whatever the problem is is fixed in sid, then we should identify the fix and SRU it into bionic
[21:17] <cjwatson> It would be a lot less annoying than having to build the thing from source in a chroot on snakefruit
[21:18] <LocutusOfBorg> anybody please accept haskell-github thanks
[21:22] <infinity> I don't see any interesting output in the mail from component-mismatches, so if it's entirely silent, that's on that script.
[21:22] <infinity> Assuming it's being run at all.
[21:30] <vorlon> doko: binutils failing its autopkgtests against gcc-9
[21:30] <vorlon> doko: I am not keen to ignore these failures
[22:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-gke-4.15 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1042.44] (no packageset)
[22:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-gcp [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1042.44] (kernel)