[01:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: joblib (focal-proposed/universe) [0.13.0-2 => 0.14.0-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[01:11] <mwhudson> vorlon (or any other aa): can you look at my subvertpy and joblib uploads?
[01:12] <mwhudson> the latter more critically as it's blocking builds of other things
[02:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libgetdata (focal-proposed/universe) [0.10.0-6build1 => 0.10.0-6build2] (no packageset)
[02:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: numpy-stl (focal-proposed/universe) [2.9.0-1build1 => 2.9.0-1build2] (no packageset)
[02:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libguestfs (focal-proposed/universe) [1:1.40.2-2ubuntu7 => 1:1.40.2-2ubuntu8] (no packageset)
[02:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: hidapi-cffi (focal-proposed/universe) [0.2.2-1build1 => 0.2.2-1build2] (no packageset)
[05:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted joblib [source] (focal-proposed) [0.14.0-0ubuntu1]
[05:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-automaton (focal-proposed/main) [1.14.0-0ubuntu2 => 1.16.0-2] (ubuntu-server) (sync)
[05:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted subvertpy [source] (focal-proposed) [0.10.1-2ubuntu2]
[05:31] <infinity> mwhudson: What makes you think your hidapi-cffi rebuild will be any different than the previous?
[05:32] <infinity> mwhudson: Actually, looking at what the build produces, seems that both rebuilds weren't needed?  I don't see any py3 versioned deps or versioned modules.
[05:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected hidapi-cffi [source] (focal-proposed) [0.2.2-1build2]
[05:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libguestfs [source] (focal-proposed) [1:1.40.2-2ubuntu8]
[05:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libgetdata [source] (focal-proposed) [0.10.0-6build2]
[05:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted numpy-stl [source] (focal-proposed) [2.9.0-1build2]
[05:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sg3-utils (disco-proposed/main) [1.42-2ubuntu1 => 1.42-2ubuntu1.19.04.1] (core)
[07:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libdrm (bionic-proposed/main) [2.4.97-1ubuntu1~18.04.1 => 2.4.99-1ubuntu1~18.04.1] (core, xorg)
[07:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (disco-proposed) [5.0.0-1024.25]
[07:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (disco-proposed) [5.0.0-1006.10]
[07:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1028.31]
[07:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.15.0-1028.31~16.04.1]
[07:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: llvm-toolchain-9 (bionic-proposed/primary) [1:9-2~ubuntu18.04.1]
[07:41] <mitya57> Hi! When is it planned to start auto-syncs from Debian?
[07:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libdrm [source] (bionic-proposed) [2.4.97-1ubuntu1~18.04.2]
[07:43] <mitya57> I wonder if I will manage to bootstrap Qt 5.12.5 in a PPA before that.
[08:32] <LocutusOfBorg> mitya57, considering how far migration is, I guess a day or two is still needed to finish rebuilds...
[08:32] <LocutusOfBorg> I don't know if they plan to land perl or it is "good enough" to open syncs
[08:45] <mwhudson> infinity: uh i don't remember, one of them had some check that only built 3.8 extensions if numpy was built or something
[08:45] <mitya57> LocutusOfBorg: ok, two days is enough for me to bootstrap Qt, but the Qt transition itself will happen after the archive is open.
[08:47] <LocutusOfBorg> mitya57, but I'm not RT, so my answer might be not good
[08:47] <mitya57> Ack
[08:47] <LocutusOfBorg> we still have lots of arm64 tests to run, and a few failures that looks bad enough for perl to migrate
[08:47] <LocutusOfBorg> I hope some more days will be used
[09:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xserver-xorg-video-amdgpu (focal-proposed/main) [19.0.1-1ubuntu1 => 19.1.0-1] (desktop-core) (sync)
[09:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xserver-xorg-video-ati (focal-proposed/main) [1:19.0.1-1ubuntu1 => 1:19.1.0-1] (desktop-core, xorg) (sync)
[09:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-greenlet (focal-proposed/main) [0.4.15-2ubuntu1 => 0.4.15-2ubuntu2] (ubuntu-server)
[09:48] <LocutusOfBorg> doko, ^^ this fixes python-gevent builds
[09:48] <LocutusOfBorg> debian bug report updated with fixed patch
[09:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libdata-stag-perl (focal-proposed/universe) [0.14-2 => 0.14-2ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[09:58] <LocutusOfBorg> ^^ debian bug opened [11:57:12] <BTS> Opened #943319 in src:libdata-stag-perl 0.14-2 by Gianfranco Costamagna (locutusofborg) «libdata-stag-perl: please recommend libxml-libxml-perl». https://bugs.debian.org/943319
[09:58] <ubot5> Debian bug 943319 in src:libdata-stag-perl "libdata-stag-perl: please recommend libxml-libxml-perl" [Normal,Open]
[10:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xorg-server (bionic-proposed/main) [2:1.19.6-1ubuntu4.3 => 2:1.19.6-1ubuntu4.4] (desktop-core, xorg)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-greenlet [source] (focal-proposed) [0.4.15-2ubuntu2]
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pygac (focal-proposed/universe) [1.1.0-3 => 1.1.0-3build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pyregion (focal-proposed/universe) [2.0-9 => 2.0-9build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pyscanfcs (focal-proposed/universe) [0.3.2+ds-2 => 0.3.2+ds-2build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-cpl (focal-proposed/universe) [0.7.4-2 => 0.7.4-2build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: silx (focal-proposed/universe) [0.11.0+dfsg-1 => 0.11.0+dfsg-1build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: specutils (focal-proposed/universe) [0.5.2-1ubuntu1 => 0.5.2-1ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: uvloop (focal-proposed/main) [0.11.3+ds1-2 => 0.11.3+ds1-2build1] (ubuntu-server)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: photutils (focal-proposed/universe) [0.7-1 => 0.7-1build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pyresample (focal-proposed/universe) [1.12.3-5 => 1.12.3-5build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-drizzle (focal-proposed/universe) [1.13.1-2 => 1.13.1-2build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sunpy (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.3-2 => 1.0.3-2build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pyraf (focal-proposed/universe) [2.1.15-2 => 2.1.15-2build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: slixmpp (focal-proposed/universe) [1.4.2-1 => 1.4.2-1build1] (no packageset)
[10:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pysynphot (focal-proposed/universe) [0.9.13+dfsg-1 => 0.9.13+dfsg-1build1] (no packageset)
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted photutils [source] (focal-proposed) [0.7-1build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pyraf [source] (focal-proposed) [2.1.15-2build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pyresample [source] (focal-proposed) [1.12.3-5build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pysynphot [source] (focal-proposed) [0.9.13+dfsg-1build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-drizzle [source] (focal-proposed) [1.13.1-2build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted slixmpp [source] (focal-proposed) [1.4.2-1build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted sunpy [source] (focal-proposed) [1.0.3-2build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cron (focal-proposed/main) [3.0pl1-134ubuntu1 => 3.0pl1-135ubuntu1] (core)
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kmod (focal-proposed/main) [26-1ubuntu1 => 26-3ubuntu1] (core)
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pspp (focal-proposed/universe) [1.2.0-2ubuntu2 => 1.2.0-3ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pygac [source] (focal-proposed) [1.1.0-3build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pyscanfcs [source] (focal-proposed) [0.3.2+ds-2build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted silx [source] (focal-proposed) [0.11.0+dfsg-1build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted uvloop [source] (focal-proposed) [0.11.3+ds1-2build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: polkit-qt-1 (focal-proposed/universe) [0.112.0-6 => 0.112.0-7.1] (kubuntu) (sync)
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pyregion [source] (focal-proposed) [2.0-9build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted specutils [source] (focal-proposed) [0.5.2-1ubuntu2]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-monasca-statsd (focal-proposed/universe) [1.10.1-0ubuntu2 => 1.11.0-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-cpl [source] (focal-proposed) [0.7.4-2build1]
[10:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: csync2 (focal-proposed/universe) [2.0-8-g175a01c-4ubuntu2 => 2.0-22-gce67c55-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[10:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libdrm [source] (bionic-proposed) [2.4.99-1ubuntu1~18.04.1]
[10:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libdrm (bionic-proposed/main) [2.4.97-1ubuntu1~18.04.1 => 2.4.97-1ubuntu1~18.04.2] (core, xorg)
[10:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-gcp [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1048.51] (kernel)
[10:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-gcp [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.15.0-1048.51]
[10:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fpylll (focal-proposed/universe) [0.4.1+ds1-5build1 => 0.4.1+ds1-5ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[10:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zbar (focal-proposed/universe) [0.23-1.1build1 => 0.23-1.2] (kubuntu) (sync)
[10:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted apport [source] (focal-proposed) [2.20.11-0ubuntu9]
[10:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted zbar [sync] (focal-proposed) [0.23-1.2]
[10:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fpylll [source] (focal-proposed) [0.4.1+ds1-5ubuntu1]
[11:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mutter (eoan-proposed/main) [3.34.1-1ubuntu1 => 3.34.1+git20191022-1ubuntu1] (desktop-core, desktop-extra)
[11:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe-edge [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.3.0-19.20~18.04.2] (kernel)
[11:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe-edge [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.3.0-19.20~18.04.2] (kernel)
[11:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe-edge [arm64] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.3.0-19.20~18.04.2] (kernel)
[11:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-hwe-edge [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [5.3.0-19.20~18.04.2]
[11:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-hwe-edge [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed) [5.3.0-19.20~18.04.2]
[11:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-hwe-edge [arm64] (bionic-proposed) [5.3.0-19.20~18.04.2]
[11:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: astropy (focal-proposed/universe) [3.2.1-1build1 => 3.2.2-1] (kubuntu) (sync)
[11:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted astropy [sync] (focal-proposed) [3.2.2-1]
[12:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: astropy (focal-proposed/universe) [3.2.2-1 => 3.2.2-1build1] (kubuntu)
[12:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected astropy [source] (focal-proposed) [3.2.2-1build1]
[12:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: astropy (focal-proposed/universe) [3.2.2-1 => 3.2.2-1ubuntu1] (kubuntu)
[12:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: amp (focal-proposed/universe) [0.6.1-1 => 0.6.1-1build1] (no packageset)
[12:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: dolfin (focal-proposed/universe) [2019.1.0-4 => 2019.1.0-4build1] (no packageset)
[12:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-aiohttp (focal-proposed/universe) [3.5.4-1 => 3.5.4-1build1] (no packageset)
[12:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: bitshuffle (focal-proposed/universe) [0.3.5-1 => 0.3.5-1build1] (no packageset)
[12:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-biom-format (focal-proposed/universe) [2.1.7+dfsg-3ubuntu2 => 2.1.7+dfsg-3ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[12:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pysmbc (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.15.6-2 => 1.0.15.6-2build1] (no packageset)
[12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-cartopy (focal-proposed/universe) [0.17.0+dfsg-6 => 0.17.0+dfsg-6build1] (no packageset)
[12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-geotiepoints (focal-proposed/universe) [1.1.8-1 => 1.1.8-1build1] (no packageset)
[12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-skbio (focal-proposed/universe) [0.5.5-2 => 0.5.5-2build1] (no packageset)
[12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: yt (focal-proposed/universe) [3.5.0-1 => 3.5.0-1build1] (no packageset)
[12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-fabio (focal-proposed/universe) [0.9.0+dfsg-1 => 0.9.0+dfsg-1build1] (no packageset)
[12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-thinc (focal-proposed/universe) [6.12.1-1 => 6.12.1-1build1] (no packageset)
[12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-pdal (focal-proposed/universe) [2.1.8+ds-2 => 2.1.8+ds-2build1] (no packageset)
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted amp [source] (focal-proposed) [0.6.1-1build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted bitshuffle [source] (focal-proposed) [0.3.5-1build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libdata-stag-perl [source] (focal-proposed) [0.14-2ubuntu1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-aiohttp [source] (focal-proposed) [3.5.4-1build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-cartopy [source] (focal-proposed) [0.17.0+dfsg-6build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-geotiepoints [source] (focal-proposed) [1.1.8-1build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-skbio [source] (focal-proposed) [0.5.5-2build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted yt [source] (focal-proposed) [3.5.0-1build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted astropy [source] (focal-proposed) [3.2.2-1ubuntu1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pysmbc [source] (focal-proposed) [1.0.15.6-2build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-fabio [source] (focal-proposed) [0.9.0+dfsg-1build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-thinc [source] (focal-proposed) [6.12.1-1build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dolfin [source] (focal-proposed) [2019.1.0-4build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-pdal [source] (focal-proposed) [2.1.8+ds-2build1]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-biom-format [source] (focal-proposed) [2.1.7+dfsg-3ubuntu3]
[12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-graphics-drivers-430 (focal-proposed/restricted) [430.50-0ubuntu2 => 430.50-0ubuntu3] (ubuntu-desktop)
[12:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-graphics-drivers-430 (bionic-proposed/restricted) [430.50-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 => 430.50-0ubuntu0.18.04.2] (no packageset)
[13:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 (focal-proposed/restricted) [435.21-0ubuntu2 => 435.21-0ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[13:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 (bionic-proposed/primary) [435.21-0ubuntu0.18.04.2]
[13:12] <cascardo> rbasak: could you look/approve at makedumpfile at the SRU queues for disco and bionic, please?
[13:14] <rbasak> cascardo: you'll be first on the list, but I'm not planning on starting my SRU shift for another hour or two
[13:15] <cascardo> rbasak: that works fine, thanks a lot!
[13:30] <ahasenack> it looks like the test results in the excuses page isn't updating
[13:30] <ahasenack> for example, https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#libfcgi-perl
[13:30] <ahasenack> the apache2 arm64 regression is from 4 days ago
[13:31] <ahasenack> https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-focal/focal/arm64/a/apache2/20191019_003018_b9db3@/log.gz
[13:31] <ahasenack> and http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/a/apache2/focal/arm64 shows green runs
[13:31] <ahasenack> Laney: related to a cron job you uncommented the other day?
[13:48] <apw> rbasak, i am already looking at the makedumpfile ones
[13:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted makedumpfile [source] (disco-proposed) [1:1.6.5-1ubuntu1.3]
[14:00] <rbasak> Thanks!
[14:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted makedumpfile [source] (bionic-proposed) [1:1.6.5-1ubuntu1~18.04.3]
[14:17] <Laney> ahasenack: no, not related. I don't see any passes with that trigger.
[14:17] <ahasenack> hm
[14:18] <ahasenack> Laney: I clicked on the retry button, that is green, but the test result link in the excuses page still points at the result from the 19th
[14:18] <Laney> sorry, what is green?
[14:18] <ahasenack> maybe I clicked retry on the perl one, actually
[14:19] <ahasenack> Laney: yeah, it was perl, sorry, that is green now, and result is up-to-date
[14:19] <Laney> other people like v_orlon and LocutusOfBor_g have been doing retries for perl things as well
[14:19] <Laney> you might all want to coordinate together to avoid duplicating things
[14:20] <ahasenack> apache2 is in our list (server)
[14:20] <ahasenack> https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses_by_team.html#ubuntu-server
[14:20] <Laney> sure
[14:20] <ahasenack> but I can hold off, specially since the archive is still closed, and I'm not sure what is going on
[14:20] <Laney> but if it's part of another migration then it makes sense to handle it with the folks coordinating that IMO
[14:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (eoan-proposed/partner) [1:20190910.1-0ubuntu1 => 1:20191009.1-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[14:27] <vorlon> Laney: does this error look familiar to you?  I don't see any reason it would fail to find libparams-classify-perl http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/b/bioperl/focal/s390x
[14:36] <Laney> vorlon: It seems like an unfortunate error when the same source package is specified twice
[14:37] <Laney> laney@nightingale> apt-cache showsrc glibc glibc >/dev/null                                                                                                                                                                       ~
[14:37] <Laney> W: Unable to locate package glibc
[14:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pasaffe (focal-proposed/universe) [0.51-0ubuntu1 => 0.54-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[14:43] <vorlon> Laney: oh did I specify it twice? ok :)
[14:43] <vorlon> fixed, thanks
[14:43] <vorlon> (i.e. retriggered)
[14:44] <Laney> well, yes, but it's still a weird failure mode
[14:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [source] (bionic-proposed) [435.21-0ubuntu0.18.04.1]
[14:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [i386] (bionic-proposed/multiverse) [435.21-0ubuntu0.18.04.1] (no packageset)
[14:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/multiverse) [435.21-0ubuntu0.18.04.1] (no packageset)
[14:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [435.21-0ubuntu0.18.04.1]
[14:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [i386] (bionic-proposed) [435.21-0ubuntu0.18.04.1]
[15:28] <doko> Laney, vorlon: update_excuses shows "Test in progress (always failed)" for many packages, even for archs with empty queues
[15:31] <LocutusOfBorg> doko, it might be because of somebody rebooting the service when lots of tests were in the queue...
[15:32] <Laney> no
[15:32] <LocutusOfBorg> I retried already lots of "test running" that weren't running, but not for arm64, because queue is still ongoing
[15:32] <Laney> give an example?
[15:32] <LocutusOfBorg> there was a lot of test in progress on s390x for example
[15:32] <LocutusOfBorg> let me find two examples
[15:32] <doko> Laney: the ones triggered by numpy
[15:32] <Laney> restarting that machine I did does not cause tests to get lost
[15:34] <Laney> it'll be much easier to wait for the queue to finish
[15:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: astropy-healpix (focal-proposed/universe) [0.4-6 => 0.4-6build1] (no packageset)
[15:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pyfai (focal-proposed/universe) [0.18.0+dfsg1-3 => 0.18.0+dfsg1-3build1] (no packageset)
[15:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: poezio (focal-proposed/universe) [0.12.1-3 => 0.12.1-3build1] (no packageset)
[15:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pymca (focal-proposed/universe) [5.5.1+dfsg-2 => 5.5.1+dfsg-2build1] (no packageset)
[15:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-430 [source] (bionic-proposed) [430.50-0ubuntu0.18.04.2]
[15:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted poezio [source] (focal-proposed) [0.12.1-3build1]
[15:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pymca [source] (focal-proposed) [5.5.1+dfsg-2build1]
[15:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted astropy-healpix [source] (focal-proposed) [0.4-6build1]
[15:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pyfai [source] (focal-proposed) [0.18.0+dfsg1-3build1]
[15:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-435 [source] (bionic-proposed) [435.21-0ubuntu0.18.04.2]
[15:38] <tjaalton> tseliot: ^ both done
[15:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: reprozip (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.14-2build1 => 1.0.16-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[15:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted reprozip [source] (focal-proposed) [1.0.16-0ubuntu1]
[15:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-guest-additions-iso (bionic-proposed/multiverse) [5.2.32-1~ubuntu18.04.1 => 5.2.34-1~ubuntu18.04.1] (no packageset)
[15:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox (bionic-proposed/multiverse) [5.2.32-dfsg-0~ubuntu18.04.1 => 5.2.34-dfsg-0~ubuntu18.04.1] (ubuntu-cloud)
[15:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-hwe (bionic-proposed/multiverse) [5.2.32-dfsg-0~ubuntu18.04.1 => 5.2.34-dfsg-0~ubuntu18.04.1] (no packageset)
[15:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-ext-pack (bionic-proposed/multiverse) [5.2.32-1~ubuntu18.04.2 => 5.2.34-1~ubuntu18.04.1] (no packageset)
[15:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: usagestats (focal-proposed/universe) [0.7-5 => 0.8-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[16:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted usagestats [sync] (focal-proposed) [0.8-1]
[16:00] <LocutusOfBorg> I still don't get why kernel updates that breaks kernel modules aren't caught before publishing the kernel...
[16:00] <LocutusOfBorg> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/virtualbox-hwe/+bug/1847662
[16:00] <ubot5> Ubuntu bug 1847662 in virtualbox-hwe (Ubuntu Bionic) "virtualbox-dkms fails to build with 18.04-hwe-edge kernel 5.3.0-12 [error: void value not ignored as it ought to be, from smp_call_function]" [Undecided,In progress]
[16:01] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, apw ^^ you discussed about a test matrix a while ago, but nobody is looking at it before releasing a kernel?
[16:01] <LocutusOfBorg> this one https://people.canonical.com/~kernel/status/adt-matrix/bionic-linux-meta-hwe.html
[16:01] <LocutusOfBorg> virtualbox-hwe and virtualbox are both shown as regressions...4
[16:02] <vorlon> I do not look at any test matrices before releasing.  I release kernels based on the tracking bugs having been marked as ready for release; it's the kernel team's responsibility to verify the results of testing before doing so
[16:02] <LocutusOfBorg> sil2100, ^^ if you could quickly have a look at the vbox for bionic, it should fix the dkms sadness
[16:02] <LocutusOfBorg> I'm trying to understand if we have a process flaw somewhere, not blaming people to be clear :)
[16:03] <LocutusOfBorg> getting some sort of automated bug report might help avoiding lots of troubles... I already get for devel series, just I don't get them for stable...
[16:04] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, -edges have a laxer check; is that one in -updates ?
[16:04] <LocutusOfBorg> yep
[16:04] <LocutusOfBorg> "virtualbox-dkms fails to build with 18.04-hwe-edge kernel 5.3.0-12
[16:04] <LocutusOfBorg> so, like "if you use edge, your responsibility to fix bugs"?
[16:04] <apw> vorlon, that data in theory is taken into a account before we remove the block-proposed tags for those kernels; so you should not get asked to copy things which have not passed adt etc
[16:04] <LocutusOfBorg> seems legit, to be honest I receive less bugs when hwe-edge breaks dkms
[16:07] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, we want people to be able to test the bits of -edge which work while we work on the issues
[16:07] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, in principle dksm failures are a clear blocker for rolling foo -> foo-edge version
[16:07] <LocutusOfBorg> I don't get... kernel 5.3 is in hwe edge since 4 hours, but my bug report is open since 13 days
[16:08] <LocutusOfBorg> so maybe that bug report is not from an user but a kernel developer?
[16:08] <LocutusOfBorg> in any case, please release the kernel together with vbox 5.2.34 so end user won't complain too much
[16:09] <xnox> apw:  hm, it's hinted as good even though it isn't? can you explain what "hinted good" means?
[16:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: reprozip (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.16-0ubuntu1 => 1.0.16-0ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[16:10] <apw> xnox, hinted good would mean someone looked at the logs and determined that it was a false negative (normally)
[16:11] <xnox> right
[16:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: astropy-regions (focal-proposed/universe) [0.4-1 => 0.4-1build1] (no packageset)
[16:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: reproject (focal-proposed/universe) [0.5-1 => 0.5-1build1] (no packageset)
[16:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gammapy (focal-proposed/universe) [0.13-1 => 0.13-1build1] (no packageset)
[16:11] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  it sounds that virtualbox-dkms needs to be fixed to be sensible and innert if the kernel one installs it against has newer module anyway.
[16:11] <xnox> Error! Module version 5.2.32_Ubuntu for vboxguest.ko
[16:11] <xnox> is not newer than what is already found in kernel 5.0.0-32-generic (6.0.6_KernelUbuntu).
[16:12] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  thus it shouldn't fail to configure, and well, just be dead weight.
[16:12] <xnox> or like maybe kernel should autogenerate Breaks: virtualbox-dkms (<< version.shipped.in.this.kernel)
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted astropy-regions [source] (focal-proposed) [0.4-1build1]
[16:12] <xnox> such that if one installs hwe kernel, virtualbox-dkms is autoremoved.
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted reproject [source] (focal-proposed) [0.5-1build1]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cdo (focal-proposed/universe) [1.9.7.1-4 => 1.9.8~rc2-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-microversion-parse (focal-proposed/main) [0.2.1-0ubuntu2 => 0.2.1-3] (ubuntu-server) (sync)
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gammapy [source] (focal-proposed) [0.13-1build1]
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-automaton (focal-proposed/main) [1.14.0-0ubuntu2 => 1.16.0-2] (ubuntu-server) (sync)
[16:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted reprozip [source] (focal-proposed) [1.0.16-0ubuntu2]
[16:13] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  apw: am I wrong about above suggestions?
[16:15] <infinity> xnox: virtualbox-dkms ships more modules than just the ones included in the kernel.
[16:16] <xnox> infinity:  ah, but postinst borgs up on the first one which is younger than kernel one?!
[16:16] <infinity> xnox: But it's true that there's no sane way right now to express relationships between virtualbox-dkms, virtualbox-dkms-hwe, and linux, linux-hwe.
[16:16] <xnox> sounds akward
[16:16] <xnox> (cause i assume the extra modules, need to be matching the other ones)
[16:16]  * xnox slowly backs away
[16:16] <infinity> They don't.  But you want vbox-dkms-hwe or it probably won't build. :P
[16:17] <infinity> I think the more correct answer would be to bundle vbox-dkms and vbox-dkms-hwe in the same vbox-dkms package, with the dkms config file pointing at different code per kernel version.
[16:17] <infinity> Which is entirely doable.
[16:18] <infinity> Cause trying to express those relationships at the dpkg level in a way that would make apt do sensible things is Very Hard.
[16:19] <infinity> Wouldn't be hard if we only had one kernel flavour, maybe, but...
[16:19] <infinity> That ship's not only sailed, it's on its way to Mars.
[16:26] <apw> xnox, i cann
[16:26] <infinity> Or, if vendoring all of the source of one version into another is too icky, they could depend on each other, and each dkms.conf could be version-constrained, so you get old modules on old kernels and new on new.
[16:26] <infinity> That might be better.
[16:26]  * apw likes the apparent simplicity of the latter
[16:29] <infinity> I have vbox-dkms installed here specifically to watch for dkms-ish breakage, but I don't run LTSes with multiple kernel tracks, so I don't see this pain first-hand.
[16:32] <LocutusOfBorg> shouldn't dkms just ignore kernel modules that are already builtin and provide only what is missing?
[16:32] <LocutusOfBorg> isn't this an easier solution to the problem?
[16:38] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Well, you still want to match hwe to hwe and ga to ga, no?
[16:38] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Since you go out of your way to provide an hwe package that builds with hwe kernels.
[16:40] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, I don't think they need to match anymore
[16:40] <LocutusOfBorg> there have been host/guest breaking changes in the past, but solved since version 5.1 IIRC
[16:40] <LocutusOfBorg> so, you can use the kernel module, or the vbox dkms one, as you wish, for host and guest
[16:40] <LocutusOfBorg> all the combinations should be fine now
[16:41] <LocutusOfBorg> this is why I say, we might build only host guest-dkms modules that are not in the kernel yet
[16:41] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: I'm not talking about combinations of vbox and modules, I'm talking about combinations of vbox-dkms and the kernel it's built for.  Do you make sure non-dkms vbox builds okay for hwe kernels?
[16:42] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, I usually don't install virtualbox-guest-dkms on my VM machines
[16:42] <infinity> Err, non-hwe dkms.
[16:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted adobe-flashplugin [source] (eoan-proposed) [1:20191009.1-0ubuntu1]
[16:42] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, you mean vbox-guest-dkms wrt vbox-guest-dkms-hwe
[16:42] <LocutusOfBorg> ?
[16:42] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: This was virtualbox-dkms, not guest-dkms.
[16:43] <infinity> Or xnox misspoke.
[16:43] <infinity> Which is possible.
[16:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-advantage-tools (trusty-proposed/main) [10ubuntu0.14.04.4 => 19.6~ubuntu14.04.1] (no packageset)
[16:44] <LocutusOfBorg> can you please rephrase your question? I didn't really get it
[16:44] <infinity> So maybe my arguments are all about vbox-dkms, but the vbox-guest-dkms case is indeed that we should just skip stuff that's builtin and newer.
[16:44] <LocutusOfBorg> vbox-dkms is not in the kernel
[16:44] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Do you ensure that virtualbox-dkms (non-hwe) is buildable with hwe kernels?
[16:44] <infinity> Yes, I know.
[16:45] <LocutusOfBorg> yes, it gets similar fixes
[16:45] <LocutusOfBorg> and it is easy to test, I usually do it
[16:45] <infinity> Hrm.  Okay.
[16:46] <infinity> Wouldn't it be easier to just restrict hwe to hwe and ga to ga, as I proposed above?
[16:46] <LocutusOfBorg> btw, the virtualbox-dkms autopkgtest is almost never failing
[16:46] <infinity> Then you'd have the same version combinations in play in, say, bionic and eoan.
[16:46] <infinity> (And that would also paper over the guest-already-built issue, but meh)
[16:49] <teward> SRU / AA team, can you reject https://launchpadlibrarian.net/447918271/carla_2.0.0-0ubuntu4+gitde67dcb_source.changes from Eoan proposed because it has a version conflict with Focal
[16:49] <teward> (cc Eickmeyer)
[16:50] <infinity> teward: Uhh, it does?
[16:50] <teward> infinity: Focal has -0ubuntu3
[16:50] <teward> the upload to Eoan has -0ubuntu4+GITREV in it
[16:50] <infinity> teward: focal has a newer one in the queue.
[16:50] <teward> infinity: i didn't se that one in the pending queue
[16:50] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, but virtualbox-guest-dkms-hwe is *exactly* the same as virtualbox-guest-dkms, just built with newer mesa foo
[16:51] <LocutusOfBorg> its a workaround for installability with newer xorg
[16:51] <infinity> teward: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=carla
[16:51] <teward> infinity: ah, there it is
[16:51] <teward> nevermind :)
[16:51] <teward> this is what happens when Eickmeyer asks me for an eyes-on look but doesn't tell me they uploaded to both Focal and Eoan and was only getting flak about Eoan
[16:51] <teward> :P
[16:51] <teward> *needs more coffee*
[16:51] <teward> sorry about noise :)
[16:59] <teward> infinity: do we have a tool to search all the queues for a given package and see if it's in it and report the info on it?
[16:59] <teward> i don't think we do, do we?
[16:59] <infinity> A for loop around 'queue'?
[16:59] <infinity> (in ubuntu-archive-tools)
[17:00] <teward> that'd do it
[17:00] <teward> ty infinity
[17:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (bionic-proposed/partner) [1:20190910.1-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 => 1:20191009.1-0ubuntu0.18.04.1] (no packageset)
[17:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (xenial-proposed/partner) [1:20190910.1-0ubuntu0.16.04.1 => 1:20191009.1-0ubuntu0.16.04.1] (no packageset)
[17:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (disco-proposed/partner) [1:20190910.1-0ubuntu0.19.04.1 => 1:20191009.1-0ubuntu0.19.04.1] (no packageset)
[17:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pyscanfcs (focal-proposed/universe) [0.3.2+ds-2build1 => 0.3.5+ds-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[17:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: skimage (focal-proposed/universe) [0.14.2-2build1 => 0.14.2-3] (no packageset) (sync)
[17:03] <infinity> vorlon: Are you still triggering perly tests, or have you taken a break?
[17:03] <vorlon> infinity: I'm done with all the necessary mass retriggers; the remainder I would only be triggering based on individual analysis
[17:04] <infinity> vorlon: Kay.  I was going to retrigger bioperl with itself as a trigger added to your massive list, just didn't want duplicates.
[17:04] <infinity> (And then going down the list)
[17:04] <infinity> Honestly, I think given the freeziness of the archive, we could probably get away with just all-proposeding it all, but meh.
[17:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pyscanfcs [sync] (focal-proposed) [0.3.5+ds-1]
[17:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted skimage [sync] (focal-proposed) [0.14.2-3]
[17:05] <vorlon> infinity: bioperl is still falling back to all-proposed and then it's failing; I don't expect adding bioperl to the trigger will help.  I can do another round of analysis of the pkgProblemResolver output
[17:06] <infinity> vorlon: Hrm?  No, the problem with bioperl is it's running the old tests against the new package.
[17:07] <infinity> vorlon: The testsuite passes, but the test that looks for a file in @INC fails, cause that file's not there in the new version.
[17:08]  * infinity re-runs.
[17:11] <infinity> vorlon: Oh, at least, that was the problem with the perl-triggered bioperl test.  I see the bioperl-triggered one also hates life differently.  Fun.
[17:17] <infinity> vorlon: Hrm.  bioperl in unstable is intentionally held out with an RC bug.  The right answer might be to punt from proposed and do a rebuild of the release pocket version instead.
[17:19] <infinity> Wait... bioperl doesn't need a rebuild at all.  Now I'm even more confused.
[17:20] <vorlon> infinity: right, running old tests against the new package, which happens because of the apt pin being unresolvable and pulling all binaries from -proposed; so a correct if complicated trigger sidesteps the brokenness of bioperl in -proposed.  But yeah I had yet to work out why bioperl was accepted in -proposed and if it was actually needed
[17:20] <infinity> Why is the new version being pulled into tests of the old one then? >:(
[17:20] <vorlon> because the autopkgtest apt pin fails
[17:20] <vorlon> and the fallback is to pull all binaries from -proposed, including bioperl
[17:20] <infinity> Okay, so just deleting the proposed one is the easiest thing for now.
[17:21] <infinity> I can copy it back later, or we can wait for another Debian upload to sync it (cause it looks like it might need a breaks/replace or something anyway)
[17:21] <infinity> Yeah, it'll need a B/R when libbio-perl-run or whatever it is is updated.
[17:21] <infinity> So I'll just pull it.
[17:25] <infinity> vorlon: Baleeted.  Re-testing later might actually work.
[17:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oem-osp1 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/universe) [5.0.0-1026.29] (no packageset)
[17:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oem [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1060.69] (kernel)
[17:26] <vorlon> infinity: but also my latest trigger may have managed to be complete, so we'll see :)
[17:26] <infinity> vorlon: Hah.
[17:27] <infinity> vorlon: I'm still fine with deleting it on the basis that it's broken without the Breaks/Replaces, so all is well.
[17:27]  * vorlon nods
[17:28] <infinity> perl transitions really highlight the need for some sort of magical trigger resolution in autopkgtest.
[17:29] <infinity> Given that perl packages almost always test green, but only after you figure out how to manually tell the system to DTRT.
[17:30] <vorlon> I don't think apt has a setting for "install from -proposed only exactly those packages you need in order to resolve the dependencies", does it?
[17:31] <teward> vorlon: i've had some success in the past running `apt -t VERSION-proposed install package`
[17:31] <teward> which might only install those deps
[17:31] <teward> but that's in a testbed system not autopkgtests, etc.
[17:31] <teward> might have to hack it around to make it really obey :/
[17:32] <vorlon> that definitely does not have the semantics we're talking about, no
[17:32] <teward> i came in late :P
[17:32] <teward> i've been looking for such a setting/mechanism for some of my automated CI tests too, for things, and haven't found one.
[17:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: skimage (focal-proposed/universe) [0.14.2-3 => 0.14.2-3ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[17:32] <teward> (someone should write such a setting!)
[17:33] <vorlon> the autopkgtest code to manage this is awful; and the fact that sometimes it falls back to installing everything from -proposed, but this isn't exposed in the UI, is also confusing
[17:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted skimage [source] (focal-proposed) [0.14.2-3ubuntu1]
[17:39]  * infinity WTFs at command-not-found not command-not-finding on only armhf.
[17:41] <infinity> vorlon, Laney: Would the world expload if the download-results cronjob was */1 or */2 instead of */5?
[17:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted adobe-flashplugin [source] (bionic-proposed) [1:20191009.1-0ubuntu0.18.04.1]
[17:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted adobe-flashplugin [source] (disco-proposed) [1:20191009.1-0ubuntu0.19.04.1]
[17:41] <infinity> I keep forgetting how to URL hack to find results I'm waiting on, and really, I don't think I should have to. :P
[17:42] <infinity> (I'm assuming that job also rebuilds the HTML, but maybe I'm wrong?)
[17:42] <vorlon> infinity: the job commonly takes >5m to finish, so I don't think that would make much difference
[17:42] <infinity> vorlon: Ahh, nevermind then. :(
[17:42] <infinity> We need to figure out a way to batch all that stuff up better somehow.
[17:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted adobe-flashplugin [source] (xenial-proposed) [1:20191009.1-0ubuntu0.16.04.1]
[17:43] <infinity> That's the killer for britney runs too.
[17:56] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, breaking only hwe kernels or similar doesn't solve the fact that guest-dkms aims to provide 4 kernel modules, but only one is now builtin in the hwe kernel itself
[17:57] <teward> infinity: ... stupid question but why're the ubuntu-archive-tools tools written in Py2?
[17:57] <teward> has nobody attempted a py3 port?
[18:00] <infinity> vorlon: libcpanplus-perl is fun.  We ask apt to install recommends.  It says "I dunno, that's hard", and doesn't.
[18:01] <infinity> teward: There's an MP for py3 that literally just changes the shebangs.  I've not tested that this is sufficient.
[18:01] <teward> it won't be
[18:01] <teward> you have a LOT of NoLongerValid things in this.
[18:01] <infinity> teward: As for "why", the answer is "history".
[18:02] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Hrm?  I didn't suggest breaking anything.
[18:03] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: I suggested that the dkms.conf for vbox*dkms should version-restrict to the GA kernel, and for vbox*dkms-hwe it should restrict to >> the GA kernel.
[18:04] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Which would end up matching the versions also builtin, assuming you backport current stable to HWE at the same time (or before) the kernel does.
[18:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-gevent (focal-proposed/universe) [1.3.7-1build2 => 1.3.7-1ubuntu1] (edubuntu)
[18:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-gevent [source] (focal-proposed) [1.3.7-1ubuntu1]
[18:07] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Your libdata-stag-perl upload was entirely unnecessary.
[18:08] <LocutusOfBorg> teward, the python binding used by ubuntu-archive-tools was python2 only...
[18:09] <LocutusOfBorg> python3-ubuntutools is a new thing...
[18:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: hidapi-cffi (focal-proposed/universe) [0.2.2-1build1 => 0.2.2-1build1] (no packageset)
[18:09] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, what is GA kernel?
[18:09] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: The release kernel.  The non-HWE one.  GA = General Availability, shorthand for "release time" in some software circles.
[18:10] <LocutusOfBorg> oh... thanks
[18:10] <LocutusOfBorg> but as I said, there is no virtualbox-dkms-hwe package at all
[18:10] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Were there other uploads you did like this one to add unnecessary extra recommends to perl modules?
[18:10] <LocutusOfBorg> the virtualbox-hwe is only providing *guest*packages
[18:10] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, I only did one perl upload
[18:11] <infinity> Okay.  I'm deleting it, FYI.
[18:11] <LocutusOfBorg> should I close the debian bug?
[18:11] <infinity> The bug isn't missing deps, it's missing test triggers which cause apt to give up installing recommends.
[18:11] <infinity> Yes, close the Debian bug.
[18:11] <infinity> Adding more recommends won't change the issue.
[18:11] <LocutusOfBorg> but the code is using a perl module that isn't recommended...
[18:11] <infinity> It's pulled in via other recommends just fine.  Until apt says no because of goofy pinning.
[18:12] <infinity> If the code directly references the module, the recommends isn't wrong.  It still won't fix this issue, though.
[18:12] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=943319
[18:12] <ubot5> Debian bug 943319 in src:libdata-stag-perl "libdata-stag-perl: please recommend libxml-perl" [Normal,Open]
[18:12] <LocutusOfBorg> they looks like caring about the bug...
[18:13] <LocutusOfBorg> should I really close it in your opinion?
[18:14] <infinity> Yes.  And note that in the log you linked, it DOES try to install lixml-perl.
[18:14] <infinity> And then gives up.
[18:14] <infinity> Due to pinning.
[18:14] <infinity> Investigating (0) libxml-perl:amd64 < none -> 0.08-3 @un uN Ib >
[18:14] <infinity> Broken libxml-perl:amd64 Depends on libxml-parser-perl:amd64 < none | 2.44-4 @un uH >
[18:14] <LocutusOfBorg> yep, got it :D
[18:14] <infinity>   Considering libxml-parser-perl:amd64 1 as a solution to libxml-perl:amd64 0
[18:14] <infinity>   Holding Back libxml-perl:amd64 rather than change libxml-parser-perl:amd64
[18:14] <infinity> Done
[18:14] <LocutusOfBorg> with the retitle it is now clear
[18:15] <LocutusOfBorg> closed
[18:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: hidapi-cffi (focal-proposed/universe) [0.2.2-1build1 => 0.2.2-1build3] (no packageset)
[18:17] <infinity> doko: hidapi-cffi already had a python3.8 rebuild (that appeared to do nothing, cause there are no py3.x deps or versioned modules that I can see)... How is this one different?
[18:18] <doko> I just looked at mwhudson's notes ...
[18:20] <doko> ahh, that's a package which wants to run the tests on all archs, but really could be a binary all package
[18:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected hidapi-cffi [source] (focal-proposed) [0.2.2-1build1]
[18:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected hidapi-cffi [source] (focal-proposed) [0.2.2-1build3]
[18:28] <LocutusOfBorg> is it possible to bump firewalld hint please?
[18:28] <LocutusOfBorg> pleeeeeeeease
[18:29] <LocutusOfBorg> at least we go back in sync with that
[18:29] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Looking.
[18:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-libdiscid (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0-5build1 => 1.0-5ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[18:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-libdiscid [source] (focal-proposed) [1.0-5ubuntu1]
[18:36] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Looks like it's exactly the same test failing so yeah, I can bump the hint but, also, it's exactly one test failing, could we maybe look into why?
[18:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pytango (focal-proposed/universe) [9.2.5-1build1 => 9.2.5-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[18:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pytango [source] (focal-proposed) [9.2.5-1ubuntu1]
[19:06] <vorlon> infinity: still never got the bioperl trigger right, but your unpublish happened, so the last test result is clean ;)
[19:13] <vorlon> infinity: libsyntax-highlight-engine-kate-perl is similarly a "missing recommends because pinning" situation.  Do we want to do a --all-proposed retry of the lot?
[19:14] <vorlon> runtests             FAIL stderr: supported-versions: WARNING: Unknown Ubuntu release: 20.04
[19:14] <vorlon> well aren't you special
[19:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (eoan-proposed/partner) [1:20191009.1-0ubuntu1 => 1:20191009.1-0ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[19:17] <vorlon> infinity: perhaps you've already done this. perhaps you've also done it in a way that lies to the system and lists no requestor?
[19:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: veusz (focal-proposed/universe) [3.0.1-1ubuntu2 => 3.0.1-1ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[19:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted veusz [source] (focal-proposed) [3.0.1-1ubuntu3]
[19:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oem-osp1 [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [5.0.0-1026.29]
[19:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oem [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1060.69]
[19:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sunpy (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.3-2build1 => 1.0.3-2ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[19:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted sunpy [source] (focal-proposed) [1.0.3-2ubuntu1]
[19:42] <infinity> vorlon: Oh, yeah, I've been triggering from snakefruit, so no requestor.  I'm a bad nan.
[19:42] <infinity> Also a bad man.
[19:45] <infinity> vorlon: I wonder if there's an apt option to treat failure to install recommends the same as failure to install depends.
[19:46] <infinity> vorlon: That would make those auto-dep8-recommends passes fail in the apt bit, which would auto-trigger all-proposed.
[20:18] <infinity> vorlon: Okay, I think everything <= lintian should be good now.  Will check >= lintian after I lunch a bit.
[20:18] <infinity> Err, <<, not <=
[20:19] <mwhudson> good morning
[20:26] <teward> um... anyone know how to get past an issue (daily) with "Release file for [mirror]/ubuntu/dists/focal/InRelease is not valid yet (invalid for another 2h7m11s) Updates will not be applied"?
[20:26] <teward> looked at it, it seems like it SHOULD be valid by timestamp
[20:27] <teward> (testing the dailies right now for Lubuntu and can't even apt update)
[20:29] <Bashing-om> teward: dumb thought from me: system time is correct?
[20:29] <teward> its a VM and has time set to etc/utc, time LOOKS right let me do some tests
[20:30] <teward> ... WOW okay so it looks like this is a problem with how it was parsing the system time (it's in a VM).  I'll have to dig into that one, interesting little bug...
[20:30] <teward> manually set the time and timezone and it's working now
[20:30] <teward> it's almost like it's ignoring RTCClock
[20:31] <teward> i'll dig later
[20:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-msgpack (focal-proposed/main) [0.5.6-1build3 => 0.5.6-1ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server)
[20:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-msgpack [source] (focal-proposed) [0.5.6-1ubuntu1]
[21:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted adobe-flashplugin [source] (eoan-proposed) [1:20191009.1-0ubuntu2]
[21:07] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, in my merge request for the hint I think I explained why
[21:07] <LocutusOfBorg> the failure is actually a regression in nftables, that is already worked on by upstream
[21:07] <LocutusOfBorg> the -2 nftables upload fixed 3 out of 4 failures
[21:08] <LocutusOfBorg> we still have one left (I already proposed to use firewalld as nftables personal regression testsuite since it catches a lot of regressions!)
[21:22] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, btw you (IIRC) dropped alt-ergo permanent hint on armhf... can you please restore it (NBS)
[21:23] <LocutusOfBorg> https://code.launchpad.net/~costamagnagianfranco/britney/hints-ubuntu/+merge/373867
[21:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-apt (focal-proposed/main) [1.9.0ubuntu2 => 1.9.0ubuntu3] (core)
[21:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-apt [source] (focal-proposed) [1.9.0ubuntu3]
[21:26] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: I did?
[21:28] <LocutusOfBorg> sorry, vorlon did
[21:28] <LocutusOfBorg>     Restore alt-ergo hint, dropped by mistake on
[21:28] <LocutusOfBorg>     revno: 3795
[21:28] <LocutusOfBorg>     committer: Steve Langasek <steve.langasek@canonical.com>
[21:28] <LocutusOfBorg> https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~costamagnagianfranco/britney/hints-ubuntu/revision/3795
[21:28] <LocutusOfBorg> it was probably a mistake I would say...
[21:29] <infinity> He probably dropped it cause the syntax was wrong, assuming that it couldn't possibly have ever worked. :P
[21:29] <LocutusOfBorg> it did work...
[21:30] <LocutusOfBorg> don't ask me why, but I'm pretty sure it worked
[21:31] <infinity> LocutusOfBorg: Anyhow, hint restored.
[21:32] <LocutusOfBorg> I wish with the "all" keyword :) lovely thanks
[21:33] <doko> infinity, vorlon: please update the hint to the new version of python-scipy
[21:35] <infinity> doko: Done.
[21:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lintian (focal-proposed/main) [2.28.0 => 2.29.0] (core) (sync)
[21:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted lintian [sync] (focal-proposed) [2.29.0]
[21:48] <infinity> Did we need another lintian?
[21:49] <LocutusOfBorg> according to libclone-perl yes...
[21:50] <infinity> That was testing 2.22.0
[21:50] <infinity> I was already re-running tests for 2.28.0
[21:50] <infinity> Oh well.
[21:50] <LocutusOfBorg> 2.29 mentions a python fix... maybe the person who syncd it needed it
[21:50] <infinity> The person was doko, so maybe.
[21:53] <doko> sorry, yes
[21:53] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: so what is triggering the alt-ergo autopkgtests on armhf given that it builds only arch-dep packages and there is no armhf binary?
[21:59] <infinity> vorlon: Huh.  perl's failure to pass its own tests is a total mystery to me.  That version passes in unstable, but fails the same way in testing and focal-proposed.  Diffing artifacts between testing and unstable shows no diffefrences other than a slightly newer python and slightly newer gcc, both of which we have.
[22:03] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, please don't ask me, I don't know... I'm just trying to make the package migrate
[22:11] <LocutusOfBorg> After this operation, 4,133 kB of additional disk space will be used.
[22:11] <LocutusOfBorg> Get:1 http://ftpmaster.internal/ubuntu eoan/universe armhf alt-ergo armhf 1.30+dfsg1-2 [1,283 kB]
[22:11] <LocutusOfBorg> interesting...
[22:11] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, maybe the old cruft package has been around in eoan for a while?
[22:11] <LocutusOfBorg> rmadison doesn't show it
[22:12] <infinity> Oh, that's fun.
[22:12] <LocutusOfBorg> I'm thinking to just no change rebuild it, just to see what happens
[22:12] <infinity> Huh?
[22:12] <infinity> No.
[22:13] <infinity> Don't.
[22:13] <infinity> That's not even the source version in eoan.  What on earth do you think a rebuild would do?
[22:14] <LocutusOfBorg> oh... got it
[22:14] <LocutusOfBorg>  	2019-07-30 14:03:18 CEST	Superseded	Eoan	release	universe	math	1.30+dfsg1-2
[22:14] <LocutusOfBorg> eoan had for a little time the old version on armhf...
[22:14] <infinity> Anyhow, that weird oops doesn't appear to have duplicated itself to focal.
[22:14] <LocutusOfBorg> so, a no change rebuild should not even start for armhf the autopkgtests
[22:14] <LocutusOfBorg> so, it should not "need" the hint...
[22:15] <infinity> I mean, it needs the hint currently.
[22:15] <infinity> But yes, maybe not once this version migrates.
[22:15] <LocutusOfBorg> this version migrated some seconds ago
[22:15] <LocutusOfBorg> this is why I was thinking to no-change rebuild and see what happens
[22:16] <infinity> Yeah, please don't?
[22:19] <LocutusOfBorg> ok so I remove the directory
[22:20] <infinity> the... what?
[22:21] <LocutusOfBorg> I had the dput of the no change rebuild ready to go, and I dropped it :)
[23:26] <LocutusOfBorg> Laney, can you please look at boost1.67 autopkgtests on arm64? they all look test in progress... (maybe this is something like what doko mentioned some hours ago)