/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2019/11/27/#ubuntu-devel.txt

cpaelzerrbalint: in systemd is a patch debian/patches/test-expect-mmap-to-fail-in-seccomp-test-on-s390-and-s390.patch of yours06:40
cpaelzerrbalint: it says "cherry picked from commit a81f7aad9a5ddeebbce002e2da36e1dd84f51b36" in which repo would that commit be?06:40
cpaelzerah found https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd - that might be it ...06:42
cpaelzerno not in that repo either06:50
cpaelzerrbalint: bonus question - was this patch ever brought up/referenced in some upstream discussion?06:54
mwhudsonuhhhh can rust 1.38 not bootstrap itself?08:32
* mwhudson sets things on fire08:33
mwhudsonah https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/6391108:37
Unit193Issue 63911 in rust-lang/rust "1.38 beta fails to bootstrap itself" [Closed]08:40
didrocksmwhudson: hey, do plan to have golang 1.13 set as default for focal? (maybe even 1.14 in January, once out?)09:05
didrocksmwhudson: I'm asking because the alternative doesn't seem to work well: if you install golang-1.13-go for instance, you don't have /usr/bin/go pointing at it (only part of golang-go default, which has a hard dep on 1.12)09:06
mwhudsondidrocks: ah yes i should make 1.13 the default09:06
mwhudsondidrocks: if you want to build with 1.13 though you need to add /usr/lib/go-1.13/bin to PATH09:07
mwhudsondidrocks: (also yes, i want 1.14 to be the default in focal)09:07
didrocksmwhudson: shouldn't we use an alternative for /usr/bin/go rather?09:07
mwhudsondidrocks: no09:07
didrocksmwhudson: also, another question, if you want me to change the default, I'm happy to do it. It seems the delta with debian is small, I'm unsure though about what kind of tests you are doing before uploading09:07
mwhudsondidrocks: alternatives are a bad idea for toolchain packages09:08
mwhudsondidrocks: yes, happy for you to make the change09:08
mwhudson(it's getting late here)09:08
didrocksmwhudson: will do then!09:08
didrockson alternative: I thought this was what we were doing for gcc, but I may be wrong09:08
didrocksotherwise yeah, adding to PATH09:08
didrocksanyway, will change the default on focal09:09
mwhudsonno gcc hasn't done this for ... uh 10 years?09:09
rbasakcpaelzer: I sent you a MR for review feedback for mdevctl. Take the commits you like, though I think the debian/copyright adjustment is mandatory.09:19
rbasakSee the commit for an explanation.09:19
rbasakWith that commit I'm happy to upload.09:19
rbasakcpaelzer: from https://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html -> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg00023.html -> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/12/msg00007.html -> https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/12/msg00194.html "Copy that statement _verbatim_ into the copyright file"09:23
rbasakNot that I consider that statement normative of Debian ftpmaster policy, but I also do agree with it - since there is a statement, we must use it and the intent to use the example licensing statement provided in the licence is not being implied.09:24
cpaelzerrbasak: thanks reviewing the MR now09:58
cpaelzerI hate dependencies all in one line TBH09:59
cpaelzerbut if that is the default I'm fine to follow09:59
* cpaelzer appreciates on diffs to just have the line==package listed10:00
cpaelzerah, when checkign in detail git is only needed for the .spec and tag target10:02
cpaelzerthanks for spotting rbasak10:02
cpaelzerI'm ok with all changes then and merging10:02
cpaelzerrbasak: I already gut my upstream MR acceped (changes for lsmdev)10:03
cpaelzerso this (Debian)delta can be dropped on the next version10:04
cpaelzerand I got upstreams IRC ping that they are happy to see it being pacakged10:04
cpaelzerlet me know if you need anything else for sponsoring this10:04
cpaelzerrbasak: I pushed a debian/0.50-1 tag to be sure on what we agree upon10:05
rbasakcpaelzer: you're welcome to use a different convention for wrapping if you like. wrap-and-sort has some options. It was only a suggestion.10:27
rbasakcpaelzer: sounds like you want -a|--wrap-always :)10:29
cpaelzeralready on it10:30
cpaelzerwriting a README.source about it before committing10:30
rbasakMaybe -t|--trailing-comma too?10:30
rbasakIt'd be nice if wrap-and-sort supported a config file10:31
cpaelzeryep10:31
cpaelzerrbasak: new tag debian/0.50-210:34
cpaelzerI can wrap it into 0.50-1 instead if that is needed/preferred10:34
rbasakI would prefer -1 please10:37
rbasak-2 implies a -1 was uploaded10:37
rbalintcpaelzer, yes, it was on my TODO list to upstream the patch, now it is done: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/1416210:45
cpaelzerrbalint: thanks for the info, but this will vastly change due to https://bugs.launchpad.net/libseccomp/+bug/185385210:51
ubottuLaunchpad bug 1853852 in systemd (Ubuntu) "hard to reproduce issues in systemd autopkgtest against new libseccomp 2.4.2" [Undecided,New]10:51
cpaelzerbut now I can refer to your MR for this part of the changes10:52
rbalintcpaelzer, ok thanks, i was wondering why you became curious :-)10:58
rbasakcpaelzer: want me to squash debian/changelog and upload?11:00
rbasakcpaelzer: also, "benfit of mroe readable diffs" :-/11:00
rbasakcpaelzer: or I can just upload your commit 642c436?11:01
rbalintcpaelzer, does your fix work on bionic?11:02
seb128rbasak, hey. I don't know if you saw the ping on #ubuntu-desktop earlier. When you do your SRU shift, can you get https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jsunit/0.2.2-1~ubuntu0.18.04.1 migrated to updates? thunderbird was copied to security/update so it probably makes sense to move that one as well (it's a new source in bionic only needed for autopkgtests enablement)11:02
rbasakAh good timing11:02
rbasakI was just looking for and failing to find that ping :)11:03
rbasakLooking now11:03
seb128thx11:03
rbasakseb128: is there a bug reference for jsunit?11:03
rbasakhttps://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html doesn't list one11:03
seb128rbasak, oSoMoN can probably provide details/reply to question if you have any11:03
rbasakSo this is somehow falling out of normal SRU process11:04
seb128oSoMoN, ^11:04
seb128indeed11:04
seb128as said the package is new to bionic and only needed for autopkgtest, but we should probably have had a bug reference to describe that11:04
cpaelzerrbasak: let me fix and retag 0.50-1, just a sec11:04
rbasaksil2100: ^ (jsunit) please could you take a look?11:05
rbasakWithout a bug reference I can't see if you left any notes for me :)11:05
cpaelzerrbalint: I'm working on it for 20.04 and prior to the new libseccomp you wouldn#t even be affected11:05
cpaelzerrbalint: I have run the test on the old seccomp, and it works at least in my tests11:05
cpaelzernot sure if in 18.04 there will be more that makes it behave even different to that11:06
rbasakoSoMoN, seb128: ah, it was a PPA copy? I think this is too complex to touch without consulting with others for the background, sorry. Hopefully sil2100 will be available to sort it for you.11:06
seb128rbasak, no worry, thanks11:06
rbasakkanashiro: looks like rrdtool is stuck in proposed. It's not obvious to me why. Please could you take a look?11:09
rbasakI can look deeper if you need any help.11:10
rbalintcpaelzer, could you please rebase you change on mine and send the PR upstream that way to preserve the commit id?11:10
cpaelzerrbasak: pushed the (new) 0.50-1 tag11:12
cpaelzerrbalint: I already rebased onto your retaining your commit as-is11:15
cpaelzerbut before sending anything for mine I'll need more testing with old/new libseccomp to be sure11:15
cpaelzerand on x86 as at least this morning I only ran s390x so far11:15
rbalintok, thanks!11:15
rbasakcpaelzer: :-/11:18
rbasakcpaelzer: you missed the second typo in "benfit of mroe readable diffs"11:19
rbasakBut I'm happy to upload anyway11:19
rbasakFWIW I avoid tagging until an upload is accepted to avoid this kind of thing11:19
rbasakftpmasters may want changes too11:19
cpaelzeroh so tagging is backwards in time11:20
cpaelzerok, I will kill the tag then11:20
cpaelzerI have fixed one mroe11:20
cpaelzerlets see where the second one is11:21
rbasakActually what I do is tag at the time of upload, but I do not push it until after the upload is accepted11:21
rbasakWhich from the perspective of everyone else is to not tag until after I guess, apart from the timestamp11:21
cpaelzertag removed (from git repo) - should be d943ccd444e3c6c18acbb4b403f41551b5df6659 now11:21
cpaelzerthere should be no mroe left in that11:22
rbasakbenfit11:22
cpaelzeroO11:22
rbasakAnyway it doesn't matter11:22
rbasakYou can fix that later11:22
cpaelzerrbasak: pushed already11:23
cpaelzer99abec1 is the head to sponsor11:23
rbasakOK11:23
cpaelzerand yes, ftpmasters might want even more11:23
rbasakUploaded11:27
cpaelzerthanks rbasak11:27
sil2100oSoMoN, rbasak: hey! Yes, it's on my plate, I missed the chance to take care of it on Monday11:44
sil2100oSoMoN: IIRC chrisccoulson was fine with getting it out to -security, right?11:44
rbasakcpaelzer: oh, whoops. I need to upload binaries too. I forgot. I'll do that.11:52
cpaelzerrbasak: wait11:58
rbasakkanashiro: I advise against tagging uploads until accepted by the archive11:58
cpaelzerrbasak: unless you have done already, since we just changed the repo11:58
rbasakkanashiro: see the mess caused by this above ;)11:58
rbasakcpaelzer: no, I haven't11:58
cpaelzerI have that reflected in d/control11:58
cpaelzerrbasak: should we rebuild then to reflect the new repo correctly in this initial upload?11:58
rbasakSure, if you wamt11:59
rbasakWhere's the new repo?11:59
cpaelzerrbasak: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/mdevctl11:59
cpaelzerrbasak: new head at b6692181 contains the VCS updates11:59
rbasakOK11:59
cpaelzerkanashiro: since we moved it to the more official space, I can now delete my project that I had under my own user right?12:01
kanashirorbasak, usually I tag right after I do the upload, for instance in this case if you don't rebuild the package from the new master (adding the new changes) I'd not now the exact content of the source package you uploaded just looking at the git repo12:02
kanashirocpaelzer, of course12:02
cpaelzerkanashiro: if only I'd find delete project in this UI then ...12:02
* kanashiro is checking rrdtool in proposed12:03
rbasakkanashiro: yeah, of course you need to tag the commit you uploaded. I'm just saying that the tag should be pushed after archive accept, not before.12:03
rbasakThis avoids problems if the upload is rejected - by a sponsor, by ftpmasters, or by queue management software12:03
rbasak(in a way that requires changes)12:04
cpaelzerkanashiro: found the remove action in the UI12:05
kanashirorbasak, sure, but you can also recreate tags. maybe I am a more git oriented person and like things been reflected in the repo all the time :p12:08
rbasakkanashiro: changing tags is very severely frowned upon though. That's not what anyone following a git repository expects to see.12:10
kanashirorbasak, you are right, but in this specific case where probably no one is tracking your changes yet is not a huge problem IMO12:11
rbasakAgreed12:13
kanashirorbasak, I also have no clue about why rrdtool is stuck in proposed, it says python3-rrdtool (= 1.7.2-3) is not satisfiable but this binary is generated by the proposed source package12:21
rbasakYes that's how far I got too.12:22
* rbasak looks deeper12:22
rbasakAh12:44
rbasakIt's because python-rrdtool-dbg is in main for some reason12:45
rbasakpython3-rrdtool-dbg rather12:45
rbasakIt doesn't appear in https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.html but that page is out of date12:47
cpaelzerrbasak: that might be the auto-promotion due to wildcards13:07
cpaelzerrbasak:  if the source is in main for any reason certain packages will be auto-promoted13:07
cpaelzerthat can be overrules in the seeds IIRC13:07
cpaelzerrbasak: look for Extra-Exclude in https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/ubuntu13:09
cpaelzerand I see rrdtool itself is in main, wich implies that the source is13:10
rbasakcpaelzer, kanashiro: ah, OK, so we need to add entry like https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/ubuntu/tree/supported#n175 to counter https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/ubuntu/tree/supported#n175 for python3-rrdtool-dbg I think?13:16
rbasakBecause python3-rrdtool-dbg depends on python3-rrdtool which is in universe13:17
cpaelzeryes13:17
rbasakAnd it doesn't make sense to have python3-rrdtool-dbg in main if python3-rrdtool isn't presumably13:17
rbasakto counter https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/ubuntu/tree/supported#n127 I mean13:17
cpaelzeryou get this all the time on merges of sources in main with binaries being in main only partial13:18
rbasakI've never seen this before!13:18
cpaelzerhmm, like 2-3 per cycle I'd think13:18
cpaelzermaybe my perception is skewed and it was less13:18
rbasakkanashiro: would you like to sort out an MP for that please?13:18
=== ricab is now known as ricab|bbl
oSoMoNsil2100, yes, I think chrisccoulson was fine with getting it out to -security, he did all the other related packages (thunderbird, enigmail, mozilla-devscripts) but he left that one out, not sure if intentionally or not13:46
chrisccoulsonoSoMoN, sil2100, oh, which one did I leave out?13:47
oSoMoNchrisccoulson, jsunit13:48
chrisccoulsonalso, we could really do with pushing an update for disco. I know it's EOL in january, but the current situation isn't great for upgrades13:48
chrisccoulsonah, sorry about that13:48
oSoMoNchrisccoulson, I prepared a 60.9.1 update for disco to address the gmail authentication issue which was the most pressing one, once it's in disco-updates I can prepare a 68.x upload13:49
oSoMoNspeaking of which, rbasak if you're still doing your SRU shift would you mind looking at the thunderbird 60.9.1 uploads to xenial and disco?13:50
oSoMoNthat's an upstream point release that fixes one single issue, bug #185065113:51
ubottubug 1850651 in thunderbird (Ubuntu Disco) "[SRU] Authentication constantly re-requested for Google" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/185065113:51
kanashirorbasak, sorry for the delay, and yes, I will prepare a MP adding python3-rddtool-dbg to this supported file in ubuntu-seeds14:10
=== ricab|bbl is now known as ricab
zygastgraber: hello, I'm trying to get systemd --user to work inside a container but fail; do you know what's the magic that spawns it for user sessions I get, for example, when ssh-ing into a box?15:21
stgraberPossibly some logind magic?15:22
zygado you know who might be able to teach me about it?15:22
zygaI realized that systemct --user and friends doesn't work inside my containers15:23
Laneyzyga: logind sessions are normally started by pam_systemd15:24
Laneypam_systemd(8) might help you?15:24
zygaah, thanks for that, I'll dig15:24
zygastgraber: is lxd exec doing any login-like things or is it just a setns into the container?15:40
zygastgraber: I'm trying to figure out if I should set everything up and then ssh into the container15:40
zygastgraber: or try to manage to get "lxc exec" to end up behaving the way I need to15:41
stgraberzyga: effectively just setns, technically quite a bit more as we also match seccomp/apparmor profiles, join the right cgroups, drop the right capabilities, ...15:41
zygaright15:41
stgraberzyga: but as far as what we do inside the container, it's just spawning the command15:41
zygaright15:41
zygaok15:41
zygathank you :)15:42
Laneycould a pam session be started or is that a bad idea for some reason?15:42
stgraberzyga: LXD's design is to never assume anything about what's present in the container and never to have the host trust any file inside the container (or even attempt to open anything prior to joining)15:42
zygaLaney: I think I want to but I need to understand more first15:42
zygaLaney: I'm working on a test that checks how snapd can track apps inside lxd containers15:42
LaneyI mean by lxd itself when execing15:42
zygaLaney: (when snapd is inside a container)15:42
Laneynod15:42
zygaLaney: and it works great for things running as root talking to systemd in the container15:43
zygabut I need to prod the "now as the user" variant as well15:43
stgraberLaney: that would require lxd to know about pam which we'd rather not do15:43
stgraberLaney: we do have the "lxc shell" alias which uses "su" and will typically go through pam as a result (so long as "su" exists in the container)15:43
zygaohh15:43
* zyga didn't know about lxc shell15:44
stgraberit's a default built-in alias for "exec @ARGS@ -- su -l"15:44
zygayeah, that's a much saner environment (for my needs)15:44
zygaI now have a seat15:44
zygaand cgroups are typical (exec just gave me /)15:45
Laneyw00t15:47
=== led_dark_2 is now known as led_dark_1
ahasenackis there a way to have debootstrap in ubuntu consider the *-updates and *-security repositories? I get just the release pocket18:00
ahasenackwith --components I can add restricted,universe etc, but not the other repositories18:00
dokoLocutusOfBorg: the pycxx Breaks/replaces relation for pycxx needs adjustment18:03
arunpyasiHi there, Do we need to ask Ubuntu in order to maintain an unofficial flavour of Ubuntu ?18:07
connor_karunpyasi, I think for it to be considered a flavor, it must be approved by Ubuntu. I think most flavors start out as "remixes"18:16
arunpyasiOh like, Budgie Remix ?18:17
connor_karunpyasi, this link might be useful: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/RecognizedFlavors18:17
connor_karunpyasi, it might have been (?) a remix at first but I see Budgie listed here as a flavor: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuFlavors18:18
arunpyasihttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Budgie I see it was formerly called as Budgie Remix18:19
arunpyasiSo, is that we need to work on it as Remix at the initial state and later to Flavors ?18:20
cjwatsonahasenack: no, requires some fairly awkward work that has never been done18:21
ahasenackcjwatson: ok, thanks18:21
connor_karunpyasi, that's my understanding. There are more details on the Recognized Flavors link I posted above under this header: "Guidelines to become and remain a recognized flavor"18:21
cjwatsonor at least not integrated18:21
cjwatsonhttps://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=690210 I think18:21
ubottuDebian bug 690210 in debootstrap "debootstrap: please support multiple suites" [Wishlist,Open]18:21
arunpyasiconnor_k, Ahh OK. Thanks a lot for your help :)18:22
connor_knp :-)18:22
connor_kddstreet, is this comment referring to an existing launchpad bug or should I file one: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/1825946/comments/722:30
ubottuLaunchpad bug 1825946 in network-manager (Ubuntu Xenial) "'nm' autopkgtest fails due to GI stderr output" [Low,New]22:30

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!