| xnox | doko: how come on ARM i cannot use any PE targets with binutils? i.e. objcopy with --target=efi-app-aarch64 fails | 08:52 |
|---|---|---|
| xnox | it seems like none of the PE targets are enabled for neither armel, armhf, or arm64 but it seems as if they sort of exists? | 08:52 |
| xnox | (efi-app being a subsystem of PE) | 08:52 |
| seb128 | vorlon, so, it's unclear to me, what are we supposed to do with things that are blocked in propose due to a missing i386 build now? | 09:17 |
| seb128 | vorlon, delete the i386 build from focal proper? | 09:17 |
| xnox | doko: i'm rebuilding binutils with --enable-targets=arm-pe => and then objcopy seems to work | 09:19 |
| xnox | but not sure if that makes valid EFI PE binaries or not | 09:19 |
| doko | well, maybe check first =) nobody asked for that before ... | 09:25 |
| seb128 | doko, hey, golang-1.13 shows on component mismatch, does it requires anything from the MIR side to get promoted or does it just qualify as a new version of packages already in main? (still needs foundations team to be subscribed to the source ... who can do that? bdmurray?) | 09:28 |
| Laney | anyone in foundations: https://bugs.launchpad.net/~foundations-bugs/+members <- they are all admins! | 09:29 |
| seb128 | nice :) | 09:31 |
| xnox | doko: hm, it seems like whilst pe-arm target exists (and one can use efi-app-arm-little for example) the pe-aarch64 does not. But it looks like llvm-objcopy does have it | 09:35 |
| doko | xnox: what about eu-objcopy? | 09:40 |
| xnox | doko: what is eu-objcopy? | 09:47 |
| doko | apt install elfutils | 09:52 |
| xnox | doko: that one does not have objcopy, only objdump | 09:53 |
| doko | ouch | 09:54 |
| === ricab_ is now known as ricab | ||
| === ricab_ is now known as ricab | ||
| === ricab_ is now known as ricab | ||
| LocutusOfBorg | doko, isn't pycxx python2 package being reintroduced? | 11:56 |
| LocutusOfBorg | in Debian I mean | 11:56 |
| doko | LocutusOfBorg: whatever, but the Breaks relation is not sufficient in focal | 11:58 |
| LocutusOfBorg | doko, if we reintroduce, why a breaks would be needed at all? | 11:58 |
| LocutusOfBorg | the breaks is because of the removal of the old package | 11:58 |
| LocutusOfBorg | if we reintroduce it... meh | 11:58 |
| LocutusOfBorg | Replaces: python-cxx-dev (<< 7.0.3-3) | 11:58 |
| doko | no, the move of the header file | 11:58 |
| LocutusOfBorg | this is what you are talking about? | 11:59 |
| LocutusOfBorg | oh... ok | 11:59 |
| LocutusOfBorg | ok, so lets wait for Debian to reintroduce the Python2 binding and then add the breaks? | 11:59 |
| doko | yes | 12:02 |
| === ricab is now known as ricab|bbl | ||
| seb128 | doko, do you know if there is a known issue with pylint in focal? | 15:08 |
| seb128 | e.g https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-focal/focal/arm64/u/ubuntu-dev-tools/20191128_062811_68c66@/log.gz | 15:08 |
| seb128 | AttributeError: 'Import' object has no attribute 'infer_name_module' | 15:08 |
| seb128 | rbalint, thx for looking at that valgrind/glib dbg symbols issue! | 15:23 |
| seb128 | RikMills, hey, could you get k3b rebuild for the libdvdread new soname in focal? (hipefully that's a no change rebuild...) | 15:30 |
| RikMills | seb128: doing... | 15:31 |
| seb128 | RikMills, thanks! | 15:31 |
| doko | seb128: I didn't check. Maybe a new upstream is needed, 2.2.2 is 12 months old | 15:32 |
| seb128 | doko, there is 2.4.4-1 in focal-proposed, I should perhaps try with that one, thx for pointing the outdated part out :) | 15:33 |
| === ricab|bbl is now known as ricab | ||
| cyphermox | coreycb: you wanted code review for bug 1852772; I did so and assigned you the bug since you can upload and commit this yourself, but let me know if you'd rather I push the changes | 16:31 |
| ubottu | bug 1852772 in software-properties (Ubuntu) "test_updates_interval fails on focal" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1852772 | 16:31 |
| coreycb | cyphermox: thanks! | 16:33 |
| xnox | seb128: i don't know if blacklist is already in place inside launchpad, and I.e. if one tries to rebuild libreoffice whether or not i386 build will be triggered | 17:33 |
| xnox | seb128: instead of uploading new libreoffice, i wonder if we should mark it's i386 autopkgtests as bad, to let the lot migrate. for example. | 17:34 |
| xnox | cjwatson: is i386 white/black list inside launchpad for focal already or not? and is there any way to query that from the API or web-ui? | 17:37 |
| xnox | i.e. if I dput libreoffice, will it create build record on i386 today? | 17:37 |
| cjwatson | xnox: https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/packagesets/focal/i386-whitelist is generated from LP | 17:40 |
| mwhudson | sil2100: looking at https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-installer/ubiquity/+git/ubiquity/+merge/376144 ... why are the ubiquity-hooks inside casper instead of, you know, ubiquity?? | 18:24 |
| mwhudson | sil2100: that's not your fault, mind | 18:24 |
| seb128 | xnox, don't reupload libreoffice please, it's going to take days again, let's wait for vorlon to be around | 19:07 |
| vorlon | seb128: yes to deleting i386 binaries from focal; sorry if that wasn't clear. with my remark on #ubuntu-release before I was roughly committing myself to doing this work on a daily basis (holidays included) to keep things moving forward, but now I seem to be a bit handicapped by the fact that qa.ubuntuwire.org is down so reverse-depends is unavailable | 20:42 |
| vorlon | but I'm not clear what the relationship is between the whitelist and any libreoffice proposed-migration blockage, since libreoffice was built on i386 before the whitelist was in place | 20:45 |
| teward | vorlon: the ZNC PPA I maintain might need its packages whitelisted, theres a number of people using it and I believe using older 32bit infra too to keep up to date with latest ZNC. I can survive without i386 builds but I dont think everyone can, what needs to be done to whitelist that from a PPA perspective to keep getting i386 builds? | 21:00 |
| teward | thats the only thing on my radar of this nature that might need kept. | 21:00 |
| vorlon | teward: why would they need a 32-bit package of znc on focal when there will be no 32-bit focal hosts? | 21:03 |
| vorlon | the whitelist only affects focal builds; you'll still get i386 builds on older releases | 21:03 |
| teward | vorlon: unless we have disabled the 32bit upgrade path ? | 21:04 |
| teward | if we have then ignore me | 21:04 |
| vorlon | we have | 21:04 |
| teward | ah cool wasnt aware :) | 21:04 |
| teward | so nevermind :) | 21:04 |
| teward | *returns to consuming feasts* | 21:04 |
| vorlon | and it's even more disabled by the fact that there's no 32-bit kernel in focal (or eoan) | 21:04 |
| vorlon | :) | 21:04 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!