| alkisg | Hi, I'm upstream and Debian maintainer for the "ltsp" package. A rewritten version of it has just landed in Debian testing, and it'd be best if focal got it too. | 09:22 |
|---|---|---|
| alkisg | Question, will this be done automatically or do I need to do some action? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ltsp lists it in "proposed". | 09:22 |
| rbasak | alkisg: hi! Thank you for looking out for your package in Ubuntu! | 09:35 |
| rbasak | The reason something gets "stuck on proposed" is much the same as migration to testing in Debian | 09:35 |
| rbasak | https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#ltsp has the details | 09:35 |
| rbasak | Is there some kind of rearrangement in the binary packages produced? | 09:36 |
| alkisg | Thanks, reading.. :) | 09:36 |
| alkisg | Yes, many binary packages were removed | 09:37 |
| alkisg | There's only one "ltsp" binary package now | 09:37 |
| alkisg | And it's "arch: all", interpreted | 09:37 |
| rbasak | I'm somewhat puzzled why this hasn't happened automatically. | 09:38 |
| alkisg | The migration to debian testing only happened yesterday | 09:38 |
| alkisg | Maybe it just needs some time? | 09:39 |
| rbasak | No Ubuntu doesn't have a mandatory delay like testing | 09:39 |
| rbasak | And the excuses file is clear that it's blocked | 09:40 |
| rbasak | I think deletion of the binaries in the release pocket would work, but I'm not sure that's definitely the right thing to do. | 09:40 |
| rbasak | We need to ask an archive admin (equivalent of an ftpmaster) to take a look. | 09:40 |
| rbasak | Unless there's something I'm missing here | 09:40 |
| alkisg | We did have to ping ftp master for the debian migration to testing | 09:40 |
| alkisg | Maybe something similar is needed here | 09:41 |
| rbasak | What happens if a user has the old binary packages installed? | 09:41 |
| rbasak | I don't see an upgrade path? | 09:41 |
| alkisg | It should remain installed, and it should be possible to get autoremoved with apt | 09:42 |
| alkisg | It was possible to have the old and the new ltsp coexist for some time, that's why this was preferred | 09:42 |
| alkisg | Also the other debian developer said that way it would avoid the New queue for debian ;) | 09:42 |
| alkisg | (vagrantc is DD, I'm just DM, so I defer to him for such issues :)) | 09:43 |
| rbasak | Could you file a bug against ltsp in Ubuntu please, and subscribe ~ubuntu-archive to it? | 09:43 |
| alkisg | Sure, thank you | 09:43 |
| rbasak | I don't want to go into the technical detail myself because I'm not confident I understand the nuances here and I don't want to take you down a path that's wrong. | 09:43 |
| rbasak | And I don't have the authority to resolve it in the archive anyway. | 09:44 |
| alkisg | Hopefully I got the correct list subscribed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ltsp/+bug/1855422 | 09:48 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 1855422 in ltsp (Ubuntu) "New ltsp package stuck in focal proposed" [Undecided,New] | 09:48 |
| rbasak | akelling: thanks! Yes, that subscription is correct. | 09:52 |
| alkisg | Ty. alkisg :) | 09:52 |
| rbasak | The archive admins tend to process things in batches though so the bug may not get attention quickly. | 09:52 |
| rbasak | Ah, sorry! | 09:52 |
| alkisg | There's no hurry, just making sure it requires no other action from my part | 09:53 |
| rbasak | You were right to ask in here. | 09:53 |
| rbasak | And feel free to ask again if it doesn't get attention in a while. | 09:53 |
| alkisg | Great, thank you | 09:53 |
| rbasak | I don't see any European archive admins in here right now | 09:53 |
| rbasak | Ah, seb128 maybe? ^ | 09:54 |
| seb128 | rbasak, hey, sorry had to change wifi, I'm around now ... what's up? | 10:03 |
| rbasak | seb128: are you an active archive admin? | 10:03 |
| seb128 | yes | 10:03 |
| rbasak | alkisg has an issue with ltsp migrating. I think it needs some binary deletions but am not sure. On my advice he just filed bug 1855422 but then I saw you were online :) | 10:04 |
| ubottu | bug 1855422 in ltsp (Ubuntu) "New ltsp package stuck in focal proposed" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1855422 | 10:04 |
| seb128 | looking | 10:05 |
| alkisg | Ty, I'm here if feedback's needed | 10:06 |
| seb128 | alkisg, rbasak, seems like the old binaries have no rdepends and just need to be deleted | 10:20 |
| alkisg | Nice | 10:21 |
| cjwatson | coreycb: those two pushes of yours should work now | 10:27 |
| cjwatson | teward: wasn't around then. what do you need? | 10:28 |
| rbasak | seb128: thank you! | 11:15 |
| seb128 | rbasak, np! | 11:21 |
| kanashiro | rbasak, did you see my message yesterday about the sphinxsearch issue? ruby-riddle regression is the only thing avoiding ruby-defaults migration atm | 11:52 |
| rbasak | kanashiro: yes. That research looks good. Did you have a question for me? | 12:20 |
| kanashiro | rbasak, there was no question, I thought I was handing it over to someone else :p but that's fine, I can try to find the fix by myself | 12:31 |
| kanashiro | if I have any question I'll ping you | 12:32 |
| rbasak | kanashiro: oh, sorry for the confusion! | 12:34 |
| kanashiro | np :) | 12:36 |
| === ricab is now known as ricab|bbl | ||
| coreycb | cjwatson: thanks | 13:05 |
| ahasenack | cpaelzer: how does one build manual test-retrigger urls again? I'm trying to do it for one package specifically before going the all-proposed=1 route (learning experience) | 13:08 |
| ahasenack | https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=focal&arch=amd64&package=samba&trigger=ldb%2F2.0.7-4 <-- failed with | 13:08 |
| ahasenack | You submitted an invalid request: ldb/2.0.7-4 is not published in focal | 13:08 |
| ahasenack | which is correct, as ldb 2.0.7-4 is in focal-proposed | 13:08 |
| ahasenack | I want to run the samba test under https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#ldb | 13:09 |
| ahasenack | but with the samba package from focal-proposed | 13:09 |
| ahasenack | test is green as is | 13:09 |
| ahasenack | or, to use a real case that is read | 13:11 |
| ahasenack | samba under https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#talloc | 13:11 |
| ahasenack | I need it to run with samba from focal-proposed | 13:11 |
| ahasenack | and didn't want to pass all-proposed=1 | 13:11 |
| * ahasenack reads https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ProposedMigration in the mean time | 13:12 | |
| * ahasenack adds samba itself as a trigger | 13:14 | |
| * ahasenack feels smart | 13:15 | |
| * ahasenack waits for the outcome | 13:15 | |
| ahasenack | Unpacking samba-libs:amd64 (2:4.11.1+dfsg-3ubuntu1) ... | 13:19 |
| ahasenack | yay, seems to have picked up the correct version | 13:20 |
| ahasenack | nice | 13:20 |
| seb128 | ddstreet, hey, please commit your network-manager changes to the packaging vcs | 13:32 |
| seb128 | alkisg, rbasak, the ltsp update is in focal now | 15:03 |
| rbasak | Thank you! | 15:15 |
| alkisg | Great seb128, thank you, thanks to rbasak too | 15:19 |
| === ricab|bbl is now known as ricab | ||
| seb128 | yw! | 15:19 |
| Odd_Bloke | rbasak: Thanks! | 16:14 |
| rbasak | yw! | 16:18 |
| ddstreet | seb128 done, sorry | 17:50 |
| seb128 | ddstreet, np, thanks! | 17:50 |
| ddstreet | vorlon will i386 autopkgtests on focal get properly tweaked somehow so they pull the right arch deps (I see you did some work for build-essential already), or will they all just get marked ignore? | 17:52 |
| ddstreet | i'm assuming for now, at least, i386 tests on focal can be ignored | 17:52 |
| doko | seb128: python-pceclib: please don't depend on python, use python2 instead | 19:01 |
| seb128 | doko, ack | 19:01 |
| === rkta_ is now known as rkta | ||
| vorlon | ddstreet: many autopkgtests will need adjusted individually to have correct cross-capable definitions; I've started working on uploading a number of these and will be posting to ubuntu-devel with some guidance on how to do this. In the meantime, it's correct to mark any that are failing "ignore" since they have regressed in the release pocket | 20:15 |
| santa_ | so ... i386 packages started to "dissapear", correct? | 20:31 |
| santa_ | from focal I mean | 20:31 |
| santa_ | ah, indeed | 20:34 |
| * santa_ reads ubuntu-devel ML | 20:34 | |
| santa_ | yep, time to ditch my kde test rebuilds for i386 I guess | 20:35 |
| vorlon | for focal, very much so ;) | 20:35 |
| LocutusOfBorg | fossfreedom, is it ok to sync nautilus-dropbox? | 21:38 |
| LocutusOfBorg | the new release is fine with budgie or not? | 21:39 |
| LocutusOfBorg | speaking wrt https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nautilus-dropbox/+bug/1683051 | 21:39 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 1683051 in nautilus-dropbox (Ubuntu) "Ubuntu Budgie: Bad integration with Dropbox" [Medium,Fix released] | 21:39 |
| LocutusOfBorg | merged it | 21:56 |
| LocutusOfBorg | kanashiro, hello, any idea for this failure? I tried to sync ruby-riddle but failed https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ruby-riddle/2.3.1-2ubuntu1 | 22:27 |
| LocutusOfBorg | looks like the current version in focal is not even working with a no-change rebuild | 22:27 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!