[00:02] <vorlon> xnox: I think that's just a weird artifact of apt output and probably not the actual problem.  Anyway, cmake's test deps are a rat's nest, even if it would be cross-testable it's not worth anyone doing that much work to annotate them
[00:02] <vorlon> so I've badtested that also
[00:06] <vorlon> and llvm-toolchain-8 also now badtested
[00:20]  * RAOF sent a long message:  < https://matrix.org/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/hHkwYCyvjhKvGqYgTppEsgsT >
[00:41] <Eickmeyer[m]> RAOF: 1) It's a prerequisite for another package (avldrums.lv2) that I have ready to go, but it first requires lv2vst be in the repos. 2) Can fix, oops. 3) That's not a question that has ever been asked of me in the past. Basically, I have had ZERO success with Debian ITPs, and much more successful here.
[00:41] <Eickmeyer[m]> RAOF:  All of the packages I have introduced have gone directly to Ubuntu and not to Debian, never even received a response on any Debian ITPs I have introduced.
[00:54] <RAOF> Eickmeyer: Huh, I'm surprised that no one else has asked whether something's going to Debian. Generally we try and minimise the number of Ubuntu-only packages (and this seems perfectly sensible to have in Debian)
[00:56] <Eickmeyer[m]> RAOF: Here's the thing: I need avldrums.lv2 to be a replacement for hydrogen if the hydrogen team fails to release their 1.0 (Qt5) version in time for Focal. Hydrogen is part of our install test-case, which will have to be rewritten if hydrogen isn't Qt5, so this has some time urgency.
[00:56] <Eickmeyer[m]> RAOF: By "our" I mean Ubuntu Studio.
[01:02] <RAOF> Yeah, I'm not going to block on it not being in Debian!
[01:02] <Eickmeyer[m]> RAOF: I'm working on getting the copyright fixed now, feel free to reject on that one.
[01:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected lv2vst [source] (focal-proposed) [20190930-0ubuntu1]
[01:19] <RAOF> Also please extend the description to give some idea of who should use it and when :)
[01:44] <Eickmeyer[m]> RAOF: I'm actually going to contact the upstream developer of avldrums to see if this is even a prerequisite. I'm just thinking about it considerably, and I'd like to be able to skip this package if I'm being honest.
[01:45] <RAOF> Heh.
[01:49] <Eickmeyer[m]> RAOF: I was using the packaging done by the developer of KXStudio as a baseline, and he had it as a build dep, but the description of lv2vst doesn't make sense for that, since avldrums is an lv2 plugin, unless the intention is to repackage avldrums as a vst plugin, which I have no interest in doing.
[01:51] <RAOF> Then it does indeed seem not-useful.
[02:17] <Eickmeyer[m]> RAOF: Yep, just confirmed: the KXStudio developer likes to re-wrap LV2 plugins as VST, so it's unnecessary. I'll get avldrums.lv2 headed your way ASAP.
[02:17] <RAOF> Oh no! I've signed up for more work! :)
[02:18] <Eickmeyer[m]> RAOF: LOL! Unless someone else beats you, but I don't want it to sit for another month, since that cuts it WAY too close for me to rewrite the test case.
[02:23] <teward> RAOF: not sure if my devscripts and such is fubar but i ran licensecheck and that one bad license didn't trigger o.O
[02:23]  * teward headscratches at that one
[02:23] <teward> just following up on my old emails :P
[02:27] <teward> RAOF: got a few seconds for a PM to clarify something?
[02:28] <teward> license definition compatibility related question
[02:28] <RAOF> Sure
[03:18] <vorlon> Laney: how do you actually run the testsuite for britney2? .travis.yml seems to only refer to nosetests3, which I can't see is running any tests of the autopkgtest policy
[05:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pt2-clone [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.02-1] (no packageset)
[05:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pt2-clone [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.02-1] (no packageset)
[05:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-extprim [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.7.0-2] (i386-excludes)
[05:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pt2-clone [s390x] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.02-1] (no packageset)
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pt2-clone [armhf] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.02-1] (no packageset)
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pt2-clone [arm64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.02-1] (no packageset)
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-extprim [s390x] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.7.0-2] (i386-excludes)
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-extprim [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.7.0-2] (i386-excludes)
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-extprim [arm64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.7.0-2] (i386-excludes)
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-extprim [armhf] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.7.0-2] (i386-excludes)
[08:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: alsa-lib (eoan-proposed/main) [1.1.9-0ubuntu1 => 1.1.9-0ubuntu1.1] (core)
[08:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: alsa-lib (bionic-proposed/main) [1.1.3-5ubuntu0.2 => 1.1.3-5ubuntu0.3] (core)
[08:50] <cpaelzer> good morning AAs
[08:50] <cpaelzer> there is abinary move main->universe for nut-powerman-pdu of src:nut
[08:50] <cpaelzer> that is expected and intended
[08:50] <cpaelzer> would be great if one could flop the swithces on that :-)
[08:50] <cpaelzer> thanks in advance
[08:50] <cpaelzer> seb128: doko: apw: ^^ (pings for the morning AA crew)
[08:51] <seb128> cpaelzer, hey, any idea who moved it and why?
[08:52] <seb128> I will wait a bit for the others to comment in case they know but will fix it in a bit if they don't reply/know
[08:52] <cpaelzer> yes seb128 we did that, let me summarize
[08:52] <cpaelzer> for years we had a delta droppign the binary
[08:52] <cpaelzer> reason is from the times where you could not have unniverse build-deps
[08:53] <cpaelzer> now we can have those, so we added back (drop delta) the universe build dep
[08:53] <cpaelzer> that builds the new binary and since src:nut is in main it automatically got added there
[08:53] <seb128> ah, makes sense
[08:53] <cpaelzer> so this isn't a surprise, but I need AAs help to get it resolved
[08:54] <cpaelzer> kanashiro: was doing the upload and xnox was the one who spotted that we can let go of this old part of the delta
[08:54] <seb128> cpaelzer, done
[08:55] <cpaelzer> thank you seb128
[08:55] <seb128> np!
[09:03] <Laney> vorlon: I just run tests/test_autopkgtest.py directly
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pt2-clone [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.02-1]
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pt2-clone [armhf] (focal-proposed) [1.02-1]
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pt2-clone [s390x] (focal-proposed) [1.02-1]
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-extprim [arm64] (focal-proposed) [1.7.0-2]
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-extprim [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [1.7.0-2]
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pt2-clone [arm64] (focal-proposed) [1.02-1]
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-extprim [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.7.0-2]
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-extprim [s390x] (focal-proposed) [1.7.0-2]
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pt2-clone [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [1.02-1]
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-extprim [armhf] (focal-proposed) [1.7.0-2]
=== andrewc is now known as Guest45944
[11:24] <LocutusOfBorg> please somebody: missing build on armhf: libsfcgal-dev, libsfcgal1 (removed in debian)
[11:24] <LocutusOfBorg> htslib on s390x (and reverse-deps) removed in debian
[11:24] <LocutusOfBorg> autopkgtest for ocfs2-tools/unknown: s390x: Regression (NBS cleanup not built on s390x anymore)
[11:25] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks!
[11:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: llvm-toolchain-8 [s390x] (focal-proposed/universe) [1:8.0.1-5~build1] (core)
[11:43] <kanashiro> cpaelzer, seb128 thanks for src:nut
[11:43] <seb128> kanashiro, np
[11:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected fwupd [source] (eoan-proposed) [1.2.10-1ubuntu4]
[11:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted backport-iwlwifi-dkms [source] (eoan-proposed) [7906-0ubuntu4]
[11:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted backport-iwlwifi-dkms [source] (bionic-proposed) [7906-0ubuntu4~18.04.1]
[12:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected fwupd [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.2.10-1ubuntu2~ubuntu18.04.3]
[12:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fwupd [source] (eoan-proposed) [1.2.10-1ubuntu4]
[12:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd (eoan-proposed/main) [1.2.10-1ubuntu4 => 1.2.10-1ubuntu4] (core)
[12:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: llvm-toolchain-8 [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1:8.0.1-5~build1] (core)
[12:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd (eoan-proposed/main) [1.2.10-1ubuntu4 => 1.2.10-1ubuntu4] (core)
[12:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd (eoan-proposed/main) [1.2.10-1ubuntu4 => 1.2.10-1ubuntu4] (core)
[12:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd (eoan-proposed/main) [1.2.10-1ubuntu4 => 1.2.10-1ubuntu4] (core)
[12:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ldc [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1:1.18.0-2ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: llvm-toolchain-8 [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/universe) [1:8.0.1-5~build1] (core)
[13:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ldc [arm64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1:1.18.0-2ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[13:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ldc [armhf] (focal-proposed/universe) [1:1.18.0-2ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ldc [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1:1.18.0-2ubuntu1]
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ldc [armhf] (focal-proposed) [1:1.18.0-2ubuntu1]
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted llvm-toolchain-8 [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [1:8.0.1-5~build1]
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ldc [arm64] (focal-proposed) [1:1.18.0-2ubuntu1]
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted llvm-toolchain-8 [s390x] (focal-proposed) [1:8.0.1-5~build1]
[14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted llvm-toolchain-8 [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1:8.0.1-5~build1]
[14:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (bionic-proposed/main) [0.7.5-1ubuntu16.7 => 0.7.5-1ubuntu16.8] (core)
[15:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: spl-linux (bionic-proposed/universe) [0.7.5-1ubuntu2 => 0.7.5-1ubuntu2.1] (no packageset)
[15:25] <vorlon> Laney: ah ok
[15:49] <xnox> vorlon:  Laney: arm64 autopkgtest VMs fail to start, and autopkgtest fails to ssh into the VM i.e. https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-focal/focal/arm64/c/cmake-extras/20200117_053318_aaef2@/log.gz
[15:50] <xnox> vorlon:  Laney: can we please bad test cmake-extras:arm64 to let a bunch of things migrate; or can somebody troubleshoot what is happening to the arm64 VMs?
[15:50] <Laney> the second one
[15:50] <Laney> that is an all-proposed run which pulled in a new kernel
[15:51] <Laney> did this happen without that?
[15:55] <Laney> doesn't look like it
[15:55] <Laney> so I guess the advice is: don't try with all-proposed or you might get a new kernal and that kernel might not work
[16:01] <xnox> Laney:  also needs reporting to kernel team i guess.
[16:02] <xnox> apw:  is linux-5.4 busted on arm64? all autopkgtest VM machines fail to come up, hence any tests triggered by linux-5.4 or linux-meta-5.4 on arm64 report <pkg>/unknown => meaning the VM failed to start.
[16:02] <xnox> sforshee:  ^
[16:03] <Laney> I wouldn't normally ping maintainers about their broken stuff, assuming that they check their own results
[16:03] <Laney> but thanks :-)
[16:03] <sforshee> xnox: yes, we're working on it
[16:04] <xnox> apw:  sforshee: note we recently had nasty binutils issues in focal-proposed on arm* thus one may need to rebuild linux-5.4 with latest binutils from focal-proposed to unfuck things. Unless it's not that.
[16:04] <xnox> sforshee:  cool
[16:05] <sforshee> xnox: what's the nature of the binutils issues? What we're seeing is an undefined instruction during boot, so certainly could be binutils
[16:05] <xnox> sforshee:  we've seen SIGIL illegal instruction due to fuck ups in ELF composed by binutils.
[16:06] <xnox> in userspace binaries.
[16:06] <xnox> sforshee:  do try simply rebuilding the kernel in focal-proposed, to see if things are "fixed"
[16:06] <sforshee> xnox: will do, thanks!
[16:10] <sforshee> xnox: I don't suppose there's a way I can tell it to just rebuild arm64 without uploading a new version, is there?
[16:13] <xnox> sforshee:  there is not.
[16:14] <xnox> one can only retry failed/cancelled builds. if it's been built and published, one has to do a new upload.
[16:15] <sforshee> xnox: that's what I thought, too bad
[16:15] <xnox> sforshee:  you can do a source copy to a ppa
[16:15] <xnox> sforshee:  that will be rebuild in that new ppa
[16:15] <xnox> sforshee:  and then one can test it
[16:15] <xnox> sforshee:  but one will not be able to put it back into the archive.
[16:15] <Laney> ya, and disable the arches you don't want in that ppa
[16:16] <xnox> sforshee:  see ./copy-package script in ubuntu-archive-tools
[16:16] <sforshee> xnox: yeah I'm familiar with how to do that
[16:56] <vorlon> Laney: well, running tests/test_autopkgtest.py fails because it seems to be looking for files under data/ that don't exist
[16:59] <Laney> vorlon: ExcuseBugs?
[16:59] <Laney> does look like my test fix had a bug due to a last minute change /o\
[16:59] <vorlon> huh
[16:59] <vorlon> yeah
[17:00] <Laney> try pulling
[17:04] <vorlon> Laney: ta
[17:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-vispy [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [0.6.4-1] (no packageset)
[17:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.3.0-28.30~18.04.1] (kernel)
[17:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe [arm64] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.3.0-28.30~18.04.1] (kernel)
[17:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.3.0-28.30~18.04.1] (kernel)
[19:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: debian-astro [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [2.1] (no packageset)
[19:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted debian-astro [amd64] (focal-proposed) [2.1]
[19:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-vispy [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.6.4-1]
[20:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-hwe [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [5.3.0-28.30~18.04.1]
[20:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-hwe [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed) [5.3.0-28.30~18.04.1]
[20:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-hwe [arm64] (bionic-proposed) [5.3.0-28.30~18.04.1]
[22:35] <OldManWinter> Huh, what happened to wireguard-linux-compat?  It should have been sync'd, Launchpad sees it (https://launchpad.net/debian/+source/wireguard-linux-compat), but I don't see it in any queues here: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+queue
[22:56] <cjwatson> [New] wireguard-linux-compat_0.0.20191226-1
[22:56] <cjwatson> No previous publications in Ubuntu
[22:56] <cjwatson> OK (Y/n)?  y
[22:56] <cjwatson>  * Trying to add wireguard-linux-compat ...
[22:56] <cjwatson> wireguard-linux-compat_0.0.20191226-1 is trying to override modified binary wireguard-dkms_0.0.20191219-1ubuntu1.  OK (y/N)?  n
[22:56] <cjwatson> https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/auto-sync/current.log
[22:58] <cjwatson> OldManWinter: ^- needs somebody to look at it and decide either that it's OK to overwrite that binary package that previously had an "ubuntu" substring in its version to indicate Ubuntu modification, or that it needs to be uploaded manually with the relevant Ubuntu delta added
[23:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ruby-github-markup [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.7.0+dfsg-3] (no packageset)
[23:18] <OldManWinter> cjwatson: Ah, OK.  I did the last wireguard merge, and the tools were split out from the dkms module in prep for inclusion in the kernel.  The delta is dropping autopkgtests and a couple patches.
[23:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: wireguard-linux-compat (focal-proposed/primary) [0.0.20191226-1ubuntu1]
[23:39] <OldManWinter> ...Well this is entirely embarassing, but can someone reject ↑?