[05:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: r-cran-setrng [amd64] (focal-proposed/none) [2013.9-1-1] (no packageset)
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nng [arm64] (focal-proposed) [1.2.3-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted r-cran-setrng [amd64] (focal-proposed) [2013.9-1-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted thesias [armhf] (focal-proposed) [3.1.1-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nng [armhf] (focal-proposed) [1.2.3-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wob [armhf] (focal-proposed) [0.6-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted thesias [arm64] (focal-proposed) [3.1.1-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nng [s390x] (focal-proposed) [1.2.3-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pacvim [arm64] (focal-proposed) [1.1.1-1~exp1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pacvim [s390x] (focal-proposed) [1.1.1-1~exp1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted thesias [s390x] (focal-proposed) [3.1.1-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wob [s390x] (focal-proposed) [0.6-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ocaml-astring [armhf] (focal-proposed) [0.8.3-1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted plastimatch [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.8.0+dfsg.1-2]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pacvim [armhf] (focal-proposed) [1.1.1-1~exp1]
[05:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wob [arm64] (focal-proposed) [0.6-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted antlr4-cpp-runtime [amd64] (focal-proposed) [4.8+dfsg-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted comskip [armhf] (focal-proposed) [0.82.009+ds.1-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fonts-solide-mirage [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.2-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nng [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.2.3-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ocaml-astring [arm64] (focal-proposed) [0.8.3-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wob [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [0.6-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted comskip [arm64] (focal-proposed) [0.82.009+ds.1-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted mecab [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.996-7]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ocaml-astring [s390x] (focal-proposed) [0.8.3-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted comskip [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [0.82.009+ds.1-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nng [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [1.2.3-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted boxfort [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.0.0-git20200105-3e16c0a-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted dark-gtk-themes [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted node-jquery-textcomplete [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.7.3+dfsg-2]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ocaml-astring [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [0.8.3-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted thesias [amd64] (focal-proposed) [3.1.1-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted comskip [s390x] (focal-proposed) [0.82.009+ds.1-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ocaml-astring [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.8.3-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted thesias [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [3.1.1-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted mopidy-gmusic [amd64] (focal-proposed) [4.0.0-1]
[05:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pacvim [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [1.1.1-1~exp1]
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted comskip [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.82.009+ds.1-1]
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-github-mattn-go-ieproxy [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.0~git20191113.7c0f686-1]
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-github-youmark-pkcs8 [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.1-1]
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wob [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.6-1]
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fonts-le-murmure [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.2-1]
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pacvim [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.1.1-1~exp1]
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golang-github-powerman-check [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.2.1-1]
[08:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rhythmbox [amd64] (focal-proposed) [3.4.4-1ubuntu1]
[08:23] <RikMills> can someone accept the plasma-discover binaries in NEW please?
[08:29] <locutus__> vorlon, please camitk, is now NBS everywhere except amd64... autopkgtest for camitk/4.1.2-4: amd64: Pass, arm64: Regression ♻ , armhf: Regression ♻ , i386: Regression ♻ , ppc64el: Regression ♻ , s390x: Regression ♻
[08:30] <locutus__> can you please do the magic? or anybody else
[10:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted plasma-discover [amd64] (focal-proposed) [5.17.90-0ubuntu2]
[10:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted plasma-discover [armhf] (focal-proposed) [5.17.90-0ubuntu2]
[10:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted plasma-discover [s390x] (focal-proposed) [5.17.90-0ubuntu2]
[10:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted plasma-discover [arm64] (focal-proposed) [5.17.90-0ubuntu2]
[10:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted plasma-discover [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [5.17.90-0ubuntu2]
[10:10] <apw> RikMills, ^
[10:10] <RikMills> apw: thanks :)
[10:10] <apw> locutus_, you mean it is FTBFS on everything but amd64 ?  and what are you hoping will be done with it
[10:11] <apw> locutus_, the others are in depwwait by the looks of it
[10:12] <locutus_> apw, hint the test
[10:13] <apw> locutus_, is it not expected to gain its dependency ?
[10:13] <locutus_> no
[10:13] <locutus_> itk-4 is amd64 only
[10:13] <locutus_> I asked to remove elsewhere because upstream don't want to support, and shipping stuff with broken testsuite and code, is bad
[10:14] <locutus_> we used to disable tests on non-amd archs, and this lead to errors in leaf packages such as camitk itself
[10:19] <apw> locutus_, ok, hinted
[10:19] <locutus_> ta.
[12:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gromacs [s390x] (focal-proposed/universe) [2020-2] (no packageset)
[12:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gromacs [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [2020-2] (no packageset)
[12:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gromacs [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/universe) [2020-2] (no packageset)
[13:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ec2-instance-connect (bionic-proposed/universe) [1.1.9-0ubuntu3~18.04.1 => 1.1.12+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~18.04.0] (no packageset)
[13:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ec2-instance-connect (xenial-proposed/universe) [1.1.9-0ubuntu3~16.04.1 => 1.1.12+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~16.04.0] (no packageset)
[13:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ec2-instance-connect (eoan-proposed/universe) [1.1.9-0ubuntu3 => 1.1.12+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~19.10.0] (no packageset)
[13:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-graphics-drivers-390 (bionic-proposed/restricted) [390.116-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 => 390.116-0ubuntu0.18.04.2] (ubuntu-desktop)
[14:05] <rbalint> RAOF, could you please check ec2-instance-connect packages in your sru cycles? ^
[14:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-390 [source] (bionic-proposed) [390.116-0ubuntu0.18.04.2]
[14:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oem [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1067.77] (kernel)
[14:26] <RAOF> Urgh. Why can't external services freeze their development along with Ubuntu freezes :)
[14:36] <RAOF> rbalint: The [Regression Potential] section of that bug is unconvincing. This is not a new package; it exists in all the series you're SRUing to.
[14:37] <RAOF> rbalint: It seems like the regression potential includes people losing SSH access to their VMs?
[14:37] <RAOF> (Which, presumably, they could get back via a web console, but still)
[14:38] <rbalint> RAOF, yes, and it will be newly installed on VMs by default after the MIR passes
[14:38] <rbalint> RAOF, i'm fixing the regression potential text, thanks for pointing that out
[14:38] <RAOF> If you'd kindly target the bug at the relevant series that'd be nice, too. LP timed out when I tried :)
[14:40] <RAOF> rbalint: Newly installed on (new) VMs by default is not as much of a regression concern as upgrading VMs which already have it.
[14:42] <rbalint> RAOF, i was luckier with lp, now it is targeted
[14:43] <RAOF> Ta.
[14:45] <RAOF> rbalint: What's the expectation for people upgrading the package? Are they going to get unexpected keys / unexpectedly missing keys?
[14:46] <rbalint> RAOF, no, they will not notice
[14:46] <rbalint> RAOF, I've extended the test case to cover that
[14:48] <RAOF> 👍️
[14:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted mdadm [source] (eoan-proposed) [4.1-2ubuntu3.2]
[14:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted mdadm [source] (bionic-proposed) [4.1~rc1-3~ubuntu18.04.4]
[14:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ec2-instance-connect [source] (eoan-proposed) [1.1.12+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~19.10.0]
[14:56] <RAOF> rbalint: Huh. Why is that tarball rebuilt with a +dfsg suffix? What non-free files are stripped?
[14:56] <rbalint> RAOF, only the debian dir was skipped
[14:58] <rbalint> RAOF, ds would have been a better choice
[14:58] <RAOF> So, (1) I think you'd traditionally use a +repack suffix for that (+dfsg implies some non-free files were stripped) and (2) If you're using source format 3.0 you don't actually need to strip an upstream debian/ directory.
[14:59] <RAOF> +ds would also be good, yeah.
[14:59] <RAOF> (At least according to https://wiki.debian.org/Projects/DebSrc3.0#Advantages_of_new_formats ; I haven't needed to use that feature)
[15:00] <RAOF> Anyway, that's not really apropos for the SRU review. More a general packaging review :)
[15:01] <rbalint> RAOF, in the next upload i will even consider switching to native, but thanks for the reminder, it was just an old habit to strip debian/
[15:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ec2-instance-connect [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.1.12+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~18.04.0]
[15:09] <RAOF> Why would you switch to native? That pretty obviously has a non-Ubuntu-specific upstream (as the rpm metadata suggests?)
[15:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: python-marshmallow-sqlalchemy (focal-proposed/primary) [0.19.0-1build1]
[15:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oem [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1067.77]
[15:16] <RAOF> You might want to mention that the xenial package isn't actually switched to debhelper 10 (as the changelog suggests)?
[15:16] <RAOF> Which is a good thing, because that's only in xenial-backports :)
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gromacs [amd64] (focal-proposed) [2020-2]
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gromacs [s390x] (focal-proposed) [2020-2]
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gromacs [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [2020-2]
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-marshmallow-sqlalchemy [source] (focal-proposed) [0.19.0-1build1]
[15:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ec2-instance-connect [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.1.12+dfsg1-0ubuntu1~16.04.0]
[15:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-marshmallow-sqlalchemy [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [0.19.0-1build1] (no packageset)
[15:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-marshmallow-sqlalchemy [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.19.0-1build1]
[15:45] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, please hint protobuf on i386 please?
[15:46] <LocutusOfBorg> apw, did you forget i386 on camitk hint? itk4 is not on "keep this package on i386" list
[15:49] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, seemingly even though i though i cut-n-pasted the errors from that line ... sigh
[16:05] <LocutusOfBorg> :)
[16:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-76.86~16.04.1] (kernel)
[16:32] <sil2100> hm, someone accepted fwupd without its fwupd-signed counterpart
[16:32] <sil2100> For bionic
[16:33] <sil2100> tjaalton: you want to review and accept fwupd-signed for bionic as well or should I do the review?
[16:33] <RikMills> yeah, hence iso fail :/
[16:34] <sil2100> Oh, actually, I don't see it in the queue, though I was sure I saw it
[16:34] <sil2100> Maybe it's in Rejected
[16:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe [ppc64el] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-76.86~16.04.1] (kernel)
[16:35] <sil2100> tjaalton: I see a fwupd-signed in Rejected, I assume this is the one that was alongside the accepted fwupd?
[16:36] <sil2100> tjaalton: nvm, I see it's not that one, guess we need a new upload
[16:37] <sil2100> I'll just do it and poke someone for a review
[16:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd-signed (bionic-proposed/main) [1.10~ubuntu18.04.2 => 1.10~ubuntu18.04.3] (no packageset)
[16:41] <sil2100> vorlon, bdmurray, rbasak, infinity, tjaalton: can one of you review/accept the fwupd-signed upload ^? It's a bump for the new fwupd, as it was accepted without a new -signed bump, causing image builds to fail
[16:50] <LocutusOfBorg> considering regression in release and this bug:
[16:50] <LocutusOfBorg> http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/r/rtags/focal/arm64
[16:50] <LocutusOfBorg> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rtags/+bug/1851700
[16:51] <LocutusOfBorg> can we please get an hint on arm64?
[16:52] <LocutusOfBorg> doko, can you please kick diet.ng out from release pocket? https://bugs.debian.org/944626
[16:52] <LocutusOfBorg> ldc thanks you :D
[16:55] <LocutusOfBorg> nevermind, probably not neeed, it has been already removed on armhf
[17:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (bionic-proposed/main) [1.8+18.04ubuntu1 => 1.8+18.04ubuntu2] (desktop-core)
[17:54] <vorlon> sil2100: done
[17:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fwupd-signed [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.10~ubuntu18.04.3]
[17:56] <vorlon> locutus__: protobuf> the mass hint of packages that built on i386 but have failing tests was a one-time deal.  When updating these packages, there should be analysis of whether the test is unfixable and should be permanently hinted
[17:58] <sil2100> vorlon: thank you o/
[18:00] <vorlon> landed my change to britney2 to not trigger tests on architectures for which there are no binaries in -proposed. That should reduce the number of false-positives requiring hinting.
[18:01] <locutus__> vorlon, it is trying to install NBS packages...
[18:02] <vorlon> locutus__: which ones are NBS, specifically?
[18:02] <vorlon> and should it not be fixed by making the test install the amd64 versions of these packages?
[18:03] <locutus__> https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-focal/focal/i386/p/protobuf/20200116_165932_b88d4@/log.gz
[18:04] <locutus__>  builddeps:/tmp/autopkgtest.ujx0Xm/1-autopkgtest-satdep.dsc:i386 : Depends: ruby-google-protobuf:i386 Depends: libprotobuf-dev:i386 Depends: libprotoc-dev:i386  Depends: python3-protobuf:i386 Depends: make:i386  Depends: zlib1g-dev:i386 but it is not going to be installed            Depends: build-essential:amd64
[18:04] <locutus__> not sure what does it mean...
[18:47] <tjaalton> sil2100: ugh, yeah it didn't have a matching -signed upload, and when I resurrected the one I first rejected, didn't remember to create one
[18:54] <sil2100> tjaalton: yeah, happens when there's a lot of back and forth with this package ;)
[18:54] <tjaalton> it has seen that, yes..
[20:40] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: I've just landed a fix for how pinning is handled for cross-testing (see #ubuntu-devel), and I'm retrying the protobuf test with this fix, since linux-libc-dev is out-of-date on i386 in -proposed and causing all-proposed to generally fail right now on i386
[20:53] <RikMills> xnox: python3-autopilot-tests depends on python-windowmocker which is python2. this seems wrong? should depend on python-windowmocker?
[20:54] <RikMills> umm I mean doko ^
[20:56] <RikMills> if it can depend on python3-windowmocker looks like the python2 binary could be dropped
[21:22] <vorlon> autopilot-tests> unmaintained project, should probably all be removed
[21:22] <vorlon> I think there's at least one removal bug for this but needs working through the revdeps etc
[21:29] <RikMills> vorlon: yeah, I was trying to uncouple it from python-qt4, but removal entirely was my next question if that was difficult
[21:30] <infinity> vorlon: Wait, why is linux-libc-dev out-of-date in proposed?  That just looks to me like it's accidentally blacklisted.
[21:30] <infinity> (Or, rather, not whitelisted)
[21:31] <infinity> vorlon: If you add linux-5.4 to your packageset, I can cause the build record to appear.
[21:32] <infinity> Also, has anyone explained why they suddenly decided to start versioning the linux source package name? :/
[21:32] <infinity> sforshee: ^
[21:36] <infinity> vorlon: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-5.4/5.4.0-11.14/+build/18595926
[21:40] <infinity> vorlon: There, i386 has linux-libc-dev now.
[21:40] <sforshee> infinity: mostly so that we can get versions into devel-proposed earlier without superseding the stable version
[21:41] <infinity> sforshee: I don't see how this actually accomplishes that.
[21:41] <infinity> sforshee: Some packages are unversioned, and will supersede anyway, and the versioned packages are only removed by NBS cleanup, which we could just opt to not do for a bit, if that's a concern.
[21:42] <infinity> sforshee: Anyhow, versioned sources can be a maintenance nightmare that reverberates far beyond your own git repo.  Just FYI.
[21:43] <infinity> sforshee: If what you really want is a "stable" and "edge", I'd recommend using the same naming we do for HWE, so there's only two sources (linux and linux-edge) and make the packaging make smart decisions based on source name (ie: -edge doesn't build linux-libc-dev, etc)
[21:43] <infinity> So there's no overlap between sources.
[21:43] <infinity> Which there very much is right now.
[21:43] <sforshee> infinity: there's more to it than just the rename which addresses some of what you've said. This plan was developed in concert with apw who I assume was aware of the archive implications
[21:44] <infinity> I suspect he wasn't fully aware, no.
[21:44] <infinity> Like the new and shiny part that we have to add the new source package to a whitelist every single time by hand for the rest of eternity. :P
[21:45] <sforshee> ok ... well it's not too late to reverse course if there are intractible issues
[21:46] <infinity> I wouldn't call that intractable, but it's mind-numbingly annoying.  linux-lts-$release had the same issues, which was one reason I pushed so hard for a stable "linux-hwe" and "linux-hwe-edge" to not have to keep dealing with new source package names all the time.
[21:47] <infinity> sforshee: Like I said, though, if the goal is really just to be able to have "the stable stuff we put on images" and "a snapshot of linux-next that we want people to be able to test", I'd think "linux" and "linux-edge" would make the most sense, with linux-edge never producing unversioned packages like linux-libc-dev.
[21:49] <infinity> sforshee: Bonus points if linux-edge has a release checklist item to make sure it's deleted before release.
[21:49] <sforshee> infinity: that's the main benefit to me, it also has some benefits for transitioning hwe-edge to hwe as it becomes just a meta package upload to do so. And maybe some other things I'm forgetting. It's something we've already been doing with the cloud backports
[21:49] <infinity> (So people don't expect support of some random stale snapshot)
[21:50] <infinity> Yeah, I've seen some cloud kernels with that scheme, but the reasoning wasn't originally this, to be fair. :P
[21:50] <infinity> It was that they wanted versions other than the ones originally committed to, and things got messy.
[21:50] <infinity> Anyhow, hwe and hwe-edge (and cloud) have the advantage that all their packages can be versioned.
[21:51] <infinity> So, yeah, you can just flip metas and carry on.
[21:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd (bionic-proposed/main) [1.2.10-1ubuntu2~ubuntu18.04.3 => 1.2.10-1ubuntu2~ubuntu18.04.4] (desktop-core)
[21:51] <infinity> linux had unversioned packages.  I guess we could make linux-libc-dev a meta that points at linux-5.4-libc-dev to "fix" that instead.
[21:51] <infinity> s/had/has/
[21:52] <infinity> There will always be chicken and egg issues with things not building for i386 until they're whitelisted, though, which sucks a bit.
[21:52] <sforshee> potentially, right now we have packaging voodoo which makes linux-libc-dev only produced by the kernel we consider to be the primary one
[21:53] <infinity> But we can work around that earlier if you're aware of the issue and build it into your process (ie: when you start staging linux-5.5, tell us to whitelist it)
[21:53] <sforshee> we can certainly do that
[21:53] <infinity> sforshee: If it's only produced by "the primary", then you lose the ability to flip primaries with a meta upload.
[21:53] <sforshee> right, we don't have that bit of niceness for the master kernels
[21:54] <infinity> Seems like a solid argument for the rename, so may as well fix it to work. :P
[21:54] <infinity> Cause without that argument, I'd be inclined to suggest a rename to "linux".
[21:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added linux-5.4 to i386-whitelist in focal
[21:54] <infinity> ^-- That's the thing we need to manually do to get you build records.
[21:55] <infinity> And it's chicken-eggish, in that there's a cronjob that runs germinate that would totally determine that needs to be added... If the packages exited for germinate to find and add them.  Which they never will, until after they're whitelisted and built.
[21:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd-signed (bionic-proposed/main) [1.10~ubuntu18.04.3 => 1.10~ubuntu18.04.4] (no packageset)
[21:58] <sforshee> infinity: ok, I'll take all that under advisement and talk it over with apw tomorrow
[21:58] <infinity> sforshee: You, me, and apw would be nice.
[21:58] <sforshee> sounds good
[21:58] <infinity> sforshee: Finer points, we can sort out, I'm calming down now. :)
[21:59] <infinity> sforshee: But for now, absolutely add "get someone to add linux-X.X to the i386-whitelist for the target series" to your new version checklist before your first PPA upload (since PPAs also obey these filters)
[22:00] <infinity> sforshee: I'm not positive who $someone is, packageset permissions are weird, it might be an AA, it might be TB, I think the only people who've directly mangled it to date are vorlon and I, who happen to share too many teams to determine that.
[22:00] <vorlon> infinity: I believe the owner of the packageset is set to AA
[22:00] <vorlon> thanks for sorting l-l-d
[22:01] <infinity> vorlon: Kay.  That certainly sounds like it's what we'd want.
[22:13] <infinity> vorlon: Oh also.  I saw you'd touched some code close to this, so you might know the answer.  britney waits to trigger tests until "all" arches are in.  Is all "everything we think we'll build on" (ie: nothing out of date) or "the intersection of not out of date and arches we actually run tests for".
[22:14] <infinity> vorlon: I assume it's the former, but maybe you spotted how hard it would be to do the latter, so when we add riscv64, we can trigger tests when the other 6 arches land and not wait for riscv64 to take another day to build.
[22:15] <vorlon> infinity: I don't know offhand if it waits for non-test archs before triggering tests
[22:16] <infinity> vorlon: Kay.  We'll probably want to know the answer (and fix it if the answer's wrong) before we start building -proposed for riscv64. :)
[22:19] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: ok, protobuf tests require python3-gi, which is a non-starter, so yes I'll mark this perma-bad
[22:46] <ddstreet> vorlon any chance you or another ~ubuntu-sru could review/approve the systemd in the upload queue for b/e?
[23:01] <vorlon> ddstreet: the header of debian/patches/lp1845909/0001-network-rename-linux_configure_after_setting_mtu-to-linux.patch appears to be a lie; I see substantive changes to the set_mtu_handler() function in this patch, such as dropping an early return
[23:04] <vorlon> ddstreet: and the statement in the description of LP: #1845909 that "that commit is already included in Eoan so this sru is needed only for Disco" is at odds with the 5 patches related to this bug that are in this debdiff
[23:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ipmctl [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [02.00.00.3673+ds-2] (no packageset)
[23:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: liblivemedia [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [2020.01.19-1] (i386-whitelist, kubuntu)
[23:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: liblivemedia [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/universe) [2020.01.19-1] (i386-whitelist, kubuntu)
[23:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: liblivemedia [i386] (focal-proposed/universe) [2020.01.19-1] (i386-whitelist, kubuntu)
[23:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: liblivemedia [s390x] (focal-proposed/universe) [2020.01.19-1] (i386-whitelist, kubuntu)
[23:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: liblivemedia [arm64] (focal-proposed/universe) [2020.01.19-1] (i386-whitelist, kubuntu)
[23:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: liblivemedia [armhf] (focal-proposed/universe) [2020.01.19-1] (i386-whitelist, kubuntu)
[23:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted liblivemedia [arm64] (focal-proposed) [2020.01.19-1]
[23:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted liblivemedia [i386] (focal-proposed) [2020.01.19-1]
[23:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted liblivemedia [armhf] (focal-proposed) [2020.01.19-1]
[23:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted liblivemedia [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [2020.01.19-1]
[23:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ipmctl [amd64] (focal-proposed) [02.00.00.3673+ds-2]
[23:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted liblivemedia [s390x] (focal-proposed) [2020.01.19-1]
[23:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted liblivemedia [amd64] (focal-proposed) [2020.01.19-1]
[23:30] <vorlon> doko: python2.7/i386 autopkgtests pass with a small patch; where would you like this?  Debian BTS? https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/Pqy6x5M7Jr/