[06:49] vorlon: why are you trying to sync python-secretstorage? It is still in main, and jeepney is still in universe. [06:49] mitya57: because I forgot that's why it wasn't synced and it showed up on merges [06:49] Ok [06:50] * mitya57 should have mentioned that in changelog [09:24] xnox: no idea, sorry [11:34] juliank: Saviq is stuck in a boot loop, where something creates Ubuntu entry, points it at grubx64 and mokmanager is not being booted (it did boot once, but he quit it rather than completing it) [11:35] o/ juliank - I can boot, but I have to keep the grub entry, hopefully not default [11:35] And yeah somehow there's nothing resembling mokmanager on my system… [11:36] Not sure how to add [11:36] once booted, [11:36] Or is that what mmx is? [11:36] yes it is [11:36] not memory test thing =) [11:37] i think in verbose mode you should be able to use efibootmgr to add a new entry and set it as bootnext [11:38] doko: server team were already looking at xen mini-transition when i poked them due to auto-tracker detecting it. Also it looks like at https://launchpad.net/~lucaskanashiro/+archive/ubuntu/focal-ruby2.7-transition someone from server team is evaluating ruby2.7 transition. [11:38] I was able to add it in setup, but it's unsigned… [11:38] sounds wrong, because it is signed [11:38] ah [11:38] well [11:38] one needs to make shim boot mmx [11:39] Right :) [11:39] there was like a magic config file or variables to make shim boot mm, instead of grub [11:43] Saviq: can you use mokutil [11:43] and like re-roll it with: [11:44] mokutil --disable-validation [11:44] mokutil --enable-validation [11:44] and after the --disable-validaion go through the whole password, reboot, type password flow [11:44] and again after enable-validation? [11:47] Trying [11:48] Got mm to start at least [11:52] xnox: ok that got me through, thanks! [11:53] juliank, I'd still like to talk to you about what went wrong here, maybe we can fix? [12:00] Saviq: sure we can do some digging on Monday [12:00] * juliank is out today [12:03] ack! [12:23] tjaalton: hi, around? Got a question about your pkcs11 patch on bind9 [12:23] bug #1565392 for reference [12:23] bug 1565392 in bind9 (Ubuntu) "[FFE] add support for native pkcs11" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1565392 [12:24] Can someone remind me where the script is for email address collection for an election please? [12:24] tjaalton: is that still needed by freeipa? Debian dropped that in their 9.12.0 package, stating that there "is a better solution with openssl engines" [12:43] ahasenack: 9.12 reimplemented it in some way, I guess. fedora hasn't moved to it yet [12:43] just like they haven't moved to > jdk8 [12:43] tjaalton: but does freeipa need a bind with pkcs11 support? [12:43] err, jdk > 8 [12:43] yes [12:44] then again, it got removed from focal, so [12:44] and that cannot be achieved via openssl configuration? [12:44] ah, that was my next question [12:44] freeipa's state in focal [12:46] haven't decided if the server will be reuploaded [12:46] dogtag got removed and freeipa with it, but jdk8 will be in focal [12:48] so experimental has 9.15, you're going to move to it? [12:48] no, the package in experimental has too many packaging changes, and looks incomplete [12:48] it doesn't have devel libraries [12:49] no s ymbols files [12:49] (all lib packages were merged into bind9-libs, and no symbols with them) [12:49] no export version too, afaik [12:49] that was for a reason aiui [12:49] but anyway, maybe best to stick to 9.11.x [12:49] well, that's the thing [12:49] the upcoming 9.16 is their lts release [12:50] heh [12:50] we could really benefit from moving to it [12:50] your call [12:50] 9.16 will be released this week or the next [12:54] * rbasak finds https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~stefanor/+junk/election-tools/view/head:/voter-addresses.py [12:57] that's the one [12:57] ahasenack: I'm not going to block the update. apparently it's not an easy task to port bind-dyndb-ldap over [12:57] ah, there's that one [12:58] I haven't checked it [12:58] and samba, come to think of it [13:16] 147 email addresses for the poll. 28 people are eligible but don't have an email address published that I can use [13:17] Some of them are quite active. What have they done in the past? Asked for a poll manually? [13:18] We've previously said "if you don't receive a ballot, ask for one" in the CfV mail. I don't remember ever receiving such a request though, so maybe that's not enough? [13:20] IMHO it's sufficient to have emailed u-d-a@ [13:20] (with instructions) [13:20] As long as I don't get inundanted with manual requests. 28 seems rather a lot. But it sounds like that won't be a concern then :) [13:21] inundanted [13:21] My fingers seem incapable of typing that [13:21] inundated [13:22] It does sound high for active uploaders, I'd have expected the GPG thingy to have found email addresses from their keys [13:22] I disabled the GPG thingy [13:22] Maybe I shouldn't have [13:22] But don't we no longer trust SKS keyservers? [13:23] I think it should be OK to query keyserver.u.c with the full fingerprint [13:23] gtg have lunch, sorry [13:24] The code has keyserver.leg.uct.ac.za hardcoded [13:30] * rbasak fights through some Python 2 induced UTF-8 goodness [13:35] With the keyserver support fix, 28 errored goes down to 2. [13:35] That's much better [13:56] sunweaver, Missing build dependencies: mate-common (>= 1.24.0-1~) [13:56] mate-common 1.24.0-0ubuntu1 [13:56] meh [14:01] "None of the above" is confusing because it'll appear backwards when people actually vote (on that particular page, "None of the below" would make more sense). What's a better term that doesn't rely on the ordering in which candidates appear? [14:03] rbasak, do you have an example so I can see ? [14:05] depmod: ERROR: ../libkmod/libkmod.c:515 lookup_builtin_file() could not open builtin file '/var/tmp/mkinitramfs_HAauWM/lib/modules/5.4.0-14-generic/modules.builtin.bin' [14:05] are you all getting this ^ for focal as well ? [14:05] (during update-initramfs) [14:05] slashd: so a quick Google revealed https://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/vote.pl?id=E_7afed1599f666137&akey=09c624659290123f for instance. Imagine if "None" said "None of the above". Try to vote for two of those, and nothing else. [14:05] (I don't mean that you should actually submit the vote, of course) [14:06] How about "No further candidates"? [14:07] Debian typically calls it "Further Discussion" but of course that doesn't make sense here. [14:07] rbasak, I'm good with "No further candidates" [14:08] rbasak possibly instead of allowing a vote for 'None' it would be better to clarify voters should use 'no opinion' for anyone they don't want to vote for, e.g. https://civs.cs.cornell.edu/faq.html [14:08] adding a 'None' candidate just means that if it wins, the DMB will be short 1 member, right? [14:08] ddstreet: correct, but multiple people have suggested to me that it will give more credibility to the vote to permit that as an option [14:09] I don't see it happening that "No further candidates" will rank higher than any of the current candidates, but giving the electorate that option does make sense I guess. [14:09] ddstreet, "no opinion" for me sound I don't care-ish ... while I think the vote should be decisive [14:09] i hope 'None' doesn't win then, unless that also adjusts the threshhold for quorum :) [14:10] I don't think it'll happen, but if it does, I'll ask the TB to decide what to do. [14:10] slashd no, the 'no option' is an actual ranking choice in the poll, not a title of something you can vote for [14:10] the faq explains it in that first question [14:11] https://civs.cs.cornell.edu/faq.html [14:11] * slashd reading [14:11] rbasak, ^^ [14:12] "Voters often pick “no opinion” when what they mean is that they don't like the choice or that they don't have any information about it." [14:12] *If* we want to give the electorate an option to reject a candidate, then I think a "No further candidates" option makes sense to allow the electorate to positively specify that. [14:13] On the If, there seems to be consensus from the current DMB that we do what to do that. [14:13] So I intend to go ahead with "No further candidates" rather than enable the no opinion option. [14:13] rbasak, sound good to me [14:15] i guess this means there are only 8 candidates ;-) [14:20] ddstreet: why do you say that? [14:20] ddstreet: the FAQ "Setting up a poll" question 3 seems to cover this case. [14:21] rbasak well i assumed we don't need 'None' option if there are more candidates than open positions [14:21] but i suppose 'None' could still win over multiple candidates [14:21] It could [14:23] rbasak option 3 is possible but it's different than just a 'None', if 'Unacceptable' won first place, then effectively the voters would have chosen *nobody* to serve on the DMB [14:23] not just 1 member short [14:23] anyway, whatever you think is best [14:24] if this case happens we will ask TBD to decide what is the next step ^^^ [14:24] ddstreet: yes. I think that's intentional. It allows the electorate to decide that everyone is unacceptable, which is a valid position to hold and be reflected in the vote. [14:24] It doesn't help staff the DMB of course, but if that's what the electorate wants... :) [14:26] sounds like the entry should be named as suggested then, 'choices ranked below this are unacceptable' [14:31] aka "None of the above", which is always included on Debian votes [14:34] so you get a result normally like Alice, Bob, Charlies, None-of-the-above, Drew, Erin, Francis, [14:39] OK poll created, and announcement sent to u-d-a@ [14:40] Now let's see how many mistakes I made :-/ [14:41] rbasak, thanks for the work on this [14:42] rbasak, there is a typo in rafaeldtinoco nickname, but I don't think it's big enough to generate confusion about who he is, ... but prefer to let you know [14:43] Thanks [14:43] Sorry rafaeldtinoco! [14:43] lol [14:43] no problem, i just realized that now [14:43] that slashd pointed out [14:45] I'm going to pull https://code.launchpad.net/~stefanor/+junk/election-tools into a git repository inside ~ubuntu-core-dev or similar. I have a bunch of fixes to the script, port to Python 3, etc. Any other choices for a good team? [14:49] u mean a team to place it ? or a name for a new team ? [14:49] An existing team to place it [14:49] Maybe even ~ubuntu-dev actually [14:50] +1 on ubuntu-dev [14:50] No reason the electorate can't help maintain the script that helps with their own elections [14:50] actually its really transparent =) [15:01] LocutusOfBorg: temporary issue... [15:05] LocutusOfBorg: I uploaded mate-common 1.24.0-1 to unstable now. Wimpress will see that it syncs over. Then this should be amended. [15:23] oof [15:23] rbasak: I used NOTB before: https://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_7ce24ee3e589e440 [15:23] sorry if this is underdocumented, must have escaped my parting brain dump AKA the knowledge base [15:27] would be good to update that while it's fresh :) [15:28] what a great slate of candidates! [16:10] sunweaver, nice! [16:23] bryce: https://code.launchpad.net/~rafaeldtinoco/ubuntu/+source/initramfs-tools/+git/initramfs-tools/+merge/379222 [16:23] u think u can +1 this ? its very easy to reproduce and check (if you have time of course) [16:23] rafaeldtinoco, alright, coffee first [16:23] deal [17:15] rafaeldtinoco, it's taking me a while to get kvm set up, I don't usually use kvm... it's coming up with no network and so I can't run update-initramfs -u [17:16] well, I mean I can run it, but I can't add the ppa before doing so [17:49] bryce: tried multipass? [17:49] or you need more low level access, like tweak qemu's command line? [17:50] ahasenack, I think I need to set up a bridge network device in NetworkManager [17:50] that sounds too complicated to be true [17:50] ahasenack, I know... :-/ [17:50] if you install libvirt, it creates a virbr0 bridge for you [17:50] same if you install multipass, it creates a bridge for you [17:53] why would you create a bridge yourself - do you need a VM that can be reached from the outside? [17:53] bryce: ^^ [17:54] cpaelzer, no, I just need to get a kvm vm that can install a ppa [17:55] but I rarely use kvm so the directions I'm googling are confusing [17:56] easiest I think is multipass; snap install multipass. multipass launch daily:focal [17:56] multipass shell [18:08] ahasenack, thanks that worked [18:08] cool [18:08] w00t [18:15] rafaeldtinoco, ok, mp looks good, +1 -- https://code.launchpad.net/~rafaeldtinoco/ubuntu/+source/initramfs-tools/+git/initramfs-tools/+merge/379222 [18:16] bryce: cool! thx bryce !! [19:49] ricotz: Shouldn't these new transitional packages in libreoffice (-gtk2 and -kde4) actually depend on the things they're being transitional to? As it stands it's not clear that they achieve anything [19:51] ricotz: I'll accept them to get things moving, but they look kind of pointless === led_dark_2 is now known as led_dark_1 [22:59] any idea why apr-util has a build-depends on python:any? [23:00] a grep for "python" in the entire source returns only a d/changelog entry saying that the python b-d was annotated with ":any"