[00:10] <xnox> vorlon:  openssh:i386 has a depwait on libfido2-dev => would you like to disable that feature on i386? or build libfido2-dev for i386?
[00:10] <xnox> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssh/1:8.2p1-4/+build/18767920
[00:10] <vorlon> xnox: that's so 2 hours ago
[00:10] <vorlon> xnox: now I need to fix the dep-wait of libfido2/i386 instead
[00:11] <xnox> ok
[00:11] <xnox> vorlon:  you don't need to do no-change rebuild, you can have done a binary copy from focal to focal-proposed => this would have created a build record on i386.
[00:12]  * xnox ponders to do that with libcbor then
[00:12] <vorlon> (it's being mired so there's no reason to deviate)
[00:12] <vorlon> xnox: no, the binary copy does not create the build records
[00:12] <vorlon> I tried that early in the process :)
[00:13] <vorlon> xnox: hmm although I don't think I ever did a focal->focal-proposed, did you actually do this and see that it worked?
[00:14] <xnox> vorlon:  it did for me before, i've done that earler in the cycle when something for doko got re-whitelisted
[00:14] <xnox> i have done this now for libcbor, let's see what happens.
[00:14] <vorlon> k
[00:14]  * xnox has no ACLs to copy to focal-release, so I only can copy to focal-proposed
[00:15] <xnox> vorlon:  https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/i386/libcbor-dev looks like it is getting published from the past
[00:15] <vorlon> and we don't want it built in focal anyway, we want it built in focal-proposed and go through the appropriate p-m sanity checks
[00:15] <xnox> vorlon:  why build at all? it's simply republishing removed i386 binary that was there.
[00:16] <vorlon> xnox: ah right, in that case it'll bring back the i386 binaries with no new build
[00:16] <xnox> i386 build of libcbor-dev already exists
[00:16] <vorlon> yes
[00:16] <xnox> vorlon:  i have done this already
[00:16] <vorlon> but I've not seen the binary copy create a new build record
[00:16] <xnox> ignore me =)
[00:16] <xnox> vorlon:  so for mattias, i did binary copy for something that didn't have i386 build, that was built in focal-proposed and already migrated to release pocket.
[00:17] <xnox> and i386 build record got created in focal-proposed
[00:17] <vorlon> and the binary copy resuscitates the i386 binaries whether you want them or not
[00:17] <xnox> that's similar to how new arches get bootstraped too
[00:17] <xnox> i think it still goes thorugh the whitelist/blacklist. I did not see non-whitelisted binaries getting published.
[00:17] <xnox> but also wouldn't want to experiment with that
[00:18] <vorlon> no, the whitelist definitely does not filter out the binaries on binary copy
[00:18] <vorlon> so packages that were built in -proposed before the whitelist was in place and haven't yet migrated to the release pocket, I've been having to go back and clean up :P
[00:20] <xnox> ouch
[00:20] <xnox> ok
[00:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-gke-4.15 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1054.57] (no packageset)
[00:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-90.91] (core, kernel)
[00:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-90.91] (core, kernel)
[00:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libcbor to i386-whitelist in focal
[00:30] <xnox> hm
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted azure-cosmos-table-python [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.0.5+git20191025-1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kodiplatform [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20180302-0ubuntu1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kodiplatform [armhf] (focal-proposed) [20180302-0ubuntu1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kodiplatform [s390x] (focal-proposed) [20180302-0ubuntu1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libserial [arm64] (focal-proposed) [1.0.0-2~build1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libserial [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [1.0.0-2~build1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted eshell-z [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.4-3]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kodiplatform [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [20180302-0ubuntu1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libserial [armhf] (focal-proposed) [1.0.0-2~build1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kodiplatform [arm64] (focal-proposed) [20180302-0ubuntu1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libserial [s390x] (focal-proposed) [1.0.0-2~build1]
[00:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libserial [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.0.0-2~build1]
[01:44] <wxl> did we add some thing to check the iso on boot? if so, where?
[01:44] <wxl> also does anyone know if this new iso manifest-diff check applies to flavors? or can we make it be? is there code for this somewhere?
[01:44] <wxl> (forgive me folks on devel for the doublespeak but it should probably be here)
[04:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted s390-tools [s390x] (focal-proposed) [2.12.0-0ubuntu2]
[04:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure [amd64] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-1004.4] (core, kernel)
[04:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [s390x] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-16.19] (core, kernel)
[04:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-16.19] (core, kernel)
[04:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [arm64] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-16.19] (core, kernel)
[04:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-16.19] (core, kernel)
[05:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-gke-4.15 [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1054.57]
[05:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-90.91]
[05:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oem [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1074.84]
[05:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: microsoft-authentication-library-for-python [amd64] (focal-proposed/none) [1.1.0-1] (no packageset)
[05:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: azure-multiapi-storage-python [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [0.2.4-1] (no packageset)
[05:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-1004.4]
[05:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [arm64] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-16.19]
[05:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [s390x] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-16.19]
[05:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-16.19]
[05:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-16.19]
[05:33] <vorlon> doko: was a new upload of python3-defaults still incoming this week?
[06:10] <vorlon> cpaelzer: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/2:3.3.16-1ubuntu2 lol (Debian bug #951494)
[06:26] <vorlon> mysqltest: At line 69: Query 'ALTER EVENT event_starts_test ON SCHEDULE AT '2020-02-02 20:00:02'' failed.
[06:26] <vorlon> ERROR 1589 (HY000): Event execution time is in the past and ON COMPLETION NOT PRESERVE is set. The event was not changed. Specify a time in the future.
[06:26] <vorlon> mmmhmm
[07:03] <cpaelzer> vorlon: nice on procps, one would think that this would have wreaked more havoc than the bit we have seen
[08:01] <vorlon> Laney, sil2100: so icu didn't quite make it because of one last package that was in the easy hint but shouldn't have been because it's not a candidate. :/  the next britney run SHOULD take care of this, but I don't have 2 hours to wait around for it.  can one of you help shepherd?  I've added some aggressive hints on this such that it really really should go through, but there might be some manual
[08:02] <vorlon> cleanup required afterwards
[08:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-90.91]
[08:14] <sil2100> vorlon: hey! Okay, thanks for that! I can keep an eye out on it
[08:15] <sil2100> vorlon: I see the force hint, any particular issues I should be looking out for? Or just seeing if icu migrates?
[08:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libept [s390x] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[08:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libept [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[08:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libept [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[08:19] <juliank> Finishing up the APT transition uploads now
[08:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libept [arm64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[08:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libept [armhf] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[08:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: aptitude (eoan-proposed/universe) [0.8.11-3ubuntu3 => 0.8.12-1ubuntu4] (no packageset)
[08:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: therion [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [5.4.4ds1-5ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[08:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt-move (eoan-proposed/universe) [4.2.27-5ubuntu1 => 4.2.27-5ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[08:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libapt-pkg-perl (eoan-proposed/main) [0.1.36 => 0.1.36build2] (core)
[08:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libqapt (eoan-proposed/universe) [3.0.4-1ubuntu4 => 3.0.4-1ubuntu5] (kubuntu)
[08:46] <juliank> huh
[08:47] <juliank> Sorry seems the script had eoan in changelog
[08:48] <juliank> I'll reupload shortly, sorry
[08:49] <apw> juliank, should i assume that those 4 uploads all want to be rejected ?
[08:50] <juliank> yes, apw
[08:50] <juliank> thanks
[08:50] <apw> np
[08:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected apt-move [source] (eoan-proposed) [4.2.27-5ubuntu2]
[08:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libapt-pkg-perl [source] (eoan-proposed) [0.1.36build2]
[08:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected aptitude [source] (eoan-proposed) [0.8.12-1ubuntu4]
[08:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libqapt [source] (eoan-proposed) [3.0.4-1ubuntu5]
[09:05] <seb128> hey there, so since the icu transition still didn't go through, if it doesn't clear today, can we get a standing ff report for packages blocked from being uploaded by it?
[09:12] <juliank> seb128: did you wait for the latest run?
[09:13] <juliank> seb128: vorlon added hints an hour ago that should make it go through
[09:15] <seb128> juliank, I had other packages migrating 50 minutes ago
[09:15] <seb128> but maybe it needs yet another round?
[09:15] <juliank> seb128: sil2100 should know
[09:19] <seb128> juliank, do you know where one can check what's the publisher status? like when was the last update started/finished?
[09:20] <sil2100> https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/log/focal/2020-02-27/
[09:20] <sil2100> So it's still running right now, the previous run seems to have been the one for vorlon's previous easy hint
[09:21] <sil2100> I assume only now the force one will be taken into consideration
[09:25] <seb128> hey sil2100, thanks
[09:26] <seb128> sil2100, do you know if update_excuses_by_team.html was listed reason why 'candidate' were not moving, like 'depends on icu' earlier in the week of I had dreamed that one?
[09:49] <juliank> who/what's retrying python-apt builds all the time`
[09:49] <juliank> ?
[09:49] <juliank> this is annoying
[09:49] <juliank> it's failing, it will continue to fail, there's no point in retrying it every hour or so
[10:04] <LocutusOfBorg> juliank, sorry, I mass retried what failed tonight, because of the x11 sadness
[10:04] <LocutusOfBorg> I had around 40 packages that went from sad to good
[10:04] <LocutusOfBorg> and I retried them once more after they published
[10:04] <rbalint> LocutusOfBorg, thanks for the retries for the sadness
[10:05] <LocutusOfBorg> lots of ruby stuff is now good
[10:06] <doko> vorlon: I wanted the current one to migrate first, maybe overriding the uninstallability issue firsdt
[10:26] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, can you please NBS-proposed cleanup https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/reposurgeon/4.3+git20200214.8d048e1-1 ?
[10:26] <LocutusOfBorg> armhf is NBS now and gone in Debian
[10:57] <Laney> icu stuff is going in now
[10:58] <LocutusOfBorg> <3
[10:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (eoan-proposed/main) [1.8+19.10ubuntu1 => 1.9+19.10ubuntu1] (desktop-core)
[11:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (bionic-proposed/main) [1.8+18.04ubuntu2 => 1.9+18.04ubuntu1] (desktop-core)
[11:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (xenial-proposed/main) [1.8+16.04ubuntu1 => 1.9+16.04ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[11:06] <LocutusOfBorg> since ocaml/gprbuild were mostly ready before ruby started the transition, can we copy-back two packages and then restore after migration?
[11:07] <LocutusOfBorg> hivex 1.3.18-2build1 and libguestsfs 1:1.40.2-7ubuntu3 are probably enough
[11:08] <LocutusOfBorg> doko,  what is your opinion? I can't parse anymore britney, it was stuck by python3.8 autopkgtests
[11:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted azure-multiapi-storage-python [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.2.4-1]
[11:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted microsoft-authentication-library-for-python [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.1.0-1]
[11:18] <cjwatson> vorlon: Could you file a bug about copies reviving binaries in spite of the DAS filter?  I don't think that's totally intended.
[11:18] <cjwatson> Or at least it seems questionable.
[11:19] <cjwatson> Copies should certainly create build records.
[11:19] <cjwatson> (Assuming the filter permits them)
[12:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: kpeoplevcard (focal-proposed/primary) [0.1-0ubuntu1]
[12:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: microsoft-authentication-extensions-for-python [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [0.1.3-1] (no packageset)
[13:01] <sforshee> can someone help get linux-firmware 1.173.15 promoted in bionic? It looks like it should be ready
[13:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-90.91~16.04.1] (kernel)
[13:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-hwe [ppc64el] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-90.91~16.04.1] (kernel)
[13:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-hwe [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.15.0-90.91~16.04.1]
[13:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-hwe [ppc64el] (xenial-proposed) [4.15.0-90.91~16.04.1]
[14:14] <sil2100> rbalint: hey! Did you see my comment/question https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ec2-instance-connect/+bug/1861909/comments/8 ?
[14:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: elasticsearch-curator [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [5.8.1-1] (no packageset)
[14:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1073.78] (kernel)
[14:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: sane-airscan (focal-proposed/primary) [0.9.16-0ubuntu1]
[14:50] <cpaelzer> hi AAs I'd ask for help on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/microsoft-authentication-extensions-for-python
[14:50] <cpaelzer> 0.1.3-1 just passed debian-New ~10h ago
[14:51] <cpaelzer> as usual with Debian new that was a binary upload
[14:51] <cpaelzer> 0.1.3-2 is the source upload and in Debian since ~3h and soon hitting ubutu as well I guess
[14:51] <cpaelzer> the package is in the Ubuntu new queue at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+queue?queue_state=0&queue_text=
[14:52] <cpaelzer> I was wondering if an AA would need to accept the one in the new queue right now
[14:52] <cpaelzer> or if this has to wait until the source upload of 0.1.3-2 appears?
[14:52] <cpaelzer> apw: seb128: doko: ^^
[14:54] <cpaelzer> bluca: I just asked the archive admins - lets wait for an answer
[14:54] <bluca> hello - thanks
[15:11] <bluca> hi seb128 - I see you took care of network-manager-openconnect in the past, any chance you could have time to please look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager-openconnect/+bug/1857624 please? We got patches in Debian to add GP support, and we use GP in Microsoft so it would be great if it worked out of the box in 20.04 for the internal users. Thanks!
[15:12] <seb128> bluca, do you know what that version is in debian/experimental only?
[15:12] <seb128> cpaelzer, I'm in a call but I try to have a look when possible
[15:16] <bluca> not 100% sure - I think the maintainer was holding back to go to the next release directly, since the patches in -3 were reworked upstream - but that requires also a new version of openconnect, so it's all kinda stalled
[15:33] <rbalint> sil2100, no, i've missed that but i'm on it, thanks!
[15:38] <vorlon> sil2100: it was just watching to make sure that if the uninstallables increased, we followed through on those.  The force hint was "just in case" something changed and broke the main hint
[15:43] <vorlon> now, does anyone know why there hasn't been a britney run /since/ this?
[15:43] <vorlon> doko: the current python3-defaults /did/ migrate last week
[15:43] <vorlon> doko: because I override the tests as we discussed
[15:43] <vorlon> overrode
[15:46] <Laney> this> icu? Sure there has
[15:51] <vorlon> ah, I was just using a wrong glob
[15:51] <vorlon> hours beginning with 1 do not have logs matching 0*
[15:51] <vorlon> :)
[15:53] <Laney> check out snakefruit:~laney/tail-latest-britney-log
[15:53] <Laney> :>
[15:58] <vorlon> Laney: do you know why arm64 autopkgtest queues aren't progressing?
[15:59] <Laney> vorlon: they are
[15:59] <Laney> ubuntu@juju-prod-ues-proposed-migration-machine-11:~$ journalctl --since=15:00 ADT_ARCH=arm64 | grep -c 'Acknowledging request'
[15:59] <Laney> 48
[15:59] <vorlon> Laney: but much more slowly than they should https://cdo.kpi.canonical.com/d/000000030/ubuntu-foundations?panelId=19&fullscreen&orgId=1
[16:01] <Laney> can't say what the value of should is
[16:01] <Laney> I noticed some unhelpful things earlier in the day like lots of duplicated gscan2pdf requests that people had done
[16:02] <Laney> and for example right now there are some libreoffice runs that are duplicating one another
[16:02] <vorlon> ah, well we should axe those for sure
[16:02] <vorlon> Laney: generally arm64 seems to be about half as fast as the others
[16:03] <vorlon> but obviously duplicate libreoffice tests are outside the norm :P
[16:05] <Laney> I sort of trained myself to expect arm64 to be the worst
[16:05] <Laney> perhaps that's not always been the case ...
[16:07] <Laney> if we had engineering but not hardware to look into this I would suggest looking at lxding by default and VMing only when needed
[16:08] <doko> vorlon: no asked for python3.8, not python3-defaults
 vorlon: would you be willing to ignore every autopkg test for python3-defaults, dropping python3.7? the reason I'm asking is that everything else is still tested with 3.7, which we don't care about anymore
[16:11] <vorlon> doko: there are logs :P
[16:11] <vorlon> you asked me to skip for python3-defaults and said there would be a new upload this week
[16:11] <Laney> vorlon: would be handy if you could take on killing off those libreoffice requests if you've time; I'm trying to help people get stuff uploaded for FF at the minute
[16:11] <vorlon> ack
[16:12] <Laney> you might like the not committed filter-amqp-dupes script
[16:12] <Laney> hmm, actually that's not that helpful for already-in-progress runs
[16:13] <Laney> what you need to do is HUP the workers, kill the runner/autopkgtest processes and then filter the requests before anything restarts and picks it back up
[16:48] <cpaelzer> seb128: apw: doko: (and now I also see vorlon around) - I wanted to ping again for microsoft-authentication-extensions-for-python in the focal new queue and how it needs to be handled (details about 2h up in the log)
[16:49] <seb128> cpaelzer, accepted
[16:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted microsoft-authentication-extensions-for-python [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.1.3-1]
[16:50] <cpaelzer> thanks seb128
[16:50] <cpaelzer> did the discussion on that vpn thing conlude as well?
[16:50] <cpaelzer> +c
[16:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted elasticsearch-curator [amd64] (focal-proposed) [5.8.1-1]
[16:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libept [arm64] (focal-proposed) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3]
[16:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libept [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3]
[16:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted therion [amd64] (focal-proposed) [5.4.4ds1-5ubuntu1]
[16:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libept [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3]
[16:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libept [s390x] (focal-proposed) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3]
[16:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libept [armhf] (focal-proposed) [1.1+nmu3ubuntu3]
[16:51] <seb128> cpaelzer, if it's not good enough to get to Debian unstable I'm a bit nervous to get it in focal
[16:52] <seb128> cpaelzer, but if someone wants to do the Debian merge and upload I will not stop them
[16:52] <seb128> I just don't have enough acccess to VPNs to test that and the fact that the Debian maintainer keeps it in experimental doesn't give me confidence
[16:53] <cpaelzer> ok good to know, bluca ^^ here you know what to work on now
[16:53] <cpaelzer> get it in unstable might be the easiest path to work on for you I guess?
[16:54] <vorlon> rafaeldtinoco: libguestfs entangled ocaml and ruby, I'm rolling this back to let us try to get both halves through sooner
[16:54] <rafaeldtinoco> no problem. tks!
[16:55] <cjwatson> Can I assume that somebody is going to take care of putting auto-sync into --dry-run mode at EOD today?
[16:56] <vorlon> cjwatson: yes
[16:56] <cpaelzer> vorlon: will you (later) bring libguestfs back again => https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libguestfs/+bug/1864164 ?
[16:56] <cjwatson> good good
[16:56] <vorlon> cpaelzer: yes
[16:56] <cpaelzer> ok
[16:56] <cpaelzer> just asked as I've known bugs depend on it
[16:57] <bluca> thanks, I'll ping the Debian maintainer
[16:58] <bluca> and thanks for processing new
[16:58] <juliank> ooh, libept is accepted, time to do rebuilds for its rdeps
[16:59] <juliank> oh not publshed yet
[16:59] <juliank> oh, my affected hint is wrong for apt transition, so you only see bad ones
[17:00] <bluca> are syncs from unstable still happening automatically? I've fixed a silly mistake in the b-deps list in https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/azure-functions-devops-build/ early this morning
[17:00] <vorlon> bluca: yes, until EOD Pacific coast time
[17:04] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg, kenvandine, marcustomlinson: I am killing all libreoffice/arm64 autopkgtests from the queue, please don't queue any more; these timeouts are choking the infra.  We will treat this as a badtest for now
[17:08] <sforshee> can linux-firmware 1.173.15 in bionic be promoted? It looks ready to me
[17:08] <vorlon> by promoted, you mean the sru released to -updates?
[17:08] <sforshee> vorlon: yes
[17:09] <vorlon> yes, doing
[17:09] <sforshee> ta
[17:11] <vorlon> xnox: I've done what I can to clear out the autopkgtest regressions for your glibc upload (by badtesting those reproducible in updates), but there are some that seem to really be proposed-only; nauty/i386 is really weird
[17:13] <vorlon> doko: what did you say was the blocker for removing python3.7 right now?
[17:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-pweave [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [0.25-2] (no packageset)
[17:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: smrtanalysis [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [0~20200227] (no packageset)
[17:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-pweave [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0.25-2]
[17:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted smrtanalysis [amd64] (focal-proposed) [0~20200227]
[17:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gnumed-server [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [22.9-1] (no packageset)
[17:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gnumed-server [amd64] (focal-proposed) [22.9-1]
[17:28] <vorlon> rafaeldtinoco: hivex also rolled back, same rationale (ocaml+ruby)
[17:29] <rafaeldtinoco> cool
[17:36] <xnox> vorlon:  i've seen weird things on i386, as if the machines started to use 64bit kernel; because some packages started to try to search for 64bit implementation of things, instead of 32bit ones. Do we know if images have changed in eoan to use 64bit kernel and for example some packages didn't run tests in eoan, since that change?
[17:37] <vorlon> xnox: but a baseline retest of that one succeeded, it only failed with the new glibc
[17:39] <xnox> vorlon:  excellent. it does suggest a missbuilt glibc.
[17:39] <xnox> and nauty itself hasn't been rebuilt in ages.
[17:40] <vorlon> except via the rebuild autopkgtest
[17:43] <xnox> checked rebuild test results for disco & eoan they don't list it
[17:50] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, are you available for some quick migration? 1) reposurgeon -> NBS on armhf in proposed, removed in debian 2) gazebo: amd64 only package, needs a permanent hint everywhere else
[17:51] <LocutusOfBorg> and this https://code.launchpad.net/~till-kamppeter/britney/hints-ubuntu/+merge/379911
[17:51] <LocutusOfBorg> its a matter of kick the can along
[17:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (bionic-proposed/main) [0.7.5-1ubuntu16.8 => 0.7.5-1ubuntu16.9] (core)
[17:58] <xnox> vorlon:  there are two tests, make-check and build-examples. The build-examples autopkgtest depends on build-essential and after failing initially, it does use all-proposed and installs both libc6-dev and libc6. During the make-check test, it does not depend on build-essential and there is this gem in the log:
[17:58] <xnox> Holding Back libc6-dev:i386 rather than change libc6:i386
[17:59] <xnox> meaning that neither new libc6 got installed, nor libc6-dev got installed thus leading to
[17:59] <xnox> naucompare.c:5: error: include file 'stdio.h' not found
[17:59] <doko> vorlon: uwsgi-plugin-python3
[18:00] <xnox> vorlon:  in an eoan i386 schroot, with manually installed libc6-dev & libc6 from proposed, ./debian/tests/make-check passes
[18:07] <xnox> vorlon:  https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/X8mqs53rcs/
[18:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kodi [s390x] (focal-proposed/universe) [2:18.5+dfsg1-0ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[18:15] <rbalint> sil2100, ec2-instance-connect is now really verified
[18:18] <bluca> can a build be done with a profile (say "nocheck") to break a build-time tie?
[18:22] <vorlon> xnox: ah, right, this is the arch skew bug with the foreign-arch hinting, I think?  hmm I thought I had patched that?  anyway, if you retry it with all-proposed=1 I think it should pass
[18:22] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: reposurgeon/armhf removed
[18:23] <sil2100> rbalint: on it!
[18:23] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: libqtpropertybrowser-dev is amd64-only?  that seems... weird
[18:24] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: anyway, gazebo hinted
[18:46] <rafaeldtinoco> there is a dead-lock in build-dependency among jruby and ruby-psych packages.. debian has done a binary upload to unlock this ..
[18:46] <rafaeldtinoco> can I upload a binary for ruby-psych, build jruby, and upload ruby-psych in source again ?
[18:46] <rafaeldtinoco> would that be possible ?
[18:46] <rafaeldtinoco> to unlock this situation ?
[18:47] <bluca> (same for azure-cli and azure-functions-devops-build which is the reason I asked about the nocheck profile build)
[18:53] <rafaeldtinoco> for my case I would need "sid" binaries of libpsych-java_3.1.0+really3.1.0-1_all.deb AND ruby-psych_3.1.0+really3.1.0-1+b1_amd64.deb for amd64, arm64, armhf, ppc64el, s390x into -proposed
[18:53] <rafaeldtinoco> that would allow be to build jruby
[18:53] <rafaeldtinoco> and rebuild ruby-psych and libpsych-java would work
[18:55] <rafaeldtinoco> just tested and it worked
[18:55] <rafaeldtinoco> vorlon: ^ any comment on that ?
[18:55] <rafaeldtinoco> would that be possible ?
[18:55] <rafaeldtinoco> this would unlock the ruby transition
[18:56] <rafaeldtinoco> https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/html/html/ruby2.7-add.html
[18:56] <rafaeldtinoco> kanashiro: fyi ^
[18:56] <LocutusOfBorg> rafaeldtinoco, no
[18:56] <LocutusOfBorg> you can't upload binaries
[18:56] <rafaeldtinoco> yep, would it be possible for an AA to do it
[18:57] <LocutusOfBorg> you can add a binary such as jruby into ruby-psych/debian directory and call it directly
[18:57] <rafaeldtinoco> bringing from sid
[18:57] <LocutusOfBorg> and then no change rebuild
[18:57] <LocutusOfBorg> this is how I do it usually
[18:57] <rafaeldtinoco> yep but there are multiple arches
[18:57] <LocutusOfBorg> you add multiple binaries :p
[18:57] <rafaeldtinoco> =o)
[18:57] <LocutusOfBorg> and then call the one directly
[18:58] <rafaeldtinoco> well, i can uncompress the debian binary
[18:58] <rafaeldtinoco> from debian/ and do lots of things
[18:58] <rafaeldtinoco> but syncing 2 binaries from sid
[18:58] <rafaeldtinoco> seem easier, no ?
[18:59] <rafaeldtinoco> they will go away right after
[18:59] <rafaeldtinoco> as soon as the first (jruby) is compiled
[19:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kodi [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [2:18.5+dfsg1-0ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[19:31] <LocutusOfBorg> rafaeldtinoco, if possible, yes
[19:31] <LocutusOfBorg> :)
[19:32] <rafaeldtinoco> let's see
[19:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kodi [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/universe) [2:18.5+dfsg1-0ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[19:59] <vorlon> doko: I think I heard you mention gnat earlier, what's the analysis here on plplot vs gnat-8 vs gnat-9? why is it depending on gnat+gnat-9?
[19:59] <vorlon> doko: ah because there's a new gnat metapackage in -proposed, ignore me
[20:10] <bluca> LocutusOfBorg: no profiles either? I'll do an upload to sid without the dependency then, and change it manually later - it's just for tests
[20:10] <bluca> too bad we can't set nocheck or stage1 or whatev
[20:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware (bionic-proposed/main) [1.173.15 => 1.173.16] (core, kernel)
[20:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected livecd-rootfs [source] (eoan-proposed) [2.620.1]
[20:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (eoan-proposed/main) [2.620 => 2.620.1] (desktop-core)
[20:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Removed boost1.67 from i386-whitelist in focal
[20:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Removed python3.7 from i386-whitelist in focal
[20:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added amtk to i386-whitelist in focal
[20:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added mapbox-geometry to i386-whitelist in focal
[20:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added mapbox-variant to i386-whitelist in focal
[20:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added mapbox-wagyu to i386-whitelist in focal
[20:50] <kanashiro> vorlon, could you please provide some feedback about rafaeldtinoco's proposal above regarding ruby-psych and jruby situation?
[20:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.15.0-1073.78]
[21:34] <vorlon> rafaeldtinoco, kanashiro: "upload a binary" - no, that's not an option
[21:34] <rafaeldtinoco> no no I know
[21:34] <rafaeldtinoco> what about U copying from debian temporarily ?
[21:34] <rafaeldtinoco> is that an option ?
[21:35] <vorlon> rafaeldtinoco: we can't copy binaries from Debian, no
[21:35] <rafaeldtinoco> ok
[21:35] <rafaeldtinoco> trying to find alternatives =)
[21:36] <vorlon> I mean, I could use a Debian binary in the bootstrap archive
[21:36] <vorlon> if that's really the only way
[21:36] <vorlon> but that requires an AA to do it
[21:36] <rafaeldtinoco> let me explain to see if you can come up with any idea
[21:37] <rafaeldtinoco> if I have libpsych-java and ruby-psych installed (from sid) I can compile jruby and then I can compile ruby-psych and libpsych-java
[21:37] <rafaeldtinoco> somehow debian got itself in a build-dependency loop by copying binaries over the releases
[21:37] <rafaeldtinoco> ruby-psych was turned into a dependency for jruby to yaml wrapping
[21:38] <rafaeldtinoco> i can generate jruby without ruby-psych, but then it complains about not supporting it when trying to compile ruby-psych itself
[21:44] <vorlon> rafaeldtinoco: is there an earlier, interim version of either package that was in Debian that didn't have the circular dep?
[21:44] <rafaeldtinoco> yes but using ruby2.5
[21:44] <vorlon> ah
[21:44] <rafaeldtinoco> not ruby2.7
[21:44] <vorlon> but would it build in Ubuntu against ruby2.7 if we synced it?
[21:44] <rafaeldtinoco> kanashiro: ^ u know ?
[21:45] <rafaeldtinoco> kanashiro: was the one working with debian ruby team
[21:45]  * rafaeldtinoco checking git in salsa
[21:45] <kanashiro> I have no idea
[21:45] <kanashiro> need to try it
[21:45] <rafaeldtinoco> debian has binary copied it also
[21:45] <rafaeldtinoco> for sid, is that correct ?
[21:46] <rafaeldtinoco> (over the releases I mean)
[21:46] <rafaeldtinoco> and it contained 2.5 and 2.7
[21:46] <kanashiro> debian sid now has ruby 2.5 and 2.7 enabled
[21:47] <rafaeldtinoco> commit f7bfddd57
[21:47] <rafaeldtinoco> Author: Miguel Landaeta <nomadium@debian.org>
[21:47] <rafaeldtinoco> Date:   Sat Sep 16 20:41:24 2017
[21:47] <rafaeldtinoco>     Fix dependencies on ruby-psych and add dependencies on libpsych-java
[21:47] <rafaeldtinoco> debian/9.1.8.0-3
[21:47] <rafaeldtinoco> this is the tag where it got included
[21:48] <rafaeldtinoco> let me see if I can build that version
[21:50] <kanashiro> that is before the current debian stable release, the chances are low of this jruby version builds fine against ruby 2.7
[21:52] <rafaeldtinoco> -               ruby-json,
[21:52] <rafaeldtinoco> it used ruby-json before
[21:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ubuntu-advantage-tools [amd64] (focal-proposed/main) [20.2.1~0ubuntu1] (core)
[21:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ubuntu-advantage-tools [s390x] (focal-proposed/main) [20.2.1~0ubuntu1] (core)
[21:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ubuntu-advantage-tools [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/main) [20.2.1~0ubuntu1] (core)
[21:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ubuntu-advantage-tools [arm64] (focal-proposed/main) [20.2.1~0ubuntu1] (core)
[21:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ubuntu-advantage-tools [armhf] (focal-proposed/main) [20.2.1~0ubuntu1] (core)
[22:05] <rafaeldtinoco> the version not depending on psych is so old
[22:05] <rafaeldtinoco> i can't get it to build
[22:09] <vorlon> ok
[22:10] <vorlon> then we might have to resort to the bootstrap archive
[22:20] <rafaeldtinoco> yes, sorry about that
[22:21] <rafaeldtinoco> i really spent a bunch of time on this trying to avoid
[22:21] <rafaeldtinoco> but ruby with java is really not my style to come up with some magick
[22:22] <rafaeldtinoco> ill have a rebuild for both pkgs ready
[22:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (bionic-proposed/main) [2.525.40 => 2.525.41] (desktop-core)
[22:47] <vorlon> xnox: o hey, all autopkgtests for glibc/eoan cleared
[23:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libxml2 [s390x] (focal-proposed/main) [2.9.10+dfsg-4] (core, i386-whitelist)
[23:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libxml2 [i386] (focal-proposed/main) [2.9.10+dfsg-4] (core, i386-whitelist)
[23:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libxml2 [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/main) [2.9.10+dfsg-4] (core, i386-whitelist)
[23:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libxml2 [amd64] (focal-proposed/main) [2.9.10+dfsg-4] (core, i386-whitelist)
[23:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libxml2 [arm64] (focal-proposed/main) [2.9.10+dfsg-4] (core, i386-whitelist)
[23:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libxml2 [armhf] (focal-proposed/main) [2.9.10+dfsg-4] (core, i386-whitelist)