[07:01] <vorlon> xnox: well, https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/html/unversioned-python-rm.html still looks wrong, only 2 packages in the "bad" set which is definitely a lie
[09:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected system-config-printer [source] (eoan-proposed) [1.5.11-4ubuntu2]
[10:03] <xnox> vorlon:  but is it more than 16?
[10:05] <xnox> vorlon:  so i think regexp is not matching things right with like
[10:06] <xnox> ", python (<< 2.8)," not being detected as "bad" potentially
[10:09] <vorlon> xnox: yes, if you expose the 'good' packages, the very first package in the list, bareos, has a build-dependency on python-dev (in -proposed; no version in release)
[10:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted stress-ng [source] (eoan-proposed) [0.10.07-1ubuntu4]
[10:09] <vorlon> xnox: bcron is similar, but in release and not in -proposed
[10:09] <vorlon> (i.e. no version in -proposed)
[10:12] <sil2100> cking: hey! I'm looking at the stress-ng upload for bionic - there is a verification-failed stress-ng already in bionic-proposed
[10:13] <sil2100> cking: I guess we want to revert it before we want to push the new one?
[10:13] <sil2100> cking: I think the stress-ng upload in the bionic queue is based on the -proposed version, right?
[10:15] <sil2100> cking: could you re-upload after sorting this out? If you think the previous bionic-proposed upload is still valid, please re-upload with -v to include the old bugs in the .changes, but I suppose it was supposed to be reverted
[10:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected stress-ng [source] (bionic-proposed) [0.09.25-1ubuntu8]
[10:20] <seb128> I've submitted a small improvement to the by-team proposed-migration report, if someone want to give a look/review
[10:21] <seb128> https://code.launchpad.net/~seb128/ubuntu-archive-scripts/display-migrate-after/+merge/380276
[10:21] <seb128> it adds the "needs to migrate after those items" information to Candidates
[10:22] <mwhudson> seb128: lgtm but needs ubuntu-archive to look i guess, do you have example output?
[10:24] <sil2100> The highlighting works o/
[10:25] <sil2100> Yeah, would be nice to see an example output of this, if possible, to see if it looks sane
[10:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ukui-biometric-auth (eoan-proposed/universe) [1.0.3-2 => 1.0.3-2ubuntu0.1] (ubuntukylin)
[10:39] <seb128> sil2100, mwhudson, https://people.canonical.com/~seb128/report.html
[10:40] <seb128> sil2100, mwhudson , look at the dee entry or for libical3 for a fake multi-after-items one
[10:40] <mwhudson> seb128: i didn't know laney was not in the release pocket! :)
[10:40] <seb128> :)
[10:41]  * Laney caused too many regressions
[10:42] <seb128> sil2100, mwhudson, appdirs is a case of candidate without migrate-after showing that this case didn't regress
[11:01] <sil2100> seb128: I htink it looks good, approved
[11:03] <doko> vorlon, xnox: looks like ben is unable to handle transitions where virtual packages are involved. it throws everything into the same dependency level
[11:03] <vorlon> well ben's idea of dependency levels are upside-down anyway
[11:04] <Laney> we should update to a non ancient ben :(
[11:04] <Laney> can we get a container / chroot for a non-ancient release on snakefruit to do that in?
[11:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oem-osp1 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/universe) [5.0.0-1042.47] (no packageset)
[11:05] <vorlon> via an RT request, probably
[11:06] <doko> hmm, didn't Colin try to do that and failed to get it working? maybe retry with a focal container?
[11:07] <vorlon> I don't know
[11:08] <Laney> I do remember some experimentation having taken place but no details
[11:10] <vorlon> chroot:bionic-transitions
[11:10] <vorlon> exists
[11:15] <cjwatson> Yeah, I failed to get ben to work there
[11:15] <cjwatson> Feel free to try
[11:15] <cjwatson> I got lost in ocaml
[11:15] <cjwatson> I talked about it here at the time so it should be in IRC logs somewhere
[11:18] <seb128> sil2100, thanks
[12:26] <kanashiro> hi! I'd like to ask your help to solve an issue I am facing regarding the multiple ruby-defaults regressions. More than 100 of them have this: "command1             FAIL non-zero exit status 77"
[12:26] <kanashiro> the latest gem2deb returns this when no test suite is declared
[12:27] <kanashiro> and the latest autodep8 considers this test skippable if it returns 77
[12:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apr-util (eoan-proposed/main) [1.6.1-4build1 => 1.6.1-4ubuntu0.1] (core)
[12:27] <kanashiro> however, yesterday we triggered a bunch of test executions against the autodep8 in proposed and we still get the same failures
[12:29] <kanashiro> is there a way to make sure that the autodep8 from proposed is used since it is not an actual test dependency?
[12:29] <Laney> autodep8's not run from the archive
[12:30] <Laney> we need to update that on the controller
[12:30] <Laney> I'll do that
[12:31] <kanashiro> Laney, thanks for the info and for taking action, I appreciate that :)
[12:34] <Laney> kanashiro: should be done, can you try one retry?
[12:35] <kanashiro> Laney, I can't, I am not a core-dev yet
[12:36] <kanashiro> Laney, could you try ruby-curses?
[12:36] <Laney> ok
[12:40] <Laney> kanashiro: it resulted in https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-focal/focal/s390x/r/ruby-curses/20200305_123852_4fea8@/log.gz
[12:40] <LocutusOfBorg> nice kanashiro Laney thanks
[12:41] <kanashiro> Laney, great, the test was skipped
[12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted procps [source] (xenial-proposed) [2:3.3.10-4ubuntu2.5]
[12:41] <LocutusOfBorg> I tried to understand how to get autodep8 used
[12:41] <LocutusOfBorg> so can we retry them now? without even needing the extra trigger?
[12:42] <kanashiro> hey LocutusOfBorg o/ I've seen you triggered some reruns, thanks for your work
[12:42] <kanashiro> LocutusOfBorg, yes, I have a list of packages that should be fixed with the new autodep8, just a sec
[12:43] <kanashiro> LocutusOfBorg, https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/pdhSgsYVSh/
[12:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: hud (focal-proposed/primary) [14.10+17.10.20170619-0ubuntu3]
[12:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ukui-biometric-auth [source] (eoan-proposed) [1.0.3-2ubuntu0.1]
[14:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libvirt [source] (eoan-proposed) [5.4.0-0ubuntu5.1]
[14:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libvirt [source] (bionic-proposed) [4.0.0-1ubuntu8.15]
[14:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure-5.3 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.3.0-1015.16~18.04.1] (no packageset)
[15:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-1004.4] (core, kernel)
[16:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libvirt (xenial-proposed/main) [1.3.1-1ubuntu10.29 => 1.3.1-1ubuntu10.30] (ubuntu-server, virt)
[16:13] <seb128> sil2100, another easy on to review, https://code.launchpad.net/~seb128/ubuntu-archive-scripts/report-include-timezone/+merge/380301
[16:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-gcp [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.0.0-1033.34] (kernel)
[16:53] <siqueira> Hi, Does anyone knows if Gnome3 session with Wayland will be set as a default on Ubuntu LTS 20.04 (FocalFossa)?
[16:56] <bryce> php-mailparse has a version string "3.0.4+2.1.7~dev20160128.orig"
[16:57] <bryce> so the tarball is named php-mailparse_3.0.4+2.1.7~dev20160128.orig.orig.tar.xz
[16:58] <bryce> when I upload a no-change rebuild of this package, I get an error back from Ubuntu Installer <archive@ubuntu.com>:
[16:58] <bryce> Rejected:
[16:58] <bryce> Unable to find php-mailparse_3.0.4+2.1.7~dev20160128.orig-1build1.debian.tar.xz in upload or distribution.
[16:58] <bryce> php-mailparse_3.0.4+2.1.7~dev20160128.orig-1build1.dsc: must have only an orig.tar.*, a debian.tar.*, and
[16:58] <bryce> optionally orig-*.tar.*
[16:58] <bryce> Files specified in DSC are broken or missing, skipping package unpack verification.
[16:58] <bryce> I'm guessing the '.orig' in the upstream tarball is the cause of the problem here, yes?
[16:58] <cjwatson> Adventures in corner cases
[16:59] <cjwatson> It seems like a good theory ...
[16:59] <bryce> so I'm wondering if there is an established workaround for this type of corner case?
[17:00] <cjwatson> I've never heard of this before
[17:00] <bryce> ah fun
[17:00] <cjwatson> If it is as you suggest then I think the workaround would be to use a less daft version
[17:00] <bryce> it sync'd in from Debian ok
[17:00] <cjwatson> But I haven't actually checked
[17:01] <cjwatson> I can't see anything in LP that specifically looks for .orig
[17:01] <cjwatson> Do you have the .changes file handy?
[17:02] <bryce> yeah
[17:03] <bryce> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/2jtzpVssV2/
[17:05] <bryce> I wonder if something is detecting the .orig as indicating this is a source archive upload
[17:05] <cjwatson> bryce: Well, LP is right, you don't have a debian.tar.xz there.  I expect ... yes, that
[17:05] <cjwatson> Probably dpkg-genchanges
[17:05] <cjwatson> You could work around it by manually editing the .changes or by finding the dpkg bug and fixing that locally ...
[17:05] <cjwatson>         foreach my $f (grep { m/\.orig(-.+)?\.tar\.$ext$/ } $checksums->get_files()) {
[17:05] <cjwatson> Maybe that
[17:05] <bryce> cjwatson, ok thanks I'll try that.  Never edited the .changes before... adventures indeed
[17:06] <cjwatson> So basically it thinks that the file is one of the extra orig component things (.orig-foo.tar.xz) and removed it
[17:06] <bryce> cjwatson, ahh that regex looks like what I was thinking must exist
[17:06] <cjwatson> Building with -sa would also work around it, more easily
[17:07] <cjwatson> You'd just redundantly upload the .orig.tar.xz, but that's OK
[17:07] <bryce> ok I'll try that first
[17:19] <bryce> no go, same error returned; trying .changes editing next
[17:31] <bryce> no go on the .changes editing either (https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/gHNfknNqkr/).
[17:36] <locutus__> kanashiro, I syncd rails to make the ruby transition move a little bit
[17:36] <locutus__> but autopkgtests are sad
[17:37] <locutus__> and I also dropped that bootsnap hack
[17:37] <locutus__> not sure if still needed or not
[17:37] <locutus__> please have a look
[17:38] <locutus__> (I remember it was making some armhf autopkgtests sad against rails)
[17:38] <locutus__> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/417386218/rails_2%3A5.2.2+dfsg-6_2%3A5.2.2+dfsg-6ubuntu1.diff.gz
[17:43] <kanashiro> locutus__, taking a look now
[18:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: ruby-factory-bot-rails (focal-proposed/primary) [5.1.1-2]
[18:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: morris (focal-proposed/primary) [0.2-6]
[18:30] <kanashiro> locutus__, I think I have a patch to fix it, I should come up with a bug report + patch soon
[18:42] <kanashiro> locutus__, could you review/sponsor this patch? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ruby-bootsnap/+bug/1866223
[18:42] <kanashiro> it fixed rails autopkgtest regression for me locally
[18:46] <locutus__> sure
[18:47] <locutus__> kanashiro, please upload them into a ppa, so I can sponsor from there
[18:47] <kanashiro> locutus__, ack
[18:59] <kanashiro> locutus__, it is building it in different architectures but here is the link: https://launchpad.net/~lucaskanashiro/+archive/ubuntu/focal-ruby-bootsnap-ruby27-support/+packages
[20:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-1004.4]
[22:25] <cjwatson> bryce: Ah, it trips a similar regex in LP, I see.
[22:26] <cjwatson> bryce: dak doesn't hit this because it has a slightly stricter regex (orig_source_ext_re in daklib.regexes)
[22:27] <cjwatson> bryce: Using a less silly version is probably the only possible workaround for now.  You can certainly file a bug against LP for the set of rejections you got after working around the dpkg bug, although it will certainly be Priority: low :-)
[22:31] <bryce> cjwatson, ok thanks, that clarifies that then.  :-)  Yes, I figured best path is to redo the tarball.