[02:12] <blackboxsw> Woot! Thanks vorlon for cloud-init!
[04:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [5.0.0-1035.37]
[05:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure-5.3 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.3.0-1016.17~18.04.1] (no packageset)
[05:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure-5.3 [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [5.3.0-1016.17~18.04.1]
[07:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure [amd64] (eoan-proposed/main) [5.3.0-1016.17] (core, kernel)
[08:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted linux-base [source] (xenial-proposed) [4.5ubuntu1.1~16.04.1]
[08:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-base [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.5ubuntu1.1~16.04.1] (core)
[09:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (eoan-proposed) [5.3.0-1016.17]
[09:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (eoan-proposed/main) [5.3.0-1012.13] (core, kernel)
[09:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (eoan-proposed) [5.3.0-1012.13]
[10:50] <LocutusOfBorg> doko, can you please do the llvm-toolchain-10 promotion to main magic?
[10:51] <LocutusOfBorg> also coq and reverse-dependencies are dropped in armhf/s390x in debian, can any AA do the same? (also reverse-deps please
[10:51] <LocutusOfBorg> NBS cleanup in proposed ^^ apw please?
[10:51] <LocutusOfBorg> this makes the coq transition finish
[10:51] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, of ?
 apw, can I please have coq removed in some architectures? it follows a debian removal bug. it might come back, but maybe not in time for focal https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=953408
 Debian bug 953408 in ftp.debian.org "RM: coq [armel armhf i386 mipsel mips64el s390x] -- ROM; FTBFS (mostly on 32bit architectures, or where ocaml has only a bytecode compiler)" [Normal,Open]
 the list and reverse-deps is on that bug, basically coq armhf i386 s390x, with also prooftree why3 and libaac-tactics-ocaml
[10:52] <LocutusOfBorg> the new coq is FTBFS there, it might come back but not in time for focal
[10:57] <doko> LocutusOfBorg: no, it's demotions, and it's always reset when you upload a new llvm :-/
[11:11] <LocutusOfBorg> but why?
[11:14] <seb128> ubuntu-archive, anyone who would like to review https://code.launchpad.net/~seb128/ubuntu-archive-scripts/report-include-timezone/+merge/380301 ? should be trivial
[11:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1075.80] (kernel)
[11:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-base [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.5ubuntu1.1~16.04.1]
[11:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.15.0-1075.80]
[11:53] <sil2100> seb128: looking
[12:08] <seb128> sil2100, thanks
[12:38] <doko> apw, sforshee, is there a way to avoid the hundreds of messages in autopkg tests like: depmod: ERROR: ../libkmod/libkmod.c:515 lookup_builtin_file() could not open builtin file '/lib/modules/5.4.0-18-generic/modules.builtin.bin'
[12:40] <apw> doko, that i think should be there; so likely yes
[12:42] <doko> apw: ? so is there a way to avoid these?
[12:43] <apw> doko: I believe there is, I suspect that says we are failing to package a new binary accelerator file
[12:44] <doko> thanks for clarifying
[12:45] <doko> seb128, Laney: https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-focal/focal/i386/libn/libnotify/20200313_112217_b01a0@/log.gz  is ignoreing stderr the right choice? or should the test be ignored?
[12:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oem-osp1 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/universe) [5.0.0-1044.49] (no packageset)
[13:11] <sforshee> doko, apw: this isn't a kernel problem, and according to bug 1864992 it should be fixed
[13:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oracle-5.3 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [5.3.0-1012.13~18.04.1] (no packageset)
[13:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1036.40] (kernel)
[13:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oem-osp1 [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [5.0.0-1044.49]
[13:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1036.40]
[13:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oracle-5.3 [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [5.3.0-1012.13~18.04.1]
[13:43] <tkamppeter> Hi, could someone have a look at bug 1865298, FFe for HPLIP, driver for newest HP printers?
[14:02] <seb128> doko, (Laney), no, ignoring stderr wouldn't be right/would fix the issue, xvfb fails to start an xserver apparently so it's not a problem of stderr noise
[14:02] <seb128> doko, sounds like a real issue
[14:02] <ahasenack> hello release team, if someone has a moment and could please look at this FFe, it's the long tail of reintroducing geoip support in bind9 9.16: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-maxminddb/+bug/1867919
[14:09] <doko> apw, sil2100: please update the mailman hint to mailman/1:2.1.29-1ubuntu3  always failed
[14:38] <doko> ruby-defaults now migratable, when ignoring autopkg tests (output_notest.txt)
[14:38] <doko> kanashiro: ^^^
[14:39] <apw> doko, done
[14:46] <kanashiro> doko, good news
[14:48] <doko> kanashiro: yesterday, we (xnox, rbalint, myself) chatted how we can help with the transition (because it's blocking some others). Do you have a status, or packages which need help?
[14:49] <doko> LocutusOfBorg: filed https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/coq/+bug/1868106. could you update that for focal?
[14:52] <kanashiro> doko, I also chatted about it with vorlon and we intend to start removing the remaining packages with autopkgtest regressions tomorrow, today I am working on chef (which I think it is an important package and we shouldn't remove it) and the other one that I am worried about is ruby-fakefs because it would remove many other packages. So when we get those 2 packages fixed I think we are good to go and request removals for the rest
[14:58] <bdmurray_> sil2100: Could you have a look at my apport SRUs for 19.10 and 18.04?
[15:01] <kanashiro> doko, btw I just got a patch to fix ruby-fakefs
[15:04] <sil2100> bdmurray: sure! I didn't do queue reviews yet, wanted to finish up netplan/networking stuff - I'm good to start now
[15:15] <ahasenack> sil2100: hi, pinging you just because you reviewed the previous FFes and have some context at least: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-maxminddb/+bug/1867919
[15:15] <ahasenack> you are nearing your eod, though
[15:15] <rafaeldtinoco> someone mind force bad-test to ruby-gtk/all/ppc64el because of LP: #1868108 for kanashiro and I ? (ruby transition)
[15:17] <sil2100> ahasenack: hey! I'll try to get to it after I do some SRU stuff
[15:23] <ahasenack> sil2100: thanks a lot
[15:24] <seb128> rafaeldtinoco, sil2100, don't badtest ruby-gnome, webkit is really busted on ppc64el and it's not a redherring
[15:24] <seb128> I've a test fix in a ppa and I'm working with upstream on it
[15:25] <tkamppeter> sil2100, are you working on FFe s today? Could you have a look at bug ld someone have a look at bug  1865298?
[15:25] <sil2100> seb128: ACK
[15:25] <seb128> thanks
[15:25] <rafaeldtinoco> tku
[15:26] <sil2100> tkamppeter: hey! I'll try to take a look at it as well after my meeting + SRU shift
[15:27] <tkamppeter> OK, thanks.
[15:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted apport [source] (eoan-proposed) [2.20.11-0ubuntu8.7]
[15:42] <nael_n> seb128, you helped me on bug #1866565. It's been fixed upstream and the GNOME developers made a bugfix release (gedit-plugins 3.36.1). Can it be brought downstream in Ubuntu? Does it need to go through Debian? I'm not sure what's the next steps and how I can help
[15:43] <seb128> nael_n, hey, first best to use #ubuntu-desktop or #ubuntu-devel, that's not a release issue
[15:43] <seb128> nael_n, also that update is on our GNOME updates list for the cycle, we do updates in Debian for most GNOME packages so we will do it there, no need to do anything more from your side
[15:45] <nael_n> OK thanks! That's good to hear. Channels noted!
[15:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted drbd-utils [source] (bionic-proposed) [8.9.10-2ubuntu0.1]
[15:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted apport [source] (bionic-proposed) [2.20.9-0ubuntu7.13]
[16:41] <LocutusOfBorg> doko, what is the action point from my side to LP:  #1868106 ?
[16:41] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks for doing it
[17:21] <hggdh> folks we have a regression on GRUB, 18.04. Please see bug 1868138
[17:23] <seb128> juliank, chrisccoulson, SRUteam, ^
[17:30] <chrisccoulson> huh, I don't see how the recent update could cause this - it doesn't touch anything that happens on install
[17:30] <chrisccoulson> it looks like it's probably a bug that's been there for a while, and just triggered by the latest update
[17:30] <chrisccoulson> the last upload to touch anything that runs on install was https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/2.02-2ubuntu8.13
[17:31] <chrisccoulson> seb128 ^
[17:31] <chrisccoulson> I'm not sure what to do about that
[17:31] <hggdh> prolly. If you change /etc/default/grub *after* the upgrade to add a continuation line, it works
[17:32] <hggdh> point is, right now, users with continuation lines will fail to upgrade. The OP states they have 100+ servers
[17:33] <seb128> chrisccoulson, right
[17:34] <hggdh> I tested it on Azure, and it fails as reported. IDK how many Azure VMs would be in the same scenario, but I expect there will be a non-insignificant number (and on other clouds as well)
[17:37] <seb128> hggdh, but why does it start being an issue now if that was introduce 2 revisions ago?
[17:39] <hggdh> seb128: I frankly have no idea yet, trying to grab more data from OP. It may well be it has been lurking there since 8ubuntu13, but nobody upgraded.
[17:40] <hggdh> nevertheless it is there now :-)
[17:42] <hggdh> and dammit, I wrote the version wrong. it is, of course, 2.02-2ubuntu8.13
[17:44] <chrisccoulson> I'm not sure what to do at the moment. This almost certainly isn't caused by the last upload, but a previous change that's been dormant until people applied updates with the recent upload
[17:45] <chrisccoulson> I'll wait for juliank to respond
[17:45] <juliank> Im not really here atm
[17:48] <juliank> This is not a regression in this update in any case
[17:48] <chrisccoulson> juliank, ah, no worries. Do you want me to escalate?
[17:49] <juliank> And it's only one user?
[17:49] <chrisccoulson> I don't know - I think hggdh has more insight there
[17:50] <juliank> Continuation lines seem wrong to have in that file
[17:50] <hggdh> juliank: I reproduced it
[17:50] <juliank> If you add a continuation line between 8.14 and 8.15, you can remove the continuation line again
[17:51] <juliank> A future update should probably handle that, but a continuation line here is not expected, and there's no point rolling it back as that's a non default unexpected thing
[17:51] <hggdh> we have no current issues on Azure (to my knowledge), but this is rather new, and I am do not really expect people to pass tens of parameters to the kernel
[17:52] <hggdh> juliank: it worked before per the OP. Also works if you add continuation lines after upgrading
[17:52] <juliank> That does not sound correct
[17:53] <juliank> You should see the same issue upgrading from 8.13 to 8.14 or 8.12 to 8.14
[17:53] <hggdh> OP on previous version: looks like it's 2.02-2ubuntu8.13 .... ~ mid-Dec '19
[17:53] <juliank> * to 8.13
[17:55] <juliank> So they made a change in their files between those and that blew up after the upgrade
[18:32] <Eickmeyer> Release team: The developer of Carla wants to get RC2 out shortly with a goal of final release on April 16th, the day before Final Freeze. What process do I need to go through to get the final release in before Final Freeze, such as exceptions?
[18:35] <ahasenack> Eickmeyer: it's called a Feature Freeze Exception
[18:35] <ahasenack> Eickmeyer: this is the process: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess
[18:36] <Eickmeyer> ahasenack: There are no new features between RC1 (in the repos) and final.
[18:36] <ahasenack> Eickmeyer: you mean rc2?
[18:36] <ahasenack> btw, I'm not in the release team, I just lurk here
[18:36] <Eickmeyer> ahasenack: RC2 will be released shortly, but there are no new features between RC1 and RC2. Feature Freeze only applies to *features* not bug fixes.
[18:37] <ahasenack> right
[18:38] <ahasenack> so that is described in that page too
[18:38] <Eickmeyer> I'm just concerned since final release will be a day before final freeze.
[18:38] <ahasenack> "FeatureFreeze for bugfix-only updates"
[18:39] <ahasenack> I think for final freeze only really critical uploads are accepted
[18:39] <Eickmeyer> So, simply stating "bugfix-only upload" in the changelog should do the trick.
[18:39] <ahasenack> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FinalFreeze
[18:39] <Eickmeyer> Yes, and I get that.
[18:39] <Eickmeyer> Not my first rodeo.
[18:39] <ahasenack> cool
[18:40] <Eickmeyer> Perhaps I just wanted to warn the release team so that they know what I'm doing when I do the uploads as I have PPU on that package.
[18:40] <ahasenack> it's good to check in here for that final release
[18:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware (eoan-proposed/main) [1.183.4 => 1.183.5] (core, kernel)
[19:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware (bionic-proposed/main) [1.173.16 => 1.173.17] (core, kernel)
[19:55] <rbalint> hi all, i've an open ffe for systemd 245.2, if you would like to give it a try please check out ppa:ci-train-ppa-service/3801
[19:56] <rbalint> so far it looks good :-)