[00:05] <xnox> Laney:  vorlon: i think ubuntu-desktop ship is broken.
[00:05] <xnox> we seeded nvidia-drivers, but didn't seed the right l-r-m modules for nvidia
[00:05] <xnox> thus offline we will install the wrong thing
[00:05] <xnox> we didn't tell which l-r-m nvidia we want so i think the pool is just wrong =)
[00:05] <xnox> ./pool/restricted/l/linux-restricted-modules-aws/linux-modules-nvidia-440-5.4.0-1009-aws_5.4.0-1009.9_amd64.deb
[00:05] <xnox> it has this
[00:06] <xnox> when we need the ones for generic-hwe-20.04 and the one for oem
[00:07] <vorlon> xnox: heh, yes we should certainly make sure we have the matching one.  you want to raise an MP?
[00:07] <xnox> yes one sec
[00:07] <vorlon> I think the ubuntu-drivers part is not done anyway to prefer lrm over nvidia-dkms. :P
[00:08] <xnox> vorlon:  it's half done
[00:09] <xnox> vorlon:  it prevers lrm over nvidia, but changes my kernel from generic => lowlatency because it got confused by linux-generic-hwe-20.04
[00:09] <xnox> * over dkms
[00:14] <xnox> vorlon:  https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/ubuntu/+merge/382619
[00:14] <xnox> vorlon:  if you are happy, please merge it.
[00:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-ipaddr (focal-proposed/universe) [2.2.0-2ubuntu2 => 2.2.0-4] (no packageset) (sync)
[00:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-ipaddr [sync] (focal-proposed) [2.2.0-4]
[00:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-virtualenv (focal-proposed/universe) [20.0.13-1 => 20.0.17-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[00:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-virtualenv [sync] (focal-proposed) [20.0.17-1]
[00:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-ipaddr [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [2.2.0-4] (no packageset)
[00:22] <xnox> anyway i think https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-meta/+bug/1873867 is worth respining the pool for
[00:22] <ubot5> Ubuntu bug 1873867 in linux (Ubuntu) "ubuntu-drivers changes kernel flavour when installing nvidia" [Undecided,Incomplete]
[00:22] <xnox> not sure about iso itself.... maybe if ubuntu-drivers are fixed
[00:24] <vorlon> xnox: why do I not see linux generic-hwe-20.04 metapackage anywhere in the seeds?
[00:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted php-text-captcha [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.0.2-7]
[00:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-ipaddr [amd64] (focal-proposed) [2.2.0-4]
[00:27] <vorlon> xnox: merged (but I still have the question)
[00:27] <vorlon> and I agree this warrants a respin
[00:27] <vorlon> bdmurray: ^^
[00:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apport (focal-proposed/main) [2.20.11-0ubuntu27 => 2.20.11-0ubuntu28] (core, i386-whitelist)
[01:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-meta (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0.25.31 => 5.4.0.26.32] (core, kernel) (sync)
[01:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-25.29 => 5.4.0-26.30] (core, i386-whitelist, kernel) (sync)
[01:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-restricted-modules (focal-proposed/restricted) [5.4.0-25.29 => 5.4.0-26.30] (core, kernel) (sync)
[01:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-signed (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-25.29 => 5.4.0-26.30] (core, kernel) (sync)
[01:06] <sforshee> Laney, apw: ^ those are the kernels with the realtek ethernet driver fix
[01:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: golang-google-grpc (focal-proposed/universe) [1.22.1-1ubuntu1 => 1.27.1-1] (ubuntu-mate) (sync)
[01:54] <mwhudson> i'm just releasing a new subiquity to stable/ubuntu-20.04
[01:58] <sarnold> mwhudson: is this the one that you'd like ppc64el testing on?
[02:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: swiftsc (focal-proposed/universe) [0.5-1.1 => 0.5-1.1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[02:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted swiftsc [source] (focal-proposed) [0.5-1.1ubuntu1]
[02:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: t-code (focal-proposed/universe) [2:2.3.1-8 => 2:2.3.1-9] (no packageset) (sync)
[02:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted t-code [sync] (focal-proposed) [2:2.3.1-9]
[02:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zeromq3 (focal-proposed/universe) [4.3.2-2 => 4.3.2-2ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist, kubuntu)
[02:18] <sarnold> hmm, what's the story with https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang-1.12 https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang-1.13 https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang-1.14  -- I'm a bit surprised to see three golangs in focal, none of them 1.10 (as in xenial and bionic)
[02:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tboot (focal-proposed/universe) [1.9.7-0ubuntu1 => 1.9.7-0ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[02:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tboot [source] (focal-proposed) [1.9.7-0ubuntu2]
[02:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: unknown-horizons (focal-proposed/universe) [2019.1-1 => 2019.1-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[02:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted unknown-horizons [sync] (focal-proposed) [2019.1-2]
[03:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: 389-ds-base (focal-proposed/universe) [1.4.3.2-1build1 => 1.4.3.6-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[03:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sssd (focal-proposed/main) [2.2.3-2 => 2.2.3-3] (ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server) (sync)
[03:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted 389-ds-base [sync] (focal-proposed) [1.4.3.6-1]
[03:05] <tjaalton> sssd ^ fixes a typo in libnss-sss postinst script when adding an entry to nsswitch.conf, would be a shame to release with that thinko..
[03:09] <tjaalton> nss-wrapper should need to be badtested on i386
[03:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: yiyantang (focal-proposed/universe) [0.7.0-5build2 => 0.7.0-6] (no packageset) (sync)
[03:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted yiyantang [sync] (focal-proposed) [0.7.0-6]
[03:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: yp-tools (focal-proposed/universe) [3.3-5.1ubuntu1 => 3.3-5.3] (no packageset) (sync)
[03:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted yp-tools [sync] (focal-proposed) [3.3-5.3]
[03:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: dhewm3 (focal-proposed/multiverse) [1.5.0+git20181221+dfsg-1build1 => 1.5.0+git20181221+dfsg-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[03:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dhewm3 [sync] (focal-proposed) [1.5.0+git20181221+dfsg-2]
[03:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lgrind (focal-proposed/multiverse) [3.67-3.1build1 => 3.67-4] (no packageset) (sync)
[03:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted lgrind [sync] (focal-proposed) [3.67-4]
[03:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ogmrip-oggz (focal-proposed/multiverse) [0.3-dmo1ubuntu1 => 0.3-dmo1ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[03:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ogmrip-oggz [source] (focal-proposed) [0.3-dmo1ubuntu2]
[04:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected linux-meta [sync] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0.26.32]
[04:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected linux-signed [sync] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-26.30]
[04:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected linux-restricted-modules [sync] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-26.30]
[04:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected linux [sync] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-26.30]
[04:34] <apw> ^ these all all good, rejected so I can ensure they are copied correctly (it is too late in the game to get this wrong)
[04:35] <mwhudson> sarnold: yes
[04:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected linux-kvm [sync] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-1009.9]
[04:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected linux-meta-kvm [sync] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0.1009.9]
[04:41] <apw> ^ these are all good too, again ensuring they are copied correctly
[04:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [s390x] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-26.30] (core, kernel)
[04:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-26.30] (core, kernel)
[04:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-26.30] (core, kernel)
[05:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [arm64] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-26.30] (core, kernel)
[05:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-26.30]
[05:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-26.30]
[05:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [arm64] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-26.30]
[05:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [s390x] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-26.30]
[05:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-pip (focal-proposed/universe) [20.0.2-4 => 20.0.2-5] (no packageset) (sync)
[05:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-pip [sync] (focal-proposed) [20.0.2-5]
[05:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pypy3 (focal-proposed/universe) [7.3.0+dfsg-1ubuntu3 => 7.3.1+dfsg-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[05:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pypy3 [sync] (focal-proposed) [7.3.1+dfsg-2]
[05:09] <vorlon> sarnold: golang-1.14 arrived too late to transition to it on all archs but is needed for riscv64 support; so that explains golang-1.1[34].  golang-1.12, appears to have no reverse-dependencies in the archive so should probably go away, if you or mwhudson wanted to file a removal request
[05:11] <tumbleweed> some of the golang stuff in proposed may get unstuck with a golang-google-grpc sync, but that probably means rebuilds, and who knows how deep that rabbithole will go. I decided not to sync it
[05:15] <cpaelzer> wgrant: qemu and libvirt builds worked as expected, autopkgtests are good as well and no listing of them in update_output
[05:16] <cpaelzer> wgrant: seems all good for once the release team un-freezes adter the current image-spin
[05:16] <wgrant> cpaelzer: yeah, some autopkgtests took a few retries, but got there in the end. They won't be mentioned in update_output because the freeze blocks them
[05:17] <cpaelzer> yep, I justwanted to collect our remaining todo's on this but it seems to be as ready as we can make it
[05:17] <wgrant> Indeed. Thanks for all the fixes.
[05:18] <wgrant> I've been using the qemu from -proposed for my dev work all day and it seems solid
[05:18] <cpaelzer> \o/
[05:22] <vorlon> cpaelzer: "unfreeze" uh we're in final freeze so that doesn't happen. you'll want to flag this to the release team as a respin-worthy update to Ubuntu Server, if you want them in
[05:25] <wgrant> vorlon: The plan was to let them in if a respin was otherwise required, I believe, otherwise retarget to -updates.
[05:25] <vorlon> ok
[05:25] <vorlon> still, there's no "unfreeze" happening at this point so it needs to get on the List of whoever's driving respins :)
[05:25] <wgrant> vorlon: Separately, do you have remaining concerns about ruby2.7? I think the unapproved -5ubuntu1 fixes your issues with the -5 sync
[05:26] <vorlon> wgrant: what does it buy us?
[05:26] <vorlon> and ruby2.7 is on the budgie images
[05:27] <wgrant> vorlon: installability of ruby stuff on riscv64 because the bootstrap ruby2.7 was badly versioned and had the bad 64-bit symbols file. But -updates would solve that too
[05:27] <wgrant> Ugh, missed that
[05:28] <wgrant> Does that not show up as a set somehow?
[05:28] <vorlon> hmm perhaps not
[05:29] <vorlon> so, needs to be coordinated with ubuntu-budgie wrt any respins
[05:30] <wgrant> Huh yeah, seeded-in-ubuntu says ubuntu-budgie/daily-live, but no corresponding packageset, annoying.
[05:30] <wgrant> Thanks for the pointer.
[06:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: librelp (focal-proposed/universe) [1.5.0-1ubuntu1 => 1.5.0-1ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[06:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted librelp [source] (focal-proposed) [1.5.0-1ubuntu2]
[06:51] <vorlon> sil2100: mornin'
[06:52] <sil2100> vorlon: morning o/
[06:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: intel-media-driver-non-free (focal-proposed/multiverse) [20.1.1+ds1-1 => 20.1.1+ds1-1build1] (i386-whitelist)
[06:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted intel-media-driver-non-free [source] (focal-proposed) [20.1.1+ds1-1build1]
[06:55] <sil2100> How are we looking? I see the new kernels in -proposed
[06:56] <sil2100> Ok, I see quite a lot of testing on the tracker, quite a few bugs reported too
[06:58] <jibel> hey sil2100, almost covered Ubuntu desktop, nothing alarming so far
[06:58] <didrocks> jibel: needed help? I’m syncing latest iso
[07:00] <sil2100> \o/
[07:00] <jibel> didrocks, help is always welcome
[07:02] <didrocks> I’ll open a bug so that xnox updates the qa tracker on http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/412/builds/210996/testcases/1447/results. This test case is invalid now that the entry was removed
[07:06] <jibel> didrocks, I removed it, default cases must be updated to verify that checksum runs on boot
[07:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added intel-media-driver-non-free to i386-whitelist in focal
[07:19] <LocutusOfBorg> hello, can bileto gain the capability to know about riscv64?
[07:20] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: what do you mean?
[07:21] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: you mean the bileto britney?
[07:22] <sil2100> Since bileto itself should build and track riscv64 as any other arch - but I don't think it's in the list of supported britney ADT arches
[07:24] <sil2100> ...I guess I could add that, maybe to NEW_ARCHES
[07:27] <LocutusOfBorg> sil2100, example: https://bileto.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/4023 shows "Successfully built", but riscv64 is still building, so somebody might click "publish" by mistake
[07:28] <LocutusOfBorg> also sil2100 since you are there and blink, also autopkgtests in bileto should take in account for hints otherwise almost every autopkgtest run on lots of packages will fail for force-history-reset and similar
[07:31] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: oh, ok, let me look into that when I have a moment
[07:34] <LocutusOfBorg> sil2100, just as example: https://bileto.ubuntu.com/excuses/4023/focal.html this one is one that shows "autopkgtest failures" but all the failures are related to i386 and are already badtested
[07:34] <LocutusOfBorg> so if you want to commit a patch we can use that one to test it
[08:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected remmina [source] (focal-proposed) [1.4.3+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[08:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: django-housekeeping (focal-proposed/universe) [1.1-1.1 => 1.2-1~ubuntu20.04.1] (no packageset)
[08:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted django-housekeeping [source] (focal-proposed) [1.2-1~ubuntu20.04.1]
[08:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: debian-installer (focal-proposed/main) [20101020ubuntu613 => 20101020ubuntu614] (core)
[08:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted lubuntu-meta [source] (focal-proposed) [20.04.8]
[08:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted git [source] (focal-proposed) [1:2.25.1-1ubuntu3]
[08:37] <sil2100> Laney, apw: d-i in teh queue ^
[08:37] <apw> sil2100, will review
[08:40] <mwhudson> vorlon: are you timeshifting your hours or just not sleeping
[08:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted debian-installer [source] (focal-proposed) [20101020ubuntu614]
[08:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted sssd [sync] (focal-proposed) [2.2.3-3]
[08:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-subtitles [sync] (focal-proposed) [1.6-2.1]
[08:54] <sil2100> Ok everyone! As per the discourse thread, we are now waiting for the kernels to be ready to migrate and, once they do, I think we'll have everything for our new candidate images
[08:56] <wgrant> sil2100: Where do we stand in terms of pending respins? I have a few I'd like to slip in if their images are going to be respun anyway: qemu/libvirt (server, both in -proposed and ready to migrate except for the block), ceph (server, built in https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/4030/+packages), zeromq3 (most non-ubuntu desktop images, built in
[08:56] <wgrant> https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/4032/+packages), ruby2.7 (built in https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/4031/+packages). Sounds like qemu/libvirt can probably go in now, if we're respinning for a kernel, since they're already ready to migrate?
[08:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted horizon [source] (focal-proposed) [3:18.2.1~git2020041013.754804667-0ubuntu3]
[08:59] <sil2100> wgrant: yeah, let me unblock those two - and Laney is reviewing/accepting the zeromq3 upload soon
[09:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted zeromq3 [source] (focal-proposed) [4.3.2-2ubuntu1]
[09:02] <sil2100> The rest I guess we'd like to leave out in -proposed
[09:03] <wgrant> sil2100: ruby2.7 is in a subset of zeromq3's images (just ubuntu-budgie) and already built, though I guess autopkgtests might be annoying.
[09:04] <sil2100> wgrant: I think for now we just wanted to have zeromq3 in -proposed, we're too close to the respins to unblock more stuff (just unblocking qemu and libvirt for now)
[09:05] <wgrant> sil2100: OK cool, makes sense. Should I request the copies into -proposed of the others now, so the autopkgtests are ready if we happen to respin again?
[09:07] <seb128> SRU team, could someone move bug #1781428 to updates and review the new pulseaudio/bionic SRU from the queue? OEM team has a close target and would like to see that in if possible
[09:07] <ubot5> bug 1781428 in pulseaudio (Ubuntu Bionic) "please enable snap mediation support" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1781428
[09:13] <sil2100> seb128: I'll take a look in a moment between stuff
[09:13] <seb128> sil2100, thanks
[09:14] <wgrant> vorlon: fwiw for intel-media-driver-non-free a self-copy would have worked to create the i386 build
[09:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20101020ubuntu614)
[09:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot arm64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20101020ubuntu614)
[09:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot armhf [Focal Final] has been updated (20101020ubuntu614)
[09:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot ppc64el [Focal Final] has been updated (20101020ubuntu614)
[09:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot s390x [Focal Final] has been updated (20101020ubuntu614)
[09:39] <cpaelzer> SRU Team, releasing https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chrony/+bug/1872183 into Bionic is also some sort of focal pre-req
[09:39] <ubot5> Ubuntu bug 1872183 in chrony (Ubuntu Bionic) "package chrony 3.2-4ubuntu4.2 failed to install/upgrade: installed chrony package post-removal script subprocess returned error exit status 1" [Undecided,Fix committed]
[09:39] <cpaelzer> it is ready and waits to be released, would be great if someone could take a look
[09:40] <cpaelzer> and on a second thought, much less urgent but hanging around ready to be SRU-released for more than two weeks is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/open-vm-tools/+bug/1868012
[09:40] <ubot5> Ubuntu bug 1868012 in open-vm-tools (Ubuntu Eoan) "MRE for open-vm-tools to version 11.0.5" [Low,Fix released]
[09:41] <cpaelzer> oh hitting refresh showed me that sil2100 was faster than my request on the latter
[09:41] <cpaelzer> thanks
[09:41] <cpaelzer> still waiting for chrony is someone has a SRU-minute for it
[09:48] <Laney> jibel: can you help to add the upgrade tests on the final milestone please?
[09:48] <Laney> I don't know how to do that
[09:57] <jibel> Laney, sure
[09:57] <Laney> cheers!
[09:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure-4.15 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1082.92] (no packageset)
[09:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1082.92~16.04.1] (kernel)
[09:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure-4.15 [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1082.92]
[09:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.15.0-1082.92~16.04.1]
[09:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base amd64 [Focal Final] (20200421) has been added
[09:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base arm64 [Focal Final] (20200421) has been added
[09:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base armhf [Focal Final] (20200421) has been added
[09:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base ppc64el [Focal Final] (20200421) has been added
[09:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Base s390x [Focal Final] (20200421) has been added
[09:59] <Laney> sil2100: ^- those worked
[10:13] <sil2100> \o/
[10:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Upgrade Kubuntu amd64 [Focal Final] (20200420) has been added
[10:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Upgrade Ubuntu MATE amd64 [Focal Final] (20200420) has been added
[10:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Upgrade Ubuntu Server amd64 [Focal Final] (20200420) has been added
[10:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Upgrade Ubuntu Studio amd64 [Focal Final] (20200420) has been added
[10:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Upgrade Ubuntu amd64 [Focal Final] (20200420) has been added
[10:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Upgrade UbuntuKylin amd64 [Focal Final] (20200420) has been added
[10:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Upgrade Xubuntu amd64 [Focal Final] (20200420) has been added
[10:15] <jibel> Laney, done
[10:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Upgrade Lubuntu amd64 [Focal Final] (20200420) has been added
[10:18] <sil2100> apw, sforshee: hey! I htink the ADT situation of the linux in focal-proposed looks good, can one of you unblock the kernel via the tracking bug?
[10:18] <sil2100> Or is there some special step still needed?
[10:20] <apw> sil
[10:21] <apw> sil2100: can do
[10:21] <sil2100> apw: thanks!
[10:21] <sil2100> Laney: oh, I guess this reminds me: I think we might want to remove the old i386 ubuntu-base tarball that's just being copied forward all the time
[10:21] <sil2100> Let me do that in a moment
[10:24] <Laney> ye
[10:32] <sil2100> Laney: and I'll deploy the ubuntu-base changes - if it explodes during the rebuilds, we can always just revert and hack it in rebuild-requests ;)
[10:32] <Laney>  sure, deploy and try a rebuild
[10:32] <Laney> maybe just one arch at first
[10:35] <sil2100> Right, good idea
[10:35] <apw> sil2100, the block should come off automatically very shortly
[10:39] <wgrant> Any reason I shouldn't copy my ceph, ruby2.7 into -proposed in case we respin again? They're both easy diffs.
[10:43] <sil2100> wgrant: push ceph to the queue, we can then review and discuss both of them
[10:43] <sil2100> We'd like to at least not accept anything right before kicking the candidate images, but afterwards we can think about that
[10:43] <wgrant> sil2100: I have ruby2.7 binaries in a silo, but I'm worried it'll autoaccept since it's only in budgie which has no packageset
[10:43] <wgrant> I forget exactly how the bot works
[10:46] <wgrant> Or rather it's only in i386-whitelist, which I think has been added to the ignore list since the upload that's currently in the queue
[10:48] <sil2100> Ah, right, Laney did change that, and it explains why the old ruby2.7 wasn't auto-accepted
[10:48] <sil2100> hm
[10:48] <sil2100> wgrant: can we in that case just wait for the kernel and such to migrate?
[10:49] <wgrant> sil2100: Of course, no rush at all
[10:49] <sil2100> If that's fine with you I'd feel better if britney had as least work to do as possible ;)
[10:49] <wgrant> Well I'm in theory properly EOD in 3 or 4 hours
[10:49] <wgrant> Heh yes
[10:49] <wgrant> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/475376905/ceph_15.2.1-0ubuntu1_15.2.1-0ubuntu2.diff.gz is the ceph diff, fwiw. The stuff under src/test is all artifacts from symlinks.
[10:50] <sil2100> wgrant: in case you'd be going EOD and we'd still want to wait, just give me a sign and I can bin-copy out of bileto for you
[10:51] <wgrant> sil2100: I'm happy for ruby2.7 and ceph to both be bin-copied out; I've tested the binaries and they work fine, and it'll save hours of build time.
[10:51] <wgrant> But I'll be around for a while yet.
[11:02] <sil2100> uh, wanted to unblock git as well, but I don't think we'll get that in time - I see the dgit ADT tests for arm run for like 3-5 hours
[11:03] <Ukikie> Urgh, that late addition of riscv is really a pain.  weechat is stuck in -proposed, it can't install a (seemingly) arch-all package and is therefore stuck in -proposed.
[11:04] <wgrant> Ukikie: The new ruby2.7 will fix that, otherwise it can be hinted through.
[11:05] <Ukikie> wgrant: Fantastic, thank you.  Sounds good enough to me! :)
[11:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libslirp (focal-proposed/main) [4.1.0-2ubuntu1 => 4.1.0-2ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[11:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-shell (focal-proposed/main) [3.36.1-5ubuntu1 => 3.36.1-5ubuntu2] (desktop-extra, mozilla, ubuntu-desktop)
[12:01] <sil2100> Ok, quick status update everyone! As per the discourse status page, we have now also identified LP: #1873867 as a blocker and are waiting for a fix for it
[12:01] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1873867 in ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "ubuntu-drivers changes kernel flavour when installing nvidia" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1873867
[12:01] <sil2100> Depending on how long fixing it will take, we might want to hold off on the respins
[12:07]  * sil2100 eyes the linux and linux-kvm packages in focal-proposed
[12:13] <slizard_> Hi all, I have a package update / release freeze related question, I'm hoping someone can help with. I'm a core dev of the software package GROMACS. We would have liked if 20.04 shipped the last patch release, the current one is one behind. Does the "finalfreeze" mean even patch releases can't be updated? BTW, the package is in Debian sid https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=gromacs&suite=sid and AFAIK it's generally
[12:13] <slizard_> pulled from there.
[12:15] <ginggs> sil2100: do you want 2020.1-1?
[12:16] <ginggs> sil2100: sorry
[12:16] <ginggs> slizard_: ^^
[12:17] <slizard_> ginggs: Yes, that is the latest patch release.
[12:19] <ginggs> slizard_: i'll sponsor that for you. in future you can use 'requestsync gromacs'
[12:19] <ginggs> i recall sponsoring this for you before
[12:20] <slizard_> ginggs: thanks. Not sure, I have made similar requests before though launchpad.
[12:21] <slizard_> ginggs: where do I post 'requestsync gromacs'?
[12:22] <ginggs> slizard_: you run it in a terminal and it open a new bug in launchpad for you, with all the information
[12:23] <slizard_> ginggs: thanks, I'll remember that for next time.
[12:23] <slizard_> ginggs: As a follow-up: after final are package versions in universe frozen? Asking because our maintenance release (with some important fixes) is planned for April 30. A pointer for documentation on the policies would suffice.
[12:26] <ginggs> slizard_: we can get the fixes in as a SRU - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
[12:28] <slizard_> ginggs: Thanks for the pointer, and for the help. Much appreciated!
[12:28] <ginggs> slizard_: yw!
[12:53] <wgrant> xnox: Are you planning on an ubuntu-meta upload for the l-r-m bits? If so, any thoughts on adding riscv64? -minimal/-standard/-server install fine with the two obvious additions to update.cfg.
[13:28] <xnox> wgrant:  no ubuntu-meta upload.
[13:29] <xnox> wgrant:  it's just a ship-live seed change, to change which files end up in the pool, as assembled by debian-cd. no ubuntu-meta upload currently planned.
[13:29] <wgrant> Ah I see.
[13:29] <wgrant> Fair enough.
[13:29] <xnox> wgrant:  i don't mind doing riscv64 upload, but in the past that generated more problems =( because arch:all things were visible, but not installable.
[13:30] <wgrant> xnox: The three arch-anys all install fine, though I didn't check Recommends.
[13:30] <xnox> wgrant:  if we have the full -minimal/-standard/-server we can add it i guess. Does it need to be in release pocket for debootstrap? or can it live in updates?
[13:31] <wgrant> xnox: I forget which metas debootstrap normally installs!
[13:33] <wgrant> sil2100: And last missing piece of the riscv64 archive, if we have the opportunity to slip it in, is llvm-toolchain-10 (seeded in budgie and server): https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/4029/+build/19180814
[13:34] <xnox> wgrant:  i could upload src:ubuntu-meta-riscv64 right? as a new source package?
[13:34] <xnox> wgrant:  cause we might want to update it a few times.
[13:43] <sarnold> vorlon, mwhudson, thanks, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang-1.12/+bug/1874090 filed
[13:43] <ubot5> Ubuntu bug 1874090 in golang-1.12 (Ubuntu) "is golang-1.12 a candidate for removal from focal?" [Undecided,New]
[13:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: desktop-file-utils (focal-proposed/main) [0.24-1ubuntu2 => 0.24-1ubuntu3] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist)
[13:45] <wgrant> xnox: That would work if you think it's best.
[13:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gromacs (focal-proposed/universe) [2020-2build1 => 2020.1-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[13:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gromacs [sync] (focal-proposed) [2020.1-1]
[13:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openssl (focal-proposed/main) [1.1.1f-1ubuntu1 => 1.1.1f-1ubuntu2] (core, i386-whitelist)
[13:52] <mdeslaur> that openssl upload is high-severity and needs to go in focal ^
[13:52] <mdeslaur> pretty please with sugar on top
=== s8321414_ is now known as s8321414
[14:03] <sil2100> mdeslaur: does it need to go into the release?
[14:03] <sil2100> mdeslaur: or can it go into focal-security?
[14:04] <sil2100> wgrant: oh my, and what's the autopkgtest story for llvm-toolchain-10? How many tests is it triggering?
[14:05] <xnox> wgrant:  do you have merge proposal for ubuntu-meta?
[14:06] <mdeslaur> sil2100: ideally it would go in the release
[14:08] <sil2100> mdeslaur: ok, reviewing
[14:08] <apw> sil2100, looks ok to my eye
[14:08] <xnox> mwhudson:  we do have autopkgtest lead time + riscv64 build
[14:10] <wgrant> sil2100: there are only a couple of dozen reverse build depends, but not sure exactly
[14:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openssl [source] (focal-proposed) [1.1.1f-1ubuntu2]
[14:11] <wgrant> xnox: into which branch/repo?
[14:12] <xnox> wgrant:  good point, there is none
[14:12] <xnox> wgrant:  pastebinit debdiff you had?
[14:12] <xnox> wgrant: cause if there is ubiquity & ubuntu-drivers & openssl we should have time for ubuntu-meta tooo......
[14:14] <wgrant> xnox: https://launchpad.net/~wgrant/+archive/ubuntu/nonvirt/+sourcepub/11198713/+listing-archive-extra
[14:14] <wgrant> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/475564343/ubuntu-meta_1.449_1.450~ppa1.diff.gz
[14:15] <mdeslaur> thanks sil2100 apw
[14:23]  * sil2100 would like to take as few things as possible, since every change can potentially cause regressions
[14:29] <xnox> wgrant:  i like it, and it does _not_ enable desktop packages (due to whitelist in debian/control)
[14:30] <xnox> wgrant:  would you like to upload that into the queue?
[14:30] <xnox> (with better version)
[14:30] <xnox> or should i?
[14:31] <wgrant> xnox: Yep, all the binaries it produces install fine.
[14:31] <wgrant> Will upload
[14:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-meta (focal-proposed/main) [1.449 => 1.450] (core)
[14:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: update-manager (bionic-proposed/main) [1:18.04.11.11 => 1:18.04.11.12] (core)
[14:47] <teward> NGINX upstream just cut 1.18 stable and I'm going to upload that so LTS is on an NGINX Stable branch.  I will need that approved before we finally release, but that'll be the last NGINX upload of this cycle.
[14:47] <teward> release team: ^
[14:47] <teward> no changes from 1.17.10 i uploaded a few days ago
[14:48] <teward> except a version string
[14:48] <sil2100> wgrant: ok, so I suppose you will be EODing soon (or should already?)
[14:48] <sil2100> wgrant: could you do the syncs for the packages?
[14:48] <wgrant> sil2100: Will do
[14:48] <sil2100> I think we are waiting for enough other stuff so that we can at least accept those into -proposed
[14:49] <xnox> wgrant:  and i think we can then publish all of the risc things to -updates. as it shouldn't matter as long as it's somewhere there this week.
[14:49] <wgrant> sil2100: So not being a bileto expert, any reason I can't just copy-package out of it?
[14:50] <cjwatson> Isn't there a landing button that causes snakefruit to do it for you and then arrange for the ticket to be closed out?
[14:51] <wgrant> I don't like magic buttons, but if it works!
[14:52] <sil2100> wgrant: you can copy-package with binaries normally - I can't remember the bileto logic, but I think there was some check that we could only publish packages that have passing autopkgtests
[14:52] <sil2100> (I think there was a way to override that tho? WOuld have to check the UI again!)
[14:52] <wgrant> Yeah, it seems to have a bunch of extra layers
[14:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nginx (focal-proposed/main) [1.17.10-0ubuntu1 => 1.18.0-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-server)
[14:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ruby2.7 [source] (focal-proposed) [2.7.0-5ubuntu1]
[14:53] <sil2100> cjwatson: yeah it does, but I think bileto is very stubborn about publishing packages that it didn't run autopkgtests for
[14:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ruby2.7 (focal-proposed/main) [2.7.0-4ubuntu1 => 2.7.0-5ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist) (sync)
[14:54] <sil2100> But Robert wrote it that way that it just tracks the package even if you directly copy it
[14:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph (focal-proposed/main) [15.2.1-0ubuntu1 => 15.2.1-0ubuntu2] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) (sync)
[14:54] <wgrant> Yeah
[14:54] <teward> if anyone can approve the nginx upload to proposed that'd be great, it has no functional changes just a version string change.  (We'd like to get this in Focal before release, if possible, so we can be on a Stable nginx branch instead of their mainline branches.)
[14:54] <wgrant> The ruby2.7 ticket is angry because there's the same version in rejected
[14:54] <sil2100> So it should just close the ticket when it sees the final package migrating to the target release
[14:55] <teward> oops repost of before, E:NEEDCOFFEE
[14:55] <wgrant> Handy.
[14:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: llvm-toolchain-10 (focal-proposed/main) [1:10.0.0-3 => 1:10.0.0-4ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist) (sync)
[14:56] <cjwatson> sil2100: Ah yes
[14:56] <cjwatson> I indeed thought there was UI to override that, but it's been a long time ...
[14:57] <sil2100> I thought the same but I couldn't find it now, just saw the 'ACK packaging changes' one
[14:59] <sil2100> teward: what is the severity of this? Since this is just a version-bump, can't it land as an SRU instead?
[15:00] <teward> sil2100: there's been precedent for this in the past, but if we can align the versions *prior* to release, that's more feasible, because I know there's some people who aren't tracking -updates and I have no idea if/when the next security patch will be out to force it to 1.18.x
[15:00] <teward> i have no qualms making it an SRU but if we're going that route, which we've done in the past, we should probably keep in mind that we're going to have people filing bugs against disparate versions of the package unless they're all synced on the same version in all releases
[15:01] <teward> 1.17.10 and 1.18.0 having separate bug reports on them is going to be a triaging nightmare even though functionally there's no differences
[15:01] <teward> sil2100: your call which you choose to do
[15:01] <teward> i have no issues regardless (hwoever it'd be nice to say we've released with the latest NGINX stable instead of post-relase SRU it)
[15:01] <teward> this is the headache with NGINX - their stable cuts happen right as we release >.>
[15:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: walinuxagent (focal-proposed/main) [2.2.45-0ubuntu2 => 2.2.46-0ubuntu1] (core, ubuntu-cloud)
[15:02] <rbalint> sil2100, bdmurray please accept it, it passed basic testing (upgrade, reboot vm) ^
[15:03] <sil2100> rbalint: looking
[15:03] <LocutusOfBorg> wgrant, did you use copy-package instead of publish for bileto?
[15:03] <teward> sil2100: i was in the process of filing FFe bug for this, but if you want I can make that an SRU for post-release inclusion
[15:03] <teward> though if we're doing that we should probably reject what's in the queue now and let me reup with an SRU bug reference
[15:03] <sil2100> Laney, bdmurray: ^ this is for a cloud related critical issue
[15:03] <wgrant> LocutusOfBorg: Yes, why?
[15:03] <teward> (For nginx)
[15:03] <sil2100> LocutusOfBorg: yes, I recommended that, why you ask?
[15:04] <LocutusOfBorg> does it include also binaries, right?
[15:04] <LocutusOfBorg> I'm worried if we copy only sources
[15:04] <sil2100> I asked wgrant to do a bin-copy
[15:04] <wgrant> I did a bin-copy, that was the whole point :)
[15:05] <wgrant> But good to check
[15:05] <LocutusOfBorg> nice! unfortunately on the web page is not shown that particular bit, and since it takes lots of days to complete, better double check :) I did that mistake too many times in the past for my node* bootstraps
[15:05] <LocutusOfBorg> and ruby* :)
[15:05] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks!
[15:06] <wgrant> Yeah, we should possibly show some more of the json_data from the PackageCopyJob there
[15:06] <wgrant> Now that binary copies are used a lot more
[15:06] <wgrant> The UI was initially designed for syncs from Debian, which of course are always source-only
[15:07] <sil2100> wgrant, LocutusOfBorg: checked with `queue show-urls` and all 3 look like bin-syncs indeed!
[15:07] <sil2100> ;)
[15:07] <seb128> Laney, bug #1874103 minir/probably too late for release now so just as a FYI
[15:07] <ubot5> bug 1874103 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) "The new RST page doesn't load translations" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1874103
[15:07] <wgrant> sil2100: Thanks for checking!
[15:08] <Laney> seb128: thanks, annoying, I tried to upload that early specifically to make translations work :(
[15:08] <Laney> if someone could dig in that would be appreciated
[15:08] <seb128> I will try to have a look
[15:10] <sil2100> wgrant, LocutusOfBorg: ok, accepted o/
[15:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ceph [sync] (focal-proposed) [15.2.1-0ubuntu2]
[15:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ruby2.7 [sync] (focal-proposed) [2.7.0-5ubuntu1]
[15:10] <wgrant> sil2100: Many, many thanks
[15:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted llvm-toolchain-10 [sync] (focal-proposed) [1:10.0.0-4ubuntu1]
[15:11] <vorlon> sil2100, bdmurray, Laney: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-drivers-common/+bug/1873867 is coming in hot, I just talked with tseliot and I'm going to do a reupload of nvidia and he's working on getting ubuntu-drivers-common landed so that the 3rd-party drivers selection on the CD is capable of picking the matching driver for the kernel
[15:11] <ubot5> Ubuntu bug 1873867 in ubuntu-drivers-common (Ubuntu) "ubuntu-drivers changes kernel flavour when installing nvidia" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[15:12] <LocutusOfBorg> lovely thanks!
[15:12] <Laney> vorlon: thanks, we know, it's tracked on the document linked in the topic
[15:12] <vorlon> ok
[15:12] <sil2100> vorlon: awesome, thanks, we're waiting on this one o/
[15:15] <doko> waveform, vorlon: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-raspi ask for promotion, however this isn't seeded anywhere
[15:16] <doko> sforshee: ^^^
[15:16] <LocutusOfBorg> kanashiro, wrt ruby2.7 rb_num2int this symbol is listed twice on your debian upload, please make sure you grab the symbols file from [2.7.0-5ubuntu1]
[15:17] <LocutusOfBorg> +        LIBS="-latomic" ./configure $(configure_options)
[15:17] <LocutusOfBorg> and still the tab -> spaces issue that makes riscv64 FTBFS
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted walinuxagent [source] (focal-proposed) [2.2.46-0ubuntu1]
[15:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubiquity (focal-proposed/main) [20.04.14 => 20.04.15] (core)
[15:19] <vorlon> mwhudson: was just not sleeping ;)
[15:19] <sil2100> doko: linux-raspi is not seeded anywhere as we don't have any per-device seeds (but maybe we should pull it somewhere), it's being pulled in via livecd-rootfs for our raspi image builds though
[15:20] <vorlon> wgrant: the last time I did a self-copy, the i386 build records were not created; the code changed since then?
[15:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-graphics-drivers-440 (focal-proposed/restricted) [440.82+really.440.64-0ubuntu4 => 440.82+really.440.64-0ubuntu5] (i386-whitelist)
[15:22] <LocutusOfBorg> where is the time we process removal from debian in ubuntu? is it already past or is it coming?
[15:22] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity^ IIRC you are the one doing this job before relase, right?
[15:22] <vorlon> he is not
[15:22] <vorlon> what specifically are you looking to have removed?
[15:23] <LocutusOfBorg> I'm interested in having some package removed that is gone long time ago in debian
[15:23] <LocutusOfBorg> node-run-sequence
[15:23] <vorlon> because at this point we shouldn't auto-process removals because it's too late for someone to object if we take away a leaf package that's interesting to them
[15:23] <vorlon> ok, I'll go back and get that one
[15:23] <LocutusOfBorg> thanks, it makes pegjs migrate
[15:23] <LocutusOfBorg> we still have the camitk hint to fix, it should become a bump or a testreset
[15:26] <doko> sil2100: should that be seeded in platform.focal/supported-kernel-common ?
[15:28] <vorlon> doko: yes
[15:29] <vorlon> doko: done (and took out snapdragon while I was at it)
[15:31] <doko> vorlon, waveform: the packages don't have a subscriber
[15:31] <doko> kernel team?
[15:31] <vorlon> doko: yeah
[15:32] <doko> apw, sforshee: ^^^linux-raspi & linux-meta-raspi
[15:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-meta [source] (focal-proposed) [1.450]
[15:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libslirp [source] (focal-proposed) [4.1.0-2ubuntu2]
[15:41] <apw> doko, subscribed
[15:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubiquity [source] (focal-proposed) [20.04.15]
[15:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: spice (focal-proposed/main) [0.14.2-4ubuntu2 => 0.14.2-4ubuntu3] (ubuntu-server)
[15:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-440 [source] (focal-proposed) [440.82+really.440.64-0ubuntu5]
[15:51] <bdmurray> seb128: Have you made any progress on bug 1871960?
[15:51] <ubot5> bug 1871960 in libgtk3-perl (Ubuntu Focal) "package libpam-modules 1.1.8-3.6ubuntu2.18.04.1 failed to install/upgrade: pre-dependency problem - not installing libpam-modules:amd64" [Critical,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1871960
[15:52] <seb128> bdmurray, I found one potential issue for which I'm about to upload a fix but I'm not sure it's enough
[16:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pango1.0 (focal-proposed/main) [1.44.7-2ubuntu3 => 1.44.7-2ubuntu4] (core, i386-whitelist)
[16:09] <seb128> bdmurray, ^
[16:09] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, please autopkgtest for black and camitk! (they are NBS, please hint-reset or whatever)
[16:11] <bdmurray> seb128: what are your concerns about it not being enough?
[16:13] <seb128> bdmurray, it's a potential case of partial upgrade problem solved but I'm not convinced there isn't upgrade ordering issues between bindings/gobject introspection/the lib
[16:14] <seb128> bdmurray, it would help if I was able to trigger the buggy situation but my upgrade tests didn't fail that way
[16:15] <seb128> bdmurray, in any case the change should be a step in the right direction
[16:15] <bdmurray> seb128: do you have a good test case for it?
[16:15] <seb128> no
[16:16] <seb128> I just hit the problem where in dist-upgrades things would fail to start while pango binaries were partially upgraded
[16:18] <seb128> but shrug, in session upgrades :/ I'm testing an upgrade now and pango/gtk and iU and anything gtk fails to start on hitting bug #1627564
[16:18] <ubot5> bug 1627564 in gtk+3.0 (Ubuntu) "Crash due to assertion failure in ensure_surface_for_gicon [gtkiconhelper.c:493] (when png loader is missing/during upgrades)" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1627564
[16:19] <seb128> and it has been like 3 minutes now that gtk is out of order and packages are being set up, so I guess anything needed debconf-gtk would fail during that time
[16:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-pip (focal-proposed/universe) [20.0.2-5 => 20.0.2-5ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[16:20] <tumbleweed> ^^ horrible hack. but should unbreak python2 virtualenvs again
[16:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-pip [source] (focal-proposed) [20.0.2-5ubuntu1]
[16:23] <Laney> seb128: this feels like a hard bug :(
[16:23] <Laney> are we going to need to do something like upgrade the debconf frontend and all its dependencies first? (would that even be feasible?)
[16:24] <seb128> I was wondering that, if we should upgrade libgtk-3-0 upfront
[16:24] <Laney> that would have to use the noninteractive frontend I guess
[16:26] <cjwatson> There's some horrible stuff in debconf's frontend code that tries to work out whether gtk is working and falls back if it isn't, but it no doubt isn't complete
[16:27] <cjwatson> https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-debconf/debconf/-/blob/master/Debconf/FrontEnd/Gnome.pm#L162
[16:28] <cjwatson> And maybe particularly https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-debconf/debconf/-/blob/master/Debconf/FrontEnd/Gnome.pm#L180
[16:28] <cjwatson> Of course trying to fix that is difficult if debconf might not have been upgraded first?  I don't know the ordering here
[16:29] <cjwatson> (Sorry about the variable naming and stuff there, it's from before my time)
[16:30] <cjwatson> But I think ideally we'd extend the child process test code there to try to catch this sort of thing
[16:31] <cjwatson> Of course there are other problems with being in a situation for an extended period of time where you can't start new desktop windows
[16:31] <seb128> cjwatson, would that be resilient to gtk segfaulting/aborting? or would that take the debconf process down in segfault with it?
[16:32] <cjwatson> seb128: That's the point of it spawning a child process there
[16:32] <cjwatson> The whole idea is exactly to be resilient against gtk segfaulting/aborting
[16:32] <seb128> right, I asked a bit too early, I read that now
[16:32] <cjwatson> But only if the child process does enough to actually tickle the bug
[16:34] <Laney> ah yeah, I guess it'd need to show some text to make the pango errors happen
[16:37] <seb128> so maybe the pango fix is enough
[16:37] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: black doesn't look like an NBS issue, it seems to be trying to download test deps from pypi and failing, that is not obviously an ignorable architecture regression
[16:37] <seb128> the gtk loader/icon thing would probably be handled by the test code
[16:38] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: camitk is easier, bumping the hint
[16:51] <doko> apw: promoted
[16:52] <sil2100> Hello everyone! Another status update as per the discourse thread: we will be spinning another set of test images as soon as ubiquity migrates, though we are still waiting for a few other packages before we can build real RC images
[16:53] <sil2100> Basically we're waiting for: migration of openssl (CVE fix), upload of ubuntu-drivers-common (the nvidia driver installation issue)
[16:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: julia (focal-proposed/universe) [1.4.0+dfsg-0ubuntu1 => 1.4.1+dfsg-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[16:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted julia [sync] (focal-proposed) [1.4.1+dfsg-1]
[17:00] <mdeslaur> apologies for the openssl upload folks, I forgot how long the autopkgtests would take
[17:02] <vorlon> mdeslaur: are you expecting this to go to the release pocket?
[17:02] <bdmurray> He is
[17:02] <vorlon> ok
[17:50] <coreycb> Hi release team, would it be ok if I seed placement for focal for bug 1805691? The MIR is already approved.
[17:50] <ubot5> bug 1805691 in placement (Ubuntu) "[MIR] placement" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1805691
[17:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pango1.0 [source] (focal-proposed) [1.44.7-2ubuntu4]
[18:05] <Laney> ^- proposed fix from seb128 for bug #1871960 which bdmurray could reproduce and will test once built in -proposed
[18:05] <ubot5> bug 1871960 in libgtk3-perl (Ubuntu Focal) "package libpam-modules 1.1.8-3.6ubuntu2.18.04.1 failed to install/upgrade: pre-dependency problem - not installing libpam-modules:amd64" [Critical,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1871960
[18:32] <vorlon> coreycb: yes, promotions to main are not blocked by freeze
[18:37] <coreycb> vorlon: great, I've updated supported-misc-servers and pushed
[19:42] <bdmurray> images are being rebuilt now b/c of linux and ubiquity but there will be another respin tomorrow
[20:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Budgie Desktop amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Studio DVD amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Xubuntu Desktop amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected shim-signed [source] (eoan-proposed) [1.39.2]
[20:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected shim [sync] (eoan-proposed) [15+1552672080.a4a1fbe-0ubuntu1]
[20:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected shim-signed [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.37~18.04.6]
[20:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected shim [sync] (bionic-proposed) [15+1552672080.a4a1fbe-0ubuntu1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected shim [sync] (xenial-proposed) [15+1552672080.a4a1fbe-0ubuntu1]
[20:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Desktop amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:35] <fginther> vorlon, are you interested in reviewing some ubuntu-drivers-common code? :)
[20:36] <vorlon> fginther: possibly
[20:36] <fginther> vorlon, looking for a second set of (good) eyes for the update tseliot was working on
[20:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Kylin Desktop amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:39] <Laney> yes!
[20:39] <Laney> (not me)
[20:40] <Laney> (yes for someone to review it :>)
[20:43] <fginther> these would be the commits over the past 2 days @ https://github.com/tseliot/ubuntu-drivers-common/commits/master
[20:43] <vorlon> fginther: ok - I think I should be able to look it over in an hour or so.  Feedback where?
[20:44] <fginther> umm, replying to the email from Alberto should be fine
[20:44] <fginther> and thanks
[20:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu MATE Desktop amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server amd64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server arm64 [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server ppc64el [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[20:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server s390x [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[21:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server arm64+raspi [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[21:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Server armhf+raspi [Focal Final] has been updated (20200421)
[21:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: vala (focal-proposed/universe) [0.48.3-1 => 0.48.4-0ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist, ubuntu-desktop)
[21:48] <jbicha> Feel free to reject subtitleeditor from focal queue. I didn't realize it was seeded & the change isn't important
[22:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected subtitleeditor [sync] (focal-proposed) [0.54.0-4]
[22:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fusiondirectory (focal-proposed/universe) [1.3-1ubuntu1 => 1.3-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[22:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gosa (focal-proposed/universe) [2.7.4+reloaded3-10ubuntu1 => 2.7.4+reloaded3-11] (no packageset) (sync)
[22:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fusiondirectory [sync] (focal-proposed) [1.3-2]
[22:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gosa [sync] (focal-proposed) [2.7.4+reloaded3-11]
[22:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-jsonrpc (focal-proposed/universe) [1.12.1-1ubuntu1 => 1.13.0-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[22:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-jsonrpc [sync] (focal-proposed) [1.13.0-1]
[22:28] <wgrant> vorlon: self-copy build creation> Huh, very weird. If it happens again, worth pinging us to investigate since that's meant to work.
[22:33] <vorlon> wgrant: ok
[22:34] <wgrant> The last thing _do_direct_copy does is call createMissingBuilds unconditionally, and there isn't much opportunity for short-circuiting before that.
[22:42] <sforshee> / rake
[22:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pypy3 (focal-proposed/universe) [7.3.1+dfsg-2 => 7.3.1+dfsg-3] (no packageset) (sync)
[22:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted pypy3 [sync] (focal-proposed) [7.3.1+dfsg-3]
[22:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libguestfs (focal-proposed/universe) [1:1.40.2-7ubuntu4 => 1:1.40.2-7ubuntu5] (no packageset)
[22:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libguestfs [source] (focal-proposed) [1:1.40.2-7ubuntu5]
[23:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cclib-data (focal-proposed/multiverse) [1.6.2-1 => 1.6.2-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[23:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cclib-data [sync] (focal-proposed) [1.6.2-2]
[23:45] <xnox> Laney:  it's better, but for some reason still installs nvidia-dkms-440 stuff i think it does not consider provides
[23:49] <xnox> apw:  vorlon: we have missmatch again
[23:49] <xnox> apt show nvidia-driver-440 | grep Depends
[23:49] <xnox> nvidia-dkms-440 (= 440.82+really.440.64-0ubuntu5) | nvidia-dkms-440 (= 440.64-0ubuntu3)
[23:50] <xnox> apt show linux-modules-nvidia-440-generic-hwe-20.04 | grep Provides
[23:50] <xnox> nvidia-dkms-440 (= 440.82+really.440.64-0ubuntu4)
[23:51] <xnox> i need to upload nvidia drivers again?
[23:56] <xnox> or will there be a matching l-r-m upload?