[09:33] <caribou> Good morning, is there a public channel where I can ask develpment/diagnostic questions about snapd ?
[09:39] <wgrant> caribou: #snappy is probably most relevant.
[09:39] <caribou> thanks wgrant
[09:48] <tjaalton> rbalint: hi, are there known issues with hostnamectl & docker?
[09:48] <tjaalton> rbalint: looks like it regressed recently, I'm not able to run hostnamectl anymore, it says 'device or resource busy'
[10:36] <rbalint> tjaalton, not that i know of, do you have a pointer?
[10:38] <tjaalton> rbalint: no bugreport yet
[10:38] <tjaalton> trying to reproduce by hand
[11:12] <seb128> mdeslaur, hey, bug #1874413 state there might be a regression with the recent openssl update
[11:14] <mdeslaur> seb128: thanks, I'll take a look
[14:15] <Bluefoxicy> really need to cobble together debsums and stuff to identify broken packages for something like a dism /online /cleanup-image /restorehealth or whatever where windows just fixes all its broken system files by redownloading them
[14:15] <Bluefoxicy> somehow one server destroyed a lot of stuff in /bin but the packages are still installed.  even gzip was gone
[14:23] <ogra> the checksumming is running by default on every start of the iso nowadays
[14:23] <Bluefoxicy> This is an old install
[14:23] <ogra> (you have to skip it with ctrl -C)
[14:23] <Bluefoxicy> apt somehow borked up during install and deleted a bunch of stuff
[14:23] <Bluefoxicy> so I'm repairing it
[14:38] <smoser> someone here surely knows (apologies if this is the wrong channel).
[14:38] <smoser> $ git branch | grep "^[^ ]"
[14:38] <smoser> * dev/create-delete-cycles
[14:38] <smoser> + fix/sizes-in-sectors
[14:39] <smoser> any idea what the '+' means ? that is new to me with git in focal.  it shows up as blue also. and only 1 of the 46 branches has it.
[14:40] <smoser> google and man are failing  me.
[14:48] <cjwatson> smoser: purely empirically I think it means "checked out in another worktree"
[14:48] <cjwatson> Oh yes
[14:48] <cjwatson> First para of DESCRIPTION in "git branch"
[14:48] <cjwatson> "Any branches checked out in linked worktrees will be highlighted in cyan and marked with a plus sign."
[14:49] <smoser> gah! thank you cjwatson.
[14:50] <cjwatson> (Fortunately I use worktrees a fair bit otherwise I might also have been mystified ...)
[16:15] <bdmurray> marcustomlinson: I'll sponsor / merge the fix for bug 1874469 unless you already have somebody lined up
[16:16] <marcustomlinson> bdmurray: that'd be great thanks!
[16:17] <bdmurray> marcustomlinson: to make sure I understand the scope of impact - what users does this affect exactly? New installs of 20.04 or people who have been running devel for a while?
[16:17] <marcustomlinson> bdmurray: the latter
[16:18] <bdmurray> Okay, then we'll do it as a normal SRU
[16:42] <marcustomlinson> bdmurray: thanks!
[18:41] <Laney> 😍
[18:42] <sil2100> Thanks for noticing!
[19:05] <bdmurray> marcustomlinson: Do you have a .crash file / OOPSID for bug 1874491?
[19:06] <marcustomlinson> bdmurray: no
[19:06] <marcustomlinson> I had to gdb
[19:06] <bdmurray> there was nothing in /var/crash?
[19:06] <marcustomlinson> nope
[19:07] <bdmurray> hrm
[19:08] <marcustomlinson> bdmurray: looks like a dup of https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/accountsservice/+bug/1843982
[19:09] <marcustomlinson> what you think?
[19:10] <marcustomlinson> yeah I think it is
[20:06] <mwhudson> philroche, tianon: we should update the :rolling and :latest tags for the docker ubuntu image too
[20:11] <philroche> mwhudson: I thought the same but figured I'd wait until we have  a G-animal
[20:11] <mwhudson> ok
[20:11] <mwhudson> seems rolling is updated anyway
[20:12] <philroche> mwhudson: When I try pull the latest focal docker image I get https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/j8Fc72xM6X/ error.
[20:12] <philroche> Is upload to dockerhub lagging or is there a different reason?
[20:12] <mwhudson> no idea
[20:13] <tianon> philroche, mwhudson: see the note at https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/7865#issuecomment-618463338 ;)
[20:14] <mwhudson> tianon: oh hai, and thanks
[20:14] <mwhudson> tianon: would redoing it to update at least ubuntu:rolling add to your queue excessively?
[20:14] <philroche> tianon: Thanks. I saw the focal-20200423 show up and was worried when pull didn't work. Thanks
[20:15] <tianon> mwhudson: nope not at this point (since they haven't all triggered yet and we're still early) :+1:
[20:16] <tianon> mwhudson, philroche: pushed a commit to update "latest" as well as "rolling" in the brew repo, should just need to regenerate library/ubuntu as a PR :)
[20:17] <philroche> mwhudson: Would you be able? I'm EOD
[20:17] <mwhudson> philroche: sure
[20:17] <philroche> Danke
[20:17] <mwhudson> tianon: do you agree with updating latest too? istr for bionic we did both on release day
[20:18] <tianon> yeah, might as well :)
[20:18] <tianon> latest = rolling = devel for this round seems fine/sane (reflects the reality upstream for the time being)
[20:18] <mwhudson> tianon: https://github.com/tianon/docker-brew-ubuntu-core/pull/179
[20:21] <philroche> 👍
[20:21] <mwhudson> tianon: https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/7873
[23:38] <tsimonq2> xnox, doko: What's your favorite way to get a package list to do an entire archive rebuild? Asking for a friend.
[23:38] <xnox> All or subset?
[23:39] <xnox> tsimonq2: when we do archive rebuilds we ask launchpad team to do it... There is rebuildd thing in Debian. And often just by creating transition trackers, trolling germinate seeds, etc.
[23:40] <xnox> Cause often one does not want to rebuild kernel, fonts, texlive, etc.
[23:43] <tsimonq2> xnox: There's a project that needs to rebuild the entire archive to comply with Canonical's legal issues surrounding shipping it on devices.
[23:43] <tsimonq2> xnox: Now, they could probably get away with a subset...
[23:43] <xnox> Tsi
[23:43] <tsimonq2> xnox: However, it's less than ideal and I wish Canonical Legal would just give them a trademark license.
[23:44] <xnox> tsimonq2: you should talk to them again & like sales. Maybe try community channels too. I think popey helped with some trademark agreements. And as rebuild will usually not help, as that will not strip branding.
[23:46] <xnox> tsimonq2: cause often things are modified in a way that breaks integration and then there are legitimate reasons to ensure it is not called Ubuntu. But also sometimes all of us get negotiations wrong.
[23:47] <tsimonq2> xnox: Fair enough, but I think in this case it should be allowed... I'll talk to popey (who has also been pinged in here). :)