Unit193Just curious at this point, but how would Ubuntu handle a request from a Debian maintainer to blacklist his package from autosync?  Is there already a process for this?00:19
bryyceUnit193, dunno if there is a process for Debian specifically, but it is possible to prevent packages from automatically syncing.  I might suggest filing a launchpad bug against the package in question, and subscribing the appropriate admin team (maybe ubuntu-archive?)00:25
Unit193OK, thanks.00:28
=== guiverc2 is now known as guiverc
seb128xnox, ddstreet, other people who might have a clue about that, could you check https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/systemd/+bug/1880258 and see if it makes sense to you?09:02
ubottuLaunchpad bug 1880258 in systemd (Ubuntu) "Add trailing dot to make connectivity-check.ubuntu.com. absolute and reduce NXDOMAIN warning noise" [Undecided,New]09:02
seb128 [connectivity]09:02
seb128I'm happy to merge the change but I don't understand enough the issue to know if it's the right fix09:03
seb128juliank, hey, is https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=958960 something you can review/fix?09:27
ubottuDebian bug 958960 in src:synaptic "synaptic: FTBFS in Ubuntu" [Normal,Open]09:27
=== Wryhder is now known as Lucas_Gray
juliankseb128: Don't really care, nothing new there10:06
juliankI've done an NMU to make it build, it works fine in Debian, and we have no need to merge it in Ubuntu, so why bother?10:07
seb128juliank, you mean by "no need to merge it in Ubuntu'?10:11
seb128juliank, sure we can ship outdated software but that's not great10:11
seb128juliank, we usually do merge on Debian at least once by cycle10:12
xnoxseb128:  https://serverfault.com/questions/803033/should-i-append-a-dot-at-the-end-of-my-dns-urls so adding the dot means "lookup on the real internet, do not try to do local network lookups"10:18
xnoxseb128:  in some ways it is correct, and will make the connectivity check quicker.10:18
xnoxseb128:  the NXDOMAIN stuff, fedora gave up on it, i wonder if we should too.10:18
xnoxseb128:  i think the '.' will prevent doing those lookups with warnings, when there is no default route anywhere.10:19
xnoxthus UX wise is good.10:19
seb128xnox, k, and no expected drawback right? said differently no reason to not do it?10:21
xnoxseb128:  drawbacks => it is http url, if it's ever switched to https, it would need multiple domains in the cert.10:24
xnoxseb128:  but i guess it is intentionally http, to catch captive portals, which cannot be https.10:24
xnoxseb128: but interestingly enough http://start.ubuntu.com./connectivity-check does not work =(10:24
xnoxand gives me 50310:24
xnoxseb128:  do test that our deployment is correct and/or check with IS if they are happy for us to hit it with trailing dot by default.10:25
xnoxfrom client point of view it's fine, but IS might not like it from endpoint point of view.10:25
xnoxi.e. it will make it harder in corporate environments to fake that dns name i think.10:25
xnox(cause some do that)10:26
seb128xnox, right, I will check with IS, thanks10:27
juliankseb128: you do know that basically the only change in there is that it's now saving the column width?10:41
seb128juliank, does it matter? still having a package in sync and uptodate is a win compared to having it outdated and showing on the merge report and having users bothering us10:42
juliankBut I just noticed it seems to be missing the 0.84.6ubuntu5 change in debian10:42
juliankseb128: yes it does, we only do manual work if there are meaningful changes10:43
seb128juliank, the angle I was coming from is bug #1870900 in the sponsoring queue10:43
ubottubug 1870900 in synaptic (Ubuntu) "Sync synaptic 0.90+nmu1 (universe) from Debian unstable (main)" [Wishlist,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/187090010:43
seb128so it bothered some contributor enough that they went to file a bug and subscribe sponsors10:44
seb128anyway,  feel free to keep an ubuntu delta if you wish, I argue enough on the topic10:44
juliankseb128: It's tough. We need to remove the patches series in Debian to comply with new rules there, but we still need to keep 01_ubuntu_changelog.dpatch effectively, or well, rework it10:52
juliankIt's quite some work10:52
seb128juliank, the debian reports stated the patch isn't needed anymore, is that wrong?10:53
seb128'I suspect this file can simply be dropped, as synaptic10:54
seb128builds fine in Ubuntu without it, and is still able to retrieve10:54
seb128changelogs due to PR #45.'10:54
seb128juliank, without removing the patch series we could at least update the patch so it applies as a first step10:55
juliankseb128: Yes of course it's wrong ,the patch is mostly not about changelogs.10:55
juliankwell, half of it is10:56
juliankseb128: Half of the patch is about showing you correct supported or not status10:57
juliankThough that's also missing ESM10:57
juliankWe should add ESM to list of supported origins10:57
seb128juliank, k, I'm not familiar with that patch, I was just trying to clean some of the sponsoring queue. Thanks for responding. Ideally we would still refresh that patch in Debian so it applies then we can sync :)10:58
juliankand then there's code telling you to look at launchpad if changelog could not be found, which does not work for ESM10:58
juliankseb128: Refreshing the patch would not be a valid NMU reason IMO, and just an annoying useless download Debian users.10:59
juliankGotta merge it I guess10:59
seb128juliank,you are afraid that mvo would freak out about you updating the ubuntu patch in Debian?!11:00
seb128mvo, how angry would you be in juliank NMU synaptic in Debian to update 01_ubuntu_changelog.dpatch to correctly apply to the current version?11:01
juliankseb128: Oh I'm sure mvo is fine with that, but other Debian people will look funny and disapprovingly :)11:01
seb128juliank, the missing fix from 0ubuntu5 might be enough of a reason for an upload11:01
juliankseb128: It's actually not missing it seems11:02
seb128juliank, I don't think other Debian people care about who a maintainer authorize to NMU that package11:02
seb128that discussion is ridiulous...11:02
juliankIn any case, I should rework this properly so we don't need all that dpatch stuff and become compliant with the TC ruling on distro-specific patch series11:02
xnoxseb128:  ubuntu first..... derivatives can cherrypick our patches.11:09
seb128xnox, yes, that discussion started out by me mentioning a sync request we have for synaptic in the sponsoring queue11:10
seb128xnox, it drifted to juliank ask why we need to merge packages and saying Debian maintainers wouldn't approve him including Ubuntu patch refreshes in a NMU even if the maintainer is fine with it11:11
seb128weird world11:11
juliankseb128: You do know there are quite a few people in Debian who hate Canonical, Ubuntu, and I don't want to give them more cannon fodder11:12
juliankbecause in the end we end up with a heated discussion that "Canonical NMUs packages with ubuntu-only changes" and I'm not interested in that.11:13
juliankUgh, and I found a synaptic memory leak11:14
juliankOTOH, they do have a story to tell about how an ubuntu person uploaded an NMU that doesn't even build on Ubuntu11:25
xnoxseb128:  just RM synaptic from Ubuntu Archive11:29
xnoxFix Released11:29
seb128really I just saw an opportunity to have one more package in sync which means less work from our side11:30
mvojuliank, seb128 sorry, only now saw the discussion, let me know how I can help12:39
seb128mvo, I guess it would help if you could refresh 01_ubuntu_changelog.dpatch to apply and do an nonNMU upload of synaptic at some point, juliank believe that if he does that as not being the maintainer the Debian people who hate Ubuntu are going to be after him12:41
mvoseb128: sure thing, I cna do that12:41
seb128mvo, thanks :)12:41
seb128we should be able to sync back again then12:42
mvoseb128: yeah, I need to check why it's not, it was at some point12:42
seb128mvo, some new apt fixes that have been NMUed since12:42
seb128mvo, we could sync, but it 0.90 doesn't build on Ubuntu due to the Ubuntu patch not applying (which isn't impacting Debian/didn't get noticed when building there)12:43
mvoseb128: aha, ok12:43
mvoseb128: so it's just this refresh, I will see what I can do, today is a bit busy but maybe tonight or tomorrow12:43
seb128mvo, thanks!12:47
seb128mvo, no hurry, it's a minor thing12:47
seb128so whenever you will have free cycles (if ever ;)12:47
juliankmvo: also debian wants us to get rid of the per-distro patch series entirely, which is why I was thinking to do like if dpkg-vendor --derives-from ubuntu; then CPFFLAGS+=-DVENDOR_DERIVED_UBUNTU; and put stuff inside #ifdef12:48
juliankOr even better, if () ...12:49
juliankso that we build the same code on debian and ubuntu12:49
* mvo nods12:58
ahasenackhi, anyone aware of this error that I just started seeing with tdb /i386 dep8 tests:  libc6:i386 : Depends: libgcc-s1:i386 but it is not going to be installed14:54
ahasenackah, an ftbfs in latest gcc1014:59
LocutusOfBorgwgrant, just FYI according to this page: https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=util-linux&arch=riscv64 the logs from 2020-06-21 02:10:59 (failed) and 2020-06-21 11:05:43 (good) differs in kernel change from 5.0 to 5.715:00
LocutusOfBorgconsidering Ubuntu has 5.4, I would say that something in kernel changes between 5.4 and 5.7 "fixed it"15:00
LocutusOfBorgjamespage, hello, FYI I'm syncing python-rfc398615:56
ricotzmight be good to remove gcc-10 from -proposed?16:25
=== ijohnson is now known as ijohnson|lunch
=== ijohnson|lunch is now known as ijohnson
ricotzLocutusOfBorg, hi, is libmount-dev missing a dep on libcryptsetup-dev?18:10
bdmurrayvorlon: I'm looking at the gkrellm2-cpufreq ftbfs and it depends on licpupower-dev which is provided by linux in debian. What's the way forward here?18:20
vorlonbdmurray: ask the kernel team if they can provide libcpupower-dev; if not, blacklist the package?18:21
=== luisp is now known as luisp_
=== luisp_ is now known as luisp
LocutusOfBorgricab_, already fixed thanks :D20:11
LocutusOfBorgsed s/ricab_/ricotz/20:11
bryyceseb128, teward nginx 1.18.0-3ubuntu1 is in proposed now, if it helps for that focal version string sru.21:11
tewardit should since it's now lower than Groovy21:12
tewardi think anyways21:12
tewardseb128: i'll just leave this in your hands while I go get drunk.  'tis booze o-clock here :)21:12
bdmurraywell that was some honesty there21:51
bdmurrayvorlon: looking at gajim in update_output.txt it added a break on gajim-rostertweaks so then that package becomes uninstallable. Oh and there is a debian request to remove it.21:58
bdmurrayvorlon: So do I just need to ping an AA about removing it?21:59
ubottuDebian bug 963604 in ftp.debian.org "RM: gajim-rostertweaks -- ROM; not maintained upstream" [Normal,Open]21:59
sarnoldLaney: oh yes, polite reminder that eoan support ends in a month or so, we usually send a message like https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-announce/2019-July/000246.html to give folks a heads-up23:48
sarnoldLaney: (where "we" means "someone on behalf of the release team" :)23:48

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!