[00:48] RikMills: yay === Wryhder is now known as Lucas_Gray [02:24] hi, need sponsor for https://launchpad.net/~vicamo/+archive/ubuntu/ppa-1886911, anyone has some time to help review/landing to bionic? [03:15] kanashiro: thanks for https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/golang-github-hashicorp-memberlist/0.1.7-1ubuntu1 === pieq_ is now known as pieq [08:35] shrug, autopkgtest retry needs a dup request filter :/ [08:36] LocutusOfBorg, http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/u/util-linux/groovy/armhf we managed to trigger three time the same thing there :/ [08:40] there's a merge proposal from tsimonq2 for that! [08:40] way to go :) [08:40] Laney: You mean the one that still needs review? [08:41] yeah [08:41] I started it when my Python skills were terrible and refactored recently. [08:41] (I'm not calling myself great it at but I'm much better now.) [08:41] :> [08:41] I *think* the last thing left there were tests. I'll get to that... [08:41] :P [08:42] I did try to ping Łukasz about it but he's not here atm [08:42] (since he reviewed before) [08:42] No worries. [08:45] seb128, yes, it sucks sometimes, I discovered it too :/ [08:52] Laney: That reminds me, I spent a solid amount of time digging re: making index.html on autopkgtest.u.c faster. It came up mostly fruitless, unfortunately. [08:53] I couldn't tell whether the bottleneck was from cold-connecting to the SQLite DB every time, since it's a CGI script triggered by Apache (from what I remember), or from SELECT taking so long. [08:54] (Actually activating the connection shouldn't be the issue, it's that it can't really be cached effectively without writing to an external file.) [08:55] Any insight you're able to provide would be appreciated, since seeing that puzzle solved would be cool. [08:59] It might be locking on the database with multiple concurrent clients accessing it [09:03] I reckon it might be worth thinking about switching to a proper database server - you could then also avoid some of the other annoying stuff like having to download the results out of swift [09:03] but that's obviously a medium sized project [09:05] At the very minimum that would require knowledge about what is considered the best "proper database server" from an administrative standpoint. [09:07] The downside would be that users could no longer just download the database as a single file, unless we really wanted to go through the effort of providing a publicly-accessible dump every so often (or at least a clone that ~ubuntu-dev could access, I'm thinking along the same lines as what DDs can do). [09:08] Those aren't really questions I can answer or Just Decide, even if I volunteered to do the work. [09:09] (I would start a thread on ubuntu-release/devel but I certainly don't want to start a DB flamewar.) [09:21] I think the maintainers could just decide :-) [09:21] but yes, if that's a valuable thing for people to use, you'd need to replace it with an API or something [09:26] I don't consider myself a maintainer until I have commit access. :P [09:27] I will however volunteer to put some work towards it. [09:27] Feel free to loop me in once the maintainers decide. ;) [10:19] if there are MOTUs around, this trivial patch could use sponsoring: https://people.canonical.com/~osomon/+1maintenance/node-buffer-shims.debdiff [11:00] oSoMoN, I do if you provide the patch to the Debian bug [11:00] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=963457 [11:00] Debian bug 963457 in src:node-buffer-shims "node-buffer-shims: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: /bin/sh -ex debian/tests/pkg-js/test returned exit code 1" [Serious,Open] [11:01] LocutusOfBorg, oh I already submitted it to salsa (https://salsa.debian.org/js-team/node-buffer-shims/-/merge_requests/1), but I didn't think of checking whether there was a bug report for it [11:01] oh, even better [11:01] I'll share the link to the merge request in the bug [11:02] LocutusOfBorg, FYI I filed and am looking into bug #1887144 [11:02] bug 1887144 in node-sha.js (Ubuntu) "autopkgtest failures on ppc64el with nodejs 12.18.1" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1887144 [11:03] oSoMoN, please update the merge request with "Closes: #963457" if that fix is for that RC bug [11:03] and I'll merge it [11:03] doing that now [11:05] LocutusOfBorg, done [11:28] kenvandine, hi, I have sent MR to fix the Snap Store name in Czech translation in two remaining active branches: https://gitlab.gnome.org/Community/Ubuntu/gnome-software/-/merge_requests - feel free to merge :) thanks! [11:29] AsciiWolf: thanks, I have it on my list to look at. [11:29] kenvandine, nice! thanks :) === Wryhder is now known as Lucas_Gray === Eighth_Doctor is now known as Conan_Kudo === Conan_Kudo is now known as Eighth_Doctor [12:07] yw mwhudson [12:08] now I am trying to figure out why nomad is FTBFS on arm{64,hf}, every time I try to build it I got a different error === plars_ is now known as plars === matlock_ is now known as matlock [14:27] vorlon: I am reviewing a fix for ruby-ncurses in bionic and I have a question: what would be the correct version string for a bionic SRU if in bionic we have 1.4.9-1build3 and in focal 1.4.9-1build5? [14:28] in bionic it was built against ruby 2.5 and it does not work, but in focal where it was built against ruby 2.7 it works fine [14:31] Laney, would you mind retrying https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=groovy&arch=armhf&package=node-depd&trigger=nodejs/12.18.1%7Edfsg-1ubuntu1 for me? [14:31] (looks flaky) [14:37] oSoMoN: I can do it if you want ^ [14:37] kanashiro, please [14:38] done [14:38] cheers [14:39] Laney, excuse my pinging you directly, I should have asked MOTUs in general before asking my favourite retrier [15:36] kanashiro: the problem I see with having the package in bionic with a version higher than the focal version, then, is that on upgrade from bionic to focal, the system will fail to upgrade to a ruby2.7 version of the package [15:36] kanashiro: it's ugly, but how about 1.4.9-1build3ubuntu0.18.04.1? [15:48] LocutusOfBorg, I attached a debdiff to https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=963063, can you sponsor that one? [15:48] Debian bug 963063 in src:nodejs, src:node-diff "nodejs breaks node-diff autopkgtest: Failed test: 41" [Serious,Open] [15:49] (the version in salsa and experimental is much newer, it probably doesn't suffer from this bug, and the patch doesn't apply, which is why I didn't submit a MR) [15:50] LocutusOfBorg, if we'd rather apply the patch in Ubuntu only (considering the new upstream version in experimental), here's the corresponding debdiff: https://people.canonical.com/~osomon/+1maintenance/node-diff-ubuntu.debdiff [15:56] vorlon: I was thinking about something on this line, that will avoid upgrade issues [15:56] rbasak: FYI ^ [16:05] vorlon: good point - thanks. I agree it's ugly which is why I wasn't sure, but that does seem like the best option. [16:27] can a MOTU please retry https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=groovy&arch=armhf&package=node-editor&trigger=nodejs/12.18.1%7Edfsg-1ubuntu1 ? [16:31] also, the node-encoding tests need to be retried with an additional trigger on the new node-iconv: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/7p6zbxcw7R/ [16:36] same for node-expat: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/fYxyk2jF6y/ [16:39] and node-express, too: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/NdvvgYtgxp/ [16:40] Laney, I love the new proposed-migration report where passing tests are hidden, that's much easier to read [16:41] node-form-data/armhf needs to be retried: https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=groovy&arch=armhf&package=node-form-data&trigger=nodejs/12.18.1%7Edfsg-1ubuntu1 [16:51] oSoMoN: yeah, nicer isn't it [16:52] where's all the green gone?!?!?!?! [16:52] that made me suspicious when I first saw it [16:52] did your retry [16:59] thanks [17:00] Laney, there's a series of other retries that need triggering, in the lines just above (pastebin links) [17:00] if you don't mind [17:05] oSoMoN: Going out for a walk now, will look later if nobody else does [17:12] thanks, enjoy the walk [18:46] xnox: Where did we land with the Ubuntu Studio Focal FTBFS? [19:27] Eickmeyer[m]: we have not [19:39] xnox: Ok, I'm just getting a little concerned with 20.04.1 being about a month away. [21:13] ahasenack, I did merge the new zoneminder version [21:13] I had to add a patch because of some missing stuff https://github.com/ZoneMinder/zoneminder/pull/2975 [21:13] can you please ping me in case something bad happens (or fix it :) ) ? [21:14] zoneminder, I have to check my cold storage to remember what I did with it :) [21:25] ah, my_bool stuff [21:26] and reserved keywords [21:26] ok