| === gusnan is now known as Guest97256 | ||
| oSoMoN | I spent some time looking into the node-sha.js autopkgtest failures on ppc64el, which (along with other test failures in various node-* packages) prevent the migration of nodejs | 12:21 |
|---|---|---|
| oSoMoN | it turns out it's a nasty bug in V8 that incorrectly optimizes a function on ppc64el only (https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/34666) | 12:21 |
| oSoMoN | this requires further investigation upstream, and I'm not sure what the best approach would be to get this moving forward in Ubuntu | 12:22 |
| oSoMoN | (nodejs in turns is blocking firefox and thunderbird) | 12:22 |
| oSoMoN | s/turns/turn/ | 12:22 |
| oSoMoN | suggestions welcome | 12:23 |
| seb128 | oSoMoN, would building with a lower -O workaround the optimization problem? | 12:27 |
| oSoMoN | seb128, I don't know, I'm not familiar with how V8 optimizes code, but I can certainly try | 12:32 |
| seb128 | oSoMoN, I'm just random suggesting, let's see if maybe doko or xnox can help there | 12:33 |
| icey | oSoMoN: feel free to ignore me but I'm kind of a fan of the minimal `eval('')` patch you mention in the bug report | 12:36 |
| oSoMoN | icey, that would just hide one symptom of the problem, but V8 would potentially incorrectly optimize other functions in other packages | 12:37 |
| icey | fair enough | 12:37 |
| oSoMoN | sil2100, hey, I just commented on bug #1889106, if you're still around and have some time for it, would you mind accepting chromium-browser 84.0.4147.105-0ubuntu0.20.04.1 into focal-proposed? | 13:54 |
| ubottu | bug 1889106 in chromium-browser (Ubuntu Focal) "[SRU] Upgrading from 18.04 to 20.04 will keep the 18.04 chromium-browser due to a higher version than the transitional deb in 20.04" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1889106 | 13:54 |
| oSoMoN | that would fix the deb->snap upgrade path for users upgrading from bionic to focal | 13:55 |
| ahasenack | seb128: I have a merge ready for gnunet, but the my_bool change is still needed | 13:59 |
| ahasenack | I opened a bug upstream this time | 13:59 |
| ahasenack | that's our only delta | 13:59 |
| seb128 | ahasenack, right, thank you! | 14:05 |
| ahasenack | seb128: it doesn't have dep8 tests, and I really don't know much about the pkg | 14:05 |
| ahasenack | seb128: was it blocking/breaking something else, something I could test with this new version? | 14:06 |
| ahasenack | otherwise, I'll jut get a quick review and upload | 14:06 |
| seb128 | ahasenack, something was depwaiting on it on the proposed report but I forgot what ... the delta is minimal and that could be an autosynced update, I would trust Debian and not spent too much effort trying to test it | 14:07 |
| ahasenack | ok | 14:08 |
| ahasenack | I just got a build failure, taking a quick look | 14:08 |
| ahasenack | might be gcc10 fun | 14:08 |
| ahasenack | seb128: ah, gnunet-fuse perhaps | 14:09 |
| ahasenack | and all the other gnunet-* src packages looks like | 14:09 |
| ahasenack | which are syncs | 14:09 |
| seb128 | ahasenack, right | 14:10 |
| ahasenack | ok, I ll handle it | 14:10 |
| ahasenack | ok, ftbfs resolved | 14:27 |
| Pinchiukas | Are the pipelines that build images for vagrant, etc public? As I understand, people in ubuntu build them. | 16:18 |
| ahasenack | vorlon: hi, good morning/afternoon. While reviewing the base-files changes regarding motd-news-config, cpaelzer came across one case which we are wondering if it's worth addressing | 17:08 |
| ahasenack | vorlon: basically the scenario is you have the current base-files and ubuntu-server installed, and the user removes /etc/default/motd-news (instead of editing it) | 17:08 |
| ahasenack | in that scenario, when you do the upgrade, /etc/default/motd-news is reinstalled when the new motd-news-config package is installed | 17:09 |
| ahasenack | you start with base-files/ubuntu-server, upgrade, and end up with base-files, ubuntu-server, and motd-news-config, as expected. But with the config file back, as it's now part of motd-news-config, and before, when the user removed it, it was part of base-files | 17:09 |
| ahasenack | is this worth addressing? If yes, how? | 17:09 |
| ahasenack | his comment, for reference: https://code.launchpad.net/~ahasenack/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+git/base-files/+merge/388835/comments/1022645 | 17:10 |
| === ijohnson is now known as ijohnson|lunch | ||
| === ijohnson|lunch is now known as ijohnson | ||
| Pinchiukas | Anyone? | 20:04 |
| xnox | ahasenack: I think it's impossible to migrate conffile between packages. | 21:54 |
| ahasenack | I'm doing it for the case of a modified conf file, when there is a backup | 21:54 |
| ahasenack | but a removed one... that's another story | 21:54 |
| xnox | ahasenack: at most you can check if the file doesn't exist in preinst and re-remove it. | 21:54 |
| xnox | ahasenack: backups and modified ones, also hard. | 21:55 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!