=== shivaram is now known as slingamn
[06:49] <cpaelzer> hi wgrant, is gdb on (emulated) riscv64 fully functional?
[06:50] <wgrant> cpaelzer: it's worked fine in my experience
[06:50] <cpaelzer> I was trying to debug a crash and can't see a backtrace at all - which might be part of the problem I try to analyze OR it might be that gdb support isn't complete on that platform
[06:50] <cpaelzer> ah ok, then I'll assume ti is part of the problem that I search
[06:50] <cpaelzer> thanks wgrant
[06:50] <cpaelzer> I wanted to make sure I won't go red herring fishing ...
[06:51] <wgrant> cpaelzer: Ah, I wouldn't be *that* sure it was reliable.
[06:52] <cpaelzer> hehe
[06:52] <cpaelzer> it is fine, hearing that it was seen working is what I wanted to hear
[06:52] <cpaelzer> but e.g. I get (so far) no backtraces at all
[06:52] <cpaelzer> so I got wondering if it might be a platform issue
[06:54] <cpaelzer> got a bt now
[06:54] <cpaelzer> need to find where it break, but that is problem-specific not riscv64 specific
[09:03] <Laney> seb128: https://launchpad.net/~laney/+archive/ubuntu/lo-test1/+build/19822873 indeed the no-change rebuild of 6.4.5 crashed the compiler cc vorlon - hopefully 6.4.4 doesn't have this problem ...
[09:06] <seb128> 'fun'
[09:06] <seb128> (not)
[09:12] <cpaelzer> Laney: seb128: there have been armhf gcc crashes since gcc-10
[09:13] <cpaelzer> is this one reproducible at least - the othere ones were not
[09:13] <Laney> yeah it seems to be
[09:13] <cpaelzer> bug 1890435 and bug 1887557 (the latter being fixed)
[09:13] <ubottu> bug 1890435 in gcc-10 (Ubuntu) "gcc-10 breaks on armhf (flaky): internal compiler error: Segmentation fault" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1890435
[09:13] <ubottu> bug 1887557 in gcc "GCC 10 is crashing with an internal compiler error when compiling Mesa" [Medium,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1887557
[09:13] <Whoopie> Hi, do we have support for wireguard in 20.04's VPN panel? Which package does provide it?
[09:14] <Laney> I don't think we got a successful armhf libreoffice build with gcc-10 yet
[09:14] <Laney> at least not afaik
[09:14] <cpaelzer> ok, so on the good side yours at least can be tracked and debugged - on the bad side thou how to compile until then :-/
[09:14] <Laney> not sure if it's always the same object though
[09:14] <Laney> 24 hour turnaround time!
[09:14] <cpaelzer> outch
[09:14] <cpaelzer> yeah it might be just compiling so much that it fails at some random point each time
[09:15] <seb128> to add even more fun, that is in the way of the icu transition
[09:17] <Unit193> Whoopie: Sounds like something you may wish to ask in #ubuntu.
[09:17] <Whoopie> Unit193: ok
[09:18] <Laney> cpaelzer: I'll file it separately in case there are two bugs here, can be merged if needed later
[09:20] <cpaelzer> yep
[09:21] <Laney> ricotz: did you see a successful armhf build of LO with gcc-10 yet? can you point me to some fail logs pls?
[09:22] <Laney> how come it works @ Debian?
[10:10] <ricotz> Laney, is debian using gcc 10 by default yet?
[10:10] <Laney> ah
[10:10] <Laney> true, I didn't check that!
[10:10] <ricotz> https://launchpad.net/~libreoffice/+archive/ubuntu/libreoffice-prereleases/+build/19818811
[10:11] <ricotz> sorry, it isn't there yet
[10:12] <Unit193> ricotz: Yes.
[10:12] <Laney> https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libreoffice&arch=armhf&ver=1%3A7.0.1%7Erc1-1&stamp=1597356576&raw=0 yeah it did use 10
[10:13] <Laney> ricotz: have you got a build of that versin 7.0.1~rc1?
[10:13] <ricotz> Laney, the links points to a 7.0.1.1 ppa build
[10:14] <Laney> cool
[10:14] <Laney> keep an eye on that one then
[10:14] <Laney> ... in 12 hours ¬_¬
[10:14] <ricotz> as expected the focal armhf build is happy
[10:14] <ricotz> with gcc 9
[10:14] <Laney> yeah
[10:15] <ricotz> so yeah, using gcc 9 this specific build would be an option
[10:15] <Laney> I just kicked off builds of 6.4.4/6.4.5 with gcc-9 (for all arches though) in two silos
[10:15] <ricotz> ok
[10:16] <Laney> in case this autopkgtest problem is some other 6.4.5 regression
[10:16] <ricotz> my 6.4.6~rc2 builds were happy on focal
[10:16] <Laney> did you try the autopkgtest on armhf?
[10:16] <ricotz> https://launchpad.net/~libreoffice/+archive/ubuntu/ppa/+sourcepub/11525210/+listing-archive-extra
[10:17] <Laney> that's what we were seeing sadness with on groovy lately
[10:17] <ricotz> no, I don't an environment for that
[10:17] <Laney> ah yeah, this is where you need upload rights ;-)
[10:18] <Laney> or a raspberry pi :p
[10:19] <seb128> Laney, http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/libreoffice/focal/armhf has an happy 6.4.5/armhf/focal result
[10:19] <Laney> ok cool
[10:19] <Laney> didn't notice it got SRUed there
[10:20] <seb128> I mentioned it the other day when we talked about new version regression, but that probably got lost in the middle of the discussion
[10:20] <Laney> likely
[10:20] <Laney> too many versions of different things going on
[10:21] <seb128> I hope we get enough clarity to find a way forward with one of the options
[10:21] <seb128> probably for monday at this point though
[10:51] <doko> ricotz, Laney: LO successfully built using gcc-10 in the test rebuild
[10:56] <Laney> k!
=== Wryhder is now known as Lucas_Gray
[15:00] <xnox> vorlon:  yes, and i didn't know about force-same-destination. Also not sure if i can copy things to groovy, i think as a core-dev i can only upload things to proposed.
[15:12] <Laney> I think that's true
[17:18] <ahasenack> vorlon: hi, just found an issue with motd-news-config, looks like it inherited "Priority: required" from src:base-files https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/groovy/amd64/motd-news-config/11ubuntu11
[17:18] <ahasenack> is that something I can override in d/control for it? What should the new value be, optional?
[17:34]  * ahasenack sets optional
[18:04] <vorlon> ahasenack: right, though the archive also has priority overrides which take precedence, so I'll also override it now.
[18:04] <ahasenack> thanks
[18:04] <ahasenack> vorlon: for all releases, i suppose?
[18:04] <vorlon> ahasenack: yes
[18:04] <ahasenack> I found this testing a release upgade from a focal desktop to groovy
[18:04] <ahasenack> ok, thanks
[18:04] <vorlon> I mean, I can only override it for series where the binary is already published
[18:04] <ahasenack> so it will have to be a reminder in the sru?
[18:05] <vorlon> if you set the priority in debian/control before SRUing, I *think* that will DTRT, but it would be good to have the reminder as well in the SRU bug
[18:05] <vorlon> best to make it part of the test case
[18:05] <ahasenack> ok, I will add it
[18:05] <ahasenack> I ahve 9 tests cases already, what is another one :)
=== ebarretto_ is now known as ebarretto