-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: update-motd (focal-proposed/main) [3.6-0ubuntu6 => 3.6-0ubuntu6.1] (core)03:19
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openjfx (focal-proposed/universe) [11.0.7+0-2ubuntu1 => 11.0.7+0-2ubuntu2] (no packageset) (sync)03:40
amurrayLaney bdmurray sil2100: would someone from the release team be able to take a look at iptables FFe bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/iptables/+bug/1894195 ? thanks :)04:30
ubot5Ubuntu bug 1894195 in iptables (Ubuntu) "FFe: Merge iptables 1.8.5-3 (main) from Debian sid (main)" [Undecided,New]04:30
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libfprint (focal-proposed/main) [1:1.90.2+tod1-0ubuntu1~20.04.1 => 1:1.90.2+tod1-0ubuntu1~20.04.2] (desktop-core, ubuntu-desktop)04:49
rafaeldtinocoSorry to bother release team. I need FFe for https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pacemaker/+bug/1896223 and Im just highlighting that because next week I'm likely moving into new job role for some months and I would like to guarantee the upload, if possible, before that happens. Thanks for understanding and sorry for the rush, I know you're05:08
rafaeldtinocoall very busy.05:08
ubot5Ubuntu bug 1896223 in pacemaker (Ubuntu) "[FFe] this is the no-quorum-policy feature (specially for mssql sevrer)" [High,New]05:08
LocutusOfBorgvorlon, libdc1394 took over the -dev packages from libdc1394-22, so I presume everything (e.g. opencv, gst-plugins-bad1.0, ffmpeg) now needs it06:14
LocutusOfBorgI plan to do the no change rebuilds so we can remove libdc1394-22 from i38606:15
LocutusOfBorgright now ffmpeg is waiting for it06:15
LocutusOfBorgdebian already did the rebulds06:21
LocutusOfBorgI issued rebuilds06:43
sil2100Hello! Can I get an ubuntu-release member to take a look at my ubuntu-image FFe? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-image/+bug/189674407:35
ubot5Ubuntu bug 1896744 in ubuntu-image (Ubuntu Focal) "[FFe] SRU 1.10 tracking bug" [Critical,New]07:35
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-flashback (focal-proposed/universe) [3.36.4-0ubuntu1 => 3.36.4-0ubuntu2] (edubuntu)07:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-flashback (bionic-proposed/universe) [3.28.0-1ubuntu1.4 => 3.28.0-1ubuntu1.5] (edubuntu)08:00
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-flashback (focal-proposed/universe) [3.36.4-0ubuntu1 => 3.36.4-0ubuntu1.1] (edubuntu)08:00
Mirv^ please remove the focal with wrong SRU version ubuntu208:01
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected gnome-flashback [source] (focal-proposed) [3.36.4-0ubuntu2]08:03
Laneyvorlon: In _merge_binaries() I made oodarchs [sic?] a dict keyed by arch. It was deciding that the package was out of date on i386 (correctly I guess, arch:all binary) and merging those binaries into -proposed. But then this was carrying over to all the later arches, and so the dropped binaries for those were merged into proposed too, which made them show up as NBS in proposed.08:04
LaneyI've been doing fixups, because eventually I'll be submitting most of this stuff upstream, and it's easier if the commits are already close to that state08:05
sil2100cpaelzer: hey! Looking at the libvirt focal SRU right now - you think we could get IBM's -proposed package verification in the nearest time, or you think this what we got is the best we can count for?08:31
Laneysil2100: I'll look at ubuntu-image for you now, was hoping someone else would :P08:35
Laneyis it possible to run that test case before uploading or does it need to be a PROPOSED=1 build?08:37
apwLaney, out-of-date-archs ?08:38
Laneyapw: seems unlikely as a python variable name :p08:42
apw:) it is rather short for python that is for sure08:42
sil2100Laney: you mean the ubuntu-image test case?08:55
Laneyin the bug description08:56
cpaelzersil2100: I don't think we can expect them verifying it again anytime soon08:56
Laneybasically I want to say to you 'have you run that for groovy?'08:56
Laneybut then I thought you might say no, that has to be done in the archive08:56
cpaelzersil2100: I did the x86 bits tha I could, but that particular s390x featu they look for isn't enabled on our box08:56
sil2100Laney: hah, ubuntu-image is just a set of python scripts and as mentioned, this change is already in the snap - so yeah, I did run it and I don't think it matters that it wasn't run against packages in the archive08:57
Laneymmm ok08:59
sil2100cpaelzer: hm hmm, ok, tricky then, I wouldn't want this SRU to just idle for too long because of this08:59
Laneythat bit is a bit confusing to be honest, all the bits about some stuff being distro patched08:59
Laneyit made me think it's not clear what is actually changing in this ffe upload08:59
sil2100cpaelzer: how big you think the risk of the PPA packages giving different results from the ones in the archive is?08:59
apw(are they copied with binaries or without)09:00
sil2100Laney: I might have written that a bit confusing ;p Since I guess the only things that are already in the archive are the dep-changes for fdisk, a test-fix and some flake8 compliance fixes09:01
sil2100Those are also in 1.10, but were distro-patched in the archive already - all the 'new features' are specific to the 1.10 upload09:02
cpaelzersil2100: on the s390x side I'm less concerned09:02
cpaelzersil2100: if anything I'm more concerned about missing an unexpected effect on x8609:02
cpaelzersil2100: which I didn't find, but that does not mean it does not exist09:02
cpaelzersil2100: yet the missing s390x verification wouldn't help with that anyway :-/09:03
vorlonLocutusOfBorg: thanks for the clarification, libdc1394/i386 triggered now09:06
vorlonLaney: ok. I'm wondering if somehow this change has anything to do with https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/groovy_uninst.txt suddenly showing pm-utils as uninstallable, even though its single dependency exists... not sure what else changed that would cause this09:07
vorlonseb128, Laney: would someone follow through on the updates needed for gst doc package removals? https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/nbs.html09:08
Laneyvorlon: it looks right, pm-utils is uninstallable in a chroot for me09:17
vorlonhmm, wasn't when I tested earlier09:18
* vorlon double-checks09:18
Laneyand ack on gstreamer, I was just reminded of that too by some conversations in #debian-gnome09:19
cjwatsonpowermgmt-base> This is another instance of bug 1896790 (compare https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/groovy/i386/powermgmt-base).  What's with all these single-architecture priority changes?09:20
ubot5bug 1896790 in Launchpad itself "libdrm-common binary incorrectly superseeded after an i386 copy" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/189679009:20
Laneyah yes, of course. I'll copy it back09:20
Laneycan we detect other instances of this proactively?09:21
cjwatsonvorlon, please hold off on any further single-arch priority changes until we figure out what's going on here09:21
cjwatsonI'm not sure, it's rather hard to detect and I couldn't think of a straightforward way to do it yesterday.  But I suppose I can think harder09:22
cjwatsonAnything to do with the dominator algorithm always takes me a run-up09:22
LaneyMight be easiest for vorlon to check shell history09:23
vorlonah yes, powermgmt-base was also in the list of priority mismatches for i386 (and I had changed it at the same time as libdrm-common)09:24
vorlonI will definitely hold off09:24
vorlonbased on shell history, I believe those should be the only two packages affected09:25
cjwatson(I think it's only single-arch override changes of Architecture: all packages, but that's slightly guesswork)09:25
vorlonyeah there were 9 packages that got overridden, only the two arch: all ones had problems09:25
Laneyshould be coming back now09:26
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Removed libcdaudio from i386-whitelist in groovy09:34
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Removed libusrsctp from i386-whitelist in groovy09:34
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libdc1394 to i386-whitelist in groovy09:34
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added qttranslations-opensource-src to i386-whitelist in groovy09:34
dgadomskisil2100: hi, could you please take a look at initramfs-tools in x/b upload queues and cryptsetup in b/f if you have a moment?09:55
sil2100dgadomski: sure! Will do after lunch10:24
dgadomskigreat, thank you10:24
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure-4.15 [amd64] (bionic-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1097.107] (no packageset)11:29
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [ppc64el] (groovy-proposed/main) [5.8.0-20.21] (core, kernel)11:29
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (groovy-proposed/main) [5.8.0-20.21] (core, kernel)11:29
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [s390x] (groovy-proposed/main) [5.8.0-20.21] (core, kernel)11:29
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [arm64] (groovy-proposed/main) [5.8.0-20.21] (core, kernel)11:31
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (groovy-proposed) [5.8.0-20.21]11:36
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [ppc64el] (groovy-proposed) [5.8.0-20.21]11:36
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [arm64] (groovy-proposed) [5.8.0-20.21]11:36
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [s390x] (groovy-proposed) [5.8.0-20.21]11:36
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure-4.15 [amd64] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-1097.107]11:36
Trevinhosil2100: hey, have you seen my ping about that mutter FTBFS in bionic? No need to do it now, just to know... :)11:50
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mdadm (focal-proposed/main) [4.1-5ubuntu1 => 4.1-5ubuntu1.1] (core, i386-whitelist)11:58
tewardrbasak: and AAs/SRU: SRU for sup-mail https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sup-mail/+bug/1888749 has been in NEW since July, if you want to go poking.12:44
ubot5Ubuntu bug 1888749 in sup-mail (Ubuntu Focal) "sup-mail broken and unusable after Bionic to Focal upgrade" [Medium,In progress]12:44
teward(rbasak prodded in -motu RE: it so I thought i'd poke again)12:45
sil2100Trevinho: hey! Might have missed it! Was that today, or older?13:04
Trevinhosil2100: last night13:04
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (bionic-proposed/main) [1.9+18.04ubuntu1 => 1.10+18.04ubuntu1] (desktop-core)13:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (xenial-proposed/main) [1.9+16.04ubuntu1 => 1.10+16.04ubuntu1] (no packageset)13:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (focal-proposed/main) [1.9+20.04ubuntu1 => 1.10+20.04ubuntu1] (desktop-core)13:09
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mdadm (focal-proposed/main) [4.1-5ubuntu1 => 4.1-5ubuntu1.1] (core, i386-whitelist)13:10
=== seb128_ is now known as seb128
sil2100juliank: hey! We have a shim/shim-signed combo in -proposed right now, I see all the bugs for shim-signed verified, but the shim one is not - but also I don't see any test case there13:30
sil2100juliank: do you remember what's the story with that one?13:31
julianksil2100: that was the regression in the 0ubuntu1 that got fixed in 0ubuntu2 but did not affect old releases13:31
julianksil2100: now we can't really test that sensibly, as it was a path lookup/parsing gone wrong, and you need actual fwupd binaries to test it. However: the binaries are the same in all releases, so we checked it against groovy13:32
julianksil2100: But: Should we also check whether loading those fwupd EFI binaries of older releases work even though that was not what the bug was about?13:32
sil2100cpaelzer: oh, uh, actually! Re: libvirt, doesn't comment #28 actually indicate testing using the -proposed packages?13:36
sil2100juliank: hm, no, I think that won't be necessary13:40
sil2100Ok, thank for clearing things out for me then13:40
cpaelzersil2100: es #20 was on the PPA and #28 on -proposed13:44
cpaelzerso yes13:44
LocutusOfBorgdoko, I syncd pypdf2, no reverse dependencies for python2 binding...13:53
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted initramfs-tools [source] (bionic-proposed) [0.130ubuntu3.11]13:56
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted initramfs-tools [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.122ubuntu8.17]13:59
Trevinhoapw: any luck you can merge https://code.launchpad.net/~3v1n0/ubuntu-archive-tools/sru-review-bileto-support/+merge/364193 ? :)14:03
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: bolt (focal-proposed/main) [0.8-4 => 0.8-4ubuntu1] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server)14:05
sil2100cpaelzer: \o/14:06
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python2.7 (focal-proposed/universe) [2.7.18~rc1-2 => 2.7.18-1~20.04] (i386-whitelist, kubuntu) (sync)14:17
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-9-cross-mipsen (focal-proposed/universe) [4+c2ubuntu2 => 4+c2ubuntu2.1] (no packageset) (sync)14:24
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-10-cross-mipsen (focal-proposed/universe) [2+c1 => 2+c1ubuntu1.1] (no packageset) (sync)14:25
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected mdadm [source] (focal-proposed) [4.1-5ubuntu1.1]14:30
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-clocks (focal-proposed/universe) [3.36.0-1ubuntu0.2 => 3.36.2-1~ubuntu20.04.1] (desktop-extra)14:32
bdmurraysil2100: What do you think about the verification of bug 1894919 now?14:40
ubot5bug 1894919 in ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu Focal) "gnome-software-plugin-snap consider an unwanted removal for 20.04 ubuntu-desktop" [Undecided,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/189491914:40
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure [amd64] (groovy-proposed/main) [5.8.0-1006.6] (core, kernel)14:41
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-gcp [amd64] (groovy-proposed/main) [5.8.0-1004.4] (core, kernel)14:41
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (groovy-proposed/main) [5.8.0-1003.3] (core, kernel)14:42
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (groovy-proposed) [5.8.0-1006.6]14:43
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-oracle [amd64] (groovy-proposed) [5.8.0-1003.3]14:43
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-gcp [amd64] (groovy-proposed) [5.8.0-1004.4]14:43
bdmurraycjwatson: Could you look at the moderation queue for the ubuntu-release mailing list?14:45
LaneyI was going to ask around for the password for that list yesterday14:50
LaneyTrevinh_o sent a mail that I would have moderated14:50
Laneymaybe it could be shared about?14:50
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted mdadm [source] (focal-proposed) [4.1-5ubuntu1.1]14:51
sil2100bdmurray: looking!14:56
julianksil2100: I marked the shim one as verified now and added a comment explaining why14:59
sil2100juliank: excellent! Will deal with it after the meeting15:01
cjwatsonbdmurray: done15:01
cjwatsonLaney: added you to the list, will MM you the password15:01
Laneycjwatson: Merci15:01
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-control-center (focal-proposed/main) [1:3.36.4-0ubuntu1 => 1:3.36.4-0ubuntu2] (ubuntu-desktop)15:24
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python2.7 [sync] (focal-proposed) [2.7.18-1~20.04]15:24
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-9-cross-mipsen [sync] (focal-proposed) [4+c2ubuntu2.1]15:26
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-10-cross-mipsen [sync] (focal-proposed) [2+c1ubuntu1.1]15:27
juliankLaney: (less often) baseline retesting for stable releases, does that make sense?15:43
juliankjust a thought that popped into my mind right this second15:43
Laneyfeels like it probably does15:45
LaneyI wonder how long it'll take to chew through, but it could make sense to try to do a round right after release, before accepting any SRUs15:47
bdmurraysil2100: so about that bug verification. ;-)15:57
sil2100bdmurray: yes! Just need this meeting to finish :)16:24
sil2100(on which you are not!)16:24
LocutusOfBorgvorlon, if you want... https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=96392416:35
ubot5Debian bug 963924 in ftp.debian.org "RM: libdc1394-22 -- RoQA; Superseeded by libdc1394" [Normal,Open]16:35
LocutusOfBorgso we remove one i386 package :p16:35
LocutusOfBorgstuff is migrating in a britney run or two16:35
LocutusOfBorgnot yet removed in Debian but should be kicked out16:36
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: sagemath (groovy-proposed/primary) [9.2~beta12-1]16:37
tjaaltonwho has the power to handle updates to partner repos? AA's?16:39
sil2100tjaalton: not sure if there's not some special team for that, I have the power if anything16:44
sil2100bdmurray: hm hmm16:44
bdmurraysil2100: So I guess the really weird thing is in comment #9 where those 3 packages were kept after the upgrade16:50
bdmurraysil2100: So those could end up being cruft that is carried around between upgrades16:51
tjaaltonsil2100: there are some flashplugin updates on the xenial/bionic/focal queues, been there for a long time now..16:51
bdmurraysil2100: And there could be more cruft depending on the package set you have installed16:51
sil2100bdmurray: yeah, makes me a bit worried to be honest16:56
bdmurraysil2100: Okay, let's remove it and I'l just release note the 'apt autoremove' having stuff to do issue16:57
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted adobe-flashplugin [source] (focal-proposed) [1:20200714.1-0ubuntu0.20.04.1]17:00
sil2100Since it just leaving stuff for later autoremoval would be fine, like what we discussed yesterday - but this is just weird, since packages are suddenly not autoremovable even though they were before17:01
sil2100bdmurray: +1 on that, sadly :<17:01
sil2100tjaalton: ok, accepting those17:01
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted adobe-flashplugin [source] (bionic-proposed) [1:20200714.1-0ubuntu0.18.04.1]17:02
sil2100bdmurray: while we're talking about SRUs, there's a few juicy ubuntu-image ones for focal, bionic and xenial17:03
bdmurraysil2100: are you trying to cut the line?17:04
LocutusOfBorgxnox, klibc... is it syncable?17:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected adobe-flashplugin [source] (xenial-proposed) [1:20200114.1-0ubuntu0.16.04.1]17:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted adobe-flashplugin [source] (xenial-proposed) [1:20200714.1-0ubuntu0.16.04.1]17:08
tjaaltonsil2100: thanks, makes the list easier on the eye :)17:11
bdmurraynow only if those backports could go somewhere17:12
=== ijohnson is now known as ijohnson|lunch
=== ijohnson|lunch is now known as ijohnson
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: file-roller (focal-proposed/main) [3.36.2-0ubuntu1 => 3.36.3-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop)18:57
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cheese (focal-proposed/main) [3.34.0-1build1 => 3.34.0-1ubuntu1] (desktop-core, desktop-extra)19:42
rbasaktjaalton, sil2100: it's ~canonical-partner-dev that can upload to partner19:43
rbasakAs listed at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/ anyway19:43
rbasakSteve, Lukasz, Dann and security19:43
tjaaltonah, indeed19:44
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed-azure [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.15.0-1097.107~16.04.1] (kernel)20:51
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apport (bionic-proposed/main) [2.20.9-0ubuntu7.17 => 2.20.9-0ubuntu7.18] (core)20:54
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-image [source] (focal-proposed) [1.10+20.04ubuntu1]20:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-image [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.10+18.04ubuntu1]21:04
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-image [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.10+16.04ubuntu1]21:06
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apport (xenial-proposed/main) [2.20.1-0ubuntu2.24 => 2.20.1-0ubuntu2.25] (core)21:10

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