=== ebarretto_ is now known as ebarretto === sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie [08:48] doko: rbalint: FYI I've seen you have rebuilt cyrus-imap but it's test dependency issues hold back perl and many (22) other things. I've found that Debian has our delta https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cyrus-imapd/3.2.3-2ubuntu1 now accepted in https://tracker.debian.org/news/1181216/accepted-cyrus-imapd-324-3-source-into-unstable/ [08:48] doko: rbalint: thereby it can be a sync and tests retriggered once built [08:49] I'll file a bug and trigger the sync unless you say that you are already on it [11:25] hey there, python questions pyferret tests fail because it does [11:25] ; for py in $(py3versions -r 2>/dev/null) ... ; $py -c "import pyferret" [11:25] and Depends on python3-ferret which Depends on python3 (>= 3.8~) [11:26] which leads to bash: python3.9: command not found [11:26] is the right fix for thoses cases to have the tests control Depends on python3-all? [11:57] seb128: yes. can you file a RC issue for Debian too? [11:57] doko, yes, will do, thanks for the reply [11:58] User: debian-python@lists.debian.org [11:58] Usertags: python3.9 [11:58] k [11:58] seb128: ^^^ [12:13] doko: rbalint: FYI the sync I mentioned earlier unblocked all things that waited on cyrus-imapd [12:16] doko: rbalint: sil2100: given the high number of long-duration-often-manually-retried that https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/libr/libreoffice/hirsute/arm64 and https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/libr/libreoffice/hirsute/armhf are causing - what do you think of badtesting that on armhf/arm64 [12:16] it feels that must have been discussed before ... [12:16] Was there any hope to not expect this to be a retry-monster forever? [12:17] The desktop team should be asked if they can work on making that less flaky [12:17] I don't think ignoring the tests there is a good answer [12:18] Reducing the coverage would be preferable if that gets it to be more stable, for example, assuming the flakiness can't be easily fixed [12:18] sounds good, I'll ask in #ubuntu-desktop if they have (or want) a bug for it [12:19] - or in the meantime while fixing the flakes as a more long term task [12:45] Hi proposed migration tries to confuse me, on recent qemu 5.1 it tells me "old binaries left on amd64: qemu-kvm (from 1:5.0-5ubuntu11)" (and the same for arm64/ppc64el/s390x) [12:45] And that is true and expected, binary "qemu-kvm" existed but is gone intentionally [12:45] As replacement there are breaks/replaces on the qemu-system-* packages, so the rev-deps should be covered. [12:46] I'm puzzled what to do now, I'd have expected this to be not a migration blocker [12:46] And once the new one migrated the old binaries to be removed via https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/nbs.html [12:46] Seems to be different now, could someone advice what/if I have to do now to ge this unstuck? [12:52] cpaelzer: it exists in proposed, was there a previous upload that didn't migrate? (yes) [12:52] an archive admin needs to remove that [12:53] * Laney does [12:55] nein, doko already did it! [12:56] thanks Laney, just to make sure I get it right (for next time). Usually we'd have the old package in -release and not in -proposed. But since I had one upload in -proposed with qemu-kvm and then another one to -proposed without we now have had the package in -proposed but not as part of the current version that shall migrate. And NBS would instead be for things missing in -release [12:57] sort of makes sense, it seems I just didn't hit this particular sub-case yet (or an AA was always too fast resolving it before it bothered me) [13:32] @pilot in === udevbot_ changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Archive: Open | Devel of Ubuntu (not support) | Build failures: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ | #ubuntu for support and discussion of Trusty-Groovy | If you can't send messages here, authenticate to NickServ first | Patch Pilots: rbalint [13:36] cpaelzer, yesterday following the recommendation of doko and vorlon i moved to the plusone discussion channel to #ubuntu-release on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PlusOneMaintenanceTeam [13:43] rbalint: intersting - we started there and were driven away being called too noisy [13:45] ok, sorry, then this needs a wider discussion [13:46] but this does not work, yesterday i missed the discussion by hanging out here [13:47] who complained about the noise? [13:50] cpaelzer, doko keeps talking on #ubuntu-release [13:54] cpaelzer, rbalint: didn't vorlon change that to #u-r? [13:57] doko, you suggested, vorlon agreed, i changed: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/S5qRB9F8B7/ [14:06] cjwatson, hey, I'm pondering adding a apt-proxy-url argument to launchpad-buildd/lpbuildd/livefs.py do you have any opinion on that before I actual start working on code changes? [14:15] seb128: Similar to the existing one in lpbuildd/debian.py? Sounds reasonable to me if you have a good idea of how to jam it into livecd-rootfs and if it similarly defaults to the value in launchpad-buildd's config file [14:22] cjwatson, thanks, I hit the issue when trying local builds with ubuntu-old-fashioned, it uses the existing --http-proxy arg when there an apt config but that does [14:22] if self.args.http_proxy: [14:22] proxy_dict = { [14:22] "http_proxy": self.args.http_proxy, [14:22] "LB_APT_HTTP_PROXY": self.args.http_proxy [14:22] } [14:23] cjwatson, the LB_ makes live-build do the right thing but the http_proxy blew up if you just use a squid-deb-proxy since it tries to use it as a real proxy and that fails [14:23] so I would just set "LB_APT_HTTP_PROXY" in the apt-proxy-url case [14:27] seb128: I expect I'll need to look at the diff, but sounds broadly reasonable I think [14:27] cjwatson, thanks === ijohnson is now known as ijohnson|lunch [18:25] so mouseemu has been removed it seems, is that correct? [18:28] yep [18:30] alr, time to see how cinnamon is doing in hirsute [18:31] hm, i gotta tell preining to release 4.7.0 in debian [18:31] Or i can reqsync 4.6.3. [18:32] It's in experimental, I'll choose the latter (4.6.0-3) === ijohnson|lunch is now known as ijohnson [20:20] bdmurray: I replied in bug 1901491. Not sure if you were asking because you hadn't realised it was an SRU regression, or if you were asking why I was tagging post-accept. [20:20] bug 1901491 in v4l2loopback (Ubuntu Focal) "Created devices are not available" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1901491 [20:29] rbasak: Thanks, I wasn't sure if some action was required. [22:02] @pilot out === udevbot_ changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Archive: Open | Devel of Ubuntu (not support) | Build failures: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ | #ubuntu for support and discussion of Trusty-Groovy | If you can't send messages here, authenticate to NickServ first | Patch Pilots: