[05:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pveclib [ppc64el] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [1.0.4+dfsg-3] (no packageset)
[05:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-asttokens [amd64] (hirsute-proposed/none) [2.0.4-1] (no packageset)
[08:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected zfs-linux [source] (focal-proposed) [0.8.3-1ubuntu12.6]
[09:09] <Laney> juliank: now make the /running page render an X next to your own items
[09:10] <juliank> Laney: but what possibly for?
[09:11] <juliank> It already tells me the username :)
[09:13] <Laney> so you don't have to go manually construct the URL if you want to delete your own items
[09:13] <juliank> Oh
[09:13] <juliank> A delete X button
[09:13] <Laney> yeah a ❌
[09:14] <juliank> Ooh unicide
[09:14] <juliank> Unicode
[09:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: qgis [s390x] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [3.10.12+dfsg-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[09:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted pveclib [ppc64el] (hirsute-proposed) [1.0.4+dfsg-3]
[09:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-asttokens [amd64] (hirsute-proposed) [2.0.4-1]
[09:47] <juliank> I just realized the queues are empty
[09:47] <juliank> nice
[09:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: qgis [amd64] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [3.10.12+dfsg-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[10:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: qgis [ppc64el] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [3.10.12+dfsg-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[10:24] <amurray> sil2100: hey just wondering if there is anything missing on my part for iptables/groovy SRU in LP #1904192 - this has been sitting in unapproved for a while now so just wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything for this
[10:31] <sil2100> amurray: hey! Oh, I wonder why no one picked it up - might be that it being a 'sync' scared people off, let me review it after the meeting
[10:31] <amurray> sil2100: cheers :)
[10:42] <sil2100> amurray: yeah, everything with the SRU, I think it was all because of it being a sync - now approved o/
[10:42] <amurray> sil2100: awesome, thanks
[10:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted iptables [sync] (groovy-proposed) [1.8.5-3ubuntu2.20.10.2]
[10:43] <seb128> sil2100, the 'syncs just sit there and being ignored' thing need to get resolved one way or another (more a comment for the SRU team than yourself)
[10:46] <sil2100> Yeah, and it's really just some strange mental thing, since there's really not that much more involved in reviewing syncs
[10:47] <sil2100> Bileto syncs are especially easy to review - as for normal syncs, those just require basically running 2-3 more commands
[10:47] <sil2100> hm
[10:47] <sil2100> But that can be automated in sru-review actually
[10:47] <seb128> sil2100, just merge https://code.launchpad.net/~3v1n0/ubuntu-archive-tools/sru-review-bileto-support/+merge/364193
[10:48] <seb128> apw approved it
[10:48] <seb128> almost a year it's sitting there...
[10:49] <sil2100> seb128: that's only for bileto support, yes, I might look into merging that but actually what we need is something that would work for all syncs, which is quite easy: making sru-review recognize syncs, create temporary directory, pull latest source, pull source from queue, diff and display
[10:49] <seb128> right
[10:50] <sil2100> I'll try looking into this (and the MP) today
[10:50] <seb128> thanks!
[10:52] <seb128> sil2100, oh, while I've you around ... https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-cdimage/+livefs/ubuntu/hirsute/ubuntu-canary I finally got a succesful build, I've been hinted that the image aren't published in a public place though? any reason why not? and is the private place one I've access to (and if not could you move the current built iso somewhere public so I can see if the result is as expected)
[10:55] <sil2100> seb128: yeah, so this is all because the canary image build scenario isn't complete IIRC, there were some bits missing and right now all the stuff is basically just sitting in debian-cd internal directories - I think at one point there was talk about getting this fixed, but then again the whole SUBPROJECT architecture of canary isn't perfect
[10:56] <sil2100> I think we wanted to discuss if we still want canary to use subprojects as is or maybe simply make it a different project and/or SUBARCH
[10:56] <seb128> I'm not familiar enough with the topic to understand what is incomplete and why
[10:56] <sil2100> And then enable it publishing properly
[10:57] <sil2100> Let me get back to you in a few to discuss this a bit more
[10:57] <seb128> k
[11:23] <xnox> doko:  i think, everything will be passing with the new python 3.9.1 cause it seems to call _at_fork_reinit() less often now. see bpo-42350
[11:24] <xnox> uploaded one more thing for python-oslo.service to stop patching needlessly eventlet, will check how it tests/migrates.
[11:30] <rbalint> sil2100, it you are testing the bileto change honoring hints (thanks!) my previous excuses example went away but this one is still valid: https://bileto.ubuntu.com/excuses/3840/hirsute.html
[12:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xorg-server (groovy-proposed/main) [2:1.20.9-2ubuntu1 => 2:1.20.9-2ubuntu1.1] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist, xorg)
[12:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected xorg-server [source] (groovy-proposed) [2:1.20.9-2ubuntu1.1]
[13:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (groovy-proposed/main) [0.8.4-1ubuntu11 => 0.8.4-1ubuntu11.1] (core)
[14:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: qgis [arm64] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [3.10.12+dfsg-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[14:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tpm2-tools (groovy-proposed/universe) [4.3.0-1 => 4.3.0-1ubuntu0.20.10] (no packageset)
[14:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tpm2-tools (focal-proposed/universe) [4.1.1-1 => 4.1.1-1ubuntu0.20.04.1] (no packageset)
[15:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted qgis [amd64] (hirsute-proposed) [3.10.12+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[15:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted qgis [ppc64el] (hirsute-proposed) [3.10.12+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[15:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted qgis [arm64] (hirsute-proposed) [3.10.12+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[15:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted qgis [s390x] (hirsute-proposed) [3.10.12+dfsg-1ubuntu1]
[15:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: qgis [armhf] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [3.10.12+dfsg-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[15:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-drivers-common (bionic-proposed/main) [1:0.5.2.5 => 1:0.8.6.3~0.18.04.1] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server)
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-drivers-common (focal-proposed/main) [1:0.8.4~0.20.04.3 => 1:0.8.6.3~0.20.04.1] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server)
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-drivers-common (groovy-proposed/main) [1:0.8.6.2 => 1:0.8.6.3~0.20.10.1] (desktop-core)
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-prime (bionic-proposed/main) [0.8.8.2 => 0.8.15.1~0.18.04.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[15:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-prime (focal-proposed/main) [0.8.14 => 0.8.15.1~0.20.04.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[15:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-prime (groovy-proposed/main) [0.8.15 => 0.8.15.1~0.20.10.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[16:21] <Laney> juliank: I think your XXX remove me in cleanup-instances can go now
[16:23] <Laney> omg OMG
[16:24] <Laney> I was like, why do I keep getting messages about orphaned mysql-connector-c++ instances
[16:24] <Laney> and the test is having trouble completing https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/running#pkg-mysql-connector-c++
[16:26] <Laney> https://git.launchpad.net/autopkgtest-cloud/tree/tools/cleanup-instances#n69
[16:26] <Laney> ...
[16:26] <Laney> c + +
[16:27] <juliank> what is that? oh
[16:28] <Laney> we're killing that test's instance every hour
[16:29] <Laney> :(
[16:29]  * Laney hands self a shiny re.escape()
[16:29] <juliank> Laney: were the broken instances removed? I doN't recall getting any emails
[16:29] <Laney> dunno, but I don't see them any more
[16:29] <Laney> feel free to double check
[16:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected zfs-linux [source] (groovy-proposed) [0.8.4-1ubuntu11.1]
[16:44] <Laney> juliank: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/DNPBDfcMff/ quick review?
[16:44] <juliank> Laney: lgtm
[16:46] <Laney> merci
[16:46] <Laney> might as well drop your thing for you
[16:47] <juliank> +1
[16:47] <Laney> all done
[16:54] <juliank> 🥳
[16:55] <xnox> doko:  2.4.0-0ubuntu2 oslo.service is now passing =) horay.
[16:55] <juliank> 🎉
[17:00] <Laney> I approve, we need more emoji in this world
[17:20] <LocutusOfBorg> Laney, but with more emoji we get also giraffes
[17:20] <LocutusOfBorg> 🦒
[17:22] <Laney> but also 😱
[17:24] <juliank> don't forget 🖖
[17:24] <juliank> ugh
[17:25] <juliank> I looked at an html document and it started with an empty line instead of doctype
[17:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: librsvg (focal-proposed/main) [2.48.7-1ubuntu0.20.04.1 => 2.48.9-1ubuntu0.20.04.1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[17:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: 34 entries have been added or removed
[19:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (groovy-proposed/main) [0.8.4-1ubuntu11 => 0.8.4-1ubuntu11.1] (core)
[19:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libfprint [source] (groovy-proposed) [1:1.90.3+tod1-0ubuntu2~20.10.1]
[19:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-release-upgrader (bionic-proposed/main) [1:18.04.41 => 1:18.04.42] (core)
[19:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libfprint [source] (focal-proposed) [1:1.90.2+tod1-0ubuntu1~20.04.3]
[19:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (focal-proposed/main) [0.8.3-1ubuntu12.5 => 0.8.3-1ubuntu12.6] (core)
[20:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libfprint (groovy-proposed/main) [1:1.90.3+tod1-0ubuntu1 => 1:1.90.3+tod1-0ubuntu2~20.10.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[20:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libfprint (focal-proposed/main) [1:1.90.2+tod1-0ubuntu1~20.04.2 => 1:1.90.2+tod1-0ubuntu1~20.04.3] (desktop-core, ubuntu-desktop)
[20:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: speech-dispatcher-contrib [amd64] (hirsute-proposed/multiverse) [0.10.2-1] (i386-whitelist)
[20:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: speech-dispatcher-contrib [i386] (hirsute-proposed/multiverse) [0.10.2-1] (i386-whitelist)
[20:32] <blackboxsw> bdmurray: rbasak, cpaelzer and  bryce , so I just validated update-notifier Focal.... https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/1881632
[20:32] <blackboxsw> bdmurray: cpaelzer rbasak bryce That said, Xenial and Bionic uploads that are queued have lint/pep8 issues that I need to reject.
[20:33] <bryce> ok
[20:33] <blackboxsw> is it better to reject X and B and proceed with Focal only on the existing stale SRU? or reject current focal upload too and just include all changes needed in a followup SRU that I can queue today for X,B and F
[20:34] <blackboxsw> X,B and F will still require a followup for product name changing and ESM url changing in either case whatever folks prefer for SRU
[20:35] <blackboxsw> so I can either reject the current SRU and replace X B and F for update-notifier with the two changesets in a new SRU that makes both changes.
[20:35] <bryce> blackboxsw, if you're able to respin things today, then seems it might be cleanest to just reject the set and redo them all together, IMHO.
[20:36] <blackboxsw> that's kindof what I was thinking/hoping. it at least would make things easier to review for all series
[20:37] <bryce> blackboxsw, one thing to think about with SRU's is that minimizing the quantity of updates users go through can help avoid triggering other unrelated problems (network issues, yada yada)
[20:37] <blackboxsw> because it would be the sameish changeset to review if we wait and do it all.
[20:37] <bryce> yep, that's another pro
[20:37] <blackboxsw> +1 I'll reject the Focal then. and put up new ones now for all 3 series.
[20:37] <blackboxsw> tjamls
[20:37] <blackboxsw> thanks rather
[20:38] <bryce> :-)
[20:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected zfs-linux [source] (groovy-proposed) [0.8.4-1ubuntu11.1]
[20:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected zfs-linux [source] (focal-proposed) [0.8.3-1ubuntu12.6]
[20:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted zfs-linux [source] (groovy-proposed) [0.8.4-1ubuntu11.1]
[20:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted zfs-linux [source] (focal-proposed) [0.8.3-1ubuntu12.6]
[20:51] <blackboxsw> bryce: thx. bdmurray,rbasak and sil2100 I've rejected update-notifier for Xenial, Bionic and Focal per https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/1881632.   I'll queue a new upload into -proposed today.
[20:52] <blackboxsw> bryce: since this upload hit and published to -proposed. Do I have to  increment the -proposed package versions 3.192.1.8 -> 3.192.1.9? I can't remember if and SRU fails validation if incrementing pkg version is still needed or whether we can reuse
[20:52] <bdmurray> blackboxsw: you can't reuse
[20:53] <blackboxsw> ok thanks bdmurray I burned it. do you want a bug against those versions then too just to document the failure
[20:53] <bdmurray> once its made it to the archive, if it was stuck in the queue you could
[20:54] <blackboxsw> as the StableUpdatesRelease says I should file a bug and mark regression-proposed
[20:54] <bdmurray> blackboxsw: I don't think a new bug just for the autopkgtest failure is needed
[20:54] <blackboxsw> ok thanks. will not worry about that part.
[20:55] <bdmurray> because its just an autopkgtest failure and not a "real" regression
[21:16] <vorlon> RikMills-M: I see you did a force-sync of kbibtex which is now failing its autopkgtests, is this something you're going to follow through on?
[21:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted zfcpdump-kernel [source] (focal-proposed) [5.4-0ubuntu1]
[21:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: 66 entries have been added or removed
[21:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron (bionic-proposed/main) [2:12.1.1-0ubuntu2 => 2:12.1.1-0ubuntu3] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[22:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [s390x] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-57.63] (core, kernel)
[22:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-57.63] (core, kernel)
[22:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-57.63] (core, kernel)
[22:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [arm64] (focal-proposed/main) [5.4.0-57.63] (core, kernel)
[22:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-57.63]
[22:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-57.63]
[22:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [arm64] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-57.63]
[22:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [s390x] (focal-proposed) [5.4.0-57.63]
[22:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-dev-tools (bionic-proposed/universe) [0.175~18.04.1 => 0.175~18.04.2] (no packageset)
[22:44] <krytarik> bdmurray: Just poking because I've noticed - in the first occurrence of the recent ubuntu-release-upgrader commit, it says "this systems 'i386' architecture" rather than "system's" >_<
[22:45] <bdmurray> krytarik: ah, thanks
[22:45] <krytarik> Of course. :)
[23:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: munipack [s390x] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [0.5.12-1] (no packageset)
[23:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: munipack [ppc64el] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [0.5.12-1] (no packageset)
[23:35] <bryce> bdmurray, the xenial portion of an apache2 SRU is failing verification for some reason.  Can we remove the package from xenial-proposed?
[23:36] <bryce> bdmurray, this is for LP: #1832182
[23:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: munipack [amd64] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [0.5.12-1] (no packageset)
[23:46] <bdmurray> bryce: You need an archive admin to remove a package additionally that wouldn't people who already installed it.
[23:48] <bryce> bdmurray, ok hrm
[23:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: munipack [armhf] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [0.5.12-1] (no packageset)
[23:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: munipack [arm64] (hirsute-proposed/universe) [0.5.12-1] (no packageset)