[11:59] <RikMills> santa_: sort of
[12:07] <santa_> RikMills: ugh, I'm a bit busy right now
[12:08] <santa_> in any case:
[12:08] <santa_> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/1915250
[12:08] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1915250 in fakeroot (Ubuntu) "buildd file owner/group for shared libraries " [High,Confirmed]
[12:09] <RikMills> santa_: thanks. subbed to that
[12:09] <santa_> ↑ the important owner problem, I've forwarded the thing to doko so he is taking care of that
[12:09] <santa_> atm I'm doing a test rebuild against the latest binutils he uploaded (built against the old libc) to see if it fixes the problem
[12:09] <santa_> another important thing
[12:10] <santa_> the packages we have in the staging PPA are built with the first defective round of tarballs
[12:10] <santa_> I haven't rebuild all with "a" versions except for kconfig
[12:11] <RikMills> yeah, I figured that
[12:11] <santa_> however I have built them in my server and I see no problem (keep in mind they are just a couple of translations missing)
[12:12] <santa_> so my idea is: just keep them mostly as they are, and whenever you upload to bileto/archive it will be automatically fixed
[12:12] <santa_> that being said, I plan to do a few fixes more for fw:
[12:12] <RikMills> that sounds fair, as the ppa packages will go away
[12:13] <santa_> - lintian overrides for long descriptions (I see no way to shorten them)
[12:13] <santa_> - mark one package of kconfig as Multi-Arch: foreign to get rid of the lintian warning
[12:14] <santa_> - maybe re-enable the acc test of kconfig and fix it if it's broken
[12:14] <RikMills> ack
[12:15] <santa_> and this way we will have everything mostly green
[12:15] <santa_> at least better than the previous version
[12:16] <santa_> also, I have fixed a small glitch in kubuntu-retry-builds in master
[12:16] <santa_> and that's it for now, I also have a bunch of misc news about my build machines, but let's leave that for the weekend
[12:17] <santa_> if you have any comments, please shoot :)
[12:19] <RikMills> don't think so. having fun with copyright :/
[12:20] <santa_> alright, 10000000000000 thanks for your work
[12:20] <santa_> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5jzkz_ZsRo
[12:20] <santa_> the best or nothing XD
[12:20] <RikMills> https://github.com/rlancaste/stellarsolver/issues/76
[13:03] <BluesKaj> Howdy folks
[18:16] -queuebot:#kubuntu-devel- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop amd64 [Focal 20.04.2.0] has been marked as ready
[21:15] <santa_> hi everyone
[21:16] <santa_> RikMills: plasma-firewall and kpmcore are out of sync in git
[21:16] <santa_> also I'm happy to say the libc6/binutils problem mitigation by doko is working so far
[21:57] <guiverc> https://kubuntu.org/getkubuntu/ links download 20.04.2 (not 20.04.2.0 - needs to be updated?)
[22:50] <mparillo> I think the links on Kubuntu.org are correct. It is the image at the top of https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/kubuntu/releases/20.04.2/release/kubuntu-20.04.2-desktop-amd64.iso that shows 20.04.2.0, correct?
[22:51] <mparillo> And then the links lower down. I think there was a re-spin where some users running non-free drivers were without a kernel or something like that.
[22:52] <guiverc> mparillo, the 64-bit download points to 20.04.2 and not later 20.04.2.0  (with OEM fixes included as I understood it)
[22:56] <mparillo> Can you refresh?
[22:56] <guiverc> :)  refreshed & all as I'd expect.  thanks mparillo 
[22:57] <mparillo> My pleasure. I may create a bug just for tracking.
[23:02] <mparillo> https://bugs.launchpad.net/kubuntu-website/+bug/1915467
[23:02] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1915467 in Kubuntu Website "Download does not point to re-spun20.04.2.0 ISO" [High,Fix released]
=== adam_ is now known as adam_sal