[02:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libreoffice [s390x] (hirsute-proposed/main) [1:7.1.1~rc1-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[04:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libreoffice [ppc64el] (hirsute-proposed/main) [1:7.1.1~rc1-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[06:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: geoclue-2.0 (focal-proposed/main) [2.5.6-0ubuntu1 => 2.5.6-0ubuntu1.1] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist)
[07:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libreoffice [amd64] (hirsute-proposed/main) [1:7.1.1~rc1-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[09:00] <RikMills> vorlon: correct. the upstream is now https://gitlab.com/accounts-sso/signond
[09:02] <RikMills> vorlon: packaging from debian should be ok. same binaries, and for the few files moved between packages, their breaks/replaces are valid and cover an upgrade to them
[09:03] <RikMills> our only patch gets dropped, as it is an upstream included in the new source
[09:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gnome-shell-extension-desktop-icons-ng [amd64] (hirsute-proposed) [0.15.0-0ubuntu1]
[09:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libreoffice [ppc64el] (hirsute-proposed) [1:7.1.1~rc1-0ubuntu1]
[09:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libreoffice [amd64] (hirsute-proposed) [1:7.1.1~rc1-0ubuntu1]
[09:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libreoffice [s390x] (hirsute-proposed) [1:7.1.1~rc1-0ubuntu1]
[11:00] <doko> xnox, vorlon: LP: #1885338, removed anna and base-installer, os-prober migrated without the udeb
[13:30] <cpaelzer> doko: did gcc-11 just become the default? And if so I wanted to ask if the following issue is already a known pattern with a known fix/workaround "error: template with C linkage"
[13:31] <cpaelzer> can't yet promise it was gcc that broke it, but 23h ago it built fine and now this is what I get, and since there is a publish on gcc packages in between I became suspicious
[13:51] <doko> cpaelzer: no, the defaults change is not planned before July ...
[14:09] <Laney> cpaelzer: which package?
[14:11] <doko> qemu
[14:12] <Laney> thanks cpoko
[14:17] <cpaelzer> FYI doko and I are sorting the details in a query to keep the channel readable :-)
[14:26] <cpaelzer> doko: indeed libglib2.0-dev 2.67.4-1 upgradable from 2.66.4-1 it is
[14:28] <cpaelzer> doko: is there a define I could check "If I'm in an extern C segment" ?
[14:28] <cpaelzer> to have the header then skip the bad extra include that is new in this version
[14:28] <cpaelzer> it does things like elif defined(__cplusplus)
[14:28] <cpaelzer> but this is a .cpp file that has "extern C" and herein leads to this
[14:29] <cpaelzer> so __cplusplus is set, yet this should not be included
[14:29] <Laney> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/issues/2331
[14:30] <cpaelzer> always fast and helpful Laney - thanks that is it
[14:30] <Laney> probably worth a message to devel
[14:35] <doko> and GCC upstream is correctly asking: "Do you need the <type_traits> include at all?"
[14:35] <cpaelzer> I'll sned a mail and sort it out with upstream qemu I guess ...
[14:49] <Laney> merci for the mail cpaelzer
[14:51] <cpaelzer> np
[14:51] <cpaelzer> also have a qemu fix that after a test build will be submitted as well
[14:53] <Laney> cpaelzer: oh looks like you cut a number from the bug ref
[14:53] <cpaelzer> arr, really
[14:53] <Laney> but if you follow up to fix that, I guess including a reference to the shape the patches look like would be nice
[14:53] <cpaelzer> IÄll reply
[14:53] <Laney> suggestion :-)
[14:55] <cpaelzer> sent
[15:01] <doko> Laney: can't you convince upstream just to remove the type_traits include?
[15:01] <doko> or revert it locally for now ...
[15:03] <Laney> I don't know
[15:05] <Laney> I could write a merge request for that but I would need help with the commit message
[15:06] <Laney> and the code really ...
[15:29] <RikMills> 1st KDE casualty from glib: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/plasma-discover/5.21.1-0ubuntu1
[15:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-oslo.messaging (bionic-proposed/main) [5.35.0-0ubuntu3 => 5.35.0-0ubuntu4] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[15:44] <seb128> is that glib upload really a release topic? probably more suitable to devel?
[15:51] <Laney> I felt like it was a losing battle trying to redirect things there, but I agree in general
[15:54] <RikMills> sorry
[15:57] <Laney> s'ok
[20:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: node-uid-number (focal-proposed/universe) [0.0.6-1 => 0.0.6-1ubuntu0.20.04.1] (no packageset)
[20:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: node-uid-number (groovy-proposed/universe) [0.0.6-1 => 0.0.6-1ubuntu0.20.10.1] (no packageset)
[22:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openssl (groovy-proposed/main) [1.1.1f-1ubuntu4.2 => 1.1.1j-1ubuntu1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[22:41] <RikMills> vorlon: looks like some of the reverse deps of signon have bitrotted more than I thought, and would need fixing. some might just be removable. so won't be as quick job as I hoped
[23:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd (hirsute-proposed/main) [1.5.7-1 => 1.5.7-1] (core)
[23:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd (hirsute-proposed/main) [1.5.7-1 => 1.5.7-1] (core)
[23:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (focal-proposed/main) [2.664.17 => 2.664.18] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist)