[00:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-pip (focal-proposed/universe) [20.0.2-5ubuntu1.3 => 20.0.2-5ubuntu1.4] (no packageset)
[07:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-settings (focal-proposed/main) [20.04.5 => 20.04.6] (ubuntu-desktop)
[07:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected evolution-data-server [source] (focal-proposed) [3.36.5-0ubuntu1]
[07:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: evolution-data-server (focal-proposed/main) [3.36.4-0ubuntu1 => 3.36.5-0ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist, ubuntu-desktop)
[08:40] <juliank> Laney: it seems a lot of xenial arm64 tests fail with grub-install: error: relocation 0x113 is not implemented yet; wondering if we should work around that somehow, e.g. by uninstalling grub
[08:41] <juliank> Laney: hang on, they worked a day earlier
[08:42] <Laney> is that a fail fail or a temp fail?
[08:43] <juliank> those seem to fail fail as /unknown
[08:45] <Laney> hmm
[08:47] <seb128> bdmurray, hey, could you check what's going on there? lp 1923267 the gjs update was accepted as a SRU in hirsute-proposed but seems it vanished from there?
[08:47] <ubot3> Launchpad bug 1923267 in gjs (Ubuntu Hirsute) "Gjs promises on Gio.File operations don't work anymore after upgrading libglib2.0-0 2.67.5-2 to 2.68.0-1 (and indicator-multiload app broke)" [High, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1923267
[08:47] <seb128> it's in impish only now?!
[08:48] <seb128> hum
[08:48] <seb128> Deleted on 2021-04-23 by Iain Lane
[08:48] <seb128> moved to impish-proposed
[08:48] <juliank> Laney: I see in journal also that "Flavor m1.large could not be found." on  bos01 for arm64, causing a bunch of errors
[08:48] <seb128> Laney, ^ could you check what happened to that SRU?
[08:49] <Laney> seb128: Copy it back. We don't have a good way to tell which pre release uploads should be kept, so it's guess work and sometimes we guess wrong
[08:49] <Laney> juliank: umm yeah, can you check that? if true, get IS to create it
[08:49] <juliank> on it
[08:49] <seb128> Laney, so pocket copy from impish?
[08:49] <Laney> looks like bos* just went down though
[08:49] <Laney> seb128: yeah
[08:49] <juliank> openstack flavor list is either slow or timing out
[08:50] <Laney> yeah, wait for the cloud to come back
[08:50] <Laney> :/
[08:50] <seb128> Laney, you don't have a command line in your backlog handy to share so I don't have to figure out the parameters to use again? ;)
[08:50] <Laney> seb128: I shared it to Rik_Mills the other day so it's probably in here, one second
[08:50] <juliank> sweet waiting time
[08:51] <Laney> #ubuntu-release.log-20210427.gz:26/04 10:24:01 <Laney> copy-package --from=ubuntu --to=ubuntu --include-binaries --from-suite=impish-proposed --to-suite=hirsute-proposed gwenview
[08:51] <seb128> Laney, thanks!
[08:51] <Laney> juliank: follow along in the outage channel!
[08:51] <seb128> I wonder also if there is some sort of query I could do to get a list of potential other SRUs we lost
[08:52] <Laney> you could probably find the last proposed-migration run before I did that in https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses/
[08:52] <seb128> Laney, thanks
[08:53] <seb128> Laney, last question on that, any idea of tweaks we could do the process or archive opening to avoid it happens again in futur cycles?
[08:54] <Laney> I don't know, we have a trello board 'devel unapproved', maybe that could be used somehow, but not super sure atm
[08:54] <rbasak> In that particular case, was there a bug reference with a verification-{needed,done}-hirsute tag? Would filtering on that have helped, if we had appropriate scripting to do it?
[08:54] <Laney> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/kpZGJVVjFp/
[08:54] <Laney> that's the list by the way
[08:54] <seb128> rbasak, yes we have a bug with proper tags
[08:55] <rbasak> I think maybe the difficulty could be reduced to things still in unapproved then maybe?
[08:55] <seb128> bug #1923267
[08:55] <ubot3> Bug 1923267 in gjs (Ubuntu Hirsute) "Gjs promises on Gio.File operations don't work anymore after upgrading libglib2.0-0 2.67.5-2 to 2.68.0-1 (and indicator-multiload app broke)" [High, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1923267
[08:55] <Laney> I'm sure scripting could help, but I was starting from dists/
[08:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gjs (hirsute-proposed/main) [1.67.2-2ubuntu1 => 1.67.2-2ubuntu2] (desktop-core, desktop-extra, i386-whitelist, mozilla) (sync)
[08:55] <Laney> so LP bugs aren't really super easily available there
[08:56] <rbasak> What do you mean by "starting from dists/"?
[08:57] <Laney> That's what I used to list -proposed (grep-dctrl). That would need to be input to another script or something which can figure out whatever it is there is to figure out.
[08:57] <Laney> Or instead the script could list proposed itself. Just saying, I wasn't using the LP API at all to do this.
[08:57] <rbasak> I see - thanks.
[08:59] <Laney> juliank: it was funny, I was literally in the middle of typing shell commands on the lxd-armhf machines when they went down
[08:59] <Laney> don't think I've caught an outage that live before :D
[09:00] <juliank> Laney: heh
[09:02] <Laney> is there a way to send ~. to an inner ssh btw?
~~.?
[09:02] <rbasak> IOW, ~~ is the escape for ~
[09:02]  * Laney tries
[09:02] <Laney> yes! thanks
[09:06] <Laney> juliank: back
[09:06]  * juliank lists flavors
[09:07] <juliank> keystone still seems down
[09:07] <Laney> nah
[09:07] <Laney> it's probably that bug where if you source one file first and then another you can't use the cloud
[09:07] <Laney> quit and go back in
[09:09] <juliank> Laney: I only ever sourced that one file :D
[09:10] <juliank> Laney: now it works
[09:10] <juliank> m1.large is there
[09:10] <juliank> maybe it was the cloud going down that caused the error
[09:10] <Laney> anything is possible in the wonderful world of openstack
[09:10] <Laney> got to say it would have been surprising if the flavor didn't exist
[09:14] <juliank> Laney: I wonder if I should try reinstating the port cleanup in cleanup-instances
[09:14] <juliank> We only kept copy-security-group, and it should be enough - at least if the worker restarts
[09:15] <juliank> maybe the worker should purge all ports in its security group before starting a job too
[09:18] <juliank> I think workers are down,  autopkgtest@bos01-arm64-6.service: Job autopkgtest@bos01-arm64-6.service/start failed with result 'dependency'.
[09:18] <Laney> yeah I'm running the maintenance thingy
[09:18] <Laney> I dunno if the port thing we're seeing atm is stray ports, did you confirm that?
[09:18] <Laney> I think it's something quotaish on our new users
[09:19] <juliank> Laney: I haven't checked, need to write a script and run it I suppose
[09:40] <Laney> there's still something wrong in Boston
[09:40] <Laney> I'm trying to get IS to help out
[10:00] <Laney> (without much success so far, it must be said)
[10:02] <juliank> I'm digging into bootloader stuff :/
[10:19] <xnox> the bootloader stuff https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1926748
[10:19] <ubot3> Launchpad bug 1926748 in grub2 (Ubuntu Xenial) "regression in xenial updates - grub2 cannot handle new arm64 relocations" [Undecided, New]
[10:24] <Laney> huh
[11:01] <xnox> hoping that one patch will do it; cause the other relocations need 13 patches =(
[11:06] <xnox> regression-updates can we please downgrade grub2 grub2-unsigned grub-signed from xenial-updates to xenial-proposed please? as otherwise upgrades are broken on aws ec2 arm64.
[11:06] <xnox> !regression-alert
[11:06] <xnox> !regression
[11:06]  * xnox is not sure what the bot command is
[11:07] <xnox> Laney:  ^^^^
[11:09] <sil2100> Ok, on it
[11:10] <xnox> sil2100:  tah.
[11:10] <sil2100> (I don't think we have highlights on this btw. ;) )
[11:10]  * sil2100 feels like he is reverting stuff all the time this week
[11:10] <xnox> sil2100:  and previous grub2 & grub2-signed need to put back into xenial-updates, as you obviously know.
[11:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph (groovy-proposed/main) [15.2.11-0ubuntu0.20.10.1 => 15.2.11-0ubuntu0.20.10.2] (ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server)
[11:15] <Ukikie> xnox: That first one used to be a factoid, but someone deleted it.
[11:15] <xnox> Ukikie:  cool. thanks.
[11:16] <jamespage> hi ubuntu-sru - I've just uploaded new ceph versions to focal and groovy proposed - one of the cherry picks included in the last uploads for SRU did not actually fix a UX issue
[11:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph (focal-proposed/main) [15.2.11-0ubuntu0.20.04.1 => 15.2.11-0ubuntu0.20.04.2] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server)
[11:16] <xnox> sil2100: will go get lunch/coffee and then will test proposed fixed, hopefully we might be able to have a fixed up grub2 sru for xenial-proposed for arm64 at least.
[11:16] <jamespage> so I've elected to drop that patch from the other SRU's in flight so we can move forwards
[11:18] <sil2100> ACK o/
[11:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2 (xenial-updates/main) [2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.31 => 2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.29] (core) (sync)
[11:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2 [sync] (xenial-updates) [2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.29]
[11:23] <sil2100> xnox: ok, old versions deleted from -updates, still present in -proposed, old versions copied over to -updates (hopefully the correct ones)
[11:24] <sil2100> I hope it's all good regarding signing bits
[11:24] <sil2100> I'll go grab a bite now as well and then take a look if all is good
[11:26] <xnox> also confused how come we have released xenial ahead of bionic.
[11:26] <xnox> and will double check that bionic is not affected otherwise.
[11:49] <sil2100> xnox: the reason was that xenial goes ESM today
[11:50] <sil2100> I mean, Steve probably should have released both bionic and xenial at this point, but now I'm happy he didn't
[11:50] <sil2100> Since we have the liberty of just checking this without rush
[12:22] <xnox> i feel like i don't even know how computers work => none of the commands on xenial work for me, and i have to look up old syntax for all the things. Even like debuild.
[12:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted google-cloud-sdk [sync] (xenial-release) [335.0.0-0ubuntu1~16.04.1]
[12:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2 (xenial-proposed/main) [2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.31 => 2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.32] (core)
[12:52] <xnox> sil2100:  juliank: please review http://launchpadlibrarian.net/536308504/grub2_2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.31_2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.32.diff.gz on amazon ec2 arm64 xenial instance that fixes things for me.
[13:48] <sil2100> xnox: looking
[13:59] <sil2100> xnox: ok, I don't know much about these parts of grub2 but upload seems sane - from the SRU POV I guess I'd like if it was built with -v to include the previous version and hm, possible since this is to go to -security, maybe actually building it in a security pocket first? Or something
[14:00] <xnox> sil2100:  -v & security is a must
[14:00] <xnox> sil2100: please reject.
[14:01] <xnox> sil2100:  re what this does "it reimplements binutils in grub basically, because it is like lets take these elf objects which are grub .mod modules and lets assemble a core.efi pe/coff binary out of it" it is black magic in binutils, and more so, in grub2. So this is an upstream cherrypick.
[14:08] <xnox> sil2100:  there is also shim signing to review in impish unapproved https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/impish/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=shim
[14:09] <xnox> sil2100:  the shim-signed with MS signature is already in impish-proposed (ftbfs, as it is waiting on shim signing to be approved)
[14:15] <xnox> sil2100:  rebuilding grub in bileto
[14:18] <juliank> xnox: do you have a ppa? I spent some time building myself to realize that I don't have a local reproducer for the linking issue
[14:18] <juliank> xnox: but I can rerun failed autopkgtest in the cloud
[14:18] <Laney> when did the autopkgtests catch it? like when it needed dist-upgrading in the base system?
[14:18] <juliank> [NEEDSBUILD] Needs building Cancel build
[14:18] <Laney> not in an actual triggered test, right?
[14:18] <juliank> Start in 2 hours
[14:19] <juliank> Laney: all the tests triggered by python-apt yesterday-today/last night
[14:19] <juliank> Laney: They all upgrade first, get grub 2.04 which was released yesterday, and then fail
[14:19] <Laney> yeah
[14:20] <Laney> so I guess the question is how can we catch this in a real test triggered by the actual upload
[14:20] <Laney> so it doesn't get released
[14:21] <xnox> juliank:  it's building
[14:22] <juliank> Laney: grub must get an autopkgtest, consisting just of Depends
[14:22] <xnox> juliank:  i built in amazon ec2 xenial arm64 instance; and tested there.
[14:22] <juliank> Laney: and true as test case
[14:22] <xnox> normal apt upgrade failed to configure grub; but manual call to ./grub-install from the built package worked
[14:22] <juliank> Laney: Ok, optimally you do want to run grub-install :D
[14:23] <juliank> But in the cloud as we have it now, it will fail either way
[14:23] <xnox> but i guess it will not build on arm64 https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/4545/+build/21482739 because all builders are borked with that grub2?
[14:23] <xnox> juliank:  do you want me to build the package in amazon cloud and give you the debs?
[14:24] <juliank> xnox: do the builders build on bare (virtual) metal, and not in a chroot?
[14:24] <xnox> juliank:  well we reverted grub from xenial-updates so all the vms should be fine now?
[14:24] <juliank> If they build in a chroot, they should be fine
[14:24] <xnox> juliank:  i think it's chroot, on a VM
[14:24] <juliank> that should be fine either way
[14:24] <xnox> but like some arm64 builders look dead https://launchpad.net/builders
[14:26] <Laney> bos02 is looking really bad from where I'm sitting, independent of the grub2 stuff
[14:28] <xnox> cool.
[14:29] <Laney> (and bos01, but that's not relevant for launchpad builds)
[14:29] <juliank> fun outages
[14:32] <Laney> like https://ubuntu-release.kpi.ubuntu.com/d/76Oe_0-Gz/autopkgtest?orgId=1 check the middle two, doesn't look great]
[14:36] <Laney> separately there's a lot of instance reboot failures in this latest set of linux tests
[14:36] <Laney> in impish
[14:37] <sil2100> xnox: looking!
[14:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected grub2 [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.32]
[14:42] <Laney> everything is baddddddd
[14:47] <sil2100> Everything is terrible
[14:48] <Laney> let's all moan together
[14:51] <juliank> sigh madness
[14:56]  * xnox has "Everything is awesome" in my head now, as sung by cjwatson
[14:57] <Laney> checking if something in impish-proposed is bad
[14:57] <Laney> there's lots of suspicious things in there :D
[14:58] <Laney> today I am thankful for lxd VMs
[15:08] <Laney> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/5VZVg7F8z4/
[15:13] <xnox> sil2100:  so it looks like my grub2 xenial sru will not build today, so we shall come back to it like on tuesday. (bank holiday here in the uk)
[15:14] <xnox> sil2100: vorlon: or if https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/4545/+packages finishes building feel free to binary copy that into xenial-proposed.
[15:14]  * xnox checks if i uploaded it with the right -v, i think i did not.
[15:14] <xnox> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/536318662/grub2_2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.32_source.changes => i did not
[15:14]  * xnox facepalm
[15:16] <vorlon> xnox: why are you building this in bileto instead of just uploading to -proposed?
[15:17] <vorlon> binary copies from bileto are annoying
[15:18] <vorlon> xnox: and you say "if it finishes building" but it's ftbfs already on arm64 and ppc64el?
[15:19] <Laney> vorlon: I think your initramfs-tools is bad, it seems to break booting somehow https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/5VZVg7F8z4/
[15:19] <vorlon> Laney: caught by autopkgtests?
[15:21] <Laney> vorlon: sort of, yes
[15:21] <vorlon> k
[15:21] <vorlon> I'll look into it, thanks
[15:21] <Laney> I noticed that all-proposed runs are failing to reboot
[15:21] <vorlon> ah
[15:21] <Laney> and then bisected until I found that
[15:21] <Laney> so I think we should drop it in the meantime
[15:21] <vorlon> ack
[15:21] <Laney> you want to do that, or me?
[15:22] <vorlon> I will
[15:22] <Laney> cheers
[15:22] <Laney> also, separately, I've seen that the boston clouds are kinda unhappy, lots of keystone errors and timeouts in lxd
[15:23] <Laney> I've not managed to get IS to bite properly yet (think it's affecting buildds too)
[15:23] <Laney> so if you want to track that it would be helpful; I'll be EODing in 90 minuts
[15:25] <xnox> vorlon:  ftbfs without any build-logs..... cause bos02 is sad
[15:29] <vorlon> Laney: ugh it's the damn +x bit being dropped from init again by MoM; I remembered this issue and tried to check for missing +x bits but apparently I mistakenly looked only in the debian/ subdir
[15:30] <Laney> urgh :(
[15:30] <vorlon> reuploaded
[15:30] <Laney> cheers for the quick fix
[15:30] <vorlon> xnox: and now https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/4545/+packages has disappeared?
[15:32] <xnox> vorlon:  because wrong -v, so uploaded to 4546
[15:32] <vorlon> instead of just uploading to the archive
[15:32] <xnox> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/536325290/grub2_2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.32_source.changes => looks better
[15:32] <xnox> vorlon:  must be built against -security pocket
[15:33] <vorlon> hmm ok
[15:33] <vorlon> build scores adjusted
[15:36] <vorlon> hmm why are the -proposed links all broken on https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html
[15:57] <sil2100> seb128 merged some changes that I think could have caused this
[16:50] <vorlon> sil2100: yeah I don't see anything in seb128's diff that obviously explains; I guess I'll dig
[17:02] <Laney> I'm out - hopefully the clouds get fixed so we can make queue progress over the weekend ...
[17:43] <seb128> vorlon, I can check if it's my changes
[17:44] <seb128> vorlon, ah, I see a typo in there, let me try with that fixed
[17:45] <seb128>             sru_item['url'] = rpkg['proposed'] = pkgurl + rpkg['proposed']
[17:50] <seb128> vorlon, sil2100, sorry for the inconvenience, I pushed a fix
[18:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: software-properties (focal-proposed/main) [0.98.9.4 => 0.98.9.5] (core)
[18:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: resource-agents [amd64] (impish-proposed/main) [1:4.7.0-1ubuntu2] (ubuntu-server)
[18:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: resource-agents [s390x] (impish-proposed/main) [1:4.7.0-1ubuntu2] (ubuntu-server)
[18:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: resource-agents [arm64] (impish-proposed/main) [1:4.7.0-1ubuntu2] (ubuntu-server)
[18:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: resource-agents [ppc64el] (impish-proposed/main) [1:4.7.0-1ubuntu2] (ubuntu-server)
[18:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: resource-agents [armhf] (impish-proposed/main) [1:4.7.0-1ubuntu2] (ubuntu-server)
[18:57] <vorlon> seb128: aha, cheers!
[18:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-pip (bionic-proposed/universe) [9.0.1-2.3~ubuntu1.18.04.4 => 9.0.1-2.3~ubuntu1.18.04.5] (no packageset)
[19:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: resource-agents [riscv64] (impish-proposed/main) [1:4.7.0-1ubuntu2] (ubuntu-server)
[19:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2 (xenial-proposed/main) [2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.31 => 2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.32] (core) (sync)
[19:33] <kanashiro> I'd appreciate if any AA could process resource-agents in impish NEW queue :)
[19:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2 [sync] (xenial-proposed) [2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.32]
[19:36] <vorlon> xnox: ^^ accepted
[20:11] <vorlon> xnox: how did shim migrate to impish release without corresponding shim-signed?
[20:13] <vorlon> hmm I guess we no longer have a dep on unsigned shim package, right
[20:20] <vorlon> xnox: why did https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shim-signed/1.47/+build/21482148 download from impish-proposed but https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shim-signed/1.47/+build/21482149 download from impish?!
[21:49] <xnox> vorlon:  because it checks apt where the candidate for shim is at, and downloads from there. now that shim is not in -proposed anymore it downloads from release
[21:50] <xnox> vorlon:  but what is more confusing is that https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shim-signed/1.47/+build/21482149 downloads current and gets ubuntu1; wheres when i download the same url from ftpmaster.internal from people.canonical.com i get ubuntu2 signed tarball.
[21:50] <xnox> vorlon:  it's as if arm64 bos02 builders see some different ftpmaster.internal?!
[21:50] <xnox> i don't know if I should ping #launchpad people but not over labor weekened :/
[21:50] <xnox> let me try #is
[21:52] <vorlon> yes, I don't know what's going on there >_<
[22:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-graphics-drivers-340 (focal-proposed/restricted) [340.108-0ubuntu5.20.04.1 => 340.108-0ubuntu5.20.04.2] (kernel-dkms, ubuntu-desktop) (sync)
[22:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: oss4 (focal-proposed/universe) [4.2-build2010-5ubuntu6~20.04.1 => 4.2-build2010-5ubuntu6~20.04.2] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[22:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: r8168 (focal-proposed/multiverse) [8.048.00-1ubuntu0.20.04.1 => 8.048.00-1ubuntu0.20.04.2] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[22:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sysdig (focal-proposed/universe) [0.26.4-1ubuntu0.2 => 0.26.4-1ubuntu0.3] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[22:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-hwe (focal-proposed/multiverse) [6.1.16-dfsg-6ubuntu1.20.04.1 => 6.1.16-dfsg-6ubuntu1.20.04.2] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[22:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (focal-proposed/main) [0.8.3-1ubuntu12.8 => 0.8.3-1ubuntu12.9] (core, kernel-dkms) (sync)
[22:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rtl8812au (focal-proposed/universe) [4.3.8.12175.20140902+dfsg-0ubuntu13~20.04.1 => 4.3.8.12175.20140902+dfsg-0ubuntu13~20.04.2] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[22:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox (focal-proposed/multiverse) [6.1.16-dfsg-6~ubuntu1.20.04.1 => 6.1.16-dfsg-6~ubuntu1.20.04.2] (kernel-dkms, ubuntu-cloud) (sync)
[22:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: v4l2loopback (focal-proposed/universe) [0.12.3-1ubuntu0.3 => 0.12.3-1ubuntu0.4] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[22:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2 (xenial-proposed/main) [2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.32 => 2.02~beta2-36ubuntu3.32] (core) (sync)
[22:13] <xnox> all of the above is from me =)
[22:22] <vorlon> kanashiro_: so your resource-agents package split mentions resource-agents-common as a base for both supported and unsupported agents, but I only see an addition of resource-agents-supported, no corresponding -unsupported package?
[22:22] <vorlon> thus I'm confused at the split
[22:24] <vorlon> also resource-agents-supported breaks/replaces old resource-agents, but new resource-agents doesn't depend on resource-agents-supported, so this agent (there seems to be only one) disappears on upgrade?
[22:34] <sergiodj> vorlon: not Lucas, but I was involved in the review of this change.  there's no corresponding -unsupported package; it is implicit that the resource-agents will contain everything that is not in the -supported package, thus being the unsupported version
[22:35] <vorlon> weird but ok?
[22:35] <sergiodj> yeah :)
[22:35] <vorlon> sergiodj: in that case, why does the unsupported package not depend on the supported one, for upgrades?
[22:36] <sergiodj> vorlon: I don't know offhand, sorry
[22:37] <sergiodj> I mean, they're two separate packages, and the user can install just one or the other
[22:39] <sergiodj> but maybe I misunderstood your question