[09:19] <sil2100> xnox: hey! I see William removed the verification-failed-hirsute tag from LP: #1923162 - is the hirsute upload still failed and should be dropped or did something change?
[09:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-shell-extension-desktop-icons-ng (hirsute-proposed/main) [0.15.0-0ubuntu4.1 => 0.15.0-0ubuntu4.2] (no packageset)
[09:53] <xnox> sil2100:  hirsute needs a new upload, with new bugfixes, but the upload in proposed should be dropped.
[09:53] <xnox> sil2100:  no idea why verification failed has been dropped.
[09:54] <xnox> sil2100:  can you please reject these broken d-i uploads in impish? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/impish/+queue?queue_state=2&queue_text=debian-installer
[09:55] <xnox> but just those.... on i386 & armhf
[09:55] <xnox> it currently making oops on every publication.
[09:55] <xnox> documented in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/debian-installer/+bug/1937237
[09:55] <xnox> (or maybe vorlon can help with that)
[10:07] <sil2100> o/
[10:18] <sil2100> xnox: hm, ok, so I see those are accepted binaries already, right? I would prefer Steve to look at that then, since I suppose this requires some manual tinkering?
[10:18] <cjwatson> You should just be able to reject them out of the accepted queue.
[10:18] <sil2100> cjwatson: hm, I don't see any option to do that, at least in my UI
[10:18] <cjwatson> They may be accepted but they aren't going to actually publish, so rejecting is probably best.
[10:18] <cjwatson> Maybe with the queue tool in ubuntu-archive-tools?
[10:18] <sil2100> No checkboxes, no Reject button
[10:19] <sil2100> Oh!
[10:19] <sil2100> Right
[10:19] <sil2100> THanks!
[10:20] <sil2100> Guess I'll reject all of them, since as cjwatson mentioned they won't actually publish, right?
[10:21] <sil2100> Ah, ok, they're just i386 and armhf anyway, on it
[10:24] <sil2100> Done, good to know one can just reject stuff out of Accepted as well o/
[10:43] <xnox> sil2100:  i know that it is possible, because it's not the first time i made something that was accepted, but was failing to transition to Done =) /me hides
[12:52] <sil2100> xnox: hehe
[13:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zmk (hirsute-proposed/universe) [0.4.2-2 => 0.4.2-2ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[13:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zhmcclient (focal-proposed/universe) [0.22.0-0ubuntu1 => 0.31.0-0ubuntu3~20.04.1] (no packageset)
[13:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: evdi (hirsute-proposed/universe) [1.9.1-1ubuntu3~21.04.1 => 1.9.1-1ubuntu4~21.04.1] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[14:54] <bdmurray> vorlon: Could you accept lime-forensics, dadhi-linux, and dwarves-dfsg from the focal unapproved queue? Those are security copies for dkms packages I couldn't do.
[14:57] <sil2100> I can take a look at those
[14:57] <bdmurray> thanks!
[14:57] <bdmurray> sil2100: Also I'll do some SRU work today given I didn't do my shift on Tuesday.
[14:58] <sil2100> Why are there 2 syncs of lime-forensics? I guess I'll reject the older one
[14:58] <bdmurray> sil2100: IIRC I got an LP OOPS doing the first one
[14:58] <bdmurray> maybe that was just for updates though
[14:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dahdi-linux [sync] (focal-security) [1:2.11.1~dfsg-1ubuntu6.3]
[14:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted lime-forensics [sync] (focal-security) [1.9-1ubuntu0.3]
[14:59] <sil2100> bdmurray: ok, thanks o/ I also didn't really start my sru shift yet, might do some a bit later, but I'll see how things go
[14:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected lime-forensics [sync] (focal-security) [1.9-1ubuntu0.3]
[15:40] <bdmurray> sil2100: Yeah, I did receive an oops with lime-forensics
[16:21] <bdmurray> Does any ubuntu-sru team member have an opinion on a rapid release of bug 1916651? It'd be good to get it out soon w/ the EoL of Groovy.
[16:22] <rbasak> bdmurray: what would be the benefit of doing it quickly? I'm not sure I follow.
[16:23] <rbasak> My concern is that it's new C code, so maybe more prone to getting it wrong, and it's in a really crucial package that everyone has.
[16:24] <bdmurray> rbasak: Well less people would have to any questions which are really confusing during the upgrade proccess.
[16:24] <rbasak> Oh sorry, I'm conflating two recent bugs I looked at.
[16:24] <rbasak> I was thinking about the numeric uid thing
[16:25] <rbasak> Disregard my concern please!
[16:25] <rbasak> This code is in bullseye
[16:25] <rbasak> I agree a quick release makes sense in principle, but it needs verifying first still?
[16:25] <bdmurray> rbasak: Yes, I'll verify it shortly.
[16:54] <bdmurray> rbasak: verified
[16:58] <rbasak> bdmurray: I wonder if you could just check that reinstalling the proposed package again correctly no-ops?
[16:58] <bdmurray> rbasak: yes, that sounds reasonable
[17:38] <bdmurray> rbasak: Okay, I've done that now
[17:42] <rbasak> bdmurray: +1; released. Thanks!
[20:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-release-upgrader (hirsute-proposed/main) [1:21.04.14 => 1:21.04.15] (core)
[20:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pyroute2 (hirsute-proposed/main) [0.5.14-0ubuntu1 => 0.5.14-0ubuntu1.1] (no packageset)
[21:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pyroute2 (hirsute-proposed/main) [0.5.14-0ubuntu1 => 0.5.14-0ubuntu1.1] (no packageset)
[21:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pyroute2 (focal-proposed/main) [0.5.9-0ubuntu1 => 0.5.9-0ubuntu2] (ubuntu-server)
[23:14] <bdmurray> laney: you accepted sanlock into groovy-backports but there are some packages in New related to that. Could you Accept or Reject those also?