[07:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fwupd-signed (focal-proposed/main) [1.27.1ubuntu4 => 1.27.1ubuntu5] (core)
[07:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted binutils-or1k-elf [amd64] (impish-proposed) [1]
[07:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted binutils-or1k-elf [armhf] (impish-proposed) [1]
[07:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted binutils-or1k-elf [riscv64] (impish-proposed) [1]
[07:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted binutils-or1k-elf [arm64] (impish-proposed) [1]
[07:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted binutils-or1k-elf [s390x] (impish-proposed) [1]
[07:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted binutils-or1k-elf [ppc64el] (impish-proposed) [1]
[07:53] <juliank> sil2100: ^^ a fixed up fwupd-signed in focal
[07:53] <juliank> sil2100: I forgot to change the build-depends last time :/
[07:54] <sil2100> o/
[07:54] <sil2100> Yeah, saw the ping from ycheng
[07:54] <sil2100> Looking now
[07:57] <schopin> xnox: I guess I did that (couldn't build the package without the patches anyway). Thanks for the explanation!
[08:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fwupd-signed [source] (focal-proposed) [1.27.1ubuntu5]
[09:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wlroots [amd64] (impish-proposed) [0.13.0-1]
[09:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wlroots [armhf] (impish-proposed) [0.13.0-1]
[09:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wlroots [riscv64] (impish-proposed) [0.13.0-1]
[09:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wlroots [arm64] (impish-proposed) [0.13.0-1]
[09:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wlroots [s390x] (impish-proposed) [0.13.0-1]
[09:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wlroots [ppc64el] (impish-proposed) [0.13.0-1]
[09:15] <sil2100> slyon: hey! Accepted the new binaries ^ But yeah, I see libwlroots7 had some reverse-depends, so yeah, those might need rebuilding/handling
[09:17] <slyon> sil2100: thanks! Yes, I triggered a sync for the sway reverse-dependency that resolves this. There is a new phoc upstream release in Debian/experimental as well, I need to look into that too
[09:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-or1k-elf [amd64] (impish-proposed/universe) [1] (no packageset)
[09:46] <sil2100> \o/
[09:49] <sil2100> huh, a lot of image build failures I see
[09:49] <sil2100> Most of the livefs builds failed with no logs though
[10:22] <xnox> something must have happened, as the gcc-or1k-elf builds also all failed without logs. restarted them now.
[10:24] <laney> eek
[10:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph (focal-proposed/main) [15.2.13-0ubuntu0.20.04.1 => 15.2.13-0ubuntu0.20.04.2] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server)
[10:31] <mwhudson> sil2100: i asked in #launchpad and got this
 mwhudson: we had a network outage this morning, can you retry them and see what happens?
[10:31] <mwhudson> sil2100: so it might be worth trying again?
[10:38] <laney> I'm trying ubuntu desktop again
[10:38] <laney> see if that works
[11:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-or1k-elf [riscv64] (impish-proposed/universe) [1] (no packageset)
[11:19] <laney> arm64 failed again
[11:22]  * laney has asked LP
[11:54] <LocutusOfBorg> juliank, cjwatson I tried to build virtualbox locally
[11:54] <LocutusOfBorg> with DH_VERBOSE=1
[11:54] <LocutusOfBorg> and r^3:no
[11:55] <LocutusOfBorg> I did "fakeroot debian/rules clean build install binary"
[11:55] <LocutusOfBorg> and I can confirm the bug if I run from unprivileged user, and no bug if I run as root
[11:55] <LocutusOfBorg> (in a chroot)
[11:56] <LocutusOfBorg> fakeroot chmod -s debian/virtualbox/usr/lib/virtualbox/VBoxSDL
[11:56] <LocutusOfBorg> this fails
[11:56] <LocutusOfBorg> and this doesn't chmod -s debian/virtualbox/usr/lib/virtualbox/VBoxSDL
[11:58] <LocutusOfBorg> forget the last sentence, I was doing -s instead of +s
[12:32] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  Rules-Requires-Root: binary-targets i've not seen such stanza before.
[12:32] <xnox> i've see no-stanza, and Rules-Requires-Root: no.
[12:33] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  i wonder if Rules-Require-Root: binary-targets is not well supported.
[12:33] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  i wonder if it worth a try to drop that line altogether, and build again.
[12:38] <LocutusOfBorg> xnox, it stopped working when I added Rules-Requires-Root: no
[12:38] <LocutusOfBorg> if I removed, or I add binary-target it works again
[12:39] <LocutusOfBorg> vbox is already busted in impish and hirsute-proposed
[12:46] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  one cannot use RRR:no with chmod +s.... it is contradictory.
[12:46] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  why did you add RRR:no?
[12:47]  * xnox expects virtualbox to build _without_ RRR stanza in control.
[12:51] <LocutusOfBorg> xnox, it works also with RRR: binary-targets
[12:52] <LocutusOfBorg> The builder may set DEB_RULES_REQUIRES_ROOT environment variable when calling any of the mandatory targets as defined in Rules-Requires-Root. If the variable is not set, the package must behave as if it was set to binary-targets.
[12:52] <LocutusOfBorg> and that variable is documented
[12:52] <LocutusOfBorg> my issue is: why R^3: no works on Debian but not in Ubuntu?
[12:52] <LocutusOfBorg> how many packages (wrongly) added R^3: no and then failed to run in Ubuntu?
[12:56] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  builders can choose to ignore RRR:no.... so i guess the question is if debian builders are honoring it, and are not missbuilt there too.
[12:56] <xnox> one is supposed to test packages before building them with RRR:no
[12:56] <xnox> some also try to do chmod +s in maintainer scripts, rather than packaging it.
[13:00] <xnox> also not sure if i care about package that incorrectly uses RRR:no and gets missbuilt to still be working.
[13:05] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  i am confused about your assertion that in Debian in works. In debian i see correct permissions and RRR:binary-targets.
[13:05] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  i don't see "correct permissions and RRR:no"
[13:05] <xnox> was that in some previous upload?
[13:06] <xnox> ah i see you did that in -4
 one is supposed to test packages before building them with RRR:no.
[13:08] <LocutusOfBorg> yes, you test on Debian, everything works, you upload, the package is broken in Ubuntu
[13:08] <LocutusOfBorg> or even, you build with pbuilder, you test, you upload, its broken
[13:08] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg: i am perplexed how did -3 build with correct permissions in debian.
 LocutusOfBorg: i am perplexed how did -3 build with correct permissions in debian.
[13:08] <LocutusOfBorg> that is the main point
[13:09] <LocutusOfBorg> the mismatch between Debian and Ubuntu behaviour
[13:09] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  either builder is ignoring RRR:no; or there is a buggy kernel; or there are some brand new fixes somehwere in debian that allow doing chmod +s; then chown root; and keep the +s ..... which is quite a violation of priviledge escalation.....
[13:09] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  there are lots of differences between debian & ubuntu. in sbuild, dpkg, toolchain, kernel behaviour.
[13:09] <xnox> so i'm not surprised that are discrepancies.
[13:10] <xnox> it would be nice to get them explained.
[13:10] <lucasmoura> Hi sil2100 we have already performed the verification for ubuntu-advantage-tools and the new package is sitting in proposed for more than a week now
[13:10] <LocutusOfBorg> but if Debian is "ignore R^3", how are people supposed to check/test it?
[13:10] <LocutusOfBorg> looks more an experimental feature
[13:10] <lucasmoura> I think we can upload it to updates
[13:10] <lucasmoura> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-advantage-tools/+bug/1934902
[13:10] <LocutusOfBorg> I already set to binary-target and looks working, so meh
[13:13] <xnox> LocutusOfBorg:  normally one tests with local build by hand. aka dpkg-buildpackage -b => as non-root user; instead of like -rfakeroot or some such.
[13:13] <xnox> as per documentation RRR:no means may invoke any target with an unprivileged user.
[13:13] <xnox> => meaning some builders can choose to ignore that.
[13:13] <LocutusOfBorg> nobody ever told anywhere to not use pbuilder to build something, specially w.r.t. R^3
[13:14] <LocutusOfBorg> anyway, probably just virtualbox is broken
[13:14] <LocutusOfBorg> so meh
[13:14] <LocutusOfBorg> I might even change to do chmod in postinst
[14:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: shim-signed (focal-updates/main) [1.40.6 => 1.40.6] (core) (sync)
[14:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: shim (focal-updates/main) [15.4-0ubuntu7 => 15.4-0ubuntu7] (core) (sync)
[14:06] <bdmurray> vorlon: where are we at with the NBS removal for Groovy?
[14:19] <sil2100> lucasmoura: hey! Will look at releasing it later today!
[14:20] <lucasmoura> Thanks sil2100
[14:21] <sil2100> xnox: hey, did you chat with William about why they didn't backport the new opensbi for the u-boot backport?
[14:22] <sil2100> Would like to know if that's still needed for .3
[14:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: wireless-regdb (bionic-proposed/main) [2020.11.20-0ubuntu1~18.04.1 => 2021.07.14-0ubuntu1~18.04.1] (core) (sync)
[14:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: wireless-regdb (focal-proposed/main) [2020.11.20-0ubuntu1~20.04.1 => 2021.07.14-0ubuntu1~20.04.1] (core) (sync)
[14:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: wireless-regdb (hirsute-proposed/main) [2020.11.20-0ubuntu1 => 2021.07.14-0ubuntu1~21.04.1] (core) (sync)
[14:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-or1k-elf [s390x] (impish-proposed/universe) [1] (no packageset)
[14:57] <xnox> sil2100:  i did, he said him and/or xypron will be preparing it.
[14:57] <xnox> sil2100:  i believe that yes we do need it for .3
[14:57] <xnox> u-boot-sifive postinst + opensbi
[14:58] <xnox> i could make it too, but don't want to duplicate work if it already started by jawn-smith & xypron
[15:00] <jawn-smith> That's correct, xypron and I have started on that, and the plan is for xypron to be the main force behind that
[15:02] <sil2100> didrocks999: helloooooooo! I have a request: could you reupload ubiquity with the new shim refreshed?
[15:02] <sil2100> didrocks999: for focal that is
[15:02] <sil2100> \o/
[15:03] <didrocks999> sil2100: hey! I just need to basically dget 20.04.15.14 and reupload it, or is there anything else needed?
[15:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-or1k-elf [arm64] (impish-proposed/universe) [1] (no packageset)
[15:09] <vorlon> bdmurray: NBS removal has finished
[15:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-or1k-elf [armhf] (impish-proposed/universe) [1] (no packageset)
[15:10] <jawn-smith> xnox: is there anything else besides the loader1/loader2 issue missing from u-boot for 20.04.3? Someone mentioned it may have a problem
[15:10] <sil2100> didrocks999: yeah, just refreshing the in-source deps is enough :)
[15:11] <xnox> jawn-smith:  1) add postinst 2) make that build of u-boot be built against the new opensbi. I.e. u-boot sru must have build-depends: opensbi => (the sru version of opensbi with errata fix)
[15:11] <didrocks999> sil2100: shouldn’t you accept the shim packages first (they are still in unapproved)?
[15:12] <didrocks999> or it’s independent and will be pick up when refreshing the in-source deps?
[15:12] <jawn-smith> right those are the two things that xypron has included in his latest ppa build that just needs sponsorship
[15:14] <didrocks999> ack, seems it’s picking  1.40.6
[15:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubiquity (focal-proposed/main) [20.04.15.14 => 20.04.15.16] (core)
[15:18] <didrocks999> sil2100: done ^
[15:20] <sil2100> \o/
[15:20] <sil2100> REVIEWING!
[15:22] <sil2100> didrocks999: yeah, it pick up stuff from -proposed, no problem
[15:22] <Eickmeyer> ubuntu-archive: Does anybody have a cycle or two to review plasma-optimus? It's a neat little plasmoid I forked for KDE Plasma. :)
[15:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ubiquity [source] (focal-proposed) [20.04.15.15]
[15:33] <sil2100> didrocks999: eeek, sorry to poke you again, the SRU is all good and all, but since I hope you have the branch still on your PC and such - there's a debian/.changelog.swp in the diff
[15:33] <sil2100> didrocks999: could you just re-upload with that removed? If you're busy I guess I could also tweak it though
[15:34] <didrocks999> sil2100: argh, I thought debuild was skipping them, weird, anyway, let me rebuild the source package and upload
[15:34] <jawn-smith> sil2100: do we ever plan to SRU the golang ubuntu-image to focal?
[15:34] <sil2100> didrocks999: thanks, this will be an insta-accept then o/
[15:35] <sil2100> jawn-smith: I would say yes! So the python ubuntu-image we actually supported on every supported release, and I think we'd still want to do something similar, especially for LTS users
[15:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubiquity (focal-proposed/main) [20.04.15.14 => 20.04.15.16] (core)
[15:36] <didrocks999> sil2100: \o/ this one should be good ^ sorry for this
[15:37] <sil2100> If, let's say, we see there's some issue in supporting it in bionic, so LTS-1, then I'd say let's at least let's support it in focal
[15:37] <sil2100> didrocks999: thank you!
[15:38] <didrocks999> yw :)
[15:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ubiquity [source] (focal-proposed) [20.04.15.16]
[15:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubiquity [source] (focal-proposed) [20.04.15.16]
[15:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Removed debian-installer from i386-whitelist in impish
[15:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added eglexternalplatform to i386-whitelist in impish
[15:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added gtk4 to i386-whitelist in impish
[15:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added nvidia-graphics-drivers-470-server to i386-whitelist in impish
[15:53] <xnox> bdmurray:  can i please request early sru-release of bug #1932173 , bug #1932169 , bug #1932160 , bug #1932159 ? these are verified, no adt regressions, but we need them out to flip hwe kernels from v5.8 to v5.11
[15:54] <bdmurray> xnox: You can always request things.
[15:55] <bdmurray> Seriously though I'll look at those today.
[15:56] <xnox> bdmurray:  =)))))))
[15:56] <xnox> bdmurray:  i feel like at this point my karma quota of that "one standard bottle of white wine" as declared on the customs forms is running out though.
[15:57] <sil2100> I'll be still doing a sweep through -proposed packages to release, so let me ping you bdmurray when I'm done with that
[15:57] <sil2100> Since I don't know if I'll manage to go through all of them
[15:57] <xnox> bdmurray:  sil2100: from kernel team, we will need two more sru-accept; verify; sru-release.
[15:58] <xnox> added targets for 20.04.3 & set importance to critical https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+milestone/ubuntu-20.04.3 as without them, we are not going to get hwe changed from v5.8 to v5.11 it will regress peoples wifi => those people will not be happy about wifi-less kernel upgrades.
[15:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added pipewire to i386-whitelist in impish
[15:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added weston to i386-whitelist in impish
[16:02] <bdmurray> sil2100: why don't you review my livecd-rootfs MP and I'll do the SRU stuff
[16:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: evdi (focal-proposed/universe) [1.9.1-1ubuntu3~20.04.1 => 1.9.1-1ubuntu4~20.04.1] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[16:05] <xnox> bdmurray:  in terms of sru-accepts kernel team really wants the evdi above https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=evdi
[16:05] <bdmurray> xnox: I've heard that
[16:05] <xnox> and https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=lttng-modules
[16:06] <xnox> bdmurray:  yeah, i bet you have. sorry. We just came out of sync meeting. and let's just say, nobody was happy that we can't flip to v5.11 already.
[16:07] <sil2100> bdmurray: I already did that!
[16:07] <sil2100> Anyway, I'm doing a sweep of proposed now, will do some queue reviews tomorrow
[16:08] <bdmurray> sil2100: I'm out tomorrow so will do some of my SRU work today
[16:11] <sil2100> bdmurray: oh, ok, so maybe let's switch in that case, I'll do part of my shift tomorrow then - I only managed to release ubuntu-advantage-tools into -updates if anything
[16:11] <bdmurray> sil2100: that sounds like a solid plan to me
[16:13] <sil2100> I'll also look into the release of shim in a bit, if not I'll do that tomorrow - so leave those to me for now
[16:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-or1k-elf [ppc64el] (impish-proposed/universe) [1] (no packageset)
[16:13] <bdmurray> sil2100: will do
[16:13] <sil2100> Since it's a mess with the fwupd entangled
[16:13] <bdmurray> or not do in this case
[16:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libopenaptx to i386-whitelist in impish
[16:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: cockpit-machines (impish-proposed/primary) [243-1]
[16:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted cockpit-machines [sync] (impish-proposed) [243-1]
[16:49] <bdmurray> vorlon: Given the NBS removal has finished AIUI I can mark Groovy as obsolete. Is that correct?
[16:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: cockpit-machines [amd64] (impish-proposed/none) [243-1] (no packageset)
[16:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted cockpit-machines [amd64] (impish-proposed) [243-1]
[16:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xtables-addons (focal-security/universe) [3.9-1ubuntu0.2~20.04.3 => 3.9-1ubuntu0.2~20.04.3] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[16:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libldac to i386-whitelist in impish
[17:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: broadcom-sta (focal-security/multiverse) [6.30.223.271-12ubuntu0.1 => 6.30.223.271-12ubuntu0.1] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[17:03] <vorlon> bdmurray: I believe so yes
[17:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rtl8812au (focal-security/universe) [4.3.8.12175.20140902+dfsg-0ubuntu13~20.04.3 => 4.3.8.12175.20140902+dfsg-0ubuntu13~20.04.3] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[17:04] <bdmurray> vorlon: okay, let's find out
[17:06] <bdmurray> vorlon: also there should be 4 packages for the security pocket in the Focal unapproved queue - bcmwl will be the 4th
[17:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: bcmwl (focal-security/restricted) [6.30.223.271+bdcom-0ubuntu7~20.04.3 => 6.30.223.271+bdcom-0ubuntu7~20.04.3] (kernel-dkms, ubuntu-desktop) (sync)
[17:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: 7772 entries have been added or removed
[17:37] <krytarik> xnox: You can simply separate multiple bug numbers by commas or "and" btw (other languages too) for the bot to parse them properly.
[17:38] <krytarik> Also, for anybody who is used to write "LP: #num", you don't need the colon here either.
[17:39] <bdmurray> krytarik: but you need LP: # for terminator!
[17:40] <krytarik> I'll be baaack!
[17:42] <krytarik> Fwiw, the '#' is entirely optional either.
[17:49] <vorlon> bdmurray: state of the art on checking syncs to -security is still to manually review the build log?
[17:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted xtables-addons [sync] (focal-security) [3.9-1ubuntu0.2~20.04.3]
[17:52] <bdmurray> vorlon: yes, although now that the PPA has been deleted...
[17:52] <vorlon> bdmurray: build logs seem to still be there
[17:53] <bdmurray> ack I found it
[17:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted broadcom-sta [sync] (focal-security) [6.30.223.271-12ubuntu0.1]
[17:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted rtl8812au [sync] (focal-security) [4.3.8.12175.20140902+dfsg-0ubuntu13~20.04.3]
[17:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted bcmwl [sync] (focal-security) [6.30.223.271+bdcom-0ubuntu7~20.04.3]
[19:09] <bdmurray> xnox: If you want to earn more good will you could tell me if bug 1914075 is fixed.
[19:10] <bdmurray> vorlon: bcmwl and rtl8812au still could use accepting for focal-security
[19:29] <bdmurray> Oh maybe I hadn't refreshed
[19:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: python-oslo.limit (impish-proposed/primary) [1.4.0-0ubuntu1]
[19:54] <bdmurray> xnox: Is there reason why evdi and lttng-modules are in the same PPA? I ask because sru-review will get the diff from the PPA description but bileto only adds the diff for one package so its only easy to review lttng-modules which is a big SAD.
[20:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-release-upgrader (hirsute-proposed/main) [1:21.04.14 => 1:21.04.16] (core)
[20:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ubuntu-release-upgrader [source] (hirsute-proposed) [1:21.04.15]
[21:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted evdi [sync] (hirsute-proposed) [1.9.1-1ubuntu4~21.04.1]
[21:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted evdi [sync] (focal-proposed) [1.9.1-1ubuntu4~20.04.1]
[21:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lttng-modules (focal-proposed/universe) [2.12.2-1ubuntu1~20.04.2 => 2.12.5-1ubuntu2~20.04.1] (kernel-dkms)
[22:24] <jawn-smith> There are automatic daily tests of Unleashed images running in Testflinger or something similar, correct?
[22:25] <vorlon> xnox, plars__: ^^ is this the case? cdimage.production doesn't show riscv in current-triggers, so we at least don't block image promotion on any tests
[22:25] <sarnold> "unleashed"? this book from 1996? :) https://books.google.com/books/about/Linux_Unleashed.html?id=IZ5kQgAACAAJ
[22:25] <vorlon> sarnold: aaaaahhhh
[22:26] <vorlon> "Readers will turn to this second edition for even more in-depth coverage of hot Linux topics -- PPP's" aaaaaaahhhhhhh
[22:27] <jawn-smith> If nothing is automatic, is there documentation someone can point me to for how I would test the daily images on the Unleashed?
[22:27] <vorlon> I'll stick with trumpet winsock thank you very much
[22:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected lttng-modules [source] (focal-proposed) [2.12.5-1ubuntu2~20.04.1]
[23:30] <bdmurray> blackboxsw: It seems like bug 1920836 is verified in that you are fine w/ its current state. Do you know anything about it being slow to launch though?
[23:36] <jawn-smith> okay bdmurray: u-boot for focal has been SRU verified
[23:38] <bdmurray> jawn-smith: cool
[23:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lttng-modules (focal-proposed/universe) [2.12.2-1ubuntu1~20.04.2 => 2.12.5-1ubuntu2~20.04.1] (kernel-dkms) (sync)
[23:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected lttng-modules [sync] (focal-proposed) [2.12.5-1ubuntu1~20.04.2]