[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] sil2100: ^^ a fixed up fwupd-signed in focal [07:53] sil2100: I forgot to change the build-depends last time :/ [07:54] o/ [07:54] Yeah, saw the ping from ycheng [07:54] Looking now [07:57] 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] slyon: hey! Accepted the new binaries ^ But yeah, I see libwlroots7 had some reverse-depends, so yeah, those might need rebuilding/handling [09:17] 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] \o/ [09:49] huh, a lot of image build failures I see [09:49] Most of the livefs builds failed with no logs though [10:22] something must have happened, as the gcc-or1k-elf builds also all failed without logs. restarted them now. [10:24] 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] sil2100: i asked in #launchpad and got this [10:31] mwhudson: we had a network outage this morning, can you retry them and see what happens? [10:31] sil2100: so it might be worth trying again? [10:38] I'm trying ubuntu desktop again [10:38] see if that works [11:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-or1k-elf [riscv64] (impish-proposed/universe) [1] (no packageset) [11:19] arm64 failed again [11:22] * laney has asked LP [11:54] juliank, cjwatson I tried to build virtualbox locally [11:54] with DH_VERBOSE=1 [11:54] and r^3:no [11:55] I did "fakeroot debian/rules clean build install binary" [11:55] and I can confirm the bug if I run from unprivileged user, and no bug if I run as root [11:55] (in a chroot) [11:56] fakeroot chmod -s debian/virtualbox/usr/lib/virtualbox/VBoxSDL [11:56] this fails [11:56] and this doesn't chmod -s debian/virtualbox/usr/lib/virtualbox/VBoxSDL [11:58] forget the last sentence, I was doing -s instead of +s [12:32] LocutusOfBorg: Rules-Requires-Root: binary-targets i've not seen such stanza before. [12:32] i've see no-stanza, and Rules-Requires-Root: no. [12:33] LocutusOfBorg: i wonder if Rules-Require-Root: binary-targets is not well supported. [12:33] LocutusOfBorg: i wonder if it worth a try to drop that line altogether, and build again. [12:38] xnox, it stopped working when I added Rules-Requires-Root: no [12:38] if I removed, or I add binary-target it works again [12:39] vbox is already busted in impish and hirsute-proposed [12:46] LocutusOfBorg: one cannot use RRR:no with chmod +s.... it is contradictory. [12:46] LocutusOfBorg: why did you add RRR:no? [12:47] * xnox expects virtualbox to build _without_ RRR stanza in control. [12:51] xnox, it works also with RRR: binary-targets [12:52] 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] and that variable is documented [12:52] my issue is: why R^3: no works on Debian but not in Ubuntu? [12:52] how many packages (wrongly) added R^3: no and then failed to run in Ubuntu? [12:56] 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] one is supposed to test packages before building them with RRR:no [12:56] some also try to do chmod +s in maintainer scripts, rather than packaging it. [13:00] also not sure if i care about package that incorrectly uses RRR:no and gets missbuilt to still be working. [13:05] LocutusOfBorg: i am confused about your assertion that in Debian in works. In debian i see correct permissions and RRR:binary-targets. [13:05] LocutusOfBorg: i don't see "correct permissions and RRR:no" [13:05] was that in some previous upload? [13:06] ah i see you did that in -4 [13:07] one is supposed to test packages before building them with RRR:no. [13:08] yes, you test on Debian, everything works, you upload, the package is broken in Ubuntu [13:08] or even, you build with pbuilder, you test, you upload, its broken [13:08] LocutusOfBorg: i am perplexed how did -3 build with correct permissions in debian. [13:08] LocutusOfBorg: i am perplexed how did -3 build with correct permissions in debian. [13:08] that is the main point [13:09] the mismatch between Debian and Ubuntu behaviour [13:09] 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] LocutusOfBorg: there are lots of differences between debian & ubuntu. in sbuild, dpkg, toolchain, kernel behaviour. [13:09] so i'm not surprised that are discrepancies. [13:10] it would be nice to get them explained. [13:10] 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] but if Debian is "ignore R^3", how are people supposed to check/test it? [13:10] looks more an experimental feature [13:10] I think we can upload it to updates [13:10] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-advantage-tools/+bug/1934902 [13:10] Launchpad bug 1934902 in ubuntu-advantage-tools (Ubuntu Hirsute) "[SRU] ubuntu-advantage-tools (27.1 -> 27.2) Xenial, Bionic, Focal, Hirsute" [Undecided, Fix Committed] [13:10] I already set to binary-target and looks working, so meh [13:13] 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] as per documentation RRR:no means may invoke any target with an unprivileged user. [13:13] => meaning some builders can choose to ignore that. [13:13] nobody ever told anywhere to not use pbuilder to build something, specially w.r.t. R^3 [13:14] anyway, probably just virtualbox is broken [13:14] so meh [13:14] 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] vorlon: where are we at with the NBS removal for Groovy? [14:19] lucasmoura: hey! Will look at releasing it later today! [14:20] Thanks sil2100 [14:21] xnox: hey, did you chat with William about why they didn't backport the new opensbi for the u-boot backport? [14:22] 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] sil2100: i did, he said him and/or xypron will be preparing it. [14:57] sil2100: i believe that yes we do need it for .3 [14:57] u-boot-sifive postinst + opensbi [14:58] i could make it too, but don't want to duplicate work if it already started by jawn-smith & xypron [15:00] 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] didrocks999: helloooooooo! I have a request: could you reupload ubiquity with the new shim refreshed? [15:02] didrocks999: for focal that is [15:02] \o/ [15:03] 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] bdmurray: NBS removal has finished [15:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-or1k-elf [armhf] (impish-proposed/universe) [1] (no packageset) [15:10] 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] didrocks999: yeah, just refreshing the in-source deps is enough :) [15:11] 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] sil2100: shouldn’t you accept the shim packages first (they are still in unapproved)? [15:12] or it’s independent and will be pick up when refreshing the in-source deps? [15:12] right those are the two things that xypron has included in his latest ppa build that just needs sponsorship [15:14] 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] sil2100: done ^ [15:20] \o/ [15:20] REVIEWING! [15:22] didrocks999: yeah, it pick up stuff from -proposed, no problem [15:22] 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] 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] didrocks999: could you just re-upload with that removed? If you're busy I guess I could also tweak it though [15:34] sil2100: argh, I thought debuild was skipping them, weird, anyway, let me rebuild the source package and upload [15:34] sil2100: do we ever plan to SRU the golang ubuntu-image to focal? [15:34] didrocks999: thanks, this will be an insta-accept then o/ [15:35] 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] sil2100: \o/ this one should be good ^ sorry for this [15:37] 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] didrocks999: thank you! [15:38] 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] 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 [15:53] Bug 1932173 in linux-hwe-5.11 (Ubuntu Focal) "xtables-addons/3.9-1ubuntu0.2~20.04.1 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.11/5.11.0-20.21~20.04.1" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1932173 [15:53] Bug 1932169 in rtl8812au (Ubuntu Focal) "rtl8812au/4.3.8.12175.20140902+dfsg-0ubuntu13~20.04.2 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.11/5.11.0-20.21~20.04.1" [Critical, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1932169 [15:53] Bug 1932160 in broadcom-sta (Ubuntu Focal) "broadcom-sta/6.30.223.271-12 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.11/5.11.0-20.21~20.04.1" [Critical, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1932160 [15:53] Bug 1932159 in bcmwl (Ubuntu Focal) "bcmwl/6.30.223.271+bdcom-0ubuntu7~20.04.2 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.11/5.11.0-20.21~20.04.1" [Critical, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1932159 [15:54] xnox: You can always request things. [15:55] Seriously though I'll look at those today. [15:56] bdmurray: =))))))) [15:56] 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] 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] Since I don't know if I'll manage to go through all of them [15:57] bdmurray: sil2100: from kernel team, we will need two more sru-accept; verify; sru-release. [15:58] 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] 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] 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] xnox: I've heard that [16:05] and https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=lttng-modules [16:06] 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] bdmurray: I already did that! [16:07] Anyway, I'm doing a sweep of proposed now, will do some queue reviews tomorrow [16:08] sil2100: I'm out tomorrow so will do some of my SRU work today [16:11] 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] sil2100: that sounds like a solid plan to me [16:13] 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] sil2100: will do [16:13] Since it's a mess with the fwupd entangled [16:13] 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] 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] 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] vorlon: okay, let's find out [17:06] 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] 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] Also, for anybody who is used to write "LP: #num", you don't need the colon here either. [17:39] krytarik: but you need LP: # for terminator! [17:40] I'll be baaack! [17:42] Fwiw, the '#' is entirely optional either. [17:49] 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] vorlon: yes, although now that the PPA has been deleted... [17:52] bdmurray: build logs seem to still be there [17:53] 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] xnox: If you want to earn more good will you could tell me if bug 1914075 is fixed. [19:09] Bug 1914075 in ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "subiquity 20.04.2 fails to install hwe kernel offline" [Undecided, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1914075 [19:10] vorlon: bcmwl and rtl8812au still could use accepting for focal-security [19:29] 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] 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] There are automatic daily tests of Unleashed images running in Testflinger or something similar, correct? [22:25] 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] "unleashed"? this book from 1996? :) https://books.google.com/books/about/Linux_Unleashed.html?id=IZ5kQgAACAAJ [22:25] sarnold: aaaaahhhh [22:26] "Readers will turn to this second edition for even more in-depth coverage of hot Linux topics -- PPP's" aaaaaaahhhhhhh [22:27] 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] 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] 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? [23:30] Bug 1920836 in software-properties (Ubuntu Xenial) "Show Extended Security Maintenence status" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1920836 [23:36] okay bdmurray: u-boot for focal has been SRU verified [23:38] 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]