| sil2100 | xypron, waveform: hey! With opensbi now in focal-proposed, we need this u-boot rebuild accepted still, right? | 08:09 |
|---|---|---|
| sil2100 | And I guess I remember xypron wanting to put one small fix on top still? | 08:09 |
| sil2100 | How's that going? I guess I'd like to get it accepted ASAP | 08:09 |
| xypron | sil2100: without rebuilding U-Boot the users won't get the benefit of the new OpenSBI. | 08:11 |
| xypron | Thanks | 08:16 |
| xnox | am i connected?! | 10:08 |
| xnox | looks like i am. | 10:08 |
| xnox | where is sil?! =) | 10:08 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added oem-sutton.newell-aekerley-meta to canonical-oem-metapackages in bionic | 10:26 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added oem-sutton.newell-aekerley-meta to canonical-oem-metapackages in focal | 10:27 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: oem-sutton.newell-aekerley-meta (focal-proposed/primary) [20.04~ubuntu1] | 10:33 | |
| waveform | xypron, just to confirm: the only thing that needs doing to the current u-boot in focal-proposed is for the opensbi dependency to be bumped to >=0.9-1~ ? | 13:03 |
| xypron | waveform: When we move U-Boot to v2021.10 it would make send to activate CONFIG_EFIDEBUG, CONFIG_NVEDIT_EFI, CONFIG_HEXDUMP. But I guess that is more a question for Impish. | 13:06 |
| waveform | xypron, yes -- I don't think we need to worry about that for the focal SRU. I just want to make sure that's the only change required for the opensbi fix before I upload it | 13:07 |
| xypron | waveform: I have created 1938446 concerning the configuration. | 13:15 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: u-boot (focal-proposed/main) [2021.01+dfsg-3ubuntu0~20.04.1 => 2021.01+dfsg-3ubuntu0~20.04.2] (core) | 13:16 | |
| xnox | waveform: postinst + rebuild. we need u-boot-sifive postinst. i.e. http://launchpadlibrarian.net/548604038/u-boot_2021.01+dfsg-4ubuntu2_2021.01+dfsg-4ubuntu3.diff.gz https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/u-boot/+bug/1936370 | 13:37 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 1936370 in u-boot (Ubuntu Focal) "u-boot-sifive does not upgrade u-boot on disk" [Critical, New] | 13:37 |
| waveform | xnox ah, sorry -- missed the postinst. I'll add that and re-upload; sil2100 could you reject the 2021.01+dfsg-3ubuntu0~20.04.2 version I just pushed to focal-proposed? | 13:41 |
| sil2100 | Sure | 13:44 |
| waveform | xnox, not important for right now, but should that dd stuff not be in flash-kernel rather than a u-boot postinst? | 13:44 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected u-boot [source] (focal-proposed) [2021.01+dfsg-3ubuntu0~20.04.2] | 13:45 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (focal-proposed/main) [2.664.24 => 2.664.25] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist) | 13:51 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: u-boot (focal-proposed/main) [2021.01+dfsg-3ubuntu0~20.04.1 => 2021.01+dfsg-3ubuntu0~20.04.2] (core) | 14:02 | |
| xnox | sil2100: bdmurray: may i please ask to have these focal SRUs to be released https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/focal/+bugs?field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&field.milestone%3Alist=92574&field.tag=verification-done-focal ? no adt regressions, verified, but not aged, but will block migrating kernel switch to v5.11 | 14:02 |
| xnox | it's just 4 packages =) | 14:02 |
| sil2100 | \o/ | 14:34 |
| sil2100 | I'll look at it now, are those the dkms package fixes? | 14:35 |
| sil2100 | Looks like it | 14:35 |
| xnox | yes they are. | 14:41 |
| bdmurray | sil2100: we should document speedy releases for dkms | 14:50 |
| sil2100 | I don't want this to become part of the regular process, but I'll mention in the bug whenever I will do an early release | 14:53 |
| xnox | bdmurray: we hoped to upload and have all dkms fixed before the sru cycle starts for the point release. but failed. | 14:56 |
| xnox | also somehow a couple of dkms modules have been broken in hirsute release with the hirsute's kernel | 14:57 |
| xnox | that didn't help when we started to do hwe kernel based on hirsute | 14:57 |
| xnox | i don't know how or why that has happened =/ | 14:57 |
| bdmurray | xnox: but it'll never happen again right? | 14:58 |
| sil2100 | xnox, klebers: do you know if for evdi Brian's additional test request has been fulfilled? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/evdi/+bug/1932163/comments/21 | 14:59 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 1932163 in evdi (Ubuntu Focal) "evdi/1.7.0+dfsg-1ubuntu1~20.04.3 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.11/5.11.0-20.21~20.04.1" [Critical, Fix Committed] | 14:59 |
| sil2100 | bdmurray, rbasak, vorlon: btw. while I remember - the current Bileto support in SRU review has one big flaw, so always double check reviews of Bileto-based SRUs | 15:03 |
| bdmurray | sil2100: what's that flaw? | 15:04 |
| sil2100 | So the problem is that right now Bileto doesn't really auto-regenerate diffs | 15:04 |
| sil2100 | Potentially someone can build a package, run the diffing job, then rebuild the package again and you will not get an updated diff automatically | 15:04 |
| sil2100 | So you can potentially review a diff of an older version | 15:05 |
| sil2100 | To be that's actually quite problematic, so I'm even thinking if maybe we shouldn't revert this feature? This is yet another reason to get proper sync reviews instead | 15:06 |
| sil2100 | Also, another annoying thing can be that Bileto only offers debdiffs for one series, so if a silo has packages for more than one silo, you won't get diffs there | 15:06 |
| sil2100 | (only for one series, per which the silo is configured for) | 15:06 |
| sil2100 | I could make Bileto periodically refresh the diffs | 15:09 |
| klebers | sil2100, xnox: I found it hard to test evdi modules without a DisplayLink device. Some folks from my team mentioned that being in universe building the modules would be enough. | 15:09 |
| klebers | maybe the hwe team would have hardware to test it, but that'd probably take a while | 15:10 |
| sil2100 | bdmurray: ^ are you fine with skipping that extra validation then? | 15:10 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted lttng-modules [sync] (hirsute-proposed) [2.12.5-1ubuntu2~21.04.1] | 15:15 | |
| xnox | sil2100: i'll make sure to use bileto per-series next time. | 15:39 |
| bdmurray | xnox: also one package per silo would help too as I noticed it only generated a diff for one of the packages | 15:54 |
| bdmurray | sil2100: you mean revert the sru-review feature which uses bileto? If so I guess that makes sense to me. | 15:56 |
| xnox | bdmurray: you can click "diff" and it will regen for extra packages in the same series | 16:45 |
| rbasak | apw: could you fix the broken link at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#oem-.2A-meta please? | 17:10 |
| bdmurray | xnox: rbasak might have a handy way for reviewing bileto syncs | 17:19 |
| bdmurray | rbasak, apw: the link is actually https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/OEMMeta and I'll fix it | 17:48 |
| coreycb | hello SRU team, by any chance can this be released? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-glance-store/+bug/1934849 | 19:03 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 1934849 in python-glance-store (Ubuntu Hirsute) "s3 backend takes time exponentially" [High, Fix Committed] | 19:03 |
| bdmurray | coreycb: looking | 19:08 |
| coreycb | bdmurray: thank you | 19:26 |
| === apw_ is now known as apw | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!