[06:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libreoffice (hirsute-proposed/main) [1:7.1.4-0ubuntu0.21.04.1 => 1:7.1.5-0ubuntu0.21.04.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[06:59] <apw> vorlon, for weeks?  that seems rather unexpected given we had a crd in there.
[07:01] <apw> vorlon, that is a very old version, -22 too, is this old kernel handling interacting badly with the nvidia upgrade process?
[07:05] <apw> vorlon, won't this in fact always happen, you have -N with an old nvidia ABI and upgrade to -M with a new nvidia ABI, won't it always trigger this need for removal and therefore the paritial upgrade warning?
[07:05] <apw> (with things as designed)
[07:07] <apw> the dependencies as formed are designed to trigger an attempt to remove like linux-modules-nvidia-460-generic meta package if it cannot upgrade nvidia too; and you are protected by the partial upgrade warning.  but it also triggers a removal of your older kernels nvidia packages (you keep the kernel but not nvidia packages associated with them) which also triggers the partial upgrade protections.
[07:10] <apw> i suspect that while horribly inacurate once changed that making the linkage as >= rather than = would make it work the way we want.
[08:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zhmcclient (hirsute-proposed/universe) [0.27.0-0ubuntu1 => 0.31.0-0ubuntu3~21.04.1] (no packageset)
[10:39] <ricotz> sil2100, hello :), when time permits please take a look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bug/1936930
[12:45] <sil2100> ricotz: sure o/
[13:12] <ricotz> sil2100, thank you :)
[13:29] <klebers> bdmurray, hi! regarding evdi dkms (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/evdi/+bug/1932163), I've talked to cascardo and he's reworded the regression potential a bit and we came to the conclusion that without hardware we can't really test it properly
[13:39] <schopin> Could somebody re-run the autopkgtest for python in the focal openssl SRU? (I don't have permissions). The failing tests are timeouts on the main testsuites.
[13:44] <tumbleweed> schopin: retrying python3.9 for amd64 and armhf
[13:44] <schopin> thanks :)
[13:56] <sil2100> klebers, bdmurray: ok, so I'll consider this resolved then and look into getting it released today o/
[13:56] <klebers> sil2100, awesome, thank you! :)
[13:57] <sil2100> tjaalton: hey! Do you think the X .3 SRUs are verified and ready to go to -updates?
[13:57] <sil2100> I guess the sooner we get those verified and included, the more time we have to fight any potential regressions
[14:00] <tjaalton> sil2100: yes, the mesa regression fix was tested to be good, so I think it's all ready now
[14:00] <tjaalton> at least I haven't heard of anything else that might block it
[14:00] <tjaalton> let me go through them one last time today
[14:01] <tjaalton> and mark verified what isn't yet
[14:01] <sil2100> tjaalton: thank you! But that's great news
[14:01] <sil2100> Note to all interested: I'll be releasing shim for both focal and bionic today, so be prepared for any strangeness related to that in the nearest days
[14:02] <sil2100> Also, this *will* cause focal daily installer media be unbootable on certain devices, this is something that will have to be fixed before we start working on the candidates
[14:03] <sil2100> Oh, xenial too, since I see we still have that to be released
[14:03] <sil2100> juliank: ^ JFYI
[14:21] <sil2100> bdmurray: hey! Did you have a moment to take a look at the u-boot follow up SRU from me?
[14:21] <sil2100> For focal?
[14:24] <bdmurray> sil2100: I'm trying to remember that was like 2 days ago
[14:25] <bdmurray> sil2100: apparently not but I could do it now
[14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-somerville-octillery-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-somerville-warcraft-intel-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-sutton.newell-aelfwine-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-somerville-squirtle-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-sutton.newell-aekerley-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[14:28] <sil2100> bdmurray: thanks o/
[14:37] <bdmurray> sil2100: where are we with livecd-rootfs for Focal?
[14:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: opencryptoki (hirsute-proposed/universe) [3.15.1+dfsg-0ubuntu1 => 3.15.1+dfsg-0ubuntu1.1] (no packageset)
[15:07] <sil2100> bdmurray: as mentioned in the release sync-up, still debugging that - it's weird and I have no idea why it's busted
[15:07] <sil2100> But I'm digging
[15:07] <bdmurray> got it
[15:39] <sil2100> I don't understand why my current attempts are not working but then again I might figured out why the original code was troublesome - I'm testing some new solutions now
[15:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware (hirsute-proposed/main) [1.197.2 => 1.197.3] (core, kernel)
[15:55] <bdmurray> sil2100: the u-boot change in the new focal upload isn't in impish‽
[15:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware (focal-proposed/main) [1.187.15 => 1.187.16] (core, kernel)
[16:09] <bdmurray> sil2100: Well, I'll just upload the change for impish.
[16:36] <tjaalton> sil2100: hwe stack all verified now
[18:31] <sil2100> bdmurray: wha? Why?
[18:31] <sil2100> bdmurray: it's invalid on impish!
[18:31] <sil2100> bdmurray: we need to drop it from impish-proposed - the target names are correct with the u-boot version in impish
[18:32] <sil2100> bdmurray: the issue was that the postinst change was backported from impish using the impish u-boot target names, while focal has an older u-boot version
[18:32] <sil2100> Let me drop the package
[18:34] <sil2100> eh, but the version number is burned, so we need to remember that when we go live with the next upload
[18:34] <sil2100> But that's fine
[18:36] <sil2100> tjaalton: thanks o/
[18:39] <sil2100> ricotz: hey! So was there a consensus among the desktop team to build libreoffice with noopt for armhf in the end?
[18:39] <sil2100> I of course leave the decision to the team managing here, especially that we currently have no active armhf-based desktop images/products that could potentially be consuming libreoffice
[18:42] <bdmurray> sil2100: okay, well that wasn't clear from the history in the bug reports
[18:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted u-boot [source] (focal-proposed) [2021.01+dfsg-3ubuntu0~20.04.3]
[19:14] <ricotz> sil2100, hey, yes, it is the better approach and seb128 agreed after he had performance concerns
[19:30] <sil2100> ricotz: ok, thanks
[19:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libreoffice [source] (hirsute-proposed) [1:7.1.5-0ubuntu0.21.04.1]
[19:46] <sil2100> bdmurray: yeah, we only discussed it here on IRC and on syncs
[19:47] <sil2100> bdmurray, juliank: ok, I released shim and shim-signed for focal now, will release bionic and xenial tomorrow - please keep an eye out for reports from people
[19:47] <sil2100> And yell in case a revert is needed
[19:47] <juliank> sil2100: Should we skip bionic, it didn't get a fwupd with SBAT yet
[19:48] <juliank> Well there's been one in unapproved queue since March
[19:48] <juliank> Maybe it is incomplete, I don't remember
[19:48] <juliank> focal should be plenty already
[19:49] <juliank> (and xenial too, I suppose, no problems there as we don't build new isntaller images anyway)
[19:49] <juliank> (just cloud images, and while they boot via removable media path, they do so via fallback which (should) strip the wrong bootloader path if we parse one)
[19:59] <sil2100> juliank: ah, indeed, +1 on skipping bionic for now
[20:00] <sil2100> We'll have to get to it sooner or later though, but not a priority for now
[20:00] <sil2100> I'll do xenial tomorrow though
[20:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected shim-signed [sync] (focal-updates) [1.40.6]
[20:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected shim [sync] (focal-updates) [15.4-0ubuntu7]
[20:06] <juliank> queuebot broken
[20:06] <juliank> or duplicate tarballs?
[20:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted alsa-ucm-conf [source] (hirsute-proposed) [1.2.4-2ubuntu1.2]
[20:07] <sil2100> Duplicate
[20:07] <sil2100> Those were the synces you performed to Updates some weeks ago!
[20:08] <sil2100> Since I released shims using sru-release as usual, forgot that you did syncs previously
[20:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (focal-proposed/main) [2.664.24 => 2.664.26] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist)
[20:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected livecd-rootfs [source] (focal-proposed) [2.664.26]
[20:16] <sil2100> bdmurray: hey! I temporarily reverted my change from livecd-rootfs to not block other work while I try to wrap my head around what's happening
[20:17] <sil2100> I pushed a new version to the queue for focal (and released for impish too)
[20:17] <sil2100> And now I might go a bit EOD o/
[20:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (focal-proposed/main) [2.664.24 => 2.664.26] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist)
[20:22] <bdmurray> sil2100: ack, thanks
[20:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-magnumclient (focal-proposed/main) [2.11.0-0ubuntu4 => 2.11.0-0ubuntu5] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[21:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-magnumclient (focal-proposed/main) [2.11.0-0ubuntu4 => 2.11.0-0ubuntu5] (openstack, ubuntu-server)
[21:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-maps (focal-proposed/universe) [3.36.1-1 => 3.36.1-1ubuntu1] (desktop-extra, ubuntu-budgie, ubuntugnome)