| === genii is now known as genii-core | ||
| === doko_ is now known as doko | ||
| icey | fyi: I'm checking out the sphinx autopkgtest regressions | 09:37 |
|---|---|---|
| icey | any advice on liborcus (regression for sphinx)? when running with nothing in proposed it passes, when running with some subset from it's pass on 17 August (https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/libo/liborcus/impish/amd64) + sphinx, it passes | 10:02 |
| ginggs | icey: i think you want the test triggered on sphinx/3.5.4-2 and liborcus/0.16.1-3ubuntu1, as was done for zlib | 11:19 |
| ginggs | I have just done so | 11:20 |
| icey | ginggs: I'm going to run that test locally first to confirm; it generally does look like the sphinx regressions aren't though; either it's a "add more from proposed" or an intermittent failure | 11:20 |
| icey | ginggs: ah, thanks! | 11:20 |
| icey | ginggs: would you mind poking highlight.js on amd64 as well please? I've run it locally and it passes fine | 11:40 |
| ginggs | icey: highlight.js . | 11:49 |
| icey | thanks again! | 11:49 |
| icey | ginggs: any chance you could do the liborcus other architectures (with failures) in the same way? the failures on those look identical to the amd64 one | 12:09 |
| ginggs | icey: i triggered liborcus for all architectures except i386 | 12:10 |
| icey | ah thanks! | 12:11 |
| ginggs | there you have a pass already https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/libo/liborcus/impish/ppc64el :) | 12:11 |
| icey | ginggs: yeah, I just was the recent tests list turn green :-D | 12:11 |
| === not_phunyguy is now known as phunyguy | ||
| === genii-core is now known as genii | ||
| GunnarHj | Good morning bdmurray! Now I have collected som '+1's at bug #1940925. | 15:59 |
| ubottu | Bug 1940925 in gnome-shell-extension-ubuntu-dock (Ubuntu) "[FFe] Do not activate spread view on first boot" [Wishlist, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1940925 | 16:00 |
| bdmurray | GunnarHj: have at fixing that bug | 17:20 |
| bdmurray | mdeslaur: now that you've looked at the last comment in bug 1865900 what do you think? | 17:20 |
| ubottu | Bug 1865900 in apache2 (Ubuntu) "apache 2.4.29-1ubuntu4.12 authentication with client certificate broken" [Undecided, In Progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1865900 | 17:20 |
| mdeslaur | bdmurray: I'm not sure I like the commit mentioned...it looks like it just happens to fix the issue because it's using a different engine, and the comments on the commit say it changes behaviour and introduces regressions | 17:21 |
| mdeslaur | doesn't really sound like something we'd want to add to stable releases | 17:23 |
| mdeslaur | ie: the commit introduced https://github.com/psf/requests/issues/5561 | 17:25 |
| ubottu | Issue 5561 in psf/requests "Requests 2.24.0 removed necessary namespace for other modules" [Closed] | 17:25 |
| bdmurray | mdeslaur: ack, thanks for looking! | 17:29 |
| GunnarHj | thanks bdmurray | 17:34 |
| dbungert | may I get a core-dev to retest click? https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=impish&arch=ppc64el&package=alertmanager-irc-relay&trigger=curl/7.74.0-1.2ubuntu4 | 18:25 |
| bdmurray | I can do that | 18:31 |
| dbungert | bdmurray: thanks! | 18:32 |
| jawn-smith | mwhudson: can fully confirm that aspectc++ is not glibc related, and that the fixes for llvm are already in llvm-toolchain-13. The aspectc++ package itself needs some work to resolve a FTBFS with the newer llvm-toolchain but it shouldn't block glibc migration | 20:32 |
| mwhudson | jawn-smith: ok, so i think deleting it and syncing / uploading any new versino that appears makes sense | 20:43 |
| jawn-smith | mwhudson: agreed, thanks! | 20:43 |
| bdmurray | jawn-smith: so you'll need to ask an AA to delete it | 20:44 |
| mwhudson | jawn-smith: does it seem active at all upstream | 20:45 |
| jawn-smith | Yes, it is somewhat active upstream | 20:52 |
| jawn-smith | Though I did confirm that the current upstream source does not have the llvm-toolchain-13 compatibility fixes | 20:52 |
| mwhudson | ok | 20:52 |
| jawn-smith | bdmurray: what is the process for asking an AA to delete a package? is it simply posting here: "Hey can any archive admin please delete aspectc++ from impish?" | 21:01 |
| bdmurray | jawn-smith: yes, here or ubuntu-release | 21:01 |
| === tomreyn_ is now known as tomreyn | ||
| jawn-smith | Is any core dev available to try what I hope is a valid autopkgtest URL? https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=impish&arch=arm64&package=boost1.74&trigger=icu/67.1-7ubuntu1 | 21:34 |
| tumbleweed | jawn-smith: sure | 21:37 |
| jawn-smith | Thanks! | 21:37 |
| === genii is now known as genii-away | ||
| === pizzaiolo is now known as pizza | ||
| mwhudson | jawn-smith, bdmurray: the process i usually follow is to file a bug asking for removal and subscribe ~ubuntu-archive and then ping in #ubuntu-reelase | 23:28 |
| RAOF | It is nice to have a bug to document the request, yes. | 23:29 |
| RAOF | Sadly, if you just subscribe ~ubuntu-archive I will never see it, because the LP query to list those bugs has never once failed to OOPS for me :| | 23:32 |
| sarnold | ahhh. I know I've filed a handful of those over the years :) | 23:36 |
| vorlon | this is the url that more often succeeds for me: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.subscriber=ubuntu-archive&field.status=NEW&field.status=Confirmed&field.status=Triaged&field.status=INPROGRESS&field.status=FIXCOMMITTED&field.status=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&orderby=-id&start=0 | 23:42 |
| * RAOF adds to ArchiveAdministration wiki page. | 23:56 | |
| RAOF | Oh, wow! That worked! | 23:56 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!