[04:37] <mwhudson> cjwatson: til (well maybe more like yil) that pc105.tree is generated by a script you wrote in like 2006 :)
[10:45] <cjwatson> mwhudson: I'm sorry
[10:46] <cjwatson> mwhudson: (it is all a bit dense ...)
[10:52] <mwhudson> cjwatson: oh i didn't try to read it!
[10:54] <cjwatson> mwhudson: very wise
[10:56] <cjwatson> mwhudson: I think the hard work was done by Matthias Urlichs in 2005 (though I have ended up maintaining that somehow)
[11:01] <mwhudson> cjwatson: ah yes, i hadn't even really noticed that the real work is done by a different package entirely :)
[13:54] <sforshee> apw, xnox: I've got wireless-regdb updates if one of you would care to sponsor them: bug 1941955
[15:43] <dbungert> ginggs: I see you've run the vip-manager/armhf tests a few times - I ran this locally in an armhf container and the test passes there.  Do you think this is related to the test env image rebuild being discussed?
[15:44] <ginggs> dbungert: quite possible
[15:44] <ginggs> vip-manager's autopkgtest regressed in release, but only on armhf
[15:47] <ginggs> listparser/armhf regressed as well
[20:21] <ItzSwirlz> Hey everyone, the Ubuntu Cinnamon Remix ISO builder is failing. I'm not sure why, and I don't want to be excluding apt packages, and the issue is base. Packages like bass-passwd are being extracted but a file already exists and it's causing it to fail... anyone got any ideas? https://github.com/Ubuntu-Cinnamon-Remix/iso-builder/runs/3465676747?check_suite_focus=true
[20:40] <cjwatson> ItzSwirlz: If I were you I would look at the earlier warning "W: The following is not a valid stage: 'false'" first, because I wonder if that might relate to a failed attempt to disable caching for the bootstrap stage, which might then mean that a cache is being extracted and in turn then explain why a file already exists
[20:40] <cjwatson> (this is just a guess)
[20:41] <ItzSwirlz> I guess it's worth a shot. lb has changed a lot recently
[20:42] <cjwatson> Also just in general I think it's often worth looking at earlier warnings/errors first, since later ones can be consequences
[21:05] <TJ-> ItzSwirlz: does the lack of quote marks around the  --apt-options in the lb command line, vs those options contained inside "..." in the config file, cause a knock-on effect?
[21:28] <TJ-> ItzSwirlz: your problem is "--cache-stages false" -- sources shows it should be " \t    [--cache-stages STAGE|\"STAGES\"]\n "
[21:28] <ItzSwirlz> uhhh... ok
[21:30] <ItzSwirlz> TJ-: are you saying that is what needs to go in the quotes?
[21:33] <TJ-> not sure! just looking and suggesting. I /think/ the man-page is out of sync with the code since "man 1 lb_config" shows  --cache-stages true|false|STAGE|"STAGES"
[21:33] <TJ-> but the code as pasted above doesn't include true|false
[22:15] <jawn-smith> mwhudson: the original openssh bug was LP: #1939751. While working that I did a submittodebian, which they have since merged. So now instead of applying that patch we're just doing a merge: LP: #1941799
[22:35] <mwhudson> jawn-smith: looks like bryceh beat me to it!
[22:43] <jawn-smi1> oh look at that, thanks bryceh!
[22:43] <bryceh> heya, yeah noticed it doing server team bug triage.  Hope I didn't step on any toes!
[22:43] <mwhudson> nope, i just got asked to look at it
[22:43] <mwhudson> but happy for someone else to have done it already :)
[22:44] <bryceh> yep cool.  only thing I noticed was the dep8 tests failed for me, but possibly that's a local environment thing.  But keep an eye on update-excuses.
[22:47] <jawn-smi1> I had run tests on armhf, arm64, and amd64 so I think they're alright. I did the armhf tests with and without the diff we carry as well to make sure it was still necessary
[22:47] <jawn-smi1> But I'll still keep an eye out!
 ah excellent, then it's probably fine.  I wondered if you might have already run them.