[10:56] rbasak: regarding your OpenSSL/NodeJS question, I *think* this document answers the question: https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/blob/main/OpenSSL-Strategy.md#nodejs-version-16x-est-apr-2021-eol-apr-2024 (I'm not responding on the ML because I'm not a dev yet so I'm always stuck in moderation queue, which isn't great for conversations) [10:59] But I'm a bit confused. Does the nodeJS package link against a vendored OpenSSL in Ubuntu? And does the NodeJS ecosystem distribute pre-built binaries in npm? [11:09] tjaalton: https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/n/nvidia-graphics-drivers-390/impish/armhf looks like it FTBFS on armhf [11:09] /var/lib/dkms/nvidia/390.144/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h:467:43: error: implicit declaration of function ‘outer_sync’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] [11:09] 467 | #define WRITE_COMBINE_FLUSH() { dsb(); outer_sync(); } [11:09] and i'm failing to figure out how did it work before (if ever) [11:15] maybe arm_heavy_mb() needs to be used instead? [11:15] xnox: you probably meant tseliot? [11:21] yes, yes i do. [11:21] sorry =) [11:21] tseliot-: ^^^ [11:25] schopin: AFAIK, the nodejs package links against a system provided openssl (via build-depends of the -dev package) and the ecosystem does distribute binaries. However I'm just going on what I've been told in bugs by people doing the actual work - I've not investigated myself. [11:27] schopin: that doc is really helpful. Looks like there's not a clear answer for nodejs for us then, as they're expecting openssl 3 support only in Apr 2021? That's likely to be too late for us. [11:28] Erm. April 2021 is in the past :) [11:30] tseliot-: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-390/+bug/1946642 [11:30] Launchpad bug 1946642 in nvidia-graphics-drivers-390 (Ubuntu) "nvidia-graphics-drivers-390 ftbfs on armhf" [Undecided, New] [11:30] Oh [11:30] https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/29817 is still open though? [11:30] Issue 29817 in nodejs/node "[Tracking Issue] OpenSSL 3" [Open] [11:37] also, if we go down the route of having both 1.1.1 and 3 openssl, i will want to make libssl-dev's be coinstallable this time around. [11:38] i.e. ship libssl1.1-dev in like /usr/include/libssl1.1/ssl/ path or some such with adjusted pc files etc. [11:38] cause then people will be able to build against 1.1.1 headers by forcing -I/usr/include/libssl1.1 [11:38] obviously it is a downstream solution, for which there is no support anywhere yet. [11:48] xnox: yes, that'd be nice :) === sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie [11:55] schopin: I've added you to the ubuntu-devel accept list, so you shouldn't get stuck in moderation again [11:56] cjwatson: many thanks! [13:24] juliank, hey, is that known that packagekit still thinks it's offline on impish today? [13:25] bug #1946196 confirmed on a current pending daily iso install [13:25] Bug 1946196 in packagekit (Ubuntu) "Additional Drivers fails with pk-client-error-quark: Cannot download packages whilst offline (257)" [High, Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1946196 [13:25] pkmon states that the system offline despite being connected to wifi [13:25] and pkcon install fails stating it can't install offline [13:34] there was bug 1943189 about something similar [13:34] Bug 1943189 in packagekit (Ubuntu Hirsute) "[SRU] 'cannot refresh whilst network offline'in plasma-discover" [Undecided, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1943189 [13:35] oh but seb is talking about bug 1946196 [13:35] Bug 1946196 in packagekit (Ubuntu) "Additional Drivers fails with pk-client-error-quark: Cannot download packages whilst offline (257)" [High, Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1946196 [13:35] Foundations has a meeting in a bit and I'll bring it up [13:41] bdmurray, thanks, and yes it does sound similar [14:19] juliank, hi! if one has to install python-apt in a venv, is `pip install 'python-apt @ git+https://salsa.debian.org/apt-team/python-apt.git[@...]' the way of doing it, or is the package published in pypi with a name I wasn't able to guess? :) [15:02] paride: it is not published [15:02] paride: generally, python-apt A.B version should match apt's [15:03] seb128: I did expect there to be more to it, the fix likely works for some, but not everyone, and it needs to be fixed in glib properly presumably [15:03] juliank, so you're saying it's not a good idea to have an arbitrary version of the python-apt on a given system [15:03] right [15:04] paride: like a future python-apt 2.9 might work with apt 2.8 or not, I can't say :D [15:04] juliank, it has more impact that the initial bug suggested though, it's not possible to install debs from snap-store atm on an new impish install [15:04] juliank, which I would consider it as a release blocker [15:04] paride: same for existing versions [15:05] juliank, ack, makes sense, thanks. [15:06] seb128: IMO this is all desktop side magic in packagekit calling glib, I'm not deep into that. Do other glib-based daemons see the system as offline too, for example, is an interesting question [15:07] Launchpad has a slightly hilarious hack to allow using python-apt from a virtualenv without having to use --system-site-packages [15:07] seb128: So all it does is: [15:07] ▸ GNetworkMonitor *network_monitor; [15:07] https://git.launchpad.net/launchpad/tree/utilities/link-system-packages.py + https://git.launchpad.net/launchpad/tree/system-packages.txt [15:07] ▸ network_monitor = g_network_monitor_get_default (); [15:07] ▸ return g_network_monitor_get_network_available (network_monitor); [15:08] I wonder if you can have release series on pip [15:08] so you can say install python-apt for focal; or install python-apt 1.8.* [15:08] I don't know how that all works, so never published anything there [15:08] juliank, it's only a system start issue though, if you restart the service things are working, so it somehow fail to refresh on interfaces changes [15:09] juliank: not usefully; last I checked, none of the defined environment markers were relevant [15:10] seb128: Yeah, I guess glib does not pick up new interfaces or something? [15:10] seb128: We did not have the complaints in hirsute, so is this a regression between glib 2.68.0/1 and 2.68.4? [15:11] juliank, could be, but we are on the same glib stable serie than for hirsute, unsure if that changed in some point release? [15:11] juliank, I will try to download glib see if that makes things better [15:18] juliank, it's not glib, same issue with the hirsute deb installed [15:19] I need to drop offline, will poke at it more later === not_phunyguy is now known as phunyguy