[04:06] <RAOF> I see gslnetworks is having another normal one; routing all my packets to various Canonical properties via a lovely Melbourne → Adelaide → (unknown) → Melbourne loop…
[05:57] <amurray> 🙄 - heh with ABB I see ADL -> MEL -> SYD -> PER -> SIN .. -> PARIS -> LONDON .. launchpad.net - but that is IPv6 - if I go with IPv4 then it is a more normal ADL -> SYD ... launchpad.net - much shorter... but total latency is longer for IPv4... go figure?
[08:45] <schopin> If I have a failure in ppc64el and s390x, would it be correct to think it is likely a big-endian related failure?
[09:00] <xypron> I am looking for a sponsor for https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/opensbi/+bug/1956362 (Sync opensbi 1.0-1 (main) from Debian sid (main)).
[09:01] <ginggs> schopin: ppc64el is little-endian
[09:01] <schopin> ginggs: damned.
[09:02] <ginggs> xypron: looking at your sync now
[11:43] <rbasak> cpaelzer: not urgent: please could you glance at the fix proposed in https://bugs.launchpad.net/uvtool/+bug/1956366 - https://launchpadlibrarian.net/578427144/uvtool-fix-armhf-failure.debdiff - and ack if it lgty?
[11:43] <rbasak> It's trivial, so if it's good I'll at least just commit it to uvtool upstream.
[11:44] <cpaelzer> I'll have a look rbasak
[12:22] <cpaelzer> rbasak: I answered ont he bug with a verbose +1
[12:30] <rbasak> Thanks!
[13:43] <jdstrand> juliank: ack, thanks! (I responded yesterday)
[15:05] <juliank> jdstrand: I don't understand your analysis in #16 fwiw (it seems to say "I don't see the cycle"), I think the approach in #17 is right though.
[15:32] <jdstrand> juliank: hah, I just wrote "Oh! I missed from the initial report that network-pre was deleted which clears up things considerably on my end (since I wasn't able to reproduce, I didn't see it locally either)". Indeed, I say the cycle but I didn't see that network-pre was deleted
[15:32] <jdstrand> saw*
[15:48] <juliank> jdstrand: yeah it will delete a random job to break a cycle
[15:50] <jdstrand> 0.36.1-3ubuntu1 is building now. hopefully that'll be that. thanks! :)
[15:53] <jdstrand> juliank: iirc, you somehow blocked promotion. does anything special need to be done for this upload so can be promoted, etc?
[15:53] <juliank> jdstrand: if the bug is closed I think it should migrate automatically
[15:53] <juliank> if not, remove block-proposed* tags
[15:53] <jdstrand> cool, I'll just keep an eye on it
[17:25] <ahasenack> schopin: hi, I was checking excuses, and saw that python-cryptography is failing tests
[17:25] <ahasenack> turns out it's failing the build too, which runs tests
[17:25] <ahasenack> the build we have in the jammy archive used openssl 3.0.0. With 3.0.1 (or at least, current jammy), it fails
[17:25] <ahasenack> have you seen that?
[17:26] <ahasenack> `[_OpenSSLErrorWithText(code=50331803, lib=6, reason=155, reason_text=b'error:0300009B:digital envelope routines::buffer too small')])`
[17:26] <schopin> No, that's news to me :/
[17:28] <ahasenack> https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-jammy/jammy/amd64/p/python-cryptography/20220101_131859_053a9@/log.gz
[17:28] <ahasenack> search for "buffer too small"
[17:32] <schopin> ahasenack: this might solve the issue ? https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/commit/753d3e412a341e157e6b55b135b8a4c1efbb5622
[17:32] <ahasenack> let me try
[17:33] <ahasenack> is this one of the changes between openssl 3.0.0 and 3.0.1? https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/16789
[17:38] <schopin> ahasenack: it is (wasn't mentioned in their changelog -_- )
[17:41] <ahasenack> ok, I'll apply it and try a build
[17:41] <ahasenack> thanks for finding it
[17:50] <jdstrand> juliank: fyi, it is fully in -proposed now and autopkgtest passed for amd64 (others are still running). looking at https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html it seems I need to remove the tags since the bug can't be closed unless it migrates and it can't migrate cause of the tags (aiui). the known problematic 0.36.1-3 is superceded and shouldn't be able to
[17:50] <jdstrand> migrate any more, so I removed the tags
[18:02] <ahasenack> schopin: build worked \o/
[18:02] <schopin> \o/
[18:21] <juliank> jdstrand: I also upgraded the autopkgtest staging instance with the new ufw and all test instances booted fine, so I guess, hooray
[18:27] <jdstrand> nice! :)
[18:47] <ahasenack> schopin: do you mind doing a quick review? https://code.launchpad.net/~ahasenack/ubuntu/+source/python-cryptography/+git/python-cryptography/+merge/413712
[18:47] <ahasenack> I can create a salsa PR too
[18:50] <schopin> ahasenack: will do, but you'll have to find someone else to do the upload, I'm only a lowly MOTU ;-)
[18:50] <ahasenack> I can upload
[18:51] <ahasenack> we just have this policy of peer review in the team I'm on
[18:52] <ahasenack> just added a slot for you
[19:04] <schopin> ahasenack: I'll get to it first thing tomorrow.