[09:58] morning folks, we are having some problems with the Github integration of https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/running#pkg-systemd-upstream [09:59] for a few days now - are there known issues? [09:59] symptom is that some jobs never report back [10:00] GH log shows the request is sent successfully when a PR is opened, and the job shows up on the autopkgtest for a while so it is running, but then goes away and status is never reported back [10:01] eg: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/22067 for s390x I can see the request going out and giving me the API url to check the result [10:01] Pull 22067 in systemd/systemd "fuzz-bus-message: add a testcase triggering an invalid read" [Open] [10:01] https://api.github.com/repos/systemd/systemd/statuses/927892e0ecf9b7148543e5a5ab5d866a8255fe07 [10:02] which says the job was successful, but on the PR it's still "yellow" (pending) [10:03] wait, it says pending there actually (looked at the wrong arch) [10:04] is it jobs getting stuck somewhere maybe? [10:22] doko: if you have some time today could you have a look at LP: #1956765 and maybe sponsor it? [10:22] Launchpad bug 1956765 in python3.9 (Ubuntu) "autopkgtests fail with openssl 3.0.1" [High, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1956765 [10:33] schopin, ok. is this also needed in 3.10? [10:33] yup, I provided both debdiffs. [12:08] cpaelzer, could you have a look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse3/+bug/1956949 please? [12:09] Launchpad bug 1956949 in fuse3 (Ubuntu) "CPC AWS jammy builds fail with: 'fuse3 : Breaks: fuse'" [Undecided, New] [12:30] ddstreet: do you know who we should ping for autopkgtest infra issues? [13:05] toabctl: looking ... [13:31] toabctl: answered on the bug, which triggered many bug pings (you'll find links there) [13:32] TL;DR: we need to check if all other deps are ready now, I added bug tasks for ginggs and didrocks (potentially to reassign it to someone else) [13:34] toabctl: if all others are fine, they shall get uploads and we get it resolved [13:34] cpaelzer, thx. is there a workaround we could apply to get image builds working now? [13:34] toabctl: if now I'll revert the last change on open-vm-tools and need to wait until the others are ready [13:34] maybe adding "* ! open-vm-tools" to the cloud-image seed ? [13:35] I'm a seed/germinate newbie so no idea if that would work .. [13:35] It depends on what images you are building atm, for some chances are they do not need open-vm-tools at all (I mentioned that in the bug updates) [13:35] but I'm not gonna massively restructure seeds and make this worse [13:36] right now after we gave everyone a chance to answer for their packages we can just revert the change in open-vm-tools [13:36] In fact I could revert it now, do an upload - and if in a few days we know all is good can revert-revert it [13:36] that seems to be the bets short term-solution [13:37] that would be good imo. then we are not blocked on image builds. [13:48] toabctl: uploaded and bug updated [13:49] cpaelzer, thanks a lot! [13:49] toabctl: but really maybe that was a good wakeup call for all involved teams to re-check their packages in this overall transition [13:49] toabctl: ! generally isn't useful in seeds [13:49] See germinate(1) [13:56] cpaelzer: what uses unionfs-fuse? [13:58] ginggs: it is in the seeds [13:58] ginggs: it has a comment there [13:58] let me fetch a link ... [13:59] ginggs: https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/platform/tree/live-common#n12 [13:59] cpaelzer: thanks [14:00] paride: FYI ^^ you know the bugs, discussion also happened here, thanks for tracking the server portion of this so I can focus on other things [14:00] ginggs: since the bug # is ~1.5M ago, chances are it isn't needed anymore [14:02] cpaelzer, thanks for adding the bug tasks, I'm reading the comments/backlog [14:02] here's hoping, because unionfs-fuse doesn't look like it's ready for fuse3 [14:14] tjaalton, bdmurray: I commented on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/v4l2loopback/+bug/1921474/comments/12. I'm fairly sure others on the SRU team would agree so I posted the comment. Let's discuss if you don't. [14:14] Launchpad bug 1921474 in v4l2loopback (Ubuntu Focal) "Support client usage notification via V4l2 Event API" [High, In Progress] [14:20] ginggs, do we actually have a good reason to keep unionfs-fuse in main? [14:20] maybe it's obviously "yes", but it's a question better asked sooner than later :) [14:20] `apt rdepends unionfs-fuse` only shows a Suggests: schroot [14:22] paride: somehow, unionfs-fuse is not in main, but it is seeded. see the link c.paelzer pasted above [14:22] nevermind, it's not in main [14:23] rbasak: I'll let vicamo reply [14:26] ginggs, but isn't that commented out? [14:26] https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/platform/commit/live-common?id=9a6fc9d9cf687a8492d6e19f9425316252d4254e [14:26] Commit 9a6fc9d in ~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/+git/platform "disable unionfs-fuse again; overlayfs should work now" [14:27] paride: it looks that way :) [14:28] ginggs: paride: indeed it is commented out, I only grepped [14:29] ginggs: paride: but the reported conflict still comes from "the rest" like grub, s390x-tools, ... [14:29] essentially all need to be ready and move at once [15:16] ginggs: paride: (Trevinho?): FYI while unionfs-fuse might not be needed anymore it should be compatible with fuse3 soon, see https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fuse3/+bug/1956949/comments/10 [15:16] Launchpad bug 1956949 in open-vm-tools (Ubuntu) "CPC AWS jammy builds fail with: 'fuse3 : Breaks: fuse'" [Undecided, Incomplete] [15:38] bluca i believe that juliank owns the autopkgtest infrastructure now [15:38] thanks - juliank are there known issues? [15:39] jobs disappear from https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/running#pkg-systemd-upstream but status is never reported back to the github api [15:39] bluca: there are not [15:39] it seems random which job it affects, it's ~50% [15:39] that makes sense [15:39] also it's not fixed by architecture, it varies [15:39] been going on for at least a week I'd say [15:41] eg, PR 22070 is no longer on that autopkgtest page, but arm64 and s390x jobs are still marked as pending on the github API report page https://api.github.com/repos/systemd/systemd/statuses/5b1cf7a9be37e20133c0208005274ce4a5b5c6a1 [15:41] Bug 22070 in linux (Ubuntu Maverick) "Logitech Quickcam Messenger is not usable" [Medium, Fix Released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/22070 [15:41] bad bot [15:46] bluca: so presumably one of the 2 web workers fails but both have the right credentials at least [15:49] I'm not really familiar with how this is implemented :-) any more data that you need? maybe an example http request webhook log from gh? [15:49] bluca: I think results should come in now, the service to submit them seems to stuck on jan 06 [15:49] fab, thank you! [15:49] I should add a timeout on this so it gets killed [15:55] slyon: have you heard of incompatibilities between systemd test_resolved_domain_restricted_dns test and dnsmasq 2.86? [15:55] slyon: seeing those in proposed (https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-jammy/jammy/ppc64el/s/systemd/20220106_211604_c8ba4@/log.gz) and wanted to avoid debugging known cases [15:56] cpaelzer: I saw the failing tests.. but I am not currently aware of any incompatibilities, didn't do any investigation either, tho [15:57] I try to have a look tomorrow and let you know if I find anything useful [15:58] ty! [16:01] bluca: I deleted all test requests older than one day, fwiw, it was going over them again and again, leading nowhere, as they were cancelled or whatever [16:01] yeah that's ok, thanks for taking care of this [16:58] ddstreet: mh, I saw queuebot's lines on #-release about gallery-dl/amd64. I might have forgotten it, but is there something about manually accepting binaries after a NEW source was already accepted? [16:59] (I accepted the source yesterday, but then didn't look anymore, and I just assumed you did something if I saw the lines at this time, right after the dmb meeting :3) [17:13] mapreri yeah, if the source is new, then after it's built, you have to go accept the binary/binaries in new also === genii-core is now known as genii [18:14] sil2100: dbungert and I were trying to build the focal branch of ubiquity using debuild and it failed for both of us. Do you know of any secrets to make it build? [18:15] see https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/Mt27KVw46W/ [18:25] dbungert, sil2100: Oh I fixed it - run "debian/rules update" [18:26] schopin: when you bumped krb5 to 1.19, I guess there was no debian upload yet? THere is one now in experimental [18:39] dbungert: Could you add a test case for the SRU of bug 1942648? Since I installed on my BitLocker system already I don't think I'll be able to recreate it. [18:39] Bug 1942648 in ubiquity (Ubuntu Focal) "restart button remains visible in the advanced partitioner after the bitlocker page is shown" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1942648 [19:18] bdmurray: on it [19:20] dbungert: Thanks! That'll help with 20.04.4 [19:27] hey. So someone at work is needing to mirror some apt archives. What is the current recommended way to do that? by-hash seems to have broken many of the old ways. aptly seems an option. anyone have other advice ? The immediate goal is to mirror 20.04. [19:32] smoser: just setting up a squid-deb-proxy might get 80% of the benefit with less storage and bandwidth use. I think folks use debmirror for 'partial' mirrors; the debian/changelog in there shows a bunch of 2021 work, so I'm optimistic [19:40] sarnold, yeah, i agree that proxy is huge win at almost no cost, but the request is for offline. [19:41] git clone https://salsa.debian.org/debian/debmirror.git && git grep -i 'by-hash' isn't making me think there is by-hash support there. [19:42] (i also will admit that I feel the request for offline is very much perfection being the enemy of good-enough here) [19:45] smoser: heh, yeah, for me it was 'cd /fst/trees/ubuntu/universe/d/debmirror && rg -i by-hash ; rg -i byhash .. it's a bit sad-sounding at first, but maybe the archive layout / design doesn't actually need specific references to it in software in order to use it. I'm not sure. it's been ages since I've read The Blogpost [19:49] sarnold: do you have a 'by-hash' directory ? [19:49] http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/focal/by-hash/ [19:49] smoser: I just rsync the whole thing :/ [19:49] if that isn't there, then .... then it isn't going to work. [19:49] oh. yeah. [20:55] good morning [20:56] mwhudson: morning, I retested all the focal glibc autopkgtest issues and the only one that is left is poor yorick, I don't it well though [20:56] bdmurray: oh thanks! [20:57] ERROR (testg) failed to open X display or create X window [20:57] i hope that's not glibc's fault [20:58] i'll try a run with glibc from release [20:58] er updates [22:12] bdmurray: looks like it's not caused by glibc https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/y/yorick/focal/ppc64el [22:13] mwhudson: okay, then we could just hint it [22:14] bdmurray: yeah, there are like 7 bugs to verify as well so no hurry :)