=== not_phunyguy is now known as phunyguy [04:21] Is GNOME 42 making it to 22.04? [04:45] theloudspeaker[m: That's the plan per the release schedule: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/jammy-jellyfish-release-schedule/23906 [08:47] < [08:47] erm, mistype, sorry :) [11:04] hi, about freeipmi migration blocked I tried to check the armhf slurm-wlm test failing but I not found the issue, I saw an RC bug related to autopkgtest (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=985725) and I suppose can be related, someone can tell me the fastest way to test build+autopkgtest on armhf on ubuntu please? launchpad don't use it or I'm wrong? [11:04] Debian bug 985725 in src:slurm-wlm "slurm-wlm: flaky autopkgtest: srun: Required node not available (down, drained or reserved)" [Serious, Open] [11:11] utkarsh2102: o/ any progress on ruby-mysql2 dep8 vs. mysql-8.0 yet please? [11:35] mmh weren't i386 builds restricted to a few libraries in the past few releases? [11:35] init-system-helpers 1.62 is not migrating from proposed because i386 build is missing [11:35] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/init-system-helpers/1.62/+build/23171404 [11:35] (because libfakeroot is not build for i386) [11:37] what should I do here to fix this? [12:52] schopin: hi, I have a freeradius 3.0.25+patches branch. It passes the dep8 tests, but does not have all openssl3-related commits in it [12:52] just enough to pass the test that was failing in moonshot [12:53] I want to test it a bit more with tls, I was digging through the freeradius docs to see where it uses tls, and try to set that up [12:53] figure a possible FFe for 3.0.25->3.0.26 would be easier than 3.0.21->3.0.26 [12:56] It does make sense, yes :) [14:03] jamespage: coreycb: would you mind me uploading this? https://code.launchpad.net/~slyon/ubuntu/+source/barbican/+git/barbican/+merge/415847 It fixes barbican compatibility with python 3.10 [14:21] cpaelzer: any idea about the above i386 issue, or who to ask for help? TIA! [15:07] hello. I am trying to get a definitive answer to the question "can Ubuntu 20.04 desktop installation be automated?" it looks like d-i presee file format has been abandoned. is that correct? [15:08] thus the only way to autoinstall a Ubuntu desktop is to autoinstall a Ubuntu server and addthe desktop as post install step. is that right? [15:12] gombara, yes [15:13] this change came with ubiquity > subiquity [15:14] not in 20.04 though ... [15:14] that still uses ubiquity (and should still be able to use ubiquitys (limited) preseed support) [15:15] indeed, started with 21.10 , based on curtin [15:15] https://launchpad.net/curtin [15:17] I have not been able to start the auto install tough. I have been providing the name of the preseed file in grub.cfg file (since IsoLinux has been removed). any ideas why auto install does not start and I land into the live desktop? [15:37] did you add "automatic-ubiquity" too ? [15:37] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbiquityAutomation [15:37] not sure how relevant it still is (it is a very old wiki page), but it used to work at some point [16:42] I opened a bug to request a libfakechroot i386 build as per wiki procedure: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-meta/+bug/1961610 [16:42] Launchpad bug 1961610 in ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "i386: seed inclusion for libfakechroot" [Undecided, New] [16:43] is there anybody from the archive team around who could please have a look? this is blocking init-system-helpers migration from proposed [16:53] it is president's day so many AAs are out, and other AAs are busy with preparing focal point release. it may take some time to get to the above request. [16:55] got it thanks - does the jammy feature freeze apply to packages currently in proposed? [16:59] bluca: if they've been uploaded before FF, they should migrate normally. [17:00] thanks [17:34] ogra, oerheks just realized that I meant 21.04 instead of 20.04. With 20.04 d-i preseed file syntax works [19:03] !dmb-ping [19:03] ddstreet, rafaeldtinoco, rbasak, sil2100, slashd, teward, tsimonq2: DMB ping [19:20] do we have some practical rules for packaging a git version of an upstream project? [19:20] like 3.0.26~git.-0ubuntu1 [19:20] or 3.0.25+git.-0ubuntu1 [19:20] I feel there should still be an index after the date, because the git hash can be later in time, but lower in version [19:20] so 3.0.25+git..-0ubuntu1? [19:20] wfyt? [19:21] looking at dpkg -l output, I see all sorts of things [19:21] 4.11.1+git32-gd0b85fb-1 [19:21] 0.9.5git20210406-0ubuntu2 [19:22] 2.4+20151223.gitfa8646d.1-2build3 [19:22] this is a mouthful [19:22] 3:6.04~git20190206.bf6db5b4+dfsg1-3ubuntu1 === roehling is now known as roehling_ === roehling_ is now known as roehling [19:32] ahasenack: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/SourceBuilds/Recipes#Version_numbers_and_substitution_variables has some discussion on this question [19:32] bzr revno's are always incrementing [19:32] (but not an answer really) [19:33] that helps in this case [19:33] I just mention it because it's the only doc I know about that covers this question, so it might be worthwhile following what it says [19:33] Though that's still not really an answer [19:34] my opinion is that I like revdate; the git hash adds clutter for only a small amount of extra usefulness [19:36] The commit hash could also go into debian/changelog as text, so putting it in the version only serves to save that lookup when (rarely?) it is needed. [19:37] The gd0b85fb matches "git describe" FWIW [19:37] The style that is [19:38] I don't expect this to be permanent (knock on wood) [19:38] I kind of like having it in the version [19:39] it's an at-a-glance feature [19:42] To be clear, I'm not opposed to that. I was just trying to distil the facts in my statements above. [19:44] yuck https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/c/cluster-glue/jammy/amd64 [19:45] hmm always passes in debian though [19:45] embiggen it [19:45] not sure that's it, from a very quick look it's a race around service startup [19:46] i guess big instances have more cpus too? [19:47] also there is ubuntu delta talking about the test that is failing [19:48] Okay, I hadn't looked really. ;-) [19:49] oh it's in main and the server team is subscribed so it might actually be worth filing a bug! [20:35] schopin: I packaged freeradius git snapshot, 3.0.26~something. Dropped my openssl3 patches as expected, and the tests pass. I also did a bunch of manual eap-tls tests [20:36] just found out that eap-md5 tunneled through tls didn't work, the message implied the client (the eap tester from src:wpa) had it disabled, but I couldn't find out where [20:36] maybe some new openssl3 restriction on md5 for security applications [20:36] it was clearly a client decision [20:36] plain eap-md5 works