[09:17] <juergh> jbicha, fixed linux-firmware is in jammy-proposed.
[09:17] <juergh> juliank, ^^
[09:18] <juergh> LocutusOfBorg, ^^
[09:19] <juliank> juergh: thansk
[10:14] <LocutusOfBorg> juergh, thanks a lot, but... why did it occur in first place?
[10:14] <LocutusOfBorg> looks like a quick and dirty solution, but I don't understand why the symlinks are such a trouble for dpkg
[10:14]  * LocutusOfBorg opinion is that this is a dpkg bug
[10:16] <juergh> LocutusOfBorg, I don't believe it's quick and dirty. dpkg seems to be notorious when it comes to handling symlinks.
[10:18] <LocutusOfBorg> this is why I would prefer a dpkg fix :)
[10:19] <LocutusOfBorg> According to the GNU manpage, -h is identical to -L, but according to the BSD manpage, it should not be used:
[10:22] <juergh> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=626203 and the bugs referenced in #10.
[10:29] <LocutusOfBorg> juergh, would it be possible to change -h to -L for a next upload?
[10:29] <juergh> LocutusOfBorg, sure. I can also add some version check that tjaalton suggested.
[10:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph-iscsi (focal-proposed/universe) [3.4-0ubuntu2 => 3.4-0ubuntu2.1] (no packageset)
[10:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph-iscsi (impish-proposed/universe) [3.4-1ubuntu1 => 3.4-1ubuntu1.1] (no packageset)
[10:45] <rbasak> I'm just looking at ceph-iscsi in the Focal and IMpish unapproved queues since I reviewed it previously and the fix is trivial
[10:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ceph-iscsi [source] (impish-proposed) [3.4-1ubuntu1.1]
[10:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ceph-iscsi [source] (focal-proposed) [3.4-0ubuntu2.1]
[10:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ceph-iscsi [source] (impish-proposed) [3.4-1ubuntu1.1]
[10:50] <paride> Hi release-team, this should prevent the Jammy live-server images from being marked OVERSIZE: https://code.launchpad.net/~paride/ubuntu-cdimage/ubuntu-cdimage/+merge/416833
[10:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ceph-iscsi [source] (focal-proposed) [3.4-0ubuntu2.1]
[12:48] <coreycb> RAOF: hi, if you have a chance in your SRU rota today I'd like to see if we can get manila reviewed in the impish unapproved queue.
[12:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted livecd-rootfs [source] (impish-proposed) [2.742.5]
[15:51] <bdmurray> paride: I'll have a look at your oversize MP
[15:52] <paride> bdmurray, thanks, it's a simple bump in size for >= Jammy
[19:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fonts-fantasma [amd64] (jammy-proposed/universe) [1.1+repack1-1] (no packageset)
[19:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libfprint (impish-proposed/main) [1:1.90.7+git20210222+tod1-0ubuntu4~21.10.2 => 1:1.90.7+git20210222+tod1-0ubuntu4~21.10.3] (ubuntu-desktop)
[19:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libfprint (focal-proposed/main) [1:1.90.2+tod1-0ubuntu1~20.04.6 => 1:1.90.2+tod1-0ubuntu1~20.04.7] (desktop-core, ubuntu-desktop)
[20:52] <jbicha> bdmurray or sil2100 : Desktop has some FFes we'd like reviewed before User Interface Freeze. Do you want specific bug numbers?
[20:54] <bdmurray> jbicha: Yes but could you email ubuntu-release?
[20:57] <seb128> ideally FFe requests following the process would get reviewed without having to send emails to the list though...
[21:15] <bdmurray> I don't see how that comment is helpful. I think we are all aware that there are problems with some processes.
[21:31] <seb128> bdmurray, it's unclear to me if the issue is process or manpower but if the release team would prefer to be emailed on their list about pending request it would help to manage expectation to send an email on a project list to say so or to update the wiki
[21:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pbbam [amd64] (jammy-proposed/universe) [2.0.0+dfsg-2] (no packageset)
[21:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pbbam [ppc64el] (jammy-proposed/universe) [2.0.0+dfsg-2] (no packageset)
[21:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pbbam [arm64] (jammy-proposed/universe) [2.0.0+dfsg-2] (no packageset)
[22:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pbbam [riscv64] (jammy-proposed/universe) [2.0.0+dfsg-2] (no packageset)
[22:59] <RAOF> coreycb: What happens if the manila user had modified policy.json - is *any* policy.json going to be broken, or is it possible that a user-modified policy.json would work?
[23:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected manila [source] (impish-proposed) [1:13.0.0-0ubuntu2]
[23:52] <RAOF> Grumble grumble libx11 SRU grumble grumble…