[02:52] <bryceh> cpaelzer, I meant to ask, when I rebased my open-vm-tools work on the upstream branch you imported, it appears the upstream tree got imported into the base directory instead of into `open-vm-tools`?
[02:53] <bryceh> cpaelzer, i.e.:  https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/pqmTFp9F8y/
[02:54] <bryceh> I'm importing this via `gbp import-ref -u 12.0.5 --upstream-branch upstream --upstream-tree upstream/12.0.5` but then the patches don't apply, etc. due to the different paths
[02:54] <bryceh> cpaelzer, wondering if I'm doing something wrong, or if the upstream import is in error?
[06:17] <cpaelzer> bryceh: no you do nothing wrong - it is me forgetting the bad habit that they ship two conflicting release tarballs
[06:18] <cpaelzer> no subdir https://github.com/vmware/open-vm-tools/releases/download/stable-12.0.5/open-vm-tools-12.0.5-19716617.tar.gz
[06:18] <cpaelzer> with subdir https://github.com/vmware/open-vm-tools/archive/refs/tags/stable-12.0.5.tar.gz
[06:18] <cpaelzer> the former is the one listed on the release page
[06:18] <cpaelzer> but not the one that should be used
[06:18] <cpaelzer> let me try to clean up and replace this
[06:30] <cpaelzer> bryceh: old branch heads and tags removed, re-imported from the correct tarball, checked paths under new tag, and pushed branches and tag
[06:32] <bryceh> cpaelzer, excellent, thanks
[12:45] <sergiodj> lvoytek: hi!  it seems that your PPA solves the issue for the reporter on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libqb/+bug/1978955 .  would you like to drive this to completion, or should we ping kanashiro_ about it?  :)
[12:46] <kanashiro> let me know if I need to do something, but this would be low prio for me right now :)
[13:02] <ahasenack> sergiodj: hm, libjose0 is in universe, sssd is depending on it
[13:02] <ahasenack> I thought only the new package would depend on it
[13:03] <sergiodj> ahasenack: yeah, me too.  let me check
[13:04] <ahasenack> maybe all that's needed is to move sssd-idp to universe
[13:04] <sergiodj> has sssd-idp been accepted yet?
[13:04] <ahasenack> the excuses page is hinting sssd depends on libjose0, but that might be wrong, or it might be referring to the src:sssd package
[13:05] <ahasenack> looks like it was accepted, and into main
[13:06] <ahasenack> sssd is clean: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/kinetic/amd64/sssd/2.7.1-2ubuntu1
[13:06] <ahasenack> wrt depends
[13:06] <ahasenack> so I think it's just move sssd-idp to universe as we planned
[13:07] <sergiodj> looks like there was a mistake when accepting the new binary, then
[13:07] <sergiodj> sssd-idp should have gone directly to universe, IIUC
[13:07] <ahasenack> the AA probably just defaulted to main because sssd is main
[13:07] <sergiodj> yeah
[13:08] <sergiodj> let me ping ubuntu-archive, then
[13:11] <sergiodj> I've retriggered the adsys/armhf failing test
[13:26] <cpaelzer> sergiodj: I do not know who did your promotions, but it is common to just promote all
[13:26] <cpaelzer> sergiodj: everything not "held in main" will auto demote anyway
[13:26] <sergiodj> cpaelzer: ah, good to know.  I thought new binaries were always accepted into universe, no matter if the other binaries are in main
[13:27] <cpaelzer> the source decides
[13:27] <cpaelzer> (IIRC) and this one is in main
[13:27] <sergiodj> yes
[13:44] <ahasenack> I thought dependent packages that had test failures would also be shown here: https://bileto.ubuntu.com/excuses/4871/jammy.html
[13:44] <ahasenack> but they are not, or at least this page disagrees with ./lp-test-ppa -r jammy --showpass  -l ppa:ci-train-ppa-service/4871
[13:45] <ahasenack> there are cacti errors, for example
[13:46] <ahasenack> they are from 5 days ago, though, but still, the latest result
[14:10] <cpaelzer> sergiodj:  sssd-idp | 2.7.1-2ubuntu1 | kinetic-proposed/universe | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el, riscv64, s390x
[14:10] <cpaelzer> so it already happened
[14:10] <cpaelzer> and this won't hold it up on the next try to migrate
[14:10] <sergiodj> cpaelzer: yeah, I pinged #ubuntu-release and Colin did the demotion
[14:11] <sergiodj> also, the last failing test (adsys/armhf) has passed, so the package will migrate
[14:11] <cpaelzer> kanashiro: I'm still talking with doko, but it seems that we do not need to promote ruby-webrick in jammy
[14:12] <cpaelzer> ruby-xmlrpc went in, no component mismatch held it up
[14:12] <cpaelzer> I think you can close the bug task and if doko lets me know otherwise the next time he is available I'll update it accordingly
[14:19] <lvoytek> sergiodj: Thanks for letting me know about LP 1978955! I can drive it from here since I already have the patch complete
[14:19] <sergiodj> lvoytek: awesome, thanks :)
[14:19] <sergiodj> kanashiro: ^
[14:28] <kanashiro> cpaelzer, ok, I'll mark the jammy task as Won't fix
[14:29] <kanashiro> thanks lvoytek :)
[21:09] <sergiodj> ahasenack: FWIW, I'm resuming my investigation on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/+bug/1928954, but so far I haven't been able to reproduce it.  another pair of eyes would be welcome
[21:16] <ahasenack> sergiodj: dunno
[21:16] <ahasenack> sergiodj: I wonder how different "pulling the network cable" is from an "ifdown <nic>"
[21:16] <ahasenack> I'm guessing it's less graceful
[21:17] <ahasenack> we could ask for sssctl domain-status (iirc that's the name)
[21:17] <ahasenack> but I'm guessing it will show online in his case?
[21:18] <sergiodj> unless I'm misunderstanding, it sounds like sometimes he *can* login while offline
[21:18] <ahasenack> anyhow, eod for me, cya tomorrow
[21:18] <sergiodj> cya