=== mfo_ is now known as mfo
[07:28] <LocutusOfBorg> Unit193, does the change I suggested fix it?
[07:29] <Unit193> Not sure why it would?
[07:46] <LocutusOfBorg> Unit193, not sure either
[07:46] <LocutusOfBorg> but backportpackage WFM
[07:47] <Unit193> Urgh, really?  As-is?  Dang.
[07:48] <LocutusOfBorg> Please check virtualbox 6.1.36-dfsg-1~bpo20.04.1~ppa1 in file:///tmp/backportpackage-sqygmvv9 carefully!
[07:48] <LocutusOfBorg> Do you want to upload the package to ppa:costamagnagianfranco/virtualbox-ppa [Y|n]? ^C
[07:48] <LocutusOfBorg> yes it does
[07:49] <Unit193> Hmmm.
[07:51] <Unit193> LocutusOfBorg: Yeah if I update requests it fixes that issue...niiice.
[07:53] <Unit193> Downgrading -ubuntutools again and marking hold. :3
[07:53] <LocutusOfBorg> why?
[07:54] <Unit193> Because It's either hold, or backport -requests and -charset-normalizer.
[07:56] <Unit193> Actually, maybe not the latter if it's rebuilt?  Dunno.
[08:01] <Unit193> ....Orrr not?  I'm just confused now.
[14:20] <slyon> jawn-smith: I just had a brief look at the fwupd/armhf failure. Seems to be the "mtd" test that is broken. I recall that I did some work on this in the past, so it might be related to this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fwupd/+bug/1973598
[14:20] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1973598 in fwupd (Ubuntu) "mtd-self-test failure on arm64 (mtdram module)" [Undecided, Fix Released]
[14:20] <slyon> it was broken on arm64 in the past, armhf now. But still it might make sense to check that bug report before doing a detailed investigation
[14:21] <jawn-smith> slyon: thanks! I'll look into that.
[15:52] <luis220413> Please set the status of 1662548 for Trusty as Won't Fix, as the package is not covered by ESM.
[15:52] <luis220413> Please set the status of vidalia in bug 911723 to Won't Fix as vidalia was removed from the archive in 2015
[15:52] <ubottu> Bug 911723 in vidalia (Ubuntu) "vidalia 0.2.15-1 is not able to start tor without root priviledges" [Undecided, Won't Fix] https://launchpad.net/bugs/911723
[15:52] <luis220413> In the first message I mean bug 1662548
[15:52] <ubottu> Bug 1662548 in tor (Ubuntu) "tor 0.2.7.6-1ubuntu1 has memory-access severe bug TROVE-2016-10-001" [Critical, Fix Released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1662548
[15:53] <luis220413> For 1662548: Same for Yakkety, as this release is end-of-life since July 2017.
[15:53] <vorlon> luis220413: I meant asking here for SRU sponsorship; my comments about bug management stand :)
[15:53] <vorlon> (yes, people here might be able to set those bug statuses, but again, it's not going to be a high priority)
[15:54] <vorlon> if you are interested in being able to do some of these things yourself, you can apply to join the bug control team: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugControl
[15:56] <luis220413> Please set the status of the gimp package in Ubuntu for bug 283115 to Invalid
[15:56] <ubottu> Bug 283115 in gtk+2.0 (Ubuntu) "Gimp: toolbox windows can't be minimized" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/283115
[15:57] <luis220413> Sorry, already done by Ale Murray
[15:57] <luis220413> *Alex
[15:57] <luis220413> vorlon: Thanks!
[15:57] <luis220413> Unit193 handled the two other bugs
[15:58] <luis220413> Before re-requesting I will check the bug status.
[15:59] <luis220413> Please sponsor my SRU in bug 1969734. The package in question is a VPN support package in the universe component that fails to work with network-manager-openconnect (a plugin for NetworkManager to work with this package).
[15:59] <ubottu> Bug 1969734 in network-manager-openconnect (Ubuntu) "[Jammy] NetworkManager-openconnect 1.2.6 not compatible with openconnect 8.20" [High, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1969734
[15:59] <luis220413> From the [Impact] section, "Users with a common GlobalProtect serverside configuration will not be able to connect." So this is a fatal bug for users of certain VPNs.
[16:27] <ernstp> thanks luis220413 !
[16:28] <luis220413> ernstp: Can you sponsor uploads of this source package to the Ubuntu archive?
[16:28] <ernstp> luis220413: no I'm not a dev at all
[16:29] <luis220413> ernstp: This is not severe enough to get into Ubuntu 22.04.1 (to be released on Thursday), but I will request sponsorship tomorrow if it is not sponsored today.
[16:29] <ernstp> luis220413: but it looks like vorlon updated the bug status so he's looked at it
[16:30] <luis220413> ernstp: Regarding vorlon, I only requested him to update the bug importance
[16:30] <luis220413> But he has looked at the bug
[16:31] <luis220413> Today's SRU vanguard (sil2100) is busy with preparing Ubuntu 22.04.1, but may sponsor the patched package today.
[16:40] <ernstp> luis220413: a couple days more or less really doesn't matter :-)
[16:40] <luis220413> ernstp: But this is a fatal bug...
[16:41] <ernstp> luis220413: yeah but it's a number of months old by now... just happy that it will get fixed!
[17:26] <luis220413> ernstp: If you have an SRU for a severe issue like this notify the SRU vanguards every weekday (Monday through Friday). However, make sure that your patch is in .debdiff format and the bug tasks for the packages in Ubuntu you want SRUs for have status New and are unassigned.
[17:27] <luis220413> See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure
[17:27] <ernstp> luis220413: i have followed everything on that page
[17:28] <ernstp> except I don't know what en SRU vanguard is. (this is in Universe btw)
[17:29] <luis220413> ernstp: See the table in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Publishing
[17:31] <bdmurray> The SRU vanguards are for packages that are in the Unapproved queue or in -proposed and need releasing to -updates. While they can sponsor things that isn't their duty when on vanguard.
[17:31] <luis220413> I know this is in Universe, but Universe SRUs are sponsored when a correct debdiff is supplied and no regressions are found (just like Main).
[17:31] <luis220413> bdmurray: Thanks! We still need a sponsor for this SRU
[17:35] <luis220413> bdmurray: The wiki page contradicts your statement. Can you edit it?
[17:37] <luis220413> The wiki page states that SRU vanguards can be contacted for any package needing release to -updates, even if it is not in the Unapproved queue nor in -proposed. However, you state that at least one of these two conditions are required for an SRU vanguard to be called.
[17:38] <luis220413> *for a given package
[17:39] <bdmurray> That mirrors what I said
[17:43] <luis220413> bdmurray: OK, but there is a small discrepancy between the conditions that I pointed out above.
[17:48] <bdmurray> This the part I'm looking at " Having said that, if there is a priority SRU waiting in the unapproved queue for release to -proposed, or needing release to -updates, feel free to contact an SRU vanguard." from section 5 Publishing
[17:48] <bdmurray> I guess it could be clarified to say "or needing release to -updates from -proposed"
[17:49] <luis220413> bdmurray: That is it
[17:49] <luis220413> ernstp: And you did not set the right version according to point 4.1
[17:54] <ernstp> luis220413: should I just called it ~ppa or whatever?
[17:54] <ernstp> luis220413: I was trying to do as much work as possible :-)
[17:56] <luis220413> ernstp: You should only put ~ppa if you will upload your package to a PPA (for example, to test whether it compiles on the Ubuntu builders).
[17:56] <luis220413> ernstp: Next time you create a patch run the debdiff command against the old and new .dsc files and upload it directly with the "patch" checkbox ticked.
[17:56] <luis220413> As an attachment to your SRU bug
[17:58] <luis220413> ernstp: The packages have built. Do you want to test them now?
[17:59] <luis220413> ernstp: Run the command dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH
[17:59] <luis220413> And write here the output
[17:59] <ernstp> I already have them in my own ppa
[18:00] <luis220413> https://launchpad.net/~luis220413/+archive/ubuntu/test-builds/+packages
[18:02] <luis220413> ernstp: Your package has the wrong version (adding ubuntuN is for uploads to the development release), so I strongly recommend that you download them from my PPA.
[18:04] <luis220413> But do not add the PPA to your system. Search for openconnect in this page, open the menu, search for your processor architecture (as given by the command above), download all packages (with extension .deb) and install those you want (that is, all but most likely not including the -dev package, that is only if you want to write programs that link against libopenconnect.so.*).
[18:05] <ernstp> luis220413: I will
[18:05] <luis220413> When you finish testing write a comment in the bug.
[18:05] <luis220413> With the results of your testing
[18:05] <luis220413> ernstp: ^
[18:56] <Unit193> schopin: Hey!  Thanks for handling irssi-plugin-xmpp!  Given the activity upstream, my thought was just to remove but this is better.  That being said, I see you've forwarded this patch upstream as well.  If you'd like, since the package is lowNMU, I can sponsor an NMU for you too.
[19:03] <luis220413> Can you also sponsor the patched package in bug 1969734 to jammy-proposed?
[19:03] <ubottu> Bug 1969734 in network-manager-openconnect (Ubuntu) "[Jammy] NetworkManager-openconnect 1.2.6 not compatible with openconnect 8.20" [High, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1969734
[19:03] <luis220413> Unit193: ^
[19:04] <Unit193> luis220413: Sorry, talking about a Debian thing here, not Ubuntu.
[19:05] <luis220413> Unit193: Do you have upload rights to this source package in Ubuntu jammy-proposed (or to the unapproved queue)?
[19:06] <luis220413> The source package in question is openconnect.
[19:07] <Unit193> I'm not part of the SRU team or anything special or anything like that, at least.
[19:08] <Unit193> That sounds like quite a problem, let me read the bug report here inj a little while.
[19:14] <vorlon> luis220413: why in the world are you marking as invalid bug tasks on a bug that I am actively working on? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-release-upgrader/+bug/1977493
[19:16] <luis220413> vorlon: OK, you did not suggest that you were working on this bug. I just read the description and the final reply by the reporter and set the bug to Invalid. Thanks for reversing my status changes.
[19:16] <luis220413> When you and bdmurray were talking about this bug in #ubuntu-release.
[19:17] <vorlon> luis220413: "triaged" means the developers agree it's a bug, it's completely inappropriate for a third party to mark the bug invalid
[19:17] <luis220413> vorlon: Only if the circumstances radically change, that is not the case here.
[19:18] <luis220413> For example, if an architecture is dropped from Ubuntu
[19:18] <luis220413> Or if a package that causes the bug in another package (whose status is being changed) is removed from Ubuntu
[19:18] <luis220413> vorlon: I mean: It is appropriate only if the circumstances radically change ...
[19:19] <luis220413> And thanks for triaging the Jammy bug task as well! Furthermore, this bug does not affect the development release and its bug task should be Invalid.
[19:19] <luis220413> If you do not support direct upgrades from 21.10 or lower to 22.10
[19:20] <luis220413> s/22.10/Kinetic/ (it may happen that it can only be released after October)
[19:20] <luis220413> The bug task for the development release is the main bug task, i.e. ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu).
[19:24] <luis220413> Unit193: Basically this is a fatal bug for users of GlobalProtect VPNs with a common server-side configuration.
[19:25] <luis220413> Unit193: I am referring to the openconnect bug
[19:53] <luis220413> Unit193: Have you handled my bug?
[19:53] <luis220413> *our
[21:26] <arraybolt3[m]> I noticed the conversation between Joshua Peisach (Ubuntu Cinnamon Remix developer) and other developers on the ubuntu-release ML. I thought I had some input that might be valuable in the discussion, but I don't want to cause trouble by interjecting something at a bad time. Would you guys look over my intended reply to Thomas's latest email on that list and tell me if this would be OK for me to send via a Reply All?
[21:26] <arraybolt3[m]> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/SxCgqvJzYj/
[21:30] <vorlon> arraybolt3[m]: I mean, there's no need to pre-screen messages to our mailing lists, but I would suggest that rather than extending the mailing list discussion any further what might be most useful here is helping directly support ItzSwirlz
[21:31] <sarnold> arraybolt3[m]: "You've been at this sort of thing for three years. If it was this easy for me to get started" doesn't feel like the most constructive way to express whatever you're trying to say
[21:31] <arraybolt3[m]> sarnold: Hmm, I see how that might come across wrong. That's a good point.
[21:32] <arraybolt3[m]> vorlon: Thanks, I'll do that.
[21:33] <sarnold> arraybolt3[m]: also, I think ItzSwirlz is young and will doubtless have loads of demands on his time that he doesn't have a lot of say about -- he may only get a few free minutes every now and then to contribute
[21:36] <Unit193> luis220413: I mean, I hadn't looked at the bug report yet, no.  Like I implied, I had stuff that needed to get done first.
=== JanC_ is now known as JanC
[21:42] <mwhudson> is oftc irc down?
[21:43] <mwhudson> hmm no
[21:43] <Unit193> coulomb.oftc.net just fell over, or nearly did.
[21:44] <Unit193> Looks like a network blip is happening here too.
[21:44] <Eickmeyer[m]> FWIW, dog took out my modem, I'm limping on a phone tethered connection today.
[21:44] <Unit193> Hah, wow. :D
[21:45] <Unit193> This likely isn't the right channel, but what breed?
[21:45] <Eickmeyer[m]> Wife's coffee right down into the circuitry, it fried. Siberian Husky.
[21:45] <sarnold> awooooooooooo
[21:45] <Eickmeyer[m]> ^ That
[21:46] <mwhudson> uh yeah oftc seems to be having a bad day indeed, even though i managed to connect
[21:47] <Eickmeyer[m]> And, no, not the right channel, but good to know for those wondering why I'm hardly doing anything today.
[21:48] <sarnold> watching 7600 clients reconnect is good fun, yeah
=== eichin_ is now known as eichin
[21:49] <Unit193> sarnold: lithium.libera.chat just went pop with a good number here.
[21:49] <Unit193> 3129C
[21:49] <arraybolt3[m]> Eickmeyer: And this is why you might want that Calyx hotspot as a fallback and overflow device. (btw, how long will it take to get a new modem?)
[21:49] <Eickmeyer[m]> arraybolt3: It's already out for delivery, I keep refreshing the page.
[21:49] <arraybolt3[m]> LOL I do that too.
[21:49] <sarnold> Unit193: oh boy oh boy *boing* :)
[21:49] <arraybolt3[m]> (Refreshing the page I mean.)
=== jelmer_ is now known as jelmer
[21:50] <Unit193> Eickmeyer[m]: I approve of your Siberian Husky as a dog.
[21:51] <Eickmeyer[m]> Unit193: I also have a Chiweenie, less likely to tip coffee into a modem.
[21:52] <arraybolt3[m]> Eickmeyer: You're probably already well aware of this, but careful with that hotspot connection - my family one time didn't realize a work-provided phone hotspot was metered and thanks mostly to my dad's game downloads, we racked up a $1K+ phone bill on that. 🤮
[21:54] <Eickmeyer[m]> arraybolt3: Yeah, thanks, I'm not doing anything huge with it.
[21:54] <Eickmeyer[m]> No ISO downloads with my tethering.
[22:11] <Unit193> ernstp: Try now.
[22:18] <Unit193> ernstp: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/jammy/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=openconnect that is.
[22:40] <Unit193> ...Urgh, if I weren't totally crap, I'd SRU something of "mine" too.  Unfortunately however....
[22:45] <Unit193> LocutusOfBorg: Ah, give backportpackage a full URL and it fails.  That's where the issue lies.  So, downgrade again indeed.
[22:56] <Unit193> (`backportpackage https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+files/ezstream_1.0.2-2.dsc ....etc)
[23:02] <sarnold> Eickmeyer[m]: *you* might not be downloading anything, but how about your snapd?
[23:03] <Unit193> Oh gosh.
[23:11] <sarnold> I can see the r/linux post now, "snapd cost my dad $1k"
[23:15] <Eickmeyer[m]> <sarnold> "Eickmeyer: *you* might not be..." <- Connection set to metered, but I did just get the new modem installed.
[23:16] <Eickmeyer[m]> sarnold: Besides, I'm 42, if it's costing my dad anything, it'll just be some laughs.
[23:17] <sarnold> hooray new modem! :D