[07:29] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, please NBS-proposed cleanup luajit/luajit2/luakit on ppc64el?
[07:29] <LocutusOfBorg> its broken, they removed the support and binary, and we should do the same
[07:30] <LocutusOfBorg> luajit on ppc64el is no-go, no matter if we try the jit or jit2 backend
[07:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: rust-rav1e (kinetic-proposed/primary) [0.5.1-4]
[08:56] <fheimes714> hi sru-team, could you please have a look at the s390-tools package in the jammy queue and ideally approve it?(It's sits there for a while in status unapproved, probably due to the .1 release, since this had to wait ...)
[08:58] <fheimes714> (similar for the zfcp-hbaapi package ...)
[10:16] <rs2009> release team: could someone run the ISO build for Ubuntu Unity? https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-cdimage/+livefs/ubuntu/kinetic/ubuntu-unity
[10:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-sutton.newell-aerwyna-meta [sync] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[10:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: oem-sutton.newell-aerwyna-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed/none) [20.04~ubuntu1] (canonical-oem-metapackages)
[10:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-sutton.newell-aethelberht-meta [sync] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[10:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: oem-sutton.newell-aethelberht-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed/none) [20.04~ubuntu1] (canonical-oem-metapackages)
[10:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-sutton.newell-caesarea-meta [sync] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[10:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: oem-sutton.newell-caesarea-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed/none) [20.04~ubuntu1] (canonical-oem-metapackages)
[13:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-sutton.newell-cahya-meta [sync] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[13:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: oem-sutton.newell-cahya-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed/none) [20.04~ubuntu1] (canonical-oem-metapackages)
[13:18] <rs2009> does anyone have any idea why gnome-shell gets pulled in as a Recommend of network-manager-gnome, even thought policykit-1-gnome is present in the Ubuntu Unity seed and is an alternate Recommend of network-manager-gnome? https://irc.ruds.io/uploads/50c522b2f9a1f538/image.png
[13:21] <rs2009> jbicha ^
[13:30] <jbicha> rs2009: you're going to have gnome-shell as long as you still have gdm3
[13:34] <rs2009> jbicha: gdm3's getting pulled in because of gnome-shell
[13:37] <ogra> rs2009, there is a "Recommends: gnome-shell | notification-daemon" in network-manager-gnome ... do you seed notification -daemon too ?
[13:38] <jbicha> yes, Ubuntu Budgie recommends notification-daemon
[13:38] <ogra> budgie ?
[13:38]  * ogra thought we talk about unity 🙂
[13:39] <jbicha> yes, but it's useful for Ubuntu Unity to see how Ubuntu Budgie worked around these kinds of issues 🙂
[13:41] <ogra> ah, yeah, indeed
[13:42] <rs2009> ogra: ah, that's probably it. didn't notice that
[13:48] <rs2009> also, do y'all know how to get rid of "Keymap changes do not work in Plasma Wayland at present. Please use systemsettings5 instead." when ibus is installed for the first time? (this notification appears when the Ubuntu Unity live session starts and when Ubuntu Unity's installed for the first time)
[13:49] <jbicha> that message comes from ibus
[13:50] <rs2009> yep, I'm aware (https://github.com/ibus/ibus/blob/main/ui/gtk3/panel.vala)
[13:50] <rs2009> was wondering if it's possible to disable it
[13:56] <jbicha> rs2009: I suggest asking the Debian uploader for help
[13:59] <rs2009> jbicha: ah, I'll ask them
[14:03] <rs2009> jbicha: notification-daemon does seem to be present in the seed already
[14:10] <jbicha> rs2009: you need to fix the dependency in ubiquity-frontend-gtk
[14:16] <rs2009> jbicha: you mean gnome-shell? we do have metacity in the live seed
[14:17] <jbicha> ok, untangling these dependencies is difficult
[14:21] <jbicha> ok, I'll try adding a blacklist 🤷
[15:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted adsys [source] (jammy-proposed) [0.9.2~22.04]
[15:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: adsys [amd64] (jammy-proposed/main) [0.9.2~22.04] (no packageset)
[15:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: adsys [arm64] (jammy-proposed/main) [0.9.2~22.04] (no packageset)
[16:21] <bdmurray> All of the autopkgtest armhf workers should be back on duty.
[16:21] <ginggs> bdmurray: thanks!
[17:02] <RikMills> vorlon: are we able to get the uim removals progressed? I know that would be sub-optimal, but blocking a double round of Qt bugfix release updates would be more so IMO
[17:03] <RikMills> mitya57: ^
[17:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: ubuntu-advantage-desktop-daemon (bionic-proposed/primary) [1.10~18.04.1]
[17:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: ubuntu-advantage-desktop-daemon (focal-proposed/primary) [1.10~20.04.1]
[17:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected ubuntu-advantage-desktop-daemon [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.9~18.04.1]
[18:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: ubuntu-advantage-desktop-daemon (xenial-proposed/primary) [1.10~16.04.1]
[18:32] <vorlon> RikMills, mitya57: I identified that there are reverse-dependencies that need to be dealt with, but did not see from your side any further analysis / confirmation that this tree was ok and appropriate to remove
[18:32] <vorlon> I only went as far as confirming there was one level of revdeps, did not verify that the binaries could be removed without them reappearing on rebuild, etc
[18:35] <mitya57> vorlon: If we rebuild reverse dependencies, then binaries will appear in -proposed and won't migrate to -release, won't they?
[18:35] <RikMills> vorlon: what more do you need? they are leaf packages that are non critical vs shipping a 2 bugix updates to a toolkit that underpins 3 Ubuntu flavours
[18:36] <mitya57> Anyway all 4 packages that depend on uim also build-dep on it, so they will probably dep-wait.
[18:36] <RikMills> ^
[18:37] <mitya57> And these packages are leaf indeed. uim-mozc is reverse-recommended by task-japanese-desktop but that is not a hard dependency.
[18:38] <mitya57> I don't speak Japanese or other Asian languages so I can't evaluate how much these packages are important. But armhf is not the most important architecture IMO.
[18:52] <vorlon> mitya57: if the reverse-dependencies have build-dependencies on uim, then they won't migrate.  If they don't have build-dependencies on uim, then yes the binaries will reappear on rebuild and that's bad and should be dealt with as part of this transition
[18:53] <vorlon> RikMills: "they are leaf packages" - I hadn't seen anyone say that before now and had not done this analysis myself.  Best to have that analysis documented in a bug report
[18:55] <spidermonkey> Hi! I've been on this channel some time ago to discuss how to get two bugs closed, which will most probably need a feature freeze exception for Kinetic. I have now validated that I am able to close these bugs, but I'm not experienced in discussing the feature freeze process. Shall I just comment on the bug reports and state everything I know or do you need a certain structure?
[18:56] <spidermonkey> Btw the bugs in question are
[18:56] <spidermonkey> bug 1960137
[18:56] <spidermonkey> bug 1974163
[19:03] <RikMills> vorlon: I won't be able to get onto tonight, and an sceptical about the necessity, but if so we can look at that in the next few days
[19:18] <mitya57> vorlon, RikMills: I filed bug 1990311
[19:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libp11 (jammy-proposed/main) [0.4.11-1build3 => 0.4.11-1ubuntu0.22.04.1] (ubuntu-server)
[20:43] <vorlon> jbicha: did you coordinate the update of unicode-data with someone in foundations?  as it's a foundations-owned package and now shows on our list at https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses_by_team.html#foundations-bugs
[20:44] <sil2100> vorlon: I think ginggs was looking into that at some point, and I was aware of this somewhat-happening due to the FFe being filled
[20:46] <jbicha> there's bug 1990146 and bug 1989626
[20:47] <vorlon> sil2100: ack
[20:50] <ginggs> vorlon: if we can live with a few universe packages being FTBFS for now, then I think we can allow unicode-data 15 to migrate.  it would be nice to get them fixed before release, and I expect changes to come from debian
[20:51] <ginggs> utf8proc compiled with unicode 14 is fully functional
[20:54] <jbicha> btw, unicode-data was specifically needed to update gucharmap. In Debian, gucharmap is correctly held from migrating but it migrated in Kinetic
[20:54] <jbicha> where should we report a bug like that?
[20:55] <jbicha> gucharmap doesn't have a binary dependency on unicode-data just Built-Using & Build-Depends
[20:56] <ginggs> vorlon: isn't that ^ the implicit dependency thing in britney?
[20:56] <vorlon> what bug do you want to report?  We will not make proposed-migration block packages in -proposed based on unsatisfiable Built-Using or Build-Depends; it makes migration too fragile
[20:56] <jbicha> ok
[20:57] <vorlon> this is part of why I emphasize getting -proposed down to a minimum for release
[21:23] <jbicha> vorlon: it looks like there aren't daily builds of Ubuntu Unity yet https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-cdimage/+livefs/ubuntu/kinetic/ubuntu-unity
[21:33] <vorlon> jbicha: correct, thanks for the reminder - I still need to add it to the cronjob
[23:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted autopkgtest [source] (jammy-proposed) [5.20ubuntu1]
[23:53] <Eickmeyer> Does anybody on the release team have half a cycle to ack a quick FFe? bug 1990320