[00:22] <mmikowski> sheytan: Last I checked, older-style fingerprint readers that required a swipe across a metal bar worked. The challenge these days are the new area-style fingerprint readers.
[00:22] <mmikowski> ^^ (worked = worked for some readers)
[12:47] <BluesKaj> Hi all
[14:32] <RikMills> building 5.26.2
[18:39] <RikMills> mmikowski: have you done any testing with 5.24.7?
[18:55] <mmikowski> Hi Rick: We just completed a full desktop check last weekend with 5.24.7. Nothing is worse, some things are better.
[18:56] <mmikowski> I sent to an email (with nate and erich and jonathan riddle) with a summary of issues on 2022-10-12. This was before the recent test. 
[18:57] <RikMills> I think I saw that
[18:57] <RikMills> 5.24.7 seems ok here, so I will set the verification to done on the SRU over the weekend most likely
[18:57] <RikMills> thanks
[18:58] <mmikowski> Yes; again, before the 5.24.7 release to backports. 
[18:58] <mmikowski> Would you like the recent test log for documentation?
[18:58] <RikMills> yes, that would be nice to see :)
[18:59] <mmikowski> Sure, I can add that to the email in a few minutes.
[18:59] <mmikowski> I'll keep it in the same thread for convenience.
[19:00] <mmikowski> Unless you doth protest :)
[19:00] <RikMills> not at all
[19:05] <mmikowski> ok
[19:08] <RikMills> FYI to all: in other update unrelated to that, now kopying plasma 5.26.2 to kinetic backports PPA
[19:13] <mmikowski> RikMills: Ok, it appears the last tests were on 5.24.6. We can run a 5.24.7 validation tonight.
[19:14] <mmikowski> We have been using 5.24.7 on various machines since it made it to backports-landing. However, I was mistakenly under the impression that it made it to backports.
[19:15] <mmikowski> So let me get that queued up and we should have a detailed review in 24 hours. Does that work?
[19:15] <RikMills> that works great :D
[19:17] <mmikowski> ok, I will get it started by install 5.24.7 on the test machine presently.
[19:19] <mmikowski> ... and the request is in for the desktop review. This is comprehensive.  We will pay extra attention to the issues outline in the email. I'll send that out again to let everyone know testing is incoming.
[20:24] <arraybolt3> mmikowski: How helpful would it be for me to install 5.24.7 on my main work machine and use it for daily driving? Would that assist in testing, and/or is there anything I can do to help test even better than that?
[20:25] <mmikowski> arraybolt3: That would certainy be useful. While our tests are comprehensive, nothing can ever capture all potential use-cases. So I'm certain everyone would appreciate that.
[20:25] <arraybolt3> +1, what PPA do I add?
[20:26] <mmikowski> It would be good to catch up with you to test bug fixes on machines before package distribution. If you have any suggesstiongs, please let me know.
[20:27] <mmikowski> Ah, to test: sudo add-apt-repository ppa:kubuntu-ppa/backports-landing and then full-upgrade.  Relogin and that should do the trick.
[20:27] <arraybolt3> Sounds like a plan. I'm a bit (ok more than a bit) tied up in Lubuntu development work right now (migration from Phabricator to Gitea, learning Python and Web API access), and I have quite a bit of other critical work scheduled, so I may be busier than normal.
[20:27] <mmikowski> no worries, and help is appreciated!
[20:27] <arraybolt3> K, I'll do that once I'm done with migrating stuff or I get too brainfraied to go any further.
[20:29] <RikMills> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/plasma-desktop/+bug/1992971
[20:29] -ubottu:#kubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 1992971 in xdg-desktop-portal-kde (Ubuntu) "[SRU] tracking bug for plasma LTS 5.24.7 bugfix updates for Jammy" [Undecided, New]
[20:30] <RikMills> if you could test the proposed packages, that would be even more useful
[20:30] <mmikowski> Rik, thank you. Same here?
[20:31] <RikMills> well, yeah. if the SRU goes through they will supersede any PPA ones
[20:32] <RikMills> with the kinetic release going on, I was not expecting the SRU ones to get accepted into proposed so quickly
[20:32] <mmikowski> Ah, so they are already in proposed.
[20:33] <RikMills> yep
[20:33] <RikMills> at least for SRU purposes, SRU team like the actual builds from proposed to be tested
[20:33] <mmikowski> Is there an easy way to do that? I'm afraid of installing all kinds of sh*te
[20:34] <mmikowski> It's on a testing machine, so easy enough to roll back, but would like to do it correctly once :)
[20:35] <Eickmeyer> I mean, if the packages in backports-landing are built against proposed, then what's the difference, RikMills?
[20:36] <RikMills> Eickmeyer: in theory not much, but they are not the actual debs that will be shipped as an update. there could have been some new lib going into proposed between the staging PPA and the archive build
[20:37] <Eickmeyer> RikMills: In my experience, the SRU team has accepted PPA builds so long as those PPA builds are built against the proposed repository. Asking someone to open their entire machine to the Proposed repo is asking them to potentially hose their machine.
[20:37] <RikMills> if testing proposed, install something like synaptic. enable proposed. install all updates with version 5.24.7 that are obviously plasma, and then didable proposed
[20:38] <RikMills> Eickmeyer: that is why you don't blindly update from proposed, but just do the packages to tes, and disable again
[20:38] <RikMills> this is not rocket science
[20:38] <Eickmeyer> RikMills: I mean, fair, but then one needs to provide a compiled list of packages to update.
[20:38] <Eickmeyer> Don't make testing hard for testers.
[20:39] <RikMills> with a proper gui package manager they are very easy to indentify
[20:40] <Eickmeyer> Ok, that makes sense, but then, for the sake of potential testers that don't know what they're doing, that process needs to be documented.
[20:41] <RikMills> anyway.... I have been running the ones from proposed. if no-one else can be bothered, then at least I can sign off
[20:41]  * RikMills goes to find a beer
[20:41] <mmikowski> This is a test machine, so rolling back is easy enough. Not a daily driver.  But like I said, it would be good to ensure it is exactly what you want it tested, as the test can take 4 hours!
[20:42] <mmikowski> RikMills: I just want to make sure the test our team executes is testing exactly what you need and is useful to others.
[20:45] <RikMills> proposed packages if practical, if not the PPA. info on either is good
[20:45] <RikMills> I'm not depending on you for primary verification, so whatver yo can do is great
[20:51] <mmikowski> RikMills: Here is what I got. Does this look good - these are all the current packages from backports-landing.
[20:52] <mmikowski> RikMills: https://dpaste.com/CSARUVFZ6
[20:53] <mmikowski> Please let me know if you require anything else like supporting packages from proposed.
[20:54] <sgmoore[m]> More snaps done! https://www.scarlettgatelymoore.dev/kde-gear-snaps-round-3/
[20:54] <RikMills> mmikowski: no it is just plasma. I think that is ok, as I only updated ones with actual bugfixes in. i.e. did not do pointless rebuilds where only the version got bumped
[20:55] <RikMills> so 13 source packages, which produces that many .debs
[20:56] <RikMills> sgmoore[m]: awesome!
[20:57] <mmikowski> So, my guess if I enable proposed and reinstall those packages, those that are not updated won't get reinstalled. Does that sound resonable? Just trying to clarify a good way to move forware. I'll rlogin to the test device and see what I get...
[20:58] <arraybolt3> I think I know enough about rolling back chaos to risk the proposed packages on my main machine :P
[20:59] <RikMills> in theory I think. as always, check what apt says is to be done before a (y) ;)
[20:59] <arraybolt3> I mean there's at least one Lubuntu developer who likes to run the latest development release as their daily driver so it's not exactly weird for us.
[20:59] <mmikowski> It easy enough to rollback here and wipe-and-reinstall. That's not the issue.
[21:00] <RikMills> arraybolt3: running proposed even there is not a good thing
[21:00] <arraybolt3> Yes I know that, I just mean that I'm not one to be scared of running development whatever on a production system.
[21:00] <mmikowski> The trouble is paying for a tester to spend 4 hours checking everything about the desktop and then finding out the software installation is not representative. I'm just trying to ensure that doesn't happen for the benefit of everyone.
[21:00] <arraybolt3> I'm not going to install all of the updates in -proposed.
[21:01] <RikMills> https://popey.com/blog/2021/02/dont-use-proposed/
[21:01] <mmikowski> Yeah, me neither. My intention was to upgrade (in-progress), then reboot, then attempt to install the list from dpaste and report back.
[21:01] <mmikowski> RikMills: Hahaha, I was just thinking of that blog post.
[21:02] <arraybolt3> RikMills: LOL I'll follow that advice. But also I don't care for a bug-free and safe experience, that's the whole point of testing.
[21:03] <mmikowski> ^^ Implied in the above process: enable proposed.
[21:04] <RikMills> even core devs and release team mess it up sometimes. I think it was Ian Lane (laney) who hosed his install by forgetting to disable proposed one he had specific installed packages to test
[21:04] <RikMills> yep, it was laney :D
[21:04] <arraybolt3> I distinctly remember one time when I didn't know to not update everything in proposed, and was like, "Welp, I can't test this thing because every time I apply all the proposed updates it nukes my VM!", and the answer was essentially "Oh yeah don't do that."
[21:05] <RikMills> [12:06]<Laney> argh I accidentally left hirsute-proposed enabled and dist-upgraded
[21:05] <RikMills> [12:06]<Laney> give me that NotAutomatic /o\/o\/o\
[21:06] <RikMills> ^^ release team and archive admin borking their install ^^ LOL
[21:07] <arraybolt3> Computers will always do exactly what you tell them to, no matter how very misguided you are.
[21:08] <RikMills> indeed
[21:09] <arraybolt3> OK, proposed is on, do I just "sudo apt install kubuntu-desktop" and hope it works?
[21:10] <arraybolt3> Eh, scratch that, looks like it won't work.
[21:11] <arraybolt3> Let's just do it piecemeal, apt list --upgradable will give me all the data I need.
[21:17] <mmikowski> arraybolt3: The problem is lots of kubuntu-desktop is recommended, so the upgrades you want probably won't make the cut :\
[21:17] <mmikowski> ^^ (sorry, I see you found that out).
[21:18] <mmikowski> fwiw, trying to install all packages from kubuntu-ppa/backports-landing tried to upgrade 45 packages and install 65 new ones. So, um, that's odd.
[21:18] <mmikowski> arraybolt3: I'll try diffing the list with upgradable and see what I get
[21:19] <arraybolt3> I just enabled -proposed, sudo apt update, apt list --upgradable, install a bunch of KDE stuff, rinse and repeat with apt list --upgradable and apt install until nothing KDE-related was left in the list.
[21:19] <arraybolt3> Now I'm about to reboot. Wish me luck, and (hopefully) brb!
[21:19] <arraybolt3> Also I'm still on Matrix so I'll catch anything else you tell me unless the bridge throws a fit again.
[21:19] <mmikowski> oooh, brave man. 
[21:21] <arraybolt3> Alright, I'm not dead! \o/
[21:21] <arraybolt3> System Monitor reports that I'm on 5.24.7.
[21:22] <arraybolt3> I am interested in knowing why apt thinks it can autoremove Jetbrains Toolbox and the Dolphin plugin for it, though...
[21:23]  * arraybolt3 apt-mark manual jetbrains-toolbox dolphin-plugins-jetbrains
[21:24] <mmikowski> Yeah, that's odd. Those are from kfocus repos.
[21:24] <mmikowski> er, ppa repo.
[21:25] <arraybolt3> *shrug* Well somewhere along the way they got targeted by autoremove, anyway I actually installed IntelliJ so I use that. Not sure if it happened before or after diving into the danger zone of proposed, wish I had paid more attention.
[21:26] <arraybolt3> I haven't done any stunts with my package manager until literally just now with -proposed, so...
[21:48] <mmikowski> arraybolt3: RikMill: I have created a list of packages to update by finding all packages from backports-landing and comparing them to a list of upgradable package from proposed: comm -1 -2 from-landing.txt upgradable.txt 
[23:22] <mmikowski> arraybolt3: Figured out why jetbrains-toolbox is marked as autoremove, although it shouldnt. cc Eickmeyer: this was recently removed as a kfocus requirement. Looking at apt-cache rdepends means it was auto-installed on your system, and volai! It's probably safe to autoremove anyway.
[23:23] <Eickmeyer> It's 100% safe, it shouldn't have ever been pre-installed anyhow. That was our fault.
[23:26] <mmikowski> arraybolt3: RikMills: Eickmeyer: Here are the steps to get ONLY the backports-landing packages. RikMills let me know if we need anything else. https://dpaste.com/68566YMXR. And here is the raw list: https://dpaste.com/2N5P6BVF5
[23:26] <mmikowski> RikMills: We are testing now, so please let me know ASAP if there is something missing.
[23:30] <mmikowski> Eickmeyer: Yeah, the toolbox should be safe (since a local app-image is installed), but I don't think customers want jetbrains-dolphin uninstalled. The fix is to install jetbrains-toolbox directly (sudo apt install toolbox) or mark it as manual.
[23:30] <mmikowski> That's an internal discussion :)