[01:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tzdata (lunar-proposed/main) [2022e-0ubuntu2 => 2022f-0ubuntu1] (core)
[01:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tzdata (lunar-proposed/main) [2022e-0ubuntu2 => 2022f-0ubuntu0.22.10.0] (core)
[01:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tzdata (jammy-proposed/main) [2022e-0ubuntu0.22.04.0 => 2022f-0ubuntu0.22.04.0] (core)
[01:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tzdata (focal-proposed/main) [2022e-0ubuntu0.20.04.0 => 2022f-0ubuntu0.20.04.0] (core)
[01:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tzdata (bionic-proposed/main) [2022e-0ubuntu0.18.04.0 => 2022f-0ubuntu0.18.04.0] (core)
[04:15] <arraybolt3> Would it be appropriate for me to modify the description of the DKMS bugfix in Ubuntu 22.10 into a proper SRU description so that it can be migrated to the -updates pocket? Or would that be possibly problematic?
[07:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-advantage-tools [source] (kinetic-proposed) [27.11.3~22.10.1]
[09:29] <RAOF> arraybolt3: I'm not aware of the specific case, but in general you're welcome to add SRU information to the relevant bug(s) if they're useful SRUs.
[09:31] <RAOF> Assuming they would be acceptable SRUs, of course :)
[10:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected tzdata [source] (lunar-proposed) [2022f-0ubuntu0.22.10.0]
[10:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tzdata (kinetic-proposed/main) [2022e-0ubuntu2 => 2022f-0ubuntu0.22.10.0] (core)
[10:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tzdata [source] (kinetic-proposed) [2022f-0ubuntu0.22.10.0]
[10:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tzdata [source] (jammy-proposed) [2022f-0ubuntu0.22.04.0]
[10:41] <RikMills> https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html
[10:41] <RikMills> Forbidden
[10:41] <RikMills> You don't have permission to access this resource.
[10:42] <vorlon> checking
[10:43] <RikMills> hmm. not there any more
[10:43] <vorlon> what do you mean by "not there"?
[10:44] <vorlon> I see the error locally
[10:44] <RikMills> doesn't exist any more in https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/
[10:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tzdata [source] (focal-proposed) [2022f-0ubuntu0.20.04.0]
[10:45] <RikMills> or at least not listed
[10:45] <vorlon> possibly a detail of how apache handles symlinks to unreadable files
[10:45] <vorlon> the symlink exists on the server, the target does not
[10:45] <RikMills> right
[10:45] <vorlon> because the lunar/ output directory doesn't exist
[10:45] <RikMills> I guess that will fix itself then
[10:45] <vorlon> so this looks like a natural outcome of the archive opening still being in-flight, and us having adjusted the symlinks (to not incorrectly point at kinetic) but not having started running p-m yet for lunar
[10:46] <seb128> Hey there. What's the status of the Lunar archive opening?
[10:46] <RikMills> looks so
[10:46] <vorlon> seb128: for uploads?
[10:46] <RikMills> anyway, thanks. was just checking all my dev booksmarks
[10:46] <seb128> vorlon, yes, but more general just interested by that status, things which maybe I can help with
[10:47] <seb128> would be nice if we had a public discourse like for the release
[10:47] <seb128> I know there was a googledoc about the archive opening in previous cycles, maybe that still exist but I don't remember the url
[10:48] <vorlon> seb128: https://warthogs.atlassian.net/browse/RTMP-547 is our jira checklist for opening.  This is the first full work day since we have the name; some of the checklist items were blocked by having the autopkgtest swift copies done
[10:48] <vorlon> and we'll sort out the question of toolchain-copies-before-opening today
[10:48] <seb128> vorlon, thanks
[10:48] <vorlon> a public discourse> except discourse's workflow for this is terrible :P
[10:48] <seb128> right :/
[10:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tzdata [source] (bionic-proposed) [2022f-0ubuntu0.18.04.0]
[10:51] <hellsworth> bdmurray: do you know the history of why nvidia-driver-520 is missing from the kinetic repo or can you point me to the right person?
[10:51] <hellsworth> this came from the kinetic testing discourse post: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ubuntu-22-10-testing-week/30894/11
[10:52] <bdmurray> hellsworth: I don't off the top of my head but sil2100 might remember
[10:53] <hellsworth> thanks
[10:54] <sil2100> hellsworth: hey! It wasn't ready for release, sadly. I think Alberto mentioned he had it ready, but it wasn't tested and ready to go. I think it's planned to go in as an SRU
[10:54] <sil2100> It popped up when we had issues with -515, but I've been told -520 wasn't 'ready', not for releasing in on release week
[10:55] <sil2100> hellsworth: tseliot will know best about the details, since he's the person working on it
[10:55] <hellsworth> ah ok thanks so much!
[10:56] <vorlon> so we released a 520 SRU to jammy before there was an upgrade path for it to kinetic?
[10:59] <vorlon> it's currently in kinetic-proposed; let's see if we can move this forward today
[11:04] <bdmurray> There's one comment about it not working well in Focal https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-515/+bug/1992669
[11:04] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 1992669 in nvidia-graphics-drivers-515 (Ubuntu) "Introduce the NVIDIA 520 UDA driver series" [High, In Progress]
[11:56] <guiverc> garfi$$75p
[11:56] <sarnold> guiverc: please to be picking a better password next time kthxbye
[11:57] <guiverc> & checking which window is current!
[11:58] <sarnold> woah woah lets not go crazy
[11:58] <guiverc> LOL
[12:50]  * arraybolt3 is glad that I use SASL
[12:50] <arraybolt3> RAOF: Thanks for your help! Yes, it is an acceptable SRU, I'm sure. Just about got respun into Kinetic, then got delayed as a day-0 SRU and then got just left in -proposed...
[12:50] <arraybolt3> Bug is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dkms/+bug/1991725
[12:50] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 1991725 in dkms (Ubuntu) "fails to sign kernel modules" [High, Fix Committed]
[12:50] <arraybolt3> Anyway I'll turn this into a good SRU and then re-ping whomever needs it soon.
[12:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected distro-info-data [source] (kinetic-proposed) [0.54ubuntu0.1]
[13:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected distro-info-data [source] (jammy-proposed) [0.52ubuntu0.2]
[13:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected distro-info-data [source] (bionic-proposed) [0.37ubuntu0.15]
[13:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected distro-info-data [source] (focal-proposed) [0.43ubuntu1.11]
[13:28] <arraybolt3> sil2100: Hey, remember that DKMS bug fix in Kinetic? It is *still* sitting in -proposed. I've turned it into a real SRU, if it can be shoved through at the earliest possible convenience that would be awesome. Thank you!
[13:28] <arraybolt3> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dkms/+bug/1991725
[13:28] <sil2100> eeek
[13:28] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 1991725 in dkms (Ubuntu) "fails to sign kernel modules" [High, Fix Committed]
[13:29] <sil2100> hm, I suppose it would be good to get a no-change rebuild of the bcmwl driver along with it I suppose?
[13:30] <arraybolt3> It wasn't necessary in my testing, but if you think so, sure.
[13:30] <arraybolt3> (For me just installing the updated DKMS make everything work right.)
[13:30] <sil2100> Oh, it did? I thought we had to trigger a rebuild of the actual dkms driver?
[13:30] <sil2100> That's good news
[13:30] <arraybolt3> Well...
[13:31] <arraybolt3> We do have to trigger a rebuild of the actual DKMS driver, but the user *should* install DKMS first.
[13:31] <arraybolt3> I mean, that's at least what we have in the Lubuntu release notes. Do a full-upgrade first, then install your drivers. Then again with Ubiquity-based flavors, having a no-change rebuild would be handy.
[13:32] <arraybolt3> Though if we're going to do that, should we trigger NCRs on all packages that contain DKMS modules (VirtualBox and v4l2loopback for instance)?
[13:32] <toabctl> bdmurray, (cc bdrung ) what's the exact eol date for lunar? cpc needs distro-info-data updated to start doing lunar builds.
[13:32] <vorlon> I would suggest the latter should be limited to those packages that might be installed by the install media
[13:33] <arraybolt3> vorlon: Makes sense.
[13:33] <vorlon> toabctl: exactly 9 months later unless otherwise indicated and such an indication should come from the Security Team who actually provides that support
[13:37]  * arraybolt3 has to go afk, will read backlog and pings when I get back in about an hour
[13:43] <toabctl> vorlon, thx. https://salsa.debian.org/debian/distro-info-data/-/merge_requests/5 does fix the dates (cc bdrung )
[13:43] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Merge 5 in debian/distro-info-data "Fix Ubuntu Lunar Lobster dates" [Opened]
[13:47] <toabctl> already solved by bdmurray.thx
[13:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-12 (lunar-proposed/main) [12.2.0-3ubuntu1 => 12.2.0-8ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist)
[13:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted base-files [source] (lunar-proposed) [12.2ubuntu4]
[13:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted base-files [source] (lunar-proposed) [12.3ubuntu1]
[14:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python3.10 (lunar-proposed/main) [3.10.7-1 => 3.10.8-1] (i386-whitelist, kubuntu) (sync)
[14:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python3.11 (lunar-proposed/universe) [3.11.0~rc2-1 => 3.11.0-1] (i386-whitelist) (sync)
[14:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distro-info-data (kinetic-proposed/main) [0.54 => 0.54ubuntu0.1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[14:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distro-info-data (jammy-proposed/main) [0.52ubuntu0.1 => 0.52ubuntu0.2] (core, i386-whitelist)
[14:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distro-info-data (focal-proposed/main) [0.43ubuntu1.10 => 0.43ubuntu1.11] (core, i386-whitelist)
[14:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distro-info-data (bionic-proposed/main) [0.37ubuntu0.14 => 0.37ubuntu0.15] (core)
[15:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt (kinetic-proposed/main) [2.5.3 => 2.5.3ubuntu0.1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[15:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt (jammy-proposed/main) [2.4.8 => 2.4.9] (core, i386-whitelist)
[15:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-12 [source] (lunar-proposed) [12.2.0-8ubuntu1]
[15:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: binutils (lunar-proposed/main) [2.39-3ubuntu1 => 2.39-8ubuntu1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[15:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted binutils [source] (lunar-proposed) [2.39-8ubuntu1]
[15:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openvswitch (jammy-proposed/main) [2.17.2-0ubuntu0.22.04.2 => 2.17.3-0ubuntu1] (core)
[15:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openvswitch (kinetic-proposed/main) [3.0.0-0ubuntu1 => 3.0.1-0ubuntu0.22.10.1] (core)
[17:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: binutils (lunar-proposed/main) [2.39-8ubuntu1 => 2.39-8ubuntu2] (core, i386-whitelist)
[17:17] <tsimonq2> Ooh, I see progress on the Lunar queue :D
[17:19] <ogra> don't look too close, you know lobsters are shy animals ...
[17:20] <tsimonq2> 😆 come on little lobster, I believe in you!
[17:21] <mdeslaur> o_O
[17:23] <tsimonq2> (all in good spirits, take your time :) )
[17:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted binutils [source] (lunar-proposed) [2.39-8ubuntu2]
[20:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: binutils [amd64] (lunar-proposed/main) [2.39-8ubuntu2] (core, i386-whitelist)
[20:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: binutils [i386] (lunar-proposed/main) [2.39-8ubuntu2] (core, i386-whitelist)
[22:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: debhelper (lunar-proposed/main) [13.9.1ubuntu1 => 13.10.1ubuntu1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[22:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: binutils [arm64] (lunar-proposed/main) [2.39-8ubuntu2] (core, i386-whitelist)
[22:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted binutils [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [2.39-8ubuntu2]
[22:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted binutils [i386] (lunar-proposed) [2.39-8ubuntu2]
[22:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted binutils [arm64] (lunar-proposed) [2.39-8ubuntu2]