[02:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-control-center [source] (jammy-proposed) [1:41.7-0ubuntu0.22.04.6] [04:55] Eickmeyer: WRT digikam #2000490 - how much effort would it be to include the test data in the package? [05:06] RAOF: I mean, it's a git repository on its own. The test data was in the package until the upstream devs arbitrarily decided to remove it prior to beta release. [05:07] Their entire make script calls "git clone" to get it. >.< [05:07] Policy-breaching from our end. [05:07] Could we just do that when building the the source package? [05:08] We can stash binaries in the source package 😬 [05:09] I mean, ew, and repack, and yikes, but... I suppose. Makes the diff even diffier. XD [05:10] Would also have to patch the makefile to *not* git clone. [05:11] I don't think you'd need to repack; source 3.0 can store binaries in the debian diff? [05:13] I'll look into it, would mean stashing in the debian directory, correct? [05:15] Dunno, actually. [05:16] Eickmeyer: Actually, I think `debian/source/include-binaries` is your winner. [05:17] git clone them to wherever they need to be, list them all in include-binaries [05:18] Ah, yes. do the git clone part of the make, include the entire directory in include-binaries, then patch the makefile to remove the `git-clone` portion. [05:18] I think I'm smelling what you're stepping in. [05:18] It is pungent. [05:18] XD [05:19] But perhaps superior to "just disable the testsuite" [05:19] Yes, perhaps. "Just disable the testsuite" was upstream's recommendation, to which I came back with "yeahhh that breaks our stuff." [05:20] ...then did it anyway. [05:20] 🤷‍♀️ [05:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted xorg-server [source] (kinetic-proposed) [2:21.1.4-2ubuntu1.4] [05:23] I'll get to that in the morning, since ERR:Late. [05:24] RAOF: Hey, while I've got you here, if you've got a chance, I've got edubuntu-installer hanging out in NEW that could use some love. It's not a system installer, just a metapackage installer for the revival my wife and I are doing of Edubuntu. A couple other components coming later, but this one's been sitting for a bit. [05:24] 👍️ [05:24] Sure, I'll poke it with a stick. [05:28] 👍️ [05:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted xorg-server [source] (jammy-proposed) [2:21.1.3-2ubuntu2.6] [05:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: gnome-shell-extension-alphabetical-grid (lunar-proposed/primary) [26.0-0ubuntu1] [06:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: bacula (jammy-proposed/primary) [9.6.7-5~22.04.1] [06:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected digikam [source] (kinetic-proposed) [4:8.0.0~+beta1-0ubuntu0.22.10.1] [06:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted edubuntu-installer [source] (lunar-proposed) [0.1] [06:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: edubuntu-installer [amd64] (lunar-proposed/none) [0.1] (no packageset) [09:05] hello ubuntu-archive, please drop missing build on riscv64: chibicc (from 0+git20220719+ds-1) [09:05] NBS in proposed on riscv64 [09:08] LocutusOfBorg, hey, removed [09:11] merci bien Séb! [09:12] de rien ! [09:14] sil2100, hey there! :) [09:14] sil2100, any idea why https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-cdimage/+livefs/ubuntu/lunar/ubuntu doesn't include arm64 builds? [09:15] seb128: so re: the arm64 ubuntu images - we disabled those builds as well, we never really did anything with them, they were just being built but we never tested or actually consume them (and from what I knew, they were broken) [09:15] seb128: at least the old ubuntu arm64 ones [09:16] seb128: since this is now building the new installer images, I can switch them on now once again if you think it makes sense [09:16] sil2100, you mean? https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-cdimage/+livefs/ubuntu/kinetic/ubuntu had arm64 builds [09:16] sil2100, the reason I'm asking is because http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-live/pending/ has an outdated arm64 iso, so we either need to remove it or to get it updated [09:16] Yes, but we never did anything with those arm64 images in the past, they were all experimental, something that I think Dimitri added at some point in time [09:17] seb128: does it make sense to build arm64 new-installer images? Do you know? [09:17] I don't really know. We have a special image for raspi? or how do people install a pi desktop? [09:18] We do have preinstalled desktop pi images [09:18] right [09:18] Since that was the way we provided pi desktop images - the arm64 ubiquity ones were uh, I think added by Dimitri because he had some arm64 laptop at some point IIRC [09:18] we keep talking about 'arm based laptops becoming reality' for years, but I don't know how true that is today [09:18] seb128: ok, let me clear out the old arm64 images then [09:19] sil2100, thanks, we can always enable it later if there is demand [09:19] But in case you hear somewhere we should try building the arm64 installer images again (but with the new installer), just give me a poke [09:19] 👍 [09:19] I'd be worried that right now they'd FTBFS [09:19] thanks! [09:20] right, well we could try if we want to know the status [09:20] but as you said we don't have hardware and wouldn't be able to do much with those anyway [09:20] so let's not waste efforts or something which has little use [09:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kgeotag [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.3.1-1] (no packageset) [09:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2-signed (bionic-proposed/main) [1.173.2~18.04.1 => 1.187.2~18.04.1] (core) (sync) [09:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2-signed (focal-proposed/main) [1.173.4 => 1.187.2~20.04.2] (core) (sync) [09:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2-unsigned (bionic-proposed/main) [2.04-1ubuntu47.4 => 2.06-2ubuntu14] (no packageset) (sync) [09:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2-unsigned (focal-proposed/main) [2.04-1ubuntu47.5 => 2.06-2ubuntu14] (no packageset) (sync) [09:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: grub2-unsigned (focal-proposed/main) [2.04-1ubuntu47.5 => 2.06-2ubuntu12] (no packageset) (sync) [09:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kgeotag [arm64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.3.1-1] (no packageset) [09:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: hippotat [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.1.7] (no packageset) [09:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: hippotat [armhf] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.1.7] (no packageset) [09:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: hippotat [ppc64el] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.1.7] (no packageset) [09:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: hippotat [s390x] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.1.7] (no packageset) [09:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: hippotat [arm64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.1.7] (no packageset) [09:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kgeotag [armhf] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.3.1-1] (no packageset) [10:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected grub2-unsigned [sync] (focal-proposed) [2.06-2ubuntu12] [10:14] seb128, if we restore kamailio 5.6.2-1build2 we can let protobuf migrate next run [10:14] and then go back to 5.6.2-1build3 [10:14] what do you think? [10:15] * LocutusOfBorg unless Britney thinks otherwise [10:15] LocutusOfBorg, what do you mean 'restore'? that's the version in lunar [10:16] build2 is built against protobuf, but not against qtbase .8 [10:16] so if we restore build1 for one britney run, we can disentangle protobuf/libphonenumber with qtbase and perl and python [10:16] and then copy-back [10:16] you said build2 and not build1 [10:16] I'm lost [10:17] seb128, if we restore kamailio 5.6.2-1build2 we can let protobuf migrate next run [10:17] and then go back to 5.6.2-1build3 [10:17] restore were? that version is in lunar [10:17] you mean delete 5.6.2-1build3 from proposed? [10:17] I'm lost too, sorry [10:18] but I don't see any mention of kamailio blocking protobuf on [10:18] I was sure build1 was in lunar [10:18] kamailio is blocking via libphonenumber? [10:18] but protobuf is not ready so britney is not calculating it? [10:18] if it goes in, even better [10:19] I want grpc/protobuf to go in [10:19] protobuf status is currently waiting on s390x test results for mysql-8.0 and protobuf itself [10:19] https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#protobuf doesn't tell us about other potential problems for now [10:20] the tests are done [10:20] this is why I want it to migrate on next britney run [10:20] but the excuses page isn't refreshed so it's hard ot guess what britney will raise next [10:23] yep, and the notest output is foo [10:23] LocutusOfBorg, so you think that deleting kamailio is going to help? [10:23] I guess so, but I'm not sure sorry [10:23] I fail to parse britney :D [10:23] I don't understand why it would [10:24] either kamailio needs to be rebuilt for the new protobuf and it is needed [10:24] or it doesn't but then why it block migration? [10:24] maybe you are right [10:25] this is what I see on protobuf [10:25] Implicit dependency: protobuf libphonenumber [10:25] and on phonenumber: Implicit dependency: libphonenumber kamailio [10:26] I don't think deleting if would remove the depends though [10:32] LocutusOfBorg: s/kamailio/kitinerary ? [10:33] yes also :D [10:33] seb128, kitinerary 22.12.1-0ubuntu1 and then copy back 22.12.1-0ubuntu2 if protobuf goes in [10:33] :) [10:38] I've a feeling protobuf isn't as close of migrating that you would like at this point :-/ [10:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: analizo [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.25.4-2] (no packageset) [10:52] sad [12:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rustc [i386] (lunar-proposed/main) [1.64.0+dfsg1-1~exp2ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist) [12:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rustc [armhf] (lunar-proposed/main) [1.64.0+dfsg1-1~exp2ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist) [12:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rustc [ppc64el] (lunar-proposed/main) [1.64.0+dfsg1-1~exp2ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist) [12:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rustc [amd64] (lunar-proposed/main) [1.64.0+dfsg1-1~exp2ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist) [12:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rustc [s390x] (lunar-proposed/main) [1.64.0+dfsg1-1~exp2ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist) [12:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: dotnet7 [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [7.0.101-0ubuntu1] (no packageset) [13:28] ok perl might be mostly ready for migration [13:29] for python3-defaults, lots of implicit dependencies are out of debian testing [13:29] can't we just remove them, to have a better view? [14:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rustc [arm64] (lunar-proposed/main) [1.64.0+dfsg1-1~exp2ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist) [14:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (jammy-proposed/main) [2.1.4-0ubuntu0.1 => 2.1.5-1ubuntu6~22.04.1] (core, kernel-dkms) [14:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: r8168 (jammy-proposed/multiverse) [8.049.02-1ubuntu1 => 8.049.02-1ubuntu1.1] (kernel-dkms) [14:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: r8125 (jammy-proposed/multiverse) [9.007.01-3 => 9.007.01-3ubuntu0.1] (no packageset) [14:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: oss4 (jammy-proposed/universe) [4.2-build2010-5ubuntu9 => 4.2-build2010-5ubuntu9.1] (kernel-dkms) [14:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sysdig (jammy-proposed/universe) [0.27.1-0.3build1 => 0.27.1-0.3ubuntu0.1] (kernel-dkms) [14:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lttng-modules (jammy-proposed/universe) [2.13.1-1ubuntu0.22.04.2 => 2.13.1-1ubuntu0.22.04.3] (kernel-dkms) [14:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: broadcom-sta (jammy-proposed/multiverse) [6.30.223.271-17 => 6.30.223.271-23~22.04.1] (kernel-dkms) [15:07] why is britney notest run empty log file? [15:08] it takes one hour to run, and results in an empty file? [16:29] LocutusOfBorg: the notest log has a start and end time, and update_output_notest.txt itself is not empty [16:31] is there something missing? [16:37] once it was full of information [16:37] like what would have migrated if tests were hinted [16:42] LocutusOfBorg: this? https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_output_notest.txt [16:46] or the one here: https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/lunar/ [16:59] LOL [17:00] I was looking at the wrong file! [17:00] https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/log/lunar/2023-01-18/ [17:00] this one [17:00] its always 68 bytes [17:00] and back of some years ago, before britney was updated, it used to contain the log as the other one [17:17] would someone please reject the dotnet7 binaries from lunar NEW? [17:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: debvm [amd64] (lunar-proposed/none) [0.2] (no packageset) [17:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: backport-iwlwifi-dkms (jammy-proposed/universe) [9858-0ubuntu3.1 => 9858-0ubuntu3.2] (no packageset) [18:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2-unsigned [sync] (focal-proposed) [2.06-2ubuntu14] [18:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2-signed [sync] (focal-proposed) [1.187.2~20.04.2] [18:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected grub2-unsigned [sync] (bionic-proposed) [2.04-1ubuntu47.5] [18:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected grub2 [sync] (bionic-proposed) [2.02-2ubuntu8.25] [18:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected grub2-signed [source] (bionic-proposed) [1.173.4~18.04.1] [18:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2-unsigned [sync] (bionic-proposed) [2.06-2ubuntu14] [18:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted grub2-signed [sync] (bionic-proposed) [1.187.2~18.04.1] [18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted alsa-ucm-conf [source] (kinetic-proposed) [1.2.6.3-1ubuntu4] [18:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted alsa-ucm-conf [source] (jammy-proposed) [1.2.6.3-1ubuntu1.3] [20:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: dnsmasq (jammy-proposed/main) [2.86-1.1ubuntu0.1 => 2.86-1.1ubuntu0.2] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) [20:33] Eickmeyer: fyi https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1029171 [20:33] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Debian bug 1029171 in ftp.debian.org "RM: muon -- ROM; Abandoned upstream" [Normal, Open] [20:34] wrong channel :/ [20:36] *sigh* [21:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: dotnet7 [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [7.0.101-0ubuntu2] (no packageset) [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted analizo [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [1.25.4-2] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted hippotat [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [1.1.7] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted hippotat [armhf] (lunar-proposed) [1.1.7] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted hippotat [s390x] (lunar-proposed) [1.1.7] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kgeotag [arm64] (lunar-proposed) [1.3.1-1] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted tuxguitar [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [1.5.6+dfsg1-1] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted debvm [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [0.2] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted hippotat [ppc64el] (lunar-proposed) [1.1.7] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kgeotag [armhf] (lunar-proposed) [1.3.1-1] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted hippotat [arm64] (lunar-proposed) [1.1.7] [22:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kgeotag [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [1.3.1-1] [23:15] ubuntu-archive: Thanks to RAOF for approving edubuntu-installer! Any chance we can get the binary package approved? It's completely clean. [23:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: bpython [amd64] (lunar-proposed/none) [0.24-1] (no packageset) [23:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: manpages-l10n [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [4.17.0-1] (no packageset)