bluesabretjaalton: Would you mind taking a look at https://salsa.debian.org/xorg-team/xorg/-/merge_requests/17 ?03:46
-ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Merge 17 in xorg-team/xorg "60x11-common_xdg_path: Inject the variables set into the session via dbus-update-activation-environment." [Opened]03:46
tjaaltonliushuyu: hi, sure04:26
liushuyutjaalton: Thank you!04:27
tjaaltonbluesabre: the rationale is missing?04:27
tjaaltonliushuyu: got an sru bug already?04:28
liushuyutjaalton: Not yet. Do you want me to create one? I am still very new to this SRU process04:29
tjaaltonliushuyu: yes, since you know what's broken and how to fix it. the wiki has info on that04:30
liushuyutjaalton: Thank you! Will do in a moment04:30
liushuyutjaalton: I have opened a SRU bug for it: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/llvm-toolchain-15/+bug/200875504:58
-ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2008755 in llvm-toolchain-15 (Ubuntu) "[SRU] Upgrade to 15.0.7 on Kinetic and Jammy" [Undecided, New]04:58
dannfcpaelzer: its not always the same test that times out - I wonder if QEMU has gotten slower for some of these use cases. I uploaded a package that adds some timing stats to a PPA, I'll do some comparison runs to see if I can narrow it down05:11
tjaaltonliushuyu: thanks05:11
liushuyutjaalton: No problem! I am not sure if I have filed the SRU request correctly, some of the links in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates are dead. Also, do I need to tag someone from the SRU team for this?05:14
cpaelzerdannf: interesting, I didn't spot that difference before06:12
cpaelzerdannf: that might also explain why it works just fine on my s390x machien where I tried to reproduce06:12
cpaelzerdannf: maybe just more cpu/memory or less contention overall06:12
cpaelzerdannf: indeed test_ovmf_4m_ms or test_ovmf_ms so far, hmm06:15
cpaelzerdannf: I'm wrapping these in pytets --durations to check if any/all tests slowed down ...06:24
cpaelzerdannf: we can assume my machine is faster, but there also is no difference qemu 7.0 5.21s-7.36s qemu 7.2: 5.48s-7.42s - that is the same within noise06:28
cpaelzerdannf: the test timeout (that you most likely increased in your PPA) is 60s which is one order of magnitude away06:28
cpaelzerdannf: let me reduce mem/cpu and see where I end up then06:29
cpaelzerdannf: I've ran a bit deeper into this rabbit hole and I think we are onto a real issue07:15
tjaaltonliushuyu: nope07:16
liushuyutjaalton: Thank you!07:38
tjaaltonliushuyu: which links are dead btw?07:55
liushuyutjaalton: In https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Phasing, the link "blog post by Brian Murray" leads to a 404 page07:57
JackFrosttjaalton: Yeah hay sorry about no good description there, thought prior discussion on IRC helped and I don't know the specifics behind it just that other Xsession scripts use that to fix the same problem, and after the MR it works here too.  Also I used `salsa`, so a bit blindly. :P07:58
tjaaltonJackFrost: but what is the problem? :)08:01
tjaaltonliushuyu: okay.. bdmurray ^ do you still have your blog online somewhere?08:02
tjaaltonliushuyu: the web never forgets, though: http://web.archive.org/web/20170719231238/http://www.murraytwins.com/blog/?p=12708:04
JackFrosttjaalton: Ah OK.  So setting the session name in XDG_CONFIG_DIRS isn't making it into the env, such that /etc/xdg/xdg-xubuntu is getting ignored and Xubuntu is getting stock upstream settings, ignoring all of our settings in xubuntu-default-settings.  For us, pretty critical. :308:13
adriencan someone retry these tests? https://pastebin.canonical.com/p/t6zbFz97X6/ they are all arm64 failures during the test preparation; the queues are heavily loaded but these test might enable the ocaml cluster to migrate08:15
adrienI'd also like https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=lunar&arch=amd64&package=openmsx&trigger=tcl8.6%2F8.6.13%2Bdfsg-2 (there's a "sleep 3" which might not have been enough during the past weeks) and https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=lunar&arch=amd64&package=plplot&trigger=tcl8.6%2F8.6.13%2Bdfsg-2 (testbed wasn't ready in time); both are for amd64 where queues are fairly10:10
adriensmall at the moment10:10
adrien(500 only!)10:10
adrienthanks! :)10:18
tjaaltonJackFrost: ack10:39
JackFrostI'd love to know what changed such that it no longer works, but not really sure where to dig.10:40
danilogondolfoMay I ask someone to re-run a bunch of autopkgtests for me, please?10:56
cpaelzerdannf: I tracked it down and found an offending commit10:56
danilogondolfois there a way to pass a list of archs btw? :P10:57
cpaelzerdannf: but while upstream might one day have a fix, for now I would still appreciate to consider bumping the timeouts or any other way that lets qemu pass for now10:57
cpaelzerdannf: here is the report https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/152010:57
-ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Issue 1520 in qemu-project/qemu "x86 TCG acceleration running on s390x with -smp > host cpus slowed down by x10" [Opened]10:57
schopindanilogondolfo: Clicking. And no, AFAIK one link is for one test run (so single arch)11:00
danilogondolfothank you, schopin :)11:01
adrienis possible to also trigger these ones again? https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=lunar&arch=arm64&package=coq&trigger=ocaml%2F4.13.1-4ubuntu1 https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=lunar&arch=arm64&package=diffoscope&trigger=ocaml%2F4.13.1-4ubuntu113:26
adrienthey were triggered not that long ago but failed for the same reasons13:26
adrienthere's also https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/request.cgi?release=lunar&arch=arm64&package=llvm-toolchain-13&trigger=ocaml%2F4.13.1-4ubuntu1 but I don't know how heavy these are13:26
utkarsh2102hello, is there any way to get all the MPs I have reviewed or took part in via LP?14:25
cjwatsonutkarsh2102: https://launchpad.net/~/+merges14:28
cjwatsonActually sorry that might just be of your own branches14:29
utkarsh2102yes! these are just my branches that I proposed14:29
cjwatsonThere's https://launchpad.net/~/+activereviews but that only gives you ones that are still open14:29
utkarsh2102not the ones that I reviewed14:29
cjwatsonSo possibly not14:29
utkarsh2102uh oh :(14:30
cjwatsonIf you know the context (project, package, whatever) then there's also views like https://launchpad.net/launchpad-project/+merges14:32
cjwatsonI don't think there's precisely what you asked for right now though14:32
slyonvorlon: I see you recently seeded (inetutils-)telnet in lunar.standard. Am I correct in my assumption that Foundations should be the owning team of src:inetutils and we should prepare a MIR for it? (We were maintaining netkit-telnet in Kinetic and earlier). Also, see the discussion in bug #1980663 which does not apply anymore to src:inetutils, I guess (not a false-positve anymore).14:37
-ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Bug 1980663 in plzip (Ubuntu) "[MIR] false-positives, do not promote" [Undecided, Fix Released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/198066314:37
EickmeyerHey! Who do I ping about serious Ubiquity issues where it's trying to install as the wrong user? bug 200873115:18
=== arraybolt3[m] is now known as Guest4510
EickmeyerAnd since Ubottu totally messed-up, https://launchpad.net/bugs/200873115:27
vorlonslyon: re: inetutils and Foundations, yes15:54
vorlonslyon: this came up from jira card review when I discovered I'd accidentally removed netkit-telnet before inetutils was ready to go15:54
Eickmeyervorlon: Who do you think would be the best person to ping about the Ubiquity installing as the wrong user bug for Edubuntu (if not yourself as I know you're busy)?16:02
slyonvorlon: ack. What's the jira ticket number that came from? I've created https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/inetutils/+bug/2008789 to track this and hand out the MIR work16:05
-ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2008789 in inetutils (Ubuntu) "[MIR] inetutils" [Undecided, Incomplete]16:05
vorlonEickmeyer: I don't really know.  ubiquity itself is being deprecated for Ubuntu Desktop, and support for the installer for flavors is best-effort16:06
vorlonEickmeyer: maybe file a bug against ubiquity in LP and see who bites16:06
vorlonslyon: FR-298316:06
Eickmeyervorlon: Yeah, done. https://launchpad.net/bugs/2008731. Would've gone with the new installer but the desktop team never got back to any of the flavors on the "how" aspect as we discussed during our flavor sync meeting.16:07
-ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2008731 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) "Ubiquity crashed on first test installation of Edubuntu" [Undecided, Confirmed]16:07
EickmeyerAnd since flavor leads don't have direct commit access, that means any bugs are going to have some very unhappy flavor leads, especially show-stoppers like this one.16:08
vorlonI wouldn't think that subiquity would be the way to go for bootstrapping a new flavor this cycle16:08
EickmeyerPerhaps not, but, with my Studio hat on, we were very interested, and that knowledge could've been useful.16:10
Eickmeyer(and transferable)16:24
utkarsh2102rbasak: hi! dropped a small text on MM, could you look at it when you have a sec?18:56
=== Guest4510 is now known as arraybolt3[m]
arraybolt3Is it expected that the python3 modules "lsb_release" no longer exists in Lunar? Calamares has a Python file that runs "from lsb_release import get_distro_information" and it's erroring out because the lsb_release module is missing, breaking Lubuntu's ability to install.22:20
arraybolt3I'm about to test more thoroughly but my Internet has gone into slow mode and so I'm aking here in case this rings a bell for anyone (I saw ther was some stuff happening with debootstrap and lsb_release recently).22:20
vorlonarraybolt3: lsb-release was replaced by lsb-release-minimal in Debian which is stripped down to the bare minimum.  what did you depend on before to get an lsb_release python module?22:35
vorlonlooks like /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/lsb_release.py came from lsb-release package22:35
vorlonanyway, no longer22:35
vorlonso yes it's expected.  I don't know if there's an equivalent that looks at /etc/os-release?22:35
arraybolt3OK, thanks for the update.22:36
jbichaarraybolt3: I suggest python3-distro https://distro.readthedocs.io/en/latest/22:36
arraybolt3The problem is either we need something that returns the lsb_release module allowing Calamares to work mostly unmodified, OR we need an Ubuntu delta, OR we need to get Calamares upstream to change their code.22:37
arraybolt3This isn't a Calamares bug, so the latter two options seem weird.22:37
arraybolt3But I'm not sure the first one is even an option.22:37
arraybolt3This is also a showstopper regression - the installer crashes due to this during a normal installation procedure.22:38
jbichaarraybolt3: python3-distro uses /etc/os-release but falls back to lsb_release, according to its docs22:38
arraybolt3Right but is it API-compatible with the original lsb_release module?22:38
jbichaprobably not but you don't need that22:39
arraybolt3actually I may be wrong about where the code is, so it may not be a big problem.22:39
arraybolt3Yeah I'm wrong, this is code in Ubuntu only, not from Calamares itself. Panic averted, nevermind.22:40
arraybolt3OK, I'll try and use python3-distro to replace lsb_release and make things work again.22:40
arraybolt3(I accidentally thought that this had broken a critial part of Calamares, when in fact it broke code that was written specifically for Lubuntu, so it's easy to update that.)22:42

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!