[03:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xscreensaver (kinetic-proposed/universe) [6.02+dfsg1-2ubuntu1.1 => 6.02+dfsg1-2ubuntu1.2] (lubuntu)
[03:52] <arraybolt3> ubuntu-sru: If anyone who can review SRUs is available for an emergency SRU, I have one that needs taken care of ASAP. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xscreensaver/+bug/2009306
[03:52] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2009306 in xscreensaver (Ubuntu Kinetic) "xscreensaver Warning message 'This version of xscreensaver is VERY OLD!  Please upgrade!' on waking my lunar box this morning" [Critical, In Progress]
[03:52] <arraybolt3> The XScreenSaver author has embedded some time-triggered easter eggs that have activated just recently.
[04:52] <RAOF> Is that only kinetic & lunar, or does that apply to earlier releases, too?
[05:02] <RAOF> arraybolt3: What you've uploaded to kinetic reverts the previous SRU in proposed; did you intend to do that??
[05:16] <arraybolt3> RAOF: I thought it built on top of it?
[05:16] <arraybolt3> Tar.
[05:16] <arraybolt3> RAOF: It's only Kinetic and Lunar, yes.
[05:16] <arraybolt3> Lunar is already taken care of.
[05:17] <arraybolt3> Grr... you're right, it reverts the previous one.
[05:17] <arraybolt3> OK, hang on a sec...
[05:18] <RAOF> I'm reasonably happy with it reverting the previous one; that hasn't been in proposed for very long, and this one is much more urgent.
[05:18] <arraybolt3> Hmm... that's a good point.
[05:18] <arraybolt3> Yeah, OK. Let's go ahead and revert the old one then.
[05:18]  * RAOF wishes jwz wouldn't do this ://
[05:18] <arraybolt3> I'll apply it over the top of the new one later.
[05:20] <RAOF> 👍️
[05:20] <arraybolt3> RAOF: I have staged the old SRU with block-proposed-kinetic, so we can now safely override it, I believe.
[05:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted xscreensaver [source] (kinetic-proposed) [6.02+dfsg1-2ubuntu1.2]
[05:20] <arraybolt3> If I verify that ASAP, can it be fast-tracked?
[05:21] <arraybolt3> (I realize that's not something that we hardly ever do, but, for rather apparent reasons, it seems like it might be worth doing this time.)
[05:22] <RAOF> Yeah. That seems reasonable to me, and the patch is nice and small.
[05:22] <arraybolt3> What really gets me is that he had the nerve to put "Update available" in one of the messages when there was not, in fact, an update available. Almost like he was thinking "yeah but there will be once this triggers :P"
[05:23] <arraybolt3> Anyway, thanks for your help, I'll let you know once it's ready, assuming nothing blows up.
[06:23] <ginggs> arraybolt3: has LP: #2009306 been forward to debian?
[06:23] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2009306 in xscreensaver (Ubuntu Kinetic) "xscreensaver Warning message 'This version of xscreensaver is VERY OLD!  Please upgrade!' on waking my lunar box this morning" [Critical, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2009306
[06:23] <arraybolt3> ginggs: Debian is using a newer version of XScreenSaver in Bookworm, so it doesn't affect them. Yet, anyway.
[06:23] <arraybolt3> I intend on forwarding it eventually, once things are taken care of on our end.
[06:23] <arraybolt3> (And the version in Bullseye doesn't appear to have the messages we're patching out now.)
[06:24] <ginggs> arraybolt3: ack, thanks
[06:25] <ginggs> so we are shipping an old version in lunar ;)
[06:25] <arraybolt3> Heh, correct.
[06:26] <arraybolt3> I actually helped the XScreenSaver maintainer with updating the package in Bookworm, but then we never got around to syncing things back into Ubuntu, and Feature Freeze has hit now, so...
[08:16] <arraybolt3> RAOF: Whenever you get a moment, verification has suceeded for bug 2009306.
[08:16] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2009306 in xscreensaver (Ubuntu Kinetic) "xscreensaver Warning message 'This version of xscreensaver is VERY OLD!  Please upgrade!' on waking my lunar box this morning" [Critical, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2009306
[09:46] <paride> sergiodj, vorlon, I'm looking into the ppc64 wrong kernel issue
[09:46] <utkarsh2102> vorlon: hi! ack, thank you!
 "RAOF (he/they): Whenever you get..." <- I'll get to that tomorrow at the earliest (it's the evening here)
[09:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libfprint [source] (jammy-proposed) [1:1.94.3+tod1-0ubuntu2~22.04.04]
[09:56] <paride> sergiodj, vorlon, ok I see it was not an autopkgtest infra issue after all. :)
[09:58] <paride> I thought it was https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/autopkgtest/+bug/2009191
[09:58] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2009191 in autopkgtest (Ubuntu) "autopkgtest: Specifying --apt-pocket causes wrong unwanted pinning to default release" [Undecided, In Progress]
[09:58] <paride> but that only affect all-proposed builds
[10:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: bind9 (focal-proposed/main) [1:9.16.1-0ubuntu2.13 => 1:9.16.1-0ubuntu2.14] (core, i386-whitelist)
[10:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: bind9 (bionic-proposed/main) [1:9.11.3+dfsg-1ubuntu1.18 => 1:9.11.3+dfsg-1ubuntu1.19] (core)
[11:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distro-info-data (kinetic-proposed/main) [0.54ubuntu0.1 => 0.54ubuntu0.2] (core, i386-whitelist)
[11:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distro-info-data (jammy-proposed/main) [0.52ubuntu0.2 => 0.52ubuntu0.3] (core, i386-whitelist)
[11:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distro-info-data (kinetic-proposed/main) [0.54ubuntu0.1 => 0.54ubuntu0.2] (core, i386-whitelist)
[11:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distro-info-data (focal-proposed/main) [0.43ubuntu1.11 => 0.43ubuntu1.12] (core, i386-whitelist)
[11:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distro-info-data (bionic-proposed/main) [0.37ubuntu0.15 => 0.37ubuntu0.16] (core)
[14:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted neutron [source] (focal-proposed) [2:16.4.2-0ubuntu6]
[14:08] <jbicha> it's Debian bug 819703 all over again? 😭
[14:08] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Debian bug 819703 in xscreensaver "xscreensaver: please disable 'This version of XScreenSaver is very old! Please upgrade!' message" [Important, Open] https://bugs.debian.org/819703
[14:59] <arraybolt3> ubuntu-sru: Quick reminder about bug 2009306, it has a verified patch and is critical enough to be reasonably fast-tracked. RAOF was helping me with this last night but I think he's not available at the moment.
[14:59] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2009306 in xscreensaver (Ubuntu Kinetic) "xscreensaver Warning message 'This version of xscreensaver is VERY OLD!  Please upgrade!' on waking my lunar box this morning" [Critical, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2009306
[15:08] <dbungert> ubuntu-archive: please remove mini-iso-tools_0.2.0_riscv64 from lunar.  It needs kexec-tools and the new version addresses this through build-depends.
[15:10] <arraybolt3> (Actually RAOF mentioned that he intends to help fix the XScreenSaver bug already, I missed that until just now. Sorry about that.)
[16:12] <vorlon> dbungert: done, thanks
[16:35] <leftyfb> I've heard inclings of iwd becoming the default supplicant for a future release of ubuntu. Is there any validity to this?
[16:44] <jbicha> leftyfb: yes, I believe iwd is proposed for 23.10
[16:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph (kinetic-proposed/main) [17.2.0-0ubuntu4 => 17.2.5-0ubuntu0.22.10.1] (ubuntu-server)
[16:45] <leftyfb> jbicha: does Canonical understand that Intel is dropping the project?
[16:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph (jammy-proposed/main) [17.2.0-0ubuntu0.22.04.2 => 17.2.5-0ubuntu0.22.04.1] (ubuntu-server)
[16:47] <seb128> leftyfb, what's the source of that statement?
[16:53] <leftyfb> I don't think it's been formally announced, but it's definitely happening and unfortunately I can't disclose how I know
[16:53] <leftyfb> seb128: ^
[18:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ceph (focal-proposed/main) [15.2.17-0ubuntu0.20.04.1 => 15.2.17-0ubuntu0.20.04.2] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server)
[18:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: certmonger (jammy-proposed/universe) [0.79.14+git20211010-2ubuntu1 => 0.79.14+git20211010-2ubuntu1.1] (no packageset)
[19:26] <ahasenack> my samba tests seem stuck in the infra, can they be killed? https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/running#pkg-samba
[19:26] <ahasenack> they can't be running "update-initramfs" for 2h
[19:32] <vorlon> paride: ^^ if you're around
[19:33] <vorlon> tracking down test runners on the infra by package name and killing them cleanly is really annoying and I don't want to touch it
[19:46] <paride> ahasenack, vorlon having a look
[19:48] <ahasenack> paride: they finished now
[19:49] <paride> ahasenack, ok good :)
[19:50] <ahasenack> longest update-initramfs ever
[20:09] <LocutusOfBorg> missing build on s390x: ddnet, ddnet-server, ddnet-tools (from 16.0.2-1build1)
[20:10] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, ^^ please? ddnet removed in debian
[20:10] <LocutusOfBorg> -ubottu/#ubuntu-release- Debian bug 1031159 in ftp.debian.org "RM: ddnet [s390x] -- RoQA; no longer builds on s390x" [Normal, Open] https://bugs.debian.org/1031159
[20:10] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Debian bug 1031159 in ftp.debian.org "RM: ddnet [s390x] -- RoQA; no longer builds on s390x" [Normal, Open] https://bugs.debian.org/1031159
[20:21] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: done
[20:21] <xnox> vorlon:  if you are around for no-change approval of https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/jammy/+queue?queue_state=0&queue_text=rust-bindgen ?
[20:22] <xnox> vorlon:  we are about to start making it a requirement for lunar kernel (and hwe kernels based off that)
[20:25] <vorlon> xnox: done
[20:25] <vorlon> (source, anyway)
[20:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-bindgen-0.56 [source] (jammy-proposed) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1]
[20:26] <xnox> thanks.
[20:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-bindgen-0.56 [amd64] (jammy-proposed/none) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1] (no packageset)
[20:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-bindgen-0.56 [ppc64el] (jammy-proposed/none) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1] (no packageset)
[20:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-bindgen-0.56 [s390x] (jammy-proposed/none) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1] (no packageset)
[20:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-bindgen-0.56 [arm64] (jammy-proposed/none) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1] (no packageset)
[20:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-bindgen-0.56 [armhf] (jammy-proposed/none) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1] (no packageset)
[20:36] <LocutusOfBorg> ta!
[20:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-bindgen-0.56 [amd64] (jammy-proposed) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1]
[20:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-bindgen-0.56 [armhf] (jammy-proposed) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1]
[20:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-bindgen-0.56 [s390x] (jammy-proposed) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1]
[20:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-bindgen-0.56 [arm64] (jammy-proposed) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1]
[20:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-bindgen-0.56 [ppc64el] (jammy-proposed) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1]
[21:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-bindgen-0.56 [riscv64] (jammy-proposed/none) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1] (no packageset)
[21:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-bindgen-0.56 [riscv64] (jammy-proposed) [0.56.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1]
[21:39] <ravage> hello everyone. sarnols said you may be able to help with https://torrent.ubuntu.com/tracker_index
[21:39] <ravage> the 22.04.2 release files seem to be missing from the TRACKER
[21:59] <xnox> sadness and despair, it might need to be forwarded to IS
[22:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: qemu (kinetic-proposed/main) [1:7.0+dfsg-7ubuntu2.1 => 1:7.0+dfsg-7ubuntu2.2] (ubuntu-server, virt)
[22:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: qemu (jammy-proposed/main) [1:6.2+dfsg-2ubuntu6.6 => 1:6.2+dfsg-2ubuntu6.7] (ubuntu-server, virt)
[22:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: qemu (bionic-proposed/main) [1:2.11+dfsg-1ubuntu7.41 => 1:2.11+dfsg-1ubuntu7.42] (ubuntu-server, virt)
[22:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: qemu (focal-proposed/main) [1:4.2-3ubuntu6.24 => 1:4.2-3ubuntu6.25] (ubuntu-server, virt)