[02:20] cjwatson: ok the memory upgrade sorted it === chris14_ is now known as chris14 [04:24] cjwatson: there is code in archive-reports to update all chdist configs but there is nothing in the archive opening or EOL checklists for initializing chdists, I find no helpers for doing the initialization, the last series that snakefruit had these for was impish, and the only explanation of what they're used for is proposed-migration for the devel series, which is no longer true. Is there any [04:24] reason for me to port this over? [04:24] (should I perhaps prune the code altogether? chdists are useful but unused on snakefruit so it seems unnecessary to have them there) [04:26] oh [04:30] mwhudson: ^^ ok so actually the find-rcbuggy-problem-packages script (which I'd forgotten about, showing how much I use its output) invokes chdist but um that's been failing for over a year so....? [04:51] cjwatson, mwhudson: created a branch-chdist helper script (not really branching but whatever) and adding it to the release opening templates now [07:41] vorlon thanks!, so, libcurl-nss move to universe please? [08:54] sil2100: looks like I need to backport xorg-server from kinetic to jammy after all, as nvidia has hardcoded the version in their driver to know that a bug has been fixed and enables a feature based on that, so a backported commit won't help. bug 2009767 [08:55] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2009767 in xorg-server (Ubuntu Jammy) "external HDMI monitor is laggy on NV reverse PRIME system" [High, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2009767 [09:54] without bileto fixing riscv64 is a bad thing... [10:04] ^ +1 [10:15] vorlon: From my perspective they were mainly for occasional manual investigation (as well as at one point for some kind of autopkgtest integration for proposed-migration, as you say). If people aren't using or updating them then I have no issue with them being dropped [10:16] vorlon: I don't quite remember, but it's quite possible this was essentially a selfish setup on my part due to having terrible home internet at the time and quite often needing to use those chdists for investigation; neither of those factors is an issue any more [10:20] again there are a lot of tests 'running' on excuses, but not queued, running, or with results on the webui [10:22] all the recently finished test on autopkgtest.ubuntu.com front page seem to be manually triggered ones [10:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu WSL [Focal 20.04.6] (4414650941) has been added [11:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: base-files (focal-proposed/main) [11ubuntu5.6 => 11ubuntu5.7] (core, i386-whitelist) [11:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-cuda-toolkit [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [11.8.0-2] [11:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-cuda-toolkit [ppc64el] (lunar-proposed) [11.8.0-2] [11:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nvidia-cuda-toolkit [arm64] (lunar-proposed) [11.8.0-2] [11:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ubuntustudio-default-settings [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [23.04.21] [11:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted tzdata [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [2022g-7ubuntu2] [11:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted base-files [source] (focal-proposed) [11ubuntu5.7] [11:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-numpy-groupies [sync] (lunar-proposed) [0.9.20-1] [11:27] what happened to linux-doc:i386? nvidia-390 tests are failing on i386 because of it missing [11:28] can we do please something related to meson/blacklisted armhf test? [11:32] tjaalton, linux-doc is installable? [11:32] unless you are in a multiarch environment, in that case the fault might be linux-libc-dev not being installable [11:36] they started failing on all releases roughly the same time as here https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/nvidia-graphics-drivers-390/lunar/i386 [11:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubiquity (focal-proposed/main) [20.04.15.19 => 20.04.15.20] (core) [11:50] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2009355 [11:50] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2009355 in linux (Ubuntu Lunar) "linux-libc-dev is no longer multi-arch safe" [Critical, Confirmed] [11:50] so not this bug? [11:52] not sure, it affects at least jammy and kinetic too [11:53] why is somebody even trying to install linux-doc? [11:53] dunno [11:54] it comes via a recommends [11:54] the kernel [11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubiquity (focal-proposed/main) [20.04.15.19 => 20.04.15.20] (core) [12:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ubiquity [source] (focal-proposed) [20.04.15.20] [12:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubiquity [source] (focal-proposed) [20.04.15.20] [12:11] since britney seems too lazy to kick autopkgtests, I'll do again for them [12:11] lazy britney is lazy [12:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-apt (focal-proposed/main) [2.0.1 => 2.0.1ubuntu0.20.04.1] (core, i386-whitelist) [12:24] could someone from the release team take a look at this FFe bug? LP #2011481 [12:24] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2011481 in pacemaker (Ubuntu) "[FFe] Depend on pcs and suggest crmsh" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2011481 [12:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-apt [source] (focal-proposed) [2.0.1ubuntu0.20.04.1] [12:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-release-upgrader (focal-proposed/main) [1:20.04.40 => 1:20.04.41] (core) [12:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-loompy [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [3.0.7+dfsg-2] (no packageset) [12:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-loompy [s390x] (lunar-proposed/universe) [3.0.7+dfsg-2] (no packageset) [12:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-loompy [ppc64el] (lunar-proposed/universe) [3.0.7+dfsg-2] (no packageset) [12:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-loompy [arm64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [3.0.7+dfsg-2] (no packageset) [12:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-release-upgrader [source] (focal-proposed) [1:20.04.41] [13:08] Hi! I recently filed 2 FFe. The first is for rebuilding isc-kea with a more strict shlibs file since we do not ship a symbols file there: LP: #2011341 [13:08] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2011341 in isc-kea (Ubuntu) "[FFe] Build kea with a more strict shlibs file" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2011341 [13:09] The second is for re-enabling LTO for squid in s390x: LP: #2011494 [13:09] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2011494 in squid (Ubuntu) "[FFe] Re-enable LTO for s390x builds" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2011494 [13:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: esda [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [2.4.3-2] (no packageset) [13:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: flox [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [0.6.7-1] (no packageset) [14:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: webkit2gtk [i386] (lunar-proposed/main) [2.39.91-1ubuntu2] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist) [15:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected webkit2gtk [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [2.39.91-1ubuntu1] [15:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected webkit2gtk [armhf] (lunar-proposed) [2.39.91-1ubuntu1] [15:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected webkit2gtk [ppc64el] (lunar-proposed) [2.39.91-1ubuntu1] [15:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted webkit2gtk [i386] (lunar-proposed) [2.39.91-1ubuntu2] [15:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected webkit2gtk [arm64] (lunar-proposed) [2.39.91-1ubuntu1] [15:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted webkit2gtk [s390x] (lunar-proposed) [2.39.91-1ubuntu1] [15:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: rejected webkit2gtk [i386] (lunar-proposed) [2.39.91-1ubuntu1] [15:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted flox [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [0.6.7-1] [15:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted esda [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [2.4.3-2] [15:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-loompy [arm64] (lunar-proposed) [3.0.7+dfsg-2] [15:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-loompy [s390x] (lunar-proposed) [3.0.7+dfsg-2] [15:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-loompy [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [3.0.7+dfsg-2] [15:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-loompy [ppc64el] (lunar-proposed) [3.0.7+dfsg-2] [17:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: sarsen [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [0.9.3+ds-2] (no packageset) [17:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: spaghetti [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.7.2-1] (no packageset) [17:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted sarsen [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [0.9.3+ds-2] [17:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted spaghetti [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [1.7.2-1] [19:45] vorlon, hello, could you take another look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bug/2009354 [19:45] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2009354 in libreoffice (Ubuntu Kinetic) "[SRU] libreoffice 7.4.6 for kinetic" [High, Incomplete] [19:51] ricotz: my SRU shift doesn't come up again until Friday, I don't have time today to look at it. But unless the packaging has changed wrt the symbols, my feedback there remains the same. Rene is a great developer but we don't blindly trust packaging changes from ANYONE in an SRU. [19:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: debian-installer (focal-proposed/main) [20101020ubuntu614.5 => 20101020ubuntu614.6] (core) [19:53] vorlon, ok, please reject the current libreoffice uploads from the kinetic queue [19:54] sil2100, bdmurray: I'm self-accepting debian-installer ^^ [19:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted debian-installer [source] (focal-proposed) [20101020ubuntu614.6] [19:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libreoffice [source] (kinetic-proposed) [1:7.4.6-0ubuntu0.22.10.1] [19:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libreoffice [source] (kinetic-proposed) [1:7.4.6-0ubuntu0.22.10.1] [20:14] could someone from the release team take a look at this FFe bug? LP #2011481 TIA! [20:14] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2011481 in pacemaker (Ubuntu) "[FFe] Depend on pcs and suggest crmsh" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2011481 [20:20] kanashiro[m], sounds like it's going to be another cycle of struggling because release team is understaffed, overworked and not onboarding new members to resolve the issue :-/ [20:21] dude [20:21] I just acked the FFe [20:22] and we are onboarding another new member this cycle as well [20:22] vorlon, it's like the 5th ping about that one I read on the channel [20:22] but thanks for reviewing it [20:23] just to give some context to my comment [20:24] and it's nice you onboard a new member but we should have onboarding at least one new member by cycle for last $n cycles in reality :/ [20:24] it's still an improvement though so I'm not going to complain [20:25] seb128: ftr I find 3 pings, one yesterday, one at 5am my time. If a 1-day turnaround is insufficient, it's better to highlight people [20:26] vorlon, alright, sorry for jumping the gun, I'm still frustrated from the experience of getting FFes reviewed in the past cycle [20:27] vorlon: thank you! [20:27] When we looked at the queue this morning there were only 2 new ones and ginggs and vorlon have been on top of them [20:28] I understand people have other important stuff to do, that's why I try to avoid highlighting them directly [20:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot amd64 [Focal 20.04.6] (20101020ubuntu614.6) has been added [20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot arm64 [Focal 20.04.6] (20101020ubuntu614.6) has been added [20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot armhf [Focal 20.04.6] (20101020ubuntu614.6) has been added [20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot ppc64el [Focal 20.04.6] (20101020ubuntu614.6) has been added [20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Netboot s390x [Focal 20.04.6] (20101020ubuntu614.6) has been added [20:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libreoffice (kinetic-proposed/main) [1:7.4.4-0ubuntu0.22.10.2 => 1:7.4.6-0ubuntu0.22.10.1] (ubuntu-desktop) [20:44] bdmurray, hello :), could you take over https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bug/2009354 ? [20:44] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2009354 in libreoffice (Ubuntu Kinetic) "[SRU] libreoffice 7.4.6 for kinetic" [High, Incomplete] === hloeung_ is now known as hloeung [21:28] bdmurray, ginggs: https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/focal/daily-live/20230314.3/focal-desktop-amd64.iso passes, releasing to focal-updates [21:29] er wait [21:29] ok no unwait [22:41] flavor leads: I'm not sure there's been much communication about this, but there was an email from Łukasz to ubuntu-devel about the fact that we're doing a 20.04.6 point release. This is a do-over of 20.04.5 for amd64-only because 20.04.5 had an already-revoked bootloader on it when it went out [22:42] we are including flavors, so flavors also have not-revoked install media for 20.04 [22:42] candidate images should start appearing soon-like? [22:43] * bdmurray looks at the topic [22:43] and if you can help test them, great; if not, we'll make sure it gets done. The delta from .5 to .6 should be small... new kernel, new debian-installer for the boot bits, no installer changes === vorlon changed the topic of #ubuntu-release to: Released: 22.10 Kinetic Kudu, 22.04.1 Jammy Jellyfish | Archive: Open | Highlight ubuntu-archive for archive admin help | Linetic Release Coordination | We accept payment in cash, cheque or whiskey | melius malum quod cognoscis | infinity, you will be missed === vorlon changed the topic of #ubuntu-release to: Released: 22.10 Kinetic Kudu, 22.04.2 Jammy Jellyfish | Archive: Open | Highlight ubuntu-archive for archive admin help | Linetic Release Coordination | We accept payment in cash, cheque or whiskey | melius malum quod cognoscis | infinity, you will be missed [22:46] oh; I didn't see notifications here of it, but candidate images are already appearing: http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/443/builds [22:46] Linetic? :) [22:46] :) [22:46] Kinetic->Linetic->Lunetic->Lunatic->Lunar === vorlon changed the topic of #ubuntu-release to: Released: 22.10 Kinetic Kudu, 22.04.2 Jammy Jellyfish | Archive: Open | Highlight ubuntu-archive for archive admin help | Lunar Release Coordination | We accept payment in cash, cheque or whiskey | melius malum quod cognoscis | infinity, you will be missed [22:47] I see a couple of portmanteaus there [22:48] * cjwatson donnes ses lunettes [22:48] *donne, bah [22:49] bdmurray: well, of course the nvidia stuff means Ubuntu .6 is 500M bigger than .5 [22:49] getting used to Mattermost message editing letting me make it look as if I can type things correctly first try [22:49] haha [22:49] http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/443/builds/274038/testcases where are my test cases [22:50] mmmm this is because we renamed Ubuntu Desktop to Ubuntu Desktop (Legacy) since 20.04.5 [22:51] so daily-live registers itself as Ubuntu Desktop but that's wrong [22:52] vorlon: I can't speak for the other flavors, but Lubuntu does not intend on having a 20.04.6 point release (as agreed by a quorum of Lubuntu Council members). There's less than a month of support left for 20.04 and the testing involved isn't really worth it. [22:52] arraybolt3: ok [22:53] (However I am excited to see RC images since I'm wanting to help test Ubuntu Desktop.) [23:02] sigh I think I just have to cowboy etc/qa-products to get this to post [23:09] alright, cowboyed [23:26] mm. while the symlink is *now* correct on the cdimage-master local mirror, the Ubuntu Desktop 20230314.4 clearly has the wrong grub [23:26] soooo respinning [23:27] I'll check the non-daily-live builds; they were built separately/later and might be ok [23:34] yah ubuntu server boots