[04:36] <RAOF> What's the status of the 20.04.6 point release? Specifically: is focal-updates open to release things into yet?
[04:37] <RAOF> Last update I can see is “it's OK to wait and release on Monday (ie: two days ago)”.
[04:43] <amurray> fwiw the security team already assumed that focal-security (and hence -updates) was open to release into and so we have been publishing back into it since late last week
[04:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: lomiri [amd64] (lunar-proposed/universe) [0.1.2-1] (no packageset)
[08:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added oem-somerville-paras-35-meta to canonical-oem-metapackages in bionic
[08:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added oem-somerville-paras-35-meta to canonical-oem-metapackages in focal
[08:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added oem-somerville-paras-35-meta to canonical-oem-metapackages in jammy
[09:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware (focal-proposed/main) [1.187.37 => 1.187.38] (core, kernel)
[09:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted linux-firmware [source] (focal-proposed) [1.187.38]
[09:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted linux-firmware [source] (kinetic-proposed) [20220923.gitf09bebf3-0ubuntu1.5]
[10:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-settings-daemon (kinetic-proposed/main) [43.0-1ubuntu1 => 43.0-1ubuntu1.1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[10:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-settings-daemon (jammy-proposed/main) [42.1-1ubuntu2.1 => 42.1-1ubuntu2.2] (ubuntu-desktop)
[10:51] <ebarretto> rbasak, hey! I see you are on SRU duty today, could you please check the openscap SRU and let me know if anything else is needed from my side? Thanks :)
[11:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop amd64 [Focal 20.04.6] has been marked as ready
[11:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu MATE Desktop amd64 [Focal 20.04.6] has been marked as ready
[11:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Desktop (Legacy) amd64 [Focal 20.04.6] has been marked as ready
[11:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Xubuntu Desktop amd64 [Focal 20.04.6] has been marked as ready
[13:08] <adrien> I'm finally following up on two stuff I notice during my +1 shift but wasn't sure how to do then: remove crystal and bettercap-caplets
[13:09] <adrien> bettercap-caplets depends on bettercap-ui which is not packaged (electron app); track.debian.org also reports bettercap-caplets as uninstallable because of that; I have not seen work towards packaging bettercap-ui
[13:13] <adrien> crystal build-depends on itself and apparently its tests require internet access; I think it can be blacklisted because noone is doing the extra work needed to (maybe?) make it available in ubuntu
[13:13] <adrien> see https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/crystal/+bugs?field.status%3Alist=NEW (there are reports from 2020)
[14:15] <rbasak> ebarretto: openscap isn't showing as green on https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/pending-sru.html
[14:16] <rbasak> ebarretto: it's expected that you specify in a bug comment exactly what versions you tested (by version string, not just by stating "all"), and what the results were, per series.
[14:16] <rbasak> Once done, please flip the verification tags.
[14:17] <rbasak> Please also specify in that comment exactly what tests you ran. Just referencing the agreed Test Plan is fine.
[14:18] <rbasak> Because sometimes people just say "yeah I tested it", we get regressions, and then it turns out that they didn't test some version or what the Test Plan said.
[14:19] <ebarretto> rbasak, why is it showing green for 2004476 ?
[14:21] <rbasak> ebarretto: presumably becaues that has the tags flipped already?
[14:22] <ebarretto> rbasak, only for bionic, shouldn't it need all?
[14:23] <rbasak> ebarretto: the report has different sections for the different series (which I find inverted, but there we are)
[14:24] <ebarretto> oh right
[14:24] <rbasak> We can release one series at a time. But that means that users might face a regression when upgrading to a newer series, depending on the ordering. It's easier to do them all at once :)
[14:25] <ebarretto> indeed, thanks! I will be adding the missing bits
[15:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted lomiri [amd64] (lunar-proposed) [0.1.2-1]
[15:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron (jammy-proposed/main) [2:20.2.0-0ubuntu1 => 2:20.3.0-0ubuntu1] (openstack)
[16:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: oem-somerville-paras-35-meta (focal-proposed/primary) [20.04~ubuntu1]
[16:23] <Trevinho> arraybolt3: that slice allocator is considered deprecated for years, if nobody tests earlier using G_SLICE=always-malloc the code, then... I assume there have been memory bugs for years.
[17:53] <utkarsh2102> vorlon: ohai! do you happen to know how frequently does germinate run on u-a-t?
[18:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected gallery-dl [source] (kinetic-backports) [1.25.0-1~bpo22.10.1]
[18:05] <ahasenack_> hi release team, please consider this hint update for samba dep8 tests on ppc64el: https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-release/britney/+git/hints-ubuntu/+merge/439411
[18:06] <ahasenack_> bdmurray: paride told me you are somewhat aware of performance issues on ppc64el dep8 vms? Perhaps storage?
[18:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gallery-dl [source] (jammy-backports) [1.25.0-1~bpo22.04.1]
[18:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted yt-dlp [source] (jammy-backports) [2023.03.04-1~bpo22.04.1]
[18:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted limnoria [source] (jammy-backports) [2023.1.28-1~bpo22.04.1]
[18:15] <bdmurray> ahasenack_: If by somewhat aware you mean have heard of yes
[18:16] <ahasenack_> yes
[18:16] <ahasenack_> I filed that PR above for a badtest hint, samba is failing consistently on ppc64el because the test can't succeed in launching a lunar container, it fails with a timeout
[18:17] <ahasenack_> bdmurray: are you in the release team? I forget
[18:18]  * bdmurray is hurt
[18:23] <ahasenack_> yes, you are, I checked, and won't forget again :)
[18:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gallery-dl [source] (focal-backports) [1.25.0-1~bpo20.04.1]
[20:09] <mwhudson> utkarsh2102: i think it's part of the cronjob that runs britney
[21:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected memtest86+ [source] (jammy-backports) [6.10-2~bpo22.04.1]
[21:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-advantage-tools (kinetic-proposed/main) [27.13.6~22.10.1 => 27.14~22.10.1] (core)
[21:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-advantage-tools (focal-proposed/main) [27.13.6~20.04.1 => 27.14~20.04.1] (core)
[21:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-advantage-tools (jammy-proposed/main) [27.13.6~22.04.1 => 27.14~22.04.1] (core)
[21:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-advantage-tools (bionic-proposed/main) [27.13.6~18.04.1 => 27.14~18.04.1] (core)
[21:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-advantage-tools (xenial-proposed/main) [27.13.6~16.04.1 => 27.14~16.04.1] (no packageset)
[22:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: glib2.0 (jammy-proposed/main) [2.72.4-0ubuntu1 => 2.72.4-0ubuntu2] (core, i386-whitelist)
[23:04] <bluesabre> sil2100, vorlon: What needs to be updated so that iso.qa shows the correct download URLs for xubuntu-minimal? http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/441/builds/274599/downloads
[23:25] <bdmurray> ahasenack brought up an autopkgtest that had only 3 lines of logs for an extended period of time. This can happen because am64 instances can be slow to provision and the test is just waiting to time out.
[23:37] <sarnold> heh is that 'arm64' or 'amd64'? they're both one typo away :)
[23:47] <bdmurray> amd64
[23:50] <sarnold> I guessed wrong!