[09:55] dbungert, subiquity could ship the apport hook by itself, but currently apport does not support snap shipping those hooks. [10:36] ginggs, hey, could you give a retry to dee , gnome-keyring and udisks2 in the lunar archive rebuild? [10:50] seb128: . [10:50] ginggs, thanks! [12:27] rbasak: do you happen to know if it's possible to git cherry-pick just a specifig file change from a commit? [12:28] specific* [12:28] like (made up) git cherry-pick -- debian/kdc.conf [12:28] (which didn't work) [12:32] ahasenack: you could use -n, "git reset" everything, then "git add" just that file. [12:32] Or do "git checkout -- debian/kdc.conf" and then commit that? [12:33] ah, good alternatives [12:33] But yeah, I don't know of a more specific way [12:33] The second way there assumes that the file hasn't changed [12:33] But the first method would be a proper cherry-pick I think [12:34] Also "git apply" has --include/--exclude options, which might help [12:34] Though that only deals with the patch part, not copying the commit message [12:34] Another way might be to check out , "git reset HEAD^", git add the file, and commit just that in detached HEAD mode. Then check back out where you were, and cherry-pick HEAD@{1} [12:35] To copy the commit message "git commit -c " is useful [12:35] This last method allows "git add -p" as well, for picking a subset of a change to a file. [12:36] Yeah, personally I tend to just cherry-pick and then amend/rebase, rather than always trying to get the commit right first time [12:36] that commit is actually a big chunk of changes, it's a git ubuntu import commit, one single commit for new usptream version and lots of other stuff [12:36] I was thinking about trying to avoid having to deal with merge conflicts in other files [12:36] Good point about commit -c, I always forget that that exists [12:37] yeah, cherrypick -n doesn't work, lots of conflicts because of the other changes which I'm not interested in [12:37] (I mean git's surface area is basically fractal, so ...) [12:51] bdrung: tzdata in Bionic has quite a bit of churn in debian/tzdata.templates, including the removal of Pacific-New from tzdata/Zones/US. I didn't see any removals in the later series. Do we have anything that demonstrates that this is safe? Shouldn't the choice be preserved somehow? [13:05] arraybolt3: your lubuntu-meta upload to Jammy is missing bug references [13:05] I'm therefore not sure how to proces it [13:19] xnox: sorry, I had no intention of being sneaky. I'll leave an annotation in future. [13:53] rbasak, previous SRUs forgot to regenerate debian/tzdata.templates. You could use 2022g and regenerate debian/tzdata.templates to see what previous SRUs should have included in their debdiff. [13:54] rbasak, Pacific-New was added but was never used. upstream removed Pacific-New some time ago. [14:13] rbasak, checked that. 2018a removed Pacific-New [14:19] bdrung: yeah but I wouldn't expect removals to be followed in SRUs. If it was user-selectable, then wouldn't dropping it be a regression for users who might have selected it previously? [14:22] rbasak, yes. That regression would have been happened years ago when upstream removed Pacific-New. [14:26] bdrung: OK, so Pacific-New in bionic-updates today is already broken? [14:27] If that's the case then there will be no SRU regression so that's fine, but I'd like to document that somewhere. Can you confirm and I'll just stick this conversation into a bug comment? [14:28] rbasak, I checked the history. Even 2018d-1 did not have Pacific-New as option (the source package has an outdated tzdata.templates). So it was never selectable for bionic users. [14:29] 2018d-1 was the version of the bionic release. [14:42] bdrung: accepted, thanks [16:51] ahasenack: are you asking for an early SRU release of bug 2000817 for Jammy? [16:51] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Bug 2000817 in openldap (Ubuntu Kinetic) "Wrong SHA256-value computed on kinetic" [Undecided, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2000817 [16:52] rbasak: I thought initially that it had been in jammy proposed for longer [16:52] and wanted to get that green before our housekeeping meeting from today [16:53] but now it's past the meeting, and this is not urgent. Except now it will be only monday before somebody looks at it again for a release [16:53] so yeah, would be a nice to have if it could be released today, but I don't have more arguments for it (it's not an urgent bug, and it's not blocking another openldap SRU atm) [16:55] I've reviewed it now. It's ready for release in all other respects. [16:56] ahasenack: how about you consider this a +1, and release it yourself given I've reviewed it - now or on Monday? Feel free to cite this conversation. [16:56] ok, thanks [16:56] For both Jammy and Kinetic. [16:57] Consider though that we're about to have a long weekend for some people. [16:57] For dealing with any fallout. I'm out on Friday and Monday (UK public holidays). [16:59] I'm out Friday, but back on Monday [17:27] ahasenack: I'm here Friday and Monday [17:27] yes, but we don't release srus on fridays :) [17:28] monday will be fine [17:28] Okay, I didn't read everything just wanted to say I'm here to help. [17:28] enr0n: bug 2015346 looks like a hardware failure to me [17:28] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Bug 2015346 in ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu) "cannot update Ubuntu to the newest version, it crashes on the 2nd pinpoint during installation" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2015346 [17:28] enr0n: Do you agree? [17:35] bdmurray: maybe. The error message definitely isn't very helpful. Have you seen similar reports in the past that ended up being a hardware issue? [17:50] enr0n: Oh, sorry look at dmesg [17:52] bdmurray: oh, yes I agree [18:03] ginggs: could you please retry puma and ruby3.1 builds in your test rebuild PPA? I was not able to reproduce them locally [18:19] ginggs: would you also be able to retry mysql-8.0 armhf? I was able to build it successfully in a PPA [18:43] kanashiro[m]: . [18:43] lvoytek: . [19:02] ginggs: ty! [19:15] Quick question about submitting merge requests to Ubuntu's fork of GRUB, there is https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/grub/+git/ubuntu & https://code.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2. I submitted a merge request to the first one but it seems like the second one is actually where you submit merge requests? [19:16] At least based off the quantity of merge requests on the second link, but there also haven't been any MRs on it since 2019 so maybe not? [19:44] The second one is an import of the first (~ubuntu-core-dev). [19:44] So use this for an MP https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/grub/+git/ubuntu/+ref/ubuntu NexusPrism [19:45] Oh, I see you did [19:55] Ah sweet, so I'm good then [22:33] rbasak: My lubuntu-meta upload to Jammy was a boffo because I forgot to change the codename in the changelog before uploading. Please toss it into the abyss never to return. :D [22:34] (I asked for it to be rejected when I first did it but I guess no one who could do so was around at the time. I've since started using dput-ng which should hopefully tell me next time I nearly do that.) [22:37] The upload was intended for Lunar (and a fixed version of said upload was accepted into Lunar). [22:56] arraybolt3: no problem. I see that Brian did it already. [23:01] Because I wouldn't expect rbasak to be around!