[00:59] <sil2100> Ok, I see that indicator-messages has some problems
[01:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mutter (lunar-proposed/main) [44.0-2ubuntu4 => 44.0-2ubuntu5] (desktop-core, desktop-extra)
[01:01] <sil2100> Wtf
[01:01] <sil2100> So it seems to be a conflict of binary package names
[01:02] <sil2100> ItzSwirlz, Eickmeyer, rsalveti, bluesabre: I think I need to push the unity version in this case to lunar-proposed
[01:03] <sil2100> As is, it seems like we cannot build indicator-messages as it offers the same binary package names as ayatana-indicator-messages
[01:04] <sil2100> I'll accept the unity upload, maybe till tomorrow it'll build for riscv64 and be ready for migrating (will not file in the unblock hint just yet)
[01:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted unity [source] (lunar-proposed) [7.7.0+23.04.20230222.2-0ubuntu2]
[01:07] <Eickmeyer> sil2100: I'm fairly sure that mutter upload is going to cause a respin for both Ubuntu Desktop and Edubuntu.
[01:08] <Eickmeyer> Related to bug 1987976
[01:08] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 1987976 in mutter (Ubuntu) "firefox black window on wayland" [High, In Progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1987976
[01:19] <sil2100> This looks like an old bug?
[01:19] <sil2100> Is this a regresion re: kinetic or jammy?
[01:21] <sil2100> I mean, I'd assume it is, because I guess we'd be made aware of this when it first popped up?
[01:21] <sil2100> But I see it's been reported on 2022 before kinetic
[01:23] <sil2100> Respin of all images is the last thing I want, so someone would have to convince me really hard that it's release critical. My answer right now would be 'no, this should be a zero-day sru'
[01:23] <Eickmeyer> sil2100: gunnarhj brought it up earlier today and created a duplicate bug.
[01:24] <Eickmeyer> https://launchpad.net/bugs/2016918
[01:24] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 1987976 in firefox (Ubuntu) "firefox black window on wayland" [Undecided, Confirmed] [duplicate: 2016918]
[01:25] <sil2100> Still, what was the state of this in kinetic?
[01:26] <sil2100> Was it working as expected? As it's a duplicate of a bug, as mentioned, reported before kinetic release
[01:26] <Eickmeyer> That I don't know.
[01:26] <Eickmeyer> All I know is that gunnarhj saw this earlier today
[01:28] <Eickmeyer> 15:16:41	<Eickmeyer>	GunnarHj, Trevinho: I see bug 2016918, assuming that will need respins?
[01:28] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 1987976 in firefox (Ubuntu) "firefox black window on wayland" [Undecided, Confirmed] [duplicate: 2016918] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1987976
[01:28] <Eickmeyer> 15:16:44	--	Notice(ubottu): Bug 2016918 in mutter (Ubuntu) "Firefox snap opens a black window on wayland" [High, In Progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2016918
[01:28] <Eickmeyer> 15:17:26	<Eickmeyer>	(anything affecting Desktop affects Edubuntu)
[01:28] <Eickmeyer> 15:17:51	<GunnarHj>	Eickmeyer: Hopefully... ;)
[01:28] <Eickmeyer> 15:18:00	<Eickmeyer>	Roger that.
[01:31] <sil2100> Ok, I need to sleep now, my gut feeling is as what I left on the bug: release-note it + 0-day/SRU and/or include the fix ONLY if we have to do full respins for some other critical reason
[01:31] <sil2100> o/
[01:32] <Eickmeyer> o/
[07:21] <seb128> RAOF, hey, following up on the wpebackend-fdo SRU, I think 'cog' is just broken, I can't get it to work and there is similar feedback on bug #1970779
[07:21] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 1970779 in wpewebkit (Ubuntu Jammy) "Upgrade to 2.36.7 for Focal and Jammy" [Undecided, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1970779
[07:23] <seb128> bug #1981592 also has some details on someone trying to get it to work without success
[07:23] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 1981592 in wpewebkit (Ubuntu) "Please remove wpewebkit and block syncs from Debian" [Undecided, Fix Released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1981592
[07:31] <RAOF> Hm. So what's our smoke test for wpewebkit?
[07:31] <RAOF> It's going to be used for webkitgtk, yes?
[07:31] <RAOF> Would checking that works be feasible?
[07:33] <ricotz> hello :), can we still get the bug fix release of vala 0.56.7-1 synced?
[07:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: vulkan-validationlayers (lunar-proposed/universe) [1.3.239.0-1 => 1.3.239.0-2] (no packageset) (sync)
[07:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vulkan-validationlayers [sync] (lunar-proposed) [1.3.239.0-2]
[07:34] <tjaalton> this ^ fixes lp2016959 in case someone is wondering
[07:38] <tjaalton> how can I tell who uploaded a package to the sru queue?
[07:38] <tjaalton> a sponsor in this case, so it's not the same as who finalized the changelog
[07:44] <RAOF> Hm. I knew this at one point. What was it…?
[07:46] <tjaalton> don't have an acute need for it anymore, but would be nice to know :)
[07:46] <RAOF> @tjaalton: Actually, maybe you _can't_ know until it's been accepted?
[07:47] <tjaalton> yeah then it's shown on the changes list
[07:48] <RAOF> You can obviously tell once it's in -proposed, but I think the consensus last time this came up was that Launchpad (obviously) knows, but won't tell you.
[07:48] <tjaalton> sneaky bastard ;)
[07:56] <RAOF> @seb128: So, if we can't use cog, what _can_ we use to smoke test wpewebkit?
[08:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted oss4 [source] (jammy-proposed) [4.2-build2010-5ubuntu9.2]
[08:27] <toabctl> sil2100, vorlon a recent change in livecd-rootfs (switch from kpartx to losetup) does break all the cloud builds (see eg. https://i661853812.restricted.launchpadlibrarian.net/661853812/buildlog_ubuntu_lunar_amd64_amd64-minimized-disk-image_kvm_qcow2_squashfs_tarball_vagrant_vmdk_hyperv-gcs_ibm-guest_cpc_BUILDING.txt.gz?token=pfLPH1b67NZnFpLscjXfQ7wTp5kfl3Vt)
[08:27] <sil2100> toabctl: we reverted that in the archive
[08:35] <sil2100> toabctl: as mentioned on the hangout, I pushed a revert to the main branch, didn't release it though as the package in the archive is reverted to a previous version
[08:41] <toabctl> thx
[09:12] <sil2100> Ok, I see unity finally migrated, I'll re-spin Ubuntu Unity
[09:14] <sil2100> ...ok, rmadison is not yet happy, I'll wait a moment more
[09:36] <ginggs> tjaalton: you can wget the .dsc and run gpg --verify on it
[09:37] <tjaalton> ginggs: ah, nice
[09:49] <sil2100> rs2009: okay, so sadly hm, I'm still waiting for unity to fully publish to re-spin Ubuntu Unity
[09:50] <sil2100> There seems to be some outage of archive.ubuntu.com causing slowness, might be related why I still don't see it all pulished as expected
[10:35] <sil2100> yay, respinning Ubuntu Unity!
[10:35] <sil2100> rs2009: ^
[10:43] <rs2009> sil2100: ah, tysm!
[10:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop amd64 [Lunar Final] has been marked as ready
[10:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Budgie Desktop amd64 [Lunar Final] has been marked as ready
[11:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Unity Desktop amd64 [Lunar Final] has been updated (20230419)
[11:02] <sil2100> \o/
[11:02] <sil2100> GunnarHj: hello hello! DO you have the power to update release notes?
[11:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu WSL [Lunar Final] has been updated (4742177178)
[12:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: vala (lunar-proposed/universe) [0.56.6-1 => 0.56.7-1] (i386-whitelist, ubuntu-desktop) (sync)
[12:40] <ricotz> sil2100, hello :), could you accept the bug fix release of vala (0.56.7-1) in the lunar/queue?
[12:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted vala [sync] (lunar-proposed) [0.56.7-1]
[12:51] <ginggs> ricotz: ^
[12:51] <ricotz> ginggs, thank you!
[12:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Edubuntu Desktop amd64 [Lunar Final] has been marked as ready
[12:59] <LocutusOfBorg> vbox is not needed nice
[13:00] <LocutusOfBorg> I hope I can get new vbox in then
[13:13] <rs2009> my internet's been acting really weird since yesterday, and the Ubuntu Unity ISO download's taking a long time (usually takes around a minute, been downloading since 45 mins today); it should be done in about ~40 mins, so I'll be able to mark Unity as ready after testing that
[13:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kbuild (lunar-proposed/universe) [1:0.1.9998svn3572+dfsg-1 => 1:0.1.9998svn3589+dfsg-1~build1] (no packageset)
[13:28] <LocutusOfBorg> sadly 11 CVE are released with vbox 7.0.8
[13:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kbuild [source] (lunar-proposed) [1:0.1.9998svn3589+dfsg-1~build1]
[13:29] <LocutusOfBorg> I would like if possible to get it into lunar, since vbox is not seeded
[13:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox-hwe (lunar-proposed/multiverse) [7.0.6-dfsg-1ubuntu1.23.04.1 => 7.0.8-dfsg-1ubuntu1.23.04.1] (kernel-dkms)
[13:29] <LocutusOfBorg> (apologies for writing needed instead of seeded!)
[13:30] <bdmurray> seb128: Would you like tepl as a 0 day SRU?
[13:30] <seb128> bdmurray, it's only a few strings showing as translated/untranslated in gedit so I don't think it's important if it's 0day or not
[13:52] <rs2009> sil2100 and mitya57: indicator-messages is still being pulled in, not sure why (with the respin of the Unity ISO)
[13:52] <sil2100> oh no
[13:53] <rs2009> so I'd really appreciate it if anyone here knows any potential package that could be pulling it in
[13:54] <sil2100> Wait, is unity at the exxpected version?
[13:54] <rs2009> indeed, it is
[13:54] <rs2009> (0ubuntu2)
[13:55] <sil2100> Ok, so looking at the logs:
[13:55] <sil2100> Installing indicator-messages:amd64 as Recommends of indicator-applet:amd64
[13:56] <rs2009> ah :facepalm:
[13:56] <sil2100> hmmm
[13:56] <rs2009> completely forgot about that one
[13:57] <sil2100> We would have to respin cinnamon for that one then as well
[13:57] <sil2100> hm, maybe it would be best to just get indicator-messages fixed
[14:02] <bdmurray> We could also suppress the crash messages in the live environment
[14:07] <seb128> sil2100, I've a similar fix for ayatana-indicator-messages in the queue
[14:08] <seb128> one way to fix it while keeping the indicator would be to accept that and also upload indicator-applet to recommends the ayatana indicator instead of the old legacy one
[14:08] <mitya57> wait, what? indicator-applet is an applet for gnome-panel, it shouldn't be present in unity or cinnamon ISO images.
[14:08] <philroche_> sil2100:/bdmurray: I would like to add a summary of the ubuntu-release mailing list thread https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/2023-April/005607.html regarding possible, but unlikely, delta in release time/dates to the release notes @ https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/lunar-lobster-release-notes/31910. Yay/nay ?
[14:09] <mitya57> In fact, unity should provide indicator-applet, so if something depends on indicator-applet, unity should satisfy that dependency and real indicator-applet should not be pulled in.
[14:10] <mitya57> Maybe some our tooling doesn't understand that it's a virtual package and somehow pulls dependencies of non-virtual indicator-applet?
[14:13] <seb128> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/661958692/buildlog_ubuntu_lunar_amd64_ubuntu-unity_BUILDING.txt.gz states
[14:13] <seb128>         Installing indicator-applet:amd64 as Recommends of indicator-datetime:amd64
[14:14] <AlsoItzSwirlz> sil2100: i looked at irc logs, you can do a cinnamon rebuild
[14:14] <seb128> which use 'Recommends: indicator-applet | indicator-renderer'
[14:14] <AlsoItzSwirlz> also: i do want to +1 on the slow image downlaods
[14:17] <GunnarHj> sil2100: No, I don't seem to have write access to https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/lunar-lobster-release-notes/31910
[14:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: chromium-browser (bionic-updates/universe) [112.0.5615.49-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 => 112.0.5615.49-0ubuntu0.18.04.1] (ubuntu-desktop) (sync)
[14:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox-hwe [source] (lunar-proposed) [7.0.8-dfsg-1ubuntu1.23.04.1]
[14:45] <Eickmeyer> I have noticed cdimage.u.c being rather slow. Switched to a mirror and it was much faster, so might be worth pinging IS about.
[14:45] <sil2100> seb128: anyway, did you see my comment on the indicator-messages bug?
[14:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Kylin Desktop amd64 [Lunar Final] has been marked as ready
[14:46] <sil2100> seb128: for us to actually get the fix, I think we'd need to drop the indicator-messages libmessaging-menu0 binaries etc.
[14:47] <sil2100> I'm pretty sure they're not used at all right now anyway
[14:47] <sil2100> Since whenever they're needed, I'm sure Ubuntu is pullin in the ones coming from ayatana
[14:58] <sil2100> rs2009: mitya57: do we have a decision on how to proceed with the indicator-messages case?
[14:59] <bdmurray> philroche_: I think the most appropriate place for that would be an Ubuntu Release Process document, but while we have checklists for processes I'm not convinced that would work well for this.
[15:00] <bdmurray> philroche_: So the release notes seems fine for LL.
[15:00] <sil2100> rs2009, mitya57: would be good to have a proposal in flight. I'm consider actually dropping the conflicting binaries from indicator-messages, since I can't think of a scenario where the old ones could be in use
[15:00] <philroche_> bdmurray: ack. I will add notes now in the "More information" section
[15:01] <bdmurray> philroche_: Let me know when you have written some words.
[15:08] <philroche_> bdmurray:  Done. See "What happens if there is a high or critical priority CVE during release day?" section of release notes https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/lunar-lobster-release-notes/31910
[15:25] <rs2009> sil2100: sure, that should work +1
[15:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted chromium-browser [sync] (bionic-updates) [112.0.5615.49-0ubuntu0.18.04.1]
[15:40] <arraybolt3> If respins happen, I'd be happy to try and test them.
[16:04] <sil2100> Ok, so I was thinking of a way to get the new package building, but it's not possible as-is in this direction. So I'm doing a test build of a new indicator-messages that drops the binary packages
[16:37] <dbungert> Some help is needed on the test http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/445/builds/276404/testcases/1773/results - it however requires some comfort with CJK input
[16:45] <dbungert> GunnarHj: handsome_feng: I have heard that one of you may be able to assist with the above test case I just linked, if so that would be appreciated.
[16:54] <mitya57> sil2100: do we have a way to forcefully exclude indicator-applet / indicator-messages from the images?
[16:55] <sil2100> mitya57: don't worry about it, I'll uh, jsut push the indicator-messages fix through
[16:56] <mitya57> Ok.
[16:56] <mitya57> Actually I was wrong, unity does not provide indicator-applet, it provides indicator-renderer. And all actual indicator depend on indicator-applet | indicator-renderer.
[16:56] <mitya57> Maybe we should reverse that dependency and make it indicator-renderer | indicator-applet?
[17:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: indicator-messages (lunar-proposed/universe) [13.10.1+18.10.20180918-0ubuntu4 => 13.10.1+18.10.20180918-0ubuntu5] (ubuntu-desktop)
[17:06] <sil2100> So I asked bdmurray and ginggs to review my franken-upload ^
[17:07] <sil2100> The plan is: if this one is fine, we would build it in the archive and then I'd ask rs2009, mitya57 and others to upgrade indicator-messages to that version for some of their flavor installs and check if that's working or not
[17:07] <sil2100> Because this package wasn't rebuilt since ages actually
[17:07] <sil2100> If it works, I'd unblock it and then respin cinnamon, xubuntu and unity
[17:07] <sil2100> bluesabre, rs2009: ^
[17:08] <bluesabre> Oh, goody.
[17:08] <sil2100> That's the initial plan
[17:09] <sil2100> Second plan is: not care
[17:09] <sil2100> That would be much easier, but the experience is meh
[17:09] <sil2100> We could just leave things as-is, but I leave it for you guys to decide
[17:10] <sil2100> I think the main affected flavor is unity and they were stopping the line for this
[17:10] <bluesabre> I'm fine with the respin. Xubuntu isn't affected, but I'm not going to drag the others down.
[17:16] <sil2100> Ok, ginggs reviewed and accepted this
[17:16] <sil2100> But now...
[17:16] <philroche_> bdmurray: sil2100: I mentioned this briefly in our release team google meet, but stating here too. The Lunar Google images have repeated failing tests which currently point to google agent updates on 20230417 being at fault. We are debugging now but if we fail to find a workaround we might have to request removal of the latest google-guest-agent version 20230330.00-0ubuntu1 and google-osconfig-agent version
[17:16] <philroche_> 20230330.00-0ubuntu1 from Lunar and revert to google-guest-agent	version 20220622.00-0ubuntu5 and google-osconfig-agent	20220824.00-0ubuntu2
[17:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted indicator-messages [source] (lunar-proposed) [13.10.1+18.10.20180918-0ubuntu5]
[17:17] <Eickmeyer> I'll ping ItzSwirlz
[17:18] <sil2100> Question is: do we *really* want to respin everything for this or is it enough to just have this as a zero-day SRU?
[17:18] <sil2100> Well
[17:18] <sil2100> Everything
[17:18] <Eickmeyer> I'll hold off on the ping....
[17:18] <sil2100> I mean the three flavors
[17:19] <sil2100> It's a top crasher, yes, but the impact is minimal. Most people install with updates enabled so it should not be a problem if we do this as zero-day
[17:19] <bdmurray> Does it crash repeatedly in the live environment or just once?
[17:20] <sil2100> rs2009 reported it as a blocker so I'd like his input as well
[17:20] <rs2009> bdmurray: just once, and I'm fine with it as a zero-day +1 (UU 22.04 had a similar bug, although that wasn't as a flavor)
[17:21] <sil2100> rs2009: MUSIC TO MY EARS! <3
[17:21] <rs2009> sil2100: lol :D
[17:21] <sil2100> rs2009: but could you, once indicator-messages builds, test it on an Ubuntu Unity system anyway?
[17:22] <sil2100> Since as said, the indicator-messages package hasn't been rebuilt from source since quite a long while, so I'd like to make sure it's working at all
[17:22] <rs2009> sil2100: of course; is it okay if I trigger an Ubuntu Unity rebuild too (once it's built)?
[17:22] <sil2100> Oh no no!
[17:22] <rs2009> oh, alright\
[17:23] <rs2009> s/\/
[17:23] <sil2100> As a zero-day SRU it means we wouldn't be respinning the images
[17:23] <sil2100> So we'd stay with Ubuntu Unity iso's as-is, but people would get it on day 0 as an update during install
[17:23] <sil2100> But yeah, for that to happen, someone would have to first enable proposed on an Unity system, upgrade indicator-messages and see if this actually still works
[17:24] <rs2009> sil2100: oh, I thought we weren't doing it as a zero-day although it was okay
[17:24] <rs2009> ignore my previous comments lol
[17:25] <rs2009> yep, I'll test it on a Unity system as soon as the fix rolls out, assuming I'm not asleep (11 pm rn)
[17:27] <bdmurray> It doesn't seem to crash in a live system
[17:28] <rs2009> bdmurray: wait, what? which ISO are you using?
[17:28] <bdmurray> ubuntu-unity
[17:28] <bdmurray> from 20230417
[17:29] <rs2009> bdmurray: weird, it did crash for me (also in the latest ISO, from today)
[17:30] <bdmurray> rs2009: just booting it or did you do something special?
[17:30] <rs2009> bdmurray: nope, just booting it
[17:31] <rs2009> trying to redownload the ISO to confirm, but looks like it's going to take a couple of hours at this speed (300 KBps, with ~400 Mbps internet)
[17:32] <bdmurray> Either way I think a 0 day SRU would be safer at this point
[17:33] <rs2009> bdmurray: yep
[18:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted carla [source] (jammy-backports) [2.5.4-0ubuntu2~bpo22.04.1]
[19:34] <AlsoItzSwirlz> hi whats happening with this google thing?
[19:46] <sarnold> googler'
[19:46] <sarnold> google's a very nifty new search engine from stanford! it takes a look at links among the pages to determine which pages might be most relevant! no more constructing complex boolean queries to try to find what you want with altavista!
[19:47] <AlsoItzSwirlz> ...
[19:47] <AlsoItzSwirlz> (did it actually come from stanford?)
[19:48] <AlsoItzSwirlz> anyways so resolution is 0-day sru?
[19:49] <AlsoItzSwirlz> eee amd64 emulation is painful
[19:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted software-properties [source] (focal-proposed) [0.99.9.12]
[19:59] <AlsoItzSwirlz> took about ten minutes from boot to ubiquity start install
[20:00] <AlsoItzSwirlz> rs2009: doing this because ily :) uefi install testcase is running via qemu
[20:16] <philroche_> bdmurray:  sil2100: Re google agent revert. After much testing we are confident that the agent is not  wholly at fault for the test failures. No change/revert required by release team.
[21:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Xubuntu Minimal amd64 [Lunar Final] has been marked as ready
[21:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Xubuntu Desktop amd64 [Lunar Final] has been marked as ready