[08:25] <caribou> Hello, Any reason why many of the Jammy kernels have disapeared from the archives ?
[08:25] <caribou> For instance :
[08:25] <caribou> # apt-get install --allow-downgrades linux-image-5.15.0-52-generic
[08:25] <caribou> Reading package lists... Done
[08:25] <caribou> Building dependency tree... Done
[08:25] <caribou> Reading state information... Done
[08:25] <caribou> Package linux-image-5.15.0-52-generic is not available, but is referred to by another package.
[08:25] <caribou> This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or
[08:26] <caribou> is only available from another source
[08:26] <caribou> E: Package 'linux-image-5.15.0-52-generic' has no installation candidate
[08:26] <caribou> its LP link also goes 404 : https://packages.ubuntu.com/jammy/linux-image-5.15.0-52-generic
[10:49] <danilogondolfo> found the same issue today with our github workflow where we try to install linux-modules-extra matching the kernel version running in the system: E: Unable to locate package linux-modules-extra-5.15.0-1036-azure
[12:30] <Jeremy31> danilogondolfo: Are you have hardware issues?
[14:16] <danilogondolfo> Jeremy31, no... it's happening in a cloud image. The package is not in the indexes anymore I guess
[14:18]  * cking waves
[14:19]  * cking wonders if any folk in the kernel team are debian developers... 
[14:21] <Jeremy31> danilogondolfo: update package lists, I don't see 1036 but there is 1037
[14:22] <ogra> cking, xnox is i think ...
[14:22] <cking> if any DD can be an advocate for me, I'm making a DD application and I'd appreciate that sooo much :-) https://nm.debian.org/process/1185/ 
[14:22] <ogra> (and with that level of growth the last months i'd be surprised if there were not more)
[14:23] <cking> xnox, ^
[14:24] <cking> i'm hoping to get more low-level Intel + kernel related tools into Debian :-)
[14:38] <arighi> cking, +1 on that (even if I'm not a DD) :D
[14:39] <cking> arighi, i see you have asked for a package to be sponsor'd into Debian, you should become a DM :-)
[14:39] <cking> I'd +1 for that
[14:40] <arighi> cking, one thing at a time... and thanks! :)
[14:47] <cking> i love the fact that this channel's topic is "Jammy 22.04 kernel development" - lol
[14:50] <arighi> cking, it's still kernel development... :D but we should definitely update it to a more generic topic (no release dependent), not sure who has the right permissions to do that
[14:50] <cking> probably apw ;-)
[16:07] <JanC> apw, Ubuntu IRC Council & Libera staff apparently
[17:17] <ghavil> Howdy, just wanted to check in on https://packages.ubuntu.com/jammy-updates/linux-gcp-lts-22.04 getting released w/ kernel 5.15. With https://packages.ubuntu.com/jammy-updates/linux-gcp being on 5.19 now, it'd be nice to be able to run 5.15 w/ security updates. 
[21:24] <chiluk> Hey folks dumb question... what is the idea behind release versioning the linux*-tools* packages... this causes lots of pain when attempting to build containers that need perf, but not knowing the kernel that will be used at runtime. 
[21:25] <chiluk> afaik the tools binaries shouldn't be changing all that much within a kernel major.minor version... i.e. 5.15.0-*
[21:26] <chiluk> basically I'd like to install the latest 5.19 -tools package into my container, knowing that my runtime kernel will likely be a later release version of the same Major.minor version.
[21:38] <chiluk> As it stands now, we execute /usr/bin/perf and it bombs out because the kernel doesn't match exactly.  A better behavior would be an error for an interactive user session followed by an attempt to find the closest versioned binary, or for non-interactive simply attempt to use the closest versioned one.
[21:39] <chiluk> but that suggestion has other criticisms. 
[21:50] <JanC> I assume perf & tools like that are too closely tied to the kernel build to make them work with other kernels...?
[21:53] <chiluk> JanC that is the excuse we've historically used.... in reality they are mostly compatible ..
[21:54] <JanC> I assume this is an upstream decision, no?
[22:14] <chiluk> I think this is an Ubuntu decision.
[22:15] <chiluk> It's for the same reason Ubuntu bumps the ABI on each release version... it's not strictly known if it's necessary, but it's being done out of an abundance of caution.
[22:15] <chiluk> until now I didn't have a great reason to stop doing that.
[22:16] <chiluk> i think being able to run perf out of a container may be that reason.