[14:59] <bdrung> \o
[15:00] <zhsj> o/
[15:00] <ogayot> o/
[15:00] <liushuyu> o/
[15:00] <ginggs> o/
[15:01] <waveform> o.O
[15:01] <enr0n> o/
[15:01] <dbungert> o/
[15:01] <bdmurray> o/
[15:02] <dviererbe> o/
[15:02] <schopin> o/
[15:02]  * vorlon waves
[15:02] <dviererbe> @schopin I like the phrase "Properly nitpicked" :D
[15:04] <bdrung> #startmeeting Weekly Ubuntu Foundations team
[15:04] <meetingology> Meeting started at 15:04:02 UTC.  The chair is bdrung.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
[15:04] <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
[15:04] <bdrung> #topic Lightning rounds
[15:04] <bdrung> #link https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/foundations-team-updates-thursday-8-jun-2023/36137/5
[15:05] <bdrung> I give everybody time to read and ask questions.
[15:10] <mclemenceau> o/
[15:13] <bdmurray> "footgun"
[15:14] <bdrung> I give everyone one more minute for reading.
[15:17] <bdrung> #topic Release incoming bugs
[15:17] <bdrung> #link http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-mm-incoming-bug-tasks.html#foundations-bugs
[15:17] <bdrung> nothing there
[15:17] <bdrung> #link http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-ll-incoming-bug-tasks.html#foundations-bugs
[15:18] <bdrung> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/aptdaemon/+bug/2008430
[15:18] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2008430 in aptdaemon (Ubuntu) "Aptdaemon crashes when there are any non-PEP-440 packages on the system due to setuptools 66.x.x" [High, Confirmed]
[15:20] <vorlon> sounds like something we should take and resolve
[15:20] <vorlon> though I thought all the non-PEP-440 packages were fixed by lunar?
[15:21] <schopin> Yes but basically the point made by the last comment is that non-distro packages that don't respect PEP440 will break apt-daemon, even if they're unrelated.
[15:21] <bdrung> all lunar packages (except for drslib) should have PEP-440 compliant versions.
[15:21] <vorlon> ok
[15:22] <vorlon> anyway, +1 for us taking this, we do rather rely on aptdaemon not exploding
[15:22]  * bdrung agrees
[15:23] <bdrung> targetted the bug to lunar
[15:24] <bdrung> tagged foundations-todo and subscribed foundations-bugs
[15:24] <bdrung> next: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/plymouth/+bug/2012698
[15:24] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2012698 in plymouth (Ubuntu) "Plymouth is stuck on a plain black screen" [Undecided, New]
[15:25] <vorlon> desktop
[15:25] <bdrung> so leaving that untouched
[15:25] <bdrung> #link http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-jj-incoming-bug-tasks.html#foundations-bugs
[15:26] <bdrung> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mysql-8.0/+bug/2019203
[15:26] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2019203 in glibc (Ubuntu Mantic) "mysql 8.0.33 binary crashes on startup on armhf" [Undecided, New]
[15:27] <vorlon> is this the same as the regression we saw in mysql in mantic-proposed from the security update?
[15:27] <vorlon> it is
[15:27] <schopin> Oh, I subscribed it, but then danilogondolfo looked into it and AFAICT the conclusion was that it wasn't a glibc issue.
[15:27] <schopin> I didn't get around to update the status.
[15:28] <danilogondolfo> I helped investigating the problem. Apparently the kernel doesn't expose information about cache line sizes on armhf and the code relied on that to allocate memory
[15:29] <danilogondolfo> allocate cache-line-size aligned memory*
[15:32] <schopin> I'll mark the glibc status as Invalid then, and add the kernel in the loop.
[15:32] <bdrung> thanks
[15:32] <bdrung> #link http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-ff-incoming-bug-tasks.html#foundations-bugs
[15:33] <bdrung> nothing for us (unless there is something in "unknown")
[15:33] <bdrung> #topic Team proposed-migration report
[15:33] <bdrung> #link https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/proposed-migration/update_excuses_by_team.html#foundations-bugs
[15:34] <bdrung> that list is short. Enjoy it before Debian unfreezes...
[15:34] <vorlon> indeed
[15:35] <vorlon> fwupd continues to be stuck there
[15:35] <vorlon> there's been discussion on the bug w/ the Debian maintainer but I haven't analyzed it
[15:35] <vorlon> he asserts that there are flaky tests and different behavior across the autopkgtest runners
[15:36] <liushuyu> vorlon: There is a LP bug for it: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fwupd/+bug/2021908 and it does not seem to be flaky...?
[15:36] -ubottu:#ubuntu-meeting- Launchpad bug 2021908 in fwupd (Ubuntu) "fwupd: network-based tests failed to run" [Undecided, New]
[15:36] <vorlon> liushuyu: that's the bug Mario repliedto
[15:36] <vorlon> liushuyu: will you continue to drive this one for the next week, or do you need to hand it off?
[15:37] <liushuyu> vorlon: I can take a look after finishing the armhf time_t stuff. It looks like the upstream did not gate the network tests correctly
[15:37] <vorlon> ok
[15:37] <vorlon> that leaves just python-apt needing an assignee
[15:38] <vorlon> any volunteers?
[15:38] <liushuyu> Even if you turn off the network tests, some of them will still run
[15:38] <schopin> o/
[15:38] <vorlon> python-apt: schopin:
[15:38] <vorlon> thanks
[15:38] <vorlon> bdrung: back to you
[15:38] <bdrung> #topic AOB
[15:39] <vorlon> I'll be out next Wed/Thu
[15:39] <mclemenceau> I'm OOO monday
[15:44] <bdrung> #endmeeting
[15:44] <meetingology> Meeting ended at 15:44:19 UTC.  Minutes at https://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2023/ubuntu-meeting.2023-06-08-15.04.moin.txt
[15:46] <vorlon> bdrung: thanks!