| rbasak | sergiodj: have you seen bug 2020913? I just hit it. | 09:34 |
|---|---|---|
| -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Bug 2020913 in elfutils (Ubuntu) "/etc/profile.d/debuginfd.{sh,csh} are created with 600 permissions" [Undecided, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2020913 | 09:34 | |
| rbasak | It isn't obvious to me why looking at the postinst, but that's the case on a default 22.04.1 desktop install. | 09:35 |
| sergiodj | rbasak: I haven't; thanks for the heads up | 14:47 |
| athos | @pilot in | 15:06 |
| === ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Archive: Mantic Open | Devel of Ubuntu (not support) | Build failures: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ | #ubuntu for support and discussion of Bionic-Lunar | Patch Pilots: athos | ||
| hjd | Could someone retrigger a build of golang-sourcehut-rockorager-tcell-term and golang-github-go-kit-kit in Mantic? Seems like they were synced and attempted built before the new version of golang-golang-x-mod-dev | 16:27 |
| hjd | Also, is there a way to see why some builds are flagged as dep-wait and some build failures, is it in the launchpad code or somewhere separate? I assume if this had been marked as waiting for dependencies, it would have been retried automatically. | 16:29 |
| athos | hjd: builds re-triggered. Do you have any examples of those dep-waiting vs failure instances? | 16:37 |
| hjd | athos: thanks :) | 16:46 |
| hjd | One example is some of the ocaml packages in Mantic. | 16:48 |
| hjd | https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ocaml-pp/1.1.2-2/+build/26395929 is marked as waiting for dependencies because these packages cannot be installed, however | 16:48 |
| hjd | https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ocaml-ipaddr/5.5.0-1/+build/26390650 is marked as a build failure even though that also seems to be due to dependencies which cannot be installed | 16:48 |
| athos | oh, so the first one is waiting o a build dependency which is not available in the archive yet | 17:22 |
| athos | its build failed (see https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ppx-expect) | 17:22 |
| athos | the second has all its build deps in the archive, however, when trying to install some b-deps, it ended up that some of these b-deps runtime deps were not available, hence the failure | 17:23 |
| athos | enr0n: hey! I added some comments in https://code.launchpad.net/~enr0n/ubuntu/+source/rdflib-sqlalchemy/+git/rdflib-sqlalchemy/+merge/445579. I suspect that more packages will FTBFS due to this issue. It would be nice to chat with the folks in #debian-python to check if this is the expected fix for all the affected packages or if they have something else in mind - given I am right about the dh-python | 17:34 |
| athos | changes in experimental | 17:34 |
| hjd | Hm, but it is not clear to my why the first one is marked as waiting while the other gets marked as just a general failure. Is it "these packages/versions cannot be resolved at all" vs "everything exists and should be installable, but it just does't work at the moment"? | 17:36 |
| cjwatson | hjd: It's because in the second case the missing dependencies are indirect. That case can't be turned into a straightforward dependency-wait, because there are multiple ways the failure could be resolved - the intermediate package could change, or the quoted dependency could become available directly - and that can't be expressed in a simple "wait until a package with this name matching this | 17:48 |
| cjwatson | version constraint exists" | 17:48 |
| cjwatson | The full logic is in https://git.launchpad.net/launchpad-buildd/tree/lpbuildd/binarypackage.py#n378 (the analyseDepWait method) | 17:49 |
| cjwatson | (And a bunch of things around that) | 17:50 |
| cjwatson | https://git.launchpad.net/launchpad-buildd/tree/lpbuildd/binarypackage.py#n422 is more like the top of the logic, I guess | 17:50 |
| hjd | cjwatson: aha, that makes sense :) | 17:54 |
| cjwatson | I remember that taking quite a bit of hard thinking to work out | 17:56 |
| jbicha | cjwatson: is it possible for depwait to retry once missing virtual packages appear? I end up having to manually retry rust-* packages because of this | 18:12 |
| vorlon | jbicha: I believe that's only blocked on someone implementing it | 19:00 |
| athos | @pilot out | 19:34 |
| === ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Archive: Mantic Open | Devel of Ubuntu (not support) | Build failures: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ | #ubuntu for support and discussion of Bionic-Lunar | Patch Pilots: N/A | ||
| bluca | did lxc on focal bork yesterday or so? our CI running on focal and starting lxc containers has been failing since yesterday with: | 20:25 |
| bluca | ERROR: meta tarball is missing the configuration file | 20:25 |
| bluca | lxc-create: bookworm-amd64: lxccontainer.c: create_run_template: 1627 Failed to create container from template | 20:25 |
| bluca | https://the-real-systemd.semaphoreci.com/jobs/cae6348b-301a-41d9-a42a-1a78e9501d7c | 20:25 |
| bluca | anybody seen that? | 20:25 |
| sarnold | bluca: try asking in #lxc, there's more folks there more familiar with the different templates | 20:30 |
| bluca | will do | 20:32 |
| bluca | looks like it's https://github.com/lxc/lxc/issues/4325 | 20:33 |
| -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Issue 4325 in lxc/lxc "Container configurations missing for most distributions" [Open] | 20:33 | |
| sarnold | that looks likely yeah | 20:36 |
| cjwatson | jbicha: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/335913 - retry-depwait is pretty horrible at the moment though, I think it'd need some re-engineering for performance first | 23:05 |
| -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 335913 in Launchpad itself "depwait builds do not retry even though the dep can be met via a virtual package" [High, Triaged] | 23:05 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!