[01:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-13-cross-mipsen [arm64] (noble-proposed/universe) [2+c1] (no packageset)
[02:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-13-cross-mipsen [amd64] (noble-proposed/universe) [2+c1] (no packageset)
[02:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gcc-13-cross-mipsen [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/universe) [2+c1] (no packageset)
[05:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gcc-13-cross-mipsen [amd64] (noble-proposed) [2+c1]
[05:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gcc-13-cross-mipsen [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [2+c1]
[05:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gcc-13-cross-mipsen [arm64] (noble-proposed) [2+c1]
[07:03] <LocutusOfBorg> llvm-toolchain-18 didn't get autosyncd... why?
[07:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: llvm-toolchain-18 (noble-proposed/primary) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1]
[07:04] <LocutusOfBorg> doko, ^^
[07:30] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: you know where the logs are to check the answer to "why"? https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/auto-sync/
[07:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted llvm-toolchain-18 [sync] (noble-proposed) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1]
[08:21] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, I see no mentioned, I checked yesterday night and today...
[08:21] <vorlon> fair enough
[08:21] <vorlon> and you were able to sync it so it wasn't an importer issue
[08:21] <vorlon> (launchpad importer I mean)
[08:22] <LocutusOfBorg> doko, removed it from release yesterday due to bad versioning, at the same time I uploaded in Debian
[08:22] <LocutusOfBorg> I checked 3 times auto sync logs, and also this morning I found stuff uploaded after llvm was syncd, but llvm not even taken in consideration
[08:22] <LocutusOfBorg> this is why I asked here
[08:23] <vorlon> ack.  puzzling, but I don't think I can prioritize trying to debug that right now.  Making a mental note of it though in case we find more such issues
[08:23] <LocutusOfBorg> I would have expected it being mentioned in "hey llvm removed from release, not syncing" or something similar, at least giving some hints
[08:23] <LocutusOfBorg> I'm just wondering how many we aren't detecting :)
[08:23] <vorlon> indeed
[08:35] <LocutusOfBorg> btw I'm following your work on time_t in Debian, it's incredible
[08:37] <vorlon> it's been a while since we've had to do one of these in Debian.  the last one was certainly before salsa existed
[08:37] <vorlon> and whatever tooling was used at the time, if it was posted to alioth, is probably long lost
[08:55] <fossfreedom_> hi ubuntu-release - is the 22.04.4 release date known? Was looking here but the .4 and .5 dates are not published as yet. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases
[09:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted livecd-rootfs [source] (jammy-proposed) [2.765.38]
[09:18] <vorlon> fossfreedom_: February 22 https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/jammy-jellyfish-release-schedule/23906
[09:19] <vorlon> (we're a bit behind, sil2100 is driving this point release and has been ill)
[09:20] <sil2100> fossfreedom_: oh, good catch, guess we missed updating that wiki page when setting the date in stone
[09:20] <vorlon> I don't recall the convention for updating https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases, if we're expected to do that when the target date is decided or only after released?
[09:20] <sil2100> ...might actually be the latter
[09:20] <sil2100> Since there's the release e-mail link
[09:21] <sil2100> And it is the 'Current' list of releases
[10:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (focal-proposed/main) [2.664.51 => 2.664.52] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist)
[11:42] <LocutusOfBorg> still slow britney?
[11:42] <LocutusOfBorg> 	09:46:25.log	2024-02-01 11:38	65M	
[11:42] <LocutusOfBorg> wow, this is what I call a huge log
[11:46] <LocutusOfBorg> E: [2024-02-01T11:38:19+0000] - Failure to fetch https://objectstorage.prodstack5.canonical.com/swift/v1/AUTH_0f9aae918d5b4744bf7b827671c86842/autopkgtest-noble/noble/amd64/a/apache2/20231220_133146_145a9@/artifacts.tar.gz/result.tar: HTTP Error 404: Not Found
[11:46] <LocutusOfBorg> interesting, full of "failed to fetch"
[11:46] <LocutusOfBorg> maybe somebody can kill britney?
[11:48] <LocutusOfBorg> interesting I can grab the artifacts manually
[12:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (focal-proposed/main) [0.8.3-1ubuntu12.16 => 0.8.3-1ubuntu12.17] (core, kernel-dkms)
[12:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (jammy-proposed/main) [2.1.5-1ubuntu6~22.04.2 => 2.1.5-1ubuntu6~22.04.3] (core, kernel-dkms)
[12:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (mantic-proposed/main) [2.2.0-0ubuntu1~23.10.1 => 2.2.0-0ubuntu1~23.10.2] (core, kernel-dkms)
[12:52] <sil2100> phew, looks like my fixup for britney did the thing, I start seeing packages migrating at least
[13:25] <LocutusOfBorg> [UPLOADING] Uploading build on bos02-s390x-002
[13:25] <LocutusOfBorg> Finished 50 minutes ago (took 4 hours, 53 minutes, 55.1 seconds)
[13:25] <LocutusOfBorg> wow something really big is going uploaded?
[13:27] <LocutusOfBorg> please kill this build https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-toolchain-r/+archive/ubuntu/ppa/+build/27732709
[13:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: llvm-toolchain-18 [s390x] (noble-proposed/universe) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1] (i386-whitelist)
[14:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kdump-tools (jammy-proposed/main) [1:1.6.10ubuntu2.1 => 1:1.6.10ubuntu2.2] (core)
[14:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kdump-tools (mantic-proposed/main) [1:1.8.1ubuntu1 => 1:1.8.1ubuntu1.1] (core)
[15:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: llvm-toolchain-18 [i386] (noble-proposed/universe) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1] (i386-whitelist)
[15:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: llvm-toolchain-18 [armhf] (noble-proposed/universe) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1] (i386-whitelist)
[15:39] <tchavadar> sil2100: can you have look at bug 2037407 to see if it is ok to approve for jammy/mantic? We have shared the missing test results for the ZCU boards
[15:39] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2037407 in flash-kernel (Ubuntu Mantic) "[SRU] Add support for AMD-Xilinx Kria KD240" [Undecided, Fix Committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2037407
[15:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: llvm-toolchain-18 [amd64] (noble-proposed/universe) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1] (i386-whitelist)
[16:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: llvm-toolchain-18 [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/universe) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1] (i386-whitelist)
[16:42] <jbicha> andersson1234: there are still missing autopkgtest results for noble, if you weren't already aware
[16:42] <jbicha> I was watching https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/r/rust-sequoia-wot/noble/ppc64el & retried a test a few times this week before realizing
[16:42] <jbicha> that the test must have passed because the packages migrated
[16:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: wsl-pro-service (noble-proposed/primary) [0.1]
[16:54] <bdmurray> jbicha: the database is being repopulated. britney has been modified to check the results in swift directly until the database is complete.
[16:54] <jbicha> ok. I just didn't want to not say anything if this detail wasn't known yet :)
[16:56] <bdmurray> jbicha: it is known and written about in the discourse status page
[16:57] <jbicha> thank you! https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/autopkgtest-service/34490
[17:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: glib2.0 [s390x] (noble-proposed/main) [2.79.1-1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[17:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: glib2.0 [amd64] (noble-proposed/main) [2.79.1-1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[17:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: glib2.0 [i386] (noble-proposed/main) [2.79.1-1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[17:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: glib2.0 [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/main) [2.79.1-1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[17:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: glib2.0 [armhf] (noble-proposed/main) [2.79.1-1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[17:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: glib2.0 [arm64] (noble-proposed/main) [2.79.1-1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[17:49] <blackboxsw> ahasenack: last week I saw the rejection of cloud-init SRU upload in your conversation with aciba per a regression found prior to the upload being accepted in proposed during cloud-init's current SRU https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cloud-init/+bug/2045582
[17:49] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2045582 in cloud-init (Ubuntu Mantic) "sru cloud-init (23.4 update) Focal, Jammy, and Mantic" [Undecided, Fix Committed]
[17:49] <ahasenack> hm, yes?
[17:50] <blackboxsw> ahasenack: we have uploads queued from that day that should resolve the discovered bug lp:#2051147, but I think they may be in the wrong state/tag to get attention
[17:50] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2051147 in cloud-init (Ubuntu Mantic) "cloud-init-23.4 cannot read '- Azure' datasource_list format" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2051147
[17:50] <ahasenack> the tags don't affect the unapproved queue, just the proposed pocket
[17:51] <ahasenack> that being said, I'm not seeing cloud-init in the trello board, but I do see it in unapproved, hmm
[17:51] <ahasenack> blackboxsw: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/mantic/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=cloud-init is the one you want attention on (and on other releases too)?
[17:51] <blackboxsw> Yeah, what should have been done in this case to get attention, as I think those unapproved uploads are languishing
[17:51] <blackboxsw> ahasenack: yes please. focal.jammy too
[17:52] <ahasenack> ok, I'll take a look
[17:52] <blackboxsw> thanks a lot
[17:52] <ahasenack> it's not in the (automated) trello board, so I wouldn't have seen it
[17:52] <ahasenack> I'm guessing the automation got confused with the reject + upload to unapproved at the same-ish time
[17:52] <blackboxsw> yes something seemed fuzzy with that as you did attend to it last week, I wonder what we did incorrect
[17:52] <blackboxsw> I think so too
[17:53] <ahasenack> https://trello.com/b/XgBxtrZ9/sru is the board I'm referring to (public)
[17:53] <ahasenack> btw
[17:54] <blackboxsw> thx for the link. I'm saving it. yes I think it could have been the dance of us adding regression-proposed tags, and uploading two uploads to the unapproved queue to correctly resolve the issue before the first review came in.
[17:55] <ahasenack> only a few of us use that board, on the other hand (me, robie, mfo), so that wouldn't have imeded others from seeing the package in unapproved
[17:55] <ahasenack> but thanks for the ping, it's the right move
[17:56] <mfo> +1
[18:03] <ahasenack> blackboxsw: I have a dentist appt in a few, but I'll continue on it afterwards
[18:03] <blackboxsw> thanks. I'll watch for any pings
[18:04] <ahasenack> 4 versions
[18:04] <ahasenack> in the changes file
[18:04] <ahasenack> that will take some looking indeed
[18:23] <ahasenack> blackboxsw: so for noble you want to keep the "exit status 2 in the case of warnings" behavior? wrt https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cloud-init/+bug/2048522
[18:23] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2048522 in cloud-init (Ubuntu Jammy) "status breaks backwards compat with exit code 2 when recoverable errors/warnings" [Undecided, In Progress]
[18:24] <blackboxsw> ahasenack: we want to retain exit 0 in the face of warnings from cloud-init status on noble which was the original behavior in the noble release to avoid breaking scripts/people
[18:24] <ahasenack> I understand that the warning that we get in noble now is because of DEB822 and duplicated entries, and that particular issue will go away,
[18:24] <blackboxsw> so we should have a quilt patch that sets exit code to 9
[18:24] <blackboxsw> so we should have a quilt patch that sets exit code to 0
[18:25] <blackboxsw> ooops misread. on noble we want to keep exit 2. stable releases, stub it back to exit 0
[18:25] <ahasenack> what about that other case from azure, which doesn't have eject
[18:25] <ahasenack> that also produces a warning
[18:26] <ahasenack> unsure if not having eject is a bug in that image, or if it's on purpose. If the latter, then cloud-init will always produce such a warning on azure on noble
[18:26] <blackboxsw> correct, deb822 issue will go away with an update to livecd-rootfs. Azure case with a missing eject util in minimal images will be fixed in 24.1 SRU, or in our next upload to noble when the following PR lands. https://github.com/canonical/cloud-init/pull/4769
[18:26] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Pull 4769 in canonical/cloud-init "feat: prefer udev's cdrom_id -e to eject" [Open]
[18:27] <ahasenack> but won't there be another case where something not that serious will produce a warning, and break scripts?
[18:28] <ahasenack> and given the history and outcry (exaggerating a bit here :) of this issue, it sounds unlikely that we will ever SRU this change in the future (status 2 in the face of warnings, just like noble is now)
[18:28] <ahasenack> so will noble+ for ever be different?
[18:30] <blackboxsw> yes correct, noble++ will be forever different/noisy with respect to warning conditions to shed light on conditions that have been ignored for years because we can't expect people to comb through cloud-init.log to seek out warning messages. Also cloud-init status --format=json tried to categorize "recoverable_errors"(warnings) vs hard "errors" to better announce conditions affecting the integrity of the base config
[18:31] <blackboxsw> we're now treating warnings as "serious enough" that they warrant attention because some of those warnings could be due to inability to install or apply security measures or incorrect configuration leaving a system in an incorrect configuration relative to what the user-data requested.
[18:32] <blackboxsw> the eject azure case is one such security condition.
[18:32] <ahasenack> we need to be careful with SRUs to never backport that change to releases older than noble
[18:32] <blackboxsw> +1 ahasenack in this SRU please pay particular attention to the quilt patch we should have in place to eliminate that exit 2 behavior
[18:32] <ahasenack> I see it
[18:33] <blackboxsw> integration tests should have validated that condition. ack
[18:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: glib2.0 [riscv64] (noble-proposed/main) [2.79.1-1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[18:35] <blackboxsw> and yes, I agree cloud-init never wants to SRU this behavior to exit 2 from cloud-init status back into stable releases. It'd break too many users.
[18:37] <ahasenack> blackboxsw: another question
[18:37] <ahasenack> blackboxsw: mantic-proposed right now has https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cloud-init/23.4-0ubuntu1~23.10.1
[18:37] <ahasenack> observe that changelog
[18:37] <ahasenack> now observe the changelog in the changes file of the new upload: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/711033413/cloud-init_23.4.2-0ubuntu0~23.10.1_source.changes
[18:38] <ahasenack> the entry for mantic-proposed's 23.4-0ubuntu1~23.10.1 was changed
[18:38] <ahasenack> refresh patches, and a list of dropped cpicks
[18:38] <ahasenack> I wasn't expecting past changelog entries to be changed
[18:39] <ahasenack> the diff: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/RtBrbhBH6n/
[18:40] <blackboxsw> ahasenack: I saw the oversight in the previous changelog entry(not accounting for cpick changes) and added `   * d/changelog: amend 23.4-0 refresh patches and dropped cherry-picks entry` to the newer changelog to account for correcting the previous changelog entry
[18:40] <ahasenack> hm, ok
[18:42] <blackboxsw> didn't want to change prior changelog entry without also providing a breadcrumb about that unexpected change to the previous d/changelog stanza. I thought we had done this one other time. I'll see if I can dig up the example
[18:46] <ahasenack> in general I'm against such things, and would be ok with a changelog entry post-documenting the missing entries from before
[18:47] <ahasenack> but in this case it's less of a problem because 23.4 never leaved proposed
[18:47] <ahasenack> left*
[18:47] <blackboxsw> https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cloud-init/commit/?id=b872f680ad
[18:47] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Commit b872f68 in ubuntu/+source/cloud-init "22.4-0ubuntu2 (patches unapplied) import/22.4-0ubuntu2"
[18:47] <ahasenack> ok, dentist time, be back later
[18:48] <blackboxsw> +1 ahasenack so in future cases. we would like to just add only the new changelog entry and say X was fix in prev version Y.
[19:52] <Eickmeyer> I mentioned in #launchpad, but https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-cdimage/+livefs/ubuntu/noble/ubuntustudio/+build/572441 is definitely stuck. Not sure if there's anything anyone can do about it. Not sure it'll unclog itself.
[20:17] <vorlon> Eickmeyer: the only thing we can do about it is kill it; and it's amd64 so it *shouldn't* be stuck at upload stage due to long queues in the pipe across the ocean, but I don't know.  I defer to launchpad unless what you want me to do is kill it
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted glib2.0 [amd64] (noble-proposed) [2.79.1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted glib2.0 [armhf] (noble-proposed) [2.79.1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted glib2.0 [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [2.79.1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted glib2.0 [s390x] (noble-proposed) [2.79.1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted llvm-toolchain-18 [armhf] (noble-proposed) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted llvm-toolchain-18 [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted glib2.0 [arm64] (noble-proposed) [2.79.1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted glib2.0 [riscv64] (noble-proposed) [2.79.1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted llvm-toolchain-18 [i386] (noble-proposed) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted glib2.0 [i386] (noble-proposed) [2.79.1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted llvm-toolchain-18 [s390x] (noble-proposed) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1]
[20:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted llvm-toolchain-18 [amd64] (noble-proposed) [1:18.1.0~rc1-1]
[20:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wsl-pro-service [source] (noble-proposed) [0.1]
[20:26] <Eickmeyer> vorlon: Let's kill it. It has never taken that long to upload across the ocean. Furthermore, the builder has moved on to other tasks, meaning the build status isn't even valid.
[20:28] <Eickmeyer> (never in my memory)
[20:34] <vorlon> Eickmeyer: amd64 doesn't cross the ocean
[20:35] <Eickmeyer> vorlon: ...
[20:35] <Eickmeyer> you know what I mean.
[20:35] <vorlon> it's *possible* that there is a known bottleneck right now with the upload queue on the launchpad side, which would be something #launchpad would have the answer for
[20:35] <vorlon> but anyway yeah I can kill it
[20:35] <vorlon> er uh
[20:35] <vorlon> no I can't
[20:36] <vorlon> wgrant: ^^ is that a result of your latest permissions changes? :)
[20:36] <vorlon> wgrant: would you like me to be able to continue to kill stuck things :)
[20:36] <vorlon> (and also reassess what set of people should have this ability, rather than "techboard")
[20:48] <Eickmeyer> vorlon: IMHO, that capability seems solidly within the scope of release team, so I agree.
[21:15] <LocutusOfBorg> vorlon, FYI today llvm-toolchain-18 was stuck in "uploading" for ~1h in some architectures. Not sure if related, just FYI
[21:16] <LocutusOfBorg> and I remember Colin saying that the upload queue was like a single one per all architectures, so if a pet package on arm64 is slow in uploading, everything else waits for it...
[21:16] <LocutusOfBorg> but I might be wrong
[21:43] <Eickmeyer> vorlon: Somehow it unstuck, but I have a funny feeling it won't publish, but that's a separate issue aiui.
[21:44] <vorlon> why would you expect it not to publish?
[21:45] <mwhudson> i suspect buildd manager is just lagging due to lots of builds completing all at once
[21:45] <mwhudson> is -> was
[21:45] <vorlon> LocutusOfBorg: yeah it is one queue for all architectures, I'm not sure how parallelized it is
[21:45] <vorlon> but ^ that
[21:45] <ahasenack> blackboxsw: comment #7 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cloud-init/+bug/2045582/comments/7 talks about https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cloud-init/+bug/2046483, but that bug is not in d/changelog, just aluded that it's "fixed upstream"
[21:45] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2045582 in cloud-init (Ubuntu Mantic) "sru cloud-init (23.4 update) Focal, Jammy, and Mantic" [Undecided, Fix Committed]
[21:45] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2046483 in cloud-init (Ubuntu Mantic) "status: races with dbus and errors out" [Undecided, In Progress]
[21:45] <ahasenack> how do you want to handle #2046483? It's still open
[21:45] <mwhudson> it's frustrating when it makes to take 45 mins to collect a build result but it's not usually a blocking problem
[21:46] <ahasenack> it's supposedly fixed in 23.4.1, right?
[21:50] <blackboxsw> ahasenack: I think that you are right on that. Double checking, you mean that content/fix and bug reference was omitted from debian/changelog and should be in there right?
[21:51] <ahasenack> not necessarily, as the sru exception only asks that you call out some bugs that you deem are worth it
[21:51] <ahasenack> I'm mostly asking if you wanted to close it with this upload, because right now you are not closing it since it's not mentioned
[21:53] <Eickmeyer> vorlon: Just a little pessimistic lately, that and the publishing issues from the past few days. That said, looks like we're in good shape right now.
[21:58] <blackboxsw> ahasenack: I think I will close the bug  manually as we were unable to reproduce this issue w/ dbus race in manual testing or automated integration tests. We have a contrived test example on the bug. and we reflected context on the bug upstream into launchpad in the event that we needed an LP bug to reference during an SRU process.
[21:58] <ahasenack> sounds good
[22:00] <LocutusOfBorg> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/petsc4py/3.19.6-3ubuntu1
[22:00] <LocutusOfBorg> petsc4py waiting for the same...
[22:00] <LocutusOfBorg> I think it will take 24h for the queue to drain
[22:01] <LocutusOfBorg> some gcc-* stuff takes 10gb for earch architecture
[22:01] <LocutusOfBorg> (to not speak about llvm-* :)
[22:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cloud-init [source] (mantic-proposed) [23.4.2-0ubuntu0~23.10.1]
[22:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cloud-init [source] (jammy-proposed) [23.4.2-0ubuntu0~22.04.1]
[22:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cloud-init [source] (focal-proposed) [23.4.2-0ubuntu0~20.04.1]
[22:21] <blackboxsw> WOOT! many thanks. We'll kick off validation stuff now
[22:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: wsl-pro-service [amd64] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1] (no packageset)
[22:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: wsl-pro-service [arm64] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1] (no packageset)
[22:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: wsl-pro-service [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1] (no packageset)
[22:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: wsl-pro-service [s390x] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1] (no packageset)
[22:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: wsl-pro-service [riscv64] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1] (no packageset)
[23:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wsl-pro-service [amd64] (noble-proposed) [0.1]
[23:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wsl-pro-service [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [0.1]
[23:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wsl-pro-service [s390x] (noble-proposed) [0.1]
[23:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wsl-pro-service [arm64] (noble-proposed) [0.1]
[23:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted wsl-pro-service [riscv64] (noble-proposed) [0.1]