/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2024/03/22/#ubuntu-release.txt

=== alucardromero2 is now known as alucardromero
=== chris14_ is now known as chris14
mwhudsonjbicha: any news on folks ftbfs?04:15
mwhudsonwhyyyy are all the haskell-gi-* packages broken05:24
=== pushkarnk1 is now known as pushkarnk
LocutusOfBorgmwhudson, good question, related to haskell09:09
LocutusOfBorgnot sure09:09
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted linux-firmware [source] (mantic-proposed) [20230919.git3672ccab-0ubuntu2.10]09:18
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted linux-firmware [source] (jammy-proposed) [20220329.git681281e4-0ubuntu3.30]09:19
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted qemu [source] (mantic-proposed) [1:8.0.4+dfsg-1ubuntu3.23.10.4]09:25
tjaaltondviererbe: hi, looking at dotnet*. at least dotnet6 for mantic mentions changes that are not in the diff09:40
dviererbetjaalton: Can you give me an example?09:41
tjaaltond/rules and d/copyright09:42
tjaaltonand dotnet7 for mantic has the git repo in the diff09:42
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected dotnet7 [source] (mantic-proposed) [7.0.117-0ubuntu1~23.10.2]09:43
dviererbeOkay, thanks. I look into it.09:43
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted firmware-sof [source] (jammy-proposed) [2.0-1ubuntu4.7]09:45
tjaaltonand I'm not sure if all the test changes should be lumped in the same bug adding a new dependency09:45
dviererbetjaalton: The diff in launchpad is against 7.0.110-0ubuntu1, but the latest version is 7.0.117-0ubuntu1~23.10.109:49
dviererbeI was super confused, because I only did changes in debian/*09:50
tjaaltonokay09:50
tjaaltontooling issue then09:50
tjaaltonit doesn't know of -security09:50
dviererbeRegarding dotnet6 changelog. You are right. This is a copy&paste error and already included with the previous upload.09:54
dviererbeHow is this fixable?09:55
tjaaltonokay, just leave it09:56
tjaalton2057982 headline at least should be changed if it's this massive change instead of just adding a dep09:56
dviererbeack, changed it09:57
tjaaltonwell it's still just a question :)10:01
dviererbeRegarding if the test should be included. The old testsuite is known to fail. If I do not change the tests, then the test do not pass.10:03
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dotnet8 [source] (mantic-proposed) [8.0.103-8.0.3-0ubuntu1~23.10.2]10:06
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dotnet8 [source] (jammy-proposed) [8.0.103-8.0.3-0ubuntu1~22.04.2]10:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dotnet7 [source] (jammy-proposed) [7.0.117-0ubuntu1~22.04.2]10:11
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dotnet6 [source] (jammy-proposed) [6.0.128-0ubuntu1~22.04.2]10:12
tjaaltondviererbe: you need to build packages with -v"foo" to include the changelog of the current version in proposed10:13
tjaaltonwithout that, tracking the closing of the bug won't happen automatically10:13
tjaaltonmissed that from dotnet6 for jammy, but you can still fix mantic10:14
dviererbeI thought that -v just affects how many entries of the changelog are included in the .changes file10:17
tjaaltonyes, and those include the refs to sru bugs10:17
tjaaltonthe new dotnet6 uploads don't have a ref to the current one in proposed now10:18
dviererbeJust so I understood you correctly: I should get a new source package uploaded with -v set, right?10:19
dviererbefor dotnet6 mantic10:19
tjaaltonI'm trying to remember if it's just the auto-closing on release that it'll miss if that's not done10:21
tjaaltonin that case it's just a matter of doing it manually10:21
tjaalton(by you :)10:21
tjaaltonor if it's just spamming the old bug. which is irrelevant here10:23
tjaaltonyour call, I think10:23
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted landscape-client [source] (mantic-proposed) [23.08-0ubuntu1.1]10:24
dviererbeI am happy to it manually this time and make sure to apply it on the next upload.10:24
tjaaltonokay, good10:25
tjaaltonthe main benefit, iirc, is spamming the old bugs to re-test assuming the new update fixes a flaw in the original sru10:26
dviererbeSorry for the complications. It's a while since I had to do an .NET SRU, since all the previous uploads where security uploads and the security team took care of many things.10:26
tjaaltonno worries10:29
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dotnet6 [source] (mantic-proposed) [6.0.128-0ubuntu1~23.10.2]10:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted runc [source] (mantic-proposed) [1.1.7-0ubuntu2.3]10:56
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted runc [source] (jammy-proposed) [1.1.7-0ubuntu1~22.04.3]10:57
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dpdk [source] (mantic-proposed) [22.11.4-0ubuntu0.23.10.1]11:00
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted runc [source] (focal-proposed) [1.1.7-0ubuntu1~20.04.3]11:01
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dpdk [source] (jammy-proposed) [21.11.6-0ubuntu0.22.04.1]11:03
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: libcypher-parser (noble-proposed/primary) [0.6.2-0.1]11:03
ginggstjaalton, dviererbe: sorry for missing the -v in the dotnet6 uploads11:08
dviererbeginggs: no worries, I wasn't aware that dpkg-genchanges generates a Launchpad-Bugs-Fixed field. Maybe we should add this to the manpage?11:11
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcypher-parser [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.6.2-0.1]11:17
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcypher-parser [amd64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.6.2-0.1] (no packageset)11:20
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcypher-parser [arm64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.6.2-0.1] (no packageset)11:21
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcypher-parser [s390x] (noble-proposed/none) [0.6.2-0.1] (no packageset)11:21
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcypher-parser [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/none) [0.6.2-0.1] (no packageset)11:22
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcypher-parser [armhf] (noble-proposed/none) [0.6.2-0.1] (no packageset)11:23
dokomitya57: I see you filed https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067009, are you involved?11:30
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Debian bug 1067009 in src:lomiri-ui-toolkit "lomiri-ui-toolkit: FTBFS: 63 failures which MUST be fixed" [Serious, Open]11:30
juliankubuntu-archive please rm apt-verify as per https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt-verify/+bug/2058734 - ta!11:40
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2058734 in apt-verify (Ubuntu) "RM: apt-verify; not fit for purpose, not installable" [Undecided, New]11:40
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcypher-parser [riscv64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.6.2-0.1] (no packageset)11:40
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcypher-parser [amd64] (noble-proposed) [0.6.2-0.1]11:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcypher-parser [armhf] (noble-proposed) [0.6.2-0.1]11:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcypher-parser [riscv64] (noble-proposed) [0.6.2-0.1]11:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcypher-parser [arm64] (noble-proposed) [0.6.2-0.1]11:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcypher-parser [s390x] (noble-proposed) [0.6.2-0.1]11:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcypher-parser [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [0.6.2-0.1]11:59
dokojuliank: done12:07
mitya57doko: I just filed that bug, but don't have ideas how to fix it yet. And what caused it.12:13
dokoat least the tests are disabled on armhf, so we will be able to build new binaries12:19
schopinubuntu-archive: please RM libosmo-inet and friends from armhf as per https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libosmo-netif/+bug/205873912:20
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2058739 in libosmo-netif (Ubuntu) "t64: remove libosmo-netif and rdeps from armhf" [Undecided, New]12:20
dokoschopin: so I have to find the binary names for myself? ;p doing now12:24
fossfreedom_hi ubuntu-release - I am trying to figure out why the nemo autopkgtest for amd64 is marked as failed here https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/proposed-migration/noble/update_excuses.html but if you click on the amd64 hyperlink both brian and myself have poked the rebuild and the results have work.  The red failed result is still from the 15th March.  Can someone please 'unconfuse me' ? cheers.12:31
dokoschopin: done12:46
schopindoko: thanks :)12:46
dokofossfreedom_: that was 2h ago, most likely will be part of a next update of excuses12:48
fossfreedom_🤞 cheers12:50
juliankThe edos-distcheck reports (not the removal-candidates obviously) in https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/ now only show unsatisfiable build-dependencies for packages which have armhf binaries in the release pocket12:55
juliankThey probably should be their own reports when I clean this up and put it on Canonical infra12:56
juliankNow it just appends `, but not a regression`13:02
juliankBut I added https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/proposed.only-regressions.txt13:06
rbasakubuntu-archive: I think src:glewlwyd is blocking gnutls28 and meets Steve's criteria for removal. I'm not sure if I have my tooling right here - please could you check?13:19
rbasakIn particular the revdeps.13:19
rbasakOh. On an older release, reverse-depends says nothing. But on a newer release it fails with 403 Forbidden.13:20
rbasakDo we know what that's about?13:20
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcupsfilters [amd64] (noble-proposed/main) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6] (no packageset)13:29
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcupsfilters [s390x] (noble-proposed/main) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6] (no packageset)13:29
juliankrbasak: https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/removal-candidates.txt confirms it is a leaf package13:29
juliank> 0 glewlwyd13:29
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcupsfilters [armhf] (noble-proposed/main) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6] (no packageset)13:29
juliankThis takes provides into accounts unlike reverse-depends13:29
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcupsfilters [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/main) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6] (no packageset)13:29
rbasakThanks!13:30
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ubuntu-mate-artwork [amd64] (noble-proposed/universe) [24.04.0] (ubuntu-mate)13:33
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ubuntu-mate-artwork [amd64] (noble-proposed) [24.04.0]13:35
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libcupsfilters [arm64] (noble-proposed/main) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6] (no packageset)13:36
juliankrbasak: Oh you said src:glewlwyd, the script checks the binary package. The armhf binary certainly can be removed, but the others are ok too, at least on armhf.13:39
juliankrbasak: So the policy to remove armhf binaries is to ping, but source package removals need a bug13:39
rbasakjuliank: ah I didn't appreciate the difference. Will just removing the armhf binary be sufficient then?13:40
juliankyeah13:41
rbasakOn another thread, Debian has a time_t fix for iddawc in a new upload that I think we should take. I could sync it, but Debian's upload also includes "Use pkgconf instead of pkg-config" as a B-D change. Is this worth adding an Ubuntu delta to avoid that change, or should I just sync it?13:41
juliankubuntu-archive: remove-package -b -a glewlwyd13:41
rbasakOh pkg-config is just a transitional package that depends on pkgconf13:43
rbasakSo no functional change there, so I'll sync13:43
juliankrbasak: This found a bug in the script, other files that filtered on packages having an upload in proposed (with or without a missing build) only showed source packages producing a single binary as I split the "Binary" field on spaces instead of ","13:45
juliankNow you can see it in https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/removal-candidates.with-proposed-missing.txt13:45
juliankEssentially "0 glewlwyd" says that "glewlwyd" is blocking migration of "src:glewlwyd"13:46
juliankbecause glewlwyd is in release but missing a build in proposed :)13:46
juliankAll of these binaries are (assuming the package builds on other architectures) blocking migration and can be removed: https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/removal-candidates.with-proposed-missing.txt13:47
juliankThat's 351 binary packages13:48
juliankJust wholesale drop them, they (1) are leaf packages, (2) have a newer version in proposed, (3) said newer version is missing a build for those binaries13:48
juliankLet's avoid doing long manual analysis each time :)13:49
rbasakSure, but I have no idea what I'm doing on my +1 shift then, apart from manual analysis!13:49
rbasakI need a list of items that need manual attention really13:49
juliankWe also have amd64 reports!13:51
rbasakIf someone were to give me a specific +1 task to work on then I'd happily work on it.13:51
rbasakEg. "figure out how to fix the build for $foo"13:51
rbasakor "make package $foo's autopkgtest for $arch" pass13:52
juliankI think we lost cross toolchains on armhf, doko , and it's breaking bochs, u-boot, snek, qemu13:52
juliankSee https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/proposed.only-regressions.txt13:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-advantage-tools (mantic-proposed/main) [31.2~23.10 => 31.2.1~23.10] (core)13:52
rbasakBut honestly right now I feel like the entire +1 maintenance programme is pointless. I'm not really doing anything useful. Just flailing about wasting all my time trying to find something useful to do.13:52
rbasakjuliank: I appreciate your work, but that doesn't seem to translate to something *specific* for me to do.13:53
juliankrbasak: It was more for doko :)13:53
juliankrbasak: There were specific actions, but we all do +1 maintenance basically13:53
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-advantage-tools (jammy-proposed/main) [31.2~22.04 => 31.2.1~22.04] (core)13:53
juliankrbasak: Like in the report I uploaded execline to fix the dependency issue in the last paragraph and a bunch more but now they are all rsolved13:54
juliankNot sure about the python3.12 stuff13:54
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ubuntu-advantage-tools [source] (mantic-proposed) [31.2.1~23.10]13:54
juliankIt is rebuilt, but somehow dose-distcheck picked up the old one13:54
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected ubuntu-advantage-tools [source] (jammy-proposed) [31.2.1~22.04]13:55
julianksimilarly libvirt-dev:armhf -> libvirt0:armhf (= 10.0.0-2ubuntu1) -> libglib2.0-0:armhf (>= 2.58.0) looked at old libvirt13:56
juliankI told the script to only look at the latest one, sigh13:56
juliankbut rrdtool, profotbuf-c, timblserver, execline were actionable13:58
juliankdoko: ok sorry, I don't know why dose-distcheck complains about bochs build-depending on gcc cross14:01
juliankProbably it tries to satisfy Build-Depends-Indep but they are only needed on amd6414:01
rbasakcourier-authlib depends on libgdbm6 instead of libgdbm6t64. It hasn't had an upload/rebuild since Lunar. Is there any reason why it hasn't had a no change rebuild from someone's automation?14:01
juliankrbasak: Do it, it doesn't even show up on my automation14:03
rbasakack14:03
juliankProbably libgdbm6 is still installable :)14:03
julianki.e. essential + courier-authlib still installs or I'd see it by now14:03
juliankrbasak: If you need trivial work, https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/proposed-binaries.txt has a trivial list at the start14:04
juliankrbasak: This is basically packages that have hardcoded libfoo1 depends and then gained libfoo1t64 from shlibs14:04
rbasakWe should be able to find all binaries that don't have replacements in proposed that depend on a known list of non-t64 libs, surely?14:04
juliankYes so I need to get the renamed library list and then could build one14:05
juliankThe normal transition tracker doesn't work somehow14:05
rbasakEven if the list isn't complete I think it would probably be useful to just have the major ones that are showing up everywhere - that'd probably help with most of the entanglements.14:05
juliankhttps://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/transitions/html/html/auto-gdbm.html14:06
julianke.g.14:06
juliankcourier-authlib doesn't appear there14:06
rbasakPackage: courier-authlib14:06
rbasakDepends: adduser, libc6 (>= 2.34), libcrypt1 (>= 1:4.1.0), libgcc-s1 (>= 3.5), libgdbm6 (>= 1.16), libltdl7 (>= 2.4.7), libpam0g (>= 0.99.7.1), libstdc++6 (>= 5.2)14:06
juliankYes14:06
juliankand that matches Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libgdbm\-compat4|libgdbm6)\b/14:07
juliankand Affected too14:07
juliankso ben is broken or something?14:07
rbasak:-/14:07
dokoben is broken, yes. I thought sil2100 would update it?14:07
juliankOh I can write my own global ben easily I see14:07
juliankI feel like end of next week I'll have written my own britney14:08
juliankLet me whip up a global-ben.py14:09
juliankrbasak: OK so here's a global-ben.py output https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/global-ben.txt - this shows all binaries that depend on binaries removed in proposed (i.e. not present in the same source package in proposed)14:23
juliankI can also reverse this and group it by dependency14:23
juliankThen it is more ben like14:24
juliankI think global-ben is usable nowp14:30
julianklibaunit21 Reverse-Depends: libaunit22-dev14:37
juliankfunny14:37
juliankSo tons of stuff that needs rebuilding, if you grep that for rebuild-for14:38
rbasakYou can additionally grep for t64 specifically14:39
rbasakDo you want to upload those? Ordering might matter though.14:40
juliankThat's the other question, do we want to upload them or do we want to let stuff migrate first, I don't think they block migration?14:41
juliankrbasak: t64 you can grep for but that's where it adds the rebuild-for comment14:41
juliank:D14:41
juliank2331 binary packages depend on old versions14:42
juliankShould I make this produce source packages14:42
rbasakIt doesn't show up in update_excuses yet, but I think gdbm would have been blocked by courier once its autopkgtests are clear, and courier FTBFS because of courier-authlib.14:44
rbasakSo I think there are cases where this list does block migration. Maybe not all of them though.14:44
juliankNicer now14:45
juliankIt now shows source packages right hand of :14:46
rbasakhttps://launchpad.net/builders - if that means what I think it does then the armhf build queue isn't bad at all at 15 minutes14:46
juliankI wonder if I should extend the script now that I have that data, I could make it build a tree of build-dependencies, order them and then give me rebuild-for instructions14:47
juliankBut vorlon was saying we should just upload all packages14:47
juliankor rather they'd all be binNMUed in Debian14:47
juliankAnd if anything misbuilds it goes in for another round14:48
juliankI'14:48
rbasakFine by me14:48
juliankSo I think I'll just do all14:48
juliankI'14:48
juliankI will just amend the script slightly for nicer changelog entries :)14:48
rbasakNote that courier-authlib is already done :)14:54
rbasak(it's awaiting build)14:54
ahasenackthe build queue is increasing, despite there being several idle builders14:54
ahasenackhttps://launchpad.net/builders14:54
ahasenackI started looking when the amd64 queue was at 60 jobs (because my build hasn't started yet), and it's now 7914:55
ahasenackand ton of idle amd64 builders, according to that page14:55
juliankrbasak: https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/global-ben.rebuild-for.txt14:55
juliankAh source package it should use14:56
juliankIt now ignores packages that are missing a build in proposed14:57
juliankand gives me instructions for my rebuild script14:57
Eickmeyerahasenack: Several jobs "cleaning" for an hour. Something needs to be kicked, I reckon.14:58
seb128-> #launchpad14:58
Eickmeyer^ indeed14:58
juliankWell 1690 packages to rebuild15:01
julianklet's goo15:01
juliankAh shoot15:02
juliankI did not deduplicate source packages :)15:02
juliank112015:05
juliankmuch better15:05
dokoLP issue, raised with the LP team15:22
juliankOK actually 50015:27
juliankbut should be fine now15:27
juliankMy rebuild-for script also ensures that if pull-lp-source finds a newer upload mentioning a t64 library that we do not trigger a rebuild15:28
rbasakSounds good!15:38
juliankJust added Recommends to the ignore list15:49
juliankThose are manual15:49
juliankand don't impact migration15:49
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcupsfilters [amd64] (noble-proposed) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6]15:53
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcupsfilters [armhf] (noble-proposed) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6]15:53
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcupsfilters [s390x] (noble-proposed) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6]15:53
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcupsfilters [arm64] (noble-proposed) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6]15:53
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libcupsfilters [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [2.0.0-0ubuntu6]15:53
juliankTool has one tiny issue: If there is an NBS binary in proposed that is broken it triggers another rebuild16:00
juliankIt mostly gets caught because rebuild-for checks if the t64 library is named in the changelog already16:01
juliank cpdb-backend-cups | 2.0~b5-0ubuntu3 | noble-proposed  | armhf16:03
juliank cpdb-backend-cups | 2.0~b5-0ubuntu4 | noble-proposed  | source, amd64, arm64, ppc64el, riscv64, s390x16:03
julianklike this it almost triggered twice16:04
juliankThis is fixed now fwiw16:34
juliankSadly I can't easily pass the commands to xargs or so so it's uploading sequentially16:34
juliankah GNU parallel16:36
juliankHad to add locking around debuild because scdaemon or the smartcard craps out when you sign stuff in parallel16:38
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: lomiri-ui-toolkit [armhf] (noble-proposed/universe) [1.3.5012+dfsg-5ubuntu1] (no packageset)16:40
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted lomiri-ui-toolkit [armhf] (noble-proposed) [1.3.5012+dfsg-5ubuntu1]16:41
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kf5-messagelib [amd64] (noble-proposed/universe) [4:23.08.5-0ubuntu3] (kubuntu)16:45
dokojuliank: hmm, did you only re-upload those packages that were missing or bad on armhf?16:46
juliankdoko: All of the packages uploaded are missing a dependency transition on armhf; and did not have an outstanding armhf build in proposed (except a couple at the start, they had older binaries published in proposed like deepin-terminal16:50
juliankdoko: Also for any libfoo1 dependency this found in the latest version; it also checked that libfoo1t64 was built on armhf16:51
juliankdoko: Some stuff like libghc-hopenpgp-dev depends libnettle8 is unfortunate16:53
juliankBut needs fixing either way to migrate16:54
dokoI only looked at the ocaml stack so far. haskell still needs to be done16:54
juliankThere's only 5 haskell ones that my t64 script found16:55
juliankbut it doesn't know all renames16:55
juliankOnly straightforward libname0 to libname0t6416:55
juliank:D16:55
juliankSo to make it clear: anything that is waiting on a build or failed to build in proposed has not been uploaded again16:56
juliankNo pointless uploads in there hopefully :)16:57
juliankThis also applies to if you drop the old binary in release pocket, even16:57
juliankWe always only check the latest version of each binary package16:57
juliankThis may be in proposed, likely is a lot of times16:58
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-rtslib-fb (jammy-proposed/main) [2.1.74-0ubuntu4 => 2.1.74-0ubuntu4.1] (no packageset)16:58
juliankBasically like I said I built a simple ben that detects libfoo0 to libfoo0t64 transitions :)16:58
juliankit only knows about armhf16:58
juliankSo if your package has an old dependency but only is on amd64, it doesn't get rebuild (but that's fine as there are Provides there)16:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: kf5-messagelib [armhf] (noble-proposed/universe) [4:23.08.5-0ubuntu3] (kubuntu)17:04
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kf5-messagelib [amd64] (noble-proposed) [4:23.08.5-0ubuntu3]17:05
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kf5-messagelib [armhf] (noble-proposed) [4:23.08.5-0ubuntu3]17:05
juliankAll have been uploaded17:06
rbasakThank you!17:12
juliankA second batch has been identified after receiving the full list from vorlon, and I have uploaded them as well now17:24
juliankI hope there is someone doing +1 later today who will go through all my build failures :D17:24
juliankI think it's about 20 so far17:24
rbasakHow to tell apart the build failures that are due to misordering, and everything else?17:25
rbasakI'm EOD very shortly though sorry.17:25
juliankI don't think there's suppsoed to be any misordering possible17:27
juliankIn the sense that we renamed nothing17:27
juliankmuch will be down to cleaning up some implicit declarations or something17:27
rbasakI'm thinking of a build failure because of a missing t64 binary that will get resolved from the same batch of rebuilds, so a second rebuild might work.17:28
rbasakBut this would be a few layers deep.17:28
rbasaks/would/could/17:28
juliankThere are no missing t64 binaries because the rebuilds don't rename any libraries to t64 as they are just rebuidls17:28
juliankThe t64 renames already happened17:29
juliankOh17:29
juliankBut if you have bar depends libfoo1t64 and baz deends libfoo1 in your build-depends and then you rebuild baz17:29
juliankI see17:29
juliankSo there may be dependency issues at build time like this17:30
juliankBut we'll see them in my report too17:30
juliankThey'd appear as new "Other conflicts" in https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/proposed.txt17:30
juliankAs always, all reports are hourly updated :)17:31
vorlonI am currently working on getting glib2.0 migratable (in principle)18:20
vorlonafter fixing multipath-tools to not have a hard-coded dep on libaio1 (instead of libaio1t64 :| ), which will let us get a view on https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/proposed-migration/update_output_notest.txt packages that will be uninstallable on armhf even if we ignore tests, I am currently going through the packages listed on18:21
vorlonhttps://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#glib2.0 as having test regressions18:21
vorlonafter trivially confirming that the test was run correctly (with --all-proposed, against a version of the package built against the current glib2.0), I will be opening blocking bugs against the packages in -proposed, and removing the armhf binaries from the release pocket18:22
vorlonthere's room for others to help if someone wants to start at the other end of the alphabet18:22
vorlonunfortunately I've gotten to the second one and it looks like a problem with a mesa misbuild18:23
vorlon(auto-multiple-choice)18:23
vorlondeliberate behavior change, zink is only built on LLVM_ARCHS in mesa and armhf is not listed as an LLVM_ARCH18:26
vorlontjaalton: ^^ why is armel listed as an LLVM_ARCH but armhf not?18:26
vorlonor is this an undocumented bootstrap artifact18:26
vorlonyes it is18:27
vorlondoko: ^ mesa bootstrap didn't get cleaned up fully, fyi; fixing now18:27
juliankvorlon: There were a couple of rebuilds for libglib2.0t64 missing that were hopefully executed by https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/global-ben.rebuild-for.txt - assuming they are not hardcoded libglib2.0 dependencies (in which case no-change rebuild will be pointless :D)18:32
juliankjust fyi18:33
juliankThe worst offenders were libfuse2 and libcfitsio10 afacit18:34
vorlonjuliank: thanks18:34
juliankand  libssl3 :D18:34
vorlonuh18:35
vorlonyou mean rebuilds for libssl3, right, not libssl3 depending on glib?18:35
juliankright18:35
vorlonok18:35
vorlontjaalton: unping, it was a bootstrap thing, sorted now18:37
vorlonand some of these failed tests against glib2.0 are 10 days old, better retry them with *current* all-proposed18:37
juliankI might teach global-ben next week to handle any libfoo[0-9]*  -> libfoo[0-9]*  (these are glob) patterns; like ben does autodetect library transitions I suppose, just detect non-numerical prefix18:37
juliankThis will unblock libfoo1 to libfoo2 and so on from getting rebuild-for commands scheduled :)18:38
vorlon 39s             " failed with stderr "sed: can't read /etc/apt/sources.list: No such file or directory18:38
vorlonoops18:38
juliankheh18:38
vorlonlooks like that was an infra issue though18:38
juliankI think QA team rebuilt armhf images with deb822 sources, maybe18:39
juliankSkia: ^18:39
vorloneh it was a one-off several days ago, not worth his time18:40
vorlonI'm very happy to see most of these glib2.0 regressions (after the first 2) are badpkg18:40
juliankvorlon: Well from the deb822 branch merge request, I know Skia tested parts of the deb822 branch to build lxd armhf images in the infra, but not sure if it was prod or staging.18:41
vorlonbdmurray: running this now: retry-autopkgtest-regressions --all-proposed --log-regex 'FAIL badpkg' | grep armhf18:41
juliankMaybe wait until my 500 something uploads are  done18:42
vorlonoh I thought they were done already18:42
juliankdone building and installed18:42
juliankI uploaded them18:42
vorlonstill, this will help clear some of the noise18:42
juliankarmhf queues are empty almost :)18:42
juliankamd64 still has 9000 tests18:43
juliankI should write a script that parses queued.json and then produces a report with tests that can be removed right18:44
tjaaltonvorlon: ack. I've had a new point-release waiting for the archive to be sorted since last week, but I'll sit on it still18:44
vorlonbdmurray: ^ amd64 tests look like they're going to be a blocker for any progress today unless we ignore them, are the runners currently healthy?18:44
vorlontjaalton: ack, please wait a little longer - hopefully we'll get things unclogged by Monday18:45
vorlon351s ERROR: ld.so: object '/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/click/libclickpreload.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded (cannot open shared object file): ignored.18:47
vorlon... in an armhf test log18:47
vorlon(gdb) run18:59
vorlonStarting program: /usr/sbin/cups-browsed18:59
vorlonDuring startup program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.18:59
vorlonblink18:59
vorlon# LD_DEBUG=all cups-browsed19:01
vorlonSegmentation fault19:01
vorlon*blink*19:01
vorlonjuliank: looks like you may have missed some packages, libppd2 is still linked against libcupsfilters2 not libcupsfilters2t64?19:05
vorlonwait hmm19:05
vorlonheh that's not in our list because the source package is different between Debian and Ubuntu19:07
EickmeyerIs it too late to make a joke about a stack of "cups" falling over?19:12
Skiajuliank: vorlon: about those deb822 patches: we have them in our branch used in production, and indeed, we rebuilt many images since the beginning of last week. Current status for armhf is that we have about 15 workers in bos02 that **may** not be deb822, depending on whether or not bdmurray rebuilt the images after rolling back to 5.20 at the beginning of the week, but what's certain is that the19:21
Skiaother 14 workers in bos03 that I deployed this week are completely deb822, built on our current 5.32+prod branch (which is here: https://salsa.debian.org/ubuntu-ci-team/autopkgtest/-/tree/ubuntu/cb2df3e+deb822+prod )19:21
vorlonyes, I think those failures were transient (and were from several days ago)19:22
Skiathat `sed` on `sources.list` error was indeed transient, was part of the fixes that we did Monday or Tuesday19:22
juliankack19:22
juliankI wonder if *tests* themselves will fail requiring sources.list, onyl time will tell19:23
juliankWell it seems over 400 of my uploads have built succesfully, the rebuild-for list is down to 136 now19:24
vorlonthere are also an unpleasant number of amd64 autopkgtest regressions against glib2.019:27
vorlonretrying these with --all-proposed as well19:27
vorlonjuliank: have we done all perlapi rebuilds :/19:29
juliankhmm19:30
juliankI don't have Provides tracking in global-ben19:30
vorlonyawp19:30
juliankBut let me add a tracker of sorts19:30
vorlonI'll get on them19:30
vorlonhah perlapi-5.38.2t64 shows up in my chroot because I have i386 enabled; did I still not get the logic right on that?19:31
vorlonbecause i386 is obviously not t6419:31
juliankvorlon: bad is perlapi-5.38.2?19:32
vorlonjuliank: only on armhf19:32
juliankI only report on armhf19:32
juliank:D19:32
vorlonwell there you go19:32
vorlonjuliank: my script says only 5 packages to rebuild, which seems suspicious19:36
vorlonah but frozen-bubble is one of them and that's the package we hit in tests19:36
vorlonhurray19:36
juliankvorlon: looking, I don't see any19:37
vorlonjuliank: even frozen-bubble?19:38
juliankvorlon: See it ignores frozen-bubble because it has a newer version in proposed that is failing to build19:38
vorlonhmm19:38
juliankI think global-ben.txt should not ignore those, but global-ben.rebuild-for.txt should19:39
vorlonah. my hack to make my rebuild script look at armhf instead of amd64 must have missed something19:39
vorlonthe list I had was:19:40
vorlonRebuilding cyrus-imapd19:40
vorlonRebuilding frozen-bubble19:40
vorlonRebuilding libgetdata19:40
vorlonRebuilding liblocale-gettext-perl19:40
vorlonRebuilding liboping19:40
vorlonare those all ftbfs?19:40
vorlonotoh libsdl-perl is also definitely ftbfs and is what actually blocks frozen-bubble19:41
juliankvorlon: Yeah you can grep '(missing|old) build for <name>' in https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/global-ben.log19:42
juliankI see now perlapi-5.38.2 Reverse-Depends: cyrus-imapd libsdl-perl frozen-bubble redland-bindings libgetdata19:43
juliankBut I believe they are all ftbfs19:43
juliankchecking liblocale-gettext-perl from your list, it already has a new one19:44
vorlonhmm if I remove frozen-bubble and libsdl-perl on armhf, and retry on !armhf with current dpkg, it should migrate and be happy19:44
vorlonjuliank: ok. confused how I got these particular results then; I just did a chdist apt update immediately before running it19:46
juliankvorlon: So https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/global-ben.txt now shows FTBFS as well, but in ()19:47
vorlontakes a long time for retry-autopkgtest-regressions to grep all the logs19:47
vorlonI deliberately didn't filter by package, so19:47
vorlonno armhf tests in the queue; something went very well or very badly19:49
juliank# packages listed in () are failing to build in proposed19:50
juliankandroid-platform-frameworks-native-headers Reverse-Depends: android-platform-frameworks-base19:50
juliankjupyter-nbextension-jupyter-js-widgets Reverse-Depends: (ipywidgets) (sagemath)19:50
julianklibabsl20220623 (rebuild-for libabsl20220623t64) Reverse-Depends: (llvm-toolchain-17) (libreoffice) (llvm-toolchain-snapshot)19:50
juliankis this readable19:50
juliankmore or less19:50
juliankLots of FTBFS19:50
juliankI should probably use [] for them19:50
juliankI use () for the hint of what the library got renamed to19:51
juliankdone, and also ordered them at teh end19:53
julianke.g. libxerces-c3.2 (rebuild-for libxerces-c3.2t64) Reverse-Depends: cegui-mk2 xalan [deepin-log-viewer] [passwordsafe] [toppic] [vecgeom]19:53
juliankYou can reason I uploaded cegui-mk2 and xalan but not the others since they could be retried19:54
juliankI can build a more global ben that checks across all architectures, because obviously amd64 or so may still refer to old names (but that is fine, due to provides, so meh)19:56
juliankvorlon: I can also print you a simple list of all FTBFS I see19:56
juliankor rather ftbfs + missing19:57
vorlonjuliank: well I can already use ubuntu-build to retry all ftbfs on armhf19:57
juliankI can't distinguish them :D19:57
juliankvorlon: Ah well do that maybe19:57
juliankBut it's good global-ben.txt now has missing builds shown so you get a broader understanding of what a transition is depending on19:58
juliankI called it global-ben because it actually shows you all transitions in one page19:58
juliank:D19:58
juliankNew report coming soon19:59
juliankIt's almost :0019:59
juliankvorlon: Do you know of any other virtual transition?20:00
juliankWhy did the list of rebuilds grow, lol20:01
juliank136 -> 14920:01
vorlonjuliank: uh there are a couple of other virtual transitions; I just have to find them20:01
juliank+rebuild-for "libssl3t64" condor20:02
juliankhmm20:02
juliankI did that20:02
juliankugh  <apt_pkg.Version object: Pkg:'condor' Ver:'23.4.0+dfsg-1build3' Section:'universe/science'  Arch:'armhf' Size:8525492 ISize:21937152 Hash:706453376 ID:72014 Priority:4> Depends libssl320:04
juliankhmm20:04
vorlonbooth tests not installable because of something in the curl stack still20:04
juliankAh hardcoded depends20:04
juliankglobal-ben.log:# Rebuilding  due to condor 23.4.0+dfsg-1build3 depending on {'libssl3t64'}20:06
julianksilly20:06
vorlonahhh don't look at that debian/control file20:06
juliankSo it was gone from previous report because condor was still building and now reappeared because it misbuilt :)20:06
juliankI like that behavior20:06
juliankI just upload another build4 now, saying "Some-change rebuild"20:07
vorlonhow is that a build rather than ubuntu?20:08
juliankIt should have been a maysync really20:08
juliankOh well20:08
vorlonwhy? is this fixed in Debian?20:08
juliankYou can't upload to Debian without fixing it20:08
vorlonand did you fix all the garbage in debian/control :P20:09
juliankNo20:09
vorlonsure you can, it'll just ftbfs everywhere20:09
julianklet me reupload :)20:09
vorlonand ruby-ethon no-change rebuild didn't help because it's arch: all :P20:09
juliankheh yeah20:10
juliankI mean you can't know, they could do magic20:10
juliankIf I were building a ctypes module package, I'd look at my libfoo-dev and then determine libfoo<num> from there20:10
* vorlon nods20:10
vorlonanyway, ruby-ethon -> that's the booth autopkgtest fixed20:11
vorlonbdmurray: https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/c/castle-game-engine/noble/amd64 now shows 5 different tests queued with glib2.0 somewhere in the triggers, and 2 of them appear to be straight duplicates; maybe some queue pruning is needed here again20:12
juliankI can just run rebuild-for script on a loop based on global-ben output20:13
juliankApparently some more transitions are still landing20:14
juliankI think I'm rebuilding kde now20:15
vorlonagain?20:15
vorlonthat shouldn't be the case20:16
vorloni.e. please abort20:16
vorlonKDE specifically only changed the package name for the base packages20:16
juliankhmm20:17
juliankvorlon: it is correct though20:18
vorlonjuliank: example?20:19
juliankvorlon: libkpim5messagecomposer5 got bumped to libkpim5messagecomposer5t6420:19
juliankhence  Rebuilding akonadi-calendar due to libkpim5akonadicalendar5 4:23.08.5-0ubuntu2 depending on {'libkpim5messagecomposer5t64', 'libkpim5messagecore5t64'}20:19
vorlonhmm20:19
juliank(ignore it says t64 in the right side)20:19
juliank(it shows the target name)20:19
vorlonwell that shouldn't be all of kde, still20:19
juliankvorlon: yeah still kdepim only20:20
vorlonjuliank: fwiw I'm rebuilding condor here to see what madness lies within20:20
vorlonit looks like libssl is the only hard-coded dep that actually gets picked up via shlibs20:20
juliankOh I didn#t know it did20:22
juliankWell I think I'll leave the US folks to it, and run another round of rebuild-for tomorrow if some new transitions appeared20:24
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: obconf-qt (jammy-proposed/universe) [0.16.0-1ubuntu1 => 0.16.0-1ubuntu2] (no packageset)20:43
arraybolt3^ fix for https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/obconf-qt/+bug/191689720:43
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 1916897 in obconf-qt (Ubuntu) "Center windows option has no effect" [Medium, In Progress]20:44
arraybolt3ubuntu-sru: ^20:44
vorlonI'm the SRU vanguard today and my shift is forfeit in favor of noble time_t migration20:44
vorlonso unlikely to be looked at until Monday20:44
arraybolt3how unreasonable! /s20:44
arraybolt3no problem, and thanks for fighting with the time_t behemoth20:45
vorlonjuliank: yeah condor does all kinds of dlopen horrors for kerberos, sigh20:46
juliankheh20:46
juliank-rw-rw-r-- 1 jak jak 442 Mär 22 21:48 lomiri-filemanager-app_1.0.4+dfsg-1ubuntu2_source.ubuntu.upload20:51
juliank-rw-rw-r-- 1 jak jak 398 Mär 22 21:49 lomiri-ui-extras_0.6.3-1ubuntu1_source.ubuntu.upload20:51
juliankthese also have such depends20:51
juliankrebuild-for "libsmbclient0" lomiri-filemanager-app20:52
juliankrebuild-for "libqt5printsupport5t64" lomiri-ui-extras20:52
juliankWell yeah had to mangle it20:52
juliankShould have dropped the first one at least really20:53
* juliank is not reading the right report20:53
julianksecond one too20:54
juliankthey are all added by shlibs why are they there manually20:54
juliankvorlon: I now added https://magenta.jak-linux.org/ubuntu-archive/distcheck/noble.armhf/proposed-binaries.only-regressions.txt which shows only proposed binary installability issues for binaries that are in the release pocket which I guess are all blockers21:01
juliankThe normal one also showed Architecture: all ones that simply never were installable21:02
juliankWe see a whole bunch of trivial conflicts21:02
julianki.e. packages depending on two conflicting packages directly21:02
julianki.e. one is hardcoded and the other comes from shlibs21:03
juliankI feel like it doesn't always show the shortest chain21:04
julianke.g. 0install has Depends: ..., libgtk-3-0, ..., libgtk-3-0t6421:05
juliankbut we see libglib2.0-0t64:armhf (>= 2.36.0) vs  libgtk-3-0:armhf -> libglib2.0-0:armhf (>= 2.77.3)21:05
juliankbad dose-distcheck21:05
dokolomiri is on the way building up it's dependencies21:10
juliankvorlon: I feel like # Rebuilding ui-utilcpp due to libui-utilcpp9t64 1.10.3-1.1build3 depending on {'libui-utilcpp9v5'}21:19
juliankvorlon: this is broken21:19
juliankBoth are or were built by ui-utilcpp21:20
julianklibui-utilcpp9t64 is the new name for libui-utilcpp9v521:20
juliankah dh_makeshlibs -V 'libui-utilcpp9v5 (>= 1.8.3)'21:20
juliankBug in the NMU21:20
juliankdebian bug #106300921:20
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Debian bug 1063009 in src:ui-utilcpp "ui-utilcpp: NMU diff for 64-bit time_t transition" [Important, Fixed] https://bugs.debian.org/106300921:20
juliankI guess need to fix the dh_makeshlibs and then go sync it21:21
juliankNMUed that and did a syncpackage --no-lp21:27
juliankwaiting until tomorrow is annoying :)21:29
vorlonannoying, and infeasible wrt timing21:32
vorlonEickmeyer: you might want to fix plasma-distro-release-notifier to not build-depend on libqt5widgets5 LP: #205878021:47
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2058780 in plasma-distro-release-notifier (Ubuntu) "proposed-migration for plasma-distro-release-notifier 20220915-0ubuntu3" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/205878021:47
Eickmeyervorlon: It was kinda funny because, at least at the time (~2 years ago) it FTBFS if it didn't have that, but Rik_Mills did a PPA rebuild on it recently that shows it's fixed now. It may have been a bug in qtbase5-dev at the time, but nto worth investigating.21:49
EickmeyerFixing momentarily.21:49
EickmeyerI didn't want to fix something superflously without your go-ahead.21:49
vorlonwell, it's "superfluous" now in that I've removed the armhf binary from the release pocket to unblock this; but as it's seeded maybe you care to fix it21:50
EickmeyerSure.21:51
juliankvorlon: So taking this public, there is OUTOFSYNC_ARCHES in britney which is supposed to allow things to migrate even if missing binaries - it is supposed to remove old binaries missing in new one, but since we don't have removals turned on in britney, it probably just ends up with NBS21:51
vorlonI'd rather not deal with all of this via NBS if I can avoid it21:52
juliankheh21:52
juliank"remove first and then migrate" vs "migrate and then remove"21:53
juliank:D21:53
vorlonwell, the remove first and then migrate approach involves a little more per-package care at the moment, catching things like mesa not having been put back upright21:54
juliankack21:54
vorlonand filing bugs on the packages that are broken21:54
vorlonbut if we run out of time, yeah21:54
julianksome people think we have run out of time21:55
juliank:D21:55
vorlonI've been given a specific deadline by Mark ;-P21:55
vorlon(Wednesday)21:55
juliankah21:55
vorlonand also, although that's the deadline Mark gave, I'm prepared to actually make the call on Monday21:56
juliankI wish we could have just removed all of armhf and then have britney migrate installable things back in21:57
juliank:D21:57
vorlonheh21:57
julianks/remove/demote to proposed/21:57
EickmeyerOk, now cdimage is having a sync fit. in https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntustudio/dvd/, 20240322 *was* popping in and out of existence, so I did a rebuild (had a new meta). Now 20240322.1 is popping in and out of existence. *facepalm*21:59
vorlonEickmeyer: dns round robin to multiple web frontends that are not all in sync.  Doing another rebuild doesn't help, and could possibly hurt (if one of the frontends is somehow out of space)22:00
EickmeyerWell, 22 is steady, but 22.1 is phasing in/out.22:01
vorlonthen it'll be sync delay22:01
juliankvorlon: A bunch of autopkgtests failed due to ubutnu-advantage-tools prerm  failure like https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-noble/noble/armhf/a/adequate/20240314_223741_08ffe@/log.gz22:01
juliankvorlon: The thing is we did not manage to retry them with searching for _Z11TimeRFC1123B5cxx11lb as the regex22:01
vorlonhmm yes we don't need an ubuntustudio bionic daily from 2019 on here22:01
EickmeyerHa! True.22:01
juliankSo I retried the oens triggered by python-apt but am at a loss to find the others22:02
vorlonjuliank: have all autopkgtests been retried at least once since then though?22:02
juliankall? no22:03
juliankI don't think we ever retried all autopkgtests22:03
juliankI last retried python-apt on 2024-03-14 22:37:41 UTC22:04
juliankand it has been failing there22:04
juliankand not been retried22:04
vorlonok22:04
juliankSo yeah maybe retry *all* armhf autopkgtests22:04
vorlongrr libmozjs still depends on wrong libreadline22:04
juliankWell anything that has not been tried will all-proposed since 2024-03-19 07:32:13 UTC22:05
vorlonjbicha: are you aware of mozj102 ftbfs on all archs?22:05
vorlonbecause of distutils22:05
juliankUgh well the autopkgtest queues are full again22:11
juliankOr it feels like it22:11
juliankok more feel than reality22:12
vorlonjbicha: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mozjs102/102.15.1-3ubuntu1 (this blocks cjs and I forgot if there was something else)22:21
vorlonstill fails; iterating (was building in parallel)22:26
juliankI meanwhile fixed python-apt22:29
juliankI just had to remove the python3-distuils b-d there :D22:29
vorlonjbicha: ok well now I'm getting a build failure because it can't write to /tmp/mozjs102-102.15.1/debian/build/_virtualenvs/build/lib/python3.12/site-packages/mach.pth because site-packages doesn't exist only dist-packages sooo22:38
vorlon*maybe* I can just patch that?22:39
vorlonprobably easiest to just os.mkdir22:40
juliankok it's almost midnight. Since the queues are quite full I looked again at whether we could merge triggers and what that would do, but it only went fro m 1700 to 1697 tests so meh22:42
juliankheh I have migrating no-change t64 rebuilds22:47
juliankI looked at one, and the dependency just disappeared22:48
juliankwell I don't care22:48
juliankI guess some dependency fixed their shlibs or symbols or something22:48
juliankhttps://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/compartment/1.1.0-5.1build122:51
juliankI guess I had a bug in the script at that point22:51
juliankYeah if you have no dependencies in the package, the script, earlier today took the depends from teh previous package22:51
juliankthe initialization of the variable was indented wrong :D22:51
juliankBut libcfitsio10t64 rebuilds end up without libcfitsio10t64 depends despite having had libcfitsio1022:52
juliank:D22:52
vorlonjbicha: ok well this is a mess. https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/ydmqPPq8tm/ I have no idea what this code is actually doing, I think it's going to need an upstream fix22:58
vorlonand it looks like I need to rip out cinnamon on armhf to accomodate22:58
juliankugh global-ben is confused by NBS in release pocket and issues rebuilds for proposed, but rebuild-for is catching them22:59
juliank# Rebuilding poco due to libpococrypto80 1.11.0-4 depending on {'libssl3'}23:00
juliankI guess I should improve that23:00
vorlonquite the stack of cinnamon things depending on cjs23:00
juliankwell23:00
vorlonah 102 is the old one, no wonder23:00
juliankcjs is their javascript engine, like gjs is for gbome?23:01
juliankI'd love if we could just remove all desktop environments on armhf23:01
juliankBut I haven't figured out how to do so safey23:01
juliankor well reasonably safely23:02
juliankbut that is a prime candidate for breaking in release pocket23:02
juliankjust break cinnamon, gnome, kde isntallation in release, who cares23:02
vorlonItzSwirlz: ^ so cinnamon depends on the old mozjs via cjs, and old mozjs needs a bunch of work to make it compatible with python3.12.  I'm removing armhf packages so that this doesn't block the beta, but this is something you'll need to take care of for release23:03
juliankor ugh drop ubuntu cinnamon armhf seed I suppose23:03
juliankI should finish my "I want to remove X from release, which reverse depends should be removed too?"23:04
juliankthen you go remove cjs/armhf and it goes like remove all of cinammon23:05
juliankand users are happy23:05
juliankI guess it's past midnight and I should sleep23:06
juliankgood -hunting- killing armhf bugs!23:06
vorlonwell, multipath-tools wasn't enough to sort glib2.0, blech23:08
vorlonah qemu has the wrong libaio on some archs?23:12
vorlonand libaio is missing the Provides:23:12
vorlonoh this was a revert wasn't it23:12
vorlonah no not exactly23:13
vorlonweird if britney picks up on it when the packages are also missing conflicts23:14
ricotzvorlon, hi, regarding python-distutils, this affects libreoffice as well, I am doing a PPA build for testing23:19
vorlonricotz: cheers23:19
vorlonah ok no, my chdist was showing me the wrong version of qemu because pins23:21
vorlonso the problem isn't that qemu isn't rebuilt, but that it's not being considered for migration23:21
vorlonimplicit dependencies on python3.12/python3-defaults23:25
vorlonright, killing that britney policy right now and may it never be resurrected23:25
jbichayeah, mozjs102 should be fixed eventually (or cjs switched to mozjs115) but dropping it on armhf avoid the need to rename now23:44

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!