/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2024/04/23/#ubuntu-release.txt

-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: landscape-client (noble-proposed/main) [24.02-0ubuntu4 => 24.02-0ubuntu5] (ubuntu-server)00:10
ahasenack_vorlon: sponsored ^00:11
ahasenack_this does not fix all of landscape wrt deb822, but it fixes that alert issue in the linked bug00:11
ahasenack_ahasenack: you stay put00:35
Eickmeyerahasenack: I'm worried you're talking to yourself. You ok?01:01
=== chris14_ is now known as chris14
ahasenackI am, the other one is gone01:13
ahasenackhe was having dinner01:13
vorlontsimonq2: it had not gotten added to https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/noble-numbat-24-04-release-status-tracking/44043 as a blocker for images so I guess that means it was a -1? I wasn't actually part of the discussion on this01:25
vorlonvpa1977: "still" unbuildable?01:26
vpa1977retrying01:27
vorlonvpa1977: ah buildable with the testing-related build-deps re-enabled, I guess01:27
vpa1977vorlon: yes, sorry for confusion01:28
vpa1977vorlon: still failing: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/725931993/buildlog_ubuntu-noble-i386.openjdk-21_21.0.3+9-1ubuntu1~ppa2_BUILDING.txt.gz01:30
vorlonvpa1977: yes. I did mention there might be a couple rounds required to get the xfwm4 stuff installable again01:31
vorlonvpa1977: restoring startup-notification and libxfce4ui now01:33
vorlonvpa1977: but the i386 build should not have been a blocker for you getting this into the unapproved queue where I could get the build started for amd64 (and riscv64)01:34
vladimirpvorlon: ack01:34
vorlonvladimirp: the longer we go today with this NOT in the queue the more likely it is to not make it into the release pocket01:35
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted landscape-client [source] (noble-proposed) [24.02-0ubuntu5]01:38
vladimirpvorlon: uploaded, changes: https://code.launchpad.net/~vpa1977/ubuntu/+source/openjdk-21/+git/openjdk-21/+merge/46479401:42
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openjdk-21 (noble-proposed/main) [21.0.3+9-1 => 21.0.3+9-1ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist)01:43
tsimonq2vorlon: bdmurray said it was being discussed, I would assume internally or IRL, was just curious if you knew anything.01:46
Eickmeyervorlon: Can I giggle at that bug report? They didn't read the release notes.01:50
vorlonEickmeyer: <shrug> it is certainly an anachronism that the UbuntuStudio image calls itself a 'DVD' image01:50
EickmeyerYeah, well, that would be a "nice to fix"01:51
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: propellor (noble-proposed/universe) [5.13-3build1 => 5.17-1] (no packageset) (sync)01:57
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted propellor [sync] (noble-proposed) [5.17-1]02:05
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openjdk-21 [source] (noble-proposed) [21.0.3+9-1ubuntu1]02:06
vorlonjohn-cabaj: fyi also: W: involflt-dkms: executable-not-elf-or-script [usr/src/involflt-0.1.0/VBitmap.c]02:07
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted involflt [amd64] (noble-proposed) [0.1.0-0ubuntu6]02:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fonts-dm-mono [amd64] (noble-proposed) [1.000+git20200415.57fadab-0ubuntu1]02:09
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: propellor [amd64] (noble-proposed/none) [5.17-1] (no packageset)02:11
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fonts-space-grotesk [amd64] (noble-proposed) [2.0.0-0ubuntu2]02:11
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted propellor [amd64] (noble-proposed) [5.17-1]02:12
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nemos-dev-key [amd64] (noble-proposed) [1.8]02:13
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: propellor [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/none) [5.17-1] (no packageset)02:14
mwhudsonvorlon, Eickmeyer: i want to kill the dvd / cd distinction early next cycle02:14
Eickmeyermwhudson: +102:15
EickmeyerI'm sure it's just a lot of livecd-rootfs and ubuntu-cdimage cleanup.02:15
mwhudsonyeah nothing deep i think02:16
EickmeyerConsidering Studio and Edubuntu both require at least double-layer DVDs now, and that technology is slow (and expensive) compared to USB, I think it's time.02:17
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ukui-control-center (noble-proposed/universe) [3.22.1.27-1 => 3.22.1.28-1] (ubuntukylin) (sync)02:17
vorlonUbuntuStudio also has 'dvd' embedded in its seed names etc02:18
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: propellor [s390x] (noble-proposed/none) [5.17-1] (no packageset)02:19
EickmeyerNot a hard cleanup from my side as long as it can be propogated to where it needs to be properly.02:19
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fparser [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.1.4-3]02:19
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted propellor [s390x] (noble-proposed) [5.17-1]02:19
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted propellor [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [5.17-1]02:19
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fparser [amd64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.1.4-3] (no packageset)02:22
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fparser [amd64] (noble-proposed) [0.1.4-3]02:23
vorlonafk for a publisher cycle or so, waiting for various things to propagate02:45
vorlon(yay, NBS report empty)02:45
Eickmeyer🎉02:49
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added asm to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added cglib to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added java-atk-wrapper to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libwnck3 to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libxfce4util to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libxpresent to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added rxtx to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added xfce4-dev-tools to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added xfconf to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added xfwm4 to i386-whitelist in noble02:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: edubuntu-artwork (noble-proposed/universe) [24.04.25 => 24.04.26] (no packageset)03:55
Eickmeyervorlon: Since we're waiting for openjdk-21 before spinning Edubuntu's RC, I need this in as well. ^ Fixes a systemd .service file which was missing a whole [Install[ section.03:55
EickmeyerRuns on first login, so it's not like a SRU-type-thing, but more like a "has to be in as part of the installer" type thing.03:59
vorlonlooking04:11
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted edubuntu-artwork [source] (noble-proposed) [24.04.26]04:14
Eickmeyerta!04:14
vorlonapw: linux-meta-nvidia wants demoted to universe04:16
vorlonvladimirp: openjdk-21/i386 building04:16
vladimirpvorlon: Thank you!!!!!!04:16
vorlonschopin: LP: #2058769 fwiw the autopkgtests all fail with preload path errors04:22
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2058769 in click (Ubuntu) "proposed-migration for click 0.5.2-2" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/205876904:22
vorlonnot that I understand why this package still exists04:22
vorlonor why things still depend on it04:22
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: click (noble-proposed/universe) [0.5.2-2ubuntu3 => 0.5.2-2ubuntu4] (no packageset)04:38
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted click [source] (noble-proposed) [0.5.2-2ubuntu4]04:40
vorlonhmm. a ukui-control-center sync04:41
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ukui-control-center [sync] (noble-proposed) [3.22.1.28-1]04:48
vorlondoko: fwiw you removed uwsgi armhf due to ceph but its build-dep on librados-dev is arch-restricted04:53
vorlondoko: (and this had knock-on effects on installability)04:54
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tcpxtract (noble-proposed/universe) [1.0.1-17ubuntu2 => 1.0.1-17ubuntu3] (no packageset)05:38
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tcpxtract [source] (noble-proposed) [1.0.1-17ubuntu3]05:41
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mdbtools (noble-proposed/universe) [1.0.0+dfsg-1.2build2 => 1.0.0+dfsg-1.2ubuntu1] (no packageset)05:58
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted mdbtools [source] (noble-proposed) [1.0.0+dfsg-1.2ubuntu1]05:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: sphinx-theme-builder (noble-proposed/primary) [0.2.0b2-2]06:34
ginggsjbicha: taskflow hinted08:12
bdmurrayEickmeyer: You mention bug 2063142 being an upgrade blocker for Mantic to Noble for Ubuntu Studio. You probably already know this but the upgrades are not flavor specific i.e. we turn on upgrades for everybody or nobody.08:19
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2063142 in ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu) "Ubuntu Studio unable to upgrade from Mantic to Noble" [High, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/206314208:19
mwhudsonubuntu-archive: in case you're, uh, bored or something https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/android-platform-frameworks-native/+bug/206318908:28
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2063189 in android-platform-frameworks-native (Ubuntu) "please remove android-platform-frameworks-native from ubuntu" [Undecided, New]08:28
sil2100hahahaha, good one!08:28
sil2100Bored he says08:29
mwhudsonsil2100: laughter is healing!09:24
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: golang-1.22 (jammy-proposed/primary) [1.22.2-2~22.04]09:25
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adsys (jammy-proposed/main) [0.9.2~22.04.2 => 0.14.1ubuntu1] (no packageset)09:28
sil2100That is true09:39
dviererbeI just tried to download the Ubuntu Base amd64 ( https://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/453/builds/300174/downloads ). I get a 404 Not Found Error, same for arm6409:42
bdmurraydviererbe: use https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-base/daily/20240422.1/ we'll sort it out09:44
dviererbebdmurray: ack09:45
sil2100This should now be fixed09:49
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: capnproto (noble-proposed/universe) [1.0.1-3build4 => 1.0.1-4] (ubuntu-desktop) (sync)09:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted capnproto [sync] (noble-proposed) [1.0.1-4]09:52
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvptx-tools (noble-proposed/universe) [0.20230904-1 => 0.20240423-1] (no packageset)10:00
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nvptx-tools [source] (noble-proposed) [0.20240423-1]10:01
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: hipcub (noble-proposed/universe) [5.7.1-3 => 5.7.1-3build1] (no packageset)10:54
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rocsparse (noble-proposed/universe) [5.7.1-3 => 5.7.1-3build1] (no packageset)10:55
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rocthrust (noble-proposed/universe) [5.7.1-2.1 => 5.7.1-2.1build1] (no packageset)10:55
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted rocthrust [source] (noble-proposed) [5.7.1-2.1build1]10:55
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted hipcub [source] (noble-proposed) [5.7.1-3build1]10:56
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted rocsparse [source] (noble-proposed) [5.7.1-3build1]10:56
ogayotHello release team. There is code in the desktop installer to prevent partitions from being automounted. It looks like we are having symptoms of partitions being automounted anyway (which results in various things like disks not being usable for guided partitioning). I believe it's a race condition at services startup time that is causing this issue. bug 2063192 has the symptoms11:04
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2063192 in ubuntu-desktop-provision "Subiquity didn't display all my drives" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/206319211:04
seb128I've asked ogayot to mention it here because because I think that might a release blocker issue11:06
bdmurrayogayot, seb128: thanks for letting us know11:12
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fakechroot (noble-proposed/universe) [2.20.1+ds-15build1 => 2.20.1+ds-17] (i386-whitelist) (sync)11:22
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fakechroot [sync] (noble-proposed) [2.20.1+ds-17]11:26
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-proxy-manager (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1build1 => 0.1.1] (no packageset)12:01
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: rust-test-log (noble-proposed/primary) [0.2.15-1]12:01
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apport (noble-proposed/main) [2.28.1-0ubuntu2 => 2.28.1-0ubuntu3] (core, i386-whitelist)12:02
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-proxy-manager [source] (noble-proposed) [0.1.1]12:06
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: ubuntu-proxy-manager (jammy-proposed/primary) [0.1.1~22.04]12:28
slyonI found an interesting Bug in livecd-rootfs (not release critical, IMHO), https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/livecd-rootfs/+bug/2063204 (CC waveform)12:42
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2063204 in livecd-rootfs (Ubuntu) "Desktop-Live ships /etc/netplan/01-network-manager-all.yaml in addition to /usr/lib/netplan/00-network-manager-all.yaml" [Medium, New]12:42
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: s3cmd (noble-proposed/universe) [2.3.0-1 => 2.3.0-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)13:06
sil2100slyon: looking13:06
sil2100slyon: oh, so it's basically just garbage that doesn't actually cause nay problems, right?13:07
slyonsil2100: Right. I don't think it causes problems. Might just lead to some confusion13:08
waveformyes ... the code in ubuntu-settings postinst is *meant* to get rid of it (and I hope does for upgraders), but looks like livecd-rootfs is still injecting the file and that presumably happens after the package's postinst is run in the image build13:09
slyonwaveform: correct. An "apt install --reinstall" also gets rid of it13:10
waveformyup, I'll prep a branch to fix livecd-rootfs but this sounds basically benign13:10
slyonack13:11
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted s3cmd [source] (noble-proposed) [2.3.0-1ubuntu1]13:11
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sopwith (noble-proposed/universe) [2.4.0-1 => 2.5.0-1] (no packageset) (sync)13:31
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted sopwith [sync] (noble-proposed) [2.5.0-1]13:35
bdmurraywaveform: if we are resinning RPi for bug 2060300 we might be able to grab your livecd-rootfs change too13:44
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2060300 in linux-raspi (Ubuntu) "KMS overlay causes OOM oops on 3A+" [Low, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/206030013:44
waveformbdmurray, the livecd-rootfs change doesn't affect the pi images as they're not built with livecd-rootfs (the extraneous file doesn't appear there)13:45
bdmurraywaveform: Okay, but where is your fix for 2060300?13:46
waveformin the gadget: https://github.com/snapcore/pi-gadget/commit/de76b4a7a6b5a0b610415d005f16fda8f478673b13:47
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Commit de76b4a in snapcore/pi-gadget "Apply CMA-128 workaround on the Zero 2W as well"13:47
bdmurrayI'll start spinning then13:47
juliankI just mentioned this in #debian-gnome but it turns out that the glib2.0 package added a transitional libglib2.0-0 package which depends on libglib2.0-0t64 which is now causing upgrade failures13:53
juliankBecause the dependency only needs to be satisfied at configuration time, libglib2.0-0 is unpacked early and the glib library disappears13:54
juliankWhereas with no transitional package libglib2.0-0 is removed and libglib2.0-0t64 is unpacked in sort of lockstep13:54
juliankNow we can potentially make libglib2.0-0 PreDepends on libglib2.0-0t64 in a 0 day SRU; but then we get an unpacking loop13:55
juliankWhat we can't do however is remove libglib2.0-0 transitional package after the release13:56
tsimonq2ubuntu-release: Extra ping about software-properties, we really should get that in before final, any updates on reviewing?13:59
jbichaglib is going to be frustrating because it triggers so many autopkgtests & is in all the desktop flavors13:59
tsimonq2utkarsh2102: ^^^13:59
jbichaat least autopkgtest queue is quiet for noble13:59
juliankjbicha: Arguably we can just kill the transitional libglib2.0-0 binary package13:59
bdmurrayjuliank: Is that this then? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/206191814:00
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2061918 in thunderbird (Ubuntu) "package thunderbird 2:1snap1-0ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: new thunderbird package pre-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 1" [Undecided, Confirmed]14:00
jbichajuliank: kill would still need an upload though, right?14:00
juliankjbicha: No we just have ubuntu-archive whack it out of the release pocket14:00
juliankbdmurray: I believe so yes14:00
jbichameh14:00
juliankjbicha: I understand it's meh but it avoids respinning all images14:01
juliankjbicha: Proper update probably works better as a 0 day SRU vs respinning it all14:01
seb128I don't know if killing binaries from a package like that is something we do?14:02
bdmurrayIf we did it as a 0 day SRU we could just wait to turn on upgrades until the SRU was complete14:04
juliankbdmurray: The issue is you need the binary gone from the release pocket or it gets installed, or quirk u-r-u to make it not a candidate14:06
jbichaI'm not opposed to dropping the transitional glib package, I'm curious if we get a reply from smcv though14:07
sil2100tsimonq2: let's revisit this in a bit14:07
juliankIt's possibly kylin needs a respin because it is seeded there for some reaosn14:07
jbichatsimonq2: would it be important to also include https://code.launchpad.net/~fossfreedom/software-properties/+git/software-properties/+merge/461666 ?14:09
juliankAh yes, to solve the specific instance of the thunderbird snap and similar ones, one could also add Depends: libglib2.0-0t64 to their deb2snap packages14:12
juliankOr I suppose it should be desktop-file-utils, but I don't think it gets deconfigured correctly14:13
juliankbut there are other undeclared triggers involved in there I think14:13
juliankAt least from what I saw in popey's upgrade log earlier today14:13
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: urdfdom (noble-proposed/universe) [3.0.1-1build1 => 4.0.0-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)14:20
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted urdfdom [source] (noble-proposed) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1]14:20
tsimonq2jbicha: Probably, I've asked fossfreedom_14:21
tsimonq2sil2100: ack14:21
bdmurrayjuliank: updating the thunderbird deb sounds nice and we could do that as an SRU. You seemed to imply other deb2snap packages might be affected though?14:22
bdmurraytsimonq2: I'm faiing to see a use case where people would want to use software-properties-qt in a live environment. Is there one?14:23
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: urdfdom [amd64] (noble-proposed/universe) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)14:23
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: urdfdom [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/universe) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)14:25
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: urdfdom [s390x] (noble-proposed/universe) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)14:25
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: urdfdom [armhf] (noble-proposed/universe) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)14:25
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (noble-proposed/main) [24.04.67 => 24.04.68] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist)14:27
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: urdfdom [arm64] (noble-proposed/universe) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)14:27
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: numix-icon-theme-circle (noble-proposed/universe) [24.02.05-1 => 24.04.22-1] (no packageset) (sync)14:29
Eickmeyerbdmurray: upgrades> Yes, I knew that. :)14:29
juliankbdmurray: Yes anything installing a desktop app will run update-desktop-database which uses libgio from libglib2.0-014:30
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted numix-icon-theme-circle [sync] (noble-proposed) [24.04.22-1]14:30
juliankbdmurray: So that presumably is firefox, thunderbird, not sure what else14:30
juliankCentrally adding a libglib2.0-0t64 depends to snapd wouldn't hurt either tbh14:31
juliankAnything using the desktop plugs I think is what is broken14:31
juliankAh yes, chromium-browser, firefox, thunderbird14:32
juliankI think that's the complete list of affected deb2snap packages14:32
juliankOh I think it needs to be Pre-Depends14:33
juliankThey run snap install in the preinst14:33
bdmurrayjuliank: Couldn't we just have u-r-u install libglib2.0-0t64 first in the upgrade process?14:34
juliankand they should gain same kind of depends in desktop-file-utils14:34
julianklet's fix the packages to declare the dependencies they have?14:34
sil2100juliank, bdmurray: I need a short summary: what options for fixing this do we have?14:36
bdmurrayWe can do that in an SRU and not have to respin nearly everything.14:36
juliankYes14:36
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted urdfdom [amd64] (noble-proposed) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1]14:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted urdfdom [armhf] (noble-proposed) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1]14:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted urdfdom [s390x] (noble-proposed) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1]14:37
juliankSo we can14:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted urdfdom [arm64] (noble-proposed) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1]14:37
sil2100YES14:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted urdfdom [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1]14:37
sil2100Please14:37
juliank1) quirk u-r-u to upgrade libglib2.0-0t64 firt (well after early libc6 upgrade)14:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-test-log [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.2.15-1]14:38
juliank2) fix the Pre-Depends of firefox, thunderbird, chromium-browser in an SRU to include the desktop-file-utils, libglib2.0-0t64 Pre-Depends they need to install successfully (that's what snapd install hooks run)14:38
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted sphinx-theme-builder [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.2.0b2-2]14:38
juliank3) have those be depends of snapd instead14:38
juliank4) whack the transitional package out of the archive with archive surgey14:38
juliankThe other options are all SRUable14:38
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted livecd-rootfs [source] (noble-proposed) [24.04.68]14:40
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-test-log [amd64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.2.15-1] (no packageset)14:42
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: sphinx-theme-builder [amd64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.2.0b2-2] (no packageset)14:42
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-test-log [arm64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.2.15-1] (no packageset)14:43
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-test-log [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/none) [0.2.15-1] (no packageset)14:43
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-test-log [armhf] (noble-proposed/none) [0.2.15-1] (no packageset)14:43
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-test-log [s390x] (noble-proposed/none) [0.2.15-1] (no packageset)14:43
sil2100juliank: so just removing the transitional package from the release pocket will be enough? Is that safe to do?14:43
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: urdfdom [riscv64] (noble-proposed/universe) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)14:44
julianksil2100: seeded-in-ubuntu tells me it's in the kylin live image, but I don't know if that's true, but that one could be rebuilt too14:44
juliankeither way I'd want to fix the transitional packages to declare the dependencies of their snap hooks14:44
EickmeyerWe also had this one show up courtesy Skia which I'm certain can be handled by u-r-u: bug 206312814:46
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2063128 in ubuntu-release-upgrader (Ubuntu) "Upgrade from mantic to noble shows a debconf prompt" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/206312814:46
seb128sil2100, can we really remove binaries which are valid builds from a source currently in the archive?14:46
seb128I mean technically we probably can but it feels wrong14:47
ahasenack_are the autopkgtest runners for non-noble still paused?14:47
=== ahasenack_ is now known as ahasenack
Skiaahasenack_: they are not completely paused, we have about 1/4 of the infra processing non-noble tests14:48
ahasenackSkia: tests for ppas, are they running? I see a ton there, I suppopse the glibc security update is taking it all up?14:48
vorlonseb128, sil2100: we *can* but yes the right answer here is a rebuild14:48
Skiayes, they are running, and yes, it's mostly glibc security update14:49
ahasenackok14:49
vorlonseb128, sil2100 (without waiting for any autopkgtests)14:49
vorlonthat transitional package, meh, it never looked any good14:50
sil2100vorlon: rebuild of glib?14:50
vorlonbut I didn't realize it would be THAT bad14:50
vorlonsil2100: yes14:50
sil2100Are we sure this is needed for release?14:50
sil2100Can't we just shove it into -updates?14:50
vorlonsil2100: no, you can't shove the DISAPPEARANCE of a package into -updates14:51
sil2100(the rebuild)14:51
vorlonyou still have to delete the binary from the release pocket14:51
vorlonso14:51
sil2100Right, it would stay as an NBS eh14:51
vorlonno14:51
bdmurrayI still think option 1 is the least respin effort14:51
vorlonit would be "it's not published but people would be confused looking at launchpad"14:51
vorlonsil2100, seb128, bdmurray: I'll point out that there's lots of precedent here though with i386 binary removals14:52
vorlonand even other arch ANAIS removals14:52
vorlonso14:52
juliankI don't think we need respinning for anything14:52
vorlonthe "nice" thing to do is to rebuild glib2.014:52
sil2100Well, if we want to rebuild glib then we do14:52
vorlonbut on balance, we should just remove the terrible no good binary packages14:52
julianklibglib2.0-0 transitional package is technically correct, the issue is that it just triggers the undeclared dependencies in deb2snap packages from the snapd desktop install hooks14:53
juliank(and potentially others)14:53
juliank(because it disappears for so long)14:53
vorlonjuliank: we should rebuild ubuntukylin and not ship binaries in an image that are not in the archive14:53
sil2100We need to check why seeded-in-ubuntu was saying kylin though14:53
juliankI think we missed some rebuilds for kylin for glib2.0 hence it pulls in the transitional package there14:54
juliankbut removing it it will pull in the provides instead14:54
vorlonactually I just checked and it's not in the daily14:54
vorlonso no rebuild there either14:54
juliankwell that's good14:54
vorlon$ grep libglib2.0-0 ubuntukylin/daily-live/current/*.manifest14:54
vorlonlibglib2.0-0t64:amd64   2.80.0-6ubuntu114:54
vorlonlibglib2.0-0 removed14:55
juliankSo if there are other undeclared dependencies on it, what happens to popey might happen to other users14:55
vorlonif we want to do anything else in addition, we can iterate14:55
juliankIt's quite funny, he's in a state apt install --fix-broken cannot recover from14:55
vorlonjuliank: should the transitional package have had a pre-depends :P14:56
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-test-log [riscv64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.2.15-1] (no packageset)14:56
vorlonvladimirp: thanks for the tcpxtract upload14:56
juliankI've had those a couple of times, the secret is to dpkg --install /var/cache/apt/archives/*.deb until apt install --fix-broken works again14:56
juliankvorlon: That's just a Pre-Depends <=> Breaks loop14:56
vorlonjuliank: meh ok14:56
juliankWhat we should have done is add a ton of diversions, really14:57
juliankhave libfoo0t64 divert all the files from libfoo014:57
Skiaahasenack: we just discussed with Brian, and set back the infra to normal, so 100% of workers are now processing all the queues, non-noble included14:57
juliankThis would have avoided the lockstep remove and break depends and fix it by unpacking t6414:57
juliankBut might have broken the diversion database by having too many14:57
vorlonand also would have been horrible to implement across all the packages14:59
tsimonq2bdmurray: live environment and software-properties-qt> As a whole, it is used for setting the most up to date mirror or e.g. adding a PPA without having to open a terminal. A decent amount of users have a live USB as a utility for e.g. debugging hardware and want a simple way to add whatever PPA or repository they need. This is something that was working as intended/designed last release but is15:06
tsimonq2no longer working this release due to underlying changes the user isn't required to care about (deb822). Completely breaking graphical functionality from 23.10 to 24.04 is not a good thing, and this is something that will stand out in the live ISO. I didn't realize this before yesterday because apparently we were too busy bikeshedding on whose fault it was that it didn't work. Not happy.15:06
juliankThe issue was I overread the l in the bug message15:07
juliankHence i did not realize it was the Qt backend or we'd have known weeks ago15:07
vorlontsimonq2, bdmurray: I'll suggest the same escape hatch that I gave waveform a cycle or two ago: fork the software-properties-qt to a separate source package (for noble and forward) so you can upload that without forcing respins of unrelated flavors15:07
juliankThe screenshot looks identical to the GTK one so I could not visually identify it either15:07
juliankvorlon: I think we can just fork it out have it dominate the other, and then merge it back in in an SRU15:08
julianktbh15:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-test-log [amd64] (noble-proposed) [0.2.15-1]15:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-test-log [armhf] (noble-proposed) [0.2.15-1]15:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-test-log [riscv64] (noble-proposed) [0.2.15-1]15:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted sphinx-theme-builder [amd64] (noble-proposed) [0.2.0b2-2]15:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-test-log [arm64] (noble-proposed) [0.2.15-1]15:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-test-log [s390x] (noble-proposed) [0.2.15-1]15:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-test-log [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [0.2.15-1]15:08
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted urdfdom [riscv64] (noble-proposed) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1]15:08
julianki.e. the software-properties-qt package temporarily switches source package in release pocket, but moves back to software-properties in update15:09
juliank* updates15:09
vorlonjuliank: for ubuntu-settings-raspi we made it a permanent split, to avoid such issues in the future15:10
vorlon$ seeded-in-ubuntu plasma-vault15:10
vorlon$15:10
vorlonplasma-vault (from plasma-vault) is seeded in:15:10
vorlon  kubuntu: daily-live15:10
vorlon  ubuntustudio: dvd15:10
vorlonmeh15:10
vorlon"meh" because plasma-vault is uninstallable on ppc64el15:10
EickmeyerANAIS removal from ppc64el?15:11
vorlondoko: ^ it's really best that you introduce a build-dependency in situations like this, to avoid per-arch binary removals from growing back15:11
vorlonEickmeyer: yes; and the "meh" is that this had already been done15:11
Eickmeyerhehe15:11
vorlonbut incompletely, per above15:11
Eickmeyeroof15:12
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xorg-server (mantic-proposed/main) [2:21.1.7-3ubuntu2.9 => 2:21.1.7-3ubuntu2.10] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist, xorg)15:16
tsimonq2vorlon, bdmurray, juliank: As jbicha mentioned, https://code.launchpad.net/~fossfreedom/software-properties/+git/software-properties/+merge/461666 is also something that should likely go in per fossfreedom_ - unsure what you'd like to do15:19
tsimonq2The escape hatch is doable, but it's also Tuesday... coverage is not quite complete yet for testing.15:21
EickmeyerBased on that MP, even if the escape hatch is used, the world would have to respin.15:22
tsimonq2Eickmeyer: Not if the source package only had that one binary package15:22
EickmeyerNegates the need for the escape hatch.15:22
tsimonq2Ah... yes15:23
bdmurrayIDK what escape hatch y'all are talking about but I might be interested in using it myself15:23
Eickmeyerbdmurray: XD15:23
tsimonq2hah15:23
EickmeyerTL;DR: Splitting software-properties-qt to its own source to keep from respinning the world, but if that MP is needed then it's moot.15:24
tsimonq2That I can agree with - just looking on a clear direction here.15:24
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xorg-server (jammy-proposed/main) [2:21.1.4-2ubuntu1.7~22.04.10 => 2:21.1.4-2ubuntu1.7~22.04.11] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist, xorg)15:24
bdmurrayThat MP on its own is not worth a respin IMO15:25
EickmeyerI'm fairly certian fossfreedom_ would disagree, but that's up to him.15:25
bdrungutkarsh2102, were in https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/noble-numbat-release-notes/39890/1 should i put the information about the tzdata-legacy split?15:26
utkarsh2102bdrung: I am not super sure but perhaps "New features in 24.04 LTS"?15:28
utkarsh2102I know it's not really a new feature per-se15:28
utkarsh2102but I can't seem to find a better place15:28
utkarsh2102than that^15:28
vorlontsimonq2: "should likely go in" is very different than OMG showstopper15:31
vorlonas bdmurray already said basically15:32
tsimonq2ok :)15:32
juliankI think software sources not being configurable on the live image is a sad thing, but it's not a showstopper15:32
bdmurrayI do see that bug 2055088 is rather old and not on the sponsoring report15:33
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2055088 in software-properties (Ubuntu) "debian/control incorrectly installs gnome-session dependencies in ubuntu-budgie" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/205508815:33
juliankand upgrading software-properties-qt after the install with 0day SRU from teh default mirror kind of works ok15:33
EickmeyerThe way I'm seeing it is that it's installing unneeded dependencies on their ISO image, so getting that fix in would solve that. Correct me if I'm wrong15:36
tsimonq2juliank: hmm... do the live ISOs use deb822 or sources.list?15:37
tsimonq2checking15:37
vorlonseb128: we should commit to a glib2.0 SRU soon-ish to drop the transitional package, so it doesn't come back15:37
juliankthis is correct but there's an easier way I suppose15:37
julianki.e. for bug 2055088 we should just whack in a livecd-rootfs change that removes gnome-session-bin from the affected live images probably15:37
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2055088 in software-properties (Ubuntu) "debian/control incorrectly installs gnome-session dependencies in ubuntu-budgie" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/205508815:37
julianksince it is only a Recommends15:37
juliankThen we can avoid respinning everything else15:38
juliankpossibly one could just add it to the seed exclude too and respin budgie15:38
fossfreedom_juliank: if it helps - I'm very relaxed for it to be included in 24.04 itself ... if software-properties-gtk can be updated post 24.04 (say in time for 24.04.1) then all will be well for the next LTS release.15:39
vorlonEickmeyer: yes, that is what that patch would fix. But escalating removal of unnecessary packages after the candidate images have been spun... <shrug>15:39
vorlonfossfreedom_: yes that should be fine15:39
Eickmeyertsimonq2: So, with my Studio hat on, maybe we don't throw this software-properties-qt fix in except as a 0-day SRU, and it'll work itself out for 24.04.1.15:41
Eickmeyervorlon, bdmurray, juliank ^15:41
tsimonq2"it'll work itself out" -1 :/15:41
tsimonq2The ISO doesn't use deb822 apparently15:41
tsimonq2So I *concur* that we should make it a 0-day SRU15:42
bdrungutkarsh2102, added. btw, it would be nice if the table of contents would be more fine grained to find stuff in the release notes.15:42
vorlontsimonq2: what ISO doesn't use deb822?15:43
tsimonq2vorlon: Lubuntu15:43
vorlonthis landed in livecd-rootfs months ago15:43
Eickmeyertsimonq2: By that logic, neither does Studio or Kubuntu, and that's categorically false.15:43
tsimonq2I'm literally telling you both what I just saw...15:44
tsimonq2Let me confirm15:44
juliankI ripped out the non-deb822 code in livecd-rootfs so there should be no way :D15:44
tsimonq2Eickmeyer: You're not helping.15:44
julianki.e. sneaking in the software-properties-qt fix, just change Source field and changelog field in software-properties to read software-properties-qt, remove all other binary packages and upload that15:45
juliankThis overrides the software-properties-qt binary because it has a higher version number15:46
juliankbut then we can SRU software-properties again with a higher one and then software-properties in -udpates assumes ownership again15:46
tsimonq2juliank: Right, that's a decent solution, I would just like to make sure that second part happens, if we go that route.15:49
juliankvorlon: So for the APT 2.8.0 SRU that's already staged in unapproved (which moves 1024R keys from warning to error) we need to make sure this actually doesn't end up getting copied to and building in noble+1, and I need to know if that's the way forward or I should make it timebomb 1024R keys later, i.e. we can make them all expiry in August instead of making the update treat them invalid15:49
juliankimmediately, but it's effort.15:49
EickmeyerAgreed, we do not want `software-properties-qt` permanently forked.15:50
* juliank wants a flutter rewrite of software-properties15:50
Eickmeyer^ That would be awesome.15:50
tsimonq2software-properties-qt gets ported to Qt 6 next cycle for us ;)15:50
vorlontsimonq2: we don't have to do a follow-up SRU, we just have to make sure that IF there's a follow-up SRU it includes this change (so should be appropriately staged in VCS)15:50
juliankI have apt 2.9.2 already for noble+1 :)15:51
juliankThe goal was to have apt 2.8.0 in the release pocket to prevent people from having PPAs they need to refresh keys for in the first place15:51
vorlonjuliank: "copied to and building in noble+1" I don't know what you mean by that, if we copy forward we do that after the binaries are built in stable-proposed15:51
vorlonlike, this is fundamental management of series in launchpad, nothing specific to atp15:52
vorlonapt15:52
juliankvorlon: I figured it ends two ways, stuff not approved for 0 day SRU ending getting moved to devel instead15:52
juliankBut I am no SRU/release team member :)15:53
juliank(yet?)15:53
tsimonq2juliank, vorlon: uhhh Lubuntu daily 20240422 has sources.list15:53
juliankLooking15:53
Eickmeyertsimonq2: Did you see the contents of sources.list?15:54
tsimonq2$ cat /etc/apt/sources.list15:54
tsimonq2deb cdrom:[Lubuntu 24.04 LTS _Noble Numbat_ - Release amd64 (20240422)]/ noble main multiverse restricted universe15:54
tsimonq2deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ noble main restricted universe multiverse15:54
tsimonq2deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ noble-security main restricted universe multiverse15:54
tsimonq2deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ noble-updates main restricted universe multiverse15:54
tsimonq2Eickmeyer: You mean these contents?15:54
juliankThe cdrom I expected, but not the rest15:54
EickmeyerWeird.15:54
EickmeyerAfter install it should be:15:55
Eickmeyer$ cat sources.list15:55
juliankI did not move the cdrom: handling to deb822 because it doesn't end up on the installed system15:55
Eickmeyer# Ubuntu sources have moved to /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu.sources15:55
juliankIt's possible this is fine post-install, because it's in a later layer15:55
julianki.e. in the live layer that adds installer15:55
EickmeyerCorrect, it doesn't show post-install. What I pasted is post-install.15:55
Eickmeyerjuliank: Lubuntu isn't a layered ISO image.15:56
tsimonq2Eickmeyer: different installers, irrelevant15:56
juliankooh15:56
EickmeyerLubuntu uses Calamares, as does Kubuntu and Ubuntu Unity.15:56
juliankIt's possible they have all sources.list on the iso then15:56
EickmeyerNone of those images are layered.15:56
juliankIt doesn't matter since calamares sets up fresh sources15:57
juliankso there is no pratical issue with software-properties-qt for any of them but I suppose for Studio?15:57
Eickmeyerjuliank: Studio uses Provision and is layered, so yes.15:57
juliankI think users will survive especially since the installer upgrades packages automatically after install; well I suppose we just need to publish software-properties to security for it to pick it up which is awkward but maybe the least effort15:59
tsimonq2juliank: Looks like the live ISO is unaffected by this but the installed system is, which is why I now think this should be a zero-day SRU :)15:59
tsimonq2+1 re: security15:59
tsimonq2or have an AA set phasing to 100?15:59
juliankNot a phasing issue, but the installer runs unattended-upgrades to install security updates only afaiui15:59
vorlonEickmeyer, vladimirp: I've added a force hint now for openjdk-21 so that the amd64 binaries can be copied to the release pocket and we can spin an edubuntu candidate. armhf and riscv64 builds will be copied once they're available16:00
Eickmeyervorlon: Thanks!16:00
tsimonq2juliank: different installers :)16:00
Eickmeyertsimonq2: I think unattended-upgrades still runs upon reboot.16:01
vorlonjuliank: I know of no reason that we would be doing security updates only16:01
tsimonq2Eickmeyer: you think or you know?16:01
Eickmeyertsimonq2: think. I was careful with my choice of words.16:01
juliankvorlon: well we use unattended-upgrades and that does only security upgrades, but I haven't checked16:02
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware-xilinx-ap1302 (mantic-proposed/multiverse) [2021.1-0ubuntu1 => 1:2.0-0ubuntu1~23.10.1] (no packageset)16:03
juliankthis is a question for dbungert, ogayot and other installer folks maybe16:03
juliankAre we configuring unattended-upgrades to install -updates too, but then why do we not just do upgrades directly?16:03
dbungertu-u on subiquity does security and release by default16:04
ogayotjuliank: -security by default. There is an option in autoinstall to install stuff from -updates as well16:04
bdmurraywhat does calamares do?16:04
julianktsimonq2: ^16:04
tsimonq2-updates and -security16:04
juliankheh16:05
tsimonq2...on checked box :)16:05
juliankis the box checked by defualt?16:05
tsimonq2not by default at this point in time16:05
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware-xilinx-ap1302 (jammy-proposed/multiverse) [2021.1-0ubuntu1 => 1:2.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1] (no packageset)16:06
Skia116:10
sil2100Ok, there's a lot going on here, so I'd like a quick recap: what does all this mean to the calamares images? Do the affected flavors want to respin to get the deb822 bits working?16:14
julianktl;dr: calamares images are only affected post-installation, not on the live image; studio image is affected on live environment too presumably16:15
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: glib2.0 (noble-proposed/main) [2.80.0-6ubuntu1 => 2.80.0-6ubuntu3] (core, i386-whitelist)16:16
juliankwith a 0 day software-properties SRU, calamares will pick it up if users check the checkbox16:16
juliankusers of Ubuntu studio would need to manually upgrade as subiquity by default only installs security upgrades16:16
juliank(or you move it into the security pocket to workaround that)16:16
juliankA respin would need a separate software-properties-qt temporary source package building a fixed software-properties-qt16:17
tsimonq2Unless we planned on respinning the world for this, which does seem unlikely at this point.16:18
tsimonq2My vote is for 0-day SRU, I can start prepping paperwork?16:18
juliankDo it either way :)16:19
tsimonq2On it.16:19
sil2100Yeah, no plans for respinning the world so far. So I'd say either doing the split package or 0-day SRU - whichever seems better in your eyes!16:19
juliankWe can do both the 0-day and the package split, fwiw, upload software-properties-qt 0.99.48.1 and migrate it, and upload a  software-properties 0.99.49 and then push that to updates16:20
juliankThey'd be identical essentially16:20
juliankI guess it would need some whacking for the python3-software-properties (= 0.99.48) dependency16:21
jbichaI've uploaded glib2.0 to the noble queue. I'm not sure that it's been fully decided to include that part of the upgrade fix but it's there when the Release Team wants it16:22
Eickmeyer+1 on that, and I'm thinking since Studio is pretty dang affected by this (the scope of which I didn't realize until just now), we should probably think about respinning it.16:22
juliankLet me PoC a software-properties-qt16:24
Eickmeyer👍16:24
bdmurrayvorlon did archive surgery already for glib2.0 and we are testing upgrades now16:26
juliankOK software-properties-qt is building16:28
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: amazon-ec2-utils (noble-proposed/universe) [2.1.0-1 => 2.1.0-1.1] (no packageset) (sync)16:29
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted amazon-ec2-utils [sync] (noble-proposed) [2.1.0-1.1]16:30
juliankSo this seems to be working: https://git.launchpad.net/software-properties/commit/?id=67354e45fcbb2e5d6b869f5bad3304122c3c2eb316:33
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Commit 67354e4 in software-properties "Add a temporary software-properties-qt source package ubuntu-qt/master"16:33
juliankI'm happy to upload it16:33
juliankI have uploaded it, please accept or reject it, but it's there now16:35
tsimonq2juliank: +116:35
juliankThe temporary branch is ubuntu-qt/master16:35
tsimonq2Thank you!16:35
juliankI refrain from adding a tag for it because of namespace concerns :)16:35
bdmurraythunderbird has installed in edubuntu-studio after the package removal16:35
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: software-properties-qt (noble-proposed/primary) [0.99.48.1]16:35
Eickmeyerbdmurray: edubuntu-studio? That's a new one.16:36
juliankNote that: We need to migrate software-properties-qt *before* we can accept software-properties into proposed or the binaries get superseded16:36
julianki.e. accept software-properties-qt, unblock it, respin the images using it, and only then accept software-properties16:37
juliankAnd then release software-properties to -updates on release day :)16:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-breakout (noble-proposed/universe) [0.5.3-7ubuntu1 => 0.5.3-8] (no packageset) (sync)16:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libt3window (noble-proposed/universe) [0.4.0-1build1 => 0.4.0-1.1] (no packageset) (sync)16:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: foliate (noble-proposed/universe) [4.~really3.1.0-0.1 => 4.~really3.1.1-1] (no packageset) (sync)16:38
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: cbmc (noble-proposed/universe) [5.95.1-4 => 5.95.1-4ubuntu1] (no packageset)16:40
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted cbmc [source] (noble-proposed) [5.95.1-4ubuntu1]16:40
juliankglib2.0 should be accepted as a 0day SRU16:40
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted foliate [sync] (noble-proposed) [4.~really3.1.1-1]16:41
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libt3window [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.4.0-1.1]16:41
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-breakout [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.5.3-8]16:41
bdmurrayEickmeyer: It's a portmanteau16:44
Eickmeyerbdmurray: Kinda thought so. XD16:44
EickmeyerI just didn't know if I needed to fix something and where to look. Like, "Which hat do I wear?"16:45
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rust-wayland-egl (noble-proposed/universe) [0.30.0-2 => 0.32.0-1] (no packageset) (sync)16:46
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: megapixels (noble-proposed/universe) [1.7.0-1build2 => 1.8.1-1] (no packageset) (sync)16:47
bdmurrayOkay, so to clarify the ubuntu-studio upgrade is on going16:47
Eickmeyer👍16:49
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted megapixels [sync] (noble-proposed) [1.8.1-1]16:50
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted rust-wayland-egl [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.32.0-1]16:50
tsimonq2https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2061214 I updated the bug report to follow the SRU format17:06
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2061214 in software-properties (Ubuntu) "[SRU] Software Sources is not compatible with deb822" [Critical, Confirmed]17:06
tsimonq2Let me know if I should clarify anything further.17:06
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: s3cmd (noble-proposed/universe) [2.3.0-1ubuntu1 => 2.4.0-1] (no packageset) (sync)17:30
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted s3cmd [sync] (noble-proposed) [2.4.0-1]17:30
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted landscape-client [source] (mantic-proposed) [23.08-0ubuntu1.2]17:37
dbungertubuntu-release - I believe that the PRs for LP: #2063192 are ready.  I require testers to assist in the process, as I am only testing simulations of the problem.17:37
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2063192 in ubuntu-desktop-provision "Partitions are automounted / Subiquity didn't display all my drives" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/206319217:37
=== liushuyu1 is now known as liushuyu
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added glade to i386-whitelist in noble18:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libgtop2 to i386-whitelist in noble18:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libxfce4ui to i386-whitelist in noble18:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added markdown-it-py to i386-whitelist in noble18:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added mdit-py-plugins to i386-whitelist in noble18:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added mdurl to i386-whitelist in noble18:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added myst-parser to i386-whitelist in noble18:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added startup-notification to i386-whitelist in noble18:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added x11-utils to i386-whitelist in noble18:37
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-release-upgrader (noble-proposed/main) [1:24.04.16 => 1:24.04.17] (core)19:26
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (noble-proposed/main) [24.04.68 => 24.04.69] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist)19:39
seb128 release team probably wants to review ^ since it is a been flagged as a rc issue from a desktop perspective19:58
dbungertseb128: I have failed to produce the underlying issue.  If you happen to know someone who can, a test would be good.19:58
seb128dbungert, not really, ogayot said he could trigger it but I guess it's past eod for him19:59
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: chibi-scheme (jammy-proposed/universe) [0.9.1-3 => 0.9.1-3ubuntu0.22.04.1] (no packageset)20:14
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: chibi-scheme (mantic-proposed/universe) [0.9.1-3 => 0.9.1-3ubuntu0.23.10.1] (no packageset)20:14
juliankdbungert: fwiw I don't understand why it's a service, why not just ship the udev rule statically in the layer, that would seem cleaner20:35
juliankJust my 2c20:36
dbungertjuliank: with my installer hat on I'm inclined to agree but that would affect the "Try Ubuntu" case - https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-desktop-provision/pull/703#discussion_r157653999320:44
-ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Pull 703 in canonical/ubuntu-desktop-provision "fix(bootstrap): use udisks2-inhibit.service" [Open]20:44
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: dart (noble-proposed/universe) [6.12.1+dfsg4-13.1build1 => 6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)22:01
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dart [source] (noble-proposed) [6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1]22:05
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: reform-setup-wizard (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-2 => 0.1.0-3] (no packageset) (sync)22:40
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted reform-setup-wizard [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.1.0-3]22:41
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: reform-setup-wizard [amd64] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-3] (no packageset)22:47
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: dart [amd64] (noble-proposed/universe) [6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)22:48
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: reform-setup-wizard [s390x] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-3] (no packageset)22:48
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: reform-setup-wizard [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-3] (no packageset)22:48
jbichasorry for the new reform-setup-wizard package: Debian decided to rename the package so we might as well follow before anyone installs the thing22:49
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: reform-setup-wizard [arm64] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-3] (no packageset)22:50
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: dart [s390x] (noble-proposed/universe) [6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)22:51
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: reform-setup-wizard [armhf] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-3] (no packageset)22:53
sarnoldr/win 3023:04
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: dart [arm64] (noble-proposed/universe) [6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)23:07
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted reform-setup-wizard [amd64] (noble-proposed) [0.1.0-3]23:09
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted reform-setup-wizard [armhf] (noble-proposed) [0.1.0-3]23:09
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted reform-setup-wizard [s390x] (noble-proposed) [0.1.0-3]23:10
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted reform-setup-wizard [arm64] (noble-proposed) [0.1.0-3]23:10
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted reform-setup-wizard [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [0.1.0-3]23:10
-queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: dart [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/universe) [6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)23:14
vorlontsimonq2, juliank: I think I need some clarification wrt the software-properties-qt in NEW.  I thought the conclusion was to not push for this in the release pocket; in which case there is no need to accept this new source package only to have it superseded again shortly in SRU, therefore I should reject this upload?23:30
vorlonbdrung: hi, so please fill me in on why the difference between dart 6.12.1 and dart 6.13.2 is going to matter over 5 (or 10) years to justify pushing an upload 2 days before release that either a) needs to take AA time now during release week to review it, or b) doesn't get reviewed and then becomes junk in the queue that AAs have to clean up post-release23:39
vorlondoes anyone want to take a stab at figuring out the "right" set of (build-)dependencies for magics-python so it doesn't build uninstallable binaries?23:58

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