[00:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: landscape-client (noble-proposed/main) [24.02-0ubuntu4 => 24.02-0ubuntu5] (ubuntu-server)
[00:11] <ahasenack_> vorlon: sponsored ^
[00:11] <ahasenack_> this does not fix all of landscape wrt deb822, but it fixes that alert issue in the linked bug
[00:35] <ahasenack_> ahasenack: you stay put
[01:01] <Eickmeyer> ahasenack: I'm worried you're talking to yourself. You ok?
[01:13] <ahasenack> I am, the other one is gone
[01:13] <ahasenack> he was having dinner
[01:25] <vorlon> tsimonq2: 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 this
[01:26] <vorlon> vpa1977: "still" unbuildable?
[01:27] <vpa1977> retrying
[01:27] <vorlon> vpa1977: ah buildable with the testing-related build-deps re-enabled, I guess
[01:28] <vpa1977> vorlon: yes, sorry for confusion
[01:30] <vpa1977> vorlon: still failing: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/725931993/buildlog_ubuntu-noble-i386.openjdk-21_21.0.3+9-1ubuntu1~ppa2_BUILDING.txt.gz
[01:31] <vorlon> vpa1977: yes. I did mention there might be a couple rounds required to get the xfwm4 stuff installable again
[01:33] <vorlon> vpa1977: restoring startup-notification and libxfce4ui now
[01:34] <vorlon> vpa1977: 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] <vladimirp> vorlon: ack
[01:35] <vorlon> vladimirp: the longer we go today with this NOT in the queue the more likely it is to not make it into the release pocket
[01:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted landscape-client [source] (noble-proposed) [24.02-0ubuntu5]
[01:42] <vladimirp> vorlon: uploaded, changes: https://code.launchpad.net/~vpa1977/ubuntu/+source/openjdk-21/+git/openjdk-21/+merge/464794
[01:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: openjdk-21 (noble-proposed/main) [21.0.3+9-1 => 21.0.3+9-1ubuntu1] (i386-whitelist)
[01:46] <tsimonq2> vorlon: bdmurray said it was being discussed, I would assume internally or IRL, was just curious if you knew anything.
[01:50] <Eickmeyer> vorlon: Can I giggle at that bug report? They didn't read the release notes.
[01:50] <vorlon> Eickmeyer: <shrug> it is certainly an anachronism that the UbuntuStudio image calls itself a 'DVD' image
[01:51] <Eickmeyer> Yeah, well, that would be a "nice to fix"
[01:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: propellor (noble-proposed/universe) [5.13-3build1 => 5.17-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[02:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted propellor [sync] (noble-proposed) [5.17-1]
[02:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted openjdk-21 [source] (noble-proposed) [21.0.3+9-1ubuntu1]
[02:07] <vorlon> john-cabaj: fyi also: W: involflt-dkms: executable-not-elf-or-script [usr/src/involflt-0.1.0/VBitmap.c]
[02:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted involflt [amd64] (noble-proposed) [0.1.0-0ubuntu6]
[02:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fonts-dm-mono [amd64] (noble-proposed) [1.000+git20200415.57fadab-0ubuntu1]
[02:11] -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]
[02:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted propellor [amd64] (noble-proposed) [5.17-1]
[02:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted nemos-dev-key [amd64] (noble-proposed) [1.8]
[02:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: propellor [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/none) [5.17-1] (no packageset)
[02:14] <mwhudson> vorlon, Eickmeyer: i want to kill the dvd / cd distinction early next cycle
[02:15] <Eickmeyer> mwhudson: +1
[02:15] <Eickmeyer> I'm sure it's just a lot of livecd-rootfs and ubuntu-cdimage cleanup.
[02:16] <mwhudson> yeah nothing deep i think
[02:17] <Eickmeyer> Considering 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)
[02:18] <vorlon> UbuntuStudio also has 'dvd' embedded in its seed names etc
[02:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: propellor [s390x] (noble-proposed/none) [5.17-1] (no packageset)
[02:19] <Eickmeyer> Not 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]
[02:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fparser [amd64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.1.4-3] (no packageset)
[02:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fparser [amd64] (noble-proposed) [0.1.4-3]
[02:45] <vorlon> afk for a publisher cycle or so, waiting for various things to propagate
[02:45] <vorlon> (yay, NBS report empty)
[02:49] <Eickmeyer> 🎉
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added asm to i386-whitelist in noble
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added cglib to i386-whitelist in noble
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added java-atk-wrapper to i386-whitelist in noble
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libwnck3 to i386-whitelist in noble
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libxfce4util to i386-whitelist in noble
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libxpresent to i386-whitelist in noble
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added rxtx to i386-whitelist in noble
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added xfce4-dev-tools to i386-whitelist in noble
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added xfconf to i386-whitelist in noble
[02:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added xfwm4 to i386-whitelist in noble
[03:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: edubuntu-artwork (noble-proposed/universe) [24.04.25 => 24.04.26] (no packageset)
[03:55] <Eickmeyer> vorlon: 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.
[03:59] <Eickmeyer> Runs 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.
[04:11] <vorlon> looking
[04:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted edubuntu-artwork [source] (noble-proposed) [24.04.26]
[04:14] <Eickmeyer> ta!
[04:16] <vorlon> apw: linux-meta-nvidia wants demoted to universe
[04:16] <vorlon> vladimirp: openjdk-21/i386 building
[04:16] <vladimirp> vorlon: Thank you!!!!!!
[04:22] <vorlon> schopin: LP: #2058769 fwiw the autopkgtests all fail with preload path errors
[04:22] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2058769 in click (Ubuntu) "proposed-migration for click 0.5.2-2" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2058769
[04:22] <vorlon> not that I understand why this package still exists
[04:22] <vorlon> or why things still depend on it
[04:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: click (noble-proposed/universe) [0.5.2-2ubuntu3 => 0.5.2-2ubuntu4] (no packageset)
[04:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted click [source] (noble-proposed) [0.5.2-2ubuntu4]
[04:41] <vorlon> hmm. a ukui-control-center sync
[04:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ukui-control-center [sync] (noble-proposed) [3.22.1.28-1]
[04:53] <vorlon> doko: fwiw you removed uwsgi armhf due to ceph but its build-dep on librados-dev is arch-restricted
[04:54] <vorlon> doko: (and this had knock-on effects on installability)
[05:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tcpxtract (noble-proposed/universe) [1.0.1-17ubuntu2 => 1.0.1-17ubuntu3] (no packageset)
[05:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted tcpxtract [source] (noble-proposed) [1.0.1-17ubuntu3]
[05:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mdbtools (noble-proposed/universe) [1.0.0+dfsg-1.2build2 => 1.0.0+dfsg-1.2ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[05:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted mdbtools [source] (noble-proposed) [1.0.0+dfsg-1.2ubuntu1]
[06:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: sphinx-theme-builder (noble-proposed/primary) [0.2.0b2-2]
[08:12] <ginggs> jbicha: taskflow hinted
[08:19] <bdmurray> Eickmeyer: 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/2063142
[08:28] <mwhudson> ubuntu-archive: in case you're, uh, bored or something https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/android-platform-frameworks-native/+bug/2063189
[08:28] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2063189 in android-platform-frameworks-native (Ubuntu) "please remove android-platform-frameworks-native from ubuntu" [Undecided, New]
[08:28] <sil2100> hahahaha, good one!
[08:29] <sil2100> Bored he says
[09:24] <mwhudson> sil2100: laughter is healing!
[09:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: golang-1.22 (jammy-proposed/primary) [1.22.2-2~22.04]
[09:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adsys (jammy-proposed/main) [0.9.2~22.04.2 => 0.14.1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[09:39] <sil2100> That is true
[09:42] <dviererbe> I 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 arm64
[09:44] <bdmurray> dviererbe: use https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-base/daily/20240422.1/ we'll sort it out
[09:45] <dviererbe> bdmurray: ack
[09:49] <sil2100> This should now be fixed
[09:52] -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]
[10:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvptx-tools (noble-proposed/universe) [0.20230904-1 => 0.20240423-1] (no packageset)
[10:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nvptx-tools [source] (noble-proposed) [0.20240423-1]
[10:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: hipcub (noble-proposed/universe) [5.7.1-3 => 5.7.1-3build1] (no packageset)
[10:55] -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]
[10:56] -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]
[11:04] <ogayot> Hello 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 symptoms
[11:04] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2063192 in ubuntu-desktop-provision "Subiquity didn't display all my drives" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2063192
[11:06] <seb128> I've asked ogayot to mention it here because because I think that might a release blocker issue
[11:12] <bdmurray> ogayot, seb128: thanks for letting us know
[11:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: fakechroot (noble-proposed/universe) [2.20.1+ds-15build1 => 2.20.1+ds-17] (i386-whitelist) (sync)
[11:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted fakechroot [sync] (noble-proposed) [2.20.1+ds-17]
[12:01] -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]
[12:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apport (noble-proposed/main) [2.28.1-0ubuntu2 => 2.28.1-0ubuntu3] (core, i386-whitelist)
[12:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-proxy-manager [source] (noble-proposed) [0.1.1]
[12:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: ubuntu-proxy-manager (jammy-proposed/primary) [0.1.1~22.04]
[12:42] <slyon> I 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]
[13:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: s3cmd (noble-proposed/universe) [2.3.0-1 => 2.3.0-1ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[13:06] <sil2100> slyon: looking
[13:07] <sil2100> slyon: oh, so it's basically just garbage that doesn't actually cause nay problems, right?
[13:08] <slyon> sil2100: Right. I don't think it causes problems. Might just lead to some confusion
[13:09] <waveform> yes ... 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 build
[13:10] <slyon> waveform: correct. An "apt install --reinstall" also gets rid of it
[13:10] <waveform> yup, I'll prep a branch to fix livecd-rootfs but this sounds basically benign
[13:11] <slyon> ack
[13:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted s3cmd [source] (noble-proposed) [2.3.0-1ubuntu1]
[13:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sopwith (noble-proposed/universe) [2.4.0-1 => 2.5.0-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[13:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted sopwith [sync] (noble-proposed) [2.5.0-1]
[13:44] <bdmurray> waveform: if we are resinning RPi for bug 2060300 we might be able to grab your livecd-rootfs change too
[13:44] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Bug 2060300 in linux-raspi (Ubuntu) "KMS overlay causes OOM oops on 3A+" [Low, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2060300
[13:45] <waveform> bdmurray, 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)
[13:46] <bdmurray> waveform: Okay, but where is your fix for 2060300?
[13:47] <waveform> in the gadget: https://github.com/snapcore/pi-gadget/commit/de76b4a7a6b5a0b610415d005f16fda8f478673b
[13:47] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Commit de76b4a in snapcore/pi-gadget "Apply CMA-128 workaround on the Zero 2W as well"
[13:47] <bdmurray> I'll start spinning then
[13:53] <juliank> I 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 failures
[13:54] <juliank> Because the dependency only needs to be satisfied at configuration time, libglib2.0-0 is unpacked early and the glib library disappears
[13:54] <juliank> Whereas with no transitional package libglib2.0-0 is removed and libglib2.0-0t64 is unpacked in sort of lockstep
[13:55] <juliank> Now we can potentially make libglib2.0-0 PreDepends on libglib2.0-0t64 in a 0 day SRU; but then we get an unpacking loop
[13:56] <juliank> What we can't do however is remove libglib2.0-0 transitional package after the release
[13:59] <tsimonq2> ubuntu-release: Extra ping about software-properties, we really should get that in before final, any updates on reviewing?
[13:59] <jbicha> glib is going to be frustrating because it triggers so many autopkgtests & is in all the desktop flavors
[13:59] <tsimonq2> utkarsh2102: ^^^
[13:59] <jbicha> at least autopkgtest queue is quiet for noble
[13:59] <juliank> jbicha: Arguably we can just kill the transitional libglib2.0-0 binary package
[14:00] <bdmurray> juliank: Is that this then? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/2061918
[14:00] -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] <jbicha> juliank: kill would still need an upload though, right?
[14:00] <juliank> jbicha: No we just have ubuntu-archive whack it out of the release pocket
[14:00] <juliank> bdmurray: I believe so yes
[14:00] <jbicha> meh
[14:01] <juliank> jbicha: I understand it's meh but it avoids respinning all images
[14:01] <juliank> jbicha: Proper update probably works better as a 0 day SRU vs respinning it all
[14:02] <seb128> I don't know if killing binaries from a package like that is something we do?
[14:04] <bdmurray> If we did it as a 0 day SRU we could just wait to turn on upgrades until the SRU was complete
[14:06] <juliank> bdmurray: 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 candidate
[14:07] <jbicha> I'm not opposed to dropping the transitional glib package, I'm curious if we get a reply from smcv though
[14:07] <sil2100> tsimonq2: let's revisit this in a bit
[14:07] <juliank> It's possibly kylin needs a respin because it is seeded there for some reaosn
[14:09] <jbicha> tsimonq2: would it be important to also include https://code.launchpad.net/~fossfreedom/software-properties/+git/software-properties/+merge/461666 ?
[14:12] <juliank> Ah yes, to solve the specific instance of the thunderbird snap and similar ones, one could also add Depends: libglib2.0-0t64 to their deb2snap packages
[14:13] <juliank> Or I suppose it should be desktop-file-utils, but I don't think it gets deconfigured correctly
[14:13] <juliank> but there are other undeclared triggers involved in there I think
[14:13] <juliank> At least from what I saw in popey's upgrade log earlier today
[14:20] -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]
[14:21] <tsimonq2> jbicha: Probably, I've asked fossfreedom_
[14:21] <tsimonq2> sil2100: ack
[14:22] <bdmurray> juliank: 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?
[14:23] <bdmurray> tsimonq2: 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)
[14:25] -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)
[14:27] -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)
[14:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: numix-icon-theme-circle (noble-proposed/universe) [24.02.05-1 => 24.04.22-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[14:29] <Eickmeyer> bdmurray: upgrades> Yes, I knew that. :)
[14:30] <juliank> bdmurray: Yes anything installing a desktop app will run update-desktop-database which uses libgio from libglib2.0-0
[14:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted numix-icon-theme-circle [sync] (noble-proposed) [24.04.22-1]
[14:30] <juliank> bdmurray: So that presumably is firefox, thunderbird, not sure what else
[14:31] <juliank> Centrally adding a libglib2.0-0t64 depends to snapd wouldn't hurt either tbh
[14:31] <juliank> Anything using the desktop plugs I think is what is broken
[14:32] <juliank> Ah yes, chromium-browser, firefox, thunderbird
[14:32] <juliank> I think that's the complete list of affected deb2snap packages
[14:33] <juliank> Oh I think it needs to be Pre-Depends
[14:33] <juliank> They run snap install in the preinst
[14:34] <bdmurray> juliank: Couldn't we just have u-r-u install libglib2.0-0t64 first in the upgrade process?
[14:34] <juliank> and they should gain same kind of depends in desktop-file-utils
[14:34] <juliank> let's fix the packages to declare the dependencies they have?
[14:36] <sil2100> juliank, bdmurray: I need a short summary: what options for fixing this do we have?
[14:36] <bdmurray> We can do that in an SRU and not have to respin nearly everything.
[14:36] <juliank> Yes
[14:37] -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] <juliank> So we can
[14:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted urdfdom [arm64] (noble-proposed) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1]
[14:37] <sil2100> YES
[14:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted urdfdom [ppc64el] (noble-proposed) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1]
[14:37] <sil2100> Please
[14:37] <juliank> 1) quirk u-r-u to upgrade libglib2.0-0t64 firt (well after early libc6 upgrade)
[14:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted rust-test-log [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.2.15-1]
[14:38] <juliank> 2) 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] <juliank> 3) have those be depends of snapd instead
[14:38] <juliank> 4) whack the transitional package out of the archive with archive surgey
[14:38] <juliank> The other options are all SRUable
[14:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted livecd-rootfs [source] (noble-proposed) [24.04.68]
[14:42] -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)
[14:43] -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] <sil2100> juliank: so just removing the transitional package from the release pocket will be enough? Is that safe to do?
[14:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: urdfdom [riscv64] (noble-proposed/universe) [4.0.0-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[14:44] <juliank> sil2100: 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 too
[14:44] <juliank> either way I'd want to fix the transitional packages to declare the dependencies of their snap hooks
[14:46] <Eickmeyer> We also had this one show up courtesy Skia which I'm certain can be handled by u-r-u: bug 2063128
[14:46] -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/2063128
[14:46] <seb128> sil2100, can we really remove binaries which are valid builds from a source currently in the archive?
[14:47] <seb128> I mean technically we probably can but it feels wrong
[14:47] <ahasenack_> are the autopkgtest runners for non-noble still paused?
[14:48] <Skia> ahasenack_: they are not completely paused, we have about 1/4 of the infra processing non-noble tests
[14:48] <ahasenack> Skia: tests for ppas, are they running? I see a ton there, I suppopse the glibc security update is taking it all up?
[14:48] <vorlon> seb128, sil2100: we *can* but yes the right answer here is a rebuild
[14:49] <Skia> yes, they are running, and yes, it's mostly glibc security update
[14:49] <ahasenack> ok
[14:49] <vorlon> seb128, sil2100 (without waiting for any autopkgtests)
[14:50] <vorlon> that transitional package, meh, it never looked any good
[14:50] <sil2100> vorlon: rebuild of glib?
[14:50] <vorlon> but I didn't realize it would be THAT bad
[14:50] <vorlon> sil2100: yes
[14:50] <sil2100> Are we sure this is needed for release?
[14:50] <sil2100> Can't we just shove it into -updates?
[14:51] <vorlon> sil2100: no, you can't shove the DISAPPEARANCE of a package into -updates
[14:51] <sil2100> (the rebuild)
[14:51] <vorlon> you still have to delete the binary from the release pocket
[14:51] <vorlon> so
[14:51] <sil2100> Right, it would stay as an NBS eh
[14:51] <vorlon> no
[14:51] <bdmurray> I still think option 1 is the least respin effort
[14:51] <vorlon> it would be "it's not published but people would be confused looking at launchpad"
[14:52] <vorlon> sil2100, seb128, bdmurray: I'll point out that there's lots of precedent here though with i386 binary removals
[14:52] <vorlon> and even other arch ANAIS removals
[14:52] <vorlon> so
[14:52] <juliank> I don't think we need respinning for anything
[14:52] <vorlon> the "nice" thing to do is to rebuild glib2.0
[14:52] <sil2100> Well, if we want to rebuild glib then we do
[14:52] <vorlon> but on balance, we should just remove the terrible no good binary packages
[14:53] <juliank> libglib2.0-0 transitional package is technically correct, the issue is that it just triggers the undeclared dependencies in deb2snap packages from the snapd desktop install hooks
[14:53] <juliank> (and potentially others)
[14:53] <juliank> (because it disappears for so long)
[14:53] <vorlon> juliank: we should rebuild ubuntukylin and not ship binaries in an image that are not in the archive
[14:53] <sil2100> We need to check why seeded-in-ubuntu was saying kylin though
[14:54] <juliank> I think we missed some rebuilds for kylin for glib2.0 hence it pulls in the transitional package there
[14:54] <juliank> but removing it it will pull in the provides instead
[14:54] <vorlon> actually I just checked and it's not in the daily
[14:54] <vorlon> so no rebuild there either
[14:54] <juliank> well that's good
[14:54] <vorlon> $ grep libglib2.0-0 ubuntukylin/daily-live/current/*.manifest
[14:54] <vorlon> libglib2.0-0t64:amd64   2.80.0-6ubuntu1
[14:55] <vorlon> libglib2.0-0 removed
[14:55] <juliank> So if there are other undeclared dependencies on it, what happens to popey might happen to other users
[14:55] <vorlon> if we want to do anything else in addition, we can iterate
[14:55] <juliank> It's quite funny, he's in a state apt install --fix-broken cannot recover from
[14:56] <vorlon> juliank: should the transitional package have had a pre-depends :P
[14:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: rust-test-log [riscv64] (noble-proposed/none) [0.2.15-1] (no packageset)
[14:56] <vorlon> vladimirp: thanks for the tcpxtract upload
[14:56] <juliank> I've had those a couple of times, the secret is to dpkg --install /var/cache/apt/archives/*.deb until apt install --fix-broken works again
[14:56] <juliank> vorlon: That's just a Pre-Depends <=> Breaks loop
[14:56] <vorlon> juliank: meh ok
[14:57] <juliank> What we should have done is add a ton of diversions, really
[14:57] <juliank> have libfoo0t64 divert all the files from libfoo0
[14:57] <Skia> ahasenack: we just discussed with Brian, and set back the infra to normal, so 100% of workers are now processing all the queues, non-noble included
[14:57] <juliank> This would have avoided the lockstep remove and break depends and fix it by unpacking t64
[14:57] <juliank> But might have broken the diversion database by having too many
[14:59] <vorlon> and also would have been horrible to implement across all the packages
[15:06] <tsimonq2> bdmurray: 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 is
[15:06] <tsimonq2> no 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.
[15:07] <juliank> The issue was I overread the l in the bug message
[15:07] <juliank> Hence i did not realize it was the Qt backend or we'd have known weeks ago
[15:07] <vorlon> tsimonq2, 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 flavors
[15:07] <juliank> The screenshot looks identical to the GTK one so I could not visually identify it either
[15:08] <juliank> vorlon: I think we can just fork it out have it dominate the other, and then merge it back in in an SRU
[15:08] <juliank> tbh
[15:08] -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]
[15:09] <juliank> i.e. the software-properties-qt package temporarily switches source package in release pocket, but moves back to software-properties in update
[15:09] <juliank> * updates
[15:10] <vorlon> juliank: for ubuntu-settings-raspi we made it a permanent split, to avoid such issues in the future
[15:10] <vorlon> $ seeded-in-ubuntu plasma-vault
[15:10] <vorlon> $
[15:10] <vorlon> plasma-vault (from plasma-vault) is seeded in:
[15:10] <vorlon>   kubuntu: daily-live
[15:10] <vorlon>   ubuntustudio: dvd
[15:10] <vorlon> meh
[15:10] <vorlon> "meh" because plasma-vault is uninstallable on ppc64el
[15:11] <Eickmeyer> ANAIS removal from ppc64el?
[15:11] <vorlon> doko: ^ it's really best that you introduce a build-dependency in situations like this, to avoid per-arch binary removals from growing back
[15:11] <vorlon> Eickmeyer: yes; and the "meh" is that this had already been done
[15:11] <Eickmeyer> hehe
[15:11] <vorlon> but incompletely, per above
[15:12] <Eickmeyer> oof
[15:16] -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)
[15:19] <tsimonq2> vorlon, 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 do
[15:21] <tsimonq2> The escape hatch is doable, but it's also Tuesday... coverage is not quite complete yet for testing.
[15:22] <Eickmeyer> Based on that MP, even if the escape hatch is used, the world would have to respin.
[15:22] <tsimonq2> Eickmeyer: Not if the source package only had that one binary package
[15:22] <Eickmeyer> Negates the need for the escape hatch.
[15:23] <tsimonq2> Ah... yes
[15:23] <bdmurray> IDK what escape hatch y'all are talking about but I might be interested in using it myself
[15:23] <Eickmeyer> bdmurray: XD
[15:23] <tsimonq2> hah
[15:24] <Eickmeyer> TL;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] <tsimonq2> That 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)
[15:25] <bdmurray> That MP on its own is not worth a respin IMO
[15:25] <Eickmeyer> I'm fairly certian fossfreedom_ would disagree, but that's up to him.
[15:26] <bdrung> utkarsh2102, were in https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/noble-numbat-release-notes/39890/1 should i put the information about the tzdata-legacy split?
[15:28] <utkarsh2102> bdrung: I am not super sure but perhaps "New features in 24.04 LTS"?
[15:28] <utkarsh2102> I know it's not really a new feature per-se
[15:28] <utkarsh2102> but I can't seem to find a better place
[15:28] <utkarsh2102> than that^
[15:31] <vorlon> tsimonq2: "should likely go in" is very different than OMG showstopper
[15:32] <vorlon> as bdmurray already said basically
[15:32] <tsimonq2> ok :)
[15:32] <juliank> I think software sources not being configurable on the live image is a sad thing, but it's not a showstopper
[15:33] <bdmurray> I do see that bug 2055088 is rather old and not on the sponsoring report
[15:33] -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/2055088
[15:33] <juliank> and upgrading software-properties-qt after the install with 0day SRU from teh default mirror kind of works ok
[15:36] <Eickmeyer> The 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 wrong
[15:37] <tsimonq2> juliank: hmm... do the live ISOs use deb822 or sources.list?
[15:37] <tsimonq2> checking
[15:37] <vorlon> seb128: we should commit to a glib2.0 SRU soon-ish to drop the transitional package, so it doesn't come back
[15:37] <juliank> this is correct but there's an easier way I suppose
[15:37] <juliank> i.e. for bug 2055088 we should just whack in a livecd-rootfs change that removes gnome-session-bin from the affected live images probably
[15:37] -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/2055088
[15:37] <juliank> since it is only a Recommends
[15:38] <juliank> Then we can avoid respinning everything else
[15:38] <juliank> possibly one could just add it to the seed exclude too and respin budgie
[15:39] <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] <vorlon> Eickmeyer: yes, that is what that patch would fix. But escalating removal of unnecessary packages after the candidate images have been spun... <shrug>
[15:39] <vorlon> fossfreedom_: yes that should be fine
[15:41] <Eickmeyer> tsimonq2: 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] <Eickmeyer> vorlon, bdmurray, juliank ^
[15:41] <tsimonq2> "it'll work itself out" -1 :/
[15:41] <tsimonq2> The ISO doesn't use deb822 apparently
[15:42] <tsimonq2> So I *concur* that we should make it a 0-day SRU
[15:42] <bdrung> utkarsh2102, added. btw, it would be nice if the table of contents would be more fine grained to find stuff in the release notes.
[15:43] <vorlon> tsimonq2: what ISO doesn't use deb822?
[15:43] <tsimonq2> vorlon: Lubuntu
[15:43] <vorlon> this landed in livecd-rootfs months ago
[15:43] <Eickmeyer> tsimonq2: By that logic, neither does Studio or Kubuntu, and that's categorically false.
[15:44] <tsimonq2> I'm literally telling you both what I just saw...
[15:44] <tsimonq2> Let me confirm
[15:44] <juliank> I ripped out the non-deb822 code in livecd-rootfs so there should be no way :D
[15:44] <tsimonq2> Eickmeyer: You're not helping.
[15:45] <juliank> i.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 that
[15:46] <juliank> This overrides the software-properties-qt binary because it has a higher version number
[15:46] <juliank> but then we can SRU software-properties again with a higher one and then software-properties in -udpates assumes ownership again
[15:49] <tsimonq2> juliank: Right, that's a decent solution, I would just like to make sure that second part happens, if we go that route.
[15:49] <juliank> vorlon: 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 invalid
[15:49] <juliank> immediately, but it's effort.
[15:50] <Eickmeyer> Agreed, we do not want `software-properties-qt` permanently forked.
[15:50]  * juliank wants a flutter rewrite of software-properties
[15:50] <Eickmeyer> ^ That would be awesome.
[15:50] <tsimonq2> software-properties-qt gets ported to Qt 6 next cycle for us ;)
[15:50] <vorlon> tsimonq2: 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)
[15:51] <juliank> I have apt 2.9.2 already for noble+1 :)
[15:51] <juliank> The 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 place
[15:51] <vorlon> juliank: "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-proposed
[15:52] <vorlon> like, this is fundamental management of series in launchpad, nothing specific to atp
[15:52] <vorlon> apt
[15:52] <juliank> vorlon: I figured it ends two ways, stuff not approved for 0 day SRU ending getting moved to devel instead
[15:53] <juliank> But I am no SRU/release team member :)
[15:53] <juliank> (yet?)
[15:53] <tsimonq2> juliank, vorlon: uhhh Lubuntu daily 20240422 has sources.list
[15:53] <juliank> Looking
[15:54] <Eickmeyer> tsimonq2: Did you see the contents of sources.list?
[15:54] <tsimonq2> $ cat /etc/apt/sources.list
[15:54] <tsimonq2> deb cdrom:[Lubuntu 24.04 LTS _Noble Numbat_ - Release amd64 (20240422)]/ noble main multiverse restricted universe
[15:54] <tsimonq2> deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ noble main restricted universe multiverse
[15:54] <tsimonq2> deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ noble-security main restricted universe multiverse
[15:54] <tsimonq2> deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ noble-updates main restricted universe multiverse
[15:54] <tsimonq2> Eickmeyer: You mean these contents?
[15:54] <juliank> The cdrom I expected, but not the rest
[15:54] <Eickmeyer> Weird.
[15:55] <Eickmeyer> After install it should be:
[15:55] <Eickmeyer> $ cat sources.list
[15:55] <juliank> I did not move the cdrom: handling to deb822 because it doesn't end up on the installed system
[15:55] <Eickmeyer> # Ubuntu sources have moved to /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ubuntu.sources
[15:55] <juliank> It's possible this is fine post-install, because it's in a later layer
[15:55] <juliank> i.e. in the live layer that adds installer
[15:55] <Eickmeyer> Correct, it doesn't show post-install. What I pasted is post-install.
[15:56] <Eickmeyer> juliank: Lubuntu isn't a layered ISO image.
[15:56] <tsimonq2> Eickmeyer: different installers, irrelevant
[15:56] <juliank> ooh
[15:56] <Eickmeyer> Lubuntu uses Calamares, as does Kubuntu and Ubuntu Unity.
[15:56] <juliank> It's possible they have all sources.list on the iso then
[15:56] <Eickmeyer> None of those images are layered.
[15:57] <juliank> It doesn't matter since calamares sets up fresh sources
[15:57] <juliank> so there is no pratical issue with software-properties-qt for any of them but I suppose for Studio?
[15:57] <Eickmeyer> juliank: Studio uses Provision and is layered, so yes.
[15:59] <juliank> I 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 effort
[15:59] <tsimonq2> juliank: 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: security
[15:59] <tsimonq2> or have an AA set phasing to 100?
[15:59] <juliank> Not a phasing issue, but the installer runs unattended-upgrades to install security updates only afaiui
[16:00] <vorlon> Eickmeyer, 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 available
[16:00] <Eickmeyer> vorlon: Thanks!
[16:00] <tsimonq2> juliank: different installers :)
[16:01] <Eickmeyer> tsimonq2: I think unattended-upgrades still runs upon reboot.
[16:01] <vorlon> juliank: I know of no reason that we would be doing security updates only
[16:01] <tsimonq2> Eickmeyer: you think or you know?
[16:01] <Eickmeyer> tsimonq2: think. I was careful with my choice of words.
[16:02] <juliank> vorlon: well we use unattended-upgrades and that does only security upgrades, but I haven't checked
[16:03] -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] <juliank> this is a question for dbungert, ogayot and other installer folks maybe
[16:03] <juliank> Are we configuring unattended-upgrades to install -updates too, but then why do we not just do upgrades directly?
[16:04] <dbungert> u-u on subiquity does security and release by default
[16:04] <ogayot> juliank: -security by default. There is an option in autoinstall to install stuff from -updates as well
[16:04] <bdmurray> what does calamares do?
[16:04] <juliank> tsimonq2: ^
[16:04] <tsimonq2> -updates and -security
[16:05] <juliank> heh
[16:05] <tsimonq2> ...on checked box :)
[16:05] <juliank> is the box checked by defualt?
[16:05] <tsimonq2> not by default at this point in time
[16:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware-xilinx-ap1302 (jammy-proposed/multiverse) [2021.1-0ubuntu1 => 1:2.0-0ubuntu1~22.04.1] (no packageset)
[16:10] <Skia> 1
[16:14] <sil2100> Ok, 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?
[16:15] <juliank> tl;dr: calamares images are only affected post-installation, not on the live image; studio image is affected on live environment too presumably
[16:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: glib2.0 (noble-proposed/main) [2.80.0-6ubuntu1 => 2.80.0-6ubuntu3] (core, i386-whitelist)
[16:16] <juliank> with a 0 day software-properties SRU, calamares will pick it up if users check the checkbox
[16:16] <juliank> users of Ubuntu studio would need to manually upgrade as subiquity by default only installs security upgrades
[16:16] <juliank> (or you move it into the security pocket to workaround that)
[16:17] <juliank> A respin would need a separate software-properties-qt temporary source package building a fixed software-properties-qt
[16:18] <tsimonq2> Unless we planned on respinning the world for this, which does seem unlikely at this point.
[16:18] <tsimonq2> My vote is for 0-day SRU, I can start prepping paperwork?
[16:19] <juliank> Do it either way :)
[16:19] <tsimonq2> On it.
[16:19] <sil2100> Yeah, 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!
[16:20] <juliank> We 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 updates
[16:20] <juliank> They'd be identical essentially
[16:21] <juliank> I guess it would need some whacking for the python3-software-properties (= 0.99.48) dependency
[16:22] <jbicha> I'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 it
[16:22] <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.
[16:24] <juliank> Let me PoC a software-properties-qt
[16:24] <Eickmeyer> 👍
[16:26] <bdmurray> vorlon did archive surgery already for glib2.0 and we are testing upgrades now
[16:28] <juliank> OK software-properties-qt is building
[16:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: amazon-ec2-utils (noble-proposed/universe) [2.1.0-1 => 2.1.0-1.1] (no packageset) (sync)
[16:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted amazon-ec2-utils [sync] (noble-proposed) [2.1.0-1.1]
[16:33] <juliank> So this seems to be working: https://git.launchpad.net/software-properties/commit/?id=67354e45fcbb2e5d6b869f5bad3304122c3c2eb3
[16:33] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Commit 67354e4 in software-properties "Add a temporary software-properties-qt source package ubuntu-qt/master"
[16:33] <juliank> I'm happy to upload it
[16:35] <juliank> I have uploaded it, please accept or reject it, but it's there now
[16:35] <tsimonq2> juliank: +1
[16:35] <juliank> The temporary branch is ubuntu-qt/master
[16:35] <tsimonq2> Thank you!
[16:35] <juliank> I refrain from adding a tag for it because of namespace concerns :)
[16:35] <bdmurray> thunderbird has installed in edubuntu-studio after the package removal
[16:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: software-properties-qt (noble-proposed/primary) [0.99.48.1]
[16:36] <Eickmeyer> bdmurray: edubuntu-studio? That's a new one.
[16:36] <juliank> Note that: We need to migrate software-properties-qt *before* we can accept software-properties into proposed or the binaries get superseded
[16:37] <juliank> i.e. accept software-properties-qt, unblock it, respin the images using it, and only then accept software-properties
[16:37] <juliank> And 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)
[16:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: foliate (noble-proposed/universe) [4.~really3.1.0-0.1 => 4.~really3.1.1-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[16:40] -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] <juliank> glib2.0 should be accepted as a 0day SRU
[16:41] -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]
[16:44] <bdmurray> Eickmeyer: It's a portmanteau
[16:44] <Eickmeyer> bdmurray: Kinda thought so. XD
[16:45] <Eickmeyer> I just didn't know if I needed to fix something and where to look. Like, "Which hat do I wear?"
[16:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rust-wayland-egl (noble-proposed/universe) [0.30.0-2 => 0.32.0-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[16:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: megapixels (noble-proposed/universe) [1.7.0-1build2 => 1.8.1-1] (no packageset) (sync)
[16:47] <bdmurray> Okay, so to clarify the ubuntu-studio upgrade is on going
[16:49] <Eickmeyer> 👍
[16:50] -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]
[17:06] <tsimonq2> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/2061214 I updated the bug report to follow the SRU format
[17:06] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2061214 in software-properties (Ubuntu) "[SRU] Software Sources is not compatible with deb822" [Critical, Confirmed]
[17:06] <tsimonq2> Let me know if I should clarify anything further.
[17:30] -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]
[17:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted landscape-client [source] (mantic-proposed) [23.08-0ubuntu1.2]
[17:37] <dbungert> ubuntu-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/2063192
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added glade to i386-whitelist in noble
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libgtop2 to i386-whitelist in noble
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added libxfce4ui to i386-whitelist in noble
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added markdown-it-py to i386-whitelist in noble
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added mdit-py-plugins to i386-whitelist in noble
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added mdurl to i386-whitelist in noble
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added myst-parser to i386-whitelist in noble
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added startup-notification to i386-whitelist in noble
[18:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added x11-utils to i386-whitelist in noble
[19:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-release-upgrader (noble-proposed/main) [1:24.04.16 => 1:24.04.17] (core)
[19:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: livecd-rootfs (noble-proposed/main) [24.04.68 => 24.04.69] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist)
[19:58] <seb128>  release team probably wants to review ^ since it is a been flagged as a rc issue from a desktop perspective
[19:58] <dbungert> seb128: I have failed to produce the underlying issue.  If you happen to know someone who can, a test would be good.
[19:59] <seb128> dbungert, not really, ogayot said he could trigger it but I guess it's past eod for him
[20:14] -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)
[20:35] <juliank> dbungert: fwiw I don't understand why it's a service, why not just ship the udev rule statically in the layer, that would seem cleaner
[20:36] <juliank> Just my 2c
[20:44] <dbungert> juliank: 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_r1576539993
[20:44] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Pull 703 in canonical/ubuntu-desktop-provision "fix(bootstrap): use udisks2-inhibit.service" [Open]
[22:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: dart (noble-proposed/universe) [6.12.1+dfsg4-13.1build1 => 6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[22:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted dart [source] (noble-proposed) [6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1]
[22:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: reform-setup-wizard (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-2 => 0.1.0-3] (no packageset) (sync)
[22:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted reform-setup-wizard [sync] (noble-proposed) [0.1.0-3]
[22:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: reform-setup-wizard [amd64] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-3] (no packageset)
[22:48] -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)
[22:49] <jbicha> sorry for the new reform-setup-wizard package: Debian decided to rename the package so we might as well follow before anyone installs the thing
[22:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: reform-setup-wizard [arm64] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-3] (no packageset)
[22:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: dart [s390x] (noble-proposed/universe) [6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[22:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: reform-setup-wizard [armhf] (noble-proposed/universe) [0.1.0-3] (no packageset)
[23:04] <sarnold> r/win 30
[23:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: dart [arm64] (noble-proposed/universe) [6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[23:09] -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]
[23:10] -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]
[23:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: dart [ppc64el] (noble-proposed/universe) [6.13.2+ds-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[23:30] <vorlon> tsimonq2, 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?
[23:39] <vorlon> bdrung: 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-release
[23:58] <vorlon> does 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?