[11:05] @pilot inm [11:05] (pilot ) -- Set yourself as in or out of patch pilot. [11:05] @pilot in === ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Archive: open | Devel of Ubuntu (not support) | Build failures: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ | #ubuntu for support and discussion of Focal-Noble | Patch Pilots: waveform [12:08] enabling a ppa on oracular fails as rsa1024 is not a supported algo anymore? [12:21] juliank: ^ [12:21] tjaalton: that's correct yes [12:21] You probably can find the 4k key for the ppa [12:23] tjaalton: So I think the repos for oracular should be dual-signed, after all, they will have gotten published after dual signing turned on most liekly [12:23] So it's a matter of grabbing the gpg key from the keyserver.ubuntu.com by ID manually until the end point points to the right key [12:28] and apt-key add the .asc? [12:29] I see the new key in apt-key list, but apt still complains [12:30] there's no config to change to allow rsa1024 locally? [12:40] tjaalton: You'll want to gpg armor it and add it to the Signed-By field in the .sources file [12:40] Hopefully the API endpoint gets sorted out soon [12:41] okau [12:41] y [12:41] Oh I said add, but of course I mean replace :D [12:41] Early adopter stress :) [12:44] thanks, that worked [14:44] i notice official ubuntu:24.04 docker images have a new ubuntu❌1000:1000 user by default, the 22.04 images don't have that... a bit of a surprise [15:07] there was a bug about this [15:17] i found this post about it also: https://askubuntu.com/questions/1513927/ubuntu-24-04-docker-images-now-includes-user-ubuntu-with-uid-gid-1000 [16:03] !dmb-ping [16:03] bdmurray, kanashiro, rbasak, seb128, sil2100, teward, utkarsh2102: DMB ping [16:03] waveform: I can see you are going through the armhf transition leftovers in the sponsor queue. Those are made before Noble was released, so Oracular in theory will still have those issues (do check if Debian has fixed the issue, as I have forwarded most of the patches to Debian) [16:05] liushuyu, yup I figured as much -- just looking at the intel-mediasdk one currently and it's much the same [16:06] waveform: It's also possible that some MPs can be replaced by a sync, I haven't checked that [16:06] I'm checking that as I go, but so far the patches haven't landed in Debian [16:07] waveform: Ah okay. Thanks! [16:17] rbasak: public holiday today - Memorial Day. I'm actually farther away than I can be from a computer. Arlington National Cemetery, paying respects at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in a few minutes, just had some lunch with veteran friends of mine. (Something we do every couple years) [16:17] (hence my not being here for the DMB meeting) === mfo_ is now known as mfo [16:19] hey waveform FYI on that one bug I replied to after you, I would reject any SRU patches where versionNumber < nextUbuntuVersionNumber for that SRU/patch if it's a full version update. `dpkg` will whine otherwise [16:19] (during an upgrade if newVersion < currentVersion it doesn't like that) [16:20] * teward shuts off his phone and goes to pay respects. [16:30] also https://code.launchpad.net/~liushuyu-011/ubuntu/+source/gdb/+git/gdb/+merge/463546 has been dragging for quite a while now [17:00] liushuyu, yes but that's in main so I skipped that one [17:06] @pilot out === ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Archive: open | Devel of Ubuntu (not support) | Build failures: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/ftbfs/ | #ubuntu for support and discussion of Focal-Noble | Patch Pilots: N/A [17:07] waveform: understood [18:34] waveform: about LP: #2061637, I know https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation suggests version same as what you have mentioned. but again, using 0.1 is technically not wrong. so just curious.. [18:34] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2061637 in xxdiff (Ubuntu Noble) "[SRU] xx-svn-review crashed with ModuleNotFoundError" [Undecided, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2061637