/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2024/07/29/#ubuntu-devel.txt

tcoae01:48
=== liushuyu1 is now known as liushuyu
=== liushuyu1 is now known as liushuyu
schopinAnyone ever encountered "Protected: yes" in a binary package definition in d/control? Specifically, it's in the definition for login in src:shadow.09:33
schopinIt seems there's a dpkg draft about it, but its status isn't clear.09:34
mirespaceschopin: https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=Protected+path%3Adebian%2Fcontrol&literal=1 but not sure if that can ggive you a clue09:35
schopinjuliank: apparently you wrote the first versions of the wiki page, is it something that's in actual use?09:35
schopinmirespace: thanks for the link. I guess it sort of confirms my intuition about it?09:36
mirespaceschopin: It seems so :)09:36
mirespaceI'm on +1 this week... I'm checking the clusters, and rust-gix seems to be hold on rust-hashbrown, but all is green for it... a matter of time to be migrated? No more info in the update_excuses page09:39
mirespaceI'm retriggering tests from the top for armhf (ERROR: testbed failure: unexpected eof from the testbed)09:46
juliankschopin: yes guillem eventually implemented that after apt had Important: yes for ages09:50
juliankHence why some have both09:50
schopinmirespace: have you checked the britney logs for rust-hashbrown?09:55
schopinIt seems to make a whole lot of rust package uninstallable.09:57
schopin(that'd be https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/proposed-migration/update_output.txt )09:57
mirespaceschopin: no, good idea ... that is outdated_oupted, right ? :$09:57
mirespaceyes, it is  :)09:57
mirespaceschopin: wow09:58
waveform@pilot in11:01
=== 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
ravikant_just an fyi - https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu-sponsorships.cgi is working again.11:35
rbasakThanks!11:37
mirespaceWorking on mako11:46
jbichamirespace: I think the biggest blocker for rust-hashbrown etc is bug 2054491 . Some work was done in rust-reqwest recently to work around similar Ubuntu autopkgtest proxy restrictions11:51
-ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Bug 2054491 in rust-ureq (Ubuntu) "rust-ureq autopkgtest fails" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/205449111:51
mirespacejbicha: thanks! checking... because I was looking into dependencies in update_output, and I was with rust-intrusive-collections because I saw it was depending on itself and blocking rust-memoffset (in amd64), but now is only happening in ppc64el ...12:00
sudipa newbie question, why does libplacebo transition has ffmpeg in dependency level 1 ?12:34
LocutusOfBorgsudip, check the build log and you will see as runtime dependency13:00
LocutusOfBorge.g. for ffmpeg on libavfilter1013:00
LocutusOfBorg Depends: libass9 (>= 1:0.15.0), libavcodec61 (= 7:7.0.1-4ubuntu1), libavformat61 (>= 7:7.0), libavutil59 (= 7:7.0.1-4ubuntu1), libbs2b0 (>= 3.1.0+dfsg), libc6 (>= 2.38), libflite1 (>= 1.4-release-9~), libfontconfig1 (>= 2.12.6), libfreetype6 (>= 2.2.1), libfribidi0 (>= 0.19.2), libharfbuzz0b (>= 0.9.9), liblilv-0-0 (>= 0.14.2~dfsg0), libmysofa1 (>= 0.7~), libplacebo338 (>= 6.338.1), libpocketsphinx3 (>=13:00
LocutusOfBorg0.8.0+real5prealpha+1), libpostproc58 (>= 7:7.0), librubberband2 (>= 3.3.0+dfsg), libsphinxbase3t64 (>= 0.8+5prealpha), libstdc++6 (>= 13.1), libswresample5 (>= 7:7.0), libswscale8 (>= 7:7.0), libva2 (>= 1.7.3), libvidstab1.1, libvpl2 (>= 2023.3.0), libzimg2 (>= 0.3.1), libzmq5 (>= 3.2.3+dfsg), ocl-icd-libopencl1 | libopencl1, ocl-icd-libopencl1 (>= 1.0) | libopencl-1.2-1, zlib1g (>= 1:1.1.4)13:00
LocutusOfBorgbut also libavfilter-extras, ffmpeg itself13:01
LocutusOfBorgbut in any case libplacebo is not yet accepted, so no transition can be done13:01
LocutusOfBorgand also I'm trying to fix ffmpeg on s390x13:01
sudipok, I was confused seeing ffmpeg in dependency level 1,  I thought packages depending on libplacebo will be in dependency level 2.13:04
LocutusOfBorgoh... that "level" thing is a "best effort code"13:45
LocutusOfBorgdon't trust level dependencies13:45
LocutusOfBorgthis is why I usually do them all at once13:45
LocutusOfBorgand then retry failing builds13:45
LocutusOfBorg(with some manual check of build logs)13:46
sudipahh.. ok.. :)13:46
waveform@pilot out15:12
=== 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
bdrungi am currently looking into vowpal-wabbit15:47
bdrunglooking into devicexlib15:58
waveformis there an issue with the git-ubuntu importer? I'm looking at the u-boot merge and while the ubuntu versions have been imported, the debian ones are way behind (https://code.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/u-boot -- debian/sid should be 2024.01+dfsg-5)17:05
ogayothello! is there a MOTU/coredev available to trigger a NCR of netgen? It needs to rebuild against mpi-defaults 1.17 (the default changed from openmpi to mpich on 32-bit arches). Thanks!18:14
ogayot(I can file a LP and attach a debdiff if that helps)18:21
Eickmeyerogayot: I can handle it.18:27
vorlonis that the only package needing a rebuild?18:27
Eickmeyerogayot: Before I dput this, ^ ?18:32
ogayotvorlon: Eickmeyer: looking!18:32
Eickmeyer:)18:32
ogayotdo we have a `$ reverse-depends src:mpi-defaults` equivalent that supports specifying a version of src:x?18:48
ogayot(it's not the only package that needs a rebuild)18:51
vorlonogayot: I think you would instead do reverse-depends src:$implementation -a i38619:04
vorlonvpa1977: ah, is it deliberate that https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bpfcc/0.30.0+ds-1ubuntu2/+build/28685703 only outputs libbpfcc on ppc64el and none of the other binaries?19:06
ogayotvorlon: that's only a couple packages on i386, but dozens (with false positives) on armhf. I will try to filter the list.19:13
vorlonogayot: cheers19:14
vorlonogayot: does 'reverse-depends libopenmpi3t64 -a i386' eliminate the false-positives?19:15
vorlonand would a rebuild of all packages depending on libopenmpi3t64:i386 && ! libmpich12:i386 be correct?19:15
john-cabajI have a couple of packages pending publication in -proposed since last Friday (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/involflt). Is there something gating this or should I discuss with the Launchpad team?19:16
vorlonjohn-cabaj: what there indicates pending publication?19:17
john-cabajvorlon: Just cling the drop down on the new version and LP says "Note: Some binary packages for this source are not yet published in the repository. "19:17
john-cabajclicking*19:17
john-cabajrmadison seems to think it's in -propsed, though.19:18
vorlonjohn-cabaj: which version is the "new version" you're referring to?19:18
john-cabaj0.1.0-0ubuntu7~22.04.1 and 0.1.0-0ubuntu7~20.04.119:19
vorlonjammy appears to be in binary NEW19:19
vorlonsame for focal19:19
vorlonjohn-cabaj: accepted now19:20
john-cabajvorlon: Thanks, I'll keep an eye out19:20
ogayotvorlon: I guess a rebuild of all packages depending on `mpi-default-bin:i386 && libopenmpi3t64:i386 && ! libmpich12:i386` would be more correct. I don't think it makes a difference for i386 but might for armhf19:29
ogayotonce openmpi 5 lands (it's in experimental currently), support for i386 will be dropped, so all packages will need to switch to libmpich12 on armhf|i38619:31
ogayots/support for i386/support for 32-bit arches/19:31
Eickmeyerogayot: Catching up on this backlog, I'll go ahead and do this package, but it looks like you've got quite a bit more that need it, correct?19:33
ogayotEickmeyer: yes, that's correct. The unfiltered list has quite a few packages listed: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/8c7RNdSM4m/19:44
ogayotEickmeyer: thanks!19:44
Eickmeyerogayot: Wow, yes, that's *quite* a lot. Well, I got netgen done, but we're going to need help with the others. Right now, I'm neck-deep in a news post for Ubuntu Studio that I've been putting off.19:46
rbasakwaveform: u-boot and git-ubuntu> I think this is bug 2028288. The commit graph will be correct; it's the branch pointer that's wrong.19:57
-ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Bug 2028288 in git-ubuntu "debian/sid branch incorrect when multiple versions are published" [Medium, Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/202828819:57
rbasakwaveform: so you should be able to get to the correct commit through the import tag19:57
vpa1977vorlon: looks like a bug I have introduced. Let me fix it20:11
vpa1977vorlon: it should also output bpfcc-introspection20:14
waveformrbasak, hmm -- some of the later imports are indeed present, up to 2024.01-dfsg+4 from experimental, but 2024.01-dfsg+5 (uploaded to Debian back in April) doesn't seem to be there20:20
rbasakwaveform: is that not https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/u-boot/tag/?h=import/2024.01%2bdfsg-5 ?20:33
waveformrbasak, oh dammit ... forgot to fetch --tags on this old clone like a fool20:34
waveformrbasak, okay ... that tag is now there but origin/debian/sid is still pointing at the ancient import. I'm guessing that's the bug you mentioned from skimming the description. Unfortunately debian/experimental's also in the past so I'll have to do some manual messing around with my merge script :)20:39
=== jfsimon1981_b is now known as jfsimon
rbasakwaveform: right20:42
=== liushuyu1 is now known as liushuyu

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