=== liushuyu1 is now known as liushuyu [02:37] sudip: we could probably remove ui-utilcpp. I believe the only reverse dependency is ui-gxmlcpp. Once it's fixed in Debian, it can autosync back to Ubuntu [06:26] sudip, according to the removal of that "strategy", we are probably fine by just dropping it [06:26] https://github.com/rrthomas/recode/commit/76d7efd2d6c9dfa81270401a346c27c52a9e7f11 [06:26] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Commit 76d7efd in rrthomas/recode "Remove conversion methods" [06:48] fix uploaded and forwarded in Debian [07:52] LocutusOfBorg: that will not work, I have already tried that in local build and also ppa [07:52] https://launchpad.net/~sudipmuk/+archive/ubuntu/test-ppa1/+build/28719230 [07:52] gets stuck in dh_auto_test [07:53] sudip, yes indeed === sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie === rkratky__ is now known as rkratky === gcwtwaljradkmgyx is now known as ufarlwiqamcfjglv === ufarlwiqamcfjglv is now known as georgiag === sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie [15:28] Anyone here familiar with the usrmerge efforts and specifically initramfs? I know udev files should go in /urs/lib, but if /lib symlinks to /usr/lib for us, is it fine for the initramfs hook to be hardcoded to /lib? I assume the symlink would exists for initramfs and it should be fine. Related LP bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/multipath-tools/+bug/2076012 [15:29] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2076012 in multipath-tools (Ubuntu) "noble: kpartx-boot initramfs hook references wrong path" [Undecided, New] [16:05] mitchdz, i am familiar. i commented the ticket [16:26] bdrung: thanks. Oracular should be all fixed up already, but I'll double check that. [16:27] Yup, the hooks reference /usr/lib specifically now [16:41] Now I don't speak Catalan and I did not find any precedence for a translation of "phased updates" [17:13] @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: enr0n [17:20] hi lvoytek - will you still be the one to follow-up on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/distribution-gpg-keys/+bug/2075505 or should I ask the next pilot? thanks! [17:20] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2075505 in distribution-gpg-keys (Ubuntu Noble) "Add distribution-gpg-keys 1.104+ds-2 to noble" [Undecided, In Progress] [18:04] Hi bluca, I will upload it for you. Just getting the changelog reviewed by others to make sure it is good to go [18:15] got it, thank you very much [19:32] mitchdz: I see bug 2074309 targetted to 24.04.1. Does it really need to be fixed on the images for the point release? [19:32] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Bug 2074309 in rabbitmq-server (Ubuntu Oracular) "upgrade 22.04 -> 24.04 won't start due to feature flags" [High, Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2074309 [19:34] It definitely should be. What the fix is, I'm not sure at the moment. [19:35] The problem is that if users get upgraded, the fix is to manually downgrade the version and then do incremental upgrades. Pretty manual and annoying process. [19:40] bdmurray: apologies, if you mean this should _block_ the point release, not technically. However I'd imagine we would get more users doing dist-upgrade once point release comes in, so it really should. [19:42] mitchdz: upgrades and image builds do not need to happen in lock step, we could enable upgrades later [19:44] Yup. No need to block the image build for LP2074309 [19:49] Thanks for checking [21:37] @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 [21:56] I'm retrying all the systemd autopkgtests for noble as we want that for the point release