[04:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kubuntu-installer-prompt (oracular-proposed/universe) [24.04.10 => 24.10.1] (no packageset) [04:11] ubuntu-release: ^ Fixes two bugs and one low-risk nice-to-have in kubuntu-installer-prompt, very similar to what was done with lubuntu-installer-prompt previously. This is an installer component so it can't be SRU'd later on in Oracular. [04:14] sleeperbarbie: your connection seems to be abit unstable [04:14] i didn't even know i was in here again, i removed thr chat from autojoin. sorry! take care, all [04:14] the* [04:15] & [04:15] np :) [05:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-graphics-drivers-535 (oracular-proposed/restricted) [535.183.01-0ubuntu2 => 535.183.01-0ubuntu3] (i386-whitelist) [05:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nvidia-graphics-drivers-550 (oracular-proposed/restricted) [550.107.02-0ubuntu1 => 550.107.02-0ubuntu2] (i386-whitelist) [05:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kubuntu-installer-prompt [source] (oracular-proposed) [24.10.1] [05:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-550 [source] (oracular-proposed) [550.107.02-0ubuntu2] [05:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted nvidia-graphics-drivers-535 [source] (oracular-proposed) [535.183.01-0ubuntu3] [08:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-construct-classes [sync] (oracular-proposed) [0.1.2-3] [08:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected debhelper [source] (oracular-proposed) [13.20ubuntu1] [08:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libmnl [sync] (oracular-proposed) [1.0.5-3] [08:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected guvcview [sync] (oracular-proposed) [2.1.0-0.2] [08:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected svt-av1 [sync] (oracular-proposed) [2.2.1+dfsg-2] [08:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-construct-classes [amd64] (oracular-proposed/none) [0.1.2-3] (no packageset) [08:33] bdmurray: https://code.launchpad.net/~hyask/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+git/base-files/+merge/474563 [08:44] bdmurray: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/base-files/+bug/2083825 [08:44] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2083825 in base-files (Ubuntu) "Release base-files for Oracular" [Undecided, New] [08:53] Skia: sponsored - thanks! [08:54] \o/ [08:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: base-files (oracular-proposed/main) [13.3ubuntu5 => 13.3ubuntu6] (core, i386-whitelist) [09:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-construct-classes [amd64] (oracular-proposed) [0.1.2-3] [09:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected base-files [source] (oracular-proposed) [13.3ubuntu6] [09:25] Can someone tell me why update-manager on Xenial https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-manager/1:16.04.23 is still in proposed? It's not listed in excuses. [09:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: base-files (oracular-proposed/main) [13.3ubuntu5 => 13.3ubuntu6] (core, i386-whitelist) [09:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted base-files [source] (oracular-proposed) [13.3ubuntu6] [09:37] nteodosio: I see it as being in -proposed and -updates [09:39] nteodosio: It shows up in the -proposed cleanup list here so I'll do that https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/pending-sru.html [09:48] nteodosio: It shows up in the -proposed cleanup list here so I'll do that https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/pending-sru.html [10:03] Thank you. === fuseteam1 is now known as fuseteam [11:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: distribution-gpg-keys (oracular-proposed/universe) [1.105+ds-1ubuntu1 => 1.105+ds-2] (no packageset) (sync) [11:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted distribution-gpg-keys [sync] (oracular-proposed) [1.105+ds-2] [12:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: python-skbio (oracular-proposed/universe) [0.6.2-1 => 0.6.2-3] (no packageset) (sync) [12:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted python-skbio [sync] (oracular-proposed) [0.6.2-3] [13:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: magicgui (oracular-proposed/universe) [0.7.2-4 => 0.9.1-1] (no packageset) (sync) [13:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted magicgui [sync] (oracular-proposed) [0.9.1-1] [14:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mesa (jammy-proposed/main) [23.2.1-1ubuntu3.1~22.04.2 => 23.2.1-1ubuntu3.1~22.04.3] (core, i386-whitelist, xorg) [14:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nova (focal-proposed/main) [2:21.2.4-0ubuntu2.13 => 2:21.2.4-0ubuntu2.14] (openstack, ubuntu-server) [14:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libgsf (oracular-proposed/main) [1.14.52-1 => 1.14.52-1ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop) [14:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected mesa [source] (jammy-proposed) [23.2.1-1ubuntu3.1~22.04.3] [14:59] tjaalton: so, I adjusted seeds and now it's nvidia 550 on https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/component-mismatches.html [15:04] vorlon: and I pushed a change that dropped 470. next there would be dropping desktop 535. we finally have transitionals for 535/550->560 [15:04] tjaalton: is it correct that the 550 packages get dropped to multiverse as opposed to seeded in restricted as transitionals? [15:06] vorlon: if I look at 525 in noble, it's in multiverse [15:07] ok [15:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: edk2 (oracular-proposed/main) [2024.05-2 => 2024.05-2ubuntu0.1] (ubuntu-server) [15:54] Eickmeyer: edubuntu stated size limit for noble and oracular is 6.1GB; actual image sizes are 6.3GB+ for noble, 6.8GB+ for oracular. I guess we should just bump these? [15:56] vorlon: Absoluttely. [15:56] Spelling nonwithstanding. [15:58] IIRC noble size limits were never addressed; everything was just so hectic that cycle. [16:02] And that point release? ;-) [16:05] Yup! [16:06] I guess Edubuntu ISO is quickly approaching DVD DL storage size limit? [16:08] liushuyu: So, just like with Ubuntu Studio, we're encouraging burn-to-USB. Straight out of the gate with 23.04 it was already there. [16:08] Ventoy and hardware-based solutions, such as the iODD line of products, are also solutions. [16:09] Eickmeyer: I see. Also more environment friendly than non-disposable plastic frisbees [16:09] Ha! Indeed. [16:09] Eickmeyer: less a question of being hectic than of me having despaired of keeping sizes under any kind of control [16:09] And much more reusable. [16:10] vorlon: I think I can speak for all flavors when I say we're trying and being mindful. It's not like we see it as a free-for-all. [16:11] yes but in practice images stay 'oversized' the whole cycle unless I go around nudging folks about targets [16:14] Valid, but the option is always to "bump". I know Lubuntu and Xubuntu are most mindful of this by trying to keep their sizes to a minimum as much as possible. [16:15] Edubuntu only increased to keep the snap parity with Ubuntu Desktop. Studio lost a few packages due to bitrot, but still gained weight which is par for the course. :/ [16:18] Eickmeyer: I think we/you might want to do CfP (Call for Participations) if you want to minimize the chance of not having packages left in/collecting dust on the side [16:19] vorlon: Do flavor leads get the oversized emails? [16:19] I'm not sure [16:21] liushuyu: Oh, those died as it seems that upstream no longer exists (invada-studio-plugins-lv2 as an example) or the package hasn't been released in 11 years (jack-tools) and hasn't seen a commit in almost the same amount of time. That's what I mean by bitrot. Those get removed from Debian and, subsequently, Ubuntu. [16:23] Eickmeyer: Ah I see, I thought you said some packages were left out of the release pocket [16:23] No, nothing like that. If it's ftbfs I'm more keen to figure out what's going on. If it's dead, it's dead. [16:27] Eickmeyer: If it's dead, it's dead. > right [16:28] I only see release team members in the too line for "Daily CD health checks" [16:29] s/too/to/ [16:43] bdmurray: yeah I just didn't know if we sent separate per-flavor mails [16:47] Or maybe the "CD image size" KPI should a size limit line? https://ubuntu-release.kpi.ubuntu.com/d/XgP-fUlGz/ubuntu-cd-images?orgId=1 [16:49] Curious that ubuntustudio doesn't show up on the "CD image size" graph. Probably an oversight. [16:50] Weren't they renamed recently? [16:50] Indeed, likely why. Oracular and later is ubuntustudio-daily-live [16:51] er... something like that. [16:51] ubuntustudio-desktop as opposed to ubuntustudio-dvd [16:53] We might sort it now [16:54] I'm in video editing mode so my answers might not be quite as accurate as I'd like. :) [17:11] ubuntu-sru: Hi SRU team, I am looking for someone in the SRU team to review https://code.launchpad.net/~liushuyu-011/ubuntu/+source/dpkg/+git/dpkg/+merge/473940 [17:11] ... SRU bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dpkg/+bug/2082636 [17:11] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2082636 in dpkg (Ubuntu) "[SRU] dpkg: backport frame-pointer enabling mechanism for Rust" [Undecided, New] [17:19] liushuyu: The SRU team generally reviews uploads in the unapproved queue. Has this been sponsored yet? [17:20] bdmurray: Not yet [17:21] liushuyu: So I think finding a sponsor needs to happen first [17:27] I do have one package that got sponsored but requiring someone from the SRU team to take a look: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dh-cargo/+bug/2028153 [17:27] -ubottu:#ubuntu-release- Launchpad bug 2028153 in dh-cargo (Ubuntu) "[SRU] dh-cargo: Backport vendored dependencies support to Jammy" [Medium, Confirmed] [18:17] ubuntu-release: I believe that pc-kernel on 24.10/stable is in the desired state, would you rebuild Desktop amd64? [18:29] dbungert: yo, i'll rebuild Desktop amd64 but waiting for libreoffice to get in [18:39] mdeslaur_: yo, how serious are libgsf vulnerabilities? [18:44] utkarsh2102: code exec when opening a file in gnome...kind of bad, but it can wait until after release if it's too much for now [18:45] $ seeded-in-ubuntu libgsf [18:45] gir1.2-gsf-1 (from libgsf) is seeded in: [18:45]   kubuntu: supported [18:45]   ubuntu-budgie: supported [18:45]   ubuntu: supported [18:45] libgsf-1-114 (from libgsf) is seeded in: [18:45]   edubuntu: daily-live, daily-preinstalled [18:45]   kubuntu: supported [18:45]   ubuntu-budgie: daily-live [18:45]   ubuntu: daily-live, daily-preinstalled [18:45]   ubuntucinnamon: daily-live [18:45] libgsf-1-common (from libgsf) is seeded in: [18:45]   edubuntu: daily-live, daily-preinstalled [18:45]   kubuntu: supported [18:45]   ubuntu-budgie: daily-live [18:45]   ubuntu: daily-live, daily-preinstalled [18:45]   ubuntucinnamon: daily-live [18:45] libgsf-1-dev (from libgsf) is seeded in: [18:46] yeah, it's going to be everywhere [18:47] you can delete it from the queue if it's too late, just let me know and I'll prepare it as an update [18:48] utkarsh2102: in fact, please remove it [18:48] mdeslaur_: thank you! i'll do that [18:48] utkarsh2102: thanks [18:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted edk2 [source] (oracular-proposed) [2024.05-2ubuntu0.1] [18:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected libgsf [source] (oracular-proposed) [1.14.52-1ubuntu1] [19:55] respins coming for a late libreoffice accept [19:58] desktop flavors respinning, except for Ubuntu amd64, which is still waiting for TPM FDE fix [19:58] vorlon: I believe the TPMFDE part is ready [19:58] not yet [19:58] according to apw the final snap hasn't been spun yet [19:58] "apw: ubuntu-core-initramfs is now published in the build environment so we are respinning linux-signed, which will then get signed, and then we can make snaps from it." [19:59] we did a revert of pc-kernel 24.10/stable to a build using 6.8, which the London crew wanted to try [19:59] this is a proper, correct fix using 6.11 and all packages from oracular [19:59] OK [19:59] the problem was tracked down to the systemd vs systemd-cryptsetup split, the cryptsetup bits were missing from the initramfs [20:30] apw: some new linux-runtime binaries that aren't seeded: demote or seed? https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/component-mismatches.html [21:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected squid [source] (noble-proposed) [6.10-0ubuntu0.24.04.1]