[06:02] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libreoffice (hirsute-proposed/main) [1:7.1.4-0ubuntu0.21.04.1 => 1:7.1.5-0ubuntu0.21.04.1] (ubuntu-desktop) [06:59] vorlon, for weeks? that seems rather unexpected given we had a crd in there. [07:01] vorlon, that is a very old version, -22 too, is this old kernel handling interacting badly with the nvidia upgrade process? [07:05] vorlon, won't this in fact always happen, you have -N with an old nvidia ABI and upgrade to -M with a new nvidia ABI, won't it always trigger this need for removal and therefore the paritial upgrade warning? [07:05] (with things as designed) [07:07] the dependencies as formed are designed to trigger an attempt to remove like linux-modules-nvidia-460-generic meta package if it cannot upgrade nvidia too; and you are protected by the partial upgrade warning. but it also triggers a removal of your older kernels nvidia packages (you keep the kernel but not nvidia packages associated with them) which also triggers the partial upgrade protections. [07:10] i suspect that while horribly inacurate once changed that making the linkage as >= rather than = would make it work the way we want. [08:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zhmcclient (hirsute-proposed/universe) [0.27.0-0ubuntu1 => 0.31.0-0ubuntu3~21.04.1] (no packageset) [10:39] sil2100, hello :), when time permits please take a look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bug/1936930 [10:39] Launchpad bug 1936930 in libreoffice (Ubuntu Hirsute) "[SRU] libreoffice 7.1.5 for hirsute" [High, In Progress] [12:45] ricotz: sure o/ [13:12] sil2100, thank you :) === sforshee_ is now known as sforshee [13:29] bdmurray, hi! regarding evdi dkms (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/evdi/+bug/1932163), I've talked to cascardo and he's reworded the regression potential a bit and we came to the conclusion that without hardware we can't really test it properly [13:29] Launchpad bug 1932163 in evdi (Ubuntu Focal) "evdi/1.7.0+dfsg-1ubuntu1~20.04.3 ADT test failure with linux-hwe-5.11/5.11.0-20.21~20.04.1" [Critical, Fix Committed] [13:39] Could somebody re-run the autopkgtest for python in the focal openssl SRU? (I don't have permissions). The failing tests are timeouts on the main testsuites. [13:44] schopin: retrying python3.9 for amd64 and armhf [13:44] thanks :) [13:56] klebers, bdmurray: ok, so I'll consider this resolved then and look into getting it released today o/ [13:56] sil2100, awesome, thank you! :) [13:57] tjaalton: hey! Do you think the X .3 SRUs are verified and ready to go to -updates? [13:57] I guess the sooner we get those verified and included, the more time we have to fight any potential regressions [14:00] sil2100: yes, the mesa regression fix was tested to be good, so I think it's all ready now [14:00] at least I haven't heard of anything else that might block it [14:00] let me go through them one last time today [14:01] and mark verified what isn't yet [14:01] tjaalton: thank you! But that's great news [14:01] Note to all interested: I'll be releasing shim for both focal and bionic today, so be prepared for any strangeness related to that in the nearest days [14:02] Also, this *will* cause focal daily installer media be unbootable on certain devices, this is something that will have to be fixed before we start working on the candidates [14:03] Oh, xenial too, since I see we still have that to be released [14:03] juliank: ^ JFYI [14:21] bdmurray: hey! Did you have a moment to take a look at the u-boot follow up SRU from me? [14:21] For focal? [14:24] sil2100: I'm trying to remember that was like 2 days ago [14:25] sil2100: apparently not but I could do it now [14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-somerville-octillery-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1] [14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-somerville-warcraft-intel-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1] [14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-sutton.newell-aelfwine-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1] [14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-somerville-squirtle-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1] [14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted oem-sutton.newell-aekerley-meta [amd64] (focal-proposed) [20.04~ubuntu1] [14:28] bdmurray: thanks o/ [14:37] sil2100: where are we with livecd-rootfs for Focal? [14:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: opencryptoki (hirsute-proposed/universe) [3.15.1+dfsg-0ubuntu1 => 3.15.1+dfsg-0ubuntu1.1] (no packageset) [15:07] bdmurray: as mentioned in the release sync-up, still debugging that - it's weird and I have no idea why it's busted [15:07] But I'm digging [15:07] got it [15:39] I don't understand why my current attempts are not working but then again I might figured out why the original code was troublesome - I'm testing some new solutions now [15:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware (hirsute-proposed/main) [1.197.2 => 1.197.3] (core, kernel) [15:55] sil2100: the u-boot change in the new focal upload isn't in impish‽ [15:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: linux-firmware (focal-proposed/main) [1.187.15 => 1.187.16] (core, kernel) [16:09] sil2100: Well, I'll just upload the change for impish. [16:36] sil2100: hwe stack all verified now [18:31] bdmurray: wha? Why? [18:31] bdmurray: it's invalid on impish! [18:31] bdmurray: we need to drop it from impish-proposed - the target names are correct with the u-boot version in impish [18:32] bdmurray: the issue was that the postinst change was backported from impish using the impish u-boot target names, while focal has an older u-boot version [18:32] Let me drop the package [18:34] eh, but the version number is burned, so we need to remember that when we go live with the next upload [18:34] But that's fine [18:36] tjaalton: thanks o/ [18:39] ricotz: hey! So was there a consensus among the desktop team to build libreoffice with noopt for armhf in the end? [18:39] I of course leave the decision to the team managing here, especially that we currently have no active armhf-based desktop images/products that could potentially be consuming libreoffice [18:42] sil2100: okay, well that wasn't clear from the history in the bug reports [18:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted u-boot [source] (focal-proposed) [2021.01+dfsg-3ubuntu0~20.04.3]