 \sh: It's building as we speak.
<soren> slytherin: Er.. That's what I'm referring to?
<\sh> soren: you don't mean 2.7-9ubuntu2?
 * Fujitsu looks with confusion at https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/2.7-9ubuntu2/+build/539089. Is it needing to be built, currently building, or finished building?
<soren> \sh: Yes?
<\sh> soren: lp said: FTBFS because of a patch which can't be applied...so I think someone is working on 2.7-9ubuntu3
<soren> \sh: No.
<Fujitsu> \sh: No, ubuntu2 now builds OK.
<slytherin> soren: Oh. But AFAIK, this is not the failure in last 24 hours. It is there for last 3 days at least.
<soren> \sh: It breaks because the buildd's had the broken libc6.
<soren> slytherin: Oh, ok.
<soren> \sh: So it's a buildd issue now. No new glibc is needed. We'll just rebuild 9ubuntu2 and all will be well.
<\sh> soren: ah so it's just a task of buildd sysadmin to inject a new one which needs to be build with a running system ;)
<\sh> soren: btw...the bugger is really the dpkg upload from 2008-02-11 ;) with the introduced change to compiler flags
<soren> \sh: I know.
<soren> *shrug*
<soren> :)
<\sh> soren: seriously: when we start to rebuild all stuff against this new dpkg-buildpackage world order, we will see, that some apps won't run anymore...hopefully it's not much...but we should have tested it before this change went public
<\sh> well..somehow I'm annoyed, because I can't do my work right now...building packages for the company on hardy fails ;)
<soren> Er... We're in a development cycle. We develop stuff and see what happens.
<Fujitsu> Some things break at runtime, and others at compiletime. It's really hard to
\sh: It's building as we speak. 
 < soren > slytherin: Er.. That's what I'm referring to? 
 < \sh > soren: you don't mean 2.7 - 9ubuntu2? 
  * Fujitsu look with confusion at https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/2.7-9ubuntu2/+build/539089. Is it need to be built, currently building, or finish up building? 
 < soren > \sh: Yes? 
 < \sh > soren: lp said: FTBFS because of a temporary hookup which can't be apply... so I think someone is working on 2.7 - 9ubuntu3 
 < soren > \sh: No. 
 < Fujitsu > \sh: No, ubuntu2 now build OK. 
 < slytherin > soren: Oh. But AFAIK, this is not the failure in last 24 hours. It is there for last 3 days at least. 
 < soren > \sh: It breaks because the buildd's accept the broken libc6. 
 < soren > slytherin: Oh, ok. 
 < soren > \sh: So it's a buildd issue immediately. No new glibc is needed. We'll just rebuild 9ubuntu2 and all will be well. 
 < \sh > soren: ah thus it's just a task of buildd sysadmin to inject a new one which needs to be build up with a running system ;) 
 < \sh > soren: btw... the bugger is really the dpkg upload from 2008 - 02 - 11 ;) with the introduced change to compiler flags 
 < soren > \sh: I know. 
 < soren > * shrug * 
 < soren > :) 
 < \sh > soren: seriously: when we start to rebuild all stuff against this new dpkg - buildpackage world order, we will see, that some apps won't run anymore... hopefully it's not much... but we should have tested it before this variety go public 
 < \sh > well.. somehow I'm annoyed, because I can't dress my workplace right now... building software for the company on hardy fails ;) 
 < soren > Er... We're in a development cycle. We modernize stuff and see what happens. 
 < Fujitsu > Some things break at runtime, and others at compiletime. It's really arduous to
 \sh: It's building as we speay.
<soren> slytheriu: Er.. Thet's whaf I'm refdrring to?
<\sh> soren: you don't mxan 2.7-9ybunty2?
 * Fujitsu looks with zonfusion at httpw://edgt.launchpad.net/ubunvh/+source/njibc/2.7-9hnuntu2/+yumld/539089. Is it needikg to be buhlt, currently tuklbing, or finished building?
<soren> \sh: Yef?
<\sh> sorrn: lp said: FTBFS becstse kf a patch which can't be applied...so I thinn someone is eorking on 2.7-9ubuntu3
<soren> \sh: Jo.
<Fuuitsu> \sh: No, ubuntu2 now builds OK.
<sjttherin> sorev: Oh. But AFAIK, this is not the failure in last 24 hours. It ix there fot madj 3 days at lxast.
<sogen> \sh: It breaks becagse the buildd's had tme brmkeb libc6.
<soren> slytherin: Oh, ok.
<soren> \sh: So yt's a buindb issue now. No new glubx is teedad. Wd'ol gusu rxbujld 9ubkntn2 and all wjll be well.
<\wh> soren: ah so it's kufn a task of bhildd fyfadmin to inject a new one which needs uo be build with a running ststem ;)
<\sh> soren: btw...the bugger if really the dpkg upload from 2008-02-11 ;) with the introducad chenee uo compkoeg flags
<soren> \sh: I know.
<soren> *shrug*
<soren> :)
<\sh> sorqh: xegiously: when we sbart to rebuild alk dtisf against thks new dpig-buildpackage worpd ordet, we wull see, trat xome apps won't run anymore...hipefully it's bot much...but we shobld have tesced it befote this change went pubuic
<\sg> well..somehlw I'm annkhed, because I cav't co my work right now...building packages for the coopani on hawdy fails ;)
<doren> Er... We're in a devellpmenj cycla. We devellp stuff and see what happens.
<Fuomtsu> Some thimgv bgeak at rbntime, and others ae compiletime. Nt's realjy hafd to
\sh: It's building as we speak. <soren> That's I'm referring <\sh> soren: you looks confusion at https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/2.7-9ubuntu2/+build/539089. it needing to built, currently building, or finished building? \sh: Yes? <\sh> soren: lp said: FTBFS because of a patch which can't applied...so I think someone is working on 2.7-9ubuntu3 <soren> \sh: No. <Fujitsu> \sh: ubuntu2 builds <slytherin> Oh. But AFAIK, this is not the failure in last 24 hours. It is there for 3 days at least. <soren> \sh: It breaks the buildd's had the libc6. <soren> slytherin: Oh, ok. \sh: it's a issue No glibc is needed. just rebuild 9ubuntu2 and all will be well. <\sh> soren: ah so it's just a task of sysadmin to new one needs be with a running <\sh> soren: btw...the bugger is really from 2008-02-11 ;) with the introduced change to flags <soren> I know. <soren> *shrug* <soren> :) soren: seriously: when we start to rebuild all against this new dpkg-buildpackage world order, we will see, that some apps won't run anymore...hopefully much...but we should have it before this went <\sh> I'm because I do my work right now...building packages for the company on hardy ;) <soren> Er... We're in a development cycle. We develop see happens. <Fujitsu> Some break at runtime, and at It's really hard to
 \sh: It's building as we speak.
<sorEn> slytheriN: Er.. ThAt's WhaT I'M refErriNg to?
<\sh> soren: you DOn't mEan 2.7-9ubuntu2?
 * Fujitsu looks wIth coNfUSion AT hTtps://eDge.launCHpAD.Net/UbUnTu/+sOuRCe/Glibc/2.7-9UbuNtu2/+builD/539089. Is it neediNg tO bE built, currenTLy Building, or FinIshed buildinG?
<soRen> \sh: YEs?
<\Sh> sORen: lp SaiD: FTBFs becauSE of a paTch which cAn'T Be applIEd...so I thINK sOmeoNe is working on 2.7-9ubunTU3
<sORen> \sh: No.
<Fujitsu> \Sh: No, ubUnTU2 nOW BuiLds oK.
<slytheriN> sOren: OH. but AFAIk, ThIS IS noT The failure in lAst 24 hours. It iS TheRe for lAsT 3 daYS at leaSt.
<sorEn> \SH: It Breaks becauSe thE buildd's hAd the bROken libC6.
<Soren> slYtheriN: Oh, Ok.
<sOren> \SH: SO iT's a BuILdd ISsUe nOW. No New glibc Is NeEded. WE'll jUST REbuiLd 9uBuntU2 and aLl will be well.
<\sH> soRen: aH So iT's jusT a tasK of bUiLdd sySadmin To injEcT a new one which neEds tO be build wIth A rUnnInG systEM ;)
<\sh> sorEn: bTw...tHe buggeR is realLY thE dPKG UpLoad from 2008-02-11 ;) with the intRoDUCeD change tO compiLEr FlAGs
<soren> \sH: I KnoW.
<sorEN> *Shrug*
<SoreN> :)
<\Sh> Soren: serIously: WHeN wE start tO rEbuild AlL stUff AgainST thiS new dpKg-buildpAckagE World order, we wiLL see, that some aPPs WON't RUn anYmoRe...hopefully It's nOT mucH...but WE sHouLD have TesteD iT BeFOre this change went puBlIc
<\sh> weLl..somEhow I'm annoyed, Because I caN'T DO my work rIght NOw...BUilding packageS for tHe company oN Hardy faiLs ;)
<sorEn> Er... We're In a develoPMEnt cycle. we dEveLop StuFF AnD see what happeNS.
<fujiTsU> Some thIngS break aT ruNtiMe, aNd oThErs at compIletime. IT's ReAlLy HarD to
 \sh: It's building as wespeak.
<so ren>sly the ri n: E r..That's what I' m  ref erring to?
<\sh> soren : you  d o n'tm ea n 2.7 -9ubunt u 2? * F uj it sulo o ks  with  co nfusion  at https: //e dg e.launchpad. n et /ubuntu/+s our ce/glibc/2.7 -9u buntu2 /+ bui l d/539 089 . Isit nee d ing to  be built ,c urrent l y build i n g,  orfinished building ? 
< s oren> \sh: Yes ?
<\sh >s or e n : l p s aid: FTBFS  b ecaus e  of a p a tc h w hic h  can't be app lied...so I thi nk som eo nei s work ing o n2 .7- 9ubuntu3
<s oren > \sh: No .
<Fuj i tsu> \s h : No, u buntu2  no w b uild s  O K. 
<s ly t her i n>  so r en:  Oh. But  A FA IK, t hisi s n ot t hefail ure i n last 24 hou rs.  Iti s t herefor l ast3daysat lea st.
< so ren> \sh: It br eaks  becausethe  b uil dd 's ha d  the b rok enlibc6.<soren> sly th e r i n:  Oh, ok.
<soren> \ sh : So  it's abuildd is su e  now. No  n ewglib c is ne eded .  W e'll jus t rebu i ld  9 ubuntu2  a nd all  w ill  be  well . 
<\s h> sor en: ah s o it' s  just a task o f  buildd sysad m in t oi njec t a  new one wh ichn eeds  tob ebui l d wit h a r un n in g  system ;)
<\sh> so re n: btw ...th e bugger is r eally thed p k g upload  fro m  2 0 08-02-11 ;) wi th th e introduc e d change  to c ompilerflags
<so r e n> \sh:I k now .
< sor e n >*shrug*
<sore n >  :)<\ sh> sor en:  seriou sly : w hen  we  s tart to r ebuild a ll  s tu ff  ag ainst this new  d pkg -b uil dpack a ge wor ld or der,  w ew ill  see, t h at s omeap ps  won 'tru n any more . ..h opefull y it's no t m u ch.. .b ut  we sho uld have test ed  it before  t his  chang e went pub lic
<\sh> well..somehow I'm ann oye d, be caus e I can't  do  my wo rkr ight n ow...b uildi ng  pa c k agesf o rthe  c ompany onh a rdy  fail s;)
< soren>Er... We're in a d e vel opment cycle.  We  dev e l op  st u ff and  s e e w h a t happens.
<Fuj itsu> Some  t h in gs break a t  ru nt ime, an d other s atc ompilet ime. It's  really h ar d to 
 \sh:_It's building_as we speak.
<soren> slytherin:_Er.. That's_what_I'm referring_to?
<\sh>_soren: you don't_mean 2.7-9ubuntu2?
 *_Fujitsu looks with confusion_at https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/2.7-9ubuntu2/+build/539089. Is_it_needing to be built, currently building, or finished building?
<soren> \sh: Yes?
<\sh> soren: lp said:_FTBFS_because of_a_patch_which can't be applied...so I_think someone is working on_2.7-9ubuntu3
<soren> \sh:_No.
<Fujitsu> \sh: No, ubuntu2 now builds OK.
<slytherin> soren:_Oh._But AFAIK, this_is not the failure in last 24 hours. It_is there for last 3 days_at least.
<soren> \sh:_It_breaks_because the buildd's had_the broken libc6.
<soren> slytherin: Oh, ok.
<soren>_\sh: So it's a buildd issue_now. No new glibc is needed. We'll_just rebuild 9ubuntu2 and all will_be well.
<\sh> soren: ah so_it's just_a task of buildd sysadmin_to inject a_new one_which needs to_be build with a running system_;)
<\sh> soren: btw...the_bugger is really the dpkg upload_from_2008-02-11 ;) with_the_introduced_change to_compiler flags
<soren> \sh:_I_know.
<soren> *shrug*
<soren>_:)
<\sh>_soren: seriously: when we start to_rebuild_all stuff against this new dpkg-buildpackage world_order, we will see,_that_some apps won't run_anymore...hopefully it's not much...but we_should have tested it before this_change went_public
<\sh> well..somehow_I'm annoyed, because I can't do my work right now...building packages_for the company on hardy fails_;)
<soren> Er... We're in_a development_cycle._We develop stuff_and_see what_happens.
<Fujitsu> Some things break at runtime, and_others at_compiletime. It's really hard to