#ubuntu-release 2010-03-19 <slangasek> davmor2: migration-assistant is higher priority (ubuntu amd64) <davmor2> slangasek: no probs I'll hit that after this xubunt 32bit wubi <slangasek> ev: the wubi 'stable' link points to r176, but davmor2 says he's been testing r174 - which am I meant to be publishing? <ev> 176 fixes the UNR is now UNE issue <ev> 174 fixes the crash <ev> I think we can get away with just 174 and telling UNE users to wait until beta 2 <slangasek> davmor2: you've been testing 174? <davmor2> slangasek: yeap but I can run une and a couple of other on 176 if you want to release on that one instead? <slangasek> no, let's go with 174 <cjwatson> err, is the release meeting in 7 minutes or 67 minutes? this is Google Calendar Confusion Week <slangasek> 67 minutes <pitti> cjwatson: 67 usually <cjwatson> goodd <davmor2> slangasek: would you like me to test 176 for une to ensure that works? <slangasek> davmor2: it's not pertinent to beta1, though it should certainly be tested at some point <davmor2> slangasek: Well m-a on 64bit ubu is 50% installed now so I can do it after that <slangasek> GrueMaster: bug #541399> loaded from USB? That seems to defeat the purpose of a netboot image <ubottu> Launchpad bug 541399 in linux-mvl-dove "netboot image fails to boot." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/541399 <GrueMaster> slangasek: It's irrelevant how the kernel gets loaded by uboot. The fact that the kernel wouldn't execute is the issue. <GrueMaster> I don't have a tftpboot server set up at the moment. <GrueMaster> But this is perfectly valid. We have an img file for babbage that gets loaded from SD card for the same image. <slangasek> GrueMaster: ah, ok <slangasek> davmor2: how long do you expect the m-a test to take to finish? <davmor2> 95% now <davmor2> 98% <slangasek> cool <davmor2> restart <davmor2> slangasek: done <slangasek> sweet <slangasek> smoser: could you update the ec2 webpages, please? (publicize-build running now) <smoser> slangasek, with --make-public ? <smoser> i will update ec2 pages now. <slangasek> smoser: isn't that implicit in the 'publicize' command? <slangasek> (I'm going by the wiki page...) <smoser> oh. shoot. no, you're right. <slangasek> ok, good :) <smoser> i was thinking you were running 'promote-daily' <smoser> thanks. <smoser> slangasek, pages updated. <slangasek> smoser: thanks! <cjwatson> slangasek: shall I kill queuebot? <slangasek> oh, probably :) * ScottK imagines cjwatson with a large revolver. <cjwatson> I've got Control and C keys, if those are equivalent <cjwatson> nhandler: I've registered queuebot now <ScottK> slangasek: You may want to look at 538860 and decide if you want to retroactively approve it or get it reverted. <slangasek> ScottK: ah, actually I approved that one from the queue by hand after a review, I just didn't comment the bug :) <ScottK> slangasek: OK. No problem then. <doko__> please promote python3-defaults and python3.1 (now needed by distribute as b-d). will have to seed python3-all-dbg <nigelb> if an apport hook is added, worth a beta freeze exception? <nigelb> or do I wait till lucid+1? <cjwatson> I don't think that needs a freeze exception <nigelb> ok, I'll get to work on it soon then :) <slangasek> doko__: is there an MIR for this? <doko> slangasek: hmm, no, in the past we never had MIR's for new versions. maybe we could have one for pybsddb3, but this is a new version of something we already have in the python2.6 package as well <doko> let me know what you prefer; I'll write it over the weekend. away now <slangasek> doko: well, python3 is a substantial enough change, and going in parallel, that I would be more comfortable having an MIR for it <doko> ok, will do over the weekend <slangasek> thanks <AnAnt> slangasek: Hello, regarding LP 402874, is there anything else needed other than than upgrade & install logs ? <ubottu> Launchpad bug 402874 in sl-modem "Sync sl-modem 2.9.11~20100303-2 (restricted) from Debian unstable (non-free)" [High,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/402874 <cjwatson> pitti: I'd like to go ahead with the grub2 SRU in bug 477104; it's definitely the right fix for grub2 itself, even if there are some problems getting the update applied to wubildr <ubottu> Launchpad bug 477104 in grub2 "After 9.10 grub update can not boot into Wubi install" [Critical,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/477104 <cjwatson> pitti: WDYT? The latter might be covered by my lupin upload <cjwatson> I could upload that to -proposed if that would help <cjwatson> ... uploaded <cjwatson> pitti: see my most recent comment on the bug <slangasek> AnAnt: yes, the information described on the FreezeExceptionProcess page <slangasek> # A description of the proposed changes, with sufficient detail to estimate their potential impact on the distribution <slangasek> # A rationale for the exception, explaining the benefit of the change <slangasek> # Any additional information which would be helpful in considering the decision <asac> FYI, bug 542141 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 542141 in ubuntu-release-notes "Lucid Beta 1 release notes mention non-product "Mozilla"" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/542141 <cjwatson> asac: does the default search change affect other Mozilla products, or just Firefox? <asac> cjwatson: just firefox <asac> cjwatson: mozilla prefers if we name it "Mozilla Firefox" <asac> rather than Firefox <asac> commented that on bug <cjwatson> asac: can we trade it for them not referring to "Ubuntu Linux" on mozilla.org? :-) <asac> haha <asac> where is that? <asac> or you want them to refer to Ubuntu rather than just "Linux"? <pitti> cjwatson: this bug keeps confusing me. A lot of people applied workarounds, but I didn't see any testing of the proposed package yet <pitti> hmm, unapproved queue still not flushed? any particular reason? <cjwatson> asac: google "Ubuntu Linux" site:mozilla.org - various wiki pages and such but some official things too <cjwatson> pitti: I think the lupin package I uploaded to karmic-proposed unapproved should help - it should fix upgrade to work the way it's meant to and rewrite wubildr automatically <cjwatson> the lack of that is probably why we haven't got real testing yet, but both parts are needed <asac> cjwatson: so they should just refer to "Ubuntu"? <asac> or what should i suggest? <cjwatson> I'll follow up <cjwatson> (to the bug) <asac> k <nhandler> cjwatson: Is there a draft of the next beta announcement? I want to s/FreeNode/freenode/g <slangasek> nhandler: feel free to copy https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LucidLynx/Beta1Announcement to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LucidLynx/Beta2Announcement and tweak <nhandler> slangasek: Will do #ubuntu-release 2010-03-20 <jcastro> slangasek: around? <doko> slangasek, pitti: python3 MIR is bug #542372 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 542372 in python3.1 "MIR for basic python3 stack" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/542372 <slangasek> jcastro: nope! <AnAnt> slangasek: Hello, I've added the remaining info for LP 402874 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 402874 in sl-modem "Sync sl-modem 2.9.11~20100303-2 (restricted) from Debian unstable (non-free)" [High,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/402874 #ubuntu-release 2010-03-21 <slangasek> pitti, cjwatson: did one of you accept simple-scan from the unapproved queue? it was pending an FFe, so I left it in the queue yesterday when flushing, and whoever accepted it didn't comment on the FFe bug <robbiew_> jcastro: ping <robbiew_> jcastro: neverming <robbiew_> and nevermind :P <nigelb> can someone from release team give me an ack on bug 543139 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 543139 in galrey "[FFE] Please sync galrey 1.0.2-4 from debian unstable" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/543139 <ScottK> nigelb: No FFe needed. I commented in the bug. <nigelb> ScottK: oh yeah, bug fix. I forgot. thanks :) <cjwatson> slangasek: not I <AnAnt> slangasek: hello #ubuntu-release 2010-03-22 <micahg> anyone around to approve FFe merges? <lamont> cjwatson/slangasek: I assume that daily builds are back to normal now that the beta is out? could you trigger a new edubuntu-dvd build for i386 pls? <lamont> afk for a bit <cjwatson> yes. running <cjwatson> lamont: ^- <lamont> ta <cjwatson> actually that probably did it for amd64 too, but ... <lamont> cjwatson: that should have the ltsp squashfs appear in the file list for i386 when it finishes <lamont> and there will be a 1.108 of livecd-rootfs <cjwatson> ok <lamont> seems y'all don't build "edubuntu" anymore, just the -dvd :( <cjwatson> indeed <lamont> and afk <lamont> cjwatson: next question: what is needed to get lucid/edubuntu-dvd/current/livecd.edubuntu-dvd-ltsp.squashfs onto the DVD iso? <cjwatson> lamont: is there a bug for this? at the moment, I'm buried in grub <lamont> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/livecd-rootfs/+bug/531546 is the closest I've got... it's either incorrectly closed and should be reopened and assigned somewhere, or a new bug created for the other... how you want me to do it? <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 531546 in livecd-rootfs "Have a LTSP chroot built and placed on the Edubuntu DVD" [Undecided,Fix released] <lamont> the bug clearly thought it was the complete thing <cjwatson> lamont: add a task on the ubuntu-cdimage project please <lamont> done <stgraber> slangasek: highvoltage just filed bug 544372 so we have that written somewhere, please ping us if we need to document anything else <ubottu> Launchpad bug 544372 in edubuntu-artwork "Edubuntu Artwork Freeze Exception" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/544372 <slangasek> stgraber: the only thing is to make sure anyone doing screenshots of Edubuntu for documentation knows it's coming; so either a mail to ubuntu-doc, or talking directly to the people who are doing Edubuntu doc if you know who that is specifically <micahg> can I get someone to approve FFe bug 513163 please? <ubottu> Launchpad bug 513163 in google-gadgets "[FFe] merge google-gadgets 0.11.2-1 from debian expermiental" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/513163 <micahg> nhandler: ^^ <nhandler> Let me look micahg <micahg> nhandler: thanks <nhandler> micahg: Why is it in experimental ? <micahg> they broke their api I think <nhandler> micahg: Does that break anything else ? <micahg> nhandler: I'm checking now, I forgot about that...is there a way to check source rdepends easily? <micahg> I don't think anything else depends on it... <nhandler> micahg: apt-cache rdepends <micahg> nhandler: does not look like anything else depends on it <micahg> nhandler: do you need any more information? <nhandler> micahg: Not right now. I'll look at it in a minute or so <micahg> nhandler: ok, thanks <stgraber> slangasek: Most of the work review and stuff like that is being done by nixternal and he's part of the Edubuntu council so it should be fine. We also still have an Edubuntu doc day to schedule and are currently waiting on the new artwork before we set a date for it. <slangasek> stgraber: ok #ubuntu-release 2010-03-23 <kirkland> slangasek: around? I need to get seabios and vgabios re-promoted to main <kirkland> slangasek: i did the MIRs earlier this cycle got them approved <kirkland> slangasek: but they fell out of main for a bit when qemu-kvm stopped depending on them <kirkland> slangasek: bug qemu-kvm now depends on them again... <kirkland> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vgabios/+bug/181876 <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 181876 in vgabios "[MIR] vgabios" [High,Fix released] <kirkland> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/seabios/+bug/508870 <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 508870 in seabios "[MIR] seabios" [High,Fix released] <slangasek> kirkland: the packages still don't show up in http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.txt - what version of qemu-kvm depends on them? <slangasek> (I'm not going to promote them until they have a revdep in main, that just runs the risk of another archive admin kicking them right back out again) <lamont> slangasek: livecd-rootfs_1.108 - how much documentation do you need for that - it's the upload to match the change that I made live to terranova earlier today... <lamont> (please to be blessing, once the source shows up - uploaded about 3 min ago) <lamont> or less <lamont> or do you want a bug filed for it for posterity? <lamont> anyway, bed for me. I'll read scrollback in the morning <slangasek> lamont: er, you know we're not in archive freeze, right? If you uploaded it, it goes straight in <slangasek> cjwatson, mvo: did you guys ever figure out a way to make libparted0/libparted1.8-12 happy? (Still held back here for me) <mvo> slangasek: I did not inverstigate further, did I ask you for your /var/lib/dpkg/status file already? <mvo> slangasek: I will add a hint to u-m as a stop-gap, until a proper fix is there <slangasek> mvo: I wasn't the one reporting it originally, I think it was pitti <mvo> slangasek: ok, could you mail me the status file please? just so that I can easily reproduce it? <slangasek> mvo: sent <cjwatson> slangasek: I didn't - is there any way you can test adding libparted0 Conflicts:/Replaces: libparted1.8-12, libparted-2.1-0? <slangasek> can do that in the morning <mvo> thanks slangasek <slangasek> cjwatson: fwiw, my first instinct there would've been to name the package 'libparted0deb' :) <cjwatson> mm, I really hate that sort of thing though ... <cjwatson> (and it'll be hard to do that now, I've already started the 2.2 transition in unstable) * slangasek nods <lamont> slangasek: oh. doh. <Riddell> BSD with advertising clause means multiverse? <Riddell> hmm, not in non-free in Debian <cjwatson> BSD with advertising clause is free, just GPL-incompatible <ScottK> and really annoying. <kirkland> slangasek: cjwatson got them for me #ubuntu-release 2010-03-24 <_Andrew> Is there anyone I can talk to about packaging up something for Lucid? I want to see this package upgraded to 1.7.0 stable ( https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/+source/ogre/1.6.4.dfsg1-1 ) however it looks like it's just imported from debian with no ubuntu maintainer? <cjwatson> lamont: so what happened to the code to generate ltsp squashfses on edubuntu dvd builds? <cjwatson> http://terranova.buildd/~buildd/LiveCD/lucid/edubuntu-dvd/current/livecd.edubuntu-dvd-ltsp.squashfs: <cjwatson> 02:25:51 ERROR 404: Not Found. <lamont> cjwatson: good question <lamont> Warning: --skipimage set, not building squashfs image, run ltsp-update-image later <lamont> ... <lamont> LTSP: Unable to build the chroot, see above for details. <lamont> so... it executed the code to build it, that code just failed./ <lamont> not sure whether that wants to prevent the dvd build so we notice, or what. <cjwatson> lamont: well, right now, it will fail the DVD build stage anyway even though it doesn't fail the livefs build stage <cjwatson> so I'd be happy for it to fail the livefs build stage too <lamont> oh, that's easy to do <lamont> cjwatson: fixed /current, and the file - please trigger an edubuntu-dvd build? <cjwatson> running <lamont> hopefully, it still fails, so we get that test case <lamont> fwiw, 0323 succeeded and is now "current" <stgraber> lamont: that "Skipping invalid chroot: /build/buildd means that /build/buildd/bin/true didn't exist at this point which should never happen as it's provided by coreutils <lamont> stgraber: ew <stgraber> hmm, actually it's just the detection code that's thinking it might be a chroot (as it's looking at everything in /build/), shouldn't be an issue then ... <stgraber> as /build/ltsp-live is scanned properly <stgraber> argh, looks like it might be LTSP 5.2.1 packaging that's slightly broken <stgraber> already fixed + uploaded for a bug but seems like I've another one there <stgraber> I'll be fixing that in the next hour <stgraber> lamont: easiest will be to drop the call to ltsp-update-image and replace by a direct call to mksquashfs, I'll give you a small patch to do that change. Seems like ltsp-update-image is trying to configure inetd + copy files in the tftp dir + ... which we really don't want to do on the builder <lamont> stgraber: exactly - we want a make-client-image that doesn't actually need all that crap <lamont> er, stuff <lamont> stgraber: making the image should be completely separate from placing the image for use by the client <stgraber> lamont: well, getting rid of ltsp-build-client will be an issue as it needs a lot of scripts that are used to build the image but for Lucid+1 we can probably split ltsp-server into two packages to make that easier <stgraber> lamont: for now, the only thing we'll replace is the call to ltsp-update-image (which builds the squashfs out of what ltsp-build-client made) <lamont> right <lamont> stgraber: anyway, pushed 1.109 in the bzr tree - I'll upload thatonce the run finishes, but go ahead and base on that for your changes <stgraber> lamont: did you update the bzr branch or is it no longer used ? (~ubuntu-core-dev/livecd-rootfs/trunk) <lamont> stgraber: just pushed rev 82 <lamont> "pushed 1.109" ==> rev82 to the branch <lamont> bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/lucid/livecd-rootfs/lucid/ <lamont> to be specific <stgraber> lamont: http://pastebin.com/cqRHYjAi <lamont> tested, I presume? <lamont> cjwatson: wanna smack another round of edubuntu-dvd into running? <cjwatson> previous one's still going on antimony <stgraber> lamont: well, "tested" as in I took that mksquashfs out of an actual run of ltsp-update-image. I didn't test in an actual build chroot as I don't have access to one ;) <stgraber> would be great if we could wait to have -0ubuntu3 before triggering a new build (ltsp that's) <stgraber> it's uploaded so should reach the archive very soon <lamont> heh. ok <lamont> stgraber: bzr branch lp:~lamont/launchpad-buildd/chroot-scripts; chroot-scripts/make-chroot.sh -dlucid --buildd --live <lamont> well, you might want a --user in there... see --help <lamont> the original form will try to create ~buildd/build-lucid-live/chroot-lucid <cjwatson> lamont: it's upgraded now <cjwatson> err, echan <stgraber> cjwatson, lamont: ltsp 5.2.1-0ubuntu3 is now in the archive. It'd be great if we could get another set of Edubuntu DVD images built, that's if the builders aren't super-busy with something else of course. <ScottK> slangasek: There's a new clamav RC out. It has a minor new feature (urgh). I'm planning on assuming the the existing clamav FFe that was approved before I uploaded the first RC is adequate for getting to clamav 0.96 final. Please tell me if that's not the case and you want more paperwork. <slangasek> ScottK: no papers needed, please go ahead <ScottK> slangasek: Thanks. <ev> would someone be so kind as to look bug 538156 (FFe) over? It's a small change. <ubottu> Launchpad bug 538156 in ubiquity "Freeze exception request: remove the seconds from the time zone map time" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/538156 <slangasek> ev: done <ev> slangasek: thanks a bunch! #ubuntu-release 2010-03-25 <slangasek> cjwatson: libparted0 added conflicts/replaces don't seem to make a difference <stgraber> lamont: Just looked at http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/livefs-build-logs/lucid/edubuntu-dvd/20100325/livecd-20100325-i386.out and I see no mention of the LTSP chroot (or error message related to it), any idea of what happened ? <lamont> stgraber: that's 1.108 - you want 1.109 before we stopped doing update-image <lamont> stgraber: and 1.110 is now current, next run should get what you want <stgraber> lamont: great, thanks <Daviey> A multiverse build failed, and i belive it was a hiccup with the buildd rather than an issue with package. If i wanted a no change rebuild done, is it an AA or LP folk that i need to ask? <Daviey> (probelm solved, thanks anyway) <Daviey> okay, not *quite* solved. Something seems odd, *mysql*3ubuntu8 was built 10 hours ago. Nothing seemed to fail afaics, but only *mysql*3ubuntu8_amd64 seems to have been published. *mysql*3ubuntu7* is still in the archive pool. <slangasek> Daviey: package name? <Daviey> slangasek: Specifically libmysqlclient16 is what raised the issue with me <Daviey> But this seems related https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mysql-dfsg-5.1/+bug/546691 <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 546691 in mysql-dfsg-5.1 "MySQL package dependancies are broken for Lucid" [Undecided,New] <slangasek> according to the archive, all architectures have published *except* i386 and sparc; that probably means i386 is in binary NEW. Checking. <slangasek> yep - processing <Daviey> hmm, doesn't really explain why amd64 is playing up tho. <Daviey> slangasek: the build that raised it with me was: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mythplugins/0.23.0+fixes23784-0ubuntu1/+build/1580419 <Daviey> further investigation, pbuilding on amd64 gave: http://paste.ubuntu.com/401035/ <slangasek> unfortunately, the new package that's causing mysql to be held up in the queue is broken and built for the wrong architecture (arch: all when it should be arch: any); let me fix this properly before letting it through <Daviey> slangasek: great, thanks <slangasek> Daviey: turns out that's more complicated than I thought, so I've filed a bug about it and let the package through; so libmysqlclient16 should be installable again with the next publishing run <Daviey> slangasek: great thanks #ubuntu-release 2010-03-26 <slangasek> ev: what are the known reasons that ubiquity might fail to offer to install side-by-side on a system with Windows 7, using Windows 7 loader, that has 45GB free? <slangasek> stgraber, lamont: edubuntu builds still failing with the same error, what's outstanding here? <ev> slangasek: what does ntfsresize --info say? <mvo> slangasek, pitti: any news for the feature freeze exception for computer-janitors dbus branch? bug #541990 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 541990 in computer-janitor "[FFe] Upgrade Computer Janitor to 2.0 (dbus edition)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/541990 <pitti> mvo: hm, this seems to be a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" kind of thing <pitti> c-j was pretty brittle in the past and caused lots of grief; I'm really nervous with having a complete rewrite at this point.. <ScottK> That could also be an argument for the rewrite. <barry> pitti: i do think it's much more stable, and i already have another use case for the dbus backend :) <pitti> ScottK: except that we know that the current version at least by and large works and doesn't wreak havoc <mvo> pitti: yeah, its tricky, however I think the benefits are worth the risk, the current threading issues are really hard to fix and dbus makes it all go away nicely <barry> pitti: btw, most of the core logic is essentially unchanged. all the plugings, cruft model, cleanup actions have just been moved into a dbus service. not saying there aren't bugs of course, but that stuff hasn't been really rewritten (cleaned up, refactored, tested, yes :) <barry> but i understand the concern, being here at b1 <slangasek> ev: dunno - will have to check next time I'm in getting a haircut <slangasek> :-) * ev raises an eyebrow <ev> clearly I missed some context :) <slangasek> my barber was interested in trying it, so I gave him a CD, and it won't auto-resize his Windows 7 :( <cjwatson> if I can ever get this damn machine to my right working, I'll test it <cjwatson> I have too many bugs to be able to spend time on hardware maint <slangasek> it doesn't fail /generally/, only on his machine <Keybuk> besides, my pilots licence quite clearly states STAY CLEAR OF CLOUD <lamont> slangasek: sigh. let me go figure it out. do you need terranova anytime soonish? (next hour or 2) <slangasek> lamont: not urgently <slangasek> Keybuk: <snort> <lamont> Keybuk: clearly you need to go for instrument rating <slangasek> for the privilege of flying blind in the cloud? <Keybuk> slangasek: yeah, you need an IR to be legally allowed to enter cloud (or in the UK, even fly above it) <slangasek> yes, I know <slangasek> I was just stretching out the word game :) <ev> slangasek, kees: do either of you know for certain if derivative distributions (specifically, Xubuntu) can use the LTS designation? <ev> That is, do we cover everything they ship with security updates for 5 years? <jdstrand> afaik, they have not in the past <jdstrand> eg, kubuntu in hardy was not LTS <charlie-tca> 3 for desktops, I think. 5 for servers <ScottK> Canonical already doesn't do security updates for Xubuntu <ev> but to be clear, Kubuntu definitely is this time, right? <ScottK> ev: yes. <ev> okay <jdstrand> I thought Xubuntu was all in universe these days? <jdstrand> maybe I am misremembering... <ScottK> jdstrand: That's why I said Canonical didn't do security updates for it. <ev> ah indeed, xfce4-panel at least is <ev> okay <ScottK> ev: To be even more specific, Kubuntu (desktop) is LTS, Kubuntu Netbook Remix is not. <ev> so it's not an LTS then * jdstrand thanks ScottK for helping him remember, before he thought to wonder if he forgot <ev> ScottK: ah, thanks for that clarification, I hadn't thought to consider the netbook editions <slangasek> ev: modulo UNE not actually being an LTS: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LucidLynx/ReleaseManifest <ev> slangasek: ah, I forgot about that page <ev> thanks a bunch! <jdstrand> as did I <pitti> slangasek: I replied to bug 546933, and I'm mildly in favor, but would like to get more opinions on that one <ubottu> Launchpad bug 546933 in xorg-server "FFE: xorg.conf.d/inputclass backport" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/546933 <ScottK> slangasek: One thing to consider for LTS/non-LTS is new ISOs for point releases. I think it'd be very confusing for Kubuntu/KNR or Ubuntu/UNE to have different package versions in their current ISO. I think it would make sense to respin those at least for .1. <slangasek> ScottK: confusing perhaps, but we already don't have a policy of respinning all ISOs for the point releases; 8.04.1 DVD, for instance, was only respun because of the ssh security issue <slangasek> pitti: will look at it this morning <ScottK> True. <ScottK> You just end up in the odd position of after 3 months the easiest way (if you have poor bandwidth) to install KNR would be to download Kubuntu 10.04.1 and then switch it. <slangasek> hum <slangasek> it would be nice if the SRU delta were not so great as to make that true * kees still wishes ReleaseManifest had seeds listed <slangasek> it's something to think about, anyway; though the practical limiting factor is usually our ability to validate the ISOs for point releases <slangasek> kees: weren't we waiting for you to tell us what the seeds were? <kees> slangasek: me? no, that's up to what defines the release <slangasek> ok, then I guess I need to check with mvo/barry on this <kees> slangasek: i.e. "Ubuntu Server" is server-ship. so when Jos says "this is 5 year", mvo's tool marks that seed <kees> but right now, we have to guess at the seed based on the product/image in the ReleaseManifest <slangasek> who does? <slangasek> is it security team guessing, or mvo, or? <kees> I'm saying "one" guesses. for lucid, we (security and mvo) understand 5 year support to be server-support + server-ship. <slangasek> then that's what I'm going to write there <kees> heh <kees> I find ReleaseManifest confusing because the "Maint commit" column does not map to anything direct. (i.e. no mention of main vs universe, seeds, etc) <slangasek> kees: my understanding was that you and mvo were in the process of *defining* that mapping, since it was done slipshod previously <slangasek> ev: btw, "is it an LTS" is a subtly different question from "is it supported for 3 years", because LTS is a product definition which might or might not be applied to Xubuntu even if the community decided to provide 3y of security support <ev> slangasek: that strikes me as being very confusing to end users <ev> if that's the case, what does LTS convey <slangasek> it conveys that Canonical is standing behind its status as a long-term-supported product <slangasek> which would not *automatically* the case for Xubuntu with a community security committment <kees> slangasek: mostly it was the mechanisms, and adjusting seeds to match expectations. it's always been defined as "server-supported" and "server-ship". we just tweak those contents and add things to a blacklist in rarer cases <kees> slangasek: so really it's now "supported-server" + "server-ship" - explicit blacklist <slangasek> kees: ok, where is the list of mappings that mvo's tool uses? <kees> slangasek: afaiu, it's done somewhere in launchpad via cron.germinate and maintenance-check.py <kees> slangasek: the blacklist is lp:~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/platform.lucid/ SUPPORTED_HINTS <kees> slangasek: right now, it is pending a change to add server-ship which was missed in the first version. <kees> slangasek: at which point the commented out bits in SUPPORTED_HINTS will be added, and then I'll re-check the lists to see what's creeped in since the sprint. <stgraber> slangasek, lamont: Any clue on what's happening with Edubuntu ? <slangasek> I'm waiting for lamont's analysis <stgraber> Could not create destination file: No such file or directory <stgraber> that's new ... <stgraber> might be something broken in my mksquashfs cmdline though it's based on what ltsp-build-client calls ... * stgraber make a note to add some debug next time he proposes a patch for that script ... would be useful to know what commands are started <stgraber> doh, I guess I found the problem ... <stgraber> seems like mksquashfs doesn't like creating an image in a non-existing directory <stgraber> http://pastebin.com/anpmac7s <stgraber> lamont: ^ <lamont> stgraber: heh <lamont> stgraber: testing <lamont> afk for a few while the build runs <ScottK> slangasek: Hello. <slangasek> ScottK: heya <slangasek> so I have http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/ubuntu_ftbfs.cgi, which AIUI I can rely on to start with as the list of failing packages <ScottK> Right. <slangasek> for this spec, I should filter those down to packages that have the same binary versions in karmic and lucid, right? <ScottK> That's a different way to look at it than I did initially. * ScottK ponders. <slangasek> what was your way? that's what I'm having a hard time remembering <ScottK> My way was to take a list of the rebuild failures just after the toolchain upload (which I've mailed you) and then remove the ones that built after that. <ScottK> So it'd be that initial list less the ones with a different binary version that aren't also still failing to build. <slangasek> ok - I'm actually not sure I ever received that email from you <ScottK> X - (Y-z) * ScottK looks for it. <ScottK> Sent in January 31, 2010 at 00:35 my time. <slangasek> misplaced on my end then, sorry <ScottK> No problem. Resent. <ScottK> The X - (Y -Z) bit was only the first part of the question. <ScottK> That gives us a good list for i386 and amd64. <ScottK> The next question was ports. <slangasek> sorry - I knew you had intended to send that mail, but when I failed to find it in my inbox folks directed me to lucas's later rebuild mails instead, which is where I started floundering because AFAIK those weren't being done with the snapshot from the original plan <ScottK> Right. No problem. <slangasek> right, the ports part I remember - remove the ports binaries IFF i386 or amd64 FTBFS and is up-to-date in the archive <ScottK> For ports, we wanted to assume anything that failed amd64 or i386 would fail on ports and remove those too, except for port specific packages (e.g. silo). <ScottK> Yes. <slangasek> (in fact, that's documented clearly in the spec :) <ScottK> Ah, good. <ScottK> Is it clear now then? <slangasek> yes, thanks <slangasek> though I still don't have that email from you <slangasek> getting wedged/filtered somewhere, I fear <ScottK> Let me post the files somewhere then. <slangasek> ok <ScottK> slangasek: http://kitterman.com/kubuntu/ <slangasek> great, thanks! <ScottK> nbs.i386only is empty on purpose <slangasek> ScottK: right, I should follow through on this while I have the state in my brain - if you're around later, I'd like to tackle the python syncs question as well <ScottK> OK. I'll be around off and on from here on out today. <lamont> gotta love the speed of that edubuntu-dvd build <stgraber> heh, it's just a huge squashfs and a smaller one ;) <stgraber> so livefs takes a lot of time (especially on i386 as it build ltsp as well) but the DVD build process should then be quite fast ;) <lamont> heh <lamont> yeah - it <lamont> s currently squashing the dvd image <lamont> and then we get to see if the other fixed it. <lamont> stgraber: fail <lamont> + mksquashfs /build/buildd/ltsp-live /build/buildd/images/ltsp-live.img -noF -noD -noI -no-exports -e cdrom <lamont> Could not create destination file: No such file or directory <lamont> gar <stgraber> lamont: and I assume /build/buildd/images exists ? <stgraber> that's what that mkdir was supposed to do <lamont> stgraber: nope. <lamont> and you created the source directory... :-p <lamont> fixed and running again already <stgraber> argh, seems like my mind wanted to create the destination but my fingers went with the source instead ... <lamont> yeah. and I had faith in your fingers. <stgraber> sorry for having you have to trigger another rebuild :( <lamont> I read the manpage right after pasting the error above, and went "doh" <lamont> OTOH, if this works, they can burn ISOs, since it's a genuine run <lamont> slangasek: still have the lock, but only because BuildLiveCD is acutally running - it's back to normal otherwise. kthx <slangasek> lamont: cheers <lamont> slangasek: and totally cowboyed - I'll upload after I confirm it works #ubuntu-release 2010-03-27 <lamont> -rwx------ 1 buildd root 550354944 Mar 26 21:59 livecd.edubuntu-dvd-ltsp-20100326.1-i386.squashfs <lamont> woot! <lamont> and 1.111 uploaded <stgraber> lamont: yeah ! thanks <lamont> stgraber: well, it was sorta ex-post-facto, but yeah <lamont> current (20100326.1) has the bits, 0327 is building now <stgraber> lamont: did you get that build log ? (20100327) <stgraber> http://terranova.buildd/~buildd/LiveCD/lucid/edubuntu-dvd/current/livecd.edubuntu-dvd-ltsp.squashfs: <stgraber> 02:11:17 ERROR 403: Forbidden. <lamont> AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA <lamont> stgraber: somehow, I had the impression this was tested <stgraber> well, that's very weird as I believe that part succeeded in the past didn't it ? <lamont> the image is created mode 600 by mksquashfs - dunno if that's a recent change, but I doubt it <stgraber> hmm, that might explain some things ... in a real LTSP environment the process accessing the image is running as root so it wouldn't be an issue. * stgraber quickly looks at ltsp-update-image for a call to chmod <lamont> I added a chmod 644 <stgraber> thanks <lamont> meanwhile, I chmodded the image <stgraber> I really hope that's the last time I have to ping you to fix things I broke this week ;) ... would be great if Edubuntu started to build as it's supposed to so I can get it tested and then focus on all these other things remaining on my Ubuntu todolist ... (release is getting really close now) <lamont> yeah - if someone wants to tickle just the ISO build, it should work this time - rebuilding the livefs won't right now, it'll 403 again <slangasek> launching an ISO build <stgraber> slangasek: thanks <lamont> ta #ubuntu-release 2010-03-28 <slangasek> lamont: http://terranova.buildd/~buildd/LiveCD/lucid/edubuntu-dvd/current/livecd.edubuntu-dvd-ltsp.squashfs: ERROR 403: Forbidden. <lamont> remind me to stab myself in the eye sometime, pls <lamont> chmodded, and typo fixed <lamont> slangasek: you wanna kick another edubuntu-dvd/i386 build, so I can actually make sure this works before I upload 1.113 <slangasek> lamont: livefs build or ISO build? <lamont> well, if stgraber wants his iso faster, you could do iso first, and then fs+iso for me, I suppose <lamont> 644 != 0644 <slangasek> heh * lamont sleeps <sbeattie> slangasek: FYI, the cdimages still identify themselves as alphas, not betas <slangasek> sbeattie: the current ones? we reset to 'alpha' for dailies that aren't beta candidates <sbeattie> slangasek: ah! Yes, the dailies. #ubuntu-release 2010-03-29 * stgraber looks at Edubuntu building and hopes that this time it'll work ;) <stgraber> seems like it worked ! * stgraber rsyncs <lamont> stgraber: woot! <lamont> Guess that means I should upload livecd-rootfs again <lamont> will do so in the morning <stgraber> yup, rsynced here, will start testing it but the logs were all looking good <lamont> slangasek: you gonna hurt me if I target bug 551069 at beta2? <ubottu> Launchpad bug 551069 in glib2.0 "FTBFS: crashes sparc" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/551069 <slangasek> lamont: nope <pitti> slangasek: I have uploaded new tzdata packages for stables (again quite urgent, meh @ governments changing them at short notice); would you mind reviewing them? <pitti> slangasek: (dapper is still uploading, will be in the queue shortly) <slangasek> pitti: ok, grabbing <slangasek> ah yes, those ever-urgent Antarctic timezone changes :-) <cjwatson> god, I hate this lvm+encryption bug, it's totally intractable <cjwatson> I'm sure I'll figure it out at some point, but I've been prodding at it for hours and getting nowhere <cjwatson> all I've discovered so far is that parted_server seems to be writing out the swap header but by the time any other process sees it it's all-zeroes again <elmo> how do I (assuming I could, without my duck) tag a bug as 'not a regression, but damn, we should fix that before release'? <slangasek> if "without my duck" ~== "without upload rights", then by talking to the release team <slangasek> if you assume upload rights, then targeting to the release <elmo> duck == rubber duck == root in LP <slangasek> yeah, I know <slangasek> the question is how un-root you want to be for this :) <elmo> slangasek: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openoffice.org/+bug/546797 <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 546797 in openoffice.org "URE: Component registries might be corrupted" [Undecided,Confirmed] <elmo> and i won't assume upload rights, I don't think I'm even an ubuntu member anymore ;-) <slangasek> eep <slangasek> yeah, targeting that to lucid; does that show up on upgrades from hardy, karmic, both? <elmo> slangasek: only tried karmic <elmo> don't tend to have OO.o on my hardy boxes <slangasek> maintainer script sez karmic-only <slangasek> and that this gets shown to *everyone* on karmic upgrade <slangasek> added in OOo 1:3.2.0~rc5-1 <sbeattie> pitti: commented on bug 445852, let me know if there's more that you would like me to test. <ubottu> Error: Could not parse data returned by Launchpad: The read operation timed out (https://launchpad.net/bugs/445852) #ubuntu-release 2010-03-30 <slangasek> pitti: so I've done some debugging of #537262, and I'm fairly convinced that this is simply a race condition resulting from sendsigs firing before the plymouth job has *started* on shutdown; there's little enough left in /etc/rc6.d on a stock system that this is very possible <slangasek> pitti: I think the right thing to do is, inside the 'for seq' loop, call initctl list again to check for any new jobs that have popped up; this is still not entirely race-free, but it is a fairly cheap fix (cheaper than waiting 10 seconds on shutdown for no reason) and should catch the vast majority of cases - what do you think? <slangasek> (even though we've stopped the crash reports now, we're still hanging around ~10s longer on shutdown than we need to because of this) <pitti> sbeattie: thanks <pitti> slangasek: that sounds plausible, at least much more than initctl having a bug of randomly not displaying jobs <pitti> slangasek: but what I don't understand is why plymouth would cause a 10 s hang then? doesn't it react to SIGTERM? <pitti> slangasek: i. e. if plymouth starts slightly late, then it wouldn't be on $OMITPIDS, and the killall5 would (try to) TERM it <pitti> which was the original effect described in the bug, I believe, that plymouth is killed prematurely <slangasek> pitti: it /can/ cause a 10s hang because it also races the invocation of killall5 - and indeed that's the case bug #537262 would correspond to, since if it had been caught by the first killall, the apport hook wouldn't have reported it <ubottu> Launchpad bug 537262 in plymouth "plymouth pid missing from OMITPIDS and terminated by sendsigs - Please no more confirmations/comments" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/537262 <pitti> slangasek: hm, but wouldn't at least the third or fourth one kill it? <slangasek> pitti: the third and fourth ones use SIGCONT, which won't kill the processes :) <pitti> oh, indeed <pitti> right, of course; /me grabs some tea to wake up <pitti> yes, that makes perfect sense now <nigelb> can someone give me an ack for a UIFe for pitivi, bug 314885 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 314885 in pitivi "Don't show version number in titlebar" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/314885 <nigelb> got blessings from translations and doc <kirkland> slangasek: is a new bash-completion file for a command line utility subject to FFe? <slangasek> kirkland: it's a feature, not a bugfix, so yes #ubuntu-release 2010-03-31 <nigelb> can someone give me an ack for a UIFe for pitivi before thu freeze? bug 314885 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 314885 in pitivi "Don't show version number in titlebar" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/314885 <nigelb> I'd really appreciate an ack for bug 314885 from someone from the release team <ubottu> Launchpad bug 314885 in pitivi "Don't show version number in titlebar" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/314885 <nigelb> cjwatson, ping <cjwatson> nigelb: hi? <cjwatson> ... ok <nigelb> cjwatson, got some time to ack a UIfe? <lamont> slangasek: are we installable enough that it makes sense for me to roll new lucid tarballs? would speed up build times to not be dist-upgrading them every build <lamont> slangasek: and I'm not clear what sort of schedule all y'all would like around that activity, in the general sense <slangasek> lamont: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/testing/lucid_probs.html <slangasek> certainly more installable than last night <lamont> slangasek: heh <lamont> interesting - I just upgraded twisted on a few buildds <cjwatson> nigelb: acked <nigelb> cjwatson, thanks :) <doko__> asac, slangasek: is the xulrunner-dev demotion seriously wanted? what's the replacement? <slangasek> doko__: sorry, what's the context? <slangasek> the upstream security policy impacts what we're going to be supporting <slangasek> i.e., "as little as possible" <doko__> slangasek: openjdk-6 build failure due to demotion <doko__> didn't see any warning before ... <slangasek> ah <slangasek> I don't know who demoted it; it shouldn't have been done while there were reverse-deps <slangasek> doko__: it looks like xulrunner-1.9.2 is in main now? <doko__> slangasek: ok, will reupload. <doko__> slangasek: I assume it is planned as well to update xulrunner to xulrunner-1.9.3 and so on for lts updates? does this mean you want to rebuild dependencies as well? <slangasek> if it's planned, it hasn't been mentioned to me; https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-lucid-new-firefox-support-model is the blueprint about this <doko__> the only thing about demotion I can find is: decide on demotion vs. droppage of xulrunner-1.9.x from the archive <ScottK> Personally, I think it should be removed, not demoted <slangasek> what does openjdk need xulrunner for, btw? It doesn't seem to have a runtime dep on it? <doko__> slangasek: the plugin <slangasek> it only needs headers to build that, no runtime dep? or is it statically linking something? <doko__> dynamically linking <doko__> /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk/jre/lib/*/IcedTeaPlugin.so <slangasek> doko__: I only see a dependency on libnspr4-0d; should it be build-depending on nspr instead of xulrunner? <slangasek> oh, hm, it links against xul but doesn't have a dep on it <doko__> $ ldd /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk/jre/lib/i386/IcedTeaPlugin.so|grep 'not found' <doko__> libxul.so => not found <doko__> libxpcom.so => not found <doko__> ahh <slangasek> probably because of the "not found" <doko__> ok, let's add this manually ... <slangasek> dh_shlibdeps -l/path/to/libs? <doko__> asac: ^^^ I think we did have the problem before <doko__> will do <doko__> the xulrunner cooperation between debian and ubuntu is just 'nice' ... <doko__> sid: $ xulrunner-1.9.1 --gre-version <doko__> +1-905-866-7687 <doko__> but no directory with this version <doko__> asac: is there anything simpler? <doko__> echo /usr/lib/xulrunner-$($(basename $(pkg-config --libs-only-L libxul | sed 's/^-L//;s/-devel//;s,/lib *$,,' )) --gre-version | sed 's/^\(.....\).*/\1/') <doko__> /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.2 <doko__> slangasek: doesn't help: <doko__> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: Can't extract name and version from library name `libxpcom.so' <doko__> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: Can't extract name and version from library name `libxul.so' <slangasek> meh, figures <doko__> slangasek: xulrunner-1.9.* doesn't have any shlibs files <slangasek> well, and if it did they apparently wouldn't work due to the unversioned soname <doko__> filed bug #552780, I'll hardcode the dependency for now <ubottu> Launchpad bug 552780 in xulrunner-1.9.2 "how to properly link against libxul and libxpcom?" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/552780 <Keybuk> slangasek: new mountall uploaded <Keybuk> buildds seem very behind today <Keybuk> so the screaming probably won't start until tomorrow * ajmitch hopes that stuff uploaded in the next few hours won't get us told off? <slangasek> nope, it's my responsibility to pull the trigger on the archive freeze when it's time #ubuntu-release 2011-03-01 <marjo> ping skaet <marjo> ping skaet_d <skaet_> jdstrand, thank you for looking into the natty_probs.html. fingers are crossed for a smooth set of builds tonight before Riddell switches the builders to manual. <skaet_> Riddell, when the images come off the build, please get them added into the .iso tester, so we can get started on testing them immediately. Note, when I checked just now, .iso tester still needs to be reset. Please work with jibel to get it cleaned up, if its not reset already to Alpha 3 when you've got images to push. <charlie-tca> Kubuntu alternate-amd64.iso dated 2011-03-01 installed on hardware <jdstrand> huh <jdstrand> various cd images died cause ubuntu-minimal couldn't be installed due to: <jdstrand> dpkg: error processing lsb-release (--configure): subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1 <jdstrand> dpkg: error processing rsyslog (--configure): subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 10 <jdstrand> not reproducable here... * jdstrand makes note to ask how antimony bootstraps images <slangasek> skaet_: so given that bug #723846 is approved for a3, does it make sense for me to upload what's in James' branch to give us a leg up on image respins? <ubot4> Launchpad bug 723846 in upstart (Ubuntu) "Feature Freeze Exception request for Upstart in Natty (affects: 1) (heat: 14)" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/723846 <slangasek> jdstrand: exit status 10 is a pretty good indicator of a debconf-related failure <jdstrand> interesting. <jdstrand> well, I am just passing through and noticed that <jdstrand> no time to debug, but will follow up and certainly learn something tomorrow * jdstrand likes to learn :) <slangasek> the lsb-release error is almost certainly *not* debconf-related, however <slangasek> jdstrand: do you have an example log I could fix my eyes on? <jdstrand> slangasek: there is not a lot to go on, but let me paste one <slangasek> well, you said "how antimony bootstraps", but package installation is normally done on the livecd builders, no? <jdstrand> slangasek: full log for LiveFS kubuntu/natty/i386 failed to build on 20110301: http://paste.ubuntu.com/573772/ <skaet_> slangsek, branch 1-3 are approved for A3 based on what jhunt and cjwatson did. <skaet_> those changes have been uploaded already earlier. What's in james' branch? <slangasek> jdstrand: right, that log is available at available at http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/livefs-build-logs/natty/kubuntu/20110301/livecd-20110301-i386.out, no? * skaet_ approved it earlier in the day, but forgot to hit save on the bug update until she got back to her computer (multiple windows hid it... :P ) <jdstrand> slangasek: looks like it :) <slangasek> skaet_: ah, if it's already uploaded then nevermind :) <jdstrand> see, I even got to learn something *tonight* \m/ <slangasek> skaet_: I saw the bug update and was trying to avoid it waiting until morning <slangasek> jdstrand: :) <slangasek> so, this is some sort of debootstrap failure involving lsb-release and pycentral; not god <slangasek> good <slangasek> (not god either, but that's a somewhat less specific statement) <jdstrand> lol <skaet_> :) <skaet_> slangsek, yup I think were good for the upstart side, now the issue of failure to builds .... urk. not good. <slangasek> yep, working on reproducing locally <skaet_> thanks. <jdstrand> I tried 'apt-get install ubuntu-minimal' in my natty schroot, which was created via mk-sbuild <jdstrand> it worked fine <jdstrand> (or course with just main and restricted, and archive.ubuntu.com, not something local <jdstrand> ) <GrueMaster> armel images failed to build. Looks like dpkg postinst issues with lsb-release and rsyslog. <jdstrand> GrueMaster: yeah, so did several others <GrueMaster> Ah. See it now in the backscroll. <jdstrand> (in recent backscroll) <jdstrand> slangasek: does antimony use debootstrap? <slangasek> jdstrand: shouldn't; the debootstrapping should be on the livefs builders * jdstrand really doesn't want to get embroiled in this right now, but is curious <slangasek> but that log is from the debootstrap call on a livefs builder, yes <slangasek> (i.e., not /from/ antimony, only dispatched via antimony) <jdstrand> I think you might have taken my question slightly too precisely <slangasek> guess so :) <jdstrand> I only know that antimony 'does stuff' to boot strap an image <slangasek> anyway, yeah, this'll be a problem related to initial installation of the core packages <jdstrand> wither helpers do it or whatever, I have no idea. but if the main thing is debootstrap, then maybe I can try that here <slangasek> yes, it's debootstrap <jdstrand> s/wither/whether/ <jdstrand> my schroot uses a buildd bootstrap... * jdstrand tries a straight up debootstrap before heading to bed <slangasek> reproducible <jdstrand> slangasek: I'm using something like this: debootstrap natty /natty/ http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ <jdstrand> slangasek: as that what you are using? <slangasek> yes <jdstrand> slangasek: so, lsb-release failed there right? looking at the logs there seemed to be problems before trying to install ubuntu-minimal <slangasek> it's lsb-release; ubuntu-minimal depends on lsb-release <slangasek> and I think this is related to my dpkg upload * jdstrand nod <jdstrand> nods even <slangasek> (pycentral is snuffling around inside of /var/lib/dpkg, which it Ought Not Do) * jdstrand just reproduced <slangasek> if not os.path.exists('/var/lib/dpkg/info/%s.list' % self.pkgname): <slangasek> self.error("package %s is not installed" % self.pkgname) <slangasek> tsk, bad python-central <slangasek> fix will be on its way before the top of the hour <jdstrand> cool <slangasek> what builds should I retrigger once it's published? <jdstrand> well, I got two learn 2 things tonight <jdstrand> let me get the list <jdstrand> kubuntu/natty/armel+omap <jdstrand> kubuntu/natty/armel+omap4 <jdstrand> ubuntu-netbook/natty/armel+omap4 <jdstrand> ubuntu-netbook/natty/armel+omap <jdstrand> kubuntu/natty/amd64 <jdstrand> kubuntu/natty/i386 <jdstrand> edubuntu-dvd/natty/amd64 <jdstrand> edubuntu-dvd/natty/i386 <jdstrand> kubuntu-mobile/natty/i386 <jdstrand> I don't know what's pending, but that is everything I have <jdstrand> kubuntu/natty/armel+omap was the last and failed 28 minutes ago <slangasek> ok <jdstrand> nice, now I don't have to feel guilty about going to bed <jdstrand> slangasek: thanks! :) <slangasek> sure thing :) <slangasek> it's my bug anyway ;) <jdstrand> learned 2 new things, and a guilt-free sleep. pretty sweet <slangasek> well, technically pycentral's, but I set it off :-) <jdstrand> hehe <slangasek> ok, python-central is accepted but I ran into the content generation job as usual <slangasek> trigger set to fire off builds as soon as that's cleared and python-central is in the archive <slangasek> and I have the fix for libreoffice on armel, but maybe today is not the day to upload that, given that it's not going to get done before alpha3 anyway :) <Keybuk> slangasek: would you mind if I made an upload? <ev> it's a trap! <Keybuk> ev: can you test something for me? <Keybuk> touch /etc/init/.conf <slangasek> Keybuk: I'm too busy putting out my own dpkg-induced fires to mind, but that doesn't mean the other members of the release team won't : <slangasek> ) <slangasek> I think I have python-central fixed now <slangasek> now I have to unbreak ucf <slangasek> which ironically is broken because of a patch to ucf that I wrote <Keybuk> wow, ev stopped responding to PING <slangasek> so... another hour before debootstrap will work again <Keybuk> he really tested that <Keybuk> you'd think he'd know better than listening to me :p <ev> jerk <Keybuk> love you too <cody-somerville> +1 <ev> 'twas an excuse to make more coffee <ev> and curse your name <Keybuk> slangasek: ok, no upload from me <slangasek> kubuntu alternate will also need respun for this issue <slangasek> it has the new dpkg in it, so
{'channel': 'ubuntu-release', 'month': 3}