15:00 <jawn-smith> #startmeeting Weekly Ubuntu Foundations team
15:00 <meetingology> Meeting started at 15:00:33 UTC.  The chair is jawn-smith.  Information about MeetBot at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology
15:00 <meetingology> Available commands: action, commands, idea, info, link, nick
15:00 <jawn-smith> #topic Lightning Round
15:00 <jawn-smith> The status is here: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/foundations-team-updates-thursday-07-july-2022/29330/2
15:02 <mclemenceau> o/
15:04 <bdmurray> bdrung: With apport's autopkgtests they aren't running / skipped for armhf on previous releases. Are the any chances of it being SRU'ed.
15:05 <bdmurray> ?
15:05 <bdrung> bdmurray, the current uploaded apport SRU fixes several autopkgtest (but not all for armhf). I can include all needed autopkgtest fixes in the next SRUs to let autopkgtest succeed on all archs.
15:06 <bdrung> IIRC except for one or two cases, all needed changes were only for the tests itself.
15:06 <bdmurray> If it is just test fixes then using block-proposed-$release sounds appropriate. I was asking because if they are fixed then they shouldn't be denylisted any more.
15:08 <bdrung> bdmurray, i will take care of removing it from the denylist
15:08 <bdmurray> https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-release/autopkgtest-cloud/+git/autopkgtest-package-configs/tree/never_run here is the never_run list
15:09 <jawn-smith> #topic Release incoming bugs
15:09 <jawn-smith> rls-kk is empty today
15:09 <jawn-smith> #link https://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-jj-incoming-bug-tasks.html#foundations-bugs
15:09 <jawn-smith> bug 1979874
15:09 <ubottu> Bug 1979874 in netplan.io (Ubuntu) "Unable to set bridge to lower MTU that interface its attached to" [Medium, Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1979874
15:09 <slyon> I tried to quickly reproduce this one. Results were inconsistent...
15:10 <slyon> Not sure if it needs to be carded
15:10 <jawn-smith> It's worth investigating. Does that investigation require a card mclemenceau ?
15:11 <mclemenceau> maybe we can leave it in LP for a little bit and revisit a little later in the cycle or if there's more impacted user?
15:12 <jawn-smith> Sounds good, let's remove the rls-jj tag
15:12 <jawn-smith> bug 1980589
15:12 <ubottu> Bug 1980589 in update-notifier (Ubuntu) "Reports that there are updates but there are none" [Undecided, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1980589
15:13 <jawn-smith> Is this really update-notifier?
15:13 <bdmurray> I think it does some motd stuff
15:13 <jawn-smith> Okay, who tends to work on update-notifier
15:13 <jawn-smith> ?
15:13 <juliank> sometimes
15:14 <jawn-smith> Does anyone have an opinion on the importance of this bug?
15:15 <juliank> let's card it that's very confusing
15:16 <bdmurray> Medium or Low I'd say
15:16 <juliank> especially it says there are security updates so it's scary and confusing if that happens
15:16 <jawn-smith> Okay we've agreed to card it
15:16 <jawn-smith> mclemenceau: would you do the honors?
15:16 <mclemenceau> sure thing
15:16 <jawn-smith> Thanks!
15:17 <jawn-smith> rls-ii and rls-ff are actually empty
15:17 <sil2100> \o/
15:17 <jawn-smith> #topic Team proposed-migration report
15:17 <jawn-smith> #link https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses_by_team.html#foundations-bugs
15:17 <jawn-smith> vorlon:
15:18 <vorlon> let's see!
15:18 <vorlon> ubuntu-meta: still in Desktop's court
15:18 <vorlon> python3-stdlib-extensions: doko, is this still yours?
15:19 <doko> yes
15:19 <vorlon> ok
15:20 <vorlon> usb-creator: as noted in the weekly status, the MIR is moving forward
15:20 <vorlon> mutt: gsasl MIR
15:20 <jawn-smith> waiting on security team
15:21 <vorlon> systemd: was skipped last time, should that just be retried?  (but it's blocking a kernel package and they have their own test matrix that's invisible to us)
15:21 <slyon> should be re-tried. systemd 251 already migrated in the meantime
15:21 <vorlon> last week we said llvm-toolchain-14 was ftbfs for the same reason as gcc; gcc has been fixed but llvm-toolchain-14 not?
15:21 <vorlon> so does someone want to follow through on llvm?
15:22 <vorlon> ah it's built now on every arch but riscv64 and that one is building
15:22 <vorlon> so probably nothing to do here
15:22 <doko> hmm, that was for arm64. I didn't check risc64 yet. it's currently building
15:22 <ginggs> it's only waiting on a riscv64 build, that keeps failing without logs
15:24 <vorlon> lintian: I saw there was a mention of this in the weekly status; MIR is open, is anyone filling those out?
15:24 <slyon> vorlon: no we need somebody to fill those
15:24 <slyon> I did some initial investigation and marked some false-positves
15:25 <vorlon> ginggs: thanks for volunteering on lintian
15:26 <vorlon> with ogayot helping (slyon can help point out which part of the MIR could be split off)
15:26 <slyon> ack
15:26 <vorlon> curl ftbfs on several archs. dbungert can you take this?
15:26 <dbungert> vorlon: ack
15:26 <vorlon> it also ftbfs in Debian fwiw
15:26 <dbungert> good datapoint
15:27 <jawn-smith> oh I had curl last week
15:27 <vorlon> oh
15:27 <jawn-smith> Didn't get to it with the long weekend and +1 maintenance
15:27 <vorlon> sorry I thought we were into the stuff that was too new to have been assigned
15:27 <vorlon> ok curl: jawn-smith
15:28 <vorlon> pygments: there's an update-excuse bug that points at pytest which needs a merge; dbungert can you take this instead?
15:28 <dbungert> vorlon: ack for pygments
15:28 <vorlon> gcc-11: also just waiting for a build on riscv64
15:29 <vorlon> libxcrypt vs perl: doko does your latest merge fix this?
15:29 <doko> I hope so
15:30 <vorlon> bdrung: can you follow through to make sure it actually does?
15:30 <bdrung> okay
15:30 <vorlon> (and also db5.3)
15:30 <vorlon> and, apparently, also dpkg :P
15:30 <vorlon> a whole lot of perl autopkgtest failures!
15:31 <vorlon> casper vs localechooser: I uploaded this, I'll take it
15:31 <vorlon> and that's the bottom of the list
15:31 <vorlon> jawn-smith:
15:31 <jawn-smith> #topic AOB
15:32 <dbungert> the pygments update-excuse, LP: #1980296, raises the concern that a merge of pytest-7 would potentially affect 2000 packages, I assume we proceed?  treat it as a transition?
15:32 <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1980296 in pytest (Ubuntu) "pygments FTBFS requires pytest >> 7.0" [Medium, New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1980296
15:33 <ginggs> pytest migration is progressing nicely in debian
15:33 <ginggs> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/pytest
15:33 <ginggs> only 9 failures left, and they are being worked on
15:35 <ginggs> you could start now by checking whether we need a merge or a sync
15:35 <dbungert> OK
15:36 <jawn-smith> #endmeeting