[Bug 2070882] Re: [MIR] jpeg-xl
** Description changed: [Availability] The package jpeg-xl is already in Ubuntu universe. The package jpeg-xl build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl [Rationale] - The packages libjxl-gdk-pixbuf and libjxl0.9 (soon to have a soname bump to libjxl0.10) are required in Ubuntu main to enable JPEG XL files to be used as a desktop wallpaper and to be viewable in GNOME-ish apps like eog and shotwell - The package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package jpeg-xl in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - Had multiple security issues in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=jpeg-xl - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/jpeg-xl + Debian has marked the 2 2023 CVEs as "no-dsa (minor issue) + The remaining needs-triage bug in Ubuntu's tracker, CVE-2021-36691, has been marked by Debian as "negligible security impact" - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/ - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=jpeg-xl - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9ubuntu1 + - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-10 - - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on all architectures except for s390x. - - s390x is skipped (shows as "neutral") which is acceptable since the intended use of jpeg-xl is on desktops and s390x is not a desktop architecture. + - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on all + architectures https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/jpeg-xl - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - Lintian overrides are present, but ok because this was affected by the t64 transition - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/debian-phototools-team/libjxl/-/blob/master/debian/rules [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation or .desktop file) [Dependencies] - There are further dependencies that are not yet in main, MIR for them is at - highway https://launchpad.net/bugs/2070807 [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy [Maintenance/Owner] - The owning team will be Ubuntu Desktop (~desktop-packages) and I have their acknowledgement for that commitment - This does not use static builds - This does not use vendored code - This package is not rust based - The package has been built within the last 3 months in the archive - - Build link on launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9ubuntu1 + - Build link on launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-10 [Background information] - The Package description explains the package well - Upstream Name is libjxl - Links to upstream project + https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl + https://jpeg.org/jpegxl/ - Some additional binary packages have no reverse dependencies and can remain in universe: + libjpegxl-java + libjxl-devtools + libjxl-tools - Before version 0.9, the gdk-pixbuf loader was not enabled in Debian or Ubuntu because it required skcms which is not available in Debian or Ubuntu; with version 0.9, the loader was buildable with lcms2 which is in Ubuntu main. It is not
[Bug 2071468] Re: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined
** Also affects: texinfo (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: texinfo (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Changed in: texinfo (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: squid (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071468 Title: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/asymptote/+bug/2071468/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071468] Re: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined
** Also affects: serf (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: serf (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Changed in: serf (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Tags added: ftbfs oracular -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071468 Title: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/asymptote/+bug/2071468/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1993849] Re: debugpy: FTBFS due to either "Timed out..." or "Address already in use"
** Changed in: debugpy (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released ** Changed in: ipykernel (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1993849 Title: debugpy: FTBFS due to either "Timed out..." or "Address already in use" To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/debugpy/+bug/1993849/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2039702] Re: systemtap 4.9-1 fails to build on ppc64el and i386
** Changed in: systemtap (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2039702 Title: systemtap 4.9-1 fails to build on ppc64el and i386 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/systemtap/+bug/2039702/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2067721] Re: proposed-migration for genx (3.0.2-2 to 3.6.22-2)
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #1058473 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1058473 ** Also affects: genx (Debian) via https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1058473 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2067721 Title: proposed-migration for genx (3.0.2-2 to 3.6.22-2) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/genx/+bug/2067721/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071613] Re: gcc-13 fails to build
** Changed in: octave (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => Fix Released ** Description changed: gcc-13 fails to build. - This is blocking the octave transition. plplot needs to migrate for the - transition to complete. plplot has gained a dependency on gcc-13 in - oracular-proposed. + + Obsolete + + This is blocking the octave transition. plplot needs to migrate for the transition to complete. plplot has gained a dependency on gcc-13 in oracular-proposed. If this is not easily fixable, maybe it would help if gcc-13 were temporarily removed from -proposed and then we rebuild plplot to not depend on the newer gcc-13. There is also an ada transition entangled in the new gcc-13 but I don't think that's as annoying. octave is showing up on the NBS report for gdal (and therefore poppler). + + Other Info + == + Locutus worked around the octave issue by bootstrapping plplot with bileto to avoid gcc-13, then rebuilt again without bileto after the octave transition migrated -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071613 Title: gcc-13 fails to build To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-13/+bug/2071613/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070807] Re: [MIR] highway
I'm setting to Incomplete because I haven't added a basic autopkgtest here yet. ** Changed in: highway (Ubuntu) Assignee: (unassigned) => Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) ** Description changed: [Availability] The package highway is already in Ubuntu universe. The package highway build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway [Rationale] - RULE: There must be a certain level of demand for the package - The package highway is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of jpeg-xl (LP: #2070882) - The package highway will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libhwy1t64 needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package highway in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=highway - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/highway - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/+bug - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=highway - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/google/highway/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/1.2.0-2 RULE: - The package should, but is not required to, also contain RULE: non-trivial autopkgtest(s). TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD RULE: - existing but failing tests that shall be handled as "ok to fail" RULE: need to be explained along the test logs below TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is TODO-B: ok because TBD RULE: - If no build tests nor autopkgtests are included, and/or if the package RULE: requires specific hardware to perform testing, the subscribed team RULE: must provide a written test plan in a comment to the MIR bug, and RULE: commit to running that test either at each upload of the package or RULE: at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug, RULE: please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual RULE: steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to RULE: assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial). RULE: If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is RULE: impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work RULE: but if you are going to ask for promotion of something untestable RULE: please outline why it couldn't provide its value (e.g. by splitting RULE: binaries) to users from universe. RULE: This is a balance that is hard to strike well, the request is that all RULE: options have been exploited before giving up. Look for more details RULE: and backgrounds https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/30 RULE: Just like in the SRU process it is worth to understand what the RULE: consequences a regression (due to a test miss) would be. Therefore RULE: if being untestable we ask to outline what consequences this would RULE: have for the given package. And let us be honest, even if you can RULE: test you are never sure you will be able to catch all potential RULE: regressions. So this is mostly to force self-awareness of the owning RULE: team than to make a decision on. TODO: - The package can not be well tested at build or autopkgtest time TODO: because TBD. To make up for that: TODO-A: - We have access to such hardware in the team TODO-B: - We have allocated budget to get this hardware, but it is not here TODO-B: yet TODO-C: - We have checked with solutions-
[Bug 1865177] Re: There is an erroneous extra dot in package name
** Changed in: gnome-calendar (Ubuntu) Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1865177 Title: There is an erroneous extra dot in package name To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-calendar/+bug/1865177/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071613] Re: gcc-13 fails to build
** Description changed: gcc-13 fails to build. This is blocking the octave transition. plplot needs to migrate for the transition to complete. plplot has gained a dependency on gcc-13 in oracular-proposed. If this is not easily fixable, maybe it would help if gcc-13 were - temporarily removed from -proposed and plplot rebuild to not depend on - the newer gcc-13. + temporarily removed from -proposed and then we rebuild plplot to not + depend on the newer gcc-13. There is also an ada transition entangled in the new gcc-13 but I don't think that's as annoying. octave is showing up on the NBS report for gdal (and therefore poppler). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071613 Title: gcc-13 fails to build To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-13/+bug/2071613/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071613] [NEW] gcc-13 fails to build
Public bug reported: gcc-13 fails to build. This is blocking the octave transition. plplot needs to migrate for the transition to complete. plplot has gained a dependency on gcc-13 in oracular-proposed. If this is not easily fixable, maybe it would help if gcc-13 were temporarily removed from -proposed and plplot rebuild to not depend on the newer gcc-13. There is also an ada transition entangled in the new gcc-13 but I don't think that's as annoying. octave is showing up on the NBS report for gdal (and therefore poppler). ** Affects: gcc-13 (Ubuntu) Importance: High Status: Triaged ** Affects: octave (Ubuntu) Importance: High Status: Triaged ** Tags: ftbfs oracular update-excuse ** Also affects: octave (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: octave (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: octave (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071613 Title: gcc-13 fails to build To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-13/+bug/2071613/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071570] [NEW] symfony fails to build
Public bug reported: symfony fails to build. I merged symfony in hopes it would help with the autopkgtest failures triggered by https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/php8.3/8.3.6-0ubuntu1 symfony did build successfully locally for me. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/symfony/6.4.7+dfsg-1ubuntu1 https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/symfony ** Affects: symfony (Ubuntu) Importance: High Status: Triaged ** Tags: ftbfs oracular update-excuse ** Description changed: symfony fails to build. I merged symfony in hopes it would help with the autopkgtest failures triggered by https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/php8.3/8.3.6-0ubuntu1 symfony did build successfully locally for me. + + https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/symfony/6.4.7+dfsg-1ubuntu1 + + https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/symfony -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071570 Title: symfony fails to build To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/symfony/+bug/2071570/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2057636] Re: [FFe] Symfony 6
** Changed in: symfony (Ubuntu) Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released ** Changed in: php-symfony-contracts (Ubuntu) Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2057636 Title: [FFe] Symfony 6 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/php-symfony-contracts/+bug/2057636/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2058131] Re: Snapshot No Camera Found
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2061687 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061687 ** This bug is no longer a duplicate of bug 2060390 Snapshot No Camera Found ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 2061687 Snapshot doesn't work until camera is unplugged and plugged back in -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2058131 Title: Snapshot No Camera Found To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-snapshot/+bug/2058131/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2061165] Re: Could not play camera stream
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2061687 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061687 ** This bug is no longer a duplicate of bug 2060390 Snapshot No Camera Found ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 2061687 Snapshot doesn't work until camera is unplugged and plugged back in -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061165 Title: Could not play camera stream To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-snapshot/+bug/2061165/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2060390] Re: Snapshot No Camera Found
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2061687 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061687 ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 2061687 Snapshot doesn't work until camera is unplugged and plugged back in -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060390 Title: Snapshot No Camera Found To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/pipewire/+bug/2060390/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071518] Re: Kernel 5.15.0.113.123
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2071351 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071351 ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 2071351 Kernel 5.15.113 and AMD graphics -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071518 Title: Kernel 5.15.0.113.123 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/2071518/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071468] Re: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined
gsequencer failed to build when I tried a test build locally. :( ** Changed in: asymptote (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071468 Title: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/asymptote/+bug/2071468/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071468] Re: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined
** Changed in: mosh (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071468 Title: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/asymptote/+bug/2071468/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071468] Re: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined
** Also affects: gsequencer (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: mosh (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: asymptote (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: asymptote (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Changed in: asymptote (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: dpkg (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Changed in: dpkg (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: gsequencer (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Changed in: gsequencer (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: mosh (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Changed in: mosh (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071468 Title: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/asymptote/+bug/2071468/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071468] Re: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined
** Package changed: octave (Ubuntu) => mwrap (Ubuntu) ** Changed in: mwrap (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Committed ** Changed in: mwrap (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071468 Title: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dpkg/+bug/2071468/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071468] Re: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined
** Also affects: octave (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071468 Title: ELF package metadata failure: environment variable ‘DEB_HOST_ARCH’ not defined To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dpkg/+bug/2071468/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1916951] Re: libvoro++1: ABI break without soname change
** No longer affects: gmsh (Ubuntu) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1916951 Title: libvoro++1: ABI break without soname change To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/voro++/+bug/1916951/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2067300] Re: octave-fits: Please RM from oracular
** Changed in: octave-fits (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released ** No longer affects: octave (Ubuntu) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2067300 Title: octave-fits: Please RM from oracular To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/octave-fits/+bug/2067300/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2059002] Re: proposed-migration for octave-dicom 0.6.0-3
** Changed in: octave-dicom (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2059002 Title: proposed-migration for octave-dicom 0.6.0-3 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/octave-dicom/+bug/2059002/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070381] Re: translate-toolkit version 3.13.0-2 ftbfs
** Changed in: translate-toolkit (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070381 Title: translate-toolkit version 3.13.0-2 ftbfs To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/translate-toolkit/+bug/2070381/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070382] Re: autopkgtests fail with gaupol 1.15-1
** Changed in: translate-toolkit (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070382 Title: autopkgtests fail with gaupol 1.15-1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/translate-toolkit/+bug/2070382/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2051512] Re: apport ftbfs with Python 3.12 as the default
** No longer affects: python3.12 (Ubuntu) ** No longer affects: python3.12 (Ubuntu Noble) ** No longer affects: python3-defaults (Ubuntu Noble) ** No longer affects: python3-defaults (Ubuntu) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051512 Title: apport ftbfs with Python 3.12 as the default To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/apport/+bug/2051512/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071519] [NEW] Update epiphany-browser to 46.2
Public bug reported: . ** Affects: epiphany-browser (Ubuntu) Importance: High Status: Fix Committed ** Affects: epiphany-browser (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: High Status: Triaged ** Tags: noble upgrade-software-version ** Also affects: epiphany-browser (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: epiphany-browser (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided => High ** Changed in: epiphany-browser (Ubuntu Noble) Status: New => Triaged -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071519 Title: Update epiphany-browser to 46.2 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/epiphany-browser/+bug/2071519/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2064762] Re: Update gnome-control-center to 46.1
** Changed in: gnome-control-center (Ubuntu) Status: Fix Released => Fix Committed ** Summary changed: - Update gnome-control-center to 46.1 + Update gnome-control-center to 46.3 ** Description changed: Impact -- There was a new bugfix release in the stable 46 series. - https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-control-center/-/compare/46.0...46.1 + https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-control-center/-/compare/46.0...46.3 - https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-control-center/-/releases/46.1 + https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-control-center/-/blob/46.3/NEWS Test Case 1 --- Install the update. Make sure that gnome-control-center continues to run well. Test Case 2 --- Install gnome-session Log out. Click your name on the login screen. Click the gear in the bottom right corner and choose GNOME. Finish logging in. Make sure that gnome-control-center continues to run well. This test case is because some of our Ubuntu customizations only show in the Ubuntu session, not other sessions like vanilla GNOME. Test Case 3 --- Open gnome-control-center Click the last item in the left sidebar named About Click Device Name. Type in a different name for your computer. Press Enter. The Rename Device dialog should close and your new computer name should take effect. What Could Go Wrong --- gnome-control-center is used by Ubuntu Desktop and Edubuntu. It is a critical app for viewing and changing a huge variety of settings for these desktops. gnome-control-center is part of GNOME Core and has a microrelease exception for Ubuntu stable release updates. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/GNOME -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2064762 Title: Update gnome-control-center to 46.3 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-control-center/+bug/2064762/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2067418] Re: Update libadwaita to 1.5.2
** Summary changed: - Update libadwaita to 1.5.1 + Update libadwaita to 1.5.2 ** Changed in: libadwaita-1 (Ubuntu) Status: Fix Released => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2067418 Title: Update libadwaita to 1.5.2 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libadwaita-1/+bug/2067418/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2058192] Re: [MIR][needs-packaging] lenovo-wwan-unlock
lenovo-wwan-unlock is now in Ubuntu so I'm resetting the status to NEW ** Package changed: ubuntu => lenovo-wwan-unlock (Ubuntu) ** Changed in: lenovo-wwan-unlock (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => New ** Changed in: lenovo-wwan-unlock (Ubuntu) Importance: Wishlist => Undecided ** Summary changed: - [MIR][needs-packaging] lenovo-wwan-unlock + [MIR] lenovo-wwan-unlock ** Description changed: [Availability] The package lenovo-wwan-unlock build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for architectures: amd64 Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lenovo-wwan-unlock [Rationale] - - The package lenovo-wwan-unlock is required in Ubuntu restricted for WWAN hardware support - - The package lenovo-wwan-unlock will generally be useful for a large part of -our user base - - There is no other/better way to solve this that is already in main or -should go universe->main instead of this. - - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the -package lenovo-fccunlock and lenovo-cfgservice in Ubuntu restricted, but there is no definitive deadline. + - The package lenovo-wwan-unlock is required in Ubuntu restricted for WWAN hardware support + - The package lenovo-wwan-unlock will generally be useful for a large part of + our user base + - There is no other/better way to solve this that is already in main or + should go universe->main instead of this. + - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the + package lenovo-fccunlock and lenovo-cfgservice in Ubuntu restricted, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - - Binary configservice_lenovo and DPR_Fcc_unlock_service in /opt/fcc_lenovo/ is no problem because AppArmor constraints applied - - Package does install services, timers or recurring jobs -lenovo-fccunlock.service -lenovo-cfgservice.service - - Security has been kept in mind and common isolation/risk-mitigation -patterns are in place utilizing the following features: -AppArmor constraints had been included: -- opt.fcc_lenovo.DPR_Fcc_unlock_service -- opt.fcc_lenovo.configservice_lenovo + - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past + - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries + - Binary configservice_lenovo and DPR_Fcc_unlock_service in /opt/fcc_lenovo/ is no problem because AppArmor constraints applied + - Package does install services, timers or recurring jobs + lenovo-fccunlock.service + lenovo-cfgservice.service + - Security has been kept in mind and common isolation/risk-mitigation + patterns are in place utilizing the following features: + AppArmor constraints had been included: + - opt.fcc_lenovo.DPR_Fcc_unlock_service + - opt.fcc_lenovo.configservice_lenovo - Packages does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages does not expose any external endpoints - Packages does not contain extensions to security-sensitive software -(filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) + (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - - The package works well right after install + - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does -not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs -- https://github.com/lenovo/lenovo-wwan-unlock/issues - - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support + - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does + not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs + - https://github.com/lenovo/lenovo-wwan-unlock/issues + - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - - The package does not run a test at build time because it contains only binary files + - The package does not run a test at build time because it contains only binary files - - The package can not be well tested at build or autopkgtest time -because it will need real hardware for testing. To make up for that: -- We have access to such hardware in the team - - Based on that access outlined above, here are the details of the -test plan - execute service by systemd command - sudo systemctl start lenovo-fccunlock - sudo systemctl start lenovo-cfgservice -and (if already possible) example output of a test run: - - output of lenovo-fccunlock: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/nsFBW3jXDk/ -- output ot lenovo-cfgservice: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/8rCFqRHQ8V/ -We will execute that test plan -on-uploads + - The package can not be well tested at build or autopkgtest time + because it will need real hardware for testing. To make up for that: + - We have access to such hardware in the team + - Based on that
[Bug 2070386] Re: [SRU] Update evolution-data-server to 3.52.3
** Summary changed: - [SRU] Update evolution-data-server to 3.52.2 + [SRU] Update evolution-data-server to 3.52.3 ** Description changed: Impact -- This is a new stable release in the 3.52 series. - https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/evolution-data-server/-/blob/3.52.2/NEWS + https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/evolution-data-server/-/blob/3.52.3/NEWS Test Case - Install the update Log out and log back in (or restart) Ensure that GNOME Calendar and Evolution still work fine. You may follow the Calendar test plan: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/TestPlans/Calendar What Could Go Wrong --- GNOME Calendar, which is pre-installed in Ubuntu Desktop, relies on evolution-data-server as its database for events and contacts. If this component misbehaves, so will GNOME Calendar and Evolution As a component of GNOME core, there is a micro-release exception for evolution-data-server https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/GNOME ** Also affects: evolution-data-server (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: evolution-data-server (Ubuntu) Importance: Low => Medium ** Changed in: evolution-data-server (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided => Medium ** Changed in: evolution-data-server (Ubuntu Noble) Status: New => In Progress -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070386 Title: [SRU] Update evolution-data-server to 3.52.3 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/evolution-data-server/+bug/2070386/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2069169] Re: Unable to send emails to more than 1 recipient
** Package changed: evolution (Ubuntu) => evolution-ews (Ubuntu) ** Changed in: evolution-ews (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Committed ** Bug watch added: gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/evolution-ews/-/issues #275 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/evolution-ews/-/issues/275 ** Also affects: evolution-ews via https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/evolution-ews/-/issues/275 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2069169 Title: Unable to send emails to more than 1 recipient To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/evolution-ews/+bug/2069169/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071396] Re: [MIR] libdisplay-info
** Description changed: [Availability] The package libdisplay-info is already in Ubuntu universe. The package libdisplay-info build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures except for i386 where it isn't needed Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info [Rationale] - The package libdisplay-info is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of mutter. It is an optional dependency for mutter 46 but is expected to be a required dependency for mutter 47 (Ubuntu 24.10 will include mutter 47). https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/3602 - The package libdisplay-info will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libdisplay-info needs to be in main for mutter to more effectively parse computer monitor display capabilities via the EDID protocol - The package libdisplay-info is required in Ubuntu main no later than August 15 due to Ubuntu 24.10 Feature Freeze [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=libdisplay-info - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/libdisplay-info - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=libdisplay-info - Upstream's bug tracker https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/emersion/libdisplay-info/-/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info/0.1.1-2ubuntu2 - - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on some architectures + - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on all architectures (not run on i386) https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/libdisplay-info - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - Lintian overrides are not present - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libdisplay-info/-/blob/master/debian/rules [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation or .desktop file) [Dependencies] - No further depends or recommends dependencies that are not yet in main [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy [Maintenance/Owner] - The owning team will be Ubuntu Desktop (~desktop-packages) and I have their acknowledgement for that commitment - This does not use static builds - This does not use vendored code - This package is not rust based - The package has been built within the last 3 months in the archive - Build link on launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info/0.1.1-2ubuntu2 [Background information] - The Package description explains the package well - Upstream Name is libdisplay-info - Link to upstream project https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/emersion/libdisplay-info An additional binary packages has no reverse dependencies and can remain in universe: libdisplay-info-bin We intend to update libdisplay-info to 0.2 later in the cycle; it is a transition and needs to be coordinated. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071396 Title: [MIR] libdisplay-info To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info/+bug/2071396/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071396] [NEW] [MIR] libdisplay-info
Public bug reported: [Availability] The package libdisplay-info is already in Ubuntu universe. The package libdisplay-info build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures except for i386 where it isn't needed Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info [Rationale] - The package libdisplay-info is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of mutter. It is an optional dependency for mutter 46 but is expected to be a required dependency for mutter 47 (Ubuntu 24.10 will include mutter 47). https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/3602 - The package libdisplay-info will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libdisplay-info needs to be in main for mutter to more effectively parse computer monitor display capabilities via the EDID protocol - The package libdisplay-info is required in Ubuntu main no later than August 15 due to Ubuntu 24.10 Feature Freeze [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=libdisplay-info - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/libdisplay-info - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=libdisplay-info - Upstream's bug tracker https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/emersion/libdisplay-info/-/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info/0.1.1-2ubuntu2 - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on some architectures https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/libdisplay-info - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - Lintian overrides are not present - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libdisplay-info/-/blob/master/debian/rules [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation or .desktop file) [Dependencies] - No further depends or recommends dependencies that are not yet in main [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy [Maintenance/Owner] - The owning team will be Ubuntu Desktop (~desktop-packages) and I have their acknowledgement for that commitment - This does not use static builds - This does not use vendored code - This package is not rust based - The package has been built within the last 3 months in the archive - Build link on launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info/0.1.1-2ubuntu2 [Background information] - The Package description explains the package well - Upstream Name is libdisplay-info - Link to upstream project https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/emersion/libdisplay-info An additional binary packages has no reverse dependencies and can remain in universe: libdisplay-info-bin We intend to update libdisplay-info to 0.2 later in the cycle; it is a transition and needs to be coordinated. ** Affects: libdisplay-info (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071396 Title: [MIR] libdisplay-info To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info/+bug/2071396/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2071396] Re: [MIR] libdisplay-info
W: libdisplay-info-bin: no-manual-page [usr/bin/di-edid-decode] (We aren't promoting libdisplay-info-bin to main) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2071396 Title: [MIR] libdisplay-info To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdisplay-info/+bug/2071396/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2065669] Re: Update osinfo-db to 0.20240523
** Description changed:
Impact
==
The purpose of osinfo-db is to provide a database of guest operating systems
for use by virtualization provisioning tools using the libosinfo library. The
two primary users are the GNOME Boxes and Virt Manager apps.
This SRU updates the database to the latest release including OS updates
for the first half of 2024 including the release of Ubuntu 24.04 LTS and
the end of life of Ubuntu 22.10.
It also includes a patch to add Ubuntu 24.10 as prerelease so that 24.10
ISOs are recognized (although it won't be suggested for download by
GNOME Boxes)
Test Case 0
===
osinfo-db has an extensive test suite to validate the data files. If the test
suite fails, it will fail the build. These tests are also run as autopkgtests.
Ensure the build succeeds and the autopkgtest passes
Test Case 1
===
1. Install the update
2. Open a terminal and run
sudo apt install gnome-boxes
3. Run gnome-boxes
4. Click + then press "Download an operating system" (The UI varies depending
on the version of gnome-boxes).
5. Select Ubuntu 24.04 LTS x86_64 (Live)
6. The ISO will download to your Downloads folder
7. When it completes, the wizard will prompt you to create a Ubuntu 24.04 LTS
virtual machine.
Complete the wizard.
8. The virtual machine should start. Finish installing Ubuntu 24.04 LTS
inside. Afterwards, restart and log into the Ubuntu 24.04 LTS virtual machine.
9. Open a terminal and run this command: cat /etc/os-release to verify that
you are using Ubuntu 24.04 LTS.
10. Afterwards, you can power off the virtual machine.
Test Case 2
===
From a terminal, run
osinfo-query os vendor="Canonical Ltd"
Ubuntu 22.04 LTS, Ubuntu 23.10, Ubuntu 24.04 LTS, and Ubuntu 24.10
should be included in the list.
Where problems could occur
==
It is always possible to use ISOs not recognized by osinfo-db with either
GNOME Boxes or Virt Manager. osinfo-db provides useful metadata like
recommended RAM, recommended hard disk size, and what virtualized hardware
interfaces are supported.
This update significantly improves the ability of those apps to
recognize distros released in the first half of 2024, while also
updating some metadata details for older releases.
The most likely possible problem is that some download links may no
longer work. However, we know that the Ubuntu 23.04 download links were
broken before this update and 24.04 LTS was marked as pre-release so in
general download links will be better with this update.
Other Info
==
- I am not preparing an SRU for Ubuntu 23.10 because it will be End of Life
soon and we encourage its users to switch to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. I expect that by
the time this SRU reaches jammy-updates that meta-release will be updated to
point to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. Therefore, anyone who gets this update on Ubuntu
22.04 LTS ("Jammy") will be prompted to upgrade to 24.04 LTS not 23.10 and
24.04 LTS will have a newer version than 22.04 LTS.
-
- Even if that doesn't happen, this is a data package, not a security-
- sensitive package.
+ I am not preparing an SRU for Ubuntu 23.10 because it will be End of Life
soon and we encourage its users to switch to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. Anyone who
upgrades to 23.10 will be prompted to upgrade to 24.04 LTS. Futher, this is
only a data package, not a security-sensitive package.
** Description changed:
Impact
==
The purpose of osinfo-db is to provide a database of guest operating systems
for use by virtualization provisioning tools using the libosinfo library. The
two primary users are the GNOME Boxes and Virt Manager apps.
This SRU updates the database to the latest release including OS updates
for the first half of 2024 including the release of Ubuntu 24.04 LTS and
- the end of life of Ubuntu 22.10.
-
- It also includes a patch to add Ubuntu 24.10 as prerelease so that 24.10
- ISOs are recognized (although it won't be suggested for download by
- GNOME Boxes)
+ the end of life of Ubuntu 22.10. It also adds Ubuntu 24.10 as a
+ prerelease so that 24.10 ISOs are recognized (although it won't be
+ suggested for download by GNOME Boxes)
Test Case 0
===
osinfo-db has an extensive test suite to validate the data files. If the test
suite fails, it will fail the build. These tests are also run as autopkgtests.
Ensure the build succeeds and the autopkgtest passes
Test Case 1
===
1. Install the update
2. Open a terminal and run
sudo apt install gnome-boxes
3. Run gnome-boxes
4. Click + then press "Download an operating system" (The UI varies depending
on the version of gnome-boxes).
5. Select Ubuntu 24.04 LTS x86_64 (Live)
6. The ISO will download to your Downloads folder
7. When it completes, the wizard will prompt you to create a Ubuntu 24.04 LTS
virtual machine.
Complete the wizard.
8. The
[Bug 2070807] Re: [MIR] highway
** Description changed: [Availability] The package highway is already in Ubuntu universe. The package highway build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway [Rationale] - RULE: There must be a certain level of demand for the package - The package highway is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of jpeg-xl (LP: #2006001) - The package highway will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libhwy1t64 needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package highway in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=highway - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/highway - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/+bug - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=highway - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/google/highway/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/1.2.0-2 RULE: - The package should, but is not required to, also contain RULE: non-trivial autopkgtest(s). TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD RULE: - existing but failing tests that shall be handled as "ok to fail" RULE: need to be explained along the test logs below TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is TODO-B: ok because TBD RULE: - If no build tests nor autopkgtests are included, and/or if the package RULE: requires specific hardware to perform testing, the subscribed team RULE: must provide a written test plan in a comment to the MIR bug, and RULE: commit to running that test either at each upload of the package or RULE: at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug, RULE: please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual RULE: steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to RULE: assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial). RULE: If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is RULE: impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work RULE: but if you are going to ask for promotion of something untestable RULE: please outline why it couldn't provide its value (e.g. by splitting RULE: binaries) to users from universe. RULE: This is a balance that is hard to strike well, the request is that all RULE: options have been exploited before giving up. Look for more details RULE: and backgrounds https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/30 RULE: Just like in the SRU process it is worth to understand what the RULE: consequences a regression (due to a test miss) would be. Therefore RULE: if being untestable we ask to outline what consequences this would RULE: have for the given package. And let us be honest, even if you can RULE: test you are never sure you will be able to catch all potential RULE: regressions. So this is mostly to force self-awareness of the owning RULE: team than to make a decision on. TODO: - The package can not be well tested at build or autopkgtest time TODO: because TBD. To make up for that: TODO-A: - We have access to such hardware in the team TODO-B: - We have allocated budget to get this hardware, but it is not here TODO-B: yet TODO-C: - We have checked with solutions-qa and will use their hardware TODO-C: through testflinger TODO-D: - We have checked with other team TBD and will use their hardware TODO-D: through TBD (eg. MAAS) TODO-E: - We have
[Bug 2051579] Re: [MIR] jpeg-xl
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 2070882 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070882 ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 2070882 [MIR] jpeg-xl -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2051579 Title: [MIR] jpeg-xl To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/+bug/2051579/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070882] Re: [MIR] jpeg-xl
** Changed in: jpeg-xl (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070882 Title: [MIR] jpeg-xl To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/+bug/2070882/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070882] Re: [MIR] jpeg-xl
W: libjpegxl-java: bad-jar-name [usr/share/java/org.jpeg.jpegxl.jar] W: jpeg-xl source: newer-standards-version 4.7.0 (current is 4.6.2) I: jpeg-xl source: debian-rules-contains-unnecessary-get-orig-source-target [debian/rules] I: jpeg-xl-doc: file-references-package-build-path [usr/share/doc/jpeg-xl-doc/html/dir_e68e8157741866f444e17edd764ebbae.html] I: jpeg-xl source: patch-not-forwarded-upstream [debian/patches/0008-Fix-conformance-test.patch] I: libjxl-tools: spelling-error-in-binary reencode re-encode [usr/bin/cjxl] I: libjxl-tools: typo-in-manual-page reencode re-encode [usr/share/man/man1/cjxl.1.gz:245] - bad-jar-name is perhaps irrelevant to this MIR since we are explicitly wanting the -java package to stay in universe. I'll likely still followup with a Debian bug or maybe even a fix. - lijbxl-tools is also going to stay in universe - newer-standards-version is a false positive, waiting for a new version of lintian to recognize the latest version number of Debian Policy - debian/rules has a comment to explain why there is a get-orig-source rule - file-references-build-path may be a false positive. That filename has been used consistently since jpeg-xl 0.7 first landed in Debian/Ubuntu. ** Description changed: [Availability] The package jpeg-xl is already in Ubuntu universe. The package jpeg-xl build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl [Rationale] - The packages libjxl-gdk-pixbuf and libjxl0.9 (soon to have a soname bump to libjxl0.10) are required in Ubuntu main to enable JPEG XL files to be used as a desktop wallpaper and to be viewable in GNOME-ish apps like eog and shotwell - The package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package jpeg-xl in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - Had multiple security issues in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=jpeg-xl - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/jpeg-xl + Debian has marked the 2 2023 CVEs as "no-dsa (minor issue) + The remaining needs-triage bug in Ubuntu's tracker, CVE-2021-36691, has been marked by Debian as "negligible security impact" - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/ - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=jpeg-xl - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9 + - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9ubuntu1 - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on all architectures except for s390x. - s390x is skipped (shows as "neutral") which is acceptable since the intended use of jpeg-xl is on desktops and s390x is not a desktop architecture. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/jpeg-xl - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - Lintian overrides are present, but ok because this was affected by the t64 transition - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/debian-phototools-team/libjxl/-/blob/master/debian/rules [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation or .desktop file) [Dependencies] - There are further dependencies that are not yet in main, MIR for them is at - highway https://launchpad.net/bugs/2070807 [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows
[Bug 2070882] Re: [MIR] jpeg-xl
** Description changed: [Availability] The package jpeg-xl is already in Ubuntu universe. The package jpeg-xl build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl [Rationale] - The packages libjxl-gdk-pixbuf and libjxl0.9 (soon to have a soname bump to libjxl0.10) are required in Ubuntu main to enable JPEG XL files to be used as a desktop wallpaper and to be viewable in GNOME-ish apps like eog and shotwell - The package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package jpeg-xl in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - Had multiple security issues in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=jpeg-xl - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/jpeg-xl + Debian has marked the 2 2023 CVEs as "no-dsa (minor issue) + The remaining needs-triage bug in Ubuntu's tracker, CVE-2021-36691, has been marked by Debian as "negligible security impact" - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/ - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=jpeg-xl - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9 - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on all architectures except for s390x. - s390x is skipped (shows as "neutral") which is acceptable since the intended use of jpeg-xl is on desktops and s390x is not a desktop architecture. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/jpeg-xl - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - Lintian overrides are present, but ok because this was affected by the t64 transition - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/debian-phototools-team/libjxl/-/blob/master/debian/rules [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation or .desktop file) [Dependencies] - There are further dependencies that are not yet in main, MIR for them is at - highway https://launchpad.net/bugs/2070807 - - openexr https://launchpad.net/bugs/2071294 - - (openexr turns depends on imath) [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy [Maintenance/Owner] - The owning team will be Ubuntu Desktop (~desktop-packages) and I have their acknowledgement for that commitment - This does not use static builds - This does not use vendored code - This package is not rust based - The package has been built within the last 3 months in the archive - Build link on launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9 [Background information] - The Package description explains the package well - Upstream Name is libjxl - Link to upstream project https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl - Some additional binary packages have no reverse dependencies and can remain in universe: + libjpegxl-java + libjxl-devtools + libjxl-tools - - Before version 0.9, the gdk-pixbuf was not enabled in Debian or Ubuntu - because it required skcms which is not available in Debian or Ubuntu; - with version 0.9, the plugin was buildable with lcms2 which is in Ubuntu - main. It is not feasible to backport this to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS which only - has version 0.7. + - Before version 0.9, the gdk-pixbuf loader was not enabled in Debian or + Ubuntu because it required skcms which is not available in Debian or + Ubuntu; with version 0.9, the loader was buildable with lcms2 which is + in Ubuntu
[Bug 2071294] Re: [MIR] openexr
** Description changed: + Notes: + The MIR paperwork was started because openexr was a dependency of jpeg-xl but we ended up building jpeg-xl without that support. + + For the OpenEXR format (.exr) to be useful on Ubuntu, we need a gdk- + pixbuf plugin (and optionally a thumbnailer) so that it can be used in + GNOME-ish apps (like eog and shotwell) and as the desktop wallpaper. + + That is available with https://github.com/afichet/openexr-thumbnailer but it hasn't been packaged in many distros yet. + https://repology.org/project/openexr-thumbnailer/versions + + I'd argue that it isn't worth promoting openexr to main without gdk- + pixbuf support. + [Availability] The package openexr is already in Ubuntu universe. The package openexr build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openexr [Rationale] - - The package openexr is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of jpeg-xl (LP: #2070882) - - The package openexr will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - - The binary package libopenexr-3-1-30 needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - - - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the - package openexr in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. + TODO [Security] - Had multiple security issues in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=openexr - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/openexr - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openexr/+bug - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=openexr - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/openexr/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - RULE: - The package must include a non-trivial test suite - RULE: - it should run at package build and fail the build if broken - TODO-A: - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails - TODO-A: it makes the build fail, link to build log TBD - TODO-B: - The package does not run a test at build time because TBD - - RULE: - The package should, but is not required to, also contain - RULE: non-trivial autopkgtest(s). - TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on - TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD - TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD - - RULE: - existing but failing tests that shall be handled as "ok to fail" - RULE: need to be explained along the test logs below - TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now - TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since - TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is - TODO-B: ok because TBD - - RULE: - If no build tests nor autopkgtests are included, and/or if the package - RULE: requires specific hardware to perform testing, the subscribed team - RULE: must provide a written test plan in a comment to the MIR bug, and - RULE: commit to running that test either at each upload of the package or - RULE: at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug, - RULE: please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual - RULE: steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to - RULE: assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial). - RULE: If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is - RULE: impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work - RULE: but if you are going to ask for promotion of something untestable - RULE: please outline why it couldn't provide its value (e.g. by splitting - RULE: binaries) to users from universe. - RULE: This is a balance that is hard to strike well, the request is that all - RULE: options have been exploited before giving up. Look for more details - RULE: and backgrounds https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/30 - RULE: Just like in the SRU process it is worth to understand what the - RULE: consequences a regression (due to a test miss) would be. Therefore - RULE: if being untestable we ask to outline what consequences this would - RULE: have for the given package. And let us be honest, even if you can
[Bug 2070882] Re: [MIR] jpeg-xl
** Description changed: [Availability] The package jpeg-xl is already in Ubuntu universe. The package jpeg-xl build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl [Rationale] - The packages libjxl-gdk-pixbuf and libjxl0.9 (soon to have a soname bump to libjxl0.10) are required in Ubuntu main to enable JPEG XL files to be used as a desktop wallpaper and to be viewable in GNOME-ish apps like eog and shotwell - The package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package jpeg-xl in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - Had multiple security issues in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=jpeg-xl - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/jpeg-xl + Debian has marked the 2 2023 CVEs as "no-dsa (minor issue) + The remaining needs-triage bug in Ubuntu's tracker, CVE-2021-36691, has been marked by Debian as "negligible security impact" - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/ - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=jpeg-xl - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9 - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on all architectures except for s390x. - s390x is skipped (shows as "neutral") which is acceptable since the intended use of jpeg-xl is on desktops and s390x is not a desktop architecture. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/jpeg-xl - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - Lintian overrides are present, but ok because this was affected by the t64 transition - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/debian-phototools-team/libjxl/-/blob/master/debian/rules [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation or .desktop file) [Dependencies] - - There are further dependencies that are not yet in main, MIR for them is at + - There are further dependencies that are not yet in main, MIR for them is at - highway https://launchpad.net/bugs/2070807 - - openexr - - which in turns depends on imath + - openexr https://launchpad.net/bugs/2071294 + - (openexr turns depends on imath) [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy [Maintenance/Owner] - The owning team will be Ubuntu Desktop (~desktop-packages) and I have their acknowledgement for that commitment - This does not use static builds - This does not use vendored code - This package is not rust based - The package has been built within the last 3 months in the archive - Build link on launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9 [Background information] - The Package description explains the package well - Upstream Name is libjxl - Link to upstream project https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl - Some additional binary packages have no reverse dependencies and can remain in universe: + libjpegxl-java + libjxl-devtools + libjxl-tools - Before version 0.9, the gdk-pixbuf was not enabled in Debian or Ubuntu because it required skcms which is not available in Debian or Ubuntu; with version 0.9, the plugin was buildable with lcms2 which is in Ubuntu main. It is not feasible to backport this to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS which only has version 0.7. - GNOME 46 (released in early 2024) switched its default desktop wallpaper to JPEG XL -- You
[Bug 2070807] Re: [MIR] highway
** Description changed: [Availability] The package highway is already in Ubuntu universe. The package highway build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway [Rationale] RULE: There must be a certain level of demand for the package - The package highway is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of jpeg-xl (LP: #2006001) - The package highway will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libhwy1t64 needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package highway in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=highway - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/highway - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/+bug - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=highway - - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/google/highway/issues + - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/google/highway/issues + + - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/1.2.0-2 RULE: - The package should, but is not required to, also contain RULE: non-trivial autopkgtest(s). TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD RULE: - existing but failing tests that shall be handled as "ok to fail" RULE: need to be explained along the test logs below TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is TODO-B: ok because TBD RULE: - If no build tests nor autopkgtests are included, and/or if the package RULE: requires specific hardware to perform testing, the subscribed team RULE: must provide a written test plan in a comment to the MIR bug, and RULE: commit to running that test either at each upload of the package or RULE: at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug, RULE: please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual RULE: steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to RULE: assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial). RULE: If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is RULE: impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work RULE: but if you are going to ask for promotion of something untestable RULE: please outline why it couldn't provide its value (e.g. by splitting RULE: binaries) to users from universe. RULE: This is a balance that is hard to strike well, the request is that all RULE: options have been exploited before giving up. Look for more details RULE: and backgrounds https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/30 RULE: Just like in the SRU process it is worth to understand what the RULE: consequences a regression (due to a test miss) would be. Therefore RULE: if being untestable we ask to outline what consequences this would RULE: have for the given package. And let us be honest, even if you can RULE: test you are never sure you will be able to catch all potential RULE: regressions. So this is mostly to force self-awareness of the owning RULE: team than to make a decision on. TODO: - The package can not be well tested at build or autopkgtest time TODO: because TBD. To make up for that: TODO-A: - We have access to such hardware in the team TODO-B: - We have allocated budget to get this hardware, but it is not here TODO-B: yet TODO-C: - We have checked with solutions-qa and will use their hardware TODO-C: through testflinger TODO-D: - We have checked with other team TBD and will use their
[Bug 2071294] [NEW] [MIR] openexr
Public bug reported: [Availability] The package openexr is already in Ubuntu universe. The package openexr build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openexr [Rationale] - The package openexr is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of jpeg-xl (LP: #2070882) - The package openexr will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libopenexr-3-1-30 needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package openexr in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - Had multiple security issues in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=openexr - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/openexr - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openexr/+bug - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=openexr - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/openexr/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] RULE: - The package must include a non-trivial test suite RULE: - it should run at package build and fail the build if broken TODO-A: - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails TODO-A: it makes the build fail, link to build log TBD TODO-B: - The package does not run a test at build time because TBD RULE: - The package should, but is not required to, also contain RULE: non-trivial autopkgtest(s). TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD RULE: - existing but failing tests that shall be handled as "ok to fail" RULE: need to be explained along the test logs below TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is TODO-B: ok because TBD RULE: - If no build tests nor autopkgtests are included, and/or if the package RULE: requires specific hardware to perform testing, the subscribed team RULE: must provide a written test plan in a comment to the MIR bug, and RULE: commit to running that test either at each upload of the package or RULE: at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug, RULE: please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual RULE: steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to RULE: assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial). RULE: If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is RULE: impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work RULE: but if you are going to ask for promotion of something untestable RULE: please outline why it couldn't provide its value (e.g. by splitting RULE: binaries) to users from universe. RULE: This is a balance that is hard to strike well, the request is that all RULE: options have been exploited before giving up. Look for more details RULE: and backgrounds https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/30 RULE: Just like in the SRU process it is worth to understand what the RULE: consequences a regression (due to a test miss) would be. Therefore RULE: if being untestable we ask to outline what consequences this would RULE: have for the given package. And let us be honest, even if you can RULE: test you are never sure you will be able to catch all potential RULE: regressions. So this is mostly to force self-awareness of the owning RULE: team than to make a decision on. TODO: - The package can not be well tested at build or autopkgtest time TODO: because TBD. To make up for that: TODO-A: - We have access to such hardware in the team TODO-B: - We have allocated budget to get this hardware, but it is not here TODO-B: yet TODO-C: - We have checked with solutions-qa and will use their hardware TODO-C: through testflinger TODO-D: - We have checked with other team TBD and will use their hardware TODO-D: through TBD (eg. MAAS) TODO-E: - We have checked and found a simulator which covers this case TODO-E: sufficiently for testing, our plan to use it is TBD TODO-F: - We have engaged with
[Bug 1908725] Re: Update the package for Focal Fossa to >= 2.5.3
Ubuntu 22.04 LTS has openexr 2.5.7 and Ubuntu 24.04 LTS has an even newer version. It doesn't fit with Ubuntu's stable release policy to update packages to new major releases. ** Changed in: openexr (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1908725 Title: Update the package for Focal Fossa to >= 2.5.3 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openexr/+bug/1908725/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070807] Re: [MIR] highway
** Description changed: [Availability] The package highway is already in Ubuntu universe. The package highway build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway [Rationale] RULE: There must be a certain level of demand for the package - - The package highway is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of jpeg-xl (LP: #) + - The package highway is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of jpeg-xl (LP: #2006001) - The package highway will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libhwy1t64 needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package highway in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=highway - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/highway - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/+bug - TODO: - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=highway - TODO: - Upstream's bug tracker, e.g., GitHub Issues - TODO: - The package has important open bugs, listing them: TBD - TODO-A: - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support - TODO-B: - The package does deal with exotic hardware, it is present at TBD - TODO-B: to be able to test, fix and verify bugs + - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=highway + - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/google/highway/issues [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/1.2.0-2 RULE: - The package should, but is not required to, also contain RULE: non-trivial autopkgtest(s). TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD RULE: - existing but failing tests that shall be handled as "ok to fail" RULE: need to be explained along the test logs below TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is TODO-B: ok because TBD RULE: - If no build tests nor autopkgtests are included, and/or if the package RULE: requires specific hardware to perform testing, the subscribed team RULE: must provide a written test plan in a comment to the MIR bug, and RULE: commit to running that test either at each upload of the package or RULE: at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug, RULE: please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual RULE: steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to RULE: assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial). RULE: If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is RULE: impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work RULE: but if you are going to ask for promotion of something untestable RULE: please outline why it couldn't provide its value (e.g. by splitting RULE: binaries) to users from universe. RULE: This is a balance that is hard to strike well, the request is that all RULE: options have been exploited before giving up. Look for more details RULE: and backgrounds https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/30 RULE: Just like in the SRU process it is worth to understand what the RULE: consequences a regression (due to a test miss) would be. Therefore RULE: if being untestable we ask to outline what consequences this would RULE: have for the given package. And let us be honest, even if you can RULE: test you are never sure you will be able to catch all potential RULE: regressions. So this is mostly to force self-awareness of the owning RULE: team than to make a decision on. TODO: - The package can not be well tested at build or autopkgtest time TODO:
[Bug 2070882] [NEW] [MIR] jpeg-xl
Public bug reported: [Availability] The package jpeg-xl is already in Ubuntu universe. The package jpeg-xl build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl [Rationale] - The packages libjxl-gdk-pixbuf and libjxl0.9 (soon to have a soname bump to libjxl0.10) are required in Ubuntu main to enable JPEG XL files to be used as a desktop wallpaper and to be viewable in GNOME-ish apps like eog and shotwell - The package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libjxl-gdk-pixbuf needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package jpeg-xl in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - Had multiple security issues in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=jpeg-xl - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/jpeg-xl + Debian has marked the 2 2023 CVEs as "no-dsa (minor issue) + The remaining needs-triage bug in Ubuntu's tracker, CVE-2021-36691, has been marked by Debian as "negligible security impact" - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/ - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=jpeg-xl - Upstream's bug tracker https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9 - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on all architectures except for s390x. - s390x is skipped (shows as "neutral") which is acceptable since the intended use of jpeg-xl is on desktops and s390x is not a desktop architecture. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/jpeg-xl - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - Lintian overrides are present, but ok because this was affected by the t64 transition - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/debian-phototools-team/libjxl/-/blob/master/debian/rules [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation or .desktop file) [Dependencies] - There are further dependencies that are not yet in main, MIR for them is at - highway https://launchpad.net/bugs/2070807 - openexr - which in turns depends on imath [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy [Maintenance/Owner] - The owning team will be Ubuntu Desktop (~desktop-packages) and I have their acknowledgement for that commitment - This does not use static builds - This does not use vendored code - This package is not rust based - The package has been built within the last 3 months in the archive - Build link on launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jpeg-xl/0.9.2-9 [Background information] - The Package description explains the package well - Upstream Name is libjxl - Link to upstream project https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl - Some additional binary packages have no reverse dependencies and can remain in universe: + libjpegxl-java + libjxl-devtools + libjxl-tools - Before version 0.9, the gdk-pixbuf was not enabled in Debian or Ubuntu because it required skcms which is not available in Debian or Ubuntu; with version 0.9, the plugin was buildable with lcms2 which is in Ubuntu main. It is not feasible to backport this to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS which only has version 0.7. - GNOME 46 (released in early 2024) switched its default desktop wallpaper to JPEG XL ** Affects: jpeg-xl (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: Incomplete ** Changed in: jpeg-xl (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070882 Title: [MIR] jpeg-xl To manage notifications about this bug go to:
[Bug 2070807] Re: [MIR] highway
** Changed in: highway (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete ** Description changed: [Availability] The package highway is already in Ubuntu universe. The package highway build for the architectures it is designed to work on. - It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures except for i386 (not needed there) + It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway [Rationale] RULE: There must be a certain level of demand for the package - The package highway is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of jpeg-xl (LP: #) - The package highway will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libhwy1t64 needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package highway in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=highway - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/highway - - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/+bug TODO: - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=highway TODO: - Upstream's bug tracker, e.g., GitHub Issues TODO: - The package has important open bugs, listing them: TBD TODO-A: - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support TODO-B: - The package does deal with exotic hardware, it is present at TBD TODO-B: to be able to test, fix and verify bugs [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/1.2.0-2 RULE: - The package should, but is not required to, also contain RULE: non-trivial autopkgtest(s). TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD RULE: - existing but failing tests that shall be handled as "ok to fail" RULE: need to be explained along the test logs below TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is TODO-B: ok because TBD RULE: - If no build tests nor autopkgtests are included, and/or if the package RULE: requires specific hardware to perform testing, the subscribed team RULE: must provide a written test plan in a comment to the MIR bug, and RULE: commit to running that test either at each upload of the package or RULE: at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug, RULE: please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual RULE: steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to RULE: assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial). RULE: If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is RULE: impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work RULE: but if you are going to ask for promotion of something untestable RULE: please outline why it couldn't provide its value (e.g. by splitting RULE: binaries) to users from universe. RULE: This is a balance that is hard to strike well, the request is that all RULE: options have been exploited before giving up. Look for more details RULE: and backgrounds https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/30 RULE: Just like in the SRU process it is worth to understand what the RULE: consequences a regression (due to a test miss) would be. Therefore RULE: if being untestable we ask to outline what consequences this would RULE: have for the given package. And let us be honest, even if you can RULE: test you are never sure you will be able to catch all potential RULE: regressions. So this is mostly to force self-awareness of the owning RULE: team than to make a decision on. TODO: - The package can not be well tested at build or autopkgtest time TODO: because TBD. To make up for that: TODO-A: - We have access to such hardware in
[Bug 2070807] Re: [MIR] highway
Lintian output: I: libhwy1t64: symbols-file-missing-build-depends-package-field libhwy.so.1 [symbols] I: libhwy1t64: symbols-file-missing-build-depends-package-field libhwy_contrib.so.1 [symbols] I: libhwy1t64: symbols-file-missing-build-depends-package-field libhwy_test.so.1 [symbols] P: highway source: package-does-not-install-examples [hwy/examples/] P: highway source: package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version 11 P: highway source: uses-debhelper-compat-file [debian/compat] O: libhwy1t64: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libhwy-contrib1 libhwy-test1 libhwy1 Forwarded fixes to Debian: https://salsa.debian.org/debian-phototools-team/highway/-/merge_requests/2 https://salsa.debian.org/debian-phototools-team/highway/-/merge_requests/3 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070807 Title: [MIR] highway To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/+bug/2070807/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070807] [NEW] [MIR] highway
Public bug reported: [Availability] The package highway is already in Ubuntu universe. The package highway build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures except for i386 (not needed there) Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway [Rationale] RULE: There must be a certain level of demand for the package - The package highway is required in Ubuntu main as a build and runtime dependency of jpeg-xl (LP: #) - The package highway will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - The binary package libhwy1t64 needs to be in main to achieve JPEG XL support - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package highway in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - https://ubuntu.com/security/cve?package=highway - https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/highway - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Packages do not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages do not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Packages do not expose any external endpoints - Packages do not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/+bug TODO: - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=highway TODO: - Upstream's bug tracker, e.g., GitHub Issues TODO: - The package has important open bugs, listing them: TBD TODO-A: - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support TODO-B: - The package does deal with exotic hardware, it is present at TBD TODO-B: to be able to test, fix and verify bugs [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/highway/1.2.0-2 RULE: - The package should, but is not required to, also contain RULE: non-trivial autopkgtest(s). TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD RULE: - existing but failing tests that shall be handled as "ok to fail" RULE: need to be explained along the test logs below TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is TODO-B: ok because TBD RULE: - If no build tests nor autopkgtests are included, and/or if the package RULE: requires specific hardware to perform testing, the subscribed team RULE: must provide a written test plan in a comment to the MIR bug, and RULE: commit to running that test either at each upload of the package or RULE: at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug, RULE: please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual RULE: steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to RULE: assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial). RULE: If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is RULE: impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work RULE: but if you are going to ask for promotion of something untestable RULE: please outline why it couldn't provide its value (e.g. by splitting RULE: binaries) to users from universe. RULE: This is a balance that is hard to strike well, the request is that all RULE: options have been exploited before giving up. Look for more details RULE: and backgrounds https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-mir/issues/30 RULE: Just like in the SRU process it is worth to understand what the RULE: consequences a regression (due to a test miss) would be. Therefore RULE: if being untestable we ask to outline what consequences this would RULE: have for the given package. And let us be honest, even if you can RULE: test you are never sure you will be able to catch all potential RULE: regressions. So this is mostly to force self-awareness of the owning RULE: team than to make a decision on. TODO: - The package can not be well tested at build or autopkgtest time TODO: because TBD. To make up for that: TODO-A: - We have access to such hardware in the team TODO-B: - We have allocated budget to get this hardware, but it is not here TODO-B: yet TODO-C: - We have checked with solutions-qa and will use their hardware TODO-C: through testflinger TODO-D: - We have checked with other team TBD and will use their hardware TODO-D:
[Bug 1939171] Re: ftbfs with golang-1.16
** Changed in: piuparts (Ubuntu) Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1939171 Title: ftbfs with golang-1.16 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/piuparts/+bug/1939171/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2039658] Re: numba 0.57.1+dfsg-1 autopkgtest regressions
** Changed in: numba (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2039658 Title: numba 0.57.1+dfsg-1 autopkgtest regressions To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/numba/+bug/2039658/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070284] Re: FTBFS: ‘starts_with’ has not been declared in ‘std::string’
** Changed in: dia (Ubuntu) Status: In Progress => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070284 Title: FTBFS: ‘starts_with’ has not been declared in ‘std::string’ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dia/+bug/2070284/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2052959] Re: FTBFS when rebuilding 1.44 with glib2-2.79.1
** Changed in: network-manager (Ubuntu) Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052959 Title: FTBFS when rebuilding 1.44 with glib2-2.79.1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/2052959/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070284] Re: FTBFS: ‘starts_with’ has not been declared in ‘std::string’
Yes, poppler's C++ code is now built with the C++20 standard so a fix like that sounds right. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070284 Title: FTBFS: ‘starts_with’ has not been declared in ‘std::string’ To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dia/+bug/2070284/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2067420] Re: [SRU] Update gnome-calculator to 46.1
** Also affects: gnome-calculator (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: gnome-calculator (Ubuntu Noble) Status: New => In Progress ** Changed in: gnome-calculator (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided => Medium -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2067420 Title: [SRU] Update gnome-calculator to 46.1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-calculator/+bug/2067420/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070090] [NEW] dvbstreamer ftbfs with cdbs & dpkg
Public bug reported: dvbstreamer fails to build. Notably the package uses cdbs which is less common now but still used by a significant number of packages. https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dvbstreamer/2.1.0-5.7 checking for gcc... gcc checking whether the C compiler works... no configure: error: in `/<>': configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables See `config.log' for more details ** Affects: dpkg (Ubuntu) Importance: High Status: Confirmed ** Affects: dvbstreamer (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Tags: ftbfs oracular update-excuse ** Tags added: update-excuse ** Also affects: dvbstreamer (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070090 Title: dvbstreamer ftbfs with cdbs & dpkg To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dpkg/+bug/2070090/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2069210] Re: krita fails to build with jpeg-xl 0.9
** Changed in: krita (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2069210 Title: krita fails to build with jpeg-xl 0.9 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/krita/+bug/2069210/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070025] Re: [MIR] wsdd
** Description changed: [Availability] The package wsdd is already in Ubuntu universe. The package wsdd build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for architectures: amd64 as a python arch-all package Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wsdd [Rationale] - The package wsdd is required in Ubuntu main for enabling win10 shares discovery in nautilus. - The package wsdd will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - There is no other/better way to solve this that is already in main or - should go universe->main instead of this. - - The binary package wssd needs to be in main to achieve shares enumeration in gvfs/nautilus. We don't plan to install wssd-server which will stay in universe. + should go universe->main instead of this. + - The binary package wssd needs to be in main to achieve shares enumeration in gvfs/nautilus. We don't plan to install wsdd-server which will stay in universe. - The package wsdd is required in Ubuntu main no later than August 15th due to Oracular feature freeze. [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Package does install an user service which is going to be started by the corresponding gvfs backend - Package does not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Package does not expose any external endpoints - Packages does not contain extensions to security-sensitive software [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does - only has a wishlist request open in Debian and minor bugs upstream - - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wsdd/+bug - - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=wsdd - - Upstream's bug tracker, https://github.com/christgau/wsdd/issues + only has a wishlist request open in Debian and minor bugs upstream + - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wsdd/+bug + - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=wsdd + - Upstream's bug tracker, https://github.com/christgau/wsdd/issues - The package has no important open bugs - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - TOFIX: we need to enable the upstream tests as part of the package build - TODO-A: - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails - TODO-A: it makes the build fail, link to build log TBD - TODO-B: - The package does not run a test at build time because TBD + - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails + it makes the build fail, link to build log + 1ubuntu1 TOFIX: we need to enable some autopkgtests TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is TODO-B: ok because TBD [Quality assurance - packaging] TOFIX: write a debian/watch for the package TODO-A: - debian/watch is present and works TODO-B: - debian/watch is not present, instead it has TBD TODO-C: - debian/watch is not present because it is a native package - debian/control has a valid Maintainer definition - This package only has minor lintian warnings # lintian --pedantic wsdd_0.8-1_amd64.changes W: wsdd: groff-message troff::145: error: character '*' is not allowed as a starting delimiter [usr/share/man/man1/wsdd.1.gz:1] W: wsdd: groff-message troff::145: error: character '*' is not allowed as a starting delimiter [usr/share/man/man1/wsdd.1.gz:2] P: wsdd source: package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version 11 P: wsdd source: trailing-whitespace [debian/control:55] P: wsdd source: trailing-whitespace [debian/control:5] P: wsdd source: trailing-whitespace [debian/rules:31] P: wsdd source: uses-debhelper-compat-file [debian/compat] - Lintian overrides are not present - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, https://salsa.debian.org/grantma/wsdd/-/blob/master/debian/rules - [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation) [Dependencies] - No further depends or recommends dependencies that are not yet in main [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS
[Bug 2070057] Re: Enable the upstream tests as part of the package build
Allesandro, I have uploaded this for you with the following changes: - I adjusted the version number to 2:0.8-1ubuntu1 - I included LP: #2070025 in debian/changelog to automatically close this bug when the package migrates from oracular-proposed to oracular - I ran `update-maintainer` from ubuntu-dev-tools to update the Maintainer field in debian/control for a Ubuntu-specific upload - I added the Forwarded field to the patch as a basic implementation of https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep3/ Could you follow up by proposing your work here to the Debian maintainer? Thank you for helping to make Ubuntu better. ** Changed in: wsdd (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070057 Title: Enable the upstream tests as part of the package build To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wsdd/+bug/2070057/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2070057] Re: Enable the upstream tests as part of the package build
I have unsubscribed ubuntu-sponsors. Feel free to resubscribe if you have something else that needs to be sponsored. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2070057 Title: Enable the upstream tests as part of the package build To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wsdd/+bug/2070057/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2069962] Re: Stop using libsoup-gnome-2.4-1
** Changed in: unity-scope-video-remote (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Changed in: unity-scope-video-remote (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Also affects: unity-lens-photos (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: unity-lens-photos (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: unity-lens-photos (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Description changed: The only packages in Ubuntu using libsoup-gnome-2.4-1 are - unity-china-video-scope - unity-scope-home - unity-scope-video-remote + - unity-lens-photos Please switch to the libsoup3 API. There is some documentation and many examples at https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libsoup/-/issues/218 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2069962 Title: Stop using libsoup-gnome-2.4-1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-china-video-scope/+bug/2069962/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2014587] Re: libgdata-common is required by libgdata22 but is empty.
Ubuntu uses language packs. The language pack process strips translations out of the .deb packages so that they can be provided by the language packs instead. In some cases, the translations are the only things in a package and the package therefore appears to be empty. However, it is not worth diverging from Debian to remove these packages only on Ubuntu. Therefore, this is expected behavior and there is nothing that needs to be fixed here. ** Changed in: libgdata (Ubuntu) Status: New => Invalid ** Changed in: libgdata (Ubuntu) Status: Invalid => Won't Fix -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2014587 Title: libgdata-common is required by libgdata22 but is empty. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libgdata/+bug/2014587/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2052537] Re: astroidmail needs to stop using webkit2gtk 4.0
** Changed in: astroidmail (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2052537 Title: astroidmail needs to stop using webkit2gtk 4.0 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/astroidmail/+bug/2052537/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2069962] [NEW] Stop using libsoup-gnome-2.4-1
Public bug reported: The only packages in Ubuntu using libsoup-gnome-2.4-1 are - unity-china-video-scope - unity-scope-home - unity-scope-video-remote Please switch to the libsoup3 API. There is some documentation and many examples at https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libsoup/-/issues/218 ** Affects: unity-china-video-scope (Ubuntu) Importance: High Status: Triaged ** Affects: unity-scope-home (Ubuntu) Importance: High Status: Triaged ** Affects: unity-scope-video-remote (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Tags: oracular ** Also affects: unity-china-video-scope (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: unity-china-video-scope (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: unity-china-video-scope (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => High ** Also affects: unity-scope-video-remote (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Tags added: oracular -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2069962 Title: Stop using libsoup-gnome-2.4-1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-china-video-scope/+bug/2069962/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2069308] Re: MIR xdg-terminal-exec
I don't know why but xdg-utils upstream does not install the xdg- terminal script. It is also not listed in the list of tools provided by xdg-utils in the README.md at https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xdg/xdg- utils For reference, Fedora does not go out of its way to install xdg-terminal either: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=37977002 glib2.0 does have explicit support for xdg-terminal-exec and Ubuntu Desktop wants to proceed with using xdg-terminal-exec rather than the older xdg-terminal. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/blob/glib-2-80/gio/gdesktopappinfo.c#L2695 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2069308 Title: MIR xdg-terminal-exec To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xdg-terminal-exec/+bug/2069308/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2066262] Re: [MIR] libdex
Thank for your review. I believe the latest version of libdex (0.6.1) is present in Ubuntu Oracular. Perhaps you were looking at Ubuntu 24.04 LTS? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2066262 Title: [MIR] libdex To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex/+bug/2066262/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2069308] Re: MIR xdg-terminal-exec
** Description changed: [Availability] The package xdg-terminal-exec is already in Ubuntu universe. The package xdg-terminal-exec build for the architectures it is designed to work on. - It currently builds and works for architectures: all + It currently builds and works for architectures: "all" Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xdg-terminal-exec [Rationale] - The package xdg-terminal-exec is required in Ubuntu main for compliance with the emerging XDG specification, https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/terminal-wg/specifications/-/merge_requests/3. - The package xdg-terminal-exec will generally be useful for a large part of our user base - Package xdg-terminal-exec covers the same use case as x-terminal-emulator, but is better because it allows setting the default terminal for a particular user (instead of system-wide), and xdg-terminal-exec ought to be configured to be the terminal used for .desktop files that set Terminal=true too, thereby we want to replace it. - There is no other/better way to solve this that is already in main or should go universe->main instead of this. - The binary package xdg-terminal-exec needs to be in main to ensure full and committed support for such a central piece for the Ubuntu desktop - It would be great and useful to community/processes to have the package xdg-terminal-exec in Ubuntu main, but there is no definitive deadline. [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past - No `suid` or `sgid` binaries - No executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Package does not install services, timers or recurring jobs - Packages does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Package does not expose any external endpoints - Packages does not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xdg-terminal-exec/+bug - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=xdg-terminal-exec - Upstream's bug tracker, e.g., GitHub Issues https://github.com/Vladimir-csp/xdg-terminal-exec/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log[1]. - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on - x64, link to test logs[2] + all Ubuntu architectures, link to test logs[2] - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - This package does not yield massive lintian Warnings, Errors Please link to a recent build log of the package[1] - Please attach the full output you have got from `lintian --pedantic` as an extra post to this bug. - Lintian overrides are not present - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions higher than medium - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules[3] [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation) - End-user applications without desktop file, not needed because not a desktop application. [Dependencies] - No further depends or recommends dependencies that are not yet in main [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy [Maintenance/Owner] - I suggest the owning team to be the desktop team - The future owning team is not yet subscribed, but will subscribe to the package before promotion - This does not use static builds - This does not use vendored code - This package is not rust based - The package was rebuilt in Launchpad recently[1]. [Background information] The Package description explains the package well Upstream Name is xdg-terminal-exec Link to upstream project https://github.com/Vladimir-csp/xdg-terminal-exec [1] https://launchpadlibrarian.net/734808252/buildlog_ubuntu-oracular-amd64.xdg-terminal-exec_0.10.0-1_BUILDING.txt.gz [2] https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/xdg-terminal-exec [3] https://salsa.debian.org/freedesktop-team/xdg-terminal-exec/-/raw/debian/master/debian/rules?ref_type=heads ** Description changed: [Availability] The package xdg-terminal-exec is already in Ubuntu universe. The package xdg-terminal-exec build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It
[Bug 2068598] Re: Mutter release 46.2
** Changed in: mutter (Ubuntu) Status: In Progress => Fix Committed ** Also affects: mutter (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: mutter (Ubuntu Noble) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: mutter (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided => Medium ** Changed in: mutter (Ubuntu Noble) Assignee: (unassigned) => Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2068598 Title: Mutter release 46.2 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mutter/+bug/2068598/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2069210] [NEW] krita fails to build with jpeg-xl 0.9
Public bug reported: See the attached Debian bug. My initial attempt to fix this was unsuccessful. ** Affects: krita (Ubuntu) Importance: High Status: Triaged ** Affects: krita (Debian) Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Tags: ftbfs oracular update-excuse ** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #1073077 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1073077 ** Also affects: krita (Debian) via https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1073077 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2069210 Title: krita fails to build with jpeg-xl 0.9 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/krita/+bug/2069210/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2068774] Re: magic-wormhole FTBFS with Python 3.12
I helped out here by filing the Debian bug for you. ** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #1073069 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1073069 ** Also affects: magic-wormhole (Debian) via https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1073069 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Changed in: magic-wormhole (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Triaged -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2068774 Title: magic-wormhole FTBFS with Python 3.12 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/magic-wormhole/+bug/2068774/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2069028] Re: Package current upstream (v2024.02.1)
I have uploaded this for you and unsubscribed ubuntu-sponsors. Please feel to resubscribe ubuntu-sponsors if you have something else that needs to be sponsored. ** Changed in: hart-software-services (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2069028 Title: Package current upstream (v2024.02.1) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hart-software-services/+bug/2069028/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2069139] Re: Sync routes 2.5.1-3 (main) from Debian unstable (main)
** Changed in: routes (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2069139 Title: Sync routes 2.5.1-3 (main) from Debian unstable (main) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/routes/+bug/2069139/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2060241] Re: prosposed migration audit 1:3.1.2-2.1build1 vs network-manager 1.46.0-1ubuntu1
** Changed in: network-manager (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released ** Changed in: audit (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060241 Title: prosposed migration audit 1:3.1.2-2.1build1 vs network-manager 1.46.0-1ubuntu1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audit/+bug/2060241/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2011582] Re: google-perftools fails to build on i386
** Description changed: google-perftools fails to build on i386 + https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/google-perftools/2.9.1-0ubuntu3 + jpeg-xl's tcmalloc feature wants google-perftools. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2011582 Title: google-perftools fails to build on i386 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/google-perftools/+bug/2011582/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2065669] Re: Update osinfo-db to 0.20240510
** Changed in: osinfo-db (Ubuntu Noble)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: osinfo-db (Ubuntu Jammy)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Summary changed:
- Update osinfo-db to 0.20240510
+ Update osinfo-db to 0.20240523
** Description changed:
Impact
==
The purpose of osinfo-db is to provide a database of guest operating systems
for use by virtualization provisioning tools using the libosinfo library. The
two primary users are the GNOME Boxes and Virt Manager apps.
- This SRU updates the database to the latest release.
+ This SRU updates the database to the latest release including OS updates
+ for the first half of 2024 including the release of Ubuntu 24.04 LTS and
+ the end of life of Ubuntu 22.10.
- It also includes patches to
- - Update Ubuntu 24.04 LTS for the stable release
- - EOL changes for Ubuntu 23.04
- - Add Ubuntu 24.10 as prerelease so that 24.10 ISOs are recognized (although
it won't be suggested for download by GNOME Boxes)
+ It also includes a patch to add Ubuntu 24.10 as prerelease so that 24.10
+ ISOs are recognized (although it won't be suggested for download by
+ GNOME Boxes)
Test Case 0
===
osinfo-db has an extensive test suite to validate the data files. If the test
suite fails, it will fail the build. These tests are also run as autopkgtests.
Ensure the build succeeds and the autopkgtest passes
Test Case 1
===
1. Install the update
2. Open a terminal and run
sudo apt install gnome-boxes
3. Run gnome-boxes
4. Click + then press "Download an operating system" (The UI varies depending
on the version of gnome-boxes).
5. Select Ubuntu 24.04 LTS x86_64 (Live)
6. The ISO will download to your Downloads folder
7. When it completes, the wizard will prompt you to create a Ubuntu 24.04 LTS
virtual machine.
Complete the wizard.
8. The virtual machine should start. Finish installing Ubuntu 24.04 LTS
inside. Afterwards, restart and log into the Ubuntu 24.04 LTS virtual machine.
9. Open a terminal and run this command: cat /etc/os-release to verify that
you are using Ubuntu 24.04 LTS.
10. Afterwards, you can power off the virtual machine.
Test Case 2
===
From a terminal, run
osinfo-query os vendor="Canonical Ltd"
- Ubuntu 22.04 LTS, Ubuntu 22.10, Ubuntu 23.04, and Ubuntu 23.10 should be
- included in the list.
+ Ubuntu 22.04 LTS, Ubuntu 23.10, Ubuntu 24.04 LTS, and Ubuntu 24.10
+ should be included in the list.
Where problems could occur
==
It is always possible to use ISOs not recognized by osinfo-db with either
GNOME Boxes or Virt Manager. osinfo-db provides useful metadata like
recommended RAM, recommended hard disk size, and what virtualized hardware
interfaces are supported.
This update significantly improves the ability of those apps to
recognize distros released in the first half of 2024, while also
updating some metadata details for older releases.
The most likely possible problem is that some download links may no
longer work. However, we know that the Ubuntu 23.04 download links were
broken before this update and 24.04 LTS was marked as pre-release so in
general download links will be better with this update.
Other Info
==
I am not preparing an SRU for Ubuntu 23.10 because it will be End of Life
soon and we encourage its users to switch to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. I expect that by
the time this SRU reaches jammy-updates that meta-release will be updated to
point to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. Therefore, anyone who gets this update on Ubuntu
22.04 LTS ("Jammy") will be prompted to upgrade to 24.04 LTS not 23.10 and
24.04 LTS will have a newer version than 22.04 LTS.
Even if that doesn't happen, this is a data package, not a security-
sensitive package.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2065669
Title:
Update osinfo-db to 0.20240523
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/osinfo-db/+bug/2065669/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2068647] [NEW] Don't update gedit to 47.0
Public bug reported: gedit 47.0 intentionally breaks all translations. Therefore, it is better for our users to avoid upgrading to that version. ** Affects: gedit Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Affects: gedit (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: Triaged ** Affects: gedit-plugins (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Affects: gedit (Debian) Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Tags: upgrade-software-version version-skip-47.0 version-skip-47.1 ** Bug watch added: gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gedit/-/issues #593 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gedit/-/issues/593 ** Also affects: gedit via https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gedit/-/issues/593 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #1072540 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1072540 ** Also affects: gedit (Debian) via https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1072540 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Also affects: gedit-plugins (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Tags added: version-skip-47.1 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2068647 Title: Don't update gedit to 47.0 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gedit/+bug/2068647/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1735002] Re: Allow configuring Wi-Fi MAC Randomization feature from GUI
It's possible to disable this feature for individual networks now. Just click Settings for the wifi network and choose a different option in Identify > Cloned Address ** Changed in: gnome-control-center (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1735002 Title: Allow configuring Wi-Fi MAC Randomization feature from GUI To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gnome-control-center/+bug/1735002/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2046354] Re: liblouisdmt tests are failing with the new liblouis
The liblouisutdml packaging has been fixed https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/liblouisutdml ** Changed in: liblouis (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2046354 Title: liblouisdmt tests are failing with the new liblouis To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/liblouis/+bug/2046354/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2045940] Re: git-filter-repo fails to build from source due to git 2.4 help changes
** Changed in: git-filter-repo (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released ** Changed in: git (Ubuntu) Status: New => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2045940 Title: git-filter-repo fails to build from source due to git 2.4 help changes To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/git/+bug/2045940/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2067979] Re: Language selection is skipped for new installations
I have created the ubuntu/noble branch now. It is intentional that the location permission dialog is not shown currently for Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. There is some background in gnome- control-center LP: #2062178 . We decided not to disable location services in gnome-control-center for now but we also didn't want to advertise the location services feature so prominently in gnome-initial- setup at this time either. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2067979 Title: Language selection is skipped for new installations To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/oem-priority/+bug/2067979/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2068243] Re: Switch keyboard layout viewer to tecla
** Attachment added: "gkbd-azerty-dark.png" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/2068243/+attachment/5786334/+files/gkbd-azerty-dark.png -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2068243 Title: Switch keyboard layout viewer to tecla To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/2068243/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2068243] Re: Switch keyboard layout viewer to tecla
** Attachment added: "gkbd-azerty-light.png" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/2068243/+attachment/5786335/+files/gkbd-azerty-light.png ** Description changed: Impact == GNOME 45 switched their default keyboard layout viewer from libgnomekbd to tecla. This change was made in gnome-control-center but Debian and Ubuntu carried a patch to revert this for gnome-shell because gnome-shell wasn't calling tecla correctly which made the keyboard layout viewer not work correctly for some keyboard layouts. The gnome-shell bug was fixed in 46.2. Tecla has these advantages compared to libgnomekbd: - Uses GTK4 and libadwaita - - Which means support for the dark style preference - - Much more modern looking window dialog + - Which means improved support for the dark style preference (Ubuntu enables dark style in many more places than GNOME normally does so the libgnomekbd viewer has partial dark style support in Ubuntu.) + - Much more modern looking window - Consistency with the existing ⋮ > View Keyboard Layout in GNOME Settings > Keyboard - Does what every other GNOME 45 or GNOME 46 distro does Therefore, this SRU drops the revert patch, drops Recommends: gkbd- capplet and adds Depends: tecla. apt should mark gkbd-capplet for autoremoval since nothing in the default Ubuntu Desktop Depends or Recommends it any more. It is harmless if either gkbd-capplet is uninstalled or kept installed. gnome-control-center already has Depends: tecla so this is not installing anything new. Test Case = From a terminal, run sudo apt install language-pack-gnome-fr Install the gnome-shell update. Log out and log back in. Open the GNOME Settings app (gnome-control-center). In the left sidebar, click Keyboard. Click Add Input Source… In the dialog, choose French (France), then choose French (AZERTY) then Add. In the right side of GNOME Shell's top bar, the keyboard layout switcher should be visible with en. Click en then change the keyboard layout to French (AZERTY). Click Show Keyboard Layout. A popup should show a keyboard layout with the second row of characters beginning with a z e r t y as shown in the tecla-azerty-light.png or tecla-azerty-dark.png screenshots. Close the keyboard layout popup. Switch the keyboard layout back to en Click Show Keyboard Layout The popup should display with the keyboard layout set to your usual English keyboard layout. What Could Go Wrong === This is a fairly minor feature and should not be essential to anyone who needs alternate keyboard layouts. I would guess people would be more likely to click the ⋮ > View Keyboard Layout option in GNOME Settings > Keyboard when choosing input sources rather than via GNOME Shell. And GNOME Settings was already set to use Tecla. This change does not affect actual usability of alternate keyboard layouts, just the single button to view the layout. Other Info == This change means that libgnomekbd will be demoted from main to universe for Ubuntu 24.10. For technical reasons, that demotion is not possible for already released stable versions of Ubuntu like Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. ** Also affects: gnome-shell (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: gnome-shell (Ubuntu Noble) Status: New => Triaged ** Changed in: gnome-shell (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided => Low ** Description changed: Impact == GNOME 45 switched their default keyboard layout viewer from libgnomekbd to tecla. This change was made in gnome-control-center but Debian and Ubuntu carried a patch to revert this for gnome-shell because gnome-shell wasn't calling tecla correctly which made the keyboard layout viewer not work correctly for some keyboard layouts. The gnome-shell bug was fixed in 46.2. Tecla has these advantages compared to libgnomekbd: - Uses GTK4 and libadwaita - Which means improved support for the dark style preference (Ubuntu enables dark style in many more places than GNOME normally does so the libgnomekbd viewer has partial dark style support in Ubuntu.) - Much more modern looking window - Consistency with the existing ⋮ > View Keyboard Layout in GNOME Settings > Keyboard - Does what every other GNOME 45 or GNOME 46 distro does + (Screenshots attached to show differences) Therefore, this SRU drops the revert patch, drops Recommends: gkbd- capplet and adds Depends: tecla. apt should mark gkbd-capplet for autoremoval since nothing in the default Ubuntu Desktop Depends or Recommends it any more. It is harmless if either gkbd-capplet is uninstalled or kept installed. gnome-control-center already has Depends: tecla so this is not installing anything new. Test Case = From a terminal, run sudo apt install language-pack-gnome-fr Install the gnome-shell update. Log out and log back in. Open the
[Bug 2068243] [NEW] Switch keyboard layout viewer to tecla
Public bug reported: Impact == GNOME 45 switched their default keyboard layout viewer from libgnomekbd to tecla. This change was made in gnome-control-center but Debian and Ubuntu carried a patch to revert this for gnome-shell because gnome-shell wasn't calling tecla correctly which made the keyboard layout viewer not work correctly for some keyboard layouts. The gnome-shell bug was fixed in 46.2. Tecla has these advantages compared to libgnomekbd: - Uses GTK4 and libadwaita - Which means improved support for the dark style preference (Ubuntu enables dark style in many more places than GNOME normally does so the libgnomekbd viewer has partial dark style support in Ubuntu.) - Much more modern looking window - Consistency with the existing ⋮ > View Keyboard Layout in GNOME Settings > Keyboard - Does what every other GNOME 45 or GNOME 46 distro does (Screenshots attached to show differences) Therefore, this SRU drops the revert patch, drops Recommends: gkbd- capplet and adds Depends: tecla. apt should mark gkbd-capplet for autoremoval since nothing in the default Ubuntu Desktop Depends or Recommends it any more. It is harmless if either gkbd-capplet is uninstalled or kept installed. gnome-control-center already has Depends: tecla so this is not installing anything new. Test Case = From a terminal, run sudo apt install language-pack-gnome-fr Install the gnome-shell update. Log out and log back in. Open the GNOME Settings app (gnome-control-center). In the left sidebar, click Keyboard. Click Add Input Source… In the dialog, choose French (France), then choose French (AZERTY) then Add. In the right side of GNOME Shell's top bar, the keyboard layout switcher should be visible with en. Click en then change the keyboard layout to French (AZERTY). Click Show Keyboard Layout. A popup should show a keyboard layout with the second row of characters beginning with a z e r t y as shown in the tecla-azerty-light.png or tecla-azerty-dark.png screenshots. Close the keyboard layout popup. Switch the keyboard layout back to en Click Show Keyboard Layout The popup should display with the keyboard layout set to your usual English keyboard layout. What Could Go Wrong === This is a fairly minor feature and should not be essential to anyone who needs alternate keyboard layouts. I would guess people would be more likely to click the ⋮ > View Keyboard Layout option in GNOME Settings > Keyboard when choosing input sources rather than via GNOME Shell. And GNOME Settings was already set to use Tecla. This change does not affect actual usability of alternate keyboard layouts, just the single button to view the layout. Other Info == This change means that libgnomekbd will be demoted from main to universe for Ubuntu 24.10. For technical reasons, that demotion is not possible for already released stable versions of Ubuntu like Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. ** Affects: gnome-shell (Ubuntu) Importance: Low Status: Fix Released ** Affects: gnome-shell (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Low Status: Triaged ** Tags: noble ** Attachment added: "tecla-azerty-dark.png" https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2068243/+attachment/5786332/+files/tecla-azerty-dark.png -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2068243 Title: Switch keyboard layout viewer to tecla To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/2068243/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2068243] Re: Switch keyboard layout viewer to tecla
** Attachment added: "tecla-azerty-light.png" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/2068243/+attachment/5786333/+files/tecla-azerty-light.png -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2068243 Title: Switch keyboard layout viewer to tecla To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/2068243/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2068065] [NEW] Update gnome-builder to 46.2
Public bug reported: Impact - This is a new stable release in the 46 series. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-builder/-/blob/46.2/NEWS Also, this adds a dependency to fix keyboard shortcuts not working (see the linked Debian bug). This issue is now tested in step 7 of the below test plan. Test Case -- Complete the test case from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/TestPlans/GnomeBuilder What Could Go Wrong --- GNOME Builder is a standalone app that is not installed by default by any Ubuntu flavor. If there is a critical bug preventing GNOME Builder from being usable, a developer could use another IDE such as Visual Studio Code. GNOME Builder is also distributed as a Flatpak and developers could use that if Ubuntu's .deb version is not working. (The .deb version of GNOME Builder installs flatpak by default anyway since that's how the build and run command is implemented for GNOME apps.) As a component of GNOME core, there is a micro-release exception for gnome-builder https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/GNOME ** Affects: gnome-builder (Ubuntu) Importance: Medium Status: Fix Released ** Affects: gnome-builder (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Medium Status: In Progress ** Affects: gnome-builder (Debian) Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Tags: noble upgrade-software-version ** Also affects: gnome-builder (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: gnome-builder (Ubuntu Noble) Status: New => In Progress ** Changed in: gnome-builder (Ubuntu Noble) Importance: Undecided => Medium ** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #1072154 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1072154 ** Also affects: gnome-builder (Debian) via https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1072154 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Description changed: Impact - This is a new stable release in the 46 series. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-builder/-/blob/46.2/NEWS - - Also, this adds a dependency to fix keyboard shortcuts not working. This issue is now tested in step 7 of the below test plan. + Also, this adds a dependency to fix keyboard shortcuts not working (see + the linked Debian bug). This issue is now tested in step 7 of the below + test plan. Test Case -- Complete the test case from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/TestPlans/GnomeBuilder What Could Go Wrong --- GNOME Builder is a standalone app that is not installed by default by any Ubuntu flavor. If there is a critical bug preventing GNOME Builder from being usable, a developer could use another IDE such as Visual Studio Code. GNOME Builder is also distributed as a Flatpak and developers could use that if Ubuntu's .deb version is not working. (The .deb version of GNOME Builder installs flatpak by default anyway since that's how the build and run command is implemented for GNOME apps.) As a component of GNOME core, there is a micro-release exception for gnome-builder https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/GNOME -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2068065 Title: Update gnome-builder to 46.2 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-builder/+bug/2068065/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2066269] Re: [MIR] sysprof
** Description changed: [Availability] The package sysprof is already in Ubuntu universe. The package sysprof build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures. Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sysprof [Rationale] - The package sysprof is required in Ubuntu main - The package sysprof will not generally be useful for a large part of our user base, but is important/helpful still because it is part of an Ubuntu initiative to focus on performance engineering, both for Ubuntu itself and for developers who build their projects on top of Ubuntu. The size of the sysprof app is fairly small and we envision sysprof as the latest of the small utilities that are included in a default Ubuntu desktop. (Disk Usage Analyzer [baobab] is another one of these utilities.) + Related to https://ubuntu.com/blog/ubuntu-performance-engineering-with-frame-pointers-by-default - There is no other/better way to solve this that is already in main or should go universe->main instead of this. - The package sysprof is required in Ubuntu main no later than August 15 due to a Ubuntu Desktop goal of including sysprof in the default 24.10 install. - The binary package sysprof needs to be in main to achieve the goal of providing a GUI performance profiling tool (command-line tools were included by default in Ubuntu 24.04 LTS, but the Desktop Team and others did not have the capacity to also handle getting sysprof into the default install then.) [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past + https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/sysprof + https://ubuntu.com/security/cves?package=sysprof - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Package does install services, timers or recurring jobs + /usr/lib/systemd/system/sysprof3.service + /usr/libexec/sysprofd + /usr/share/dbus-1/system-services/org.gnome.Sysprof3.service - Security has been kept in mind and common isolation/risk-mitigation patterns are in place utilizing the following features: + App uses /usr/share/polkit-1/actions/org.gnome.sysprof3.policy to gain the elevated permissions it needs to use ptracing in the Linux kernel. - Package does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Package does not expose any external endpoints - Package makes use of ptracing in the Linux kernel because it is required for the system-wide profiling feature that is essential to this app. I recommend Security Team review. [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sysprof/ - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=sysprof - Upstream https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/sysprof/-/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sysprof/46.0-1build1 - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on all architectures except for i386 https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/sysprof - We also will do manual testing of the GUI app https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/TestPlans/Sysprof [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - This package does not yield massive lintian Warnings, Errors - Please link to a recent build log of the package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sysprof/46.0-1build1 - Please attach the full output you have got from `lintian --pedantic` as an extra post to this bug. - Lintian overrides are present, but ok because the overrides document why those Lintian warnings should be ignored. - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/gnome-team/sysprof/-/blob/debian/latest/debian/rules [UI standards] - Application is end-user facing, Translation is present, via standard gettext system - End-user applications that ships a standard conformant desktop file + /usr/share/applications/org.gnome.Sysprof.desktop [Dependencies] - There are further runtime dependencies that are not yet in main + MIR for libdex is at LP: #2066262 + MIR for libpanel is at LP: #2066272 [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy [Maintenance/Owner] - The owning team will be
[Bug 2066269] Re: [MIR] sysprof
Running lintian... W: sysprof source: newer-standards-version 4.7.0 (current is 4.6.2) W: sysprof: no-manual-page [usr/bin/sysprof-agent] I: sysprof: desktop-entry-lacks-keywords-entry [usr/share/applications/org.gnome.Sysprof.desktop] I: sysprof source: superficial-tests [debian/tests/control] I: sysprof: systemd-service-file-missing-documentation-key [usr/lib/systemd/system/sysprof3.service] P: sysprof source: maintainer-manual-page [debian/sysprof-cli.1] P: sysprof source: maintainer-manual-page [debian/sysprof.1] P: sysprof source: package-does-not-install-examples [examples/] N: these are LD_PRELOAD modules, not libraries O: libsysprof-6-modules: lacks-ldconfig-trigger usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsysprof-memory-6.so usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsysprof-speedtrack-6.so usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsysprof-tracer-6.so O: libsysprof-6-modules: no-shlibs usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsysprof-memory-6.so O: libsysprof-6-modules: no-shlibs usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsysprof-speedtrack-6.so O: libsysprof-6-modules: no-shlibs usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsysprof-tracer-6.so O: libsysprof-6-modules: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsysprof-memory-6.so O: libsysprof-6-modules: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsysprof-speedtrack-6.so O: libsysprof-6-modules: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsysprof-tracer-6.so O: libsysprof-6-modules: package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libsysprof-memory-6 libsysprof-speedtrack-6 libsysprof-tracer-6 N: sysprofd is D-Bus-activated and does not need to be started during boot. O: sysprof: systemd-service-file-missing-install-key [usr/lib/systemd/system/sysprof3.service] ** Description changed: [Availability] The package sysprof is already in Ubuntu universe. The package sysprof build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures. Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sysprof [Rationale] - The package sysprof is required in Ubuntu main - The package sysprof will not generally be useful for a large part of our user base, but is important/helpful still because it is part of an Ubuntu initiative to focus on performance engineering, both for Ubuntu itself and for developers who build their projects on top of Ubuntu. The size of the sysprof app is fairly small and we envision sysprof as the latest of the small utilities that are included in a default Ubuntu desktop. (Disk Usage Analyzer [baobab] is another one of these utilities.) + Related to https://ubuntu.com/blog/ubuntu-performance-engineering-with-frame-pointers-by-default - There is no other/better way to solve this that is already in main or should go universe->main instead of this. - The package sysprof is required in Ubuntu main no later than August 15 due to a Ubuntu Desktop goal of including sysprof in the default 24.10 install. - The binary package sysprof needs to be in main to achieve the goal of providing a GUI performance profiling tool (command-line tools were included by default in Ubuntu 24.04 LTS, but the Desktop Team and others did not have the capacity to also handle getting sysprof into the default install then.) [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past + https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/sysprof + https://ubuntu.com/security/cves?package=sysprof - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Package does install services, timers or recurring jobs + /usr/lib/systemd/system/sysprof3.service + /usr/libexec/sysprofd + /usr/share/dbus-1/system-services/org.gnome.Sysprof3.service - Security has been kept in mind and common isolation/risk-mitigation patterns are in place utilizing the following features: + App uses /usr/share/polkit-1/actions/org.gnome.sysprof3.policy to gain the elevated permissions it needs to use ptracing in the Linux kernel. - Package does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Package does not expose any external endpoints - Package makes use of ptracing in the Linux kernel because it is required for the system-wide profiling feature that is essential to this app. I recommend Security Team review. [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sysprof/ - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=sysprof - Upstream https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/sysprof/-/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log
[Bug 2066262] Re: [MIR] libdex
** Changed in: libdex (Ubuntu) Assignee: Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) => (unassigned) ** Description changed: [Availability] The package libdex is already in Ubuntu universe. The package libdex build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures. Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex [Rationale] - The package libdex is required in Ubuntu main because it is a runtime dependency of sysprof (MIR LP: #2066269) - There is no other/better way to solve this that is already in main or should go universe->main instead of this. - The package libdex is required in Ubuntu main no later than August 15 due to a Ubuntu Desktop goal of including sysprof in the default 24.10 install [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past + Note that CVE-2016-3758 is about a vulnerability in Android's libdex which is a completely different project with no shared history or functionality. GNOME libdex was not created until 2022. + https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/libdex + https://ubuntu.com/security/cves?package=libdex - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Package does not install services, timers or recurring jobs - TODO: - Security has been kept in mind and common isolation/risk-mitigation - TODO: patterns are in place utilizing the following features: - TODO: TBD (add details and links/examples about things like dropping - TODO: permissions, using temporary environments, restricted users/groups, - TODO: seccomp, systemd isolation features, apparmor, ...) - Package does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Package does not expose any external endpoints - Package does not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) - TODO: I noticed that libdex uses liburing which uses the Linux kernel io_uring interface. Wikipedia points out that io_uring is a frequent source of bugs in the Linux kernel. I don't know if this matters for apps using liburing, but I think the Security Team should have a look. libdex does have a build-time option to disable liburing in cases where it is unavailable (for instance it's disabled on i386 since Ubuntu currently doesn't build liburing on i386). [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex/ - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=libdex - Upstream https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libdex/-/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex/0.6.1-1 - The package does not run an autopkgtest. See next lines. - This package is minimal and will be tested in a more wide reaching solution. + libdex is only used by sysprof and gnome-builder. In addition to the existing build tests for libdex, we will also do manual testing for Sysprof and GNOME Builder. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/TestPlans/Sysprof https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/TestPlans/GnomeBuilder [Quality assurance - packaging] - debian/watch is present and works - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field - This package does not yield massive lintian Warnings, Errors - Please link to a recent build log of the package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex/0.6.1-1 - Please attach the full output you have got from `lintian --pedantic` as an extra post to this bug. - Lintian overrides are not present - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/gnome-team/libdex/-/blob/debian/latest/debian/rules [UI standards] - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation) [Dependencies] - No further depends or recommends dependencies that are not yet in main [Standards compliance] - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy [Maintenance/Owner] - The owning team will be Ubuntu Desktop (~desktop-packages) and I have their acknowledgement for that commitment - The future owning team is not yet subscribed, but will subscribe to the package before promotion - This does not use static builds - This does not use vendored code - This package is not rust based - The package has been built in the archive more
[Bug 2066269] Re: [MIR] sysprof
** Changed in: sysprof (Ubuntu) Assignee: Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) => (unassigned) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2066269 Title: [MIR] sysprof To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sysprof/+bug/2066269/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2066272] Re: [MIR] libpanel
W: libpanel source: newer-standards-version 4.7.0 (current is 4.6.2) W: libpanel-doc: stray-devhelp-documentation [usr/share/doc/panel-1.0/panel-1.0.devhelp2] I: libpanel-doc: possible-documentation-but-no-doc-base-registration The latest Debian Policy is 4.7.0 but lintian has not been updated since that version was released. https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/debian-policy The devhelp warning is a false warning. Many GNOME modules have switched to gi-docgen to build help and it does things differently that the older gtk-doc-tools. The devhelp app was updated to support devhelp2 files being located in this location. doc-base is a Debianism that I believe to only barely be used. ** Changed in: libpanel (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => New ** Changed in: libpanel (Ubuntu) Assignee: Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) => (unassigned) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2066272 Title: [MIR] libpanel To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libpanel/+bug/2066272/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2066262] Re: [MIR] libdex
Running lintian... W: libdex source: newer-standards-version 4.7.0 (current is 4.6.2) W: libdex-doc: stray-devhelp-documentation [usr/share/doc/libdex-1/libdex-1.devhelp2] I: libdex-doc: possible-documentation-but-no-doc-base-registration P: libdex source: package-does-not-install-examples [examples/] All of these can be ignored. The latest Debian Policy is 4.7.0 but lintian has not been updated since that version was released. https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/debian-policy The devhelp warning is a false warning. Many GNOME modules have switched to gi-docgen to build help and it does things differently that the older gtk-doc-tools. The devhelp app was updated to support devhelp2 files being located in this location. doc-base is a Debianism that I believe to only barely be used. The examples are built during the build but are intentionally not installed per upstream's meson.build https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libdex/-/blob/main/examples/meson.build -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2066262 Title: [MIR] libdex To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex/+bug/2066262/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2066272] Re: [MIR] libpanel
** Description changed: - TODO + [Availability] + The package libpanel is already in Ubuntu universe. + The package libpanel build for the architectures it is designed to work on. + It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures except for i386. + Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libpanel + + [Rationale] + - The package libpanel is required in Ubuntu main because it is a runtime dependency of sysprof (MIR LP: #2066269) + - There is no other/better way to solve this that is already in main or should go universe->main instead of this. + - The package libpanel is required in Ubuntu main no later than August 15 due to a Ubuntu Desktop goal of including sysprof in the default 24.10 install + + [Security] + - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past + + https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/libpanel + + https://ubuntu.com/security/cves?package=libpanel + + - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries + - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` + - Package does not install services, timers or recurring jobs + - Package does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). + - Package does not expose any external endpoints + - Package does not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) + + [Quality assurance - function/usage] + - The package works well right after install + + [Quality assurance - maintenance] + - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs + - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libpanel/ + - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=libpanel + - Upstream https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libpanel/-/issues + - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support + + [Quality assurance - testing] + - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log + https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libpanel/1.6.0-1build1 + + - The package does not run an autopkgtest. See next lines. + + - This package is minimal and will be tested in a more wide reaching solution. + + libpanel is only used by sysprof and gnome-builder. In addition to the existing build tests for libpanel, we will also do manual testing for Sysprof and GNOME Builder. + + https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/TestPlans/Sysprof + https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/TestPlans/GnomeBuilder + + [Quality assurance - packaging] + - debian/watch is present and works + - debian/control defines a correct Maintainer field + - This package does not yield massive lintian Warnings, Errors + - Please link to a recent build log of the package + https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libpanel/1.6.0-1build1 + - Please attach the full output you have got from `lintian --pedantic` as an extra post to this bug. + - Lintian overrides are not present + + - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. + - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies + + - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf questions + - Packaging and build is easy, link to debian/rules https://salsa.debian.org/gnome-team/libpanel/-/blob/debian/latest/debian/rules + + [UI standards] + - Application is end-user facing, Translation is present, via standard + gettext build and runtime internationalization system + + - End-user applications without desktop file, not needed because this is + a UI library (with translatable strings) but is not actually an app + itself so no need for a .desktop + + [Dependencies] + - No further depends or recommends dependencies that are not yet in main + + [Standards compliance] + - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy + + [Maintenance/Owner] + - The owning team will be Ubuntu Desktop (~desktop-packages) and I have their acknowledgement for that commitment + - The future owning team is not yet subscribed, but will subscribe to the package before promotion + + - This does not use static builds + - This does not use vendored code + - This package is not rust based + + - The package has been built in the archive more recently than the last + test rebuild + + [Background information] + - The Package description explains the package well + - Upstream Name is libpanel + - Link to upstream project https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libpanel -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2066272 Title: [MIR] libpanel To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libpanel/+bug/2066272/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2066262] Re: [MIR] libdex
** Description changed: [Availability] The package libdex is already in Ubuntu universe. The package libdex build for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for all Ubuntu architectures. Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex [Rationale] - - The package libdex is required in Ubuntu main because it is a runtime dependency of sysprof (MIR LP: #) + - The package libdex is required in Ubuntu main because it is a runtime dependency of sysprof (MIR LP: #2066269) - There is no other/better way to solve this that is already in main or should go universe->main instead of this. - The package libdex is required in Ubuntu main no later than August 15 due to a Ubuntu Desktop goal of including sysprof in the default 24.10 install [Security] - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past + Note that CVE-2016-3758 is about a vulnerability in Android's libdex which is a completely different project with no shared history or functionality. GNOME libdex was not created until 2022. + https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/libdex + https://ubuntu.com/security/cves?package=libdex - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` - Package does not install services, timers or recurring jobs TODO: - Security has been kept in mind and common isolation/risk-mitigation TODO: patterns are in place utilizing the following features: TODO: TBD (add details and links/examples about things like dropping TODO: permissions, using temporary environments, restricted users/groups, TODO: seccomp, systemd isolation features, apparmor, ...) - Package does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024). - Package does not expose any external endpoints - Package does not contain extensions to security-sensitive software (filters, scanners, plugins, UI skins, ...) - TODO: I noticed that libdex uses liburing which uses the Linux kernel io_uring interface. Wikipedia points out that io_uring is a frequent source of bugs in the Linux kernel. I don't know if this matters for apps using liburing, but I think the Security Team should have a look. libdex does have a build-time option to disable liburing in cases where it is unavailable (for instance it's disabled on i386 since Ubuntu currently doesn't build liburing on i386). [Quality assurance - function/usage] - The package works well right after install [Quality assurance - maintenance] - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu/Upstream and does not have too many, long-term & critical, open bugs - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex/ - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=libdex - Upstream https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libdex/-/issues - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support [Quality assurance - testing] - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails it makes the build fail, link to build log - https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex/0.6.0-1build1 + https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdex/0.6.1-1 - RULE: - The package should, but is not required to, also contain - RULE: non-trivial autopkgtest(s). - TODO-A: - The package runs an autopkgtest, and is currently passing on - TODO-A: this TBD list of architectures, link to test logs TBD - TODO-B: - The package does not run an autopkgtest because TBD + - The package does not run an autopkgtest. See next lines. - RULE: - existing but failing tests that shall be handled as "ok to fail" - RULE: need to be explained along the test logs below - TODO-A: - The package does have not failing autopkgtests right now - TODO-B: - The package does have failing autopkgtests tests right now, but since - TODO-B: they always failed they are handled as "ignored failure", this is - TODO-B: ok because TBD + - This package is minimal and will be tested in a more wide reaching solution. + + libdex is only used by sysprof and gnome-builder. In addition to the existing build tests for libdex, we will also do manual testing for Sysprof and GNOME Builder. - RULE: - If no build tests nor autopkgtests are included, and/or if the package - RULE: requires specific hardware to perform testing, the subscribed team - RULE: must provide a written test plan in a comment to the MIR bug, and - RULE: commit to running that test either at each upload of the package or - RULE: at least once each release cycle. In the comment to the MIR bug, - RULE: please link to the codebase of these tests (scripts or doc of manual - RULE: steps) and attach a full log of these test runs. This is meant to - RULE: assess their validity (e.g. not just superficial). - RULE: If possible such things should stay in universe. Sometimes that is - RULE: impossible due to the way how features/plugins/dependencies work - RULE: but if you are going to ask for promotion of
[Bug 2024064] Re: libssh dep8 fails on ppc64el/s390x
The autopkgtests are passing now so I'm closing this bug. https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/libssh ** Changed in: libssh (Ubuntu) Status: In Progress => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2024064 Title: libssh dep8 fails on ppc64el/s390x To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libssh/+bug/2024064/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2067844] Re: [nvidia] gnome-control-center render and graphics bug on ubuntu 24 fresh install
See bug 2061079 which might be similar to what you are experiencing. ** Summary changed: - gnome-control-center render and graphics bug on ubuntu 24 fresh install + [nvidia] gnome-control-center render and graphics bug on ubuntu 24 fresh install ** Tags added: nvidia -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2067844 Title: [nvidia] gnome-control-center render and graphics bug on ubuntu 24 fresh install To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-control-center/+bug/2067844/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2065587] Re: Add explicit dependency on glib 2.80 to ease upgrades 22.04 → 24.04
We do actually need to keep this change since GNOME Shell 46.2 now requires glib 2.80. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/commit/11a10214 It does not need to be listed as an SRU bug though. ** Changed in: gnome-shell (Ubuntu Noble) Status: Triaged => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2065587 Title: Add explicit dependency on glib 2.80 to ease upgrades 22.04 → 24.04 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/2065587/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
