Re: +1 maintenance day report
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 10:53:31AM +1200, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: > On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 at 05:31, Paride Legovini wrote: > > > mathcomp-multinomials: > > - holding 3 packages > > - missing builds on all archs but riscv64 > > - reason: missing b-deps (riscv64 got lucky because it slow) > > - retriggered builds; built everywhere but on arm64. > > - reason for missing arm64 build: > >. > >The following packages have unmet dependencies: > > libcoq-mathcomp-bigenough : Depends: libcoq-mathcomp-ssreflect-94ef7 > >E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages. > >. > > - HANDOVER: I think we just need a no-change rebuild of > >src:mathcomp-bigenough to rebuild against a newer ssreflect. > > > > I did this. I like how Paride called out the item to handover to another person on +1 maintenance in their report (and of course that it was picked up!). Could we make using this format (HANDOVER) a convention for passing things on in our reports? Thanks! -- Brian Murray -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: +1 maintenance day report
Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote on 19/07/2022:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 at 05:31, Paride Legovini wrote:
>
> qiime:
>> - holding 2 packages
>> - direct autopkgregression on armhf, with error:
>>AssertionError: dtype('int64') !=
>> - I wasn't expecting this to ever pass on armhf and did a
>>migration-reference/0 retrigger, but it actually passed!
>> - I expect the package to now be a candiate.
>>
>
> This is backwards, I think? The reference test succeeded but the new
> version fails --> this is a regression on armhf. However the Debian
> maintainer has requested removal on 32 bit arches:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1014692. I guess we
> should follow.
Right, this is a force-badtest case, thanks. To finish up the job:
https://code.launchpad.net/~paride/britney/+git/hints-ubuntu/+merge/427073
Despite that RM bug the Debian maintainer didn't do an upload dropping
the 32bit archs yet, so a hint looks appropriate to me for now.
Paride
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: VT console font
No upgrades, always fresh installs for me. Yes I noticed there's some automatic high-DPI detection in plymouth and then gnome-shell matches it. It works on some laptops but not others, certainly not my 4K desktop. I would advocate changing the DPI threshold for that but at the same time don't recall it ever working for console fonts -- they're always too small AFAICS. On 18/7/22 10:43 pm, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: Hi, On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 at 13:36, Daniel van Vugt wrote: I find myself increasing the VT console font size on practically all modern machines: sudo dpkg-reconfigure console-setup Is it perhaps time that Kinetic defaulted to a larger console font? Is this upgraded machine, or fresh install? i think when we enabled auto-detected high-dpi console fonts, we couldn't really do an upgrade case as it was not possible to check/know if configuration was default or manual. Or do you want font even bigger, than what we boot into by default? You can check stock behaviour by booting live usb stick and checking how vt console font looks there for you. -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: +1 maintenance report
Hi, On 18/07/2022 12:02, Nick Rosbrook wrote: ### ruby-certificate-authority FTBFS (https://pad.lv/1981458) There was a print format change for the x509 v3 authority key identifer field in openssl 3.0, and this test suite appears to depend on that format. Changing the expected test string to match the new format fixes the issue. William sponsored an upload that resolved this. Thanks for the patch. I uploaded it to Debian already. -- Lucas Kanashiro -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
