Re: Bug triage report for 2020-01-18 (Monday triage)
On Tuesday, January 19 2021, Robie Basak wrote: > LP: #1909950 - *(New) [bind9] - TCP connections never close I've been meaning to take a look at this one, but I'm trying to juggle my current tasks and I currently have other things happening. > Finally, I'm not sure how to handle this one in terms of priority. > Normally I'd say that if it is valid, it doesn't affect most Ubuntu > users so needs a volunteer to drive it. Should it be treated any > differently just because it's an i386 whitelist request? > > LP: #1904990 - *(Triaged) [sssd] - Missing i386 version of > libnss-sss Not sure, TBH. Based on the discussion Timo said it'd be fine to drop gdm from the list of sssd's B-D, but I'd like to understand it a bit better the possible impact of doing that. -- Sergio GPG key ID: E92F D0B3 6B14 F1F4 D8E0 EB2F 106D A1C8 C3CB BF14 -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
Re: Bug triage report for 2020-01-18 (Monday triage)
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 04:59:55PM +, Robie Basak wrote: > Bugs last updated between 2021-01-15 (Friday) and 2021-01-17 (Sunday) > inclusive > > Date range identified as: "Monday triage" > > There were quite a few bugs worth mentioning: > > Bugs that seem valid and could do with attention soon. I've made sure > they're correctly in the backlog with Importance set: > > LP: #1873923 - *(Confirmed) [freeradius] - freeradius with > freeradius-python3 fails to start out of the box > LP: #1885403 - *(Confirmed) [postfix]- posttls-finger fails to > connect to private/tlsmgr > LP: #1909950 - *(New) [bind9] - TCP connections never close > LP: #1911999 - (New)[multipath-tools] - faulty paths are not > removed > > I additionally tagged this one server-next as a patch is available: > > LP: #1912118 - (New)[dovecot]- assertion failure in > message_part_finish when searching large folder Looks like a SRU request for focal. I'll add this to my todo list. > Finally, I'm not sure how to handle this one in terms of priority. > Normally I'd say that if it is valid, it doesn't affect most Ubuntu > users so needs a volunteer to drive it. Should it be treated any > differently just because it's an i386 whitelist request? > > LP: #1904990 - *(Triaged) [sssd] - Missing i386 version of > libnss-sss Looks like it's not as simple as a whitelist entry; from the discussion sounds like the build dependency on gdm would need altered/dropped in order to address build issue for sssd. Potentially could be a bit of work. So for prioritizing, think it could be marked per normal policy. Bryce -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
Bug triage report for 2020-01-18 (Monday triage)
Bugs last updated between 2021-01-15 (Friday) and 2021-01-17 (Sunday) inclusive Date range identified as: "Monday triage" There were quite a few bugs worth mentioning: Bugs that seem valid and could do with attention soon. I've made sure they're correctly in the backlog with Importance set: LP: #1873923 - *(Confirmed) [freeradius] - freeradius with freeradius-python3 fails to start out of the box LP: #1885403 - *(Confirmed) [postfix]- posttls-finger fails to connect to private/tlsmgr LP: #1909950 - *(New) [bind9] - TCP connections never close LP: #1911999 - (New)[multipath-tools] - faulty paths are not removed I additionally tagged this one server-next as a patch is available: LP: #1912118 - (New)[dovecot]- assertion failure in message_part_finish when searching large folder One valid bug that I'm not sure needs as high a priority, but is correctly in the backlog so I left it alone: LP: #1893753 - *(Triaged) [nginx] - libnginx-mod-http-lua 0.10.11 not compatible with NGINX 1.18/1.17 I didn't think this bug belongs to the server team, even if it is valid, so I left it alone: LP: #1891810 - (New)[libseccomp] - Missing openat2 syscall, causes problems for fuse-overlayfs in nspawn containers Finally, I'm not sure how to handle this one in terms of priority. Normally I'd say that if it is valid, it doesn't affect most Ubuntu users so needs a volunteer to drive it. Should it be treated any differently just because it's an i386 whitelist request? LP: #1904990 - *(Triaged) [sssd] - Missing i386 version of libnss-sss Robie signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
