On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 09:00:58AM +1200, Vladimir Petko wrote:
> I am applying to become a Contributing Developer...
The DMB voted today to approve Vladimir's application. Congratulations,
Vladimir!
On behalf of the DMB,
Robie
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
ubuntu-devel
In response to feedback, I have a branch up for review that provides two
experimental commands directly in the git-ubuntu snap:
* git-ubuntu.experimental-build (formerly gu-build, by Steve)
* git-ubuntu.experimental-emptydirfixup (empty directory workaround -
see LP: #1917877)
These
In response to feedback, I have a branch up for review that provides two
experimental commands directly in the git-ubuntu snap:
* git-ubuntu.experimental-build (formerly gu-build, by Steve)
* git-ubuntu.experimental-emptydirfixup (empty directory workaround -
see LP: #1917877)
These
(LP: #1889248)
add libfabric to whitelist
Lena Voytek (1):
Updates for inclusive naming
Paride Legovini (1):
snapcraft: drop --enable-experimental-package-repositories
Robie Basak (135):
Update release process to also close fixed bugs
prometheus-alertmanager
(LP: #1889248)
add libfabric to whitelist
Lena Voytek (1):
Updates for inclusive naming
Paride Legovini (1):
snapcraft: drop --enable-experimental-package-repositories
Robie Basak (135):
Update release process to also close fixed bugs
prometheus-alertmanager
** Changed in: bridge-utils (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Expired
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to bridge-utils in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2018060
Title:
Merge bridge-utils from
** Changed in: libmnl (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Expired
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libmnl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2018079
Title:
Merge libmnl from Debian unstable for
** Changed in: libseccomp (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Expired
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libseccomp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2018081
Title:
Merge libseccomp from Debian
Hi,
As a list of 46 packages this is rather large and non-trivial to review.
Presumably we'll want to group them by upstream (are all managed by the
OpenStack umbrella upstream, or are there exceptions?) and then take a
view on them as a whole.
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 11:44:04AM -0400, Corey
> This is an improvement to the current situation of aborting release
upgrade half way through.
Is it? If the user ends up with a broken DKMS package on release
upgrade, then at least they'll know about it. But if we silently ignore
the failure, the release upgrade will finish pretending that it
@afredfactice it sounds like your issue is not related to this bug. If
you think it is related, please could you explain why? Otherwise, please
see https://ubuntu.com/community/support for community support options.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
I also posted here yesterday, having forgotten about this thread:
https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/improving-the-git-ubuntu-based-sponsorship-workflow/37964
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
There's an open question on glib2.0 and the GNOME MRE here:
https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/scope-of-gnome-mru/18041/65?u=rbasak
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to glib2.0 in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2028082
On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 10:57:04AM -0300, Athos Ribeiro wrote:
> Bugs last updated between 2023-08-04 (Friday) and 2023-08-06 (Sunday)
> inclusive
> Date range identified as: "Monday triage"
>
> https://pad.lv/2029431 | libslirp | Provide static library in libslirp-dev
> This is a request to
There were 31 bugs but nothing really needed attention.
LP: #2028810 || DF | Incomplete| rsync | rsync
3.1.3 performance regression |
I just mentioned on this that I think an SRU would be acceptable.
Of the two "take another look bugs" and one needed attention.
I've been also half-occupied with meetings this week as part of an
internal Canonical event but I've managed to look at proposed migration
for some of the time at least. On Wednesday I chose to do my SRU shift
instead as I assume this is preferable.
# apport
This looked like it was holding up
Public bug reported:
tests/integration/test_packaging_apt_dpkg.py::test_get_file_package_diversion
fails if it doesn't detect any dpkg diversions. Apparently something
(possibly dash?) stopped diverting something, so now there are no
diversions in the autopkgtest environment and therefore this
Public bug reported:
Rebuilding apport in mantic today FTBFS because of a pylint complaint.
We discussed this in #ubuntu-devel today. I don't think that failing the
build on a lint failure is appropriate in distribution packaging in a
production build since otherwise the build regresses for no
** Tags added: server-triage-discuss
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to unattended-upgrades in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2017401
Title:
Unexpected / unwanted unattended-upgrades behaviour after
The following subscriptions are missing:
lua5.4
Missing subscriptions added
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
Thank you for the report. It would be smoothest if upstream released a
version with that change. I see that is requested in
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xdg/desktop-file-utils/-/issues/69
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #1041654
Thank you for the report. It would be smoothest if upstream released a
version with that change. I see that is requested in
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xdg/desktop-file-utils/-/issues/69
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #1041654
The verification of the Stable Release Update for openldap has completed
successfully and the package is now being released to -updates.
Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being
unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In
the event that you encounter
Thank you for the verification jenhsun!
There was also a plan to carry out testing as documented at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/TestPlans/RemoteDesktop. See the
plan in the bug description above. Was this done? If so, please document
that and flip the tag back.
** Tags removed:
Thank you for the detailed analysis! So to make sure I understand: we
think adsys 0.9.2 was broken in Kinetic all along due to some problem at
the Kerberos end. You isolated this issue to outside adsys using
ldbsearch. This issue with ldbsearch does not occur with Jammy. So
you're confident that
The verification of the Stable Release Update for kexec-tools has
completed successfully and the package is now being released to
-updates. Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being
unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In
the event that you
Miriam, if you could preserve the state of the system please if you
still have it for debugging, then that would be helpful.
** Tags added: server-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssh in Ubuntu.
I noted that Lunar wasn't updated when I accepted this, but didn't want
to block progress Jammy while I enquired. However, another SRU team
member has confirmed that it is a requirement for hardware enablements
for the latest stable release of Ubuntu to be enabled as well -
otherwise users will be
** Tags added: regression-update
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to curl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2028170
Title:
curl 7.81.0-1ubuntu1.11 fails verifying proper ssl cert w/ subj-alt-
name
> Users have talked about upgrading via the command line to 22.10, but I
figured that Lunar was about to EOL
You mean Kinetic? Lunar has a while left to go. Does that mean that
users can upgrade from 22.04 to 23.04 still?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
It doesn't look like this is fixed in the current stable release (Lunar)
and I don't see an SRU upload for this either. What are your plans for
Lunar? Please see:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Newer_Releases
If Lunar isn't relevant for WSL and therefore nobody could hit the bug
Hello You-Sheng, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20220329.git681281e4-0ubuntu3.16 in a few hours, and then in
the -proposed repository.
Please help us by
Hello Chris, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20220329.git681281e4-0ubuntu3.16 in a few hours, and then in
the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing
Hello Chris, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into lunar-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20230323.gitbcdcfbcf-0ubuntu1.4 in a few hours, and then in the
-proposed repository.
Please help us by testing
Hello You-Sheng, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20220329.git681281e4-0ubuntu3.16 in a few hours, and then in
the -proposed repository.
Please help us by
Hello You-Sheng, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into lunar-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20230323.gitbcdcfbcf-0ubuntu1.4 in a few hours, and then in the
-proposed repository.
Please help us by
Hello Mario, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20220329.git681281e4-0ubuntu3.16 in a few hours, and then in
the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing
Hello Mario, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into lunar-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20230323.gitbcdcfbcf-0ubuntu1.4 in a few hours, and then in the
-proposed repository.
Please help us by testing
Hello Timo, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20220329.git681281e4-0ubuntu3.16 in a few hours, and then in
the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing
Hello You-Sheng, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20220329.git681281e4-0ubuntu3.16 in a few hours, and then in
the -proposed repository.
Please help us by
Hello You-Sheng, or anyone else affected,
Accepted linux-firmware into lunar-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-
firmware/20230323.gitbcdcfbcf-0ubuntu1.4 in a few hours, and then in the
-proposed repository.
Please help us by
Hello Ioanna, or anyone else affected,
Accepted kexec-tools into focal-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kexec-
tools/1:2.0.18-1ubuntu1.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new package.
Hello Chris, or anyone else affected,
Accepted firmware-sof into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firmware-
sof/2.0-1ubuntu4.2 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Releasing this to Jammy is blocked on understanding what happened with
Kinetic. Not necessarily for the Kinetic release, but I think we should
understand what happened first in case it has implications for Jammy.
** Tags removed: verification-done-focal verification-done-jammy
Hello Fabio, or anyone else affected,
Accepted mutter into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mutter/42.9-0ubuntu2
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Hello Daniel, or anyone else affected,
Accepted mutter into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mutter/42.9-0ubuntu2
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Accepting into Jammy. I can see that the code changes appear already
present in lunar-proposed. Please could you confirm the status of the
fix in lunar-updates please, so we can avoid introducing a regression
when users upgrade?
On test plans, I see both this bug and the other one will be
Hello Fabio, or anyone else affected,
Accepted mutter into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mutter/42.9-0ubuntu2
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Hello Daniel, or anyone else affected,
Accepted mutter into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mutter/42.9-0ubuntu2
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Accepting into Jammy. I can see that the code changes appear already
present in lunar-proposed. Please could you confirm the status of the
fix in lunar-updates please, so we can avoid introducing a regression
when users upgrade?
On test plans, I see both this bug and the other one will be
I discussed this with Sergio elsewhere and we concluded that we don't
want to change behaviour in Jammy to opt users in to start automatically
reaching debuginfod.ubuntu.com without further discussion. So for this
bug, we'll consider the issue to be simply that if the user configures a
server in
The verification of the Stable Release Update for gjs has completed
successfully and the package is now being released to -updates.
Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being
unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In
the event that you encounter a
The verification of the Stable Release Update for gjs has completed
successfully and the package is now being released to -updates.
Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being
unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In
the event that you encounter a
I think it's OK to skip Kinetic if you don't want to proceed with it.
However, what are the implications of that severe regression for the QA
process for other releases? Are there QA gaps that could also affect a
release into Jammy, for example? Is it worth investigating the Kinetic
failure
On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 05:35:21PM +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> Today we had a Backporters meeting, and indeed we don't have any
> opposition to this latest proposal, thank you for the prods, and I'm
> happy that this topic is finally coming to a close!
Thanks!
> Please do email us a bit more
On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 05:35:21PM +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> Today we had a Backporters meeting, and indeed we don't have any
> opposition to this latest proposal, thank you for the prods, and I'm
> happy that this topic is finally coming to a close!
Thanks!
> Please do email us a bit more
I performed the Test Plan on Lunar, Kinetic, Jammy and Focal. With the
current versions the problem reproduced as expected in scenarios A and
B, and scenario C worked as expected. Then I upgraded to proposed and
scenarios A, B and C all worked as expected.
The current versions were:
Lunar:
> This results in DEBUGINFOD_URLS not being set for non-root users.
Should the Test Plan not then check that DEBUGINFOD_URLS is actually set
correctly, and that debuginfod functionality actually works?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded
Fixed in 0.193ubuntu5 in mantic-proposed; awaiting migration.
** Changed in: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of MOTU,
which is subscribed to ubuntu-dev-tools in Ubuntu.
Progress
** Changed in: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu Jammy)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Robie Basak (racb)
** Changed in: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu Kinetic)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Robie Basak (racb)
** Changed in: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu Lunar)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Robie Bas
** Description changed:
+ [Impact]
+
src:ubuntu-dev-tools 0.193ubuntu4~20.04.2 regressed behaviour in how
python3-ubuntutools downloads source packages from Launchpad. This is
currently breaking the git-ubuntu importer, causing it to fail to update
repositories for some packages, since
The verification of the Stable Release Update for gnome-remote-desktop
has completed successfully and the package is now being released to
-updates. Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being
unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In
the event that
** Description changed:
src:ubuntu-dev-tools 0.193ubuntu4~20.04.2 regressed behaviour in how
python3-ubuntutools downloads source packages from Launchpad. This is
currently breaking the git-ubuntu importer, causing it to fail to update
repositories for some packages, since the git-ubuntu
** Changed in: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Robie Basak (racb)
** Changed in: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu Focal)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Robie Basak (racb)
** Changed in: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: u
> I don't see a way of getting the requests library to handle transfer
encoding but not content encoding without using undocumented API. As far
as I can tell, the raw attribute would give me neither.
Digging into this much deeper, the handling of transfer encoding doesn't
seem to be documented
Also relevant is https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu-dev-
tools/commit/ubuntutools/misc.py?id=1e2036399e535c939c6e581259e5aa9fdae99f27
which explicitly swapped raw access for the purposes of decoding.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of MOTU,
which is subscribed to
It seems that python3-ubuntutools switched from using
urllib.request.urlopen() to requests.get() when fetching sources using
the pull() method. For the sake of providing a progress bar, both the
old code and the new code "streamed" the data by asking for chunks at a
time, incrementally saving
Also reproduced on Mantic with 0.193ubuntu4.
** Also affects: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu Focal)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu)
Importance: Critical => Medium
** Changed in: ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu Focal)
Status: New => Triaged
**
Public bug reported:
src:ubuntu-dev-tools 0.193ubuntu4~20.04.2 regressed behaviour in how
python3-ubuntutools downloads source packages from Launchpad. This is
currently breaking the git-ubuntu importer, causing it to fail to update
repositories for some packages, since the git-ubuntu snap is
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:03:56AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> The one case where this is currently suboptimal is if the last comment on
> the MP is from an Ubuntu dev saying it needs changes, but the submitter has
> pushed new changes addressing that feedback without leaving a further
>
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 02:36:06PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I think the least-effort approach is for the handling of MPs for sponsorship
> to match the handling of bugs: ~ubuntu-sponsors is unsubscribed, and it's
> the responsibility of the submitter to re-subscribe them (and patch pilots
>
Dear Ubuntu Developers,
Currently it's unclear what patch pilots are supposed to do when an MP
in the sponsorship queue cannot be resolved immediately. This relates to
how the sponsorship queue behaves as MP state changes. It seems that we
should have a "manual for sponsors" that explains what to
The following subscriptions are missing:
containerd-app
Missing subscriptions added
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
+LP8e8LQ2PwCsCF31KpvSfjV56DkDm3ObIc8OECPW4XCljlDP2EQJxwZ3A
Sn25JLpM6W9vhkLAlOkO
=q6Ka
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Robie Basak (via nm.debian.org)
For details and to comment, visit https://nm.debian.org/process/1192/
--
https://nm.debian.org/process/1192/
Hello errors.ubuntu.com, or anyone else affected,
Accepted gnome-remote-desktop into jammy-proposed. The package will
build now and be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-remote-
desktop/42.8-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help
(and it's a current topic in the ubuntu-release@ thread, so sort of
unresolved generally)
** Changed in: gnome-remote-desktop (Ubuntu Jammy)
Status: Incomplete => Fix Committed
** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-jammy
--
You received this bug notification because you
Hello Jeremy, or anyone else affected,
Accepted gnome-remote-desktop into jammy-proposed. The package will
build now and be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-remote-
desktop/42.8-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by
I'm accepting as this question can be resolved after accept but before
release.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to gnome-remote-desktop in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2024240
Title:
[rdp]
Hello errors.ubuntu.com, or anyone else affected,
Accepted gnome-remote-desktop into jammy-proposed. The package will
build now and be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-remote-
desktop/42.8-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help
Accepting, thanks. FTR, I think it's fine to have made improvements in
testing without a separate SRU bug. I have reviewed this change and
testing looks objectively better now.
** Changed in: gnome-remote-desktop (Ubuntu Jammy)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
** Tags added:
Hello Roxana, or anyone else affected,
Accepted dkms into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dkms/2.8.7-2ubuntu2.2
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Hello Marco, or anyone else affected,
Accepted gjs into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gjs/1.72.4-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Hello Vladimir, or anyone else affected,
Accepted gjs into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gjs/1.72.4-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
This looks good. Accepting, but subject to test plan review. See
https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/scope-of-gnome-mru/18041/61?u=rbasak.
It's probably worth waiting on SRU verification until the test plan is
approved.
** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-jammy
--
You received
Hello Vladimir, or anyone else affected,
Accepted gjs into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gjs/1.72.4-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Hello Marco, or anyone else affected,
Accepted gjs into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gjs/1.72.4-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
This looks good. Accepting, but subject to test plan review. See
https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/scope-of-gnome-mru/18041/61?u=rbasak.
It's probably worth waiting on SRU verification until the test plan is
approved.
** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-jammy
--
You received
** Description changed:
[ Impact ]
That's the GNOME 42 stable update, including some fixes:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gjs/-/commits/1.72.4
[ Test case ]
The update is part of GNOME stable updates
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/GNOME
- Gjs applications
** Description changed:
[ Impact ]
That's the GNOME 42 stable update, including some fixes:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gjs/-/commits/1.72.4
[ Test case ]
The update is part of GNOME stable updates
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/GNOME
- Gjs applications
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 10:26:12AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Auto-closure of bug tasks was irrelevant to me. We almost never have bug
> tasks open in Launchpad against stable series of packages, *except* when
> they have been opened as part of the SRU process. I didn't even bother to
> look
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 02:59:39PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Lallement wrote:
> Can you please be concise and provide a list of bullet points that must be
> addressed to move forward?
Question 1. Do you want:
a) an exception that allows you to change behaviour on existing
installations when users
Version 28 is in Mantic, so Fix Released there.
** Changed in: ubuntu-advantage-tools (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of नेपाली
भाषा समायोजकहरुको समूह, which is subscribed to Xenial.
Matching subscriptions: Ubuntu 16.04
For reference, here are the definitions of options 2 and 3:
> >> 2) Reference them normally but then require or expect that the bugs are
> >> verified anyway, even though that's not strictly necessary because of
> >> the agreed QA process as part of the exception.
> >>
> >> 3) Reference them
I was about to ask *why* Ubuntu users need this change before I read
Steve's comment. It might be helpful to expand on that, because without
a full explanation, we (SRU team) are only really _speculating_ on the
actual user impact.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
An upload of jansson to jammy-proposed has been rejected from the upload
queue for the following reason: "Questions in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jansson/+bug/1987678 remain
unresolved after many months".
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
An upload of gnome-session to jammy-proposed has been rejected from the
upload queue for the following reason: "Questions in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-session/+bug/1970424
oustanding for two months".
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
An upload of thermald to focal-proposed has been rejected from the
upload queue for the following reason: "Question in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/oem-priority/+bug/2009676/comments/14
outstanding for over a month".
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
An upload of gnome-session to jammy-proposed has been rejected from the
upload queue for the following reason: "Questions in
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-session/+bug/1970424
oustanding for two months".
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 11:43:12AM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Lallement wrote:
> This special case is now documented on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AdsysUpdates
> . Can you please review this exception?
Thank you for putting this together!
From that text:
> The scope of this exception excludes major
Which package builds of linux-firmware did you test please? All three?
Just one?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to linux-firmware in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1968604
Title:
rtl8761b usb bluetooth doesn't
301 - 400 of 17436 matches
Mail list logo
