Based on the discussion in #ubuntu-release earlier, I think you want the
current livecd-rootfs in mantic-proposed to be released first, and
therefore the upload for this SRU is blocked on that?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
Thank you for your diligence! In that case, marking this as not ready.
** Tags removed: verification-done-noble
** Tags added: verification-needed-noble
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Also affects: tar (Ubuntu Mantic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: libseccomp (Ubuntu Mantic)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
This isn't a full review, but in passing I saw:
> Also, a packaging quirk of openssh-server is that checksums of the
patched sshd_config (along with certain settings tweaked) need to be
recorded in debian/openssh-server.ucf-md5sum to avoid unnecessary
debconf prompts on upgrades. I have updated
> I confirm that this also affects Noble.
Thanks! Oracular and Noble are at the same version of libseccomp then,
so I'll mark those tasks as still open.
> ...but `docker build` always uses the build-in/default profile, so
it's a limited workaround.
Can Docker be fixed upstream instead, such
** Changed in: displaycal-py3 (Ubuntu Noble)
Status: In Progress => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061329
Title:
[SRU] displaycal 3.9.11-2 needs patch to work with
Are we sure this issue doesn't affect 24.04? This bug was filed on 27
March, a day after libseccomp 2.5.5-1ubuntu1 was published into the
Noble release pocket. It looks like this was first fixed upstream in
2.5.5. The original reporter (understandably) did not report the version
of the libseccomp
Thank you for working on this!
I think this is really a different upstream bug though. The current fix
is just kicking the can down the road. We don't hardcode versioned
dependencies for what we ship with, because that would lead to brittle
packaging that breaks every package when Python is
An upload of displaycal-py3 to noble-proposed has been rejected from the
upload queue for the following reason: "See
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/displaycal-
py3/+bug/2061329/comments/13".
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 02:24:18PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > IOW, I can't think of any situation where mapping VERSION_CODENAME to
> > osVersion would be a problem, and it's more stable. I would be happy
> > to
> > stand corrected, though!
>
> Please don't - these notes are there to be
> I don't think the suggestion that CPC change that general guidance
because grub.d is less well known that other `.d` directories is a
strong rationale.
While .d directories are a common pattern and CPC should use them where
these are provided, that fundamentally has to be considered on a
I was going to say that you could use debconf to provide a setting that
allows the user to change this, and then have cloud images do that
instead of using the .d/ directory.
Then I looked and found some code to do that already, in grub-efi-
amd64.config, using the grub2/linux_cmdline_default
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 01:03:56PM +0100, Robie Basak wrote:
> In
> Ubuntu's case (and Debian's), that's possible with the name, version and
> os fields only, without ambiguity.
It just occurred to me that in Debi
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 01:37:22PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> The implementation maps VERSION_ID from /etc/os-release to the osVersion
> key. Do you suggest to use VERSION_CODENAME from /etc/os-release
> instead?
Yes. That seems like the closest thing we have that would be suitable.
> The
> and it is used in various artefacts and third party places
Please could you expand on this? If we'd just have to adjust base-files
and distro-info-data in the case of a schedule change then that's easy
and there would be no problem to do it. But locking in artifacts that
ship with the release
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 12:56:12PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> It is communicated directly at archive opening, when we upload the
> base-files containing the os-release saying that:
>
> $ grep 24.10 /etc/os-release
> VERSION_ID="24.10"
> VERSION="24.10 (Oracular Oriole)"
>
> I believe
Public bug reported:
See: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-
devel/2024-June/043027.html
Blocking proposed migration for now pending discussion in case it helps.
I'm not sure if this would stop the new dpkg being used in proposed
builds or not though.
** Affects: dpkg (Ubuntu)
Thank you for working on this! It looks like it will be useful to have
that metadata there.
On Sat, Jun 15, 2024 at 12:46:15AM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Packaging Metadata:
>
Ah. Thanks!
In that case, I think this kind of feature should be added upstream, and
isn't something that it's appropriate for Ubuntu to maintain a delta for
indefinitely.
@Nathaniel thank you for the contribution but we are unable to take this
directly into Ubuntu for this reason. I'll set the
The following six nominations have been received to fill the seven expiring
seats on the Developer Membership Board. In randomized order:
Benjamin Drung (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BenjaminDrung)
Simon Quigley (https://launchpad.net/~tsimonq2 https://github.com/tsimonq2)
Robie Basak (https
** Changed in: u-boot-nezha (Ubuntu Oracular)
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/2068600
Title:
Rebuild with current OpenSBI
To manage notifications
Uploaded with a few minor changes as agreed in #ubuntu-devel:
Dropped versioned B-D as this is unnecessary.
Adjusted changelog to add bullet '*' and note that the reason for the
B-D change is to fix an FTBFS.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
@Nathaniel
Thank you for the merge proposal! Asking here in the bug since I think
my question is more general.
Please could you explain your use case? In reviewing your merge proposal
I'm missing that context which makes it difficult for me to verify the
correctness of your code.
os-prober is
Reminder: nominations to stand for the Developer Membership Board close
on Tuesday 11 June.
If you're a core dev or MOTU, please consider if you can help.
Please also encourage anyone you think is qualified and would be good at
it to accept a nomination! Sometimes the most suitable people don't
Hello lahari, or anyone else affected,
Accepted horizon into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/horizon/4:24.0.0-0ubuntu1.1 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
Hello Hua, or anyone else affected,
Accepted horizon into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/horizon/4:24.0.0-0ubuntu1.1 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
** Changed in: sysstat (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Robie Basak (racb)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2066117
Title:
sysstat.service is enabled by default on 24.04
This seems fine, but I don't see any mention of inverse tests in the
test plan. Are we sure that password changes will continue to fail in
scenarios where it is expected to fail, such as in admin password
incorrect and user not authorized cases? If there are already automated
tests that exercise
Hi Phil,
Thank you for working on verifiable package builds!
On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 12:20:28PM +0100, Phil Roche wrote:
> I am bringing this to your attention as in support of being able to verify
> package builds in Ubuntu LTS releases I propose that we no change rebuild
> the above packages.
The verification of the Stable Release Update for gnome-shell-extension-
appindicator 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 verification of the Stable Release Update for gnome-shell-extension-
appindicator 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 verification of the Stable Release Update for gnome-shell-extension-
appindicator 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 verification of the Stable Release Update for libfilezilla 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
The verification of the Stable Release Update for gnome-shell-extension-
appindicator 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 verification of the Stable Release Update for gnome-shell-extension-
appindicator 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 verification of the Stable Release Update for gnome-shell-extension-
appindicator 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 verification of the Stable Release Update for crash 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
Thank you for the analysis. I've triggered a retest against migration-
reference/0 then. That should reset the baseline and remove the flag.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2059847
Thank you for the analysis. I've triggered a retest against migration-
reference/0 then. That should reset the baseline and remove the flag.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to mutter in Ubuntu.
The binary is accepted now. But if we're not going to use apt to try
installing from proposed, I suppose I should wait for a britney run to
ensure that there are no installability issues.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
The verification of the Stable Release Update for libvpoll-eventfd 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
I pinged in #ubuntu-release for an AA review for the binary.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061182
Title:
mstflint-dkms no longer exists in mantic
To manage notifications about
Looks like we rely solely on autopkgtests for verification, so a formal
verification report isn't needed? If so it might be worth explicitly
mentioning this in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bind9Updates and the SRU
template used.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
The verification of the Stable Release Update for bind9 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 boinc 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 ngspice 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 python-qrencode 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
The verification of the Stable Release Update for motion 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 hexchat 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
Further to discussion in #ubuntu-devel just now[1], we'll aim for a
4.7.3 release that will eliminate the need for the distro patches and
with Steve's other comments above addressed. For now then I'll reject
the current uploads from the queue.
[1]:
Size-based benefit analysis here:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2024-May/043006.html
** Summary changed:
- Packages file contains extra uinnecessary hashes
+ Packages file contains extra unnecessary hashes
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Public bug reported:
Packages files (eg.
http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jammy/main/binary-
amd64/Packages.xz) contain hashes using MD5sum, SHA1, SHA256 and SHA512,
but if we deprecate the older ones and leave only SHA512 (for example),
then we get a 30% or so size saving, reducing the
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 06:23:05PM +1200, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote:
> If we want to make apt update quicker / lighter on resources we should
> figure out if we can stop publishing some of the hashes (which entirely
> dominate the size of the compressed package lists). We currently have 4
>
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 08:43:11AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On Debian I have seen apt-update downloading diff files. Why don't we use
> those for Ubuntu especially for the large files like Contents?
This would require implementation inside Launchpad I think, which
presumably should
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 03:11:18PM +0200, Marco Trevisan wrote:
> In the past [1] I was suggesting something similar, and IMHO it would be
> quite useful for having better SRU testing tooling too.
>
> It's true that using `apt -t *-proposed` would work well for testing,
> but I was wondering if
On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 07:23:09AM -0400, David A. Desrosiers wrote:
> Let's also not lose sight of the fact that if proposed had been enabled by
> default with the current LTS release, the xz exposure and impact would have
> been a lot broader than it was, and also a lot harder to clean up and
>
The verification of the Stable Release Update for far2l 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
Hello Erich, or anyone else affected,
Accepted easyeffects into noble-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/easyeffects/7.1.6-1ubuntu0.24.04.1
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package.
Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately this doesn't address my concerns
though. Please address paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 from my comment 7 above.
Depending on your answer, it may be the case that I end up rejecting the
SRU because the impact is not sufficient to justify one (see:
Thank you for the discussion. My reaction was the same as Andreas', but
with the alternatives having been considered, if you still want to make
this change then I guess it's fine to defer to you to make the call as
you're driving this and the various options all seem reasonable to me.
The change
The terms of three seats on the Development Membership Board have
recently expired and are being temporarily extended by the Technical
Board. The terms of the remaining four seats expire on 16 June. This is
a call for nominations to fill all seven seats.
The DMB is responsible for reviewing and
I spoke to Andreas and Renan about this bug just now. I'm told that 32.2
in proposed passes all verification tests against the exceptional test
plan except for this bug. But we also need this bug fixed and don't want
to have to wait for the additional time a full test rerun would take
along with a
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
Ubuntu better.
It isn't obvious to me what Ubuntu might be "doing wrong", if anything,
that is causing this issue. Xen in Ubuntu is in our universe component
and community-supported only. Therefore I don't expect this bug to
** Description changed:
- I understand that, when informing me about notifications, update-
- notifier will tell me about Pro-only updates that I cannot receive
- unless I subscribe to Pro.
+ I understand that, when informing me about updates, update-notifier will
+ tell me about Pro-only updates
Steve asked for this to be Critical and assigned to Simon.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2065863
Title:
needrestart causes kernel upgrade messages in motd
To manage notifications
Public bug reported:
On Noble, I see this in my motd:
*** System restart required ***
Pending kernel upgrade!
Running kernel version:
6.8.0-22-generic
Diagnostics:
The currently running kernel version is not the expected kernel version
6.8.0-31-generic.
I found this code in needrestart:
This doesn't seem like a duplicate to me?
** This bug is no longer a duplicate of bug 2051115
ubuntu pro integration interferes with dist-upgrade prompting
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
On Sat, May 04, 2024 at 02:08:16AM +, Seth Arnold wrote:
> But, I also expect very few of our users would use -proposed. What
> percentage do you expect? I'm guessing less than 1%.
I agree. But making it easier to test proposed for that tiny percentage
of users would benefit all users[1] in
On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 04:05:31PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> Often I see apt-get update downloads exceeding 100 MiB. That is without a
> single package download.
I think it might be worth quantifying this. Right now, for amd64
proposed pocket Packages.xz files for the following:
Jammy:
This should be Fix Released for the development release, right?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to intel-gpu-tools in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061324
Title:
Error when re-building package from source
This should be Fix Released for the development release, right?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu-X,
which is subscribed to intel-gpu-tools in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061324
Title:
Error when re-building package from source
To manage
OK, thanks. I guess we can review the Jammy upload for now then on the
assumption that the Mantic upload won't have substantial changes until
it arrives in the queue.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
OK, thanks. I guess we can review the Jammy upload for now then on the
assumption that the Mantic upload won't have substantial changes until
it arrives in the queue.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to adsys in Ubuntu.
This should be Fix Released for the development release, right?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061324
Title:
Error when re-building package from source
To manage notifications
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 02:15:59AM -0800, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> I'd like to suggest that we start setting NotAutomatic: yes for the
> proposed pocket with hirsute+1, such that things like SRU verification
> will be easier, and all those people who enable proposed in sources.list
> for I
I wondered if ucf is expected to handle dpkg-divert -ed files in the
first place, since that seemed odd to me. It does seem like that's a
feature the code was intended to support, although it's unclear to me if
it ever worked, and it's not really documented anywhere I can find
except that is
> * run update-maintainer script
FWIW, it's not necessary to mention this directly. It is correct to do
it, but convention is to skip mentioning it in the changelog because
otherwise we'd have to unnecessarily mention it on nearly every Ubuntu
upload.
--
You received this bug notification
> * run update-maintainer script
FWIW, it's not necessary to mention this directly. It is correct to do
it, but convention is to skip mentioning it in the changelog because
otherwise we'd have to unnecessarily mention it on nearly every Ubuntu
upload.
--
You received this bug notification
I wondered if ucf is expected to handle dpkg-divert -ed files in the
first place, since that seemed odd to me. It does seem like that's a
feature the code was intended to support, although it's unclear to me if
it ever worked, and it's not really documented anywhere I can find
except that is
Debian is behind and the server team is upstream, so there is no work to
do on this package.
There is a delta introduced in Ubuntu, but no need to merge it upstream
right now as there wouldn't be any user-facing benefit to that. We can
catch up when there is user-facing benefit work to do.
**
There is currently no newer Debian version.
** Changed in: mosh (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/2064428
Title:
Merge mosh from Debian
Currently the version of adsys in Mantic is 0.13.1ubuntu0.1, which is
lower than the version in Jammy Unapproved. What's your plan for Mantic
and/or users upgrading to Mantic please?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to adsys
Currently the version of adsys in Mantic is 0.13.1ubuntu0.1, which is
lower than the version in Jammy Unapproved. What's your plan for Mantic
and/or users upgrading to Mantic please?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Hello Leonardo, or anyone else affected,
Accepted intel-gpu-tools into mantic-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/intel-gpu-
tools/1.27.1-1ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new
Hello Hector, or anyone else affected,
Accepted intel-gpu-tools into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/intel-gpu-
tools/1.26-2ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new
Hello Leonardo, or anyone else affected,
Accepted intel-gpu-tools into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/intel-gpu-
tools/1.26-2ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new
Hello Leonardo, or anyone else affected,
Accepted intel-gpu-tools into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/intel-gpu-
tools/1.26-2ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new
Hello Leonardo, or anyone else affected,
Accepted intel-gpu-tools into mantic-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/intel-gpu-
tools/1.27.1-1ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new
Hello Hector, or anyone else affected,
Accepted intel-gpu-tools into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/intel-gpu-
tools/1.26-2ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new
Hello Leonardo, or anyone else affected,
Accepted intel-gpu-tools into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/intel-gpu-
tools/1.26-2ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new
Hello Leonardo, or anyone else affected,
Accepted intel-gpu-tools into mantic-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/intel-gpu-
tools/1.27.1-1ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new
Hello Hector, or anyone else affected,
Accepted intel-gpu-tools into jammy-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/intel-gpu-
tools/1.26-2ubuntu0.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new
I'm concerned that my questions at
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-release/2024-March/005937.html
have not been fully answered. Please could you participate in that
discussion?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
The verification of the Stable Release Update for usbguard 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 detailed explanation of your testing!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1855189
Title:
usbguard stops responding when recvmsg receives ENOBUFS
To manage notifications
The verification of the Stable Release Update for sagemath 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
The verification of the Stable Release Update for libreoffice 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
The verification of the Stable Release Update for libreoffice 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
~ubuntu-release: could we treat this as a blocker for enabling upgrades,
please?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2064349
Title:
ubuntu-kernel-accessories does not get installed on
Public bug reported:
Upgrading from Jammy to Noble, we need the kernel metapackage to switch
from the Jammy HWE one to linux-generic or similar. linux-generic
Recommends ubuntu-kernel-accessories. It should get pulled in on
upgrade. It's important to ensure that this works so it is the same as
in
1 - 100 of 17459 matches
Mail list logo
