Let me know when it's safe to start work on LP: #2049352 for 5.72 or if
someone else wants to do it.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047780
Title:
BlueZ release 5.71
It looks like I was overly strict with the MIR compliance, which sort of
balances out this bug as a whole. :)
After it migrates, Gianfranco or myself will try reverting ubuntu2 to
see if we can push those two packages forward.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
ell had an approved MIR but the only thing it was used for was iwd which
is not currently in main. After the MIR is approved, something in main
needs to depend on it (or add it to a main seed) and then the Archive
Admins can promote it to main.
--
You received this bug notification because you
next time we should make sure the changelog lists all the delta from Debian :)
But with the same tarball it will be easier to find it out
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
> Force pushing my local commits over, sorry not sorry. :)
Yeah it's fine this time. :)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047780
Title:
BlueZ release 5.71
Status in
> Simon, ell already has a recent approved MIR LP: #1971738
Er, the binary packages in question don't.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047780
Title:
BlueZ release 5.71
> Please also remember to commit proposed changes to
https://git.launchpad.net/~bluetooth/bluez
Force pushing my local commits over, sorry not sorry. :)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
I'm pretty shocked, I ran a local sbuild with this and yet it still
FTBFS. Doing an ubuntu2 upload as a fixup.
I would think that because we use the published tarball and not the
upstream source like Debian does, that would affect our ability to ship
the -test package.
Something's up with my
BTW, having the previous Ubuntu version 5.71-0ubuntu3 on line 415 of the
changelog doesn't feel ideal for people wanting to read the Ubuntu
release history.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
Ideally please open a new bug for the merge. This bug should remain Fix
Released because we're already past the point in time when it was
released to Noble.
Please also remember to commit proposed changes to
https://git.launchpad.net/~bluetooth/bluez
** Changed in: bluez (Ubuntu)
Status:
Simon, ell already has a recent approved MIR LP: #1971738
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047780
Title:
BlueZ release 5.71 and merge from Debian
Status in bluez package
At first I was just going to say, ell-dev isn't built on i386 and it's
not arch:all, of course it will need an i386 allowlist entry! However,
this is the output I'm getting:
```
$ check-mir
Checking support status of build dependencies...
* debhelper-compat does not exist (pure virtual?)
*
** Changed in: bluez (Ubuntu)
Status: Fix Released => In Progress
** Summary changed:
- BlueZ release 5.71
+ BlueZ release 5.71 and merge from Debian
** Changed in: bluez (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) => Simon Quigley (tsimonq2)
--
You received this bug notification
two patches are now with Debian bugs
Opened #1060393 in bluez 5.67-1 by Gianfranco Costamagna (locutusofborg)
«please update patch
work-around-Logitech-diNovo-Edge-keyboard-firmware-i.patch».
https://bugs.debian.org/1060393
Opened #1060395 in bluez by Gianfranco Costamagna (locutusofborg)
and ell-dev needs a i386 whitelist, not sure
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047780
Title:
BlueZ release 5.71
Status in bluez package in Ubuntu:
Fix Released
Bug
Hello, I did the merge from Debian, now the packaging is really simpler,
please have a look and upload if possible.
** Attachment added: "bluez_5.71-1ubuntu1.debian.tar.xz"
This bug was fixed in the package bluez - 5.71-0ubuntu3
---
bluez (5.71-0ubuntu3) noble; urgency=medium
* Denylist libebook1.2-dev on i386.
-- Simon Quigley Sat, 06 Jan 2024 14:25:13 -0600
** Changed in: bluez (Ubuntu)
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You
Hello Daniel!
>Thank you for working over the weekend on this. I would have resolved
it myself on the Monday if someone >answered the question in comment
#11.
This is what a team does, help other people.
In this case I started answering to comment #11, I did fix->fix->fix
DH_VERBOSE, fix
Daniel, I don't want you to feel burned over this. That wiki page does
seem quite rational, and I appreciate that you linked it. I'm reading
some mixed feelings, so let me be clear: thank you for the work you
*are* able to put into this.
Both Gianfranco and I are Ubuntu Core Developers but are
Thank you for working over the weekend on this. I would have resolved it
myself on the Monday if someone answered the question in comment #11.
Also I've sent a bug report to Debian about their orig tarball not
matching the upstream release tarball. I feel that's a discussion they
need to have
It looks like most of you are members of ~bluetooth already via ~ubuntu-
core-dev so feel free to commit directly to
https://git.launchpad.net/~bluetooth/bluez in future.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
I appreciate everyone is frustrated. BlueZ isn't really staffed, it's
just something I look at once or twice a year. The diff to Debian is
shrinking over the long term, but again that's something I don't look at
very often.
The justification for Ubuntu using a separate process for the past 6
evolution-data-server still has uninstallable binaries on i386. You can
ignore bluez for the binfmt-support issue.
However, for bluez, Ubuntu uses --enable-phonebook-ebook . There are
other phonebook options; maybe what Debian uses works for Debian.
--
You received this bug notification because
> In other words, asking an Archive Admin to build binfmt-support on
i386.
I have stopped short of this so far because I'm entirely unsure if we
still need that build dependency in the first place. Debian doesn't have
it, and I'm not sure I see rationale on our end for it.
There is probably
Simon, I think it would be better to get libphonenumber fixed correctly
instead of working around it.
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libphonenumber/8.12.57+ds-4build1
https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/proposed-
migration/noble_uninst.txt
In other words, asking an Archive Admin to
Following the dependency chain through to the cause for the i386 builds,
binfmt-support should be added to the i386 allowlist. This may be a bug
in evolution-data-server in the case libebook-contacts-1.2-4 can build
without libphonenumber8-protobuf32 - for now, blanket-disabling that
dependency in
This is now blocking a Lubuntu feature goal. I tested this locally with
my bluetooth earbuds, and have been streaming audio with no problems.
Uploaded Gianfranco's packaging with some minor tweaks.
Please, we *need* to merge this from Debian *this* cycle. The Security
Team will NOT be happy when
Rik mentioned a common mistake that I've been trying harder to catch
(but didn't in this case, to my great frustration)...
If we're doing a merge and an orig tarball already exists in Debian,
always always ALWAYS grab that one instead of using uscan or finding the
tarball yourself. It breaks
> Also, why is the tarball different from the Debian one?
At least for 5.71, it looks as if Ubuntu are using the tar.xz from the
kernel.org download url in the debian/watch file, while debian are
fetching or making a tar from the git.kernel.org (or gihub mirror) bluez
repo.
--
You received this
The reason I essentially blindsponsored this was out of faith and
courtesy for the Desktop Team.
Lubuntu does similar things, but we have a merge party from Debian once
a cycle. If your response would be "we don't follow Debian," *I get it*,
but once or twice a cycle a merge should really be
I don't understand why bluez packaging can't be merged with the debian fixes
and continues to follow some logic of "never update to newer dh or compat".
Also patches from Debian are never received, as well as new binaries not
installed.
I did some really little cleanup and the package now
Turns out it's not as simple as the above comments suggest.
> https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd/-/commit/ee83b5721
> https://salsa.debian.org/DebianOnMobile-team/modemmanager/-/commit/367180c3
udev changes are not relevant to the failures in
Daniel, if you'd like to iterate on this (a debdiff for an ubuntu2
upload), it would be appreciated.
If you don't have the time, say the word, this looks like a simple fix.
...on everything but i386. What's up with that?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Daniel, systemd was updated today in noble-proposed. It includes changes
as part of Debian's ongoing usrmerge work. In particular this commit:
https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd/-/commit/ee83b5721
Here is a Debian commit to adapt to the change:
The build is failing:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bluez/5.71-0ubuntu1
But I don't know how to reproduce the failure. Certainly it builds on
both noble and mantic, and installs, and works for me. Is this because
Launchpad is using a focal toolchain?
--
You received this bug notification
> 34174 lines in this case is not plausibly reviewable.
I typically use filterdiff to get the packaging changes, and review
specific source files as necessary (including copyright changes in the
diff, which can be important, even if you're just using a script for
it).
Thanks for your help here.
It's usually Seb sponsoring these, but he's on vacation. To avoid any
future complaints in case he's away again I will also include debdiffs
in future.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
Here's the debdiff. We don't usually use them for major updates though
because of the size. 34174 lines in this case is not plausibly
reviewable.
** Patch added: "bluez_5.71-0ubuntu1.debdiff"
I very much dislike reviewing packages this way. For a package to be in
the sponsorship queue, it needs to have a debdiff, not a debian.tar.xz.
I understand that it's a new upstream release, but that does not excuse
the need for a debdiff, even if you *also* include these files.
I'm uploading
** Attachment added: "bluez_5.71-0ubuntu1.debian.tar.xz"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bluez/+bug/2047780/+attachment/5735865/+files/bluez_5.71-0ubuntu1.debian.tar.xz
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez
Updated source files are attached above. And the source is in:
https://git.launchpad.net/~bluetooth/bluez/log/
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047780
Title:
BlueZ
** Attachment added: "bluez_5.71.orig.tar.xz"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bluez/+bug/2047780/+attachment/5735864/+files/bluez_5.71.orig.tar.xz
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
** Changed in: bluez (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2047780
Title:
BlueZ release 5.71
Status in bluez package in Ubuntu:
43 matches
Mail list logo
