Thank you for your bug report. It seems you accidentally unmounted
/boot/efi, make sure your ESP is mounted there.
** Changed in: grub2-signed (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
http
Thank you for your bug report. I don't understand how your touchpad not
working is relevant to your bootloader not installing, please open a
separate bug for that.
For the bootloader issue, it seems you broke your /etc/default/grub,
please go ahead and fix it back up.
/var/lib/dpkg/info/grub-pc.
That is, there is a space here between LIN and UX that should not be
there:
GRUB_CMDLINE_LIN UX_DEFAULT="quiet splash i8042.nomux i8042.nopnp
i8042.noloop"
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
** Description changed:
- I am running hirsute on Thinkpad X1 Carbon gen 7. Fwupdmgr used to work
- on groovy. Now, fwupdmgr detects new firmware, successfully places the
- .cap file in /boot/efi/EFI/ubuntu/fw/, successfully sets efi "next boot"
- to 2 which is "Linux-Firmware-Updater", but on reb
** Description changed:
+ [Impact]
+ Systems that do not support QueryVariableInfo() EFI function fail to boot.
+
+ [Test plan]
+ Would be good to get this checked on the Mellanox BF1 SmartNIC on one release
(shim is binary copied)
+
+ [Where problems could occur]
+ it might still fail to mirro
** Description changed:
- If I put a hirsute guest in a reboot loop, I find it will eventually
- crash:
+ [Impact]
+ Sometimes arm64 fails to reboot
+
+ [Test plan]
+ Let dannf run his reboot loop on one of the releases It's OK testing this in
one release, as the fix is entirely shim-side and it
Public bug reported:
[Impact]
shim-signed uploads FTBFS for a couple hours after upload on arm64, as the
arm64 builders are behind a proxy with caching, and the proxy caches the old
version for the current/ url.
Switch the download-signed script to extract the current version from
the apt cache
Please also test the shim-signed 1.50+... binaries in proposed.
If they do not work, please run mokutil --set-verbosity true and reboot
and capture the output with a camera such that we can see verbose
logging.
Thank you!
** Changed in: shim-signed (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
Using other bug
** Changed in: fwupd (Ubuntu Focal)
Status: New => Won't Fix
** Changed in: fwupd-signed (Ubuntu Focal)
Status: New => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net
** Description changed:
+ [Impact]
+ Needed for fwupd 1.5.11
+
+ [Test plan]
+ It has a test suite and fwupd uses it, so testing fwupd tests it to some
extend
+
+ [Where problems could occur]
+ fwupd could break on regressions. Then again, this is a straight backport and
it's fairly small.
+
fwupd actually built fine without new libjcat, so not sure if we
actually need to upgrade it. Arguably there seems to be a CVE in the old
version and a couple of bug fixes that might be worthwhile anyway.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subs
It's been that way for a while (15.4-0ubuntu1 probably, ubuntu5
certainly). Whether that was really intentional I can't say. It is
however nothing we can afford blocking this on and do another round of
resigning.
** Tags removed: verification-failed-xenial
** Tags removed: verification-failed ver
We do not support arm64 secure boot on xenial, so this is practically
verified.
** Tags removed: erification-done-focal
** Tags added: verification-done-focal verification-done-xenial
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
ht
Dimitri confirmed this change was intentional, fwiw. The auxiliary
binaries moved to shim-signed, and there isn't really any need for
unsigned shim binaries.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bu
** Changed in: shim-signed (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1936759
Title:
shim-signed 1.48+15.4-0ubuntu5 does not secure boot
To manage notif
If you could try the 1.47+15.4-0ubuntu2 binaries as well, that'd be
great, you can find them via launchpad:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shim-signed/1.47/+build/21482148
If this fails, the issue is one of the three patches in there
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
We discussed this a bit upstream and we believe this to be random, and
not a regression in those later 15.4 updates.
Apparently there is a buffer overflow in shim that makes it override
memory of other EFI components, and depending on where that triggers, it
can cause all sorts of random boot fail
Thank you for your bug report. Why did it fail, and what steps did you
take?
** Changed in: shim-signed (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/1937034
ndiswrapper is not a supported system component. It is not built for
recent kernels anymore. My suggestion would be to get a different WiFi
card that does not require you to resort to Windows XP era drivers.
Anyhow, the problem here is for *ndisgtk*. Maybe gksu is not installed
on your system for
Please submit a proper merge against the git repo and make sure to use
gbp pq to export the patch instead of manually editing debian/patches (I
can see in your patch, your formatting is off).
The repository is located at https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-
dev/grub/+git/ubuntu
--
You receiv
As stated in bug "We do not have tests to verify this", so marking
verified.
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic
verification-needed-focal verification-needed-xenial
** Tags added: verification-done verification-done-bionic
verification-done-focal verification-done-xe
fwupd is not being run on xenial. need to verify against new fwupd on
focal; bionic fwupd SRU still unapproved.
** Tags removed: verification-needed-xenial
** Tags added: verification-done-xenial
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed t
We verified them once, no need or ability to reverify those binaries
across all releases on macs.
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic
verification-needed-focal verification-needed-xenial
** Tags added: verification-done verification-done-bionic
verification-done-focal
Marking as verified for all releases, since bianry is the same.
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic
verification-needed-xenial
** Tags added: verification-done verification-done-bionic
verification-done-xenial
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
I verified that this did not cause any regressions prior to submitting
the build for signing, unfortunately we're still missing a VMWare
license and cannot validate it actually fixes the issue on VMWare (or
that the issue exists) - just trusting SUSE on that one.
** Tags removed: verification-need
I checked the build logs for all releases (1.50, 1.40.6, and
1.37~18.04.10) and they all fetched via versioned URLs.
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic
verification-needed-focal verification-needed-hirsute
** Tags added: verification-done verification-done-bionic
ver
bionic is good, as soon as I add the bionic-proposed sources.list entry
(containing 1.37~18.04.10), the package is treated as essential.
# apt autoremove
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Verification looks the same for focal (1.40.6+15.4-0ubuntu7)
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-focal
** Tags added: verification-done verification-done-focal
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https
The verification from 16.04.9 is also valid for 16.04.10, as only the
shim binaries changed, and not the scripts
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-xenial
** Tags added: verification-done verification-done-xenial
--
You received this bug notification because you are a membe
In lieu of other releases not being hirsute, I just did the "exit from
grub returns to shell" test from inside the EFI shell with
15.4-0ubuntu7, which passed. I also accidentally did a MAAS-style PXE
shim -> PXE grub -> ESP shim -> ESP grub chainboot which worked fine.
We are going to do more regr
OK so I'm actually going to mark this as verified, since I verified the
load option parsing fix in 15.4-0ubuntu7 that makes it find the correct
binaries, and will leave the verification of the fwupd's SBAT stuff to
the fwupd SRUs.
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic
ve
Seems to be an issue with shim / the UEFI firmware on those machines.
Could be a regression from the load option parsing, but confused as to
how we end up trying to boot a non existing file instead of falling
back.
Could also be memory corruption (shim pull #365).
Need to mokutil --set-verbosity
Please also include the output of efibootmgr -v on those systems. There
is likely garbage in the boot loader entries the UEFI generated for
those devices.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/
I have posted a work around for this issue upstream:
https://github.com/rhboot/shim/pull/393
This will add a 2s delay on invalid filenames or not found files, and
then fallback to the default loader. Hence it's still a good idea to
parse the load options properly to avoid the errors in the first p
So, the regression potential is wrong and the fallback code I was
thinking of does not exist. This seems to have caused a regression in
bug 1937115. This will affect some systems that contain garbage in
default boot order entries that still gets parsed as a valid second
stage loader.
This should o
Please don't modify that in /etc/grub.d, set GRUB_RECORDFAIL_TIMEOUT=5
in the /etc/default/grub file (or in an /etc/default/grub.d snippet).
/etc/grub.d file changes are last resort, that file changes and
incorporating those changes with your own ones will be annoying.
--
You received this bug no
** Tags removed: block-proposed-focal
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1928434
Title:
shim-signed does not boot on EFI 2.40 by Apple
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https
Verified the shim on focal.
* xnox verified windows booting on hirsute, binaries are same
* I verified maas style chained netbooting
* Verified the interactions with mokutil
+ Verified loading dkms modules
+ Verified end2end IRL boot on ThinkPad X230 with ZFS
- Did not verify actual Maas boot, but
Most tests from focal and newer are valid on xenial too, as the binaries
are the same. I hence just verified the interaction with xenial's
mokutil and kernel keyring:
* Tested enrolling MOK and modprobing vboxdrv module
* Tested timeout and reset, modprobe after reset failed to find the key, as it
You can read /var/log/apt/term.log yourself. Embedding that nicely seems
hard, but then again, apport should have shown you the messages when you
reported the bug?
As the log tells you, you have installed the postfix mail server, but
configured an invalid hostname "04":
newaliases: warning: valid
I'd still like to see efibootmgr -v output from affected machines, for
the boot entry that failed to boot.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1937115
Title:
Unable to boot/install Impish
Do we need a snapshot past 3.0.13 for this? I'd prefer to use releases,
to be honest. The upstream versioning for snapshots should really be
something like 3.0.13+git..
Doing this properly in the git repo (https://salsa.debian.org/efi-
team/gnu-efi) would be nice, and then upload to experimental a
Yeah, that's not the right way. Then it would be 3.0.13-0ubuntu1, and
not changed in the upstream version. Which is OK too, but I went ahead
and imported a git-archive export as 3.0.13+git20210716.269ef9d-1 in the
Debian repository and uploaded that to experimental with any-riscv64
(and any-ia64) a
** Changed in: shim (Ubuntu Impish)
Status: Incomplete => Triaged
** Changed in: shim (Ubuntu Impish)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
** Changed in: cd-boot-images-amd64 (Ubuntu Impish)
Status: Confirmed => Triaged
--
You received this bug notification because you are a memb
Hi folks,
we don't need reports of what works and what doesn't.
We already know that only live media are affected - installed systems
usually don't boot via removable media path - but if they do, they go
via fallback loader binary which works around the issue as it does not
interpret its argument
@sudodos, @leok You can do that in an installed Ubuntu system, on a non-
impish live media, heck in any other Linux distro.
We need the new shim for 20.04.3, and this is the sorta blocker, hence
the focal tag.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which i
According to bug 1934209:
Verification passed on Focal
Secure boot on
shim-signed: 1.40.6+15.4-0ubuntu7 (proposed channel, sbat applied)
fwupd: 1.5.11-0ubuntu1~20.04.2 (propsoed channel, sbat applied)
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-focal
** Tags added: verification-done
** Tags removed: verification-needed
** Tags added: verification-done
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1934209
Title:
Dell dock USB4 module need fwupd 1.5.11
To manage notifications ab
** Tags removed: verification-needed
** Tags added: verification-done
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1920724
Title:
Upgrade focal/libjcat to version 0.1.3-2 and MIR it
To manage noti
** Changed in: update-manager (Ubuntu Focal)
Status: Incomplete => Triaged
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1938043
Title:
ubuntu-security-status
To manage notifications about t
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Focal)
Status: Won't Fix => Triaged
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1872200
Title:
apt does not accept globs and regexes in some cases
To manage noti
Well hirsute does not exist in that ppa. This is not a bug in Ubuntu
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1903323
Title:
trying to
As a compromise, and given that I ripped of the previous faulty http-
internal retry code, I think we do need to go with Retries set to 2 for
hirsute, and worry about improvements later, because while I appreciate
all the bugs I get for failures and the chance to fix them, they also
break people's
In proposed now
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1727470
Title:
[RFE] Automatically update the Ubuntu version strings in python-apt
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https:
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu Groovy)
Assignee: duong xuan minh (mrminh) => (unassigned)
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Assignee: duong xuan minh (mrminh) => (unassigned)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bug
** Changed in: glibc (Ubuntu)
Assignee: irakli chubinidze (skrdxx12) => (unassigned)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1871268
Title:
Installation fails due to useless immediate con
Uploaded in Debian as 2.1-1, pending processing there and autosync.
** Changed in: networkd-dispatcher (Ubuntu Hirsute)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad
This is not a grub bug. I don't know what that module is, I assume you
installed it manually. Use askubuntu, irc, or mailing list for support.
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subsc
How is this a bug in apt? I don't see you use apt anywhere.
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1903975
Title:
Hashsum mismatch C
** Changed in: grub-installer (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1898342
Title:
Bootloader install failed
To manage notifications about
** Also affects: grubzfs-testsuite (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1899372
Title:
update-grub 10_linux_zfs fails when /usr is a sep
This is not a bug in apt. dpkg cleans up its database and removes hold
states for non-installed packages following an operation.
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Yes, but that's really something for dpkg upstream to look at, and not
something we should patch out downstream.
** No longer affects: apt (Ubuntu)
** Changed in: dpkg (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Low
** Changed in: dpkg (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Triaged
--
You received this bug n
I didn't remember the discussions with the dpkg maintainer about this,
but I did find them now, and he basically pointed at the same thing.
Anyway, this is not a common use case, so there's no point adding an
extra delta here. Use pinning in apt instead.
--
You received this bug notification bec
Kernels do have to be signed with UEFI methods, we do not support GPG.
** Changed in: grub2 (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Opinion
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1820296
Title:
Thanks for your bug report. Unfortunately, you have not included any
error messages like the stacktrace from such a crash, and the bug cannot
be analyzed further without them.
** Changed in: update-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because yo
Does it work if you include any other modules than linux.mod which come
to the same overall file size?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1900668
Title:
MAAS PXE Boot stalls with grub 2.0
Sure you can keep versions away with pinning, you pin them to negative
values, e.g.
Package: idontlike
Pin: version *
Pin-Priority: -1
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1904195
Title:
a
I think the question is whether there is documentation that states that
zsys supports split /usr, and the answer for that is no.
Also, um, the installer does not support installing like this - there's
only one experimental ZFS option, on desktop anyway.
So this bug in essence will answer the ques
Marking this as incomplete until we have access to reproducers or
someone committed to answering questions.
- Does it fail with other images that contain linux.mod but are smaller
- Does it fail with other larger images that don't contain linux.mod
- Does it fail with 2.04 in focal as well?
@stgr
Oh yeah, please set debug=all and retry, if you can't give access for
checking
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1900668
Title:
MAAS PXE Boot stalls with grub 2.02
To manage notificatio
And try with the current SRU with the TFTP fix.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1900668
Title:
MAAS PXE Boot stalls with grub 2.02
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https:
Also try on different server, it might very well be a bug in the
server's firmware.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1900668
Title:
MAAS PXE Boot stalls with grub 2.02
To manage notifi
The proper command name is net_bootp, not net_bootps
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1904588
Title:
Network boot from MAAS sometimes fails at "grub>" prompt
To manage notifications ab
Hello!
This seems to be a duplicate of https://launchpad.net/bugs/1900668 -
could you check that? I have some list of things in there I'm looking
for, mostly running with debug=all and trying current SRU in proposed
with has a tftp fix (probably unrelated).
Thanks!
--
You received this bug noti
Sorry for the many comments, but net_dhcp is a more modern replacement
for net_bootp too AFAIUI.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1904588
Title:
Network boot from MAAS sometimes fails a
Stéphane:
You've never run net_bootp (in the attached screenshots at least) - the
command that's failing here, so it's not certain if you have the same
problem.
If you look at the end of the bug report, you'll see the image matters -
the custom image works, but if linux.mod is included, it fails.
Michał that sounds promising, if a bit unexpected, thanks for letting us
know.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1900668
Title:
MAAS PXE Boot stalls with grub 2.02
To manage notificatio
And yes, the answer is most likely that linux-image-5.8.0-30-generic was
not built when you tried, hence it could not upgrade the meta package.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1904870
Ti
Please don't use proposed if you don't know what you're getting
yourselves into. Especially on a development release.
** Changed in: apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bu
Been running for 1d 15h sofar and it seems to be fine
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1896091
Title:
[i915] Noise-like lines of graphics corruption when moving windows in
Xorg sessio
> I probably don't, but have no idea want it actually does.
It provides safe access to files on your disk to snaps or flatpaks.
> You can silence this with "df -x fuse.portal"
Odd, when I tried it didn't work for me, maybe I made a typo.
Added a task for coreutils - we should ignore fuse.portal
** Changed in: coreutils (Ubuntu)
Status: New => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1905623
Title:
df: /run/user/1000/doc: Operation not permitted
To manage notificati
I think we've gotten enough (independent) verifications of this now to
mark it as done.
** Tags removed: verification-needed-groovy
** Tags added: verification-done-groovy
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.l
Just to note, a huge number of other file systems don't show:
$ grep fuse /proc/mounts
fusectl /sys/fs/fuse/connections fusectl rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime 0 0
https://sd2dav.1und1.de/ /media/jak/smartdrive fuse
rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,user_id=1000,group_id=1000,allow_other,max_read=
How did you upgrade from 16.04 to 20.04?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1907083
Title:
hwe-support-status fails without displaying unsupported packages
To manage notifications about
** Also affects: python-apt (Ubuntu Groovy)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: python-apt (Ubuntu Groovy)
Status: New => Triaged
** Changed in: python-apt (Ubuntu Groovy)
Importance: Undecided => Critical
** Changed in: python-apt (Ubuntu)
Status: New =>
Again, this patch is invalid, you don't ship debian/patches in native
packages, and they're not applied during the build anyway.
** Tags removed: patch
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/19
Again, this patch is invalid, it only contains a changelog entry.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1907729
Title:
pycodestyle error E741 in source
To manage notifications about this bu
When you have provided a proper debdiff against ubuntu-release-upgrader
1:20.04.29, please subscribe sponsors team again.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1907728
Title:
pycodestyle err
Please resubscribe sponsors after you have a proper debdiff against
1.0.2-0ubuntu1
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1907729
Title:
pycodestyle error E741 in source
To manage notificati
There are no changes in that debdiff except for adding a header to the
patch file and updating a couple of po files. There should not be patch
files in there in the first place, this is a native package.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subsc
Please resubscribe sponsors after providing a proper debdiff against
version 1:20.04.10.1.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1907727
Title:
pycodestyle error E741 in source
To manage no
None of the patches were valid. They were either empty and/or against
obsolete versions.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1883175
Title:
Missing code linter support for python3.8 langua
Also they all had wrong version numbers in changelog and associated
release information.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1883175
Title:
Missing code linter support for python3.8 langua
We really should have backported the parser changes for 3.8, and not the
entire pycodestyle. Tons of stuff has test suites that use pycodestyle
and start failing on new versions.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://
The autopkgtest failures only tell half the story, other packages more
wisely only end up running pyflakes in pep8; and pushing out a ton of
SRUs like this to users when they don't actually care about them is just
annoying.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Alternatively, revert the new error changes in pycodestyle/flake8
instead of patching up unrelated packages to fix breakage from the SRU
and annoy users with updates they don't need.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
http
This is incomplete, APT deduplicates descriptions based on the
description hash, so if the description is the same, barring a bug in
apt, it should be available for both versions. Without seeing an apt-
cache showpkg of the affected package, we can't really tell. It seems to
work for me, but I also
There is no movement and there will be no movement for some more months
at least.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1865515
Title:
Chainbooting from grub over the network to local shim b
601 - 700 of 5121 matches
Mail list logo
