[Bug 1913179] [NEW] krb5 fails dep8 in Hirsute

2021-01-25 Thread Robie Basak
Public bug reported:

I'm creating this bug to lead people looking at update_excuses to the MP
that fixes this issue, since unfortunately there's no easier way of
doing that.

** Affects: krb5 (Ubuntu)
 Importance: Undecided
 Status: Triaged


** Tags: update-excuse

** Merge proposal linked:
   
https://code.launchpad.net/~racb/ubuntu/+source/openldap/+git/openldap/+merge/396853

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1913179

Title:
  krb5 fails dep8 in Hirsute

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/krb5/+bug/1913179/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1848330] Update Released

2021-01-25 Thread Robie Basak
The verification of the Stable Release Update for audit 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 regression using the package from
-updates please report a new bug using ubuntu-bug and tag the bug report
regression-update so we can easily find any regressions.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848330

Title:
  Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audit/+bug/1848330/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1848330] Re: Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

2021-01-23 Thread Robie Basak
I think it's important to distinguish:

 a) merely failing to reproduce the issue; versus

 b) confirming reproduction of the issue against the previous version of
the package (version 1:2.8.2-1ubuntu1 in this case), and then confirming
that the proposed version (version 1:2.8.2-1ubuntu1.1 in this case)
resolves the issue _in the same environment_.

The distinction is important because if the test method and environment
used is unable to reproduce against the previous version, then
confirming that it's not possible to reproduce the issue with the
proposed version is effectively no testing at all.

Please could you confirm if the testing was actually case b, and if so
detail what testing was performed?

Thanks!

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848330

Title:
  Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audit/+bug/1848330/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1848330] Re: Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

2021-01-22 Thread Robie Basak
** Tags removed: verification-done-bionic
** Tags added: verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848330

Title:
  Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audit/+bug/1848330/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1910611] Please test proposed package

2021-01-22 Thread Robie Basak
Hello richard, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sssd into focal-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/2.2.3-3ubuntu0.3
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910611

Title:
  sssd startup fails when apparmor in enforcing mode

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/apparmor/+bug/1910611/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1910611] Re: sssd startup fails when apparmor in enforcing mode

2021-01-22 Thread Robie Basak
Hello richard, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sssd into groovy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/2.3.1-3ubuntu3 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
groovy to verification-done-groovy. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-groovy. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: sssd (Ubuntu Groovy)
   Status: New => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-groovy

** Changed in: sssd (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: New => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910611

Title:
  sssd startup fails when apparmor in enforcing mode

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/apparmor/+bug/1910611/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1848330] Re: Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

2021-01-21 Thread Robie Basak
I'd like to see some testing from someone actually affected please.
Otherwise we'd be releasing a change that risks regression to users not
affected, for a bug that we're not even sure if we've fixed.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848330

Title:
  Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audit/+bug/1848330/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1910432] Re: dirmngr doesn't work with kernel parameter ipv6.disable=1

2021-01-21 Thread Robie Basak
> I suggest you use 2.2.20-1ubuntu1.20.10.1 based on
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Update_the_packaging.
Alternatively this problem will be resolved as soon as 2.2.20-1ubuntu2
in hirsute-proposed migrates.

It occurred to me that 2.2.20-1ubuntu1.20.10.1 won't help either. We
need the Hirsute release pocket to move beyond 2.2.20-1ubuntu1.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910432

Title:
  dirmngr doesn't work with kernel parameter ipv6.disable=1

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnupg2/+bug/1910432/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1912496] Re: update-notifier-common pulls in ubuntu-drivers-common including on server where it is not required

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Robie, or anyone else affected,

Accepted update-notifier into focal-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-
notifier/3.192.30.5 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: update-notifier (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1912496

Title:
  update-notifier-common pulls in ubuntu-drivers-common including on
  server where it is not required

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/1912496/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1880443] Re: targetcli fails iscsi setup after upgrade from 18.04 to 20.04

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
Wearing my SRU hat, my answer is "I don't know, depends on the
specifics". In a discussion with the server team we weren't clear on the
specifics. How is it that this regresses on upgrade from Bionic? Did a
system unit that previously existed accidentally vanish? Or something
else more complicated?

However also we noted that this is in universe in Focal.

** Tags removed: server-triage-discuss

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1880443

Title:
  targetcli fails iscsi setup after upgrade from 18.04 to 20.04

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/targetcli-fb/+bug/1880443/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1893753] Re: libnginx-mod-http-lua 0.10.11 not compatible with NGINX 1.18/1.17

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
** Tags removed: server-triage-discuss

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1893753

Title:
  libnginx-mod-http-lua 0.10.11 not compatible with NGINX 1.18/1.17

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nginx/+bug/1893753/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1912496] Re: update-notifier-common pulls in ubuntu-drivers-common including on server where it is not required

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
Instead of a hard dependency from update-notifier-common -> ubuntu-
drivers-common, how about seeding ubuntu-drivers-common directly in
desktop, and making list-oem-metapackages no-op if not installed?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1912496

Title:
  update-notifier-common pulls in ubuntu-drivers-common including on
  server where it is not required

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/1912496/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1912496] Re: update-notifier-common pulls in ubuntu-drivers-common including on server where it is not required

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
If we consider this bug valid, it is actually a regression in the
already-landed SRU of update-notifier-common driven by bug 1908050.

** Tags added: regression-update

** Also affects: update-notifier (Ubuntu Focal)
   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/1912496

Title:
  update-notifier-common pulls in ubuntu-drivers-common including on
  server where it is not required

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/1912496/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1912496] [NEW] update-notifier-common pulls in ubuntu-drivers-common including on server where it is not required

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
Public bug reported:

update-notifier 3.192.37 (https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source
/update-notifier/commit/?id=f766bda4ab5032a5af84311fabd2e6d9e56b3254)
added a dependency on ubuntu-drivers-common, which causes ubuntu-server
to bloat, for example by pulling in alsa-utils.

I don't know if there's an easy solution to this, or if we just need to
live with it. If the latter, this bug can be Won't Fix'd.

** Affects: update-notifier (Ubuntu)
 Importance: Undecided
 Status: New

** Affects: update-notifier (Ubuntu Focal)
 Importance: Undecided
 Status: New


** Tags: regression-update

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1912496

Title:
  update-notifier-common pulls in ubuntu-drivers-common including on
  server where it is not required

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/1912496/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1904988] Re: [SRU] set defaults to be sslv23 not tlsv1

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
Thanks Marc!

Unsubscribed ~ubuntu-sponsors.

For SRU verification, would checking that eventlet can correctly connect
to each the various protocol versions be appropriate?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1904988

Title:
  [SRU] set defaults to be sslv23 not tlsv1

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-eventlet/+bug/1904988/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1904988] Re: [SRU] set defaults to be sslv23 not tlsv1

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Hua, or anyone else affected,

Accepted python-eventlet into xenial-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-
eventlet/0.18.4-1ubuntu2 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
xenial to verification-done-xenial. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-xenial. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: python-eventlet (Ubuntu Xenial)
   Status: Triaged => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-xenial

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1904988

Title:
  [SRU] set defaults to be sslv23 not tlsv1

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-eventlet/+bug/1904988/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1895643] Re: Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
I think thunderbird needs a versioned Breaks on tinyjsd and jsunit now,
right? And also, shouldn't it have a versioned Breaks on enigmail (and
vice versa) to ensure that the new enigmail is updated in lockstep with
Thunderbird?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1895643

Title:
  Backport Thunderbird 78 to 20.04 LTS and 18.04 LTS

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunderbird/+bug/1895643/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1908119] Re: Update and SRU 1.90.8

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
> Security team was happy to have this in, but we preferred to go
through the SRU process in order to have better regression analysis.

That's pretty convincing, since a security update would trump the SRU
process anyway. And it does make sense to use the SRU process for time
to bake in proposed, a more visible opportunity for users to flag
issues, and so forth.

However, I want to make sure that we don't end up in a gap where the
security team think that the SRU team consider it fine and the SRU team
think that the security team think it's fine so nobody actually gives it
the necessary consideration for regression risk. To avoid this kind of
issue, I prefer to avoid basing decisions on hearsay in bugs.

Can I ask, if we're going to accept this on the basis that the security
team require it for security purposes, that the security team review the
upload and then note +1 in this bug?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1908119

Title:
  Update and SRU 1.90.8

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fprintd/+bug/1908119/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1902044] Proposed package upload rejected

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
An upload of deja-dup to groovy-proposed has been rejected from the
upload queue for the following reason: "Missing SRU information (see
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/deja-
dup/+bug/1902044/comments/1 and
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/deja-
dup/+bug/1902044/comments/5)".

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1902044

Title:
  SRU the current 42.6 stable update

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/deja-dup/+bug/1902044/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1910432] Please test proposed package

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Heitor, or anyone else affected,

Accepted gnupg2 into focal-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnupg2/2.2.19-3ubuntu2.1 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910432

Title:
  dirmngr doesn't work with kernel parameter ipv6.disable=1

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnupg2/+bug/1910432/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1910432] Re: dirmngr doesn't work with kernel parameter ipv6.disable=1

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
> We should look out for potential regressions when connecting to
servers with exclusive IPv4 or IPv6 connectivity, to make sure the
server is not getting marked as 'dead' due to missing one of the
versions.

+1. Please do this during SRU verification, as well as checking that
dual stack works as expected. I accept though that the code path being
added is only when errno == EAFNOSUPPORT so scope for regression is very
limited.

The Hirsute release pocket currently has 2.2.20-1ubuntu1, same as
Groovy. So I can't accept 2.2.20-1ubuntu1 into Groovy, since then the
Hirsute release pocket would be a lower version than what is in Groovy.
I suggest you use 2.2.20-1ubuntu1.20.10.1 based on
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Update_the_packaging.
Alternatively this problem will be resolved as soon as 2.2.20-1ubuntu2
in hirsute-proposed migrates.

Please fix the Groovy upload, or otherwise ping when fixed. I see no
reason to block right now on accepting the Focal upload, but it would be
nice to get both into proposed and then released at once, so users don't
regress when upgrading from Focal to Groovy.

** Changed in: gnupg2 (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Changed in: gnupg2 (Ubuntu Groovy)
   Status: In Progress => Incomplete

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910432

Title:
  dirmngr doesn't work with kernel parameter ipv6.disable=1

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnupg2/+bug/1910432/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1892361] Re: SRIOV instance gets type-PF interface, libvirt kvm fails

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Peter, or anyone else affected,

Accepted nova into focal-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nova/2:21.1.1-0ubuntu2
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: nova (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: New => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1892361

Title:
  SRIOV instance gets type-PF interface, libvirt kvm fails

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-archive/+bug/1892361/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1906720] Re: Fix the disable_ssl_certificate_validation option

2021-01-20 Thread Robie Basak
Please add a regression analysis as required by
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure.

In particular, please take some steps here to make sure that we don't
accidentally disable certificate validation across the board - since
that would have severe consequences, we're messing with "should we check
the certificate" code, and the problem wouldn't be detected just by
checking this bug is fixed.

That's the most obvious possible issue to me, but please consider and
add anything else relevant.

** Changed in: python-httplib2 (Ubuntu Bionic)
   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/1906720

Title:
  Fix the disable_ssl_certificate_validation option

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-httplib2/+bug/1906720/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1912122] Re: /var/log/dmesg is 0644, should be 0640 to match new DMESG_RESTRICT restrictions

2021-01-19 Thread Robie Basak
Is this really worth an SRU to Groovy? One could consider the change to
be fully implemented since Hirsute only, and Groovy will EOL before long
anyway. Otherwise there's a risk that we'll break users' existing
automation that is already live against Groovy.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1912122

Title:
  /var/log/dmesg is 0644, should be 0640 to match new DMESG_RESTRICT
  restrictions

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rsyslog/+bug/1912122/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1912118] Re: assertion failure in message_part_finish when searching large folder

2021-01-19 Thread Robie Basak
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
Ubuntu better.

This is the upstream patch:
https://github.com/dovecot/core/commit/a668d767a710ca18ab6e7177d8e8be22a6b024fb

** Changed in: dovecot (Ubuntu)
   Importance: Undecided => High

** Tags added: server-next

** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #970386
   https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=970386

** Also affects: dovecot (Debian) via
   https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=970386
   Importance: Unknown
   Status: Unknown

** Changed in: dovecot (Ubuntu)
   Status: New => Triaged

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1912118

Title:
  assertion failure in message_part_finish when searching large folder

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dovecot/+bug/1912118/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1911999] Re: faulty paths are not removed

2021-01-19 Thread Robie Basak
** Changed in: multipath-tools (Ubuntu)
   Importance: Undecided => High

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1911999

Title:
  faulty paths are not removed

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/multipath-tools/+bug/1911999/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1912049] Re: package samba 2:4.11.6+dfsg-0ubuntu1.6 failed to install/upgrade: problemas de dependencias - se deja sin configurar

2021-01-19 Thread Robie Basak
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu 
better.  
Since it seems likely to me that this is a local configuration problem, rather 
than a bug in Ubuntu, I'm marking this bug as Incomplete.

Specifically it looks like you have modified (deleted) configuration files 
related to Samba, so as a consequence your Samba configuration is broken on 
your system.
 
If indeed this is a local configuration problem, you can find pointers to get 
help for this sort of problem here: http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community

Or if you believe that this is really a bug, then you may find it
helpful to read "How to report bugs effectively"
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html. We'd be grateful
if you would then provide a more complete description of the problem,
explain why you believe this is a bug in Ubuntu rather than a problem
specific to your system, and then change the bug status back to New.


** Changed in: samba (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/1912049

Title:
  package samba 2:4.11.6+dfsg-0ubuntu1.6 failed to install/upgrade:
  problemas de dependencias - se deja sin configurar

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba/+bug/1912049/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1909950] Re: TCP connections never close

2021-01-19 Thread Robie Basak
** Changed in: bind9 (Ubuntu)
   Importance: Undecided => High

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1909950

Title:
  TCP connections never close

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bind9/+bug/1909950/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1886114] Re: package samba-common-bin 2:4.11.6+dfsg-0ubuntu1.3 failed to install/upgrade: installed samba-common-bin package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 1

2021-01-19 Thread Robie Basak
Sorry, I still cannot reproduce this. I tried:

lxc launch ubuntu:focal samba
lxc exec samba bash
apt update
apt install samba-common-bin

...and this succeeded as expected. Please could you provide exact steps
to reproduce this problem?

** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu)
   Status: Confirmed => Incomplete

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1886114

Title:
  package samba-common-bin 2:4.11.6+dfsg-0ubuntu1.3 failed to
  install/upgrade: installed samba-common-bin package post-installation
  script subprocess returned error exit status 1

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba/+bug/1886114/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1911702] Re: package mysql-server-5.7 5.7.32-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 failed to install/upgrade: installed mysql-server-5.7 package post-installation script subprocess returned error exit status 127 cras

2021-01-19 Thread Robie Basak
Marking Incomplete pending response.

** Changed in: mysql-5.7 (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/1911702

Title:
  package mysql-server-5.7 5.7.32-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 failed to
  install/upgrade: installed mysql-server-5.7 package post-installation
  script subprocess returned error exit status 127 crashed during ubuntu
  upgrade to 18LTS

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mysql-5.7/+bug/1911702/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1910709] Re: DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340

2021-01-14 Thread Robie Basak
** Tags added: hwe-dkms regression-update

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1910709

Title:
  DKMS linux-headers-5.8.0-34-generic update brokes nvidia-340

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340/+bug/1910709/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1911465] [NEW] autopkgtest fails on Xenial

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
Public bug reported:

See bug 1906364 for details. This bug just serves to hold block-
proposed-xenial as this upload is for an autopkgtest fix only and does
not need to be installed by users. It serves just to stage the fix in
case there is a subsequent update needed.

** Affects: docker.io (Ubuntu)
 Importance: Undecided
 Status: Invalid

** Affects: docker.io (Ubuntu Xenial)
 Importance: Undecided
 Status: Fix Committed


** Tags: block-proposed-xenial verification-needed verification-needed-xenial

** Also affects: docker.io (Ubuntu Xenial)
   Importance: Undecided
   Status: New

** Changed in: docker.io (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/1911465

Title:
  autopkgtest fails on Xenial

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/docker.io/+bug/1911465/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1908167] Re: [SRU] pulseaudio: the headset-mic or heapdhone-mic could not be selected automatically if there is no internal mic

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
I asked on IRC for confirmation that the regression fix has landed in
Hirsute.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1908167

Title:
  [SRU] pulseaudio: the headset-mic or heapdhone-mic could not be
  selected automatically if there is no internal mic

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/hwe-next/+bug/1908167/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1911465] Re: autopkgtest fails on Xenial

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Robie, or anyone else affected,

Accepted docker.io into xenial-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/docker.io/18.09.7-0ubuntu1~16.04.8
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
xenial to verification-done-xenial. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-xenial. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: docker.io (Ubuntu Xenial)
   Status: New => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-xenial

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1911465

Title:
  autopkgtest fails on Xenial

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/docker.io/+bug/1911465/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1900642] Please test proposed package

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Rob, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sssd into focal-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/2.2.3-3ubuntu0.2
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1900642

Title:
  sssd won't start

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/+bug/1900642/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1900642] Please test proposed package

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Rob, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sssd into groovy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/2.3.1-3ubuntu2 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
groovy to verification-done-groovy. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-groovy. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: sssd (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: Confirmed => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1900642

Title:
  sssd won't start

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/+bug/1900642/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1900642] Re: sssd won't start

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
I agree with the better fix of also covering /etc/sssd/conf.d in the
condition, and taking the upstream patch is the best way of reducing the
maintenance burden in Hirsute.

For Focal and Groovy, I'd normally expect a more minimal fix of just
patching the service file, rather than the increased complexity of the
conditional build, given that we know what the answer to the condition
is on Ubuntu and that we usually aim for the most minimal fix. However
in this case we can easily verify the outcome of the conditional build
and that'll happen via SRU verification automatically, so I'm accepting
it.

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-groovy

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1900642

Title:
  sssd won't start

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/+bug/1900642/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1801267] Re: regina-normal crashes on startup

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Ben, or anyone else affected,

Accepted regina-normal into bionic-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/regina-
normal/5.1-2build2 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
bionic to verification-done-bionic. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-bionic. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1801267

Title:
  regina-normal crashes on startup

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/regina-normal/+bug/1801267/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1848330] Please test proposed package

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Dr., or anyone else affected,

Accepted audit into bionic-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audit/1:2.8.2-1ubuntu1.1 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
bionic to verification-done-bionic. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-bionic. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848330

Title:
  Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audit/+bug/1848330/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1848330] Re: Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
I verified that this is fixed in both Focal and Hirsute by examining the
source (so presumably Groovy too).

** Also affects: audit (Ubuntu Bionic)
   Importance: Undecided
   Status: New

** Changed in: audit (Ubuntu)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Released

** Changed in: audit (Ubuntu Bionic)
   Status: New => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1848330

Title:
  Installing auditd sometimes fails in post-inst

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audit/+bug/1848330/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1789177] Re: RabbitMQ fails to synchronize exchanges under high load

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
I don't see anything in the queue for Xenial but I do see a debdiff
above, so I'm leaving ~ubuntu-sponsors subscribed (sorry I'm not
supposed to both sponsor and SRU review).

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1789177

Title:
  RabbitMQ fails to synchronize exchanges under high load

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-archive/+bug/1789177/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1789177] Re: RabbitMQ fails to synchronize exchanges under high load

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Oleg, or anyone else affected,

Accepted python-oslo.messaging into bionic-proposed. The package will
build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source
/python-oslo.messaging/5.35.0-0ubuntu2 in a few hours, and then in the
-proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
bionic to verification-done-bionic. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-bionic. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: python-oslo.messaging (Ubuntu Bionic)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1789177

Title:
  RabbitMQ fails to synchronize exchanges under high load

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-archive/+bug/1789177/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1904988] Re: [SRU] set defaults to be sslv23 not tlsv1

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
What's the situation with Bionic, Focal and Groovy please? Do these
already support TLS 1.1 and 1.2? We need to make sure we don't regress
users upgrading up from Xenial.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1904988

Title:
  [SRU] set defaults to be sslv23 not tlsv1

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-eventlet/+bug/1904988/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1907109] Re: xtables-addons 3.0-0.1ubuntu4/3.8-2ubuntu0.1 fails to build with linux 5.4.0-57.63

2021-01-13 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Kleber, or anyone else affected,

Accepted xtables-addons into bionic-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xtables-
addons/3.0-0.1ubuntu5 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
bionic to verification-done-bionic. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-bionic. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: xtables-addons (Ubuntu Bionic)
   Status: Confirmed => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1907109

Title:
  xtables-addons 3.0-0.1ubuntu4/3.8-2ubuntu0.1 fails to build with linux
  5.4.0-57.63

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xtables-addons/+bug/1907109/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Re: [Bug 1901344] Re: [SRU] Spotify album icon shows optimal CD disk instead of album/cover image

2021-01-12 Thread Robie Basak
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 05:14:12PM -, Joshua Peisach wrote:
> The .patch files will work on the same-on groovy build you will just get
> this applying quilt:
> 
> Applying patch debian/patches/fix-spotify-artwork-url.patch
> patching file files/usr/share/cinnamon/applets/so...@cinnamon.org/applet.js
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 687 (offset -4 lines).
> 
> If it works, I'll take your word for it. So I guess on that note they
> both work.

Yeah, that'll be fine, and I prefer that to refreshing the patch because
the patch files being the same means there's less to review. The key
thing is to look for the word "fuzz". If it says it applied with fuzz (I
forget the exact wording), then that's acceptable to quilt but not to
dpkg.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901344

Title:
  [SRU] Spotify album icon shows optimal CD disk instead of album/cover
  image

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cinnamon/+bug/1901344/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1743592] Re: NGINX fails to start/install/upgrade if IPv6 is completely disabled.

2021-01-12 Thread Robie Basak
@Nikita

If you're using automation to install and configure nginx, then you
should already be using policy-rc.d to disable the service start when
you install it with apt. Then nginx shouldn't fail to start because it
doesn't attempt to start. You can then configure nginx and start it
manually.

For example, with ansible, you can use policy_rc_d=101 when calling the
apt module.

In my opinion automation tooling that doesn't do this by default is
buggy. That's unfortunately all of them. But they can generally be
arranged to do it properly in configuration.

Does this work for you?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1743592

Title:
  NGINX fails to start/install/upgrade if IPv6 is completely disabled.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nginx/+bug/1743592/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1901344] Re: [SRU] Spotify album icon shows optimal CD disk instead of album/cover image

2021-01-12 Thread Robie Basak
Patch and quilt will cope fine with line numbers changing. But if the
context has changed and it doesn't work or applies only with fuzz, then
the patches will need reworking. Otherwise, if it works, please try to
keep the quilt patch files identical - this makes review easier.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901344

Title:
  [SRU] Spotify album icon shows optimal CD disk instead of album/cover
  image

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cinnamon/+bug/1901344/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1901344] Re: [SRU] Spotify album icon shows optimal CD disk instead of album/cover image

2021-01-11 Thread Robie Basak
This looks good from a quick glance. What's the status of the bug in
Hirsute? I appreciate you might not have been able to add bug tasks, but
just a comment would help me create the tasks and set the status you
state.

To save review time, could you also prepare the Groovy debdiffs please?
If the quilt patch files can be kept the same, then that really helps.
But even if not, a reviewer can do both faster than two reviewers
reviewing the two series separately at different times.

** Also affects: cinnamon (Ubuntu Focal)
   Importance: Undecided
   Status: New

** Also affects: cinnamon-screensaver (Ubuntu Focal)
   Importance: Undecided
   Status: New

** Also affects: cinnamon (Ubuntu Groovy)
   Importance: Undecided
   Status: New

** Also affects: cinnamon-screensaver (Ubuntu Groovy)
   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/1901344

Title:
  [SRU] Spotify album icon shows optimal CD disk instead of album/cover
  image

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cinnamon/+bug/1901344/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1898077] Re: [conntrackd][plugin] add conntrack info

2021-01-06 Thread Robie Basak
> If one has a plugin_options in /etc/sos/sos.conf specific to former
name 'conntrackd' (e.g skip the plugin, enable the plugin, ...) well it
won't be effective anymore, and one would need to update their config
file to reflect new reality of the plugin name change. But it's very
uncommon to see users using such plugin options. Very unlikely to
happen.

Thank you for calling this out. For a normal package I don't think this
would be acceptable as it's straightforward to simply not rename the
plugin in the SRU. But for sosreport I think it's OK, given that it's
run manually by users only in special circumstances and as you say it's
unlikely that this will actually affect anyone.

> +# Collect info from conntrackd

This change seems to have disappeared in the backport to Bionic, but it
doesn't matter so I left it.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1898077

Title:
  [conntrackd][plugin] add conntrack info

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/+bug/1898077/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1898077] Please test proposed package

2021-01-06 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Eric, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sosreport into bionic-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/3.9.1-1ubuntu0.18.04.3 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
bionic to verification-done-bionic. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-bionic. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1898077

Title:
  [conntrackd][plugin] add conntrack info

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/+bug/1898077/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1898077] Please test proposed package

2021-01-06 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Eric, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sosreport into focal-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/4.0-1~ubuntu0.20.04.3 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: sosreport (Ubuntu Bionic)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1898077

Title:
  [conntrackd][plugin] add conntrack info

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/+bug/1898077/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1898077] Re: [conntrackd][plugin] add conntrack info

2021-01-06 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Eric, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sosreport into groovy-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/4.0-1ubuntu2.1 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
groovy to verification-done-groovy. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-groovy. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: sosreport (Ubuntu Groovy)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-groovy

** Changed in: sosreport (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1898077

Title:
  [conntrackd][plugin] add conntrack info

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/+bug/1898077/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1901555] Please test proposed package

2021-01-06 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Eric, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sosreport into bionic-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/3.9.1-1ubuntu0.18.04.3 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
bionic to verification-done-bionic. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-bionic. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901555

Title:
  [plugin][networking] Include ns ip neigh and ip rule info

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/+bug/1901555/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1901555] Please test proposed package

2021-01-06 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Eric, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sosreport into focal-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/4.0-1~ubuntu0.20.04.3 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: sosreport (Ubuntu Bionic)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901555

Title:
  [plugin][networking] Include ns ip neigh and ip rule info

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/+bug/1901555/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1901555] Re: [plugin][networking] Include ns ip neigh and ip rule info

2021-01-06 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Eric, or anyone else affected,

Accepted sosreport into groovy-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/4.0-1ubuntu2.1 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
groovy to verification-done-groovy. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-groovy. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: sosreport (Ubuntu Groovy)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-groovy

** Changed in: sosreport (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901555

Title:
  [plugin][networking] Include ns ip neigh and ip rule info

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sosreport/+bug/1901555/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1898904] Re: Calibre crashes at startup with AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'cancel'

2021-01-06 Thread Robie Basak
Hello grofaty, or anyone else affected,

Accepted calibre into focal-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/calibre/4.99.4+dfsg+really4.12.0-1ubuntu1
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: calibre (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1898904

Title:
  Calibre crashes at startup with AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has
  no attribute 'cancel'

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/calibre/+bug/1898904/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1906496] Re: [SRU] mgr can be very slow in a large ceph cluster

2021-01-06 Thread Robie Basak
Hello dongdong, or anyone else affected,

Accepted ceph into bionic-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ceph/12.2.13-0ubuntu0.18.04.6 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
bionic to verification-done-bionic. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-bionic. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: ceph (Ubuntu Bionic)
   Status: Triaged => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1906496

Title:
  [SRU] mgr can be very slow in a large ceph cluster

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-archive/+bug/1906496/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1908512] Re: VNC unusable when booting ubuntu-20.04.1-live-server-amd64.iso

2021-01-05 Thread Robie Basak
Hello EOLE, or anyone else affected,

Accepted seabios into focal-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/seabios/1.13.0-1ubuntu1.1 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: seabios (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: Confirmed => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1908512

Title:
  VNC unusable when booting ubuntu-20.04.1-live-server-amd64.iso

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/seabios/+bug/1908512/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1908512] Re: VNC unusable when booting ubuntu-20.04.1-live-server-amd64.iso

2021-01-05 Thread Robie Basak
** Tags added: regression-release

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1908512

Title:
  VNC unusable when booting ubuntu-20.04.1-live-server-amd64.iso

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/seabios/+bug/1908512/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1894618] Re: samba vfs glusterfs shares do not work because glusterfs.so is missing from samba-vfs-modules

2021-01-04 Thread Robie Basak
I understand that Andreas is no longer expecting to be able to work on
this soon, so I'm unassigning him to make this clear.

Sorry, I disagree with you on the priority. Therefore I don't expect
anyone to work on this soon.

However Andreas has provided test packages above, for those who need to
get going right now. If you need this feature in Ubuntu's "official"
samba packaging, then you're welcome to volunteer the necessary work, or
find someone who can. We'd be happy to help guide a volunteer, but we
wouldn't expect to be doing the legwork in that case.

** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu)
 Assignee: Andreas Hasenack (ahasenack) => (unassigned)

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1894618

Title:
  samba vfs glusterfs shares do not work because glusterfs.so is missing
  from samba-vfs-modules

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba/+bug/1894618/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1908814] Re: systemd : inconsistencies in man pages

2021-01-04 Thread Robie Basak
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
Ubuntu better.

You didn't say which version of systemd whose manpages you are looking
at, or which Ubuntu release you're using. I looked at the current
development release of Ubuntu, and I don't see that we're changing the
manpages at all from upstream in this respect (other changes are made,
but that are not relevant here). Since your suggestion is an editorial
one rather than a material error, I suggest that you make your case to
systemd upstream directly to see if they are willing to change it. If
you want to do this, I suggest you file an issue (or better, a pull
request) against https://github.com/systemd/systemd/tree/master/man.

I don't think it makes sense for Ubuntu to your proposed change without
upstream, so I'm going to mark this bug as Won't Fix. However if
upstream make the change you suggest, a future release of Ubuntu will
pick it up.

** Changed in: openssh (Ubuntu)
   Importance: Undecided => Low

** Changed in: openssh (Ubuntu)
   Status: New => Won't Fix

** Package changed: openssh (Ubuntu) => systemd (Ubuntu)

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1908814

Title:
  systemd : inconsistencies in man pages

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/systemd/+bug/1908814/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1891202] Re: Multipathd hangs with long iscsi target names in Ubuntu 18.04

2021-01-04 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Fernando, or anyone else affected,

Accepted multipath-tools into bionic-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/multipath-
tools/0.7.4-2ubuntu3.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
bionic to verification-done-bionic. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-bionic. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: multipath-tools (Ubuntu Bionic)
   Status: Triaged => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1891202

Title:
  Multipathd hangs with long iscsi target names in Ubuntu 18.04

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/multipath-tools/+bug/1891202/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1899180] Please test proposed package

2020-12-09 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Balint, or anyone else affected,

Accepted libvirt into bionic-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/4.0.0-1ubuntu8.18 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
bionic to verification-done-bionic. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-bionic. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1899180

Title:
  autopkgtest fails Bionic@amd64 (service) and Hirsute@arm64 (racy)

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/+bug/1899180/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1899180] Please test proposed package

2020-12-09 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Balint, or anyone else affected,

Accepted libvirt into focal-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/6.0.0-0ubuntu8.6 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: libvirt (Ubuntu Bionic)
   Status: New => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed-bionic

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1899180

Title:
  autopkgtest fails Bionic@amd64 (service) and Hirsute@arm64 (racy)

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/+bug/1899180/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1899180] Re: autopkgtest fails Bionic@amd64 (service) and Hirsute@arm64 (racy)

2020-12-09 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Balint, or anyone else affected,

Accepted libvirt into groovy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/6.6.0-1ubuntu3.2 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
groovy to verification-done-groovy. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-groovy. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

** Changed in: libvirt (Ubuntu Groovy)
   Status: New => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed verification-needed-groovy

** Changed in: libvirt (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: New => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed-focal

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1899180

Title:
  autopkgtest fails Bionic@amd64 (service) and Hirsute@arm64 (racy)

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/+bug/1899180/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1907420] Re: certbot renew fails

2020-12-09 Thread Robie Basak
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
Ubuntu better.

One other person reported this issue in Debian, but nobody managed to
reproduce it. Details, and request for further details from an affected
user at: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=951696

** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #951696
   https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=951696

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1907420

Title:
  certbot renew fails

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-certbot/+bug/1907420/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1899180] Re: autopkgtest fails Bionic@amd64 (service) and Hirsute@arm64 (racy)

2020-12-09 Thread Robie Basak
block-proposed is for the development release (Hirsute) only. I'll leave
you to remove that if you want to unblock Hirsute.

block-proposed-{bionic,focal,groovy} are needed to mark your uploads as
"staged" for these releases. Please leave these in place. See the
documentation at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Staging_an_upload

** Tags added: block-proposed-bionic block-proposed-focal block-
proposed-groovy

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1899180

Title:
  autopkgtest fails Bionic@amd64 (service) and Hirsute@arm64 (racy)

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/+bug/1899180/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1906627] Re: GSS-SPNEGO implementation in cyrus-sasl2 is incompatible with Active Directory, causing recent adcli regression

2020-12-09 Thread Robie Basak
Unsubscribing ~ubuntu-sponsors as I believe there is no longer anything
to sponsor.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1906627

Title:
  GSS-SPNEGO implementation in cyrus-sasl2 is incompatible with Active
  Directory, causing recent adcli regression

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/adcli/+bug/1906627/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1906627] Re: GSS-SPNEGO implementation in cyrus-sasl2 is incompatible with Active Directory, causing recent adcli regression

2020-12-09 Thread Robie Basak
Thank you for preparing this revert.

Since Bionic 0.8.2-1ubuntu1 was previously in bionic-security, I think
this revert needs to go into the security pocket, and therefore cannot
be built in the bionic-updates pocket and needs handling via the
security team PPA.

However I'm not sure, so to avoid confusion I'll leave this for Łukasz.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1906627

Title:
  GSS-SPNEGO implementation in cyrus-sasl2 is incompatible with Active
  Directory, causing recent adcli regression

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/adcli/+bug/1906627/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1905274] Re: enable u-boot spl for riscv64

2020-12-09 Thread Robie Basak
> Groovy will not receive these changes.

Thank you for making these plans clear.

If, in Focal, someone starts using the u-boot binary directly after this
SRU lands, then upgrades to Groovy, won't that regress them? If so, I'm
not sure how this fits with SRU policy and will make a note to consult
with the wider team. My understanding is that this would normally be a
supported use case; hence the usual "must also SRU all subsequent still-
supported releases" requirement for feature enablements.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1905274

Title:
  enable u-boot spl for riscv64

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/livecd-rootfs/+bug/1905274/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1904654] Re: focal:linux-hwe-5.8 evdi-dkms build failure

2020-12-09 Thread Robie Basak
> Regression potential: Technically this doesn't work on the 5.8 hwe
kernel in focal right now, so it cannot be any more broken than it
currently is.

What about the 5.4 kernel that shipped with Focal? Wouldn't users who
originally installed 20.04 at the time of release have this one? Is this
package completely broken for this set of users, or is it possible that
they are using it, and thus we have to consider the risk of regression
them with your proposed bump of 1.6.0 to 1.7.0?

** Changed in: evdi (Ubuntu Focal)
   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/1904654

Title:
   focal:linux-hwe-5.8 evdi-dkms build failure

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/evdi/+bug/1904654/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1899180] Re: autopkgtest fails Bionic@amd64 (service) and Hirsute@arm64 (racy)

2020-12-08 Thread Robie Basak
I've reviewed and approved all the SRU MPs (as well as the Hirsute MP).
FWIW, full SRU information for just autopkgtest changes aren't usually
required; I'd have accepted with just "fixing autopkgtest; block-
proposed-* please" :-)

** Tags added: block-proposed-bionic block-proposed-focal block-
proposed-groovy

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1899180

Title:
  autopkgtest fails Bionic@amd64 (service) and Hirsute@arm64 (racy)

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/+bug/1899180/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1901627] Please test proposed package

2020-12-07 Thread Robie Basak
Hello Chad, or anyone else affected,

Accepted update-notifier into focal-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-
notifier/3.192.30.3 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.

Please help us by testing this new package.  See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation on how
to enable and use -proposed.  Your feedback will aid us getting this
update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug,
mentioning the version of the package you tested, what testing has been
performed on the package and change the tag from verification-needed-
focal to verification-done-focal. If it does not fix the bug for you,
please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-
failed-focal. In either case, without details of your testing we will
not be able to proceed.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification .  Thank you in
advance for helping!

N.B. The updated package will be released to -updates after the bug(s)
fixed by this package have been verified and the package has been in
-proposed for a minimum of 7 days.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901627

Title:
  Update product naming: Simplify UA Infrastructure ESM to UA Infra: ESM

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/1901627/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1836475] Re: [SRU] update-notifier-common weekly cron job runs at the same time for all computers across the globe

2020-12-07 Thread Robie Basak
> I tried to verify this but it looks like it was removed from focal-
proposed.

Sorry, I should have communicated this better.

With the proposed patch for Focal, users who have customised the file in
/etc/cron.* (eg. by removing it) won't have that customisation
transferred to the systemd timer. This needs consideration, so we're
removing it from the SRU so as not to block the SRU for bug 1901627.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1836475

Title:
  [SRU] update-notifier-common weekly cron job runs at the same time for
  all computers across the globe

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/1836475/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Re: [Bug 1905790] Re: Recompile SSSD in 20.04 using OpenSSL (instead of NSS) support for p11_child

2020-12-02 Thread Robie Basak
On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 03:29:43AM -, Marco Trevisan (Treviño) wrote:
> Soo... Given we prefer to stay conservative and not change SSSD crypto

I didn't say that!

> backend fully (to be clear, I would have preferred it to follow
> upstream, not to provide a solution that will change in next LTS no
> matter what, and avoid having "frankensteins", but wasn't a strong
> requirement for me) I've been exploring ways to get only the component
> we care (p11_child) to use p11-kit and openssl.

This is certainly a valuable angle to look at - thanks!

> Robie, this would be better SRU approach?

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying that your upload *has* to
be narrow. I've not formed an opinion that yet. What I'm saying is that
whatever size of scope you choose, there must be a regression analysis
that covers that scope.

If you take a widely scope, then I expect a regression analysis to cover
what I feel are the obvious possible implications of that change. By
nature of it being wider, the regression analysis can be expected to be
more work, of course. Because a wider scope generally correlates with
increased regression risk, I'd also expect a justification of why the
narrow scope is less desirable. But the analysis is still necessary and
must not be skipped.

If you take a narrow scope, then that's correlated with lower regression
risk, and because a regression analysis would be narrower in scope to
match, it might well be less work.

I appreciate that sometimes it's harder or riskier to narrow the scope,
so I'm still open to widening the scope - *if* there is an appropriate
justification *and* full regression analysis of that wider scope
provided.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1905790

Title:
  Make SSSD in 20.04 using OpenSSL and p11-kit (instead of NSS) for
  p11_child

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/+bug/1905790/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1902044] Re: SRU the current 42.6 stable update

2020-12-01 Thread Robie Basak
> It's not under the GNOME MRE no, just a micro release update worth
SRUing for the fixes it includes.

In that case the third paragraph of my comment 1 above still needs
addressing please.

** Changed in: deja-dup (Ubuntu Groovy)
   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/1902044

Title:
  SRU the current 42.6 stable update

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/deja-dup/+bug/1902044/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Re: [Bug 1905790] Re: Recompile SSSD in 20.04 using OpenSSL (instead of NSS) support

2020-12-01 Thread Robie Basak
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 03:22:33PM -, Marco Trevisan (Treviño) wrote:
> > What if, for example, someone has an LDAP server that only supports
> > older TLS, and switching to OpenSSL causes their sssd LDAP TLS client to
> > require newer TLS because of our stronger defaults? What I describe
> > would result in a regression for that user until they reconfigure
> > things. Is this a realistic possibility?
> 
> First, are we sure that such scenario would currently work in current
> NSS?

I don't know. You tell me! I expect this to be considered and
investigated in advance of an SRU.

> I can't say whether that's a realistic scenario, we would need metrics,
> but I also think that if you're forcing a more secure behavior it's not
> to me a regression, it's making people aware that they're misbehaving.
> 
> As we do SRU a browser version that no longer accepts a deprecated
> crypto mechanisms, potentially causing an user regression, I don't see a
> problem in doing it other tools.

I agree that it may be reasonable in principle to bump up default
cryptosystem requirements during the lifetime of an LTS on security
grounds. However that decision should be made deliberately and carefully
as part of a security-driven review into the trade-offs between security
enhancement and user regression.

In the case of browsers, this review is done by upstreams and
distributions generally have no choice in the matter. In the case of
such a change being driven by Ubuntu, I'd expect the review to be driven
*by the security concern itself*, probably have input from the security
team, and for the proposed change to have a specific security-enhancing
goal.

Swapping out NSS for OpenSSL without analyzing these types changes, and
therefore possibly *accidentally* adjusting this type of configuration,
does not meet my expectations detailed above and in my opinion is
unacceptable.

You seem to be claiming that my example would enhance security, albeit
in a breaking way, and is thus acceptable. Without analyzing the
details, how do you know my example is the reality though? How do you
know it isn't regressing security in a breaking way?

> It may require an admin action? Yes, but that's acceptable IMHO when the 
> system in use is known to be not secure.
> And IMHO we're responsible for that too, not just accept people to use unsafe 
> methods by default.
> 
> > I think you're thinking of functional regressions here (ie. introducing
> > actual bugs), whereas I'm more bothered about regressing edge case user
> > configurations (eg. introducing a change that requires users to change
> > their local configurations to avoid a behavioural regression).
> 
> I'm thinking at those too (and especially in my scenario), but given
> there's right now no known actual and reported regression (not just in
> Ubuntu, but everywhere in the web I've searched for), so while there
> might be indeed edge cases until I don't have proofs of them I still
> thinking that the proposed change can only cause an improvement.

I disagree with your approach here. To land an SRU we are expected to
consider what regressions *might* occur, even if we don't specifically
have evidence about them. Lack of known and reported regressions does
not give us a free pass; in fact that's the exact opposite of documented
Ubuntu SRU policy.

We don't expect people to be perfect, but we do expect people to
have taken some reasonable effort to consider the potential regression
impact.

I expect the potential areas of regression I've identified to be
investigated and to be reported in this bug. I'm not saying they are
blockers; I'm saying that I don't know if they should be blockers, and I
think we should determine that with a reasonable documented
justification, and then proceed accordingly. I don't think it's
productive to be spending time arguing about about *whether*
investigation of potential regression is unnecessary.

> BTW, unrelated to this, but this request mostly is triggered by bug
> #1865226, and to support it reliably we need to use open-ssl based
> p11_child.

If, after having done a proper analysis, we decide that fixing that bug
is on balance worth the risk of regression as the least-worst option,
then we might decide to go ahead on that basis. We might even accept
some known use case regressions requiring users to reconfigure. But
without actually doing the investigation we aren't in a position to be
able to weigh it up.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1905790

Title:
  Recompile SSSD in 20.04 using OpenSSL (instead of NSS) support

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/+bug/1905790/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Re: [Bug 1905790] Re: Recompile SSSD in 20.04 using OpenSSL (instead of NSS) support

2020-11-30 Thread Robie Basak
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 03:33:45AM -, Marco Trevisan (Treviño) wrote:
> Probably not enough to compare, but from what I see in these matrices
> [4], there's basically nothing that NSS supports and OpenSSL doesn't
> (while it's true the other way around).

OK, but what about build configuration and default enabled cryptosuites
and suchlike? For example we've "locked down" OpenSSL's default
configuration to no longer support some older cryptosuites. Will
swapping NSS for OpenSSL cause user configurations to narrow the set of
cryptosuites that are enabled?

What if, for example, someone has an LDAP server that only supports
older TLS, and switching to OpenSSL causes their sssd LDAP TLS client to
require newer TLS because of our stronger defaults? What I describe
would result in a regression for that user until they reconfigure
things. Is this a realistic possibility?

> Not to mention that we already switched to an OpenSSL-based version of
> SSSD in 21.10, and even if its user base can't be compared to 20.04, so
> far I didn't read about related issues [5].

I think you're thinking of functional regressions here (ie. introducing
actual bugs), whereas I'm more bothered about regressing edge case user
configurations (eg. introducing a change that requires users to change
their local configurations to avoid a behavioural regression).

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1905790

Title:
  Recompile SSSD in 20.04 using OpenSSL (instead of NSS) support

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/+bug/1905790/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1905740] Re: SRU the current 3.36.5 stable update

2020-11-30 Thread Robie Basak
Most of this looks fine but I'm concerned about this upstream changelog
item:

 sharing: Replace vino with gnome-remote-desktop for X11 sessions

It looks like that was done because of a problem with Wayland only.
Changing behaviour for X11 that isn't for the purpose of fixing a bug is
something we would normally avoid in a stable release. Will this change
functionality from a user perspective? Is it appropriate to be making
this change in an LTS?

** Also affects: gnome-control-center (Ubuntu Focal)
   Importance: Undecided
   Status: New

** Changed in: gnome-control-center (Ubuntu Focal)
   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/1905740

Title:
  SRU the current 3.36.5 stable update

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-control-center/+bug/1905740/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1905740] Re: SRU the current 3.36.5 stable update

2020-11-30 Thread Robie Basak
Oh sorry, it looks like you reverted this in your upload.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1905740

Title:
  SRU the current 3.36.5 stable update

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-control-center/+bug/1905740/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1902044] Re: SRU the current 42.5 stable update

2020-11-30 Thread Robie Basak
Also 42.6 includes:

- Exclude snap and flatpak cache files (fixed regression that stopped
doing this)

Would this be a regression introduced by this upload?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1902044

Title:
  SRU the current 42.5 stable update

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/deja-dup/+bug/1902044/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1902044] Re: SRU the current 42.5 stable update

2020-11-30 Thread Robie Basak
I'm not clear on whether you want to update deja-dup on the basis of the
GNOME MRE or not.

If you intend to base this on the GNOME MRE, then I don't see this in
the current working list of included packages at
https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/scope-of-gnome-mru/18041/8?u=rbasak so if
you want to proceed on this basis, this needs further discussion there.

If not based on the GNOME MRE, then your provided upload needs to meet
the criteria listed at
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#New_upstream_microreleases.
Please provide a summary of how the package meets that criteria in the
SRU information.

** Also affects: deja-dup (Ubuntu Groovy)
   Importance: Undecided
   Status: New

** Changed in: deja-dup (Ubuntu Groovy)
   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/1902044

Title:
  SRU the current 42.5 stable update

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/deja-dup/+bug/1902044/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1902210] Proposed package upload rejected

2020-11-30 Thread Robie Basak
An upload of boinc to groovy-proposed has been rejected from the upload
queue for the following reason: "Upload contains many changes which
appear to contradict SRU policy to avoid regressions, and information on
them has not been provided.".

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1902210

Title:
  Error when I launch Boinc Manager

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/boinc/+bug/1902210/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1902210] Re: Error when I launch Boinc Manager

2020-11-30 Thread Robie Basak
> the current package is not usable

AIUI, it is usable, just not by default, because a workaround is
available? In this case I don't think this is a justification for
ignoring normal SRU requirements to avoid regressing existing users.
Please provide an upload that either contains a minimal fix or otherwise
complies with SRU policy.

** Changed in: boinc (Ubuntu Groovy)
   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/1902210

Title:
  Error when I launch Boinc Manager

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/boinc/+bug/1902210/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1905790] Re: Recompile SSSD in 20.04 using OpenSSL (instead of NSS) support

2020-11-27 Thread Robie Basak
> While the change may involve quite different code paths when it comes
to security features, I think we trust OpenSSL enough to be an
acceptable crypto backend. And behavior should not change.

Are you sure about this? TLS has a wide variety of protocol options and
the supported vs. "available" cryptosystem matrix is complex. Won't
these all change if the underlying implementation changes?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1905790

Title:
  Recompile SSSD in 20.04 using OpenSSL (instead of NSS) support

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/+bug/1905790/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1905341] Re: kdeconnect-app broken on Focal

2020-11-24 Thread Robie Basak
Thanks Rik. I was going to prepare an SRU myself, but although locally
cherry-picking this patch fixes this particular issue, after also
working around bug 1888215, I still couldn't get it all working, so I
left it for now. I got the impression some of the plugin panels were
silently failing.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1905341

Title:
  kdeconnect-app broken on Focal

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdeconnect/+bug/1905341/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1905341] [NEW] kdeconnect-app broken on Focal

2020-11-23 Thread Robie Basak
Public bug reported:

On a default Ubuntu (not Kubuntu) desktop install, kdeconnect-app does
not work at all. When running it from a terminal, it outputs:

QQmlApplicationEngine failed to load component
qrc:/qml/main.qml:93 Cannot assign object of type "DevicesModel" to property of 
type "QAbstractItemModel*" as the former is neither the same as the latter nor 
a sub-class of it.

And then hangs.

This is fixed in upstream release v1.4.1, specifically upstream commit
58a400a.

Groovy and Hirsute are not affected.

** Affects: kdeconnect (Ubuntu)
 Importance: Undecided
 Status: Fix Released

** Affects: kdeconnect (Ubuntu Focal)
 Importance: High
 Status: Triaged

** Also affects: kdeconnect (Ubuntu Focal)
   Importance: Undecided
   Status: New

** Changed in: kdeconnect (Ubuntu Focal)
   Status: New => Triaged

** Changed in: kdeconnect (Ubuntu Focal)
   Importance: Undecided => High

** Changed in: kdeconnect (Ubuntu)
   Status: New => 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/1905341

Title:
  kdeconnect-app broken on Focal

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdeconnect/+bug/1905341/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1888215] Re: kdeconnect is missing libqt5 quick-particles dependencies

2020-11-23 Thread Robie Basak
(on Focal)

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1888215

Title:
  kdeconnect is missing libqt5 quick-particles dependencies

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdeconnect/+bug/1888215/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1888215] Re: kdeconnect is missing libqt5 quick-particles dependencies

2020-11-23 Thread Robie Basak
I found that qml-module-qt-labs-settings and qml-module-qt-labs-
folderlistmodel are further missing dependencies after (locally) fixing
bug 1905341.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1888215

Title:
  kdeconnect is missing libqt5 quick-particles dependencies

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdeconnect/+bug/1888215/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1857584] Re: MySQL X protocol port 33060 listening on network by default

2020-11-19 Thread Robie Basak
Note that if you care, the workaround is to close the port in a
configuration file is trivial. What remains is the trade-off in
regressing users in stable releases versus a more sensible default.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1857584

Title:
  MySQL X protocol port 33060 listening on network by default

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mysql-8.0/+bug/1857584/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1857584] Re: MySQL X protocol port 33060 listening on network by default

2020-11-19 Thread Robie Basak
It is addressed properly. This was fixed in https://salsa.debian.org
/mariadb-team/mysql/-/commit/94e3a663b235d7720f7e98d9f34af27aace166ef

What Ubuntu releases (if any yet) include this change needs checking. If
this needs fixing in a stable Ubuntu release, then this needs separate
justification and consideration for regressing users. Closing a port
that a user might be using in an update to a stable release will
certainly regress users using that port.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1857584

Title:
  MySQL X protocol port 33060 listening on network by default

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mysql-8.0/+bug/1857584/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1873608] Re: libmysqlclient-dev prevents npm/nodejs

2020-11-19 Thread Robie Basak
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1794589 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1794589

This is the same as bug 1794589. Details in that bug and in bug 1779863.
In short, due to the way Node works (or did work in the version released
with Bionic), and because that particular version of Node is broken
unless it is built with what was at the time an old version of OpenSSL,
it isn't possible for this to work.

** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1794589
   libssl1.0-dev conflicts libssl-dev

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1873608

Title:
  libmysqlclient-dev prevents npm/nodejs

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mysql-5.7/+bug/1873608/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1794589] Re: libssl1.0-dev conflicts libssl-dev

2020-11-19 Thread Robie Basak
> Theoretically Canonical could upgrade bionic's nodejs to use the
system's primary openssl.

This isn't possible. It would resurface bug 1779863. The nodejs version
in Ubuntu Bionic requires a specific version of OpenSSL to remain
compatible with external third party modules, since the version of
OpenSSL used forms part of its ABI. Details in the other bug.

> As I understand, all of the packages listed above come from the Ubuntu
repository (universe) - since this is an LTS release, shouldn't it be
kept in a state where it's always possible to install two unrelated
packages (here: libmysqlclient and nodejs) and they don't conflict with
each other?

Ideally, yes, but due to the way Node upstream works (or at least, the
way it did work at the time of the Node version in Bionic), this
restriction exists.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1794589

Title:
  libssl1.0-dev conflicts libssl-dev

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/net-snmp/+bug/1794589/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1901491] Re: Created devices are not available

2020-11-19 Thread Robie Basak
> @Robie - Is there a reason you tagged this regression-update?

Only for categorization - no action required.

I was regressed and it would have been easier for me to find this bug
had it been tagged already, so I tagged it in case others come looking.

I also generally try to tag all SRU regression bugs so that we can find
them later. For example, one can consider previous regressions in a
package when considering the safety of a future proposed change. One
day, I'd like to analyze past SRU regressions to see how we might be
able to prevent more of them.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901491

Title:
  Created devices are not available

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/v4l2loopback/+bug/1901491/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1901491] Re: Created devices are not available

2020-11-17 Thread Robie Basak
** Tags added: regression-update

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1901491

Title:
  Created devices are not available

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/v4l2loopback/+bug/1901491/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1902348] Re: package mysql-server-8.0 8.0.22-0ubuntu0.20.04.2 failed to install/upgrade: installed mysql-server-8.0 package pre-removal script subprocess returned error exit status 1

2020-11-05 Thread Robie Basak
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1490071 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1490071

I think this is a duplicate of bug 1490071. You can't switch between
MySQL and MariaDB relying on the package manager alone; you have to sort
the mess out manually.

** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1490071
   MySQL 5.6 refuses to install on systems that have had MariaDB 10.0 
installed, preventing users from reverting to MySQL without manual intervention 
(aka mysql flag file system needs a redesign)

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1902348

Title:
  package mysql-server-8.0 8.0.22-0ubuntu0.20.04.2 failed to
  install/upgrade: installed mysql-server-8.0 package pre-removal script
  subprocess returned error exit status 1

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mysql-8.0/+bug/1902348/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1893274] Re: Certbot will stop working for 23, 847 users with upcoming Let's Encrypt deprecation

2020-10-30 Thread Robie Basak
Hi Erica,

I'm just after some way to verify whether the bug exists or not. Then by
verifying that the bug exists without this update, we can test the
update by verifying that the bug goes away. We'll do this once the
proposed package is built and ready to publish. It doesn't have to be
automated - having some manual steps ready to perform would also 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/1893274

Title:
  Certbot will stop working for 23,847 users with upcoming Let's Encrypt
  deprecation

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-certbot/+bug/1893274/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1893274] Re: Certbot will stop working for 23, 847 users with upcoming Let's Encrypt deprecation

2020-10-30 Thread Robie Basak
> It's a little tricky to test for this, because you either need to have
an old account lying around (as new ACMEv1 accounts can't be created
anymore), or modify a boulder instance and then run that.

Ah. I see the issue. If it's not too difficult then instructions on
setting up and modifying a boulder instance would be useful. If that
seems unreasonably awkward, then we can be pragmatic and just do the
best we can. Perhaps we could manually modify a configuration to the old
endpoint and check that it (locally) redirects the configuration to the
new endpoint, for example.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1893274

Title:
  Certbot will stop working for 23,847 users with upcoming Let's Encrypt
  deprecation

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-certbot/+bug/1893274/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1902109] Re: rsync uses lchmod and fails in Ubuntu >= 20.10

2020-10-29 Thread Robie Basak
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
Ubuntu better.

This is interesting and I appreciate your investigation! I wonder though
if there's a third outcome here - that it's not a bug because the glibc
implementation of lchmod() requires /proc to be mounted, and if you
don't have /proc mounted then by that definition you have a broken
system and lchmod() is not expected to work, so rsync won't work, as a
design decision of upstream glibc.

I'm not claiming that this is the case, just that it's another case to
consider.

** Changed in: rsync (Ubuntu)
   Status: New => Triaged

** Summary changed:

- rsync uses lchmod and fails in Ubuntu >= 20.10
+ rsync uses lchmod and fails in Ubuntu >= 20.10 if /proc isn't mounted

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1902109

Title:
  rsync uses lchmod and fails in Ubuntu >= 20.10 if /proc isn't mounted

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rsync/+bug/1902109/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 1893274] Re: Certbot will stop working for 23, 847 users with upcoming Let's Encrypt deprecation

2020-10-29 Thread Robie Basak
Test PPA builds available at ppa:racb/experimental
(https://launchpad.net/~racb/+archive/ubuntu/experimental)

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1893274

Title:
  Certbot will stop working for 23,847 users with upcoming Let's Encrypt
  deprecation

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-certbot/+bug/1893274/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >