Hello Benjamin, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apport into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/2.28.1-0ubuntu3.3 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https:/
I've reviewed the changes from 2.28.1-0ubuntu3.2 to 2.28.1-0ubuntu3.3
and they're fine from an SRU perspective since they only tweak the dep8
test. I see that the upload of 2.28.1-0ubuntu3.3 uses -v as expected, so
I'm accepting it to squash into the in-flight SRU without re-review of
what's alread
Hello Karl-Philipp, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apport into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/2.28.1-0ubuntu3.3 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
htt
Hello Benjamin, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apport into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/2.28.1-0ubuntu3.3 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https:/
Hello Chris, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apport into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/2.28.1-0ubuntu3.3 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wi
Hello errors.ubuntu.com, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apport into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/2.28.1-0ubuntu3.3 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. Se
Hello Jānis, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apport into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apport/2.28.1-0ubuntu3.3 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wi
An upload of cyrus-sasl2 to noble-proposed has been rejected from the
upload queue for the following reason: "See
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cyrus-
sasl2/+bug/2078851/comments/16".
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which
> 1. > There are spurious development artifacts being added
> I have looked through the debdiffs and couldn't find such, are you
referring to the "Maintainer" and "XSBC-Original-Maintainer" section
maybe?
Not the debdiffs, the actual upload. For example, from the Rejected
queue, http://launchpadl
Hello Dave, or anyone else affected,
Accepted mesa into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mesa/24.0.9-0ubuntu0.2
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ub
Leaving my draft here both so you can read it and so I don't lose it:
> Indeed, the reason for this is that in authd we are presenting a
qrcode to perform weblogin and that doesn't work.
This seems a reasonable justification for an SRU in principle then, now
that it's documented. Thank you for th
The final upload to Noble unapproved cherry-picks the required fixes
rather than bumping to 24.2, right? So this bug is presumably better
described for the actual problem being solved rather than one presumed
solution that is no longer the plan?
** Summary changed:
- [SRU] Mesa bump to 24.2 requi
SRU review
1. Is this bug that saslauthd doesn't work in Noble at all because the
permissions are wrong? Or only in certain circumstances, and in which
case, which ones?
2. Is it possible that somebody is successfully using saslauthd running
as root, and changing the group of the service to sasl
Hello Ian, or anyone else affected,
Accepted neon27 into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/neon27/0.32.2-1ubuntu0.1 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki
Thank you for contributing the fix for this!
The changes look good to me and I'll accept these into jammy-proposed
shortly.
I would like a couple of things thought about with regard to testing
though please:
1) It's a hard requirement that a test be performed to ensure that the
package still wor
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-noble
** Tags added: verification-failed verification-failed-noble
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to initramfs-tools in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/
Looking at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python3.10/3.10.12-1~22.04.6, it
sounds like this was caused by a security update?
** Information type changed from Public to Public Security
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is s
Nice find!
So that's *a* bug, but is it *this* bug?
@mcecs do you have $errors set in your environment?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to python3-defaults in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2078356
Tit
Accepting. I see that the change is scoped to
"[org.gnome.desktop.background:GNOME-Greeter]" so I guess there's low
likelyhood of impact outside that, but for testing, to what extent do we
need to consider other flavours that use gnome-greeter?
** Tags added: verification-needed verification-neede
Hello Matthew, or anyone else affected,
Accepted ubuntu-settings into noble-proposed. The package will build now
and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-
settings/24.04.5 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
This seems like quite an invasive change. It has not yet been accepted
upstream. It touches PAM, and it looks to me like it might affect
behaviour before authentication is complete. It affects escaping.
Injection of malicious data into a stream to be parsed by the terminal
has security implications
Thank you for working on this!
SRU review
> Currently there is an issue with the ac_on_power script where it
thinks that USB-c ports with devices plugged in to them are plugged in
to power.
This isn't a statement of user impact, making it difficult to understand
how changing the stable releases
** Tags added: regression-release
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to procps in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2003027
Title:
fq_codel qdisc compiled but not enabled on 22.10
Status in Ubuntu:
Fix Re
This missed making it into 24.04.1, but it'd be nice to get this
released immediately after the images for 24.04.1 are finalised, so that
users get the new behaviour from day one of using 24.04.1. I asked about
this in #ubuntu-release. It'd be a great help if this could be SRU-
verified *immediatel
Accepting for 24.04. It is unfortunate to have to change behaviour in
this way, but this seems preferable than to switch to the reported-worse
qdisc just for 24.04, and also preferable to do sooner rather than later
in 24.04's lifetime, given that the .1 release is due this week.
However, if this
Hello Dave, or anyone else affected,
Accepted procps into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/procps/2:4.0.4-4ubuntu3.1 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wi
Public bug reported:
In bug 2003027, Ubuntu's procps regressed the default qdisc from
fq_codel to pfifo_fast. Given that this was considered important enough
to justify changing behaviour in a stable release, we should have an
autopkgtest that verifies our intended delta against upstream, but we d
Hello James, or anyone else affected,
Accepted software-properties into noble-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-
properties/0.99.49.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new packa
Hello Julian, or anyone else affected,
Accepted software-properties into noble-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-
properties/0.99.49.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed
repository.
Please help us by testing this new pack
Accepting, but my request to amend the Test Plan from comment 2 still
stands, and needs adjusting (and SRU verification accordingly) prior to
SRU release.
** Changed in: software-properties (Ubuntu Noble)
Status: Incomplete => Fix Committed
** Tags added: verification-needed verification-n
Actually, no need to actually release, since it's identical to the
special binary package, right? So I can just accept the next SRU for
this package into noble-proposed and treat this bug as completed. When
that SRU lands, this no-binary-change one will, too.
--
You received this bug notification
OK I'm releasing this on the basis of Julian's justification above.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2061214
Title:
[SRU] Software Sources is not
This is missing the previous changelog entry, but also should just be
squashed together. I pinged juliank and jamespage in #ubuntu-devel.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://b
This is missing the previous changelog entry, but also should just be
squashed together. I pinged juliank and jamespage in #ubuntu-devel.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://b
I see the Test Plan has been copied over from previous bugs. I think we
should also test that apt seems the cloud archive correctly. That was
already being done, so I'll just add to the Test Plan what was actually
being already done.
** Description changed:
Please add support for:
-cloud
I discussed the plan for noble-updates and for 24.04.1 with Julian in
detail yesterday. I think the plan is likely to be accepted by the SRU
team. We're behind with the documentation, but I'm accepting the newest
upload to noble-proposed now since time is tight. Julian will make sure
that the full
Hello Julian, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apt into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/2.8.2 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Tes
Hello Julian, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apt into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/2.8.2 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Tes
From #ubuntu-release, Jeremy suggested that this needs doing before the
language packs are generated for 24.04.1.
** Changed in: gsettings-desktop-schemas (Ubuntu Noble)
Milestone: None => ubuntu-24.04.1
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded pa
** Also affects: python3-defaults (Ubuntu Jammy)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: dh-python (Ubuntu Jammy)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed t
Ghadi is working on a replacement upload, so I'm rejecting the current
one as agreed with him.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to tar in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2059734
Title:
Tar fails to extra
Thanks all for working on this!
Do we know if releases prior to Noble are affected?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to dh-python in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2075337
Title:
py3clean fails when us
I think it's fair to call this Critical since SRU releases generally are
currently blocked by this. Looking at the definition, "Severely affects
applications beyond the package responsible for the root cause" also
applies.
** Changed in: python3-defaults (Ubuntu)
Importance: High => Critical
-
Setting C.UTF-8 would work internally I agree. But what does this mean
for SRUs? Does every affected SRU now have to declare Breaks:
python3-minimal (<< whatever)?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to python3-defaul
Here's the buggy code that assumes UTF-8:
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python3-defaults/tree/debpython/files.py#n54
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to python3-defaults in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpa
Any suggestions on how to identify SRUs that are affected so that we can
ensure that the necessary Breaks are in there?
(also, do we know that Breaks will work as needed for an issue in the
prerm?)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, wh
I wondered if ucf is expected to handle dpkg-divert -ed files in the
first place, since that seemed odd to me. It does seem like that's a
feature the code was intended to support, although it's unclear to me if
it ever worked, and it's not really documented anywhere I can find
except that is implie
> * run update-maintainer script
FWIW, it's not necessary to mention this directly. It is correct to do
it, but convention is to skip mentioning it in the changelog because
otherwise we'd have to unnecessarily mention it on nearly every Ubuntu
upload.
--
You received this bug notification becaus
The verification of the Stable Release Update for openssh 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
It's not clear to me if a simple "ssh -Snone localhost" is covered by
the autopkgtests, so I did that manually, testing without -proposed
first, and ensuring to run "sudo systemctl restart ssh" after upgrading
to -proposed to ensure that I'm definitely hitting the daemon from
-proposed.
Success on
** Tags added: reboot-required
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to unattended-upgrades in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1747499
Title:
98-reboot-required and Interaction with livepatch
Status in unatt
** Tags added: reboot-required
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to unattended-upgrades in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2017401
Title:
Unexpected / unwanted unattended-upgrades behaviour after kernel
** Tags added: regression-update
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055776
Title:
After updating ubuntu, the network to which the subnet address is
assigned
This sounds like exactly the behaviour that I explained in 2013 here:
https://askubuntu.com/a/332421/7808
ifconfig still exists but is deprecated and no longer shipped by
default. Users should use its replacement "ip" instead.
However it is true that ifconfig does not display the additional alias
** Changed in: openssh (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Triaged
** Changed in: openssh (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Tags added: server-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssh in Ubuntu.
h
I'm flagging this as Critical. It sounds like everyone agrees that the
distro patch we're carrying is bad. I think it's possible that it's bad
in quite a serious way, so we should investigate immediately without
delay until we've understood the severity of this, especially because by
carrying the d
Hello Mekaniserad, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apt into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/2.4.12 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.c
Hello Mekaniserad, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apt into mantic-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/2.7.3ubuntu0.1 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki
Hello Andy, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apt into mantic-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/2.7.3ubuntu0.1 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ubuntu
Hello Andy, or anyone else affected,
Accepted apt into jammy-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/2.4.12 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Test
I'm retrying these failing autopkgtests with migration-reference/0 since
if they fail anyway they shouldn't hold things up.
In the meantime, could you please also verify that behaviour on 4K page
size hasn't regressed? It looks like this was implied in the Test Plan
but hasn't been verified. Thank
The verification of the Stable Release Update for dnsmasq has completed
successfully and the package is now being released to -updates.
Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being
unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In
the event that you encounter a
The verification of the Stable Release Update for dnsmasq has completed
successfully and the package is now being released to -updates.
Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being
unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In
the event that you encounter a
Thank you for preparing the SRU and for testing!
The Test Plan agreed in the bug description included two cases but it
looks like you only did the first one? Given that a different SRU team
member did the review and agreed the fully stated plan, I don't feel
that I'm in a position to then release
"Where problems could occur" says "...in [Other Info] section I included
some query examples for well-known domains, so we can be more confident
with this change", but I don't see these carried out as part of the SRU
verification.
Admittedly they weren't documented as part of the Test Plan, but if
Thank you for the clarification! I'll remove the regression-update tag
then, since this is the intended behaviour of the security update, so it
shouldn't count towards regression statistics.
** Tags removed: regression-update
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubun
Hello Steve, or anyone else affected,
Accepted ubuntu-settings into mantic-proposed. The package will build
now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-
settings/23.10.5.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. Se
> It is unlikely but possible that the removal of the raspi binary
package from this source package will have inadvertently modified the
contents of the other remaining binary packages.
It might be worth running a binary debdiff for SRU verification then,
against the binary packages built in propo
** Also affects: base-passwd (Debian) via
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1058500
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to base-passwd in Ubuntu.
https:
I don't have time to provide a fully researched answer, but I hope this
will help.
If you're not already familiar, I suggest you start at
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#users-and-
groups. Ubuntu cannot allocate these without potential future collision
with Debian. So you
Looks like this is a reported regression in the security pocket.
** Information type changed from Public to Public Security
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to bluez in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2045
Reopening because a PIN of is not reported to work (and even if it
did, that would still be a regression in a stable release).
** Changed in: bluez (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Confirmed
** Changed in: bluez (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Critical
--
You received this bug no
Further to a conversation in #ubuntu-devel I'm setting the Lunar task to
Won't Fix. Further details:
https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2023/11/15/%23ubuntu-devel.html
** Changed in: e2fsprogs (Ubuntu Lunar)
Status: In Progress => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
Also, given that this is the second time this kind of thing has
happened, perhaps it is appropriate to add a dep8 test to ensure that
the compatibility "level" of the default has not regressed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which i
(in the development release)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to e2fsprogs in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2025339
Title:
FDE image fails to run e2fsck
Status in e2fsprogs package in Ubuntu:
Fix Re
> So if we disable this by default, I think it should only impact
performances of generated filesystems and probably not break anything
else.
This sounds like it could be insignificant, or a major performance
regression in some use cases. It's not clear which. Presumably
orphan_file was introduced
Hello Nathan, or anyone else affected,
Accepted software-properties into xenial-proposed. The package will
build now and be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/0.96.20.11 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new pac
Note related bug 2029089 that needs releasing at the same time.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to software-properties in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2029473
Title:
Backport Ubuntu Pro to Xenial
St
OK, thanks all!
In that case, Aleksandr (or someone) please could you start by preparing
a debdiff for noble to fix the issue there and add an appropriate
autopkgtest as Stéphane recommends? While noble isn't open the SRU isn't
strictly blocked on this, but we should at least have the upload ready
Sorry, I just hit send on a reply by accident on a reply before I was
ready - I intended to postpone it instead. I need to go now but I will
get back to this later and fix my reply.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed
On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 04:27:16PM -, Aleksandr Mikhalitsyn wrote:
> >Has this been fixed in the development release, and if so, how?
>
> LXC_DEVEL is 1 in the development release:
> https://github.com/lxc/lxc/blob/main/meson.build#L36
>
> But LXC_DEVEL is 0 in *any* stable tag:
> https://git
Thank you for working on this.
Has this been fixed in the development release, and if so, how?
It's not clear to me that making this change is the appropriate thing to
do in an SRU. How is LXC_DEVEL used in practice? Have you analysed known
reverse dependencies to understand the impact of making
Could we have a justification for why this is important for SRU, please?
As written, the Impact statement describes a bug, but doesn't present
any explanation of why it is important for Ubuntu to fix it in its
stable releases. If it is just that the output might be wrong and we'd
like it to be corr
(unsubscribing ~ubuntu-sponsors as given my previous comment there is
now nothing remaining to sponsor)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to procps in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2035061
Title:
uptime
** Changed in: systemd (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Critical
** Changed in: systemd (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Nick Rosbrook (enr0n)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu.
http
Hello Ye, or anyone else affected,
Accepted rsync into focal-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rsync/3.1.3-8ubuntu0.7
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ubu
** Changed in: bridge-utils (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Expired
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to bridge-utils in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2018060
Title:
Merge bridge-utils from Debian
** Changed in: libmnl (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Expired
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libmnl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2018079
Title:
Merge libmnl from Debian unstable for mant
** Changed in: libseccomp (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Expired
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to libseccomp in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2018081
Title:
Merge libseccomp from Debian unsta
Public bug reported:
tests/integration/test_packaging_apt_dpkg.py::test_get_file_package_diversion
fails if it doesn't detect any dpkg diversions. Apparently something
(possibly dash?) stopped diverting something, so now there are no
diversions in the autopkgtest environment and therefore this tes
Public bug reported:
Rebuilding apport in mantic today FTBFS because of a pylint complaint.
We discussed this in #ubuntu-devel today. I don't think that failing the
build on a lint failure is appropriate in distribution packaging in a
production build since otherwise the build regresses for no goo
** Tags added: server-triage-discuss
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to unattended-upgrades in
Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2017401
Title:
Unexpected / unwanted unattended-upgrades behaviour after ke
The verification of the Stable Release Update for openldap has completed
successfully and the package is now being released to -updates.
Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being
unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In
the event that you encounter a
Miriam, if you could preserve the state of the system please if you
still have it for debugging, then that would be helpful.
** Tags added: server-todo
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to openssh in Ubuntu.
https:
** Tags added: regression-update
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to curl in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2028170
Title:
curl 7.81.0-1ubuntu1.11 fails verifying proper ssl cert w/ subj-alt-
name
St
> Users have talked about upgrading via the command line to 22.10, but I
figured that Lunar was about to EOL
You mean Kinetic? Lunar has a while left to go. Does that mean that
users can upgrade from 22.04 to 23.04 still?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
T
It doesn't look like this is fixed in the current stable release (Lunar)
and I don't see an SRU upload for this either. What are your plans for
Lunar? Please see:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Newer_Releases
If Lunar isn't relevant for WSL and therefore nobody could hit the bug
ther
I discussed this with Sergio elsewhere and we concluded that we don't
want to change behaviour in Jammy to opt users in to start automatically
reaching debuginfod.ubuntu.com without further discussion. So for this
bug, we'll consider the issue to be simply that if the user configures a
server in /e
> This results in DEBUGINFOD_URLS not being set for non-root users.
Should the Test Plan not then check that DEBUGINFOD_URLS is actually set
correctly, and that debuginfod functionality actually works?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages
I was about to ask *why* Ubuntu users need this change before I read
Steve's comment. It might be helpful to expand on that, because without
a full explanation, we (SRU team) are only really _speculating_ on the
actual user impact.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
1 - 100 of 1017 matches
Mail list logo