On 9/9/20 5:31 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 02:51:45PM -0300, Guilherme Piccoli wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:48 PM Colin Watson wrote:
>>> Failing that, can somebody advise on whether there's an appropriate way
>>> to configure this in an image without having to maintain
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 11:35, Colin Watson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:22:05AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > chroot builders do call ~= `sudo chroot` at some point.
>
> The main work is done by sbuild, which uses schroot, not "sudo chroot".
>
> (We used to use sbuild's sudo sessi
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:22:05AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> chroot builders do call ~= `sudo chroot` at some point.
The main work is done by sbuild, which uses schroot, not "sudo chroot".
(We used to use sbuild's sudo session mode, but I changed that to
schroot in 2017.)
> would chang
On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 at 23:25, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 10:33:00AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > > Failing that, can somebody advise on whether there's an appropriate way
> > > to configure this in an image without having to maintain a fork of
> > > systemd? The wor
Thanks Dimitri, Steve and Colin for the good discussion. The consensus
was to update Bionic's systemd to bump such a limit and make it on-par
with Focal and newer releases, so I went ahead and worked on such SRU.
I found an "old" Launchpad bug [0] proposing this, so used that and
backported the ups
[Restoring CC of launchpad-users@ - not sure why this was dropped.]
On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 03:25:04PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 10:33:00AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > I have not tried this, but i think one should be able to create a
> > snippet in /etc/secur
On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 10:33:00AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> > Failing that, can somebody advise on whether there's an appropriate way
> > to configure this in an image without having to maintain a fork of
> > systemd? The workflow here is that we consume Ubuntu cloud images and
> > make
On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 02:51:45PM -0300, Guilherme Piccoli wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:48 PM Colin Watson wrote:
> > Failing that, can somebody advise on whether there's an appropriate way
> > to configure this in an image without having to maintain a fork of
> > systemd? The workflow here
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:48 PM Colin Watson wrote:
> The simplest and IMO best way to do this would be to SRU the systemd
> change that bumped it to 64M [1] to bionic; we'd then pick that up in
> the natural course of events by way of new cloud image builds. Has that
> been considered? It feels
Hi,
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 at 17:49, Colin Watson wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 12:57:28PM -0300, Guilherme Piccoli wrote:
> > Hi Colin et.al., first of all thanks for the builder update and
> > heads-up! We've noticed a failure in building cryptsetup from source,
> > reported in LP #1891473 [0]
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM Colin Watson wrote:
>
> The VMs in Launchpad's build farm have been on Ubuntu 16.04 (xenial) for
> some time. We're intentionally fairly conservative about upgrading the
> base VMs, but it's about time to have something newer, so we've just
> upgraded them to Ubunt
On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 12:57:28PM -0300, Guilherme Piccoli wrote:
> Hi Colin et.al., first of all thanks for the builder update and
> heads-up! We've noticed a failure in building cryptsetup from source,
> reported in LP #1891473 [0]. The reason for such failure is detailed
> in the LP, but a summ
12 matches
Mail list logo
