Patch Pilot Hand-off 24.04

Hello, fellow Patch Pilots and Ubuntu community members,

This post serves as the official hand-off for the Patch Pilot Program for the 24.04 cycle. The purpose of this thread is to ensure continuity in our program, keeping operations smooth and contributors supported. Whether you’ve just wrapped up a piloting session or are gearing up for your session, this space ensures that no detail gets lost in the shuffle. If you are interested in what is going on, you can subscribe to this post.

:warning: Please reserve responses in this thread ONLY to hand-off reports. If you have a question as a contributor please check with the current patch pilot. If you need a clarification from the last pilot please reach out to them separately. If you have a more general question please create a new topic in this category.

To the incoming pilot: please take a moment to review the updates from the previous session. It provides the context you’ll need to pick up where they left off. When writing your own report, please include the following headlines:

  • Notable Achievements
  • Important Context
  • Notable Contributors (tag them if you know their discourse username)
  • Program Improvements (anything that you think needs documenting or otherwise improving)

Links: Latest hand-off post | Previous cycle hand-off


Notable Achievements

Important Context

1 Like
  • OpenSSL LP #2023545: I took a look and did not find anything ready to be reviewed, just a PPA which is not ready for the archive. Asked for a MP or debdiff.
  • walinuxagent MP: the patch submitter decided to work on this later (NN cycle), I asked if there is a way to remove the ubuntu-sponsors review slot to make it disappear from the sponsorship queue.
  • sssd MP: this needs Server team discussion, I marked as Needs Information until it is discussed internally.
  • arm-trusted-firmware-s32 NEW package review: I did an initial review for this package and shared all my notes with some action items.
  • optee-os-s32 NEW package review: I added some extra comments on top of what seb already mentioned before.
  • xdg-desktop-portal-gtk LP #2039187: reviewed the provided debdiff and left some questions and a possible action item.
1 Like

Notable Achievements

Important Context

  • LP: #2036873 - after review, I agreed with Paride’s analysis, did the small tweaks Paride asked for, and uploaded the bootstrap builds for focal/jammy.
  • LP: #2039736 - analyzed the request and agreed with submitter that a syncrequest was appropriate to drop the ubuntu delta, which only set a minimum version on python3-urllib, which would not be possible to see unless building unmodified for pre-jammy. But it’s requested already, so no action other than unsubscribe sponsors. Updated bug state to match.
  • LP: #2039611 - adjust for noble instead of mantic and upload.
1 Like
  • I looked through several of the bugs in the sponsoring queue, and they were waiting on debdiffs for Noble. Maybe it would be better if ubuntu-sponsors had been unsubscribed from these bugs.
  • modem-manager-gui LP: #1971435 this bug re-appeared in my inbox recently. Although I’m unable to reproduce the problem myself, I hope one of the affected users might be able to perform the verification for an SRU. I prepared a package in a PPA for testing.
1 Like
  • tp-smapi #2026589: added a comment, question, and marked as incomplete
  • flash-kernel #2037407: I’m not familiar with this package. Added some comments about the devel-series patch, and subscribed @waveform who has uploaded this in the past. I also added proper ubuntu release tasks to the bug, given the attached debdiffs.
  • xdg-desktop-portal-gtk #2039187: discussion still going on in the upstream PR. I added a comment to the LP bug and unsubscribed sponsors, asking to subscribe it again once a decision has been reached.
  • wget merge #2039429: sponsored
  • iproute2 #2039280: useful patches for iproute2, which in ubuntu is behind debian. I agree a merge would be better, but I don’t know how long that would take, given we have been behind since at least lunar. I asked for information and some changes.
  • bluez #2036149: just unsubscribed sponsors, since it was uploaded yesterday
  • transmission #1973084: memleak in transmission in jammy and lunar. The reports claim that the attached patch fixes them, so I prepared a PPA for lunar and jammy and asked for testing. If all goes well, this is definitely worth an SRU.
1 Like

Notable achievements

  • Reviewed GDB MP, left comments asking for small adjustments, but the bulk of the work went into reserving an ARM64 machine and testing the fix before sponsoring. Update: getting an ARM64 machine proved to be basically impossible, so I decided to go ahead and upload the package after having reviewed and agreed with the changes.
  • Reviewed and sponsored gnutls MP to disable TLS 1.0/1.1 via config file. Left comments suggesting better practices next time.
  • Reviewed tmux MP, left comments asking for more information about a specific thing, but otherwise the MP is ready to be sponsored, which I will do once @mdzurick provides the request info.

Notable Achievements:

  • LP: #2040352 [openjdk-8]: sync’d
  • LP: #2041724 [python-linecache2]: sync’d

Important Context

  • mp:e2fsprogs/454796 [e2fsprogs]: Left some review comments, this sort of feels like two fixes in one, and should maybe have two SRU bug reports.
  • LP: #2039460 [network-manager-applet]: Needs targeted to noble and bug ref added. Unsubbed sponsors for now.
  • LP: #2039873 lxc: Waiting for debdiff, requested by Robie. Unsubbed sponsors for now.


  • There are a number of [needs-packaging] entries in the queue, that are adding new packages to noble, presumably for HWE/kernel needs? Are these intended to be included in the patch pilot effort? If so, is there a documented process for how to handle them?

  • mp:secureboot-db/454748: This lacks a d/changelog entry, which I almost commented about, but then I’m not certain if this is actually intended to be a sponsorship request, or if Ubuntu Sponsors got auto-added erroneously? If the latter is the case, then it may be worthwhile to add an entry to the git-ubuntu patch pilot document[1], such as:

      "How do I remove the 'Ubuntu Sponsors' reviewer from a git-ubuntu MP?"

    Is there a best practice established for this by now? (I know a workaround is to claim the slot and then close it as Abstain. If there is not a better way, could/should we document that?)


I was on shift yesterday. Since we are at an internal event at Canonical, I didn’t do any active sponsoring work, but was still available on IRC, where no one came over to ask me questions.

@tsimonq2 took care of some sync requests in the sponsoring queue (thanks!).

In this shift I mostly did reviews and mentoring.

Important context

1 Like
  • LP: #1508290 - uploaded with block-proposed-jammy
  • LP: #2043494 - processed sync request
  • LP: #1097467 - uploaded, thanks @waveform80 for the attention on bugs that have been open for a very long time. (this also cleans up LP: #589496 !)
  • LP: #2036873 - reviewed, nearly convinced, start discussion on plan for the test suite

Nothing to report from IRC

  • alacarte LP: #2037326 fix was auto-sync’d from Debian, asked in the bug about SRUs, unsubscribed Ubuntu Sponsors
  • evince LP: #1794064 reviewed and sponsored SRU for Jammy
  • gdb LP: #2040113 reviewed and sponsored SRU for Lunar

The request for the gdb SRU came from irc. There was another request just after I ended my shift for an openssl SRU, but it needs more than just a quick look.

Notable achievements

  • MP #455564 and MP #455517: apache2 MPs for @mdzurick. Left comments asking for improvements.

  • Bug #1991909: the user addressed the comments made by @paride, so I uploaded the package and staged the SRU as per @ahasenack’s instructions.

  • MP #455006: curl merge from @danilogondolfo. Left minor comments asking for improvements. He addressed them, and I uploaded the package.

  • MP #454972: netcat-openbsd merge from @danilogondolfo. Left a question. Also explained more about how dpkg-buildpackage scans changelog entries to automatically close bugs.

  • Bug #2008594: getmail6 fix. Uploaded after doing a small adjustment to the provided debdiff.

  • Bug #2038834: fix for mesa. The Noble upload was done, but there’s no debdiff for Mantic. I left a comment asking for it.

General comments

  • I think we should unsubscribe ~ubuntu-sponsors from bugs whose debdiffs/packages have been uploaded. If there are any subsequent problems with the upload, the reporter can always flag us again. I had a brief conversation with @tsimonq2 and @ahasenack on IRC about it.
  • #2026589: left a comment asking how this is supposed to be tested, with a suggestion.
  • #2039280: no update since my last shift on Oct 27th, unsubscribing sponsors.
  • #2039429: stuck in noble migration, due to armhf dep8 infrastructure problems. Since I sponsored this upload, I’ll keep an eye on it. For now, unsubscribing sponsors from the bug, as there is nothing else to sponsor here.
  • #1973084: got confirmation the ppa fixes the problem for some user(s). I prepared the SRU template and sponsored the uploads.
  • #2042059, #2042094: unsubscribed sponsors, as it was uploaded already
  • #2042394: marked as incomplete, added other ubuntu release tasks. Patch is just for jammy, others needed.
  • #2029930: wget crash when calculated download speeds are in the Tb/s range. Prepared a ppa, asked for confirmation on the fix for noble at least, and help with coming up with a test scenario for a possible SRU.

I’ve been casually taking care of one or two a day. I haven’t been posting here because I don’t want to fill up the thread with my one or two each time, but feel free to mention me. :slight_smile:

Today I did these two:

I think, intuitively I take the LIFO approach to the queue, but in reality it should be FIFO. Would be nice to see some of those older items gone. :slight_smile:

  • LP: #2026589; left a comment requesting the updated test case first referenced by @ahasenack and unsubscribed ubuntu-sponsors until this is addressed
  • Reviewed the status of nemos-dev-key, optee-os-s32, u-boot-s32, and arm-trusted-firmware-s32
  • With nemos-dev-key now sponsored thanks to @tsimonq2 (LP: #2043448), optee-os-s32 was ready to go (LP: #2034648) so I sponsored that with minor changes
  • Reviewed u-boot-s32 (LP: #2034650) but I need to compare it to a fresh build of u-boot under noble and I’m now getting yet-another FTBFS due to cross-build compiler flags on that. I’ll dig into it again tomorrow, but ultimately I’m aiming to deal with this and the remaining -s32 packages.
1 Like

I did more than my usual “one or two” packages today, so here’s a post.

According to the KPI metrics, the sponsorship queue was at 33, 24 hours ago. Right now, it sits at 24. Here are the uploads I personally did today:

  • Looks like kernelshark was accepted. Thanks for your help, @tjaalton!
  • Sponsored redshift-qt to both Debian and Ubuntu NEW queues for @arraybolt3. With my Lubuntu hat on, it’s a feature goal for 24.04 LTS and has a straightforward license, so it should be a pretty simple review.
  • Sponsored cryptsetup for @mkukri. We’re both going to keep a close eye on Britney, so we can address any potential issues with autopkgtests.
  • Some NemOS packages (I think all of these are?), which are:
  • openjdk was sponsored as well, I expressed concerns with the nearly 50 Lintian warnings, @vpa19771 promised me he’d look into them before the release. Not very happy about sponsoring a package that looks like that, but I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.

Other extremely important notes:

  • [19:28] (@eeickmeyer) kernelshark do do do do do do :shark:
  • Re: [Merge] ~mkukri/ubuntu/+source/cryptsetup:merge into ubuntu/+source/cryptsetup:debian/sid
    • Review: Approve
           / .--. \
          / /    \ \
          | |    | |
          | |.-""-.|
        ||| ::/  \:: ;
        ||; ::\__/:: ;
         \\\ '::::' /

Remember, community members can patch pilot too. If you’re in ~ubuntu-dev, take a seat in the cockpit! :airplane:

I’d also like to highlight @bdrung’s starter work on an ubuntu-sponsoring package, with some additional refinements to the code. I think the original package looks promising, but if anyone (~ubuntu-dev or not) is looking for some low-hanging fruit, I’m sure he’d appreciate the help with test cases, splitting data collection and rendering, etc.


1 Like

I will say my singing was on-point.

1 Like