Hi, Paul Gevers (2020-10-25): > On 25-10-2020 19:44, intrigeri wrote: >> This being said, this was a while ago, and I wonder if the problem got >> somehow fixed in one of those packages in the meantime. Could you >> please give it another try with 2.13.5-1 (sid) or 3.0.0-1 >> (experimental), and ideally both? This would establish an updated >> baseline for further investigation. > > Scheduled on amd64. Note however that I reported that the test didn't > always fail, so if it passes, it's not saying for sure that everything > is OK.
> https://ci.debian.net/user/elbrus/jobs?package=apparmor Thank you. https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/a/apparmor/7743678/log.gz (sid) did not expose the problem. As you said, it does not prove anything. https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/unstable/amd64/a/apparmor/7743977/log.gz (experimental) failed because I asked you to trigger this too early: my 3.0.0-1 upload had not reached the archive. I've tried to re-trigger it myself but it seems that's not possible since the package is in the blocklist. Could you please re-trigger it? (package = apparmor, suite = unstable, pin = "src:apparmor, experimental") >>>> Is there a better way for me to investigate? >> >>> We have given DD's temporarily access to one of our workers before. If >>> you're interested we could do that again for this case. That way you >>> could even skip the upload to experimental, assuming it reproduces if >>> run from a local tree. And you can check what's going on in the test bed. >> >> This looks great. I'd like to do this once the updated baseline is >> established, if it still fails. I could book time for this on Nov >> 28-29. > > Can you can already point me at your public key? Easiest is with a > signed e-mail, but if it's otherwise easily traceable it's from you, I > can take it from elsewhere. Sure, will do right away in a private email. Cheers!
