[02:40] <smartboyhw> balloons: Have you slept yet?
[02:42] <balloons> smartboyhw, sleeping now.. good night
[02:44] <smartboyhw> balloons: Good night! :P
[06:18] <jibel> good morning
[06:29] <jibel> pitti, you were right about loop devices, I created 1000 yesterday without problems, I don't know why I had this limit in mind, maybe linux 1.2.x times ... :)
[06:35] <pitti> jibel: with /dev/loop-control?
[06:35] <pitti> jibel: as I tried with mount -o loop, and that indeed doesn't seem to request new loop devices if the existing ones run out
[06:37] <jibel> pitti, with mknod
[06:38] <pitti> ah, that works, too :)
[06:39] <pitti> my hope is that a less ancient util-linux will actually ask loop-control for more by itself
[07:09] <jibel> didrocks, I moving prepare_fs from the pre-mount hook to a pre-start hook, then will unmount manually in a post-stop hook, see if it fixes the umount issue
[07:10] <didrocks> jibel: oh, nice idea!
[07:10] <didrocks> I'll be able to confirm if needed
[07:10]  * didrocks continues on the archive thingy
[08:21] <jibel> didrocks, pitti I fixed the loop devices leak in otto by moving all the mounts to a pre-start script and unmounting in a post-stop
[08:22] <didrocks> jibel: oh
[08:22] <didrocks> jibel: I have a post-stop as well
[08:22] <jibel> furthermount I use umount.aufs instead of umount to fix a problem with permanent links between the delta and the rootfs after the umountr
[08:22] <didrocks> jibel: please push so that I reconcile :p
[08:22] <jibel> didrocks, np, it is just a function
[08:22] <didrocks> jibel: ok, I handled the copy of those scripts in a better way as well
[08:23] <didrocks> I'm archive, finish testing the restore now ;)
[08:23] <didrocks> archiving*
[08:26] <jibel> didrocks, oh, and now lxc-start works without pre-mounting the iso
[08:29] <didrocks> jibel: excellent!
[08:29] <jibel> didrocks, r59
[08:30] <didrocks> jibel: ok, reconciling with this :)
[08:31] <jibel> didrocks, I dropped all the checks that verifies a squashfs exists on the iso, and they should be moved to the pre-start scripts
[08:32] <didrocks> jibel: hum, maybe my merge will be hard then :p
[08:32]  * didrocks tries
[08:33] <pitti> jibel: rock!
[08:33] <pitti> jibel: that gets rid of the atexit lazy unmount, too?
[08:33] <jibel> pitti, yes
[08:34] <pitti> really nice
[08:34] <pitti> jibel: so in general, we want to push as many smarts as possible into the pre/post-mount script, right?
[08:35] <pitti> as there they have the potential for getting partial upstream adoption
[08:35] <didrocks> jibel: instead of you redoing iso_mount="/run/otto/iso/$(echo $IMAGE | tr '/' '_')" which double the logic, mind if I put that as a parameter?
[08:35] <jibel> pitti, I think so, we should stay as close as possible of native lxc commands, what do you think?
[08:35] <jibel> didrocks, go
[08:35] <pitti> jibel: yes, my feeling as well
[08:36] <pitti> didrocks: ah, I used that tr (in python, formerly) to allow running several instances in parallel and still knowing which image is which
[08:37] <didrocks> pitti: sure, that's fine, it's just the logic is in two places now :) otto and the post-stop script
[08:38] <didrocks> I'm passing it as a parameter to post-stop
[08:39] <pitti> didrocks: perhaps we should move the mount point into the /var/lib/lxc/<container> directory?
[08:39] <pitti> and call it /iso
[08:39] <pitti> that's even more clear, and it doesn't need parameterization
[08:39] <pitti> similarly to /squashfs
[08:39] <pitti> why didn't I think of this yesterday..
[08:39] <didrocks> pitti: but we'll be able to mount the same iso in two containers?
[08:39] <pitti> sure
[08:39] <pitti> you can loop-mount an image as many times as you like
[08:40] <didrocks> pitti: ok, let me first get back and reconcicle with jibel last changes
[08:40] <didrocks> let's see afterward to mount within the container
[08:40] <pitti> the "mountpoint" check was just to avoid mounting an iso over the same mount point twice (it's possible, but might lead to refcount issues0
[08:40] <pitti> but /var/lib/lxc/container/iso seems more elegant to me
[08:40] <didrocks> jibel: argh, you failed me
[08:40] <didrocks> jibel: as you mount now in pre-mount…
[08:40] <didrocks> I can't get access to the iso infos
[08:41] <didrocks> so all my consistency check is not possible :/
[08:41] <didrocks> (like if you want to keep the delta, and so on…)
[08:41] <pitti> ah, good point
[08:42] <didrocks> jibel just removed my 2 last hours of work :p
[08:46] <jibel> didrocks, you just need to extract .disk/info from the iso isn't it ?
[08:47] <jibel> didrocks, alternatively, you can mount in otto and check in the pre-start if it's already mounted
[08:47] <didrocks> .disk/info, README.diskdefines and the dist directory
[08:47] <jibel> this way you can keep the logic in otto and lxc-start will still work
[08:47] <didrocks> jibel: let's do this
[08:52] <jibel> didrocks, I found the problem with autopilot and zeitgeist
[08:52] <jibel> didrocks, .local mode is set to 600
[08:55] <jibel> didrocks, I think it's because it exists on the ISO, so we need to override it
[08:56] <didrocks> jibel: ah… makes sense
[08:56] <didrocks> jibel: hum, I wonder if my bzr rebase didn't failed on some on your file
[08:56] <didrocks> like I don't see the pre-start.sh
[08:57] <didrocks> hum, there is none…
[08:57] <didrocks> (on trunk)
[08:57]  * didrocks digs where mounting the iso is
[08:58] <jibel> didrocks, r60
[08:58] <didrocks> jibel: ok, I was at r59 :p
[08:58] <jibel> You'd see it if I added it
[08:58] <didrocks> I need to rerebase
[09:01] <jibel> didrocks, did you add support for proxies and custom uris in sources.list ?
[09:05] <didrocks> jibel: not yet
[09:06] <didrocks> jibel: I'm fighting to get something working again, it's weird, I'm mounting in otto, but then, it seems pre-start sees it as unmounted and can't mount it again…
[09:06] <didrocks> ah, was a transient issue it seems (like it happens sometimes if I don't reboot)
[09:07] <didrocks> no, after a manual run, of lxc-start, it's failing
[09:07]  * didrocks should have pushed first :p
[09:41] <jibel> didrocks, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/+bug/1181136
[10:21] <jibel> didrocks, http://paste.ubuntu.com/5673638/
[10:32] <didrocks> pitti: ok, FYI, apparmor was the guilty one from our discussion :)
[10:32] <didrocks> pitti: pushed, if you use otto, you should be able to save/restore old run
[10:32] <didrocks> (also, check for image consistency is done)
[10:39] <pitti> didrocks: oh, which discussion?
[10:40] <didrocks> pitti: was that discussion above about mounting not working ^
[10:40] <pitti> didrocks: nice!
[10:41] <pitti> oh, that
[11:43] <jibel> didrocks, finally on the host: sudo ln -s /etc/apparmor.d/usr.bin.lxc-start /etc/apparmor.d/disable/; sudo /etc/init.d/apparmor reload
[11:58] <didrocks> jibel: ok, we need to write that in a procedure :)
[12:59] <elfy> phillw: posted and stuck it now
[13:03] <smartboyhw> elfy: Did I miss anything?
[13:06] <phillw> elfy: thanks!
[13:32] <chrisccoulson> jibel, you seen these firefox failures in saucy?
[13:32] <chrisccoulson> https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/saucy-adt-firefox/26/ARCH=i386,label=adt/
[13:32] <chrisccoulson> not sure what is going on with that one
[13:33] <chrisccoulson> also, https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/saucy-adt-firefox/23/ARCH=i386,label=adt/ looks like it's using the source package from proposed, but the old binaries in the release pocket
[13:33] <chrisccoulson> oh, actually
[13:33] <jibel> chrisccoulson, yes I have seen that failure for lot of different packages yesterday, it doesn't really make sense to me.
[13:34] <chrisccoulson> actually, the second failure makes sense now. it actually wasn't published in proposed when that ran
[13:34] <chrisccoulson> which you already know about :)
[13:35] <chrisccoulson> jibel, did you see my last few comments in #ubuntu-desktop? it seems seb uploaded a broken fontconfig which caused a lot of firefox tests to fail
[13:35] <chrisccoulson> which is good ;)
[13:35] <elfy> smartboyhw: not that I know of
[13:35] <jibel> chrisccoulson, hm, this is possible only for PPAs, for -proposed we really start the test when the binary hits the archive. That's really weird.
[13:36] <chrisccoulson> yeah, that is a bit weird
[13:36] <jibel> chrisccoulson, yeah, it's great when tests find bugs :)
[13:36] <chrisccoulson> but the second error is definitely due to running the test scripts from the new source with the old binaries
[13:36] <chrisccoulson> as it's showing a file missing that was only introduced in to the latest upload
[14:11] <balloons> xnox, are you still about?