=== Pici is now known as TalkingMuffin [10:28] bug 1234469, once again all the duplicate reports have been removed... what up with that? [10:28] Launchpad bug 1234469 in linux (Ubuntu) "Network does not come up after resuming from suspend." [Medium,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1234469 [10:28] sorry, bug 1184262 is the main one [10:28] Launchpad bug 1184262 in systemd (Ubuntu) "[logind] stuck in PrepareForSleep, causing network and other services to not resume" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1184262 [10:47] brainwash: Hmm I could almost kind of understand that on the 'linux' one, because we try to avoid dupes on the 'linux' bugs unless we're 110% sure it's the same problem [10:48] penguin42: many have been converted to linux ones I think [10:48] it's a mess [10:49] brainwash: Nod, tbh I'd have picked Linux as the source for a suspend/resume network problem; but 1184262 seems to be actively working it on the systemd/etc side of things so it does look it's being worked [10:54] for many people is was clearly a network-manager issue in the first place [10:54] well, you say that but that's not where the debug process is going in that bug [10:54] it's just a bit annoying if someone messes around with reports [10:55] right, because people are not familiar with systemd yet [10:56] and most confirmed that the network-manager could be re-enabled manually [10:57] Yeh it's a little odd, if there weren't any work around on it and it was just network-fails-after-suspend I would have put it against linux as well, but I agree with the bugs that show the workaround it does seem unlikely to be the kernel [10:57] but removing all duplicates without stating a reasons seems a bit wrong [10:58] yeh should always state reasons for doing something [11:00] I'll try to contact him and ask about this, so I can understand why he did this [11:00] penguin42: thanks for clarifying some things :) [13:16] brainwash: pitti has been working on this bug. If he replaced n-m by systemd-shim it is because he believes systemd-shim is the actual guilty party === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk [14:59] hggdh: I know that, because I'm bothering him all the time with my observations and log files :) [14:59] heh === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha [15:06] and that's the reason I actually care about the removal of all the duplicates [15:32] brainwash: I am assuming that pitti removed them (I do not have details in the log). If he indeed removed them, it is because he considered them *not* the same issue. [17:01] hggdh: very unlikely, because it is the same issue in most cases, some reports don't provide enough details, but describe the same issue (saucy, resume does not wakeup network-manager and/or session is stuck in sleep state) [17:04] pitti's updated package does fix many cases of this issue, but we still investigate if the remaining people are eventually affected by another dbus timeout (systemd also) === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk [17:06] and some bug reporters have already marked their report as duplicate once again === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha [17:39] darn! I *hate* when people change bug status without explaining why. [17:43] nod [17:45] OK. comment added on bug 1187005, which has seen a small flurry of wrong duplicates [17:45] Launchpad bug 1184262 in systemd (Ubuntu) "duplicate for #1187005 [logind] stuck in PrepareForSleep, causing network and other services to not resume" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1184262 [17:46] hggdh: I have a little sympathy that without noticing the work around people found, I'd have also guessed at 'linux' being the package for a suspend/resume bug, and once you've set it to linux you don't do dupes [17:46] penguin42: indeed. But, if Linux is not the correct package, undupping & dupping to a different bug strikes me as weird [17:48] brainwash: at least 1234469 was set as a dup to your bug by pitti himself... [17:52] penguin42: also, I would expect people to read the comments *and* look at the activity log. Although, I concede, if one does not know the other players, it get difficult to value their knowledge. [17:52] * hggdh is now thinking this also applies to self... [17:52] hggdh: tbf I don't think the bugs actually been fixed yet (or hadn't yesterday) [17:53] I agree. Martin's fix does not get all, or there are different issues at play [17:56] and I am pretty sure that, right now, I do not want to look at systemd, it is rather confusing, docs lacking, API seems to change suddenly, etc [17:58] hggdh: Yeh I mean it sounded like a hideous interaction of systemd/nm and a bunch of other stuff - wth knows who dropped the ball [17:59] [18:02] it's not actually systemd's fault, but ubuntu's own wrapper for some dbus calls -> systemd-shim [18:03] systemd-shim quits after 10sec (that too fast), this has been fixed by pitti's new package [18:04] brainwash: I understand. But the fact we *need* a translator (shim) to interact with systemd says something is blowing out known APIs [18:05] well, we had to replace consolekit (deprecated) with logind (part of systemd) [18:06] and we don't ship every part of systemd, because it would replace upstart [18:07] indeed. But then systemd is getting to be a monolithic beast -- replacing a lot of known/used programs with its own, and incompatible with a lot (or everything else). [18:07] brainwash: rule 24: Any fixed timeout is wrong [18:09] it seems that the 10sec timeout causes trouble, if the system is slow at suspending [18:09] brainwash: Anything like that is a nightmare, things like suspend/resumes are really random times on different hardware [18:09] brainwash: No timeout value will ever be right [18:10] indeed. Or, at least, fail gracefully [18:10] true === wylde_ is now known as Guest32821 [18:11] 13.10 still feels somewhat broken and unpolished [18:12] well, this is sort of expected, 13.10 is a preparation for 14.04 [18:12] (so we could *sort* of look at it as a beta) [18:12] yes :) [18:14] tbh I think it's time to throw the towel in and use systemd - it seems to work [18:15] canonical won't like this [18:15] indeed, but then users don't like bugs like this === Ursinha_ is now known as Ursinha === rsalveti_ is now known as rsalveti [18:27] all in all, it will be a pity -- I like the idea of using events [18:30] * hggdh remember the happiness when learning petri nets a long time ago [18:32] well nowt wrong with events as long as you never lose any [18:32] and you have a clear description of all events [18:33] hggdh: It's like if I eat one of the M&Ms/smarties you were using to keep track of your petri net [18:33] LOL [18:34] indeed. And then try to prove you reach a final state... [18:34] hggdh: maths/formal method stuff? [18:35] yes [18:35] hggdh: I spent some time doing clock-less CPUs, there were a bunch of formal guys trying to do proofs against deadlock [18:36] faded to failure, IIRC [18:37] might still be possible if we had finite state (sub)machines; we might be able to prove the machine eventually enters a final state (which would be input to the next machine) === wylde is now known as Guest77372 [18:45] it's very difficult - the complexity just explodes as soon as you do anything useful === maxb_ is now known as maxb