[00:06] <balloons> elfy, excellent!
[05:51] <pitti> barry: we just got bug 1430479 which sounds fairly common
[13:21] <barry> pitti: that looks exactly like what happened to my vm the first time
[13:45] <pitti> barry: ah, good; that workaround is in vivid now
[13:47] <barry> pitti: awesome.  i have one more vivid vm to try to break now :)
[13:47] <pitti> that was a fun bug
[13:51] <barry> pitti: the best ones are :)
[13:59] <elopio> good morning.
[14:07] <kalikiana> ubuntu-qa: ping, I'm looking to change a property from Autopilot - preferrably w/o relying on visible UI in the QML
[14:10] <elopio> kalikiana: thanks :)
[14:10] <elopio> kalikiana: so, I assume that you want this to change the orientation, is that right?
[14:12] <elopio> I ask because generally that's a bad idea, we should rely only on UI visible components. But faking an orientation change is one of the exceptions to that rule.
[14:12] <kalikiana> elopio: yes. I have the QML support for it now. but it only works via a button; see here https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-sdk-team/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/orientationManual/+merge/252270 something like "root.__helper.orientation = Qt.LandscapeOrientation" is called by the OptionSelector
[14:13] <kalikiana> the thing is, no real app would ever have a button to flip orientation
[14:14] <kalikiana> and I'm hoping this could become generally useful for apps
[14:14] <elopio> kalikiana: I see two options. I imagine there must be a way to link a QML property to an environment variable. If so, we could change the env var when we want to change the orientation.
[14:14] <elopio> the other options is https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-platform-qa/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/autopilot-listview/+merge/252586
[14:14] <elopio> sorry, wrong link.
[14:15] <elopio> kalikiana: the other option is http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~autopilot/autopilot/trunk/view/head:/autopilot/introspection/qt.py
[14:15] <elopio> you can call a slot from autopilot.
[14:15] <elopio> if you make a function to change the orientation, we could trigger it using from dbus through autopilot.
[14:16] <kalikiana> the env var wouldn't be sufficient, because it would only work for an initial value, not at runtime
[14:17] <kalikiana> elopio: hmm so I add a "function rotate(int orientation){this.orientation=orientation}" basically?
[14:18] <kalikiana> is there an example of how to call it?
[14:20] <elopio> kalikiana: no examples. This is the first time I've seen a good use case for this.
[14:20] <elopio> kalikiana: I'm not sure how to define a slot in QML. I'm reading about that. But if you open autopilot3 vis while your app is running with testabililty, you can see the slots defined for each qml type in the tree.
[14:21] <elopio> I'll take a look at your branch.
[14:28] <kalikiana> elopio: indeed a function shows up in "slots"
[14:34] <elopio> kalikiana: that's nice. Now, I'm not quite sure how to call them from autopilot. My guess would be just to call select_single('OrientationHelper').slot()
[14:35] <elopio> I'm slower than you, just looking at the app with the orientation button now.
[14:44] <kalikiana> elopio: no worries, I appreciate your taking the time to guide me, that branch didn't pop up in 5 minutes either :-D
[14:46] <elopio> kalikiana: you access the slots through the slots property.
[14:46] <elopio> self.main_view.select_single('OrientationHelper').slots.test()
[14:47] <kalikiana> okay, lemme try that
[14:47] <elopio> cool! that works :)
[14:49] <elopio> kalikiana: rhuddie: I defined test like this: http://paste.ubuntu.com/10580419/
[14:50] <elopio> it just needs to be smarter to switch from the current orientation instead of just setting it to portrait.
[14:50] <elopio> this is really nice kalikiana, thanks for working on it.
[14:52] <rhuddie> elopio, kalikiana, that looks like it could be really useful
[14:53] <elopio> rhuddie: lets start a vanguard journal. Do you think the scrum journal is too big already?
[14:55] <rhuddie> elopio, yes. I would definitely start a new doc. Maybe this is something to put in autopilot docs too.
[14:56] <elopio> rhuddie: this class has been undocumented on purpose. It would be good to discuss about it.
[14:58] <elopio> ping pitti. Would it be a good idea to add a reset() to the adb ssh script that does ubuntu-device-flash?
[14:58] <elopio> now that we are upgrading, every test breaks the testbed.
[14:59] <balloons> elopio, rhuddie slots are definitely interesting. I can see how we might abuse them
[15:00] <pitti> elopio: hm, upgrade tests need some scriptery around them anyway (install an old version, etc.); it seems a bit excessive to me to wrap that into the script, as it doesn't need to run while adt-runs (just afterwards)
[15:00] <elopio> balloons: we found our first use case for them in 3 years :D
[15:00] <pitti> elopio: but if it's useful to you for some reason, and you have a way to make that work without extra proxy settings and the like, feel free to add a --reflash
[15:01] <elopio> pitti: I think that the first flash is the responsibility of whatever is calling adt-run. But it would be nice if after every test, it gets back to the version it had at the start.
[15:02] <elopio> that will need parameters for version number and channel. So we need to think more about it. I'll make a card for this sprint.
[15:03] <pitti> elopio: so you'd need to save them at the start, and re-flash at the end
[15:04] <elopio> pitti: I'm guessing you would do it by writting the values to files like with adt_reboot_target.
[15:07] <brendand> elopio, mardy mentioned you might know how to create a u1 account from the command line?
[15:08] <brendand> elopio, the bug that we're trying to write a test for requires the account to be authenticated, but i can't find how to do it in any scripted way
[15:08] <elopio> brendand: : yes, take a look at the unity-scope-click project.
[15:08] <brendand> elopio, you mean account-console?
[15:08] <elopio> in autopilot/credentials.py
[15:09] <elopio> brendand: in there, we are using dummy oauth tokens. I think you would need to get a real one. There's a sso client python library that might help
[15:11] <brendand> elopio, you just call add_u1_credentials on AccountManager to create the account?
[15:12] <elopio> brendand: that add_u1_credentials is implemented in there.
[15:12] <elopio> I don't remember what it does. Adds a provider, a service, sets some properties.
[15:33] <elopio> fgimenez: nice work on the reboot branch. I'll give it a try later.
[15:34] <fgimenez> elopio, thanks, let's see how it works with the rest of the pieces
[15:35] <fgimenez> i'm currently adding a test for the noop case (no update available), to make sure that all goes fine until then
[15:39] <elopio> fgimenez: rhuddie or brendand: please review https://code.launchpad.net/~veebers/autopilot/fix_for_config_init/+merge/251862
[15:39] <elopio> fgimenez: a noop case should raise an exception, right?
[15:40] <fgimenez> elopio, yes, i think that TimeOutError should be raised
[15:42] <rhuddie> elopio, I'll take a look
[15:43] <elopio> fgimenez: sounds good.
[15:43] <elopio> we need to start thinking about reflashing the phone after a successful upgrade.
[15:43] <elopio> I didn't had that in mind before.
[15:44] <fgimenez> elopio, to leave it in the initial state right?
[15:45] <elopio> fgimenez: yes. We currently have only one test, but we will add more. We need each test to finish in the same version it started.
[15:47] <fgimenez> elopio, we could keep the first value returned by get_current_build_number to use it later
[16:24] <fgimenez> elopio, there's no exception on noop, the Rebooting signal is received with status set to false
[16:24] <fgimenez> it's already pushed
[16:24] <elopio> fgimenez: I think that we can raise the exception based on the status of CheckUpdates.
[16:25] <elopio> like, check update, if there is update, upgrade, if there i none, raise error.
[16:25] <elopio> I'm not sure if that's what you have just tried.
[16:25] <fgimenez> elopio, no, just calling ApplyUpdate without having downloaded one
[16:28] <fgimenez> for testing the reactor, what you say about check updates makes sense
[17:34] <brendand> elopio, what am i supposed to do with the account returned by add_u1_credentials? it created an account but that account isn't authenticated
[17:34] <brendand> elopio, it's important that's done otherwise the bug doesn't reproduct
[17:34] <brendand> reproduce
[17:35] <elopio> brendand: I don't know about that. For the scope tests we just needed an account, as we were using a fake server that ignores the tokens.
[17:36] <elopio> brendand: what are you trying to reproduce?
[17:36] <brendand> elopio, the bug we're writing the test to cover
[17:36] <brendand> elopio, if you upgrade then it deletes your u1 account
[17:36] <brendand> elopio, but it only happens if the u1 account was created in the ui
[17:37] <brendand> elopio, so it needs to be created the same way
[17:37] <elopio> brendand: how is it different creating the account from the UI to creating it with the glib service?
[17:38] <brendand> elopio, i don't know exactly, but with the glib service there is nothing in the 'ID' field on the details screen
[17:40] <brendand> elopio, the one created in the ui has  token, token_secret, consumer_key etc
[17:40] <elopio> brendand: maybe you are not setting some properties. I think that there is nothing that the UI does that we can't do with the service, but mardy or dobey are the ones who can answer that question.
[17:41] <brendand> elopio, yeah i agree - i just don't know what to do
[17:41] <dobey> the U1 UI does a lot
[17:41] <elopio> brendand: take a look at http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntuone-control-tower/unity-scope-click/trunk/view/head:/autopilot/unityclickscope/test_click_scope.py#L242
[17:42] <dobey> if you want a real account that works against a live server, you'll pretty much have to use the UI at this point
[17:42] <elopio> dobey: can't we take the tokens from the sso client?
[17:43] <brendand> dobey, no i don't think we do need that
[17:43] <dobey> elopio: you mean ubuntu-sso-client? no
[17:43] <brendand> dobey, or maybe we do, i'm currently confused
[17:44] <elopio> dobey: and can we sign with the UI in one phone, and then copy the credentials to other?
[17:44] <dobey> elopio: at least, i don't think so. ubuntu-sso-client uses the v1 REST API, and i'm not sure those tokens will work with v2 api using things (and v1 api doesn't support 2fa). ubuntu-sso-client also depends on gnome-keyring which will only make things more complex.
[17:45] <brendand> dobey, we're actually working on a test to cover https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-system-settings/+bug/1413655
[17:45] <dobey> elopio: it's theoretically possible to copy the credentials, but it's not trivial at all, and i wouldn't advise doing it
[17:45] <brendand> dobey, so we'd need an account which would reproduce that bug
[17:46] <dobey> brendand: it will be very hard to do that at this point, as there's also now a migration script (in rtm), so even if you had an account that didn't have the ACL, upon upgrade it will be migrated when the phablet user is logged in, and so things will just work
[17:47] <brendand> dobey, well that's ok :)
[17:47] <dobey> so a test that forces that behavior to happen would be very diffcult to do, and way too complex i think
[17:47] <brendand> dobey, no we just want a test that would make it happen *if* the fix wasn't there
[17:48] <brendand> dobey, i already reproduced it by upgrading from rtm 16 to rtm 19
[17:48] <brendand> dobey, but it only happens with the u1 account i created via the ui
[17:49] <brendand> if it's not possible then i need to fall back to using autopilot for this, which is what i was doing
[17:49] <brendand> but it would be nice if there was a simple, few lines of python/bash way
[17:51] <dobey> you're using https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntuone-control-tower/unity-scope-click/trunk/view/head:/autopilot/unityclickscope/credentials.py right?
[17:52] <dobey> oh, since i'm in here
[17:52] <dobey> what do you guys know about this "boottest" thing?
[17:53] <dobey> oh, nevermind. seems that corrected itself now
[18:00] <dobey> brendand: if you do what's done in https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntuone-control-tower/unity-scope-click/trunk/view/head:/autopilot/unityclickscope/test_click_scope.py#L242 then you should see the issue, as that account is not being created with the ACL
[18:00] <brendand> dobey, ok, cool
[18:33] <elopio> jibel: in case you want to review it: https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-platform-qa/ubuntu-sanity-tests/fix1422569-wait_greeter/+merge/252630
[18:35] <alesage> rvr, hey Victor, do you have a few min to tutorialize the new flashing rules?
[18:35] <rvr> alesage: Yes
[18:36] <rvr> alesage: ops-standup?
[18:36] <alesage> rvr, ok!
[19:06] <alesage> rvr, that seems to have worked thx :)
[19:06] <alesage> rvr, so use that recovery image for what?
[19:06] <rvr> alesage: Nice, you don't need to do anything else to the phone for regression testing
[19:07] <alesage> rvr, use for silos too, etc.?
[19:07] <rvr> alesage: For silo testing, installing the silo with the citrain tool
[19:08] <rvr> citrain device-upgrade <silo number> <password>
[19:08] <rvr> phablet-tools-citrain
[19:08] <rvr> That's the package which ships it
[19:37] <alesage> rvr, but always start from that recovery image, ok
[19:45] <dobey> elopio: you were asking the other day about making url-dispatcher work in a chroot or whatever under X right?
[19:46] <elopio> dobey: right.
[19:47] <dobey> elopio: did you figure out a solution for that?
[19:48] <elopio> dobey: there were some options. It needs a qpa
[19:48] <elopio> currently, the qpa is define in mirclient.
[19:48] <dobey> oh right :-/
[19:48] <elopio> ted suggested that instead of writing the qpa, it would be more useful to get mir working on the virtual machines.
[19:49] <elopio> we have a way to run mir on kvm, http://unity.ubuntu.com/mir/setup_kvm_for_mir.html
[19:49] <dobey> well, i don't need it for running autopilot tests
[19:49] <dobey> so mirvfb wouldn't help me really
[19:50] <elopio> but we don't have those vms available on the ci lab, so ci is investigating what would be better for them.
[19:50] <elopio> dobey: if you can start the mirxfb on the machine that you are writting the tests, you could run them in the mirvfb
[19:50] <dobey> i think mirvfb would be best for ci
[19:51] <dobey> elopio: yeah, i'm not doing this for tests. i want it for an actual application :)
[19:52] <elopio> dobey: ah, so, yes, we need a qpa for unity7 desktop.
[19:52] <dobey> so i can have my app open up instead of firefox/chromium/whatever for certain urls
[19:53] <elopio> dobey: I would like that very much. Shouldn't this qpa be installed when url-dispatcher is isntalled?
[19:54] <dobey> elopio: i would presume so, yes; but it's difficult to control that, as we wouldn't want to have it installed on the phone i don't think
[19:56] <rvr> alesage: The only thing different for silo testing in vivid is that you need to flash the custom tarball too, using jibel's original script
[20:08] <Letozaf_> balloons, hey :D
[20:08] <balloons> Letozaf_, hello
[20:08] <Kaleo> elopio, are you aware of any way to fake device orientation for test purposes?
[20:08] <elopio> Kaleo: thanks.
[20:08] <elopio> we have two options, both in progress.
[20:08] <Kaleo> - in progress as in I can't use them yet?
[20:09] <elopio> one is faking the sensors, https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical/unity8/fake_platform_sensors_module/+merge/247334
[20:09] <Letozaf_> balloons, I fixed this if you want to take a look: https://code.launchpad.net/~carla-sella/ubuntu-filemanager-app/fixed-test-cut-directory/+merge/252205
[20:09] <Letozaf_> :D
[20:10] <elopio> Kaleo: the other is extending the orientation helper to be able to overwrite it: https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-sdk-team/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/orientationManual/+merge/252270
[20:10] <elopio> Kaleo: no, you can't use them yet. But I think kalikiana is close to finishing his branch.
[20:11] <Kaleo> elopio, thanks, that will be nice; will there be away to trigger the orientation lock as well?
[20:11] <veebers> elopio: hey, who and when did you ping re: autopilot CI issues? I would like to follow it up
[20:11] <elopio> Kaleo: we can do that through dbus.
[20:12] <elopio> veebers: fginther, like 30 minutes ago. Said fixed it, it is running, and I should just wait.
[20:13] <elopio> Kaleo: let me show you some code that I think we have...
[20:15] <elopio> Kaleo: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~charlesk/unity8/lp-1410915-re-enable-rotation-lock-test/view/head:/tests/autopilot/unity8/fixture_setup.py#L91
[20:16] <elopio> you would need to add the unity8-autopilot dependency.
[20:16] <elopio> if that is not correct for your scenario, we would need to find a better place to put it.
[20:16] <veebers> elopio: awesome, thanks for that
[20:17] <Kaleo> elopio, I see, is that available already?
[20:17] <balloons> Letozaf_, I saw that but didn't review
[20:18] <balloons> I suppose I can now :-)
[20:18] <elopio> Kaleo: that one is on unity trunk, yes.
[20:18] <elopio> sorry, I linked using a branch.
[20:18] <Letozaf_> balloons, :) yes please :)
[20:18] <balloons> Letozaf_, so adding the cleanup means it should always cleanup. The only issue that would remain then is if the test doesn't exist cleanly (which can happen I guess)
[20:19] <Kaleo> elopio, ok
[20:19] <Kaleo> elopio, thank you
[20:19] <Letozaf_> balloons, oh! I understand...
[20:19] <elopio> Kaleo: np. next time you have a question, please ping the team as mentioned on the topic and whoever is on vanguard will help you.
[20:20] <Letozaf_> balloons, I will fix
[20:21] <Kaleo> elopio, ok
[20:21] <balloons> Letozaf_, also, the cleanup step is run as part of the teardown the test. so it's run at the end
[20:21] <balloons> the order then doesn't matter, and your logger line then doesn't make sense
[20:22] <Letozaf_> balloons, ok thanks, I will cancel it then
[20:22] <balloons> Letozaf_, all that said, I see that the temporary home is only run on non-devices
[20:22] <balloons> presumably the issue is on the device or no?
[20:23] <balloons> Letozaf_, but notice it uses fixtures.TempDir().. which already cleans up after
[20:24] <balloons> so again presumably this is ONLY an issue when testing the click on the device
[20:24] <balloons> in which case the answer there is a bit muddled
[20:24] <Letozaf_> balloons, I will check better
[20:24] <balloons> Letozaf_, it's ok, I didn't give it a good look until now
[20:25] <Letozaf_> balloons, :) it's ok I will fix :)
[20:26] <balloons> Letozaf_, SO, with all that in mind, I would suggest implementing something a little different. For click, see if you can create a temporary directory inside of home. Give it a random name. Then for the start of each test as needed, change to that directory. That will let you make sure you can add/remove the folders
[20:26] <balloons> Letozaf_, alternatively you can simply just issue removals for any files / folders you need before creating them
[20:26] <balloons> you need to make sure things are setup as you want
[20:26] <balloons> the latter option is "ok", and I might even suggest it
[20:29] <Letozaf_> balloons, ok I will do so
[20:29] <balloons> I think that goes back to your original implementation. I would just make sure it's done then for everything
[20:29] <balloons> I hope my rambling makes sense heh
[20:29] <Letozaf_> balloons, yes more or less, but yes I think I got the point
[20:30] <nuclearbob> so who's the vanguard over here?
[20:31] <nuclearbob> I'm having problems with package updates for sanity tests
[20:32] <balloons> nuclearbob, say the magic words
[20:32] <nuclearbob> balloons: abracadabra? please? open sesame?
[20:32] <elfy> size of a buffalo
[20:32] <balloons> nuclearbob, speak friend and enter
[20:33] <nuclearbob> or is a problem with sanity tests something I need to ask ubuntu-qa about?
[20:33] <nuclearbob> I'm getting this http://paste.ubuntu.com/10582078/
[20:34] <balloons> nuclearbob, that's the magic
[20:34] <nuclearbob> balloons: that's what I was afraid of. I'm not sure if I'm recursively summoning myself now
[20:34] <balloons> nuclearbob, however I can help. Notice the error at the bottom.. That was hopefully supposed to be more informative than in the past
[20:35] <balloons> basically it means your image index is out of date with the archive
[20:35] <nuclearbob> balloons: how do I updated that? I went to the system settings, and it doesn't offer me an update
[20:35] <balloons> this is common on older images, but possible even on the latest image. the hack listed as a workaround might work for you. If it doesn't the only answer is flash a newer image
[20:36] <nuclearbob> balloons: I'm not invoking adt-run directly, unfortunately, so I'm not sure how to pass that argument
[20:36] <veebers> nuclearbob: looking at your log now
[20:36] <nuclearbob> veebers: thanks. I tried adding -u, and that changed the error, but it's still erroring
[20:36] <nuclearbob> is error a verb?
[20:36] <veebers> nuclearbob: not with that attitude ;-)
[20:36] <veebers> nuclearbob: um, when did you last flash your phone?
[20:37] <nuclearbob> veebers: today?
[20:37] <balloons> nuclearbob, ahh gotcha. Well, good luck with that. presumably the archive updated after the image was built
[20:37] <balloons> you should check and see when those packages landed..
[20:37] <veebers> nuclearbob: hmm yeah, well the -u should help with that
[20:37] <nuclearbob> veebers: would the log when I run it without -u be useful?
[20:38] <nuclearbob> the main different error there is: E: Packages need to be removed but remove is disabled.
[20:38] <veebers> nuclearbob, balloons has a good idea. Its def. something to to with the packages in the archive
[20:38] <nuclearbob> veebers: okay. hmm
[20:38] <veebers> hmm
[20:38] <nuclearbob> I see we had the same idea
[20:38] <veebers> nuclearbob: yeah sure a log without the -u might be good
[20:39] <nuclearbob> http://paste.ubuntu.com/10582114/
[20:40] <nuclearbob> so I guess oxideqt-codecs-extra is the problem
[20:40] <balloons> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-touch-meta/1.212
[20:40] <veebers> nuclearbob: yeah I would say so, deciding to remove ubuntu-touch to fix the problem sounds wrong
[20:41] <nuclearbob> is ubuntu-touch an important package? it doesn't have autopilot in the name, maybe I don't need it
[20:41] <nuclearbob> so do I just wait until a new image is built?
[20:42] <veebers> nuclearbob: lol :-) Um I imagine so, it's worth mentioning in #u-ci-eng to see if someone there has the downlow
[20:42] <nuclearbob> the dependency refresh happened today, but the image is from yesterday
[20:42] <balloons> yea, package hit today
[20:42] <balloons> fun isn't it?
[20:42] <balloons> so nuclearbob veebers can we get something on the backlog to talk about this?
[20:43] <balloons> adt isn't the magic sauce I once thought it was
[20:43] <nuclearbob> maybe I can build that functionality into utah...
[20:43] <nuclearbob> veebers: I guess we need to propose a card to jfunk?
[20:43] <veebers> balloons: what is it that you want to talk about? It seems that something screwy has happened with the archive + image
[20:44] <nuclearbob> veebers: I think the problem is, if a package hits the archive, we can't test until the new image is built
[20:44] <balloons> veebers, basically it's not possible to recreate test results
[20:44] <balloons> and further, it's impossible to test old images
[20:44] <balloons> or in this case, the latest image, heh
[20:44] <veebers> balloons, nuclearbob, right once we have a story formulated we'll talk to jfunk. (He's in the process of setting up a template to use etc.)
[20:45] <balloons> this popped up a couple weeks ago, and has been mulling in my mind. pitti and I discussed it at length
[20:45] <balloons> the error message you see is thanks to my bantering and filing a bug so it would evident and martin updated adt
[20:48] <balloons> I guess I'll start a thread and evolve it from there
[20:50] <veebers> balloons: sorry needed coffee. That's def a big problem. Is it obvious whose backlog it would exist on?
[21:09] <dkessel> balloons: hey, good day - why would plymouthd consume 10% cpu all the time while i am logged into the desktop?
[21:10] <dkessel> make that around 12,5% and that might be one cpu thread...
[21:13] <balloons> dkessel, howdy
[21:14] <balloons> veebers, umm.. I suppose qa.. really ci isn't too affected, but both are indeed affected, as is the community
[21:15] <dkessel> well... so i just killed plymouthd :p
[21:18] <veebers> balloons: right, it affects qa but it's not really us causing it right? But yes putting it with qa is a good start then we could go from there
[21:18] <balloons> dkessel, hmm.. maybe it's crashing on startup?
[21:18] <dkessel> maybe it was...
[21:19] <balloons> veebers, well, I mean it's a tool that your team maintains.. And yes, it's not something you can fix in the tool; but presumably your team is the ones with the know-how and ability to create a better solution
[21:21] <balloons> dkessel, I would point you here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Plymouth
[21:22] <Kaleo> elopio, is there a special trick for wait_select_single to find an object inheriting from QObject only?
[21:22] <Kaleo> elopio, in a QML app
[21:23] <dkessel> balloons: ok so i got this in syslog: Mar 11 20:18:25 daniel-laptop systemd[1]: Received SIGRTMIN+20 from PID 6282 (plymouthd).
[21:23] <veebers> balloons: oh right you mean fix adt or the sanity suite? I thought you meant that it's possible that there is an image that has uninstallable packages due to image and archive release times
[21:23] <dkessel> i'll see if i can reproduce after reboot
[21:23] <balloons> veebers, ohh that.. yea, that lies in CI and I suppose is quite related
[21:24] <Kaleo> elopio, not an object inheriting from QQuickItem
[21:26] <veebers> balloons: right sorry looks like we had our wires a little crossed there. Yeah, qa for getting the tools working which will probably spawn further work for teams re: the archive/image issue
[21:26] <veebers> nuclearbob: you have any luck with running the tests?
[21:34] <elopio> veebers: can you give a hand to Kaleo?
[21:34] <Kaleo> elopio, thanks
[21:35] <veebers> elopio, Kaleo sure thing
[21:35]  * veebers reads backlog
[21:35] <Kaleo> veebers, so, let's back up a little, elopio earlier pointed me to how to fake orientation sensor values: https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical/unity8/fake_platform_sensors_module/+merge/247334
[21:36] <Kaleo> veebers, but now I'd like to be able to _read_ what the current orientation is
[21:37] <veebers> Kaleo: Ah right, there should be code as an example there. One moment while I find it
[21:37] <Kaleo> there is a "# TODO how to get the shell orientation?" :)
[21:38] <Kaleo> veebers, I would have a not too  hard way to do it that works for me because I have in my app an instance of OrientationSensor available http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qml-qtsensors-orientationsensor.html
[21:38] <Kaleo> veebers, but my wait_select_single on it always fails
[21:38] <veebers> hmm, now was that on this laptop or my old one. Kaleo, as an aside while I'm looking for what I'm sure exists, from memory there is a property in the Unity shell, I print_tree-ed the shell
[21:39] <veebers> Kaleo: I wonder if its not exported for introspection (not everything is, i.e. most non-visible elements)
[21:39] <Kaleo> veebers, note that I don't want the orientation of the apps (that is influenced by the orientation lock) but the actual orientation of the device
[21:39] <veebers> Kaleo: ah right, hmm.
[21:40] <veebers> Kaleo: A quick test re: your select single is to do a print_tree on the root element and grep the log to make sure what you're looking for is there (or has a different name or something like that)
[21:40] <veebers> On that note, the example I was looking at was the properties that the unity shell provide
[21:41] <Kaleo> veebers, good idea
[21:41] <veebers> Kaleo: how much longer are you online? I've just packed up my devices etc. as I was out the door to the other office, do you have ~5-10 minutes? Then I can go there and get my device out etc
[21:42] <elopio> Kaleo: veebers: that TODO is in there because the orientation property will change. Not because it's not possible to get it.
[21:43] <elopio> the shell has an "orientation" property. Currently it doesn't change as the shell ignores orientation changes, but when they land the orientation PPA, there will be something similar you can query.
[21:43] <veebers> elopio: right, the shell property is there somewhere (I need to have a look for it as I've lost my notes) the question is if the shell exports the details that Kaleo is looking for
[21:43] <Kaleo> veebers, I can wait a bit
[21:44] <veebers> in the past I've been able to see some orientation change details, but I can't remember exactly where or what (will need to boot up my device)
[21:44] <veebers> Kaleo: awesome cheers, sorry for the delay :-P I'll be back shortly.
[22:03] <veebers> Kaleo: right, back now
[22:03] <veebers> getting my device ready to introspect
[22:20] <elopio> hum, kiwi doesn't work really well for more than a minute.
[22:21] <veebers> Kaleo: so I can see 'deviceOrientationAngle:' in the unity8 shell, not sure if that helps you at all?
[22:21] <veebers> elopio: kiwi?
[22:21] <elopio> it's the irc client on the phone.
[22:21] <Kaleo> veebers, it might
[22:21] <ianorlin> join #ubuntu-offtopic
[22:21] <Kaleo> veebers, how can I read it from my app's AP test?
[22:21] <Kaleo> veebers, does it return the device orientation without the orientation lock interfering though?
[22:27] <veebers> Kaleo: good question, I'm not too sure
[22:27] <veebers> Kaleo:  would have to play around withit
[22:28] <Kaleo> veebers, k
[22:45] <elopio> Kaleo: veebers: in order to access the property from the shell, you would have to launch unity with testability.
[22:45] <elopio> Kaleo: what is it that you are testing?
[22:45] <Kaleo> elopio, I would need to access it from my app
[22:45] <Kaleo> elopio, the camera app
[22:46] <veebers> elopio: ah right good point
[22:47] <veebers> Kaleo: how does the camera app (or any app)know if it's rotated or not, surely it should know something about that?
[22:47] <elopio> veebers: is it because of this bug that autopilot can't see the orientationsensor object? https://bugs.launchpad.net/autopilot-qt/+bug/1273956
[22:47] <veebers> elopio: potentially
[22:48] <veebers> elopio: is the orientationsensor in the app?
[22:49] <Kaleo> veebers, I use OrientationSensor
[22:49] <Kaleo> elopio, yes it is :)
[22:49] <veebers> elopio: if that bug is the reason it should be easier to resolve it for this instance as we changed a little how autopilot-qt did it's introspection so we can do it piecemeal instead of for the whole lot (which is where we ran into major issues and thus couldn't get it released)
[22:50] <elopio> veebers: Kaleo: we have been working around that issue with non-visual components adding the value you are looking for as a property.
[22:50] <veebers> Kaleo, elopio: Right, looks like we could resolve this by updating libautopilot-qt. We should get a card to fix it
[22:50] <elopio> you will see on the shell that the property is:
[22:50] <elopio> readonly property int deviceOrientationAngle: Screen.angleBetween(Screen.primaryOrientation, Screen.orientation)
[22:50] <Kaleo> elopio, the underlying issue really needs fixing :/
[22:50] <elopio> you could do something similar on your app, with Screen or the sensor.
[22:50] <elopio> veebers: if that bug can be fixed, that would be awesome.
[22:51] <elopio> I had already forgotten about it.
[22:51] <Kaleo> elopio, the Screen.orientation value is wrong for me
[22:51] <Kaleo> elopio, it is influenced by the orientation lock
[22:51] <veebers> elopio, Kaleo: I think the bug could be quickly resolved for this instance (and a couple of other defined non-visual) it's a bigger bug for all non-visual
[22:51] <Kaleo> elopio, yes I could add a property
[22:53] <veebers> hmm, odd that bugs title and the contents don't match (the description is re: issues with a newer version of qt :-P)
[22:54] <elopio> it looks recycled :)
[22:56] <veebers> yeah :-) elopio, Kaleo I might file a specific bug re: the orientationsensor not being exported to get a card in the backlog, the card should include investigation around getting all elements exported (but focus on just the sensor for now)
[22:57] <Kaleo> veebers, ok, cool
[22:58] <elopio> sounds good. Thanks veebers.
[23:00] <elopio> veebers: btw, I pushed on today's meeting to keep the proxy base classes bug in the suggested backlog.
[23:00] <elopio> I had no idea how to make a good story for it, so the title might not be the best.
[23:01] <veebers> elopio: ack, I can eyeball it if you like
[23:01] <elopio> if you have good reasons to fix it in the next sprint, it would be nice if you left them in the comments.
[23:01] <veebers> fyi bug #1431057
[23:02] <veebers> ack, will do
[23:07] <veebers> elopio: thoughts? http://paste.ubuntu.com/10582689/'
[23:11] <veebers> elopio: (man, I keep bugging you today :-)) hey you have a moment to discuss the upgrade MP quickly? https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-platform-qa/ubuntu-ota-tests/upgrade/+merge/252372
[23:14] <elopio> veebers: you are not bugging me.
[23:14]  * veebers increases effort to bug elopio
[23:15] <elopio> veebers: the paste looks good. jfunk: http://paste.ubuntu.com/10582689/ (in case you want to change the title)
[23:15] <elopio> veebers: so, upgrade...
[23:15] <veebers> elopio: so to confirm the file 'adb-reboot-to-recovery' is a forked/patched copy of what's in adt-run already? Followup: 'autopkgtest-reboot' is provided by adt-run?
[23:16] <veebers> coolio re: card, I'll email jfunk in a bit about this card and getting a new one in for the ap-qt/sensor bug
[23:17] <jfunk> thx elopio, veebers -- plz put in email
[23:17] <veebers> jfunk: do you have a template yet? :-)
[23:17] <elopio> veebers: yes, it is. It has two line changes for adt_reboot_target
[23:18] <elopio> and we might need two more lines if we want to reboot with /sbin/reboot instead of adb reboot.
[23:18] <veebers> elopio: any possibility of this being upstreamed into autopkgtest ?
[23:19] <elopio> veebers: it must be upstreamed.
[23:19] <veebers> elopio: awesome
[23:19] <elopio> I haven't done it because I think it would be good to make the two changes in the same patch. But we can do it anytime.
[23:19] <elopio> and /tmp/autopkgtest-reboot is provided by adt-run, yes.
[23:20] <veebers> elopio: sweetbix, that's my 'big' questions asked then :-) I'll give it a run and I have a couple of comments re: non-functional parts of the diff (needed comments/clarifications etc.) otherwise it's looking good. Always a good experience reading your code
[23:22] <elopio> veebers: thanks man. Please leave all the suggestions in there and I'll implement them in the night.
[23:23] <veebers> elopio: will do
[23:53] <veebers> ubuntu-qa: I'm having flashing troubles. trying this command using u-d-f from ppa: ubuntu-device-flash touch --developer-mode --password 0000 --channel="ubuntu-touch/devel-proposed" --bootloader --wipe
[23:54] <veebers> and getting the error: unknown flag bootloader
[23:54] <veebers> I also get that error if I try to use the --revision=138 flag, which is documented in the help text
[23:54] <veebers> any ideas?
[23:55] <alesage> veebers hi
[23:56] <veebers> hey alesage o/
[23:56] <alesage> veebers, what does --bootloader do?  not seeing it in help
[23:57] <veebers> alesage: I'm told by elopio it's what I need to do to fix my issue :-)
[23:59] <alesage> veebers, ok I'm stumped :) , can you describe the issue?