[00:40] <mup> PR snapd#8195 opened: tests/lib/prepare.sh: simplify, combine code paths <Simple 😃> <Test Robustness> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8195>
[02:26] <mup> PR snapcraft#2953 opened: meta: remove remaining `__dict__` and key list usage in snap <Created by cjp256> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/2953>
[06:04] <mup> PR snapd#8189 closed: seed,cmd/snap-bootstrap: introduce seed.Snap.EssentialType, simplify bootstrap code <UC20> <Created by pedronis> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8189>
[06:05] <mup> PR snapd#8183 closed: tests: remove tmp dir for snap not-test-snapd-sh on security-private-tmp test <Simple 😃> <Created by sergiocazzolato> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8183>
[06:17] <mup> PR snapd#8140 closed: tests: enable more tests for UC20/UC18 <Test Robustness> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8140>
[06:19] <mup> PR snapd#8186 closed: run-checks: SKIP_GMFMT really skips formatting checks <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8186>
[06:22] <mup> PR snapd#8085 closed: [RFC] netutil: add default gateway monitor <Created by mvo5> <Closed by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8085>
[06:30] <mborzecki> morning
[06:30] <mvo> mborzecki: good morning
[06:32] <mup> PR snapd#8196 opened: client: add "Resume" to DownloadOptions and new test <Simple 😃> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8196>
[06:33] <mup> PR snapd#8188 closed: spread.yaml: make qemu ubuntu-core-20-64 use ubuntu-20.04-64 <Simple 😃> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8188>
[06:33] <mborzecki> mvo: hey! so PRs are finally green :)
[06:35] <mvo> mborzecki: yes, it's quite nice, if we push a bit we could go below 50 today
[06:35] <mup> PR snapd#8081 closed: tests/main/user-session-env: add test verifying environment variables inside the user session <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8081>
[06:42] <mborzecki> hmm can't push an update to #8169
[06:42] <mup> PR #8169: tests/many: don't use StartLimitInterval anymore, unify snapd-failover variants, build snapd snap for UC16 tests <Test Robustness> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8169>
[06:43] <mborzecki> looks like ian didn't tick allow edits from maintainers box
[06:45] <mvo> mborzecki: meh, a shame
[06:45] <mup> PR snapd#8195 closed: tests/lib/prepare.sh: simplify, combine code paths <Simple 😃> <Test Robustness> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8195>
[06:51] <mup> PR snapd#8197 opened: snap: refacot code in `snap download` to prepare for snap downloads <Simple 😃> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8197>
[07:02] <mup> PR snapd#7707 closed: snap: add TestDownloadDirectStoreHappy test <Created by mvo5> <Closed by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7707>
[07:32] <jamesh> could someone restart https://travis-ci.org/snapcore/snapd/builds/655225016 for me?  It looks like it failed on a timeout talking to github.com
[07:46] <mborzecki> jamesh: sure
[07:46] <jamesh> mborzecki: thanks
[07:47] <mborzecki> jamesh: looks like it's already restarted
[07:47] <zyga> Dobę
[07:47] <zyga> Done even
[07:47] <jamesh> I wonder how hard it'd be to cut Travis out of the loop completely
[07:48] <jamesh> the main feature missing from github actions is the option to make secrets available to PRs
[07:48] <zyga> jamesh: oh? Are you sure?
[07:48] <zyga> I saw secrets used in some actions I looked at
[07:49] <jamesh> zyga: yeah.  Secrets come up blank if the the job is initiated by someone without write access to the repository
[07:49] <zyga> Aaaah
[07:49] <zyga> I see
[07:49] <zyga> I guess that is only expected
[07:55] <jamesh> in contrast, anyone can submit a PR that changes .travis.yml so that their test run will exfiltrate the secrets
[08:02] <pstolowski> morning
[08:02] <mborzecki> pstolowski: hey
[08:03] <mvo> hey pstolowski
[08:03] <mvo> pstolowski: I saw some of these in travis: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/3jdZTp7QPd/
[08:04] <mborzecki> damn serial terminals
[08:04] <pstolowski> mvo: is this with latest master?
[08:05] <mvo> pstolowski: I think so, let me double check
[08:05] <mborzecki> mvo: pstolowski: i saw this locally today when merging master to ijohnson's branch
[08:07] <pstolowski> mborzecki: ah, ok. that's annoying :(. i'll intensify my efforts on the followup then, i was hoping the last bump of the sleep time was enough as a temporary workaround
[08:08] <mvo> pstolowski: we could bump again by 1s or so
[08:08] <mvo> pstolowski: until we have the fix
[08:09] <jamesh> mvo: I noticed that, and had it happen locally.  I needed to up the wait to 3 seconds
[08:09] <jamesh> wasn't sure if it was something I'd introduced
[08:11] <mvo> jamesh: it's a recent change from pstolowski
[08:11] <mvo> jamesh: 3s each? anything unusal about your machine? particularly slow or fast?
[08:12] <pstolowski> okay, i can propose one more bump, and in the meantime will continue working on the better fix
[08:13] <jamesh> mvo: just that one test.
[08:14] <jamesh> mvo: I tried bumping in smaller increments locally, but had no idea what it was doing with the time
[08:15] <jamesh> the system is not particularly fast
[08:16] <mvo> jamesh: thank you for letting us know
[08:21] <mup> PR snapd#8198 opened: o/tests: bump TestEnsureLoopPruneAbortsOld sleep time <⚠ Critical> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8198>
[08:25] <zyga> Sleep bump a day keeps those pesky races at bay
[08:27] <mup> PR snapd#7146 closed: [sketch] UC20: cmd/snap-verify: sketch of snap-verify <UC20> <⛔ Blocked> <Created by pedronis> <Closed by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7146>
[08:30] <kbroulik> Is it true Ubuntu ships chromium or chrome as Snap soon/by default or something along the lines?
[08:33] <zyga> kbroulik: dunno, is that announced somewhere?
[08:34] <kbroulik> https://snapcraft.io/blog/chromium-in-ubuntu-deb-to-snap-transition I think this
[08:35] <zyga> This seems like a deb is migrating to a snap, is that what you meant?
[08:35] <kbroulik> yeah, sorry, my wording wasn't clear
[08:35] <zyga> That is not the same as ship by default (preinstall)
[08:35] <kbroulik> "is it true Ubuntu ships chromium as a snap instead of a deb?" :)
[08:35] <kbroulik> right
[08:36] <zyga> Given that post it would seem so
[08:36] <kbroulik> hm maybe I should try it first and see if it breaks my project :)
[08:48] <mup> PR snapd#8199 opened: tests: enable snapd-failover on uc20 <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8199>
[08:52] <mvo> mborzecki: for your recovery-chooser pr - you need to install it in the debian packaging to some place
[08:52] <mvo> mborzecki: check e.g. debian/snapd.install
[08:53] <mborzecki> mvo: it's already added there
[08:53] <mborzecki> hmmm
[08:53] <mborzecki> uhh 14.04
[08:55] <mvo> mborzecki: was just looking over the recent failure in spread, not really looking closely
[08:56] <kbroulik> ok so yeah I tried chromium snap and as I feared: it breaks plasma-browser-integration as it cannot find the native host :/
[08:59] <kbroulik> interestingly it does have a whitelist for /etc/chromium which should allow this
[09:06] <kbroulik> ah. ok, so chromium snap also breaks gnome chrome shell. so the whitelist doesnt actually work
[09:06] <kbroulik> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+bug/1741074 ok, is known. thanks anyway :)
[09:06] <mup> Bug #1741074: [snap] chrome-gnome-shell extension fails to detect native host connector <snap> <chromium-browser (Ubuntu):Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1741074>
[09:41] <zyga> mvo: I wonder if master will be red by Friday
[09:44] <mvo> zyga: mh, why?
[09:45] <mvo> zyga: it looks mostly green right now
[09:45] <zyga> mvo: that prune thing
[09:45] <zyga> mvo: feels like a deeper problem
[09:47] <mvo> zyga: no worries, pawel is working on a better version of this test
[10:17] <mup> PR snapd#8200 opened: [RFC] cmd/snap-chooser-ui-demo: a demo of recovery chooser UI <Skip spread> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8200>
[10:17] <pedronis> zyga: #7219 was force pushed a bunch of times, that is not great
[10:17] <mborzecki> mvo: the UI demo bit ^^
[10:17] <mup> PR #7219: devicestate/firstboot: check for missing bases early <Created by stolowski> <Merged by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7219>
[10:18] <pedronis> heh, I meant #7129
[10:18] <mup> PR #7129: userd: allow setting default-url-scheme-handler <⛔ Blocked> <Created by jwheare> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7129>
[10:18] <jwheare> unfortunately rebasing onto master was required and that requires a force
[10:18] <jwheare> this has been open a looong time heh
[10:18] <zyga> pedronis: yeah, I noticed, I just +1 the fact that the contributor has not lost interest
[10:19] <pedronis> jwheare: well, it means now it needs a review by me, even it got a lot of +1s already
[10:19] <zyga> it looks like the entire history is kept, just rebased
[10:19] <mborzecki> damn, github ui popup when you start entering #<PRnumber> is so confusing and buggy
[10:20] <zyga> pedronis: can you delegate that review to others?
[10:20] <pedronis> zyga: maybe
[10:20] <pedronis> I still need to understand what the PR does either way
[10:20] <pedronis> I planned to do that in any case
[10:21] <jwheare> also, as was mentioned in the comments, i was iterating yesterday just to force sloow test reruns, often including white space changes, which were useless. during that time there were some comments before i had finished, and i squashed at the end. the squashed part is clearly marked out
[10:22] <zyga> I had a look at this originally, the key is the {Check,Get,Set}Sub API - it's a part of the xdg-settings system https://portland.freedesktop.org/doc/xdg-settings.html
[10:22] <zyga> the rest is glue to our stack
[10:22] <zyga> pedronis: ^
[10:22] <pedronis> I marked it for me, hopefully I can decide something about it still this week
[10:24] <zyga> pedronis: perhaps github UI has improved as the rebase did not break the flow of the comments
[10:24] <pedronis> it seems it has
[10:29] <pedronis> zyga: also it should probably not go in 2.44, we are too close to wanting to cut it
[10:29] <pedronis> and it's already full of things
[10:29] <mborzecki> yeah, the comments stay and are marked as outdated, you can also click on the rebase change and see the diff
[10:30] <mvo> mborzecki: nice!
[10:31] <zyga> pedronis: it's not my decision, I would probably let it in as it's been there for a while and I'm not sure how getting it in at the next cycle will help - it probably won't be tested by anyone apart from the currently, single user interested in it (as in single snap)
[10:31] <mborzecki> time to put all the recover bits back together again
[10:31] <pedronis> zyga: if nothing else it changes spread tests, that's reason enough not to merge just before cutting
[10:32] <mup> PR snapd#8194 closed: o/devicestate: unset recovery_system when done seeding <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8194>
[10:41] <pedronis> zyga: I looked a bit, there are actually issues with the code
[10:42] <zyga> pedronis: I'll check your review
[10:42] <pedronis> zyga: I haven't reviewe, I'm just skimming, but saw a place where it could panic for example
[10:44] <zyga> pedronis: on SplitN?
[10:44] <pedronis> yes for example
[10:44] <pedronis> also why the cast to string
[10:46] <zyga> on checkOutput? bytes / strings
[10:46] <jwheare> that was in the original code
[10:46] <pedronis> no, there's SplitN(string(thing)...  but thing is already a string
[10:46] <pedronis> anyway it needs clearly another review pass and checking for coverage
[10:46] <pedronis> sorry
[10:47] <jwheare> https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/blob/master/usersession/userd/settings.go#L168
[10:50] <mup> PR snapd#8201 opened: [WIP,RFC] Mock prune ticker in overlord tests to reduce wait times <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8201>
[10:52] <pedronis> jwheare: different assumptions, but yes that code is fragile too, but that code doesn't even assume there's a path wher the 2nd part is not there
[10:53] <jwheare> probably down to me copy/pasting existing code to a different place. well spotted
[10:53] <pedronis> the string bit is needed because output is []byte there
[10:53] <jwheare> yeah
[10:54]  * zyga straces systemd-run to see why it hangs
[10:54] <zyga> good old 18.04
[10:54] <zyga> everything works
[10:54] <pedronis> anyway, I'll try to give this some attention still this week (next week we are at a sprint), but no promises, my own queue is long atm
[10:54] <zyga> extend tests to all systems
[10:54] <zyga> 16.04 shows it's rusty fangs
[10:55] <jwheare> pedronis: there is no rush, more eyes are always good
[10:55] <jwheare> i have to say i lost a lot of time to that "not" command
[10:56] <jwheare> "why is this erroring when i test this on some dummy bash code locally"
[10:57] <jwheare> also trying to work out what's happening in failing tests that check stderr output by redirecting to a file when set -x prints to stderr too is fun
[10:58] <mup> PR snapd#8202 opened: cmd/snap-bootstrap,seed: verify only in-play snaps <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8202>
[10:58] <jwheare> 90% of this PR was probably test wrangling heh
[10:59] <pedronis> mvo: mborzecki: #8202 should speed up snap-bootstrap a bit
[10:59] <mup> PR #8202: cmd/snap-bootstrap,seed: verify only in-play snaps <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8202>
[11:04] <zyga> so I guess I have a solution for the systemd-run getting stuck
[11:04] <zyga> it changes the usability a little but not by much, at least for testing
[11:05] <pedronis> pstolowski: hi, should I look at #8201, or not yet?
[11:05] <mup> PR #8201: [WIP,RFC] Mock prune ticker in overlord tests to reduce wait times <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8201>
[11:05] <pstolowski> pedronis: let's see if it passes first, i'll re-run it a few times
[11:06] <pedronis> ok
[11:08] <mvo> fun on arm64 it seems http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/Q7CMcqRK5T
[11:08]  * mvo retries the ppa build where this happend
[11:09] <zyga> mvo: that's the new stopper code?
[11:09] <pedronis> yes
[11:09] <mvo> yes
[11:10] <zyga> maybe want to see my simple epoll code instead
[11:10] <zyga> though it's kind of close to release
[11:10] <zyga> so dunno
[11:10] <mvo> lookng now
[11:10] <zyga> maybe just more locking / if nil things
[11:13] <mvo> zyga: yeah, looks like the timeout is nil for some reason
[11:14] <mborzecki> pedronis: cool, let me take a look
[11:16] <mup> PR snapd#8192 closed: tests: add more debug output to the snapd-failure handling <Created by mvo5> <Merged by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8192>
[11:17] <ijohnson> mborzecki sorry not sure why the box wasn't ticked on 8169 but it should be good now
[11:18] <mborzecki> ijohnson: cool, let me merge again and push
[11:18] <pedronis> mvo: ah, you cannot pass nil for timeout on arm64
[11:19] <mvo> pedronis: interessting, shall I push a fix or will you?
[11:19] <mvo> pedronis: breaks the arm64 builds right now
[11:20] <pedronis> mvo: yes, but it's a bit unclear what the fix should be, null means don't timeout
[11:21] <pedronis> 0 means don't even try
[11:23] <pedronis> mvo: this is fixed in newer versions of go :/
[11:23] <mvo> pedronis: oh no
[11:23] <mvo> pedronis: we could workaround with timeout.Sec: 999999
[11:24] <zyga> mvo: perhaps the man page is relevant
[11:24] <mvo> pedronis: fugly but would probably be ok?
[11:24] <zyga> I didn't read the code so not sure if that's the culprit
[11:24] <zyga> https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/zFnzXT9r/
[11:24] <pedronis> mvo: we probably should workaround but setting everything to the max but only on arm64
[11:24] <mvo> pedronis: +1
[11:24] <mvo> pedronis: I can prepare a PR
[11:24] <pedronis> zyga: the panic points to a place and the place is reading timeout
[11:25] <ijohnson> mborzecki did you see my typo in the PR too? Seems the spread tests didn't run due to my typo in that PR
[11:25] <pedronis> it's fixed in newer go
[11:25] <zyga> pedronis: I see
[11:25] <pedronis> see the if at line 90 here: https://golang.org/src/syscall/syscall_linux_arm64.go
[11:25] <pedronis> older go don't have it
[11:25]  * pedronis lunch
[11:26] <zyga> uh, I see
[11:26] <zyga> sucks, bug in the wrapper
[11:26] <mvo> yep
[11:27] <mborzecki> ijohnson: yeah, i'm looking and shellcheck, it's unhappy about some things, also one of the warnings looks like a bug in shellcheck ;)
[11:28] <ijohnson> :-(
[11:29] <mborzecki> ijohnson: hahah https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/yb6d9NMN3B/
[11:30] <ijohnson> Ahh
[11:44] <mup> PR snapd#8203 opened: netlink: fix panic on arm64 with the new rawsockstop code <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8203>
[11:45] <pedronis> mvo: in theory if we timeout the subsquent read will give us EWOULDBLOCK or similar and we retry, so just having some kind of long timeout should work
[11:46] <pedronis> mvo: not sure if we can test somehow that scenario though
[11:46] <mvo> pedronis: I pushed the workaround with int64 seconds timeout
[11:48] <mborzecki> ijohnson: pushed
[11:48] <mvo> pedronis: it's enough time I think, still worth double checking if select behaves sanely for such a huge value
[11:49] <pedronis> mvo: or we don't make it huge but as I said check that the udev code does the right thing if select timeouts
[11:49] <pedronis> it should (in theory)
[11:50] <mvo> pedronis: I have no strong opinion either way, I pushed the simplest thing but I can iterate on this
[11:51] <mborzecki> ijohnson: i should probably file an issue with shellcheck about the for loop
[11:57]  * zyga stops banging the head against the wall and breaks for a quick snack
[12:00] <mup> PR snapd#8204 opened: data/systemd: improve the description <Created by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8204>
[12:04] <pedronis> mvo: I'll try something test-wise on top of your PR in a bit
[12:05] <mvo> pedronis: sure
[12:07] <mborzecki> ijohnson: https://github.com/koalaman/shellcheck/issues/1847 heh
[12:07] <zyga> back
[12:08] <mborzecki> ijohnson: wouldn't be surprised if _ is an actual variable getting assigned to at this point
[12:08] <zyga> mborzecki: what were you expecting?
[12:08] <zyga> oh
[12:08] <zyga> actually
[12:08] <mborzecki> zyga: nothing ;)
[12:08] <zyga> I'm surprised now
[12:08] <zyga> mborzecki: bash and dash disagree
[12:08] <zyga> mborzecki: _ is ok in dash
[12:08] <zyga> mborzecki: and a no-op in bash
[12:09] <zyga> I suspect it is documented somewhere
[12:10] <mborzecki> zyga: fwiw it's flagged for -s bash too
[12:40] <pedronis> mvo: not for 2.44 but we should consider using x/sys/unix for a our few syscall needs maybe
[12:43] <pedronis> mvo: there's a missing import in _other.go
[12:51] <mup> PR snapd#8199 closed: tests: enable snapd-failover on uc20 <Simple 😃> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8199>
[12:55] <jwheare> pedronis: probably worth mentioning the force push thing in the contribution guide btw, since different projects have different norms https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
[13:04] <zyga> wl
[13:04] <zyga> sorry,
[13:04] <zyga> thunder :)
[13:04] <zyga> winter is over
[13:07] <zyga> and hail
[13:08] <pedronis> mvo: pstolowski: I pushed a fix and one more test (at the cost of some changes) to #8203
[13:08] <mup> PR #8203: netlink: fix panic on arm64 with the new rawsockstop code <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8203>
[13:09] <pstolowski> pedronis: ok, will rereview
[13:10]  * pstolowski lunch
[13:11] <pstolowski> zyga: nb, #8170 is ready for re-review
[13:11] <zyga> ack
[13:11] <mup> PR #8170: snap-preseed: support for preseeding of snapd and core18 <Preseeding 🍞> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8170>
[13:11] <zyga> looking
[13:11] <pstolowski> ty
[13:14] <mborzecki> heh, last minute changes are always a bad idead
[13:16] <zyga> mborzecki: what did you break?
[13:16] <zyga> ;)
[13:17] <mborzecki> zyga: heh little tweaks in the ui before opening the PR
[13:17] <mborzecki> ofc unit tests are passing ;)
[13:33] <mup> PR snapd#8196 closed: client: add "Resume" to DownloadOptions and new test <Simple 😃> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8196>
[13:55] <zyga> pstolowski: reviewed
[13:56] <pstolowski> zyga: thanks!
[13:56] <zyga> pstolowski: thank you, I just did the last review :)
[14:37] <mup> PR snapd#8205 opened: tests: just remove user when the system is not managed on create-user-2 test <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8205>
[14:41] <zyga> pstolowski: we should bring barylki
[14:41] <zyga> they will function both as sweets
[14:41] <zyga> hand sanitizers
[14:41] <zyga> and throat sanitizers
[14:42] <mup> PR snapd#8204 closed: data/systemd: improve the description <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by sergiusens> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8204>
[14:42] <zyga> I'll take a break to take the dog out
[14:42] <zyga> brb
[14:45] <pedronis> mvo: it's a minor thing but it might make sense to backport 8204 to 2.44 if it's what is going into 20.04
[14:45] <pedronis> and is not too annoying
[14:45] <mvo> pedronis: +1
[14:47] <mup> PR snapd#8206 opened: travis.yml: run unit tests on arm64 as well <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8206>
[14:50] <pstolowski> zyga: i'm actually thinking about some 'stronger' sweets this time ;)
[14:53] <mborzecki> mvo: for the race with mount units: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/z7ZpDRmKcW/
[14:54] <zyga> back
[14:54] <zyga> my phone just got an ... ubuntu touch update
[14:54] <mvo> mborzecki: oh, nice!
[14:55] <zyga> yeah
[14:59] <pstolowski> zyga: woot!?
[14:59] <pstolowski> ubuports?
[15:01] <zyga> yes
[15:01] <zyga> booting now
[15:05] <zyga> pstolowski: heh, there's a new UI
[15:06]  * cachio lunch
[15:13] <ijohnson> mborzecki: hmm seems the merge went a bit awry on 8169, okay if I push up some changes or are you working on it ?
[15:17] <pstolowski> zyga: show me a screenshot pls
[15:18] <zyga> how do I make screenshots on core
[15:18] <zyga> er
[15:18] <zyga> phone
[15:20] <zyga> it's pretty, I"ll bring it
[15:20] <zyga> you'll see :)
[15:20] <zyga> back to services
[15:23] <ijohnson> mborzecki: well I'll just push anyways
[15:30] <pedronis> zyga: mvo: at this point #7825 targets 2.45, right?
[15:30] <mup> PR #7825: many: use transient scope for tracking apps and hooks <Security-High> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7825>
[15:31] <zyga> pedronis: yes
[15:31] <zyga> pedronis: there's one real issue that needs fixing
[15:31] <zyga> pedronis: and tests to cover it
[15:31] <pedronis> it's fine, changing the milestone
[15:31] <zyga> pedronis: it's not critical (not desktop) but needs to be debugged all the way because it's critical path
[15:31] <mvo> pedronis: +1
[15:32] <mborzecki> ijohnson: yeah, please do, there were 2 merges, both had conflicts because of related things landing
[15:33] <ijohnson> mborzecki: ack
[15:46] <ijohnson> pedronis: I reviewed your essential snaps PR, thanks for that
[15:46] <ijohnson> pedronis: if you could quick take a look at my question on https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8185#issuecomment-591193478 that would be appreciated thanks
[15:46] <mup> PR #8185: tests: add uc20 kernel snap upgrade managers test, fix bootloadertest bugs <Test Robustness> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8185>
[15:50] <pedronis> ijohnson: thank you
[15:50] <pedronis> ijohnson: looking (was having a different chat somewhere else)
[15:50] <ijohnson> pstolowski: should I re-review #8170, seems to have changed a bit since I last reviewed
[15:50] <mup> PR #8170: snap-preseed: support for preseeding of snapd and core18 <Preseeding 🍞> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8170>
[15:50] <ijohnson> pedronis: thanks
[15:51] <pedronis> ijohnson: ah, that, we always keep 2 or 3 older revisions per snap, so it's normal that the unpacked assets for them would stay around, you need to install 4 kernels before you see assets go away I think
[15:51] <pedronis> keep 2 or 3 XoldX revisions
[15:51] <ijohnson> pedronis: ok, not sure if we wanted to keep the assets around on ubuntu-boot
[15:52] <ijohnson> looks like the unit test is correct then and I'll just remove that last check
[15:52] <pedronis> ijohnson: that's the logic as is right now, we might want to change it but needs a larger discussion
[15:52] <pstolowski> ijohnson: i think the changes are very small, not necessary
[15:52] <ijohnson> pstolowski: ok thanks for confirming
[15:53] <pstolowski> ijohnson: np, thanks for asking!
[15:54] <pedronis> ijohnson: that's what we do on uboot devices atm for UC16 UC18
[15:54] <ijohnson> pedronis: makes sense. today I will work on cross-checking the signing keys in the kernel.efi we booted with in snap-bootstrap vs the ones in the current_kernels kernel snaps and open the other boot robustness PR then
[15:55] <pedronis> thx
[15:55] <pedronis> ijohnson: ping me if you need input on something
[15:55] <ijohnson> sure
[16:06] <zyga> I'll grab some food, family's back
[16:15] <pedronis> pstolowski: I reviewed #8190, looks like what I expected, some comments on details
[16:15] <mup> PR #8190: overlord, taskrunner: exit on task/ensure error when preseeding <Preseeding 🍞> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8190>
[16:15] <pstolowski> pedronis: thanks! i forgot about state lock
[16:16] <pstolowski> pedronis: nb #8170 is probably close if you can re-review
[16:16] <mup> PR #8170: snap-preseed: support for preseeding of snapd and core18 <Preseeding 🍞> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8170>
[16:18] <pedronis> pstolowski: I don't think #8170 needs a review by me, I think you address my main point, right?
[16:18] <mup> PR #8170: snap-preseed: support for preseeding of snapd and core18 <Preseeding 🍞> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8170>
[16:18] <pedronis> *addressed
[16:18] <pstolowski> pedronis: that's fine, i wasn't sure if that was all. thanks
[16:19] <pedronis> pstolowski: actually, I am a bit confused, I thought preseeding worked with core 16 ?
[16:19] <pedronis> it seems you are blocking that too?
[16:19] <pedronis> or am I misreading the code
[16:19] <pedronis> or are you being careful because there is not spread test yet?
[16:23] <pedronis> pstolowski: to be clear I'm fine, we don't have a strong use case for core atm, especially core 16, just trying to understand
[16:26] <pstolowski> pedronis: my intent was to allow only classic with core snap or core18+snapd, and consider core systems in followups (with tests)
[16:26] <pedronis> pstolowski: ok, that's fine
[17:08] <cmatsuoka> cachio: what was the name of the sb/tpm enabled image again?
[17:10] <cachio> cmatsuoka, google-tpm is the server
[17:10] <cachio> backend
[17:10] <cmatsuoka> ah ok, let me try that... thanks!
[17:10] <cachio> cmatsuoka, https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/blob/master/spread.yaml#L128
[17:11] <cachio> you should try something like google-tpm:ubuntu-20.04-64:
[17:12] <cachio> cmatsuoka, you are the first one using those images
[17:12] <cachio> cmatsuoka, please tell me if you need any change
[17:18] <ijohnson> pstolowski: what's the first release that hotplug worked on ? 2.42 ?
[17:19] <pstolowski> ijohnson: hmm, tough question, i need to dig a bit, one moment
[17:19] <ijohnson> thanks
[17:19] <mup> PR snapcraft#2952 closed: spread: introduce appstream parse-info test <Created by cjp256> <Merged by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/2952>
[17:22] <pstolowski> ijohnson: 2.39 it seems
[17:23] <ijohnson> thanks pstolowski
[17:23] <pstolowski> ijohnson: based on https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/hotplug-implementation-plan/4554/3 cause debian changelog wasn't too helpful
[17:23] <ijohnson> pstolowski: degville: I made a small edit to https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/hotplug-support/10750 to reflect that snapd edge isn't useful anymore
[17:23] <ijohnson> err rather isn't needed anymore for enabling hotplug
[17:24] <degville> ijohnson: thank you!
[17:26] <pstolowski> ijohnson: thanks, makes sense
[19:23] <pedronis> mvo: are you building a new 2.43 ?
[19:24] <pedronis> of snapd
[20:31] <zyga> mvo, pedronis: snapd is held up in store review
[20:31] <zyga> types: New type "application" does not match the type of the latest approved revision, r6625 ("snapd")
[20:32] <pedronis> zyga: that's a 2.43 build, that's why I asked mvo
[20:32] <zyga> I see
[20:50] <mvo> pedronis: no plan to re-build 2.43, cherry picked one commit though in this branch just in case, I think we can ignore this
[20:54] <mvo> uh, looks like master is red - is that because of "tests/main/retry-network" failing?
[20:57] <mvo> looks like it - oh well
[20:57] <mvo> something for my morning I guess
[21:06] <pedronis> mvo: yes, something strange going on with retry-network
[21:07] <pedronis> lots of red
[21:07] <pedronis> not just master
[21:11] <cachio> pedronis, I am testing a fix for the retry-network
[21:11] <cachio> it is a timing issue
[21:24] <ijohnson> cachio: what's the timing issue for retry-network?
[21:29] <cachio> ijohnson, takes some time to NoNetwork: true
[21:29] <ijohnson> cachio: ah as in the network namespace isn't created immediately?
[21:30] <cachio> in the output file I see NoNetwork: false
[21:30] <cachio> but after a time it appears NoNetwork: true
[21:33] <cachio> ijohnson, I am testing the fix right now
[21:34] <ijohnson> cachio: cool let me know when/if you want me to review
[21:34] <cachio> ijohnson, sure, thanks!!
[21:49] <cachio> there are 2 problems
[21:49] <cachio> timing issue
[21:49] <cachio> which is fixed
[21:49] <cachio> also getent hosts www.ubuntu.com is returning the ipv6 instead of the ip
[21:49] <cachio> todya I updated the images
[21:50] <cachio> I think there was a change in a package which is affecting this
[21:51] <cachio> ijohnson, ~
[21:51] <ijohnson> cachio: ah I see yeah ipv6 could break things I suppose
[21:52] <ijohnson> cachio: I need to step out for a while, but feel free to request my review, I'll be back in a hour or two
[21:52] <cachio> ijohnson, sure, np
[22:17] <mup> PR snapd#8207 opened: tests: fix retry network test after image update <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8207>
[22:41]  * cachio afk