/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2020/03/24/#snappy.txt

mupPR snapd#8326 opened: [wip] boot: move initramfs-mounts logic to boot pkg <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8326>04:46
mborzeckimorning06:48
mborzeckiayy new kernel, brb06:53
mborzeckire06:55
zygaGood morning07:06
zygaI will make coffee first07:06
mborzeckizyga: hey07:10
jameshmborzecki: thanks for your feedback on the xdg-open-to-portal PR.  The test is now successfully running on Arch.07:29
jameshmvo: I think https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8318 is ready, although it hit two unrelated spread test failures07:30
mupPR #8318: tests: ensure sockets target is ready in session agent spread tests <Created by jhenstridge> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8318>07:30
mborzeckijamesh: thanks for updating the PRs!07:42
mborzeckizyga: do you remember whether spread sets nullglob in bash?07:43
mvojamesh: yeah, pushed one fix for this test failure07:46
mupPR snapd#8327 opened: tests: update proxy-no-core to match latest CDN changes <Simple 😃> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8327>07:46
mvojamesh: looking at the other now07:46
jameshmvo: the other is a "google-unstable" task, so perhaps doesn't matter07:47
mvojamesh: yeah, the unstable ones are not blocking merges07:48
mborzeckimvo: hm gperf seems to be gone from our 18.04 images, causing snap-seccomp-syscalls tests to fail07:49
jameshmborzecki: the xdg-open-portal spread test fails when I was running it on debian-9 and opensuse-15.1.  I'm not sure if it is down to the old xdg-desktop-portal versions, or if fakeportalui is using some Python API not available in those release07:51
zygamborzecki: I don't know what nullglob is07:51
zygaespanding non-matching glob to nothing?07:51
zygahey mvo07:51
mborzeckizyga: yes07:51
* zyga checks if travis responds 07:51
zygayesterday I could not get travis-ci.io to load at all07:52
zygaI see it's fixed now07:52
mborzeckizyga: so foo* gives nothing instead of 'foo*' ;)07:52
zygayeah07:52
zygahuh07:53
zygamaster failed07:53
zygaplease install gperf07:53
zygawhat the f***07:53
zygaconfigure: error: please install gperf07:53
zyga*why* do we need g-frelling-perf now07:53
mborzeckizyga: on it now07:53
zygathank you07:53
zygasigh07:53
zygaI want to get us off autotools07:53
mborzeckizyga: seems it was preinstalled in 18.04 images before, but is no longer there07:54
zygawe're not using it, why is it mandatory?07:54
zygathank you maciek07:54
* zyga tries something new07:54
mborzeckizyga: we build libseccomp upstream and they use gperf, since like 3 months now ;)07:54
zygaah07:55
zygaoh boy07:55
zygaman07:55
* zyga is unusually grumpy today, sorry07:55
mupPR snapd#8328 opened: tests/main/snap-seccomp-syscalls: install gperf <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8328>07:55
zygamborzecki: but it's weird that we depend on it07:55
zygait's usually a build-dep07:56
zyganot a runtime dep07:56
mborzeckizyga: the test depends on it, not snapd07:56
zygaah07:56
zygasorry, I missed that we build libseccomp upstream07:56
mborzeckizyga: look at what the test does07:56
zygabtw, why do we do that? to check for upcoming regressions?07:56
mborzeckizyga: yes, and we know when the list of syscalls we know of needs to be updated07:56
mborzeckizyga: the part of not rebuilding seccomp profiles when not needed07:57
mborzeckizyga: haha so found something interesting in #8316 build log08:01
mupPR #8316: github: add prototype workflow running unit tests <Skip spread> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8316>08:01
mborzeckiwtf is riscv_flush_icache syscalls?08:02
zygamborzecki: riscv flush instruction cache?08:02
zygamborzecki: what did you find?08:02
mborzeckizyga: left a comment there08:02
zygaok08:02
pstolowskimorning08:03
zygahahaha08:03
zygamborzecki: that's funny08:03
zygaI wonder how they do it08:03
zygabut they apparently do a better job than we do :D08:03
mborzeckizyga: hopefully #8295 will fix that08:03
mupPR #8295: osutil: do not leave processes behind after the test run <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8295>08:03
zygamhm08:03
mvomborzecki: yeah, looking at the snap-seccomp-syscalls test right now - unless someone else was faster, then I will stop08:03
mborzeckimvo: i'm on it already08:03
zygathank you guys :)08:03
mvomborzecki: cool08:03
mvomborzecki: aha, nice08:04
mborzeckiouch, our PR title checker just got `urllib.error.HTTPError: HTTP Error 429: too many requests`08:11
mupPR snapd#8321 closed:  cmd/snap-failure,tests: try to make snap-failure more robust (2.44) <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8321>08:12
mborzeckihmm, actually why is oldwait4 removed?08:17
mvomborzecki: yeah, this is strange08:17
mvomborzecki: also, why did this change, what package changed?08:17
pedronismvo: hi, did you see my comment in 8325 ?08:18
mborzeckimvo: hmm https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp/commit/4bd8de391d5920bdbdb639b1d81ddd7bfe4d754908:19
mvomborzecki: I didn't, let me look08:21
mvomborzecki: oh, interessting08:21
mborzeckimvo: i'll check the list of syscalls from HEAD and one before that commit08:22
mvopedronis: yeah, will fix, makes sense08:22
mvopedronis: I want to look at improving unit tests too but otherwise that would be the recover mode08:23
mvomborzecki: aha, we git checkout to test for the syscalls, right? so we are always git-fresh?08:23
mborzeckimvo: yes08:23
zygamvo: so, I guess we can kind of do nvidia tests08:26
zygamvo: and pi tests08:26
zygamvo: or aarch64 tests on specific board even if we wanted to08:27
mvozyga: we can or we can't ?08:27
zygawe *can* :)08:27
mborzeckimvo: so this commit introduces the list of syscalls that is used right now, oldwait4 is no longer there https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp/commit/f5b3166d6126f4a45b59d6af6780b5e00a0e986708:32
mvomborzecki: ok08:34
mborzeckithere is no __NR_oldwait4 in my system either08:35
zygamborzecki: does it spell trouble?08:35
pedronismvo: you might or not conflict with Ian draft PR, otoh that one needs work, it feels too complicated atm08:35
mvopedronis: ok08:35
mborzeckizyga: mvo: intersting, we have that syscall in our template08:36
zygahar har08:37
zygaI wonder why they removed it08:37
zygais it really gone08:37
zygawas it ever available08:37
mborzeckizyga: mvo: and snap-seccomp ignores the syscalls that are unknown to libseccomp library, maybe the test should be smarter about checking?08:37
zygaon 14.04?08:37
zygait only ignores because error checking in seccomp is not great08:37
zygawe have not way to differentiate "this is a valid syscall but your arch doesn't have it" from "lol, no, that is bogus"08:38
mvoit's a bit mysterious, linux famously never breaks abi with userland so just removing it if it was there sounds strange08:38
mborzeckizyga: fwiw, i don't see that syscall in my kernel source tree either08:38
zygamborzecki: try 14.0408:38
pedronismvo: I noticed the problem in #8237 last night, I pinged cachio about it08:41
mupPR #8237: interfaces/{docker,kubernetes}-support: updates for lastest k8s - 2.44 <Created by jdstrand> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8237>08:42
pedronisgrumble, 832708:42
zyga?08:43
mvopedronis: what problem in 8237 is that? the k8s update looks ok to me, what am I missing?08:44
mvooh, sorry08:44
pedronismvo: I mistyped08:44
mvopedronis: let me look at 8327 instead :)08:44
mvopedronis: but sergio did not do a pr yet, did he?08:45
pedronisseems not08:45
pedronisit was late for him as well I suppose08:45
mvook, should be fine, the fix is trivial08:45
mborzeckizyga: mvo: we should be fine afaict https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=a0673fdbcd42105261646cd4f3447455b5854a3208:45
pedronispstolowski: hi, what's the state of the search v2 PR? there are still some comments to address, right?08:46
mborzeckimvo: zyga: this was done in 4.1708:46
mborzeckii'll update the commit message08:47
mvomborzecki: hm,hm, we support 4.4 back in 16.04, still harmless?08:48
pedronisUC 18 is 4.1508:49
pedronisthat's also older than 4.1708:49
pedronisonly 20 is newer than 4.17 at 5.408:49
mborzeckimvo: aiui it's only used on 'score' architecture, which got removed in 4.17 as well08:49
zygabrb, some stuff at home08:50
pstolowskipedronis: i think i addressed all the comments except for potential specialial-casing of some errors from error-list, let me reply to all comments08:52
mvomborzecki: ok, spread should tell us is there is any issue08:52
pstolowskipedronis: ah, sorry, missed one about copyNonZero..08:52
pedronispstolowski: I added 2 more comments to #830908:57
mupPR #8309: o/configcore: implement Apply method for early configuration of core <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8309>08:57
pstolowskity08:57
pedronispstolowski: but let's try to wrap search v2 first08:57
pstolowskipedronis: okay; we will need to wait for store rename still08:58
pedronispstolowski: yes, but let's try to get the rest in order and also get a 2nd review08:58
pstolowskisure08:58
pedronismvo: mborzecki: when you have a moment can you review #825308:59
mupPR #8253: snap-bootstrap: expand data partition on install <UC20> <Created by cmatsuoka> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8253>08:59
mborzeckimvo: just to be sure, i pinged jdstrand and updated the commit message with relevant links08:59
mborzeckimvo: as i understand it, unless we supported that architecture (which nobody did?), the syscall should not come up09:00
mborzeckipedronis: sure09:00
zygare09:02
pedronismvo: so my comment in your recover auth PR was really about the original one? #801009:05
mupPR #8010: snap-bootstrap: add support for "recover" mode <UC20> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8010>09:05
mvopedronis: yes, but it's fine, we can use only a single PR, the copy auth data is a bit complex so I was splitting but it's not long so either way is fine with me09:06
mupPR snapd#8327 closed: tests: update proxy-no-core to match latest CDN changes <Simple 😃> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8327>09:06
pedronismvo: no, let's try to merge 8010 first?09:08
mvopedronis: +109:08
pedronisbut the Buffer stuff needs fixing09:08
mupPR snapd#8313 closed: release: 2.44.1 <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8313>09:09
pedronismvo: what happens right now in recover mode? do we run console-conf or did we turn that off?09:09
mvopedronis: right now recover mode just errors, with 8010 as is we would run console-conf and allow you to create a new login (it's unmanaged) and then you could ssh into it and inspect recovery-ubuntu-data09:10
mvopedronis: so we want the auth commit too09:11
mvopedronis: (that was the question, right?)09:11
pedronismvo: did we turn off console-conf in install?09:11
mvopedronis: let me quickly check, iirc we have a ConditionKernelCommandline for it, but not sure how targeted that is09:11
mvopedronis: it looks like it's active, I checked the released source and I see no kernelcommandline condition, let me double check with git09:14
mupPR snapd#8295 closed: osutil: do not leave processes behind after the test run <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8295>09:16
mvono kernel commandline condition in git either09:16
pedronispstolowski: you already have those apiV1 checks at the end of the test, the commented bits just needed removing afaict09:16
pstolowskipedronis: ahh, of course, you're right, thanks, missed them09:17
pedronismvo: we need to do something about that09:24
pedronismvo: either with the unit or setting something from bootstrap09:25
pedronismvo: remember that we use it for the chooser as well now? mborzecki09:25
pedronisso we need to be careful what we do?09:26
zygamvo: do you want to merge https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8328 before jamie review (it fixes master)09:29
mupPR #8328: tests/main/snap-seccomp-syscalls: install gperf <Simple 😃> <⚠ Critical> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8328>09:29
mvopedronis: right, so I think we need to not run it in install mode, for recover mode we probably don't want to run it either, the only corner case would be if the device has no user09:32
mvozyga: yes09:32
pedronismvo: yes, but I think it has code that checks for managed vs not, the problem is that your copying of auth alone will not have snapd give the right answer09:33
pedronisbecause that requires users in state09:34
mvopedronis: exactly, fixing this would be hard, we would have to have some smarts to just extract the users from state and copy that over to the ephemeral part09:34
mvopedronis: but then a state.json would prevent the first time seeding so :(09:35
pedronismvo: that's not true, seeding is based on seed flag09:35
pedronismvo: anyway first we need to decide what is the right thing to do, 2nd what we can do now09:35
mvopedronis: right09:35
mvopedronis: indeed, I was thinking of https://github.com/snapcore/core20/blob/master/static/usr/lib/core/run-snapd-from-snap#L57 but ian fixed it a while ago so we can actually transfer the user09:37
mvopedronis: in this case it seems like the right thing would be to transfer the "user" part of the state to the ephemeral state in "run" mode, yes? and disable console-conf in install mode as it's meaningless here09:37
pedronismvo: yes, something like that09:38
pedroniswhile keeping the chooser working09:38
mupPR snapd#8318 closed: tests: ensure sockets target is ready in session agent spread tests <Created by jhenstridge> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8318>09:39
mvopedronis: indeed09:39
mvomborzecki: if we want to disable console-conf in "install" mode (but keep the recovery-chooser) what is the right thing to do? can we just add a "kernel command line not snapd_recover_mode=install" or will that break the chooser now that they are more interwined?09:40
mupPR snapd#8322 closed: client: use Assert when checking for error <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8322>09:41
mupPR snapd#8323 closed: many: improve comments, naming, a possible TODO <Created by pedronis> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8323>09:41
mborzeckimvo: the chooser doesn't really run in install mode09:42
mvomborzecki: aha, nice09:42
mvomborzecki: what prevents it from running?09:42
mborzeckimvo: hm maybe i wasn't clear, it does not need to run in install mode, probably the same for trigger09:43
mborzeckimvo: so we could add ConditionKernelCommandLine=!snapd_recovery_mode=run right?09:44
mborzeckiuh, way09:44
mupPR snapd#8319 closed: github: run unit tests and spread via github actions <Created by zyga> <Closed by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8319>09:44
mupPR snapd#8324 closed: github: cache go build cache and pkg dirs <Created by zyga> <Closed by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8324>09:44
mborzeckimvo: snapd_recovery_mode=run, and we need to make sure that run is always passed in the mode09:45
mvomborzecki: yeah, I think we don't prevent it from running right now and should. so adding your suggestion sounds right09:45
mvomborzecki: pretty sure we always set snapd_recover_mode09:46
pedronispstolowski: +1 to #8309 but with some final suggestions which I hope make sense10:08
mupPR #8309: o/configcore: implement Apply method for early configuration of core <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8309>10:08
pstolowskipedronis: thanks!10:10
pedronismvo: made a couple of suggestions: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8325#discussion_r39704489610:23
mupPR #8325: snap-bootstrap: copy auth data from real ubuntu-data in recovery mode <UC20> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8325>10:24
mvopedronis: thank you!10:25
mupPR snapd#8316 closed: github: add prototype workflow running unit tests <Skip spread> <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8316>11:02
zygaplease let me know if the new github actions misbehaves11:05
mborzeckiopened the chooser PR https://github.com/CanonicalLtd/subiquity/pull/655 ;)11:23
mupPR CanonicalLtd/subiquity#655: console_conf: implement UC20 recovery chooser <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/CanonicalLtd/subiquity/pull/655>11:23
mborzeckii should probably add some tests, because there's none for console-conf atm11:23
mborzeckiat the same time, there's some snapd work to do still11:23
mupPR snapd#8329 opened: allow raw access to USB printers <Created by ogra1> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8329>11:53
zygamvo: ping11:54
ograzyga, hmm, your actions port writes werid emails ... i just got sent a link to someone elses merge it seems11:57
zygawhat?11:57
zygacan you be more specific please11:58
ograzyga, i added a PR ... https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8329 ... and got a mail https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/G5bFF7TyJk/ ... clicking the link in the mail gets me to: https://github.com/ogra1/snapd/runs/53025592311:59
mupPR #8329: allow raw access to USB printers <Created by ogra1> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8329>11:59
zygainteresting11:59
zygawhat was in the mail?12:00
zygaah, one sec12:00
ograthe tests for my PR seems to be fine though12:00
zygayeah, it's weird12:00
zygaI can see the test passed just fine12:00
ograthe pastebin has all the content of the mail12:00
zygawait12:00
zygathat's different12:00
ograsubject was: [ogra1/snapd] Run failed: Quick Go unit tests - master (ff4e1ba)12:00
zygait failed on _your_ master12:00
ograwhy would it run anything on my master ?12:00
zygabecause you pulled actions12:01
zygahttps://github.com/ogra1/snapd/runs/53025592312:01
ograbah12:01
zygaha12:01
zygafunny12:01
zygaok, I know how to fix it12:01
zygathank you for reporting12:01
zygaI will handle it :)12:01
zygago's very picky about repository name12:01
zygathanks ogra :)12:01
ogranp :)12:01
zygaogra: done12:06
zygahttps://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/833012:06
mupPR #8330: github: always checkout to snapcore/snapd <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8330>12:06
mupPR snapd#8330 opened: github: always checkout to snapcore/snapd <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8330>12:06
zygacan you cherry-pick this into your master12:06
zygato see if it fixes12:06
zygajust fetch from my remote and cherry pick and push to your fork's master branch please12:06
cachiomvo, pedronis sorry, yesterday I missed the comment about the proxy12:07
cachiomvo, I just promoted core to candidate12:11
mvocachio: nice, thanks12:26
mvocachio: proxy> no worries, it's fixed now12:26
cachiomvo, about cloud config https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/TbTrf4Dcfp/12:27
mvocachio: is that working?12:27
cachioI am doing that to update the image12:27
cachiobut It didnt work yesterday12:28
cachionow I am going to boot locally the image12:28
cachiomvo, then I could not continue because of 2.44.112:28
cachiomvo, do you see anything that could be improved in that code?12:29
mupPR snapd#8331 opened: github: run spread via github actions <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8331>12:30
mvocachio: it llooks ok12:32
mupPR snapd#8332 opened: gadget: CoreDefaults helper for FilesystemOnlyApply (2/N) <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8332>12:32
cachiomvo, ok, I'll boot the image here in that case because yesterday didn't work12:33
mvocachio: uh, ok - would be nice to inspect the resulting image, i.e. if the file is in the right place on ubuntu-seed and ubuntu-data12:35
mvocachio: maybe it's something silly during the data copy12:35
cachiomvo, sure, I'll check that12:37
mupPR snapd#8330 closed: github: always checkout to snapcore/snapd <Skip spread> <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8330>12:46
zygata12:46
mupPR snapd#8328 closed: tests/main/snap-seccomp-syscalls: install gperf <Simple 😃> <⚠ Critical> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8328>13:11
zygamvo: ^ fyi, I think master should be not broken anymore13:16
ijohnsonhello folks13:35
roadmrijohnson!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!13:35
roadmrhello!13:35
roadmrhehe :)13:35
ijohnsonhey roadmr13:35
* ijohnson thinks about running away with that many exclamation marks13:36
roadmryes it's typically followed by a very complicated ask or something13:36
roadmrbut no - just saying hi :)13:36
ijohnson:-)13:36
ijohnsonpedronis: do you want to chat after the SU today? I realize my PR is a bit complicated, but I rather like the fact that all the base snap modeenv changes is done in bootstate20 alongside all the other boot state changes we do during normal running13:37
ijohnsonpedronis: I will try to look at your comments before the SU13:38
pedronisijohnson: I don't the issue is bootstate20 vs not, the issue is that is following patterns that are bit overkill for it inside it, I think there should be a complexity middle ground, but yes, happy to chat13:39
ijohnsonpedronis: okay13:39
pedronisijohnson: the other issue is that boot doesn't care about snapd so far, and that I think we should keep it that way13:39
ijohnsonpedronis: but for uc20, now the snapd snap is part of the boot process on first boot run mode and in install mode13:40
pedronissnapd itself doesn't require to touch bootloader states or modeenv anyway atm13:40
jdstrandmborzecki: I looked at the PR and said it LGTM13:40
mborzeckijdstrand: thanks!13:40
ijohnsonpedronis: the snapd snap here is a bit of an odd egg, but it feels cleaner to me IMHO13:41
pedronisijohnson: it's not cleaner, in my opinion, without moving even more stuff13:41
pedronisand the win is unclear at this point13:41
pedroniscleanliness is only one factor here13:41
ijohnsonright one of the points I made in the PR is that I wanted to move more stuff from cmd_initramfs_mounts.go to the boot package13:42
ijohnsoni.e. install mode mount choosing13:42
pedronisijohnson: formulated in those terms is not a win or not13:42
pedroniswhy is it good or bad?13:42
pedronisijohnson: anyway my recommendation is to leave snapd alone at this point13:43
ijohnsonalright I will bring my reasoning with to our meeting13:44
* ijohnson still needs to have breakfast13:44
pedronisijohnson: refactoring is to fix other TODOs properly, is not a goal in itself (especially at this point in time)13:45
pedronisijohnson: anyway if you worry that you'll have to start this from scratch, I don't think so13:46
ijohnsonwell fwiw I can easily ressuect the simpler version of this that I started with which just moves code to the boot package but it feels much more mechanical and at that point it seems what's the point if we just move the same code from one file to another13:47
pedronisijohnson: that we can call it from tests13:47
pedronisijohnson: anyway, I'm happy to discuss, I'm not sure what the mechnical version does13:48
pedronisso I can't say it's better or worse13:48
pedronisijohnson: I can see where the current code as proposed could go13:48
mupPR snapcraft#2991 opened: yaml_utils: don't sort keys when dumping <Created by cjp256> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/2991>13:54
mvozyga: yay13:57
zygare :)13:57
cachiocmatsuoka, hey13:57
cmatsuokahi cachio13:58
sergiusenszyga: if we implement https://bugs.launchpad.net/snapcraft/+bug/1868460 then this stops being yaml https://yaml.org/spec/1.2/spec.html#id276560814:01
mupBug #1868460: environment sections are reordered <Snapcraft:Confirmed for cjp256> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1868460>14:01
cjp256sergiusens/zyga:  i was just writing something like that up for LP :D  at first i thought it may have been a change in behavior either due to something I did, or the recent pyyaml uprev, but I think not14:04
zygasergiusens: I'm okay if that stops being yaml in a way14:09
zygasergiusens: I think we cannot reorder it to be a sequence now14:09
zygacc pedronis ^14:09
ijohnsonlet's just all move everything to toml and call it a day14:09
sergiusenszyga: you can accept both inputs or get degville to fix the docs to say this is NOT yaml, but yaml-like14:10
zygasergiusens: I think we can be reasonable, it's yaml but we respect the order14:10
zygasergiusens: if we need to fix this snapd side we can but I would rather have snapcraft maintain the order14:11
sergiusenszyga: well, I would have preferred that snapd had implemented a sequence, as I bet kyrofa would have too14:13
zygasergiusens: sure but that's too late, the spec is set14:13
sergiusenszyga: you know that YAML spec is also set14:15
zygasergiusens: I know, I'm not asking you to change that spec14:15
sergiusenszyga: we will make the change, but fix the docs14:15
=== luk3yx` is now known as luk3yx
zygasergiusens: ack, I think environment is not documented (I could not find it) so I'll see what we can do about that first14:41
mupPR snapcraft#2988 closed: tests: add two more workers to the 18.04 systems <Created by sergiusens> <Closed by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/2988>14:42
mborzeckimvo: can you upload 2.44.1 release tarballs?14:47
rbasakijohnson: thank you for your answer (on refresh hook exit status https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/supported-snap-hooks/3795/12) - should the behaviour be documented then? It's only alluded to in the official docs.14:50
mvomborzecki: uh, sorry, sure14:56
mborzeckipedronis: cmatsuoka: there is a bug with generating timer schedules, but i can't really reproduce the OOM thing14:57
mborzeckipedronis: cmatsuoka: the bug is that we don't effectively generate a schedule if if it's a single `mon` thing (but we have a plenty of weird, complicated schedules)14:58
pstolowskimborzecki: hey, i was just talking with mvo about https://bugs.launchpad.net/snapd/+bug/1868706, can you help with this?15:03
mupBug #1868706: Snapd postinst script hangs <snapd:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1868706>15:03
* zyga -> lunch15:16
pstolowskiany idea if .postinst stdout goes to a log file somewhere?15:16
ijohnsonrbasak: yes it should be documented somewhere, degville perhaps can help with that15:17
mborzeckipstolowski: let me see15:18
mborzeckipstolowski: wow15:18
mborzeckipstolowski: hmm that's the interactive ask for password prompt right?15:18
pstolowskimborzecki: whoot? where?15:19
pstolowski2388?15:19
mborzeckipstolowski: systemd-tty-ask15:20
mborzeckipstolowski: afaik it's actually calling systemctl start which is added by dh-systemd15:20
mvothe systemd-tty-ask might be a red herring15:21
cachiomvo, I just see mnt/system-data/etc/cloud/cloud-init.disabled15:21
mborzeckimvo: it might, but it will block further operations15:21
mvocachio: aha, interessting. is this a grade dangerous model?15:22
cachiomvo, yes15:22
kyrofasergiusens, "I would have preferred that snapd had implemented a sequence, as I bet kyrofa would have too" -> you know it15:26
cachiomvo, this is the partions https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/x9n6wmNtQQ/15:27
mvomborzecki: interessting, keep me updated please15:27
mvocachio: odd, can you point me to the full branch that you use? I will try to run it here15:27
cachiomvo, https://github.com/sergiocazzolato/snapd/tree/tests-extend-uc20-nested-suite15:28
ijohnsonpedronis: wdyt of adding a "Rewrite()" to modeenv, turns out we have places we need to artificially create a modeenv then write it out somewhere, so I think we should have two methods, Rewrite() for writing to where we read it, and Write() for writing to anywhere15:28
cachiomvo, this is the test https://github.com/sergiocazzolato/snapd/blob/tests-extend-uc20-nested-suite/tests/nested/manual/uc20-smoke/task.yaml15:28
mvocachio: thanks15:28
ijohnsonpedronis: i.e. https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/gdQdfxCt3V/15:29
ijohnsonactually slightly more sensible version https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/FJwFQzgXcd/15:31
tkamppeterijohnson, jdstrand, pedronis: We have our meeting now.15:32
ijohnsontkamppeter: I thought the meeting was in 30 minutes?15:32
ijohnsontkamppeter: that's what the calendar invite says?15:32
tkamppeterI have a calendar invite for 4:30pm.15:33
jdstrandtkamppeter: mine also says 30 minutes from now15:33
ijohnsonI mean I'm free now if we want to meet now I guess15:33
tkamppeterSo then let us have it in 30 minutes, no problem.15:33
ijohnsonokay, in 30 minutes, thanks tkamppeter15:33
mupPR snapd#8333 opened:  wrappers: fix timer schedules that are days only <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8333>15:42
pedronisijohnson: sounds ok, either that or Write and WriteTo15:43
ijohnsonah I like WriteTo and Write better15:44
ijohnsonthanks15:44
mborzeckipedronis: cmatsuoka: please take a look at #833315:45
mupPR #8333:  wrappers: fix timer schedules that are days only <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8333>15:45
pedronismborzecki: looks alright15:46
tkamppeterijohnson, jdstrand, pedronis: If you are all free we could start right away now.15:49
ijohnsongive me a few minutes to wrap up what I'm doing right now15:50
tkamppeterOK.15:50
pstolowskizyga: does this https://bugs.launchpad.net/snappy/+bug/1868620 fall into the category of any known nvidia/GL issues?15:52
mupBug #1868620: Snaps based on Wine fail with nvidia driver 440  <Snappy:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1868620>15:52
zygaI noticed that bug a moment ago, I would have to check15:53
tkamppeterijohnson, jdstrand, pedronis: I am connected now.15:54
ijohnsonsorry pulseaudio problems16:01
* jdstrand shakes fist at pulseaudio16:01
mvocachio: fwiw, I did a manual test, created a new image, copied things onto it and the cloud-init data.cfg got copied to the right place. the user is not created and I'm not sure why but the file is in the right place. I will collect the steps and pastebin them16:03
cachiomvo, ahh, thanks for testing that16:04
mvocachio: http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/gMTKqZxPSt/16:05
mvocachio: I look now why the user is not there, maybe the cloud-init logs have hints16:06
cachiosnapd on esge already has the cloud init code right?16:07
mvocachio: yes, I created the image with --channel=edge16:09
mvocachio: I see in /run/cloud-init/cloud-init-generator.log: "cloud-init is enabled but no datasource foudn, disabling"16:09
mvocachio: looks like either you need to write a more complex data source or I need to implement the uc16 compatbile cloud-init overrides, I think this is what we want anyway so probably a good idea to wait for this16:10
mvocachio: unless tweaking the data.cfg is easy16:10
* mvo does not know16:10
cachiomvo, ahh, ok16:10
cachioI'll update the cfg and then once we have that in place I'll revert the config16:11
cachiothanks for the info16:11
mvocachio: my pleasure16:15
zygacachio: is ubuntu-20.04-64 using a desktop image?17:36
zygacachio: it's significantly slower than other systems17:36
cachioI found some interesting stuff17:37
cachiozyga, the most important was related to systemd17:37
cachioall the systemd operations took more time on ubuntu 20.0417:37
zygacachio: so it's not a desktop image?17:37
zygacachio: no gdm, no extra packages?17:38
cachioit uses the cloud image published by ubuntu17:38
zygavanilla?17:38
cachiono deskto17:38
cachiop17:38
zygaIIRC we had our own images derived form cloud17:38
cachiozyga, right17:39
cachiowe are using one which is a copy from the published by ubuntu-cloud17:39
zygaand we have not, by any chance, installed gdm?17:40
cachiozyga, gcloud compute images list --project ubuntu-os-cloud-devel | grep ubuntu-2004-lts17:41
cachiozyga, I can check manually that17:41
zygacachio: thanks, I remember seeing gdm in some logs17:41
zygaon 20.04 classic17:41
zygawhich made me wonder if there's something odd that would also explain the extra time17:41
cachiozyga,17:44
cachiogoogle:ubuntu-20.04-64 .../tasks/google/start-instance# apt-cache policy gdm317:44
cachiogdm3:17:44
cachio  Installed: 3.34.1-1ubuntu117:44
cachio  Candidate: 3.34.1-1ubuntu117:44
cachio  Version table:17:44
cachio *** 3.34.1-1ubuntu1 50017:44
cachio        500 http://us-east1.gce.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal/main amd64 Packages17:44
cachio        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status17:44
zygawoot17:44
zygaso it's there?17:44
zygacan you try to guess why17:44
zygaI wonder if the 20.04 images are wrong17:44
zygaor we pulled it via dependencies somehow17:45
cachiolet me check the base image17:45
zygasuper, thank you17:45
mvomborzecki: any clues re bug 1868706 ?17:51
mupBug #1868706: Snapd postinst script hangs <snapd:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1868706>17:51
zygamvo: maybe seeding bug on old focal images?17:52
mborzeckimvo: left some ideas for pstolowski17:52
cachiozyga, look at this https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/N7Fc5KsWY2/17:52
zygalooking17:52
mvomborzecki: nice17:52
mborzeckimvo: but imo it's the systemd-ttyu-ask-password is runnig and waiting for prompt17:52
zygaO M G17:52
zygainstalling evolution-data-server pulls in GDM and the desktop17:52
zygagosh17:52
mborzeckimvo: which is weird because systemctl believes it's runnign on tty and not under uid 017:52
zygacan you file a bug on that17:52
zygaand we can fight it later17:52
zyganow we can at least remember17:53
zygathank you for checking!17:53
cachiozyga, is it a bug?17:53
zygaI think we don't want to run the desktop session in our images17:53
zygawe should adjust our tests17:53
zygaand the script that regenerates images17:53
zygaso that we don't have gdm3 installed17:53
zygalook at what this pulled17:53
zygamvo: ^ fyi17:54
zygawhy stuff is slower17:54
cachioI compare systemd  on 18.04 nad 20.0417:54
cachioand takes much more time on focal than in bionic17:55
cachiozyga, let me cehck if I can find the source data17:55
cachioI addded that to the standup notes but I think i was purged17:56
zygaok17:56
cachiomvo, in 1~2 hour snapd will be ready to go to candidate18:04
cachiomvo, internet is very slow today18:05
cachiozyga, lp:186885718:10
zygathank you :)18:10
cachiozyga, yaw18:10
mvocachio: ok18:12
mupPR snapd#8334 opened: many: add core.resiliance.vitality-hint config setting <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8334>18:14
* zyga EODs18:21
zygao/18:21
cachiopedronis, I am debugging uc20 with encription which is still rebooting constantly20:01
cachiopedronis, any idea why it could restart almost always after showing in the console output the line20:01
cachio[   21.191888] systemd[1]: Starting Create Static Device Nodes in /dev...20:01
pedronisno, not sure20:02
pedroniscmatsuoka maybe knows more or can help20:02
cachiopedronis, ok, thanks20:03
cmatsuokacachio: is it rebooting in a loop, or just once after it reaches run mode?20:07
cmatsuokacachio: could you make an image available for me to test locally?20:07
mupPR snapd#8335 opened: many: introduce naming.WellKnownSnapID <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8335>20:08
cachiocmatsuoka, it is not reaching run mode20:09
cachiokeeps rebooting in install mode20:09
cmatsuokacachio: oh, that's something we didn't see before, right?20:11
cachiocmatsuoka, I reproduce it with this https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/HJQt9Rxh7g/20:11
cachioin gce it fails 100% of the times20:12
cachiocmatsuoka, I'll try the same now but using ubuntu image snap instead20:12
=== vorlon` is now known as vorlon
cmatsuokacachio: just for me to understand where we are, what was changed since the last image that worked?20:19
cachiocmatsuoka, I think the problem is ubuntu-image20:20
cachioworks different using the snap and the deb20:20
cachiocmatsuoka, confirmed20:21
ijohnsoncachio: yes the deb is definitely behind the snap20:21
cachioworks bad when the image is created using ubuntu-image from deb20:21
cachioijohnson, agree, but   I though both should work20:24
ijohnsonyeah I think eventually they both will work, but it takes time for the deb to get all the features that the snap gets20:24
cmatsuokamm, something strange in #8333, travis test passed but github thinks it's still in progress20:28
mupPR #8333:  wrappers: fix timer schedules that are days only <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8333>20:28
ijohnsoncmatsuoka: yeah that has been happening recently20:29
ijohnsoncmatsuoka: what fixed it last time is to close and re-open20:29
cmatsuokaouch20:30
mupPR snapd#8336 opened: boot,many: add modeenv.WriteTo, make Write take no args <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8336>20:32
cmatsuokaijohnson: well it seems that closing/re-opening didn't work this time :\20:37
ijohnsonoh sorry what I meant is that closing /re-opening would make the tests re-run and then after running they would update travis properly20:38
cmatsuokaijohnson: and it spawned another set of github quick tests20:38
ijohnsonerr travis would update github properly after re-running20:38
cachiocmatsuoka, using the ubuntu image snap I can reproduce the error https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/CyqDHtrvPF/20:38
cmatsuokaijohnson: ah ok, I'll wait to see if it works20:38
ijohnsoncachio: did you try edge channel of ubuntu-image snap ?20:39
cachioijohnson, no20:39
cachioijohnson, I'll try20:40
cachioreset20:40
cachioijohnson, same error20:43
ijohnsonhmm20:43
cachioijohnson,20:44
cachiotrying with an image with is not updated20:44
cachioa pure one20:44
cachiocmatsuoka, that could affets?20:45
cachioaffect20:45
cachioif I add a file to the image and the vm is using secure boot?20:45
cmatsuokahmm, it shouldn't unless your file is something used in the boot process20:46
cachiocloud init config20:46
cmatsuokacachio: and we're not measuring anything yet, so sb should only check shim and friends20:47
cachiocmatsuoka, I see20:47
cmatsuokacachio: at which point it reboots? does it boot the target system and seeds?20:47
cachioBdsDxe: loading Boot0001 "UEFI Misc Device" from PciRoot(0x0)/Pci(0x3,0x0)20:47
cachioBdsDxe: starting Boot0001 "UEFI Misc Device" from PciRoot(0x0)/Pci(0x3,0x0)20:47
cachioerror: file `/EFI/ubuntu/grubenv' not found.20:47
cachioerror: no such device: ubuntu-boot.20:47
cachioerror: no such device: ubuntu-boot is new20:48
cmatsuokacachio: I think the missing grubenv is only a warning and it's not fatal20:48
cmatsuokano ubuntu-boot is interesting, because it's created during install20:49
cmatsuokacachio: and you said it fails in install mode?20:49
cachioyes20:49
cachioonce I went to run mode20:49
cachiobut it is really randome20:49
cachiosometimes goes to run mode sometimes still rebooting in install mode20:50
cmatsuokaah, so you actually reboot in run mode and then it fails?20:50
cmatsuokaah20:50
cachionow it is not going to run mode20:50
cmatsuokaand are you able to reproduce this behavior locally?20:51
cachiocmatsuoka, didn't try20:51
cmatsuokabecause maybe it's not completing the install?20:51
cachiocmatsuoka, because my internet sucks today20:51
cachiocmatsuoka, let my try20:51
mupPR snapd#8337 opened: cmd/snap-bootstrap/initramfs-mounts/tests: use dirs.RunMnt over s.runMnt <Simple 😃> <Test Robustness> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8337>21:10
pedronisijohnson: I tried to answer your question,  I think we should try to get rid of the modeEnv hanging on DeviceManager at some point soon21:55
pedroniswe don't keep a bootloader around like that21:55
mupPR snapcraft#2992 opened: [WIP] repo: ubuntu implementation refactoring with initial package-management <Created by cjp256> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/2992>23:14

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!