/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2020/04/09/#snappy.txt

=== JanC is now known as Guest39672
=== JanC_ is now known as JanC
mborzeckimorning05:39
zygaHey05:54
zygaTaking the dog out05:54
mborzeckizyga: found anything interesting about the lxd issue?05:54
mborzeckizyga: reading through https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/snapd/+bug/1871652 nice find!06:03
mupBug #1871652: snap run hangs on system-key mismatch due to reexec and shutdown <champagne> <snapd:In Progress by zyga> <snapd (Ubuntu):Confirmed for zyga> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1871652>06:03
mborzeckimvo: hey06:14
mvogood morning mborzecki06:14
mborzeckizyga: hm i was worried that maybe the client gets stuck, but looking at the backtrace the client timeout seems to work06:15
mborzeckizyga: i think that the unfortunate part is that the client timeout (overall timeout for all retried requests) is 50s, then *12 retries in snap run, we're looking at 10 minutes after which snap run would fail eventually06:16
zygamborzecki: it's debugged06:18
zyga:)06:18
zygamborzecki: if you are talking about the lxd issue06:18
zygamvo: good morning :)06:18
* zyga woke up in good mood and just returned from dog & bike ride06:18
mvozyga: good morning! you seem to be in a good mood :) ?06:18
zygaindeed06:18
mborzeckizyga: i know, just looking at the backtrace you posted there, https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462 and the client.do() loop06:18
mupPR #8462: cmd/snap: don't wait for system key when stopping <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462>06:18
zygayesterday surely ended on a high note06:19
zygaI have some more thoughts about how this problem is annoying06:19
zygabut I think the fix is valid06:19
mvomborzecki: yeah, a timeout of 10min seems a bit excessive06:19
mvozyga: yeah, I like hte idea to just check for shutdown06:19
mborzeckimvo: there's this comment that isn't true anymore https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462/files#diff-0ffbc404d8a8e3aaeca8cd9d066c3d71R16006:20
mupPR #8462: cmd/snap: don't wait for system key when stopping <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462>06:20
mborzeckiuhh it's `// connect timeout for client is 5s on each try, so 12*5s = 60s`06:20
mvomborzecki: uh, so it looks like we try to accomodate thie situation already? is that check buggy?06:21
mvomborzecki: also if the retry timeout should be max 60s but in reality is 10min is there a different bug there too :( ?06:21
zygaI can debug this further06:22
zygaI wanted to check the solution in practice06:22
zygathe socket is there06:22
zygabut will never activate06:22
mborzeckimvo: probably the client retry bits evolved separately06:22
zygamaybe we just hang on connect?06:22
zygaahhh06:22
zygafiun06:22
zygahhe06:22
mborzeckizyga: yeah06:22
zygaok, I'll get back to my coffee06:22
mvomborzecki: aha, yeah, that makes sense06:23
zygabut I'm happy :)06:23
mvomborzecki: sorry, I see these lines are from an open PR06:23
mborzeckiif the socket wasn't there it would fail much earlier i believe06:23
mvozyga: woah, thanks so much for adding this PR so quickly06:23
zyga:D06:23
zygaafter breakfast I'll verify this06:23
zygaand write some tests06:24
mvozyga: yeah, having a test there would be great06:24
mborzeckizyga: mvo: so actually a funny scenario, the socket we use to talk to snapd is there, but snapd may be inactive, how do you find out that the other end is inactive if poking th socket isn't reliable?06:24
zygaany issues with spread?06:24
zygamborzecki: we should think about how to prevent the bug for real06:26
zygamborzecki: I realized it's much harder because the dependency is dynamic06:26
zygamborzecki: we depend on the active reexecution target that may be core or snapd and the revisions may change at runtime any number of times06:26
zygamborzecki: which is not great06:27
zygamvo: so 2.44... 4?06:31
mvozyga: 2.44.306:31
zygaperfect06:31
zygathank you06:31
mvozyga: I hope I can upload that today06:31
mvotonight06:31
mvosomething like this :)06:31
mborzeckihmm preseed reset is failing in an intresting way07:00
mborzeckisaw the same rpoblem twice already07:01
zygayeah I noticed07:01
zygadid you debug it more? I didn't look deeper07:01
mborzeckithe log https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/gTcdq4h8CF/07:01
pstolowskimorning07:14
zygagood morning pawel07:15
mborzeckipstolowski: hey07:17
mborzeckipstolowski: preseed reset hangs on 20.04 https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/gTcdq4h8CF/07:17
mborzeckipstolowski: but i'm not able to reproduce it manually07:17
mvopstolowski: good morning07:17
pstolowskimborzecki: interesting, i'll take a look07:19
mborzeckidoing 'restart all jobs' in gh actions is actually very confusing07:22
mborzeckilooks like it's first restating the unit tests job, then the canary jobs, and then the stable ones07:23
mborzeckiand E: Failed to fetch http://pkg.jenkins.io/debian-stable/binary/jenkins_2.222.1_all.deb  Could not connect to pkg.jenkins.io:80 (52.202.51.185), connection timed out07:23
jameshpresumably it is respecting the job dependencies: the stable jobs can't restart until the restarted canary jobs have completed, which can't restart until the restarted unit tests have completed07:26
zygajamesh: exactly07:27
zygamborzecki: yeah, they don't invalidate past results until such jobs actually start07:27
zygamborzecki: if it's a one off failure like that just ask mvo to override07:27
zygano use in burning money on this07:27
zygacan I get a 2nd review on green https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/840307:31
mupPR #8403: sandbox/cgroup: avoid making arrays we don't use <Skip spread> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8403>07:31
zygait's not much and I'd like to get it in and have one less07:31
zygajdstrand: thank you for the reviews07:35
zygaI'll break for breakfast and then get back to work07:35
mvozyga: which PR is that? I can override if needed07:36
pedronispstolowski: I reviewed #8414, thank you07:43
mupPR #8414: o/configstate: core config handler for persistent journal <Needs Samuele review> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8414>07:43
pedroniscouple small comments07:43
pstolowskipedronis: ty07:50
pstolowskimborzecki: yeah, hangs for me too when run on gc. will try to add some debug07:52
mborzeckipstolowski: oh, you manged to reproduce it?07:53
mborzeckizyga: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462#pullrequestreview-39056529107:54
mupPR #8462: cmd/snap: don't wait for system key when stopping <Security-High> <⚠ Critical> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462>07:54
pstolowskimborzecki: it seems so.. it's hanging on < /mnt/cloudimg/var/lib/snapd/desktop/applications, i'm waiting for spread to timeout07:54
mborzeckipstolowski: ha, interesting, i ran with -shell and executed the test line by line07:55
mborzeckipstolowski: btw. diff -up is easier to read there07:55
pstolowskimborzecki: also it's interesting it found a diff07:55
mupPR snapd#8450 closed: selinux: export MockIsEnforcing; systemd: use in tests <Simple 😃> <Test Robustness> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8450>07:58
zygamvo: not sure, it was pawel08:00
zygamborzecki: ta08:00
* mborzecki wonders why it's showing `degraded` here08:00
zygamborzecki: systemctl --failed08:01
mborzeckizyga: yeah, that's the mystery, shadow.service apparenty failed :P08:02
zygashadow.service?08:02
zygawhat is that08:02
zygaI don't have it08:02
zygais it related to homed?08:02
mborzeckizyga: idk maybe https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/f7hkWx94vQ/08:02
zygawhich package ships that?08:03
mborzeckizyga: surprise surprise.. `shadow` :P08:04
mborzeckizyga: btw it runs the following /bin/sh -c '/usr/bin/pwck -r || r=1; /usr/bin/grpck -r && exit $r'08:05
zygapwck?08:09
zygawow08:09
zygaI learned something today already08:09
zygaYoU HaVe BeEn Hax0rEd08:09
zygare08:16
mborzeckizyga: yeah, from what i managed to find it checks /etc/group against /etc/gshadow08:20
zygaso is something corrupted on your system?08:20
mborzeckizyga: nah, i had a `sudo` group at some point that was listed in gshadow, but got removed from /etc/group08:21
mborzeckizyga: probably something went out of sync during one of my arch 'installs', that's actually rsyncing whole sysroot from another arch system, wouldn't be surprised since the actuall install from scratch was years ago08:23
zygamborzecki: can you look at https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462 again please08:43
mupPR #8462: cmd/snap: don't wait for system key when stopping <Security-High> <⚠ Critical> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462>08:43
mvozyga: thanks for adding the test to 846208:50
zygamvo: I'll verify this in the machine where it is easy to reproduce now09:01
mvozyga: \o/09:02
zygaI believe I can write a spread test for this as well09:14
mvozyga: extra browny points if that is possible and not too much work09:29
zygamvo: I think so, just a moment to know09:29
mvozyga: \o/09:30
zygamvo: gotta justify a push to fix that silly typo :D09:30
zygatest in progress09:45
* mvo hugs zyga09:51
ijohnsonmorning folks10:01
ijohnsonhey zyga I saw this failure for session-tool on one of my PR's that is relatively up to date with master https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/tj9qTTN6Wf/10:01
ijohnsonlooks like it's a gdm issue with 19.10?10:01
zygayeah10:01
zygaI saw it, I asked sergio to remove gdm10:01
pstolowskihi ijohnson !10:01
ijohnsonok10:01
zygaI'll send a patch to stop the gdm session10:01
ijohnsono/ pstolowski10:01
zygathough10:01
zygamaybe I should remove that part of the test10:01
zygait's not like we are leaking our sessions10:01
zygait's just a goose chase10:02
zygaijohnson: what do you think?10:02
ijohnsonmmm it's a bit annoying, but in this instance also genuinely useful to have it tell us that something is on the image that is leaking state around10:02
ijohnsonI dunno10:02
pstolowskiis it related to the bug sergio raised recently? https://bugs.launchpad.net/snapd/+bug/186885710:03
mupBug #1868857: Installing evolution-data-server on test images pulls in GDM and the desktop <snapd:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1868857>10:03
zygapstolowski: yes10:04
zygaafter checking and checking I managed to convince him we have GDM :)10:04
zygabrb10:07
ijohnsonmmm okay another random failure from overnight about being unable to connect to the systemd user session: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/QdyVGHHDrJ/10:10
pstolowskimborzecki: this preseed-reset hang issue is misterious; i added debug that should show up right after the last diff line where it hangs , but it's quiet :/10:11
pedronispstolowski: core-persistent-journal is failing on core1610:11
pstolowskipedronis: yeah, i've seen this, didn't happen when run locally, investigating10:12
mborzeckipedronis: mvo: i'm looking into the mount point rename10:15
mvomborzecki: thank you10:27
mborzeckimvo: pedronis: i'll split the /run/mnt/host bind mount till after we have the directory in the core snap10:30
mborzeckii mean the /host directory10:31
mvo+110:31
zygaafk for another moment, sorry :/10:32
=== Aavar_ is now known as Aavar
ijohnsonmvo: could you use your magical powers to merge https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8451 ? It's been restarted numerous times and all the current failures there have either been reproduced and known by others, or have been reported10:42
mupPR #8451: osutil: mock proc/self/mountinfo properly everywhere <Test Robustness> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8451>10:42
mvoijohnson: sure10:44
mupPR snapd#8451 closed: osutil: mock proc/self/mountinfo properly everywhere <Test Robustness> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8451>10:44
ijohnsonthank you \/o10:44
ijohnsonoh whoops I was too excited10:44
ijohnson\o/10:45
mvohaha10:45
pedronispstolowski: now, it passed, it seems flakey somehow10:51
pstolowskipedronis: yes, maybe there is something flaky. i'm running it in a loop locally now10:55
zygare11:03
mupPR snapd#8464 opened: cmd/snap-boostrap, boot: use /run/mnt/data instead of ubuntu-data <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8464>11:05
mborzeckimvo: pedronis: ^^11:05
mborzeckii did not add the /run/mnt/data -> /run/mnt/ubuntu-data bind mount too, let's see if the tests pass11:05
pedronismborzecki: they won't, actually initramfs will need some changes11:07
mborzeckihmm ah right, there's some hard coded names there too11:07
pedronismborzecki: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/cF4NVBChbG/11:07
mborzeckilooks like the bind mount data -> ubuntu-data could make it work tho11:08
pedronisyes, but we do want then to change the initrd11:08
pedronisbecause otherwise is a bit too many level of mounts11:09
pedronismborzecki: also my pastebin has type -d (not sure why I did that), so there's a couple more things actually11:09
pstolowskipedronis: just run it 10 times without failure. weird. will give it one more spin11:10
ijohnsonpedronis: mborzecki: suspicious that the initrd has things like this:11:10
ijohnson    echo 'LABEL=ubuntu-boot /run/mnt/ubuntu-boot auto defaults 0 0' >> /run/image.fstab11:10
ijohnsonthat seems like it would defeat the purpose of our cross-checking no?11:11
pedronisijohnson: it's optimizing some mounts11:11
pedronisijohnson: you'll have to discuss what that means11:11
ijohnsonmmm yes11:12
ijohnsonpedronis: is the results of the discussion this morning summarized somewhere ?11:12
pedronisijohnson: seems you got the doc11:13
ijohnsonyes mborzecki PM'd it to me11:13
pstolowskizyga: btw i've re-requested your review of #8414 as it changed substantially11:14
mupPR #8414: o/configstate: core config handler for persistent journal <Needs Samuele review> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8414>11:14
zygaack11:14
zygaI'll look in 10 minutes11:14
ijohnsonpedronis: I left a comment in the doc, so will we now have /run/mnt/boot instead of (or in addition to) /run/mnt/ubuntu-boot ?11:18
pedronisijohnson: no11:18
ijohnsonok, so the changes are just for ubuntu-data really11:18
ijohnson(and all alter egos of ubuntu-data)11:19
pedronisijohnson: yes, we'll have temporarely both data and ubuntu-data until initramfs is fixed11:19
ijohnsonsure11:19
zygapstolowski: looking11:28
diddledanjdstrand: possibly I'm still broken? https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/snapcraft-and-strict-multipass-call-for-testing/16488/511:33
Saviqdiddledan: yeah that's not something we're doing11:33
diddledanstrangely at least two snaps have started fine, but those are desktop apps and I spent some time cooking toast11:33
diddledan... after reboot, so I was well past apparmor starting when I logged-in11:34
diddledanSaviq, yeah LXD is also dead11:35
zygapstolowski: +111:38
Saviqdiddledan: have a look at https://github.com/ubuntu/zsys/issues/60#issuecomment-609729305 for what fixed things for me on zfs root - not snapd, but the overall problem may be the same - look in the journal for things refusing to mount due to target not being empty11:39
diddledanit's not that.. I have a correct set of files in /etc/zfs-list.cache and there are no failed mounts in the journal11:44
zygamvo: sorry for the lag, i have a test11:46
zygaI'm running a few more iterations to recheck if fails without the fix and to remove redundant parts12:04
zygaI'll push the final version before the standup12:04
zygamost likely in 20 minutes, after the next run12:05
pstolowskipedronis: 100 runs and no failure; i wonder if we were seeing a failure from before USR1 commit12:06
pedronispstolowski: maybe, let's see if it gets green and can land12:06
pstolowskipedronis: doh.. it failed on 20.0412:07
pstolowskipedronis: on preseed-reset, which is the other issue i'm investigating12:08
pedronispstolowski: could you recheck quickly my #8436 , I had to change the spread test because I remember it passing on core20 but actually the systemd there now uses a different property name12:08
mupPR #8436: configcore,tests: use daemon-reexec to apply watchdog config <Squash-merge> <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8436>12:08
pedronispstolowski: maybe we need an explicit journalctl --flush ? or do some activity that is none to produce logs?12:09
pstolowskipedronis: looking12:09
pedroniss/none/known/12:09
pstolowskipedronis: maybe, but it seems that enabling logging writes a single starting entry, so only question is if flush is needed12:10
pstolowskipedronis: but the problem is now preseed-reset test which breaks with master12:11
jdstranddiddledan: can you perform: sudo systemd-analyze plot > ./1871148-vm-no-varlib-mount_diddledan.svg' and attach it to https://bugs.launchpad.net/apparmor/+bug/1871148?12:12
mupBug #1871148: services start before apparmor profiles are loaded <AppArmor:Invalid> <apparmor (Ubuntu):Fix Released by jdstrand> <zsys (Ubuntu):Invalid by jibel> <apparmor (Ubuntu Focal):Fix Released by jdstrand> <zsys (Ubuntu Focal):Invalid by jibel> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1871148>12:12
jdstrand(without that trailing "'" of course12:12
jdstrand)12:12
diddledanjdstranddone :-)12:21
diddledanjdstrand done :-)12:21
pstolowskiaaha, we started shipping var/lib/snapd/desktop/applications in the pkg, that's the primary reason of preseed-reset test failure12:22
=== pedronis_ is now known as pedronis
jdstranddiddledan: https://bugs.launchpad.net/snapd/+bug/1871148/comments/2412:38
mupBug #1871148: services start before apparmor profiles are loaded <AppArmor:Invalid> <snapd:New> <apparmor (Ubuntu):Fix Released by jdstrand> <zsys (Ubuntu):Invalid by jibel> <apparmor (Ubuntu Focal):Fix Released by jdstrand> <zsys (Ubuntu Focal):Invalid by jibel> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1871148>12:38
jdstrandmvo, zyga: ^ I added a snapd task. please see my comment. it seems that root on zfs is aggravating the condition that apparmor.service might start after snap services12:39
zygalooking12:39
jdstrandsince we don't see it on non-root-on-zfs systems (even though the possibility is there)12:40
zygayeah, I think we need to think about how to handle this12:40
jdstrandmvo: this is possibly another 2.44 point release. up to you to decide, but with focal making zfs an option in the installer, and that seems to push the system into this bug more than others, ...12:41
mupPR snapd#8465 opened: tests: update snap-preseed --reset logic to acommodate for 2.44 change <Simple 😃> <⚠ Critical> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8465>12:42
cachiopedronis, hey12:44
jdstrandzyga: I need to step away, but maybe this is the time to align with non-Ubuntu-but-apparmor-enabled systems? I forget the details, but iirc, there is an additional snap-apparmor unit or similar that can be After apparmor, and then snapd can add After snap-apparmor to the units. I defer to you, mvo, etc on the design and am happy to review a PR12:44
cachioI see this error on uc20 nested tests12:44
cachiohttps://paste.ubuntu.com/p/sBWXC4VZyG/12:44
cachiois it something new?12:44
cachiofirst time I see this12:44
zygajdstrand: that's a brilliant idea12:44
zygajdstrand: we can just no-op if apparmor is of12:44
zyga*off12:44
jdstrandyeah12:44
zygaand we can always put the dependency into the units12:44
jdstrandyeah12:44
zygamvo: ^ that's a solution that's easy12:44
zygaI can look at this after the current bug12:45
jdstranddiddledan: thank you for your persistence :)12:45
* jdstrand -> steps away12:45
mvozyga, jdstrand works for me12:45
cachiopstolowski, hey, I see also this error in nested test for uc20 Apr 09 12:08:53 ubuntu snapd[720]: hotplug.go:131: internal error: cannot get global device context: broken assertion storage, looking for model: broken assertion storage, cannot decode assertion: asser12:46
mupPR #9: Added the travis config file <Created by elopio> <Merged by niemeyer> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9>12:46
cachiopstolowski,  any idea?12:46
pstolowskicachio: no, maybe core20 requires something new to be done in that area, i'll need to investigate12:48
cachiopstolowski, thanks12:48
pstolowski#8465 should unbreak master12:48
mupPR #8465: tests: update snap-preseed --reset logic to acommodate for 2.44 change <Simple 😃> <⚠ Critical> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8465>12:48
pedronisit sounds like some code is running before seeding is done12:48
pstolowskimborzecki: ^12:48
pedronisI thought that code waiting on seeding12:48
zygatoday is sponsored by <critical> tag12:49
mborzeckiheh ;)12:49
mvozyga: yeah, it totally is12:49
mvoit's the N-days before the release feeling12:49
pstolowskipedronis: it doesn't wait12:50
pedronispstolowski: it waits for the system snap to be there at least12:50
pstolowskipedronis: right, that's true12:50
pstolowskimborzecki: for clarity, i pinged you about 846512:51
mborzeckipstolowski: figured ;)12:51
mborzeckimvo: pedronis: added the compatibility bind mount, i can succesfuly go through the install mode, but it hangs in initramfs in run mode12:52
mvozyga: so you are suggesting all our snap unit have "After=apparmor.service", is that what you said earlier? are you on it? should I?12:52
mborzeckimvo: pedronis: pushed a patch to #8464 anyway12:52
mupPR #8464: cmd/snap-boostrap, boot: use /run/mnt/data instead of ubuntu-data <Skip spread> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8464>12:52
mvomborzecki: please do, maybe something for dimitri12:52
mvopstolowski: do we need 8465 for 2.44 as well as a cherry pick?12:53
pedronismvo: we have no way to rewrite atm though12:53
pedronisto rewrite units12:53
mborzeckipstolowski: do you know what that blocked the test?12:53
mborzeckipstolowski: it would actually hit the kill timeout12:54
mvopedronis: yeah, but at least all new focal install with zfs will not be affected if we have it now12:54
pedronispstolowski: that's really weird because 131 is definitely after we are getting events12:54
pedronissomething is very broken12:56
pstolowskimborzecki: not yet, as i said in the comment and standup notes i'm investigating; maybe qemu-nbd hangs when we leave execute. if i re-arrange the test to first unmount and clean up and then fail on diffing, it fails as expected and doesn't hang12:57
pstolowskimvo: probably yes12:58
=== hggdh is now known as hggdh-msft
zygamvo: I've verified that the spread test fails without the fix and passes with the fix13:28
zygamvo: I'll jump into the apparmor issue in a moment, after the call13:29
diddledanzyga, I take it from that the fix doesn't work? I'm understanding how CI testing works, right?13:30
zygadiddledan: ?13:31
diddledan:-p13:31
zygadiddledan: hopefully not :)13:31
diddledanfail test == fix works; passing test == shruggy shoulders no idea13:31
diddledanmaybe it works?13:32
mvozyga: \o/ thank you13:32
diddledan#shipit!13:32
zygamvo: I pushed the test now13:38
zygathat was a nice bug13:44
zygajdstrand: I'm looking after apparmor now13:45
zygamvo: have a look at 8462 again please13:54
zygamaybe mborzecki as well13:54
zygaI'll get rid of my plate, grab coffee and jump into apparmor and zfs13:54
mvozyga: sure, will do13:55
ijohnsonpedronis: I merged master into 8424, the only thing missing there are tests for lsblk.go and the reimplementation of lsblk with sysfs + udev, which probably means we need to rename the file or maybe move it to it's own package somewhere13:56
ijohnsonbut all the logic in boot and cmd_initramfs_mounts should be there and that is tested and ready to review13:56
pedronisijohnson: so I should focus on cmd_initramfs_mounts ?  and a bit on boot , if I understand correctly13:59
ijohnsonpedronis: yes13:59
pedronisok, having a break and then I will look14:00
ijohnsonthanks14:00
pedroniszyga: btw, I didn't says this in the standup but I definitely prefer our snap services' units to be after something we control (or well defined from systemd) than a 3rd package service, we can control the dep on that one in one place at least14:02
zyga+114:02
zygayeah, I strongly agree14:02
zygathis is so much cleaner than vague dependency on apparmor in each of the service files we write14:02
pstolowskimvo: the script ijohnson linked requires greasemonkey which works on pretty much every browser14:06
mborzeckizyga: hah, so when a workflow is successful, there's no way to restart it14:08
mvopedronis: should I cherry pick 8459 (omit many snap-ids) for 2.44.3 too?14:08
mvopstolowski: nice!14:08
zygamborzecki: yeah :)14:10
zygamborzecki: I have some ideas on that though14:10
mborzeckiomg, close/reopen didn't trigger anything14:10
mborzeckioh w8, it did14:10
zygareally?14:11
zygaoh14:11
zygaodd14:11
zygathere's a way to trigger on more14:11
zygaanyway14:11
zygaENOTIME14:11
mupPR snapd#8466 opened: tests: backport partition fixes to 2.44 <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8466>14:14
pstolowskioh, preseed-reset fix failed on 19.1014:23
pstolowskicachio: did you update 20.04 images but not 19.10?14:24
cachiopstolowski, I updated all of them14:26
cachiopstolowski, https://travis-ci.org/github/snapcore/spread-cron/builds/67270178714:27
mvopstolowski: hm, 8465 failed in 19.10 in preseed-reset it seems, can you please have a look?14:30
mvopstolowski: it's strange as it seems like the only place where it fails14:30
pstolowskimvo: yeah, i just noted this above14:30
mvopstolowski: aha, sorry14:30
pstolowskimvo: i'm confused14:30
pstolowskimvo: did our deb packaging change made it to all ubuntu versions?14:30
mvopstolowski: maybe not, the SRUs are notoriously slow :/14:31
mvopstolowski: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/SzwVMqT9GX/14:31
pstolowskimvo: yes, plus it needs to be on the image we download. oh well, i need to relax this test check then14:33
mvook14:33
mvopstolowski: or just limit it to 20.04 for now?14:33
pstolowskimvo: good idea14:33
cachiopstolowski, do you need another update?14:34
pstolowskicachio: no, not for now, afaiu we need to snapd deb 2.44 to make it through14:35
pstolowski*to wait14:35
cachiomvo, I found that the nested machine is locked because it reaches 100% of cpu14:43
cachioand it has 1 cpu14:43
cachiomost of the cases is when snapd is installing or removing14:44
zygare14:52
zygaam I online?14:52
pstolowskizyga: no14:53
zygahaha :)14:53
zygaI managed to connect from my thinkpad14:54
cachiomvo, I'll try some qemu configuration to avoide this14:56
jdstrandzyga: fyi, I answered your question about offline and unknown in https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462#discussion_r40626920815:03
zygathank you, looking15:03
mupPR #8462: cmd/snap: don't wait for system key when stopping <Security-High> <⚠ Critical> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462>15:03
zygajdstrand: I'm wrapping up the fix for apparmor now15:03
jdstrandzyga: but, then that got me thinking about: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462#discussion_r40627014715:04
zygajdstrand: hmmm15:04
jdstrandzyga: these are not blockers imo15:04
zygajdstrand: maybe15:04
jdstrandI have to step into a meeting15:04
zygaI need to go AFK for 10 minutes now15:04
jdstrandzyga: or maybe return nil (I mentioned that in a followup comment)15:06
* jdstrand fully attends meeting15:07
mborzeckiguys, i'm taking a day off tomorrow as well, ping me if there's anything urgent15:07
mvocachio: nice, thank you15:07
pedronisijohnson: I did a high-level pass on 8424,  let me know if you have questions15:07
pstolowskimvo: ok, i pushed a fix. tested manually on 19.10 & 20.04, should work. fingers crossed15:07
mvopstolowski: cool, thank you15:10
ijohnsonthanks pedronis looking now15:11
zygaI'm home now15:40
zygamvo: testing apparmor fix now15:40
zygait's so annoying we build depend on gcc-multilib15:41
zygait clashes with cross compiler stack I use15:41
mvozyga: thanks, looking forward to the PR15:42
mupPR snapd#8403 closed: sandbox/cgroup: avoid making arrays we don't use <Skip spread> <Created by zyga> <Merged by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8403>15:44
zygamvo: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462 is green, except for preseed-reset on ubuntu 20.0415:45
mupPR #8462: cmd/snap: don't wait for system key when stopping <Security-High> <⚠ Critical> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462>15:45
zygamvo: shall I merge it?15:45
zygait's one patch15:45
mvozyga: yes, sounds good15:49
zygak15:49
mvozyga: I will cherry pick then15:49
zygamvo: release branch CI overflows 50minutes in travis15:50
zygamvo: actually, you must merge it15:50
zygarequired status check15:50
mvozyga: just noticed but I think it also hang in the preseed15:50
zygaaha15:50
zygaI didn't look deeper15:50
mvozyga: so hopefully once the preseed fix lnaded this is good again :)15:50
zygafocusing on apparmor15:50
mvozyga: no worries15:50
zygahmm15:50
zygabut15:50
zygaah ok15:50
mvozyga: yeah, looking forward to this fix15:50
mupPR snapd#8462 closed: cmd/snap: don't wait for system key when stopping <Security-High> <⚠ Critical> <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8462>15:55
zygathanks!15:55
mvozyga: I backed the system-key lxd fix to 2.44 (cc stgraber) - I still plan an upload tonight/in the morning15:55
mvozyga: *thank you*15:55
zygapleasure :)15:55
stgraberexcellent, thanks zyga and mvo16:04
zygastgraber: thank you for providing the perfect laboratory environment :)16:04
ijohnsonmborzecki: how did you manage to duplicate the number of tests on 8464 ? o_O16:15
ijohnson> 37 successful and 3 failing checks16:15
mborzeckiijohnson: clearly gh wanted to test that PR thoroughly16:18
ijohnsonit wanted to be double extra sure16:18
mborzeckieach +1 doubles the tests16:19
ijohnsonthat would be kinda funny if gh just kept adding to the list, so if you have to restart tests like 4 times it would say "89 successful and 4 failing checks"16:19
mupPR snapd#8467 opened: many: fix loading apparmor profiles on Ubuntu 20.04 with ZFS <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8467>16:21
zygamvo, jdstrand: ^16:25
zygatested locally on my focal install16:26
zygawith lxd and systemd-analyze16:26
zygaI'll break for coffee and be back later (mvo: tg to summon me please)16:27
pstolowski8465 failed on google:ubuntu-20.04-64:tests/main/interfaces-timeserver-control16:42
alvesadrianhello, there is something similar for after: on app: , I know after is only for parts but there is something like that in app:16:46
pstolowskiFailed to restart systemd-timesyncd.service: Unit systemd-timesyncd.service is masked.16:46
alvesadrianI mean apps:16:46
zygapstolowski: check what masks that service16:48
alvesadrianzyga, hello why after: is not accespted by snapcraft in apps: ?16:49
alvesadrianzyga there is something like after: from parts: in apps:?16:50
zygaI don't understand16:50
alvesadrian$ snapcraft16:50
alvesadrianIssues while validating snapcraft.yaml: The 'apps/ovs-vswitchd' property does not match the required schema: Additional properties are not allowed ('after' was unexpected)16:50
zygaI still don't understand16:51
zygawhat do you mean after for parts?16:51
alvesadrianzyga parts: accept after:16:51
alvesadrianbut it looks like u can use after: on apps:16:51
zygayes but the meaning is different16:52
zygawhat do you want to do?16:52
alvesadrianservice or command orders after this do this16:53
zygaalvesadrian: https://snapcraft.io/docs/snap-format documents "after" for apps16:56
zygaalvesadrian: which version of snapcraft are you using?16:56
alvesadrian2.4416:56
ijohnsonalvesadrian: are your apps meant to be services/daemons ?16:56
alvesadrianijohnson yes16:56
zygaalvesadrian: are you building in docker?16:57
zygaalvesadrian: snapcraft is at 3.1116:57
zygaalvesadrian: that version surely supports this construct16:57
ijohnsonalvesadrian: you probably need to add `daemon: simple` or something to make sure your apps are daemons and not CLI/GUI "apps"16:58
zygaalvesadrian: snapcraft or snapd?16:58
zyga(I mean 2.44)16:58
alvesadriansnapcraft16:59
ijohnsonalvesadrian: what's `snapcraft version` ?16:59
alvesadrian snapcraft version16:59
alvesadriansnapcraft, version 2.43.1+18.416:59
ijohnsonalvesadrian: you should install snapcraft via the snap not the debian package16:59
alvesadrianbionic16:59
ijohnsonalvesadrian: `apt remove snapcraft && snap install snapcraft`17:00
jdstrandis there a way with the new spread tests to re-run a specific job? it seems like twice now I only have 're-run all jobs'?17:00
jdstrandI'm talking about the github interface17:00
zygajdstrand: not at present, ask mvo to override if this is a well-known failure that is fixed elsewhere17:01
zygajdstrand: we discussed github actions vs travis and while there are some shortcomings as compared to travis we decided to keep the experiment alive for now17:01
jdstrandzyga: ok, so long as I'm not missing something. it seems that fedora is failing a lot.17:02
jdstrandsomething about reboot iirc17:03
zygajdstrand: it's more that a specific test is failing,17:03
jdstrandI'll keep an eye on it17:03
zygajdstrand: aha17:03
zygathanks, maybe it's something new17:03
zygathere are a few fixes in flight that should get rid of most of those17:03
zygajdstrand: on the upside actions lets us really run those tests as soon as possible, much faster than travis offered17:03
jdstrandzyga: it was a specific spread test related to core reboot *I *think*, don't jump on it now ;)17:03
zygaI won't, my goal is to focus on your feedback for udev PR17:04
zygabut I think tomorrow, today I just want to get the fixes ready17:04
jdstrandzyga: I also commented on the apparmor pr17:04
jdstrand(but only a comment at this point since you were still testing)17:05
zygaI noticed, going through that now! :)17:05
Eighth_Doctorpopey: hey, I just noticed that the instructions for rhel are wrong: https://snapcraft.io/install/icq-im/rhel17:08
Eighth_Doctorsnapd has been available in EPEL 8 for a while now17:08
zygahey Eighth_Doctor :)17:08
zygagood to see you again17:09
Eighth_DoctorThe CentOS instructions were updated, but apparently not the RHEL ones17:09
Eighth_Doctorzyga: hello :D17:09
popeyhello Eighth_Doctor17:09
Eighth_Doctorhow are you surviving?17:09
zygaEighth_Doctor: with three kids at home17:09
popeythey're editable on the forum now, which makes life easier17:09
Eighth_Doctorpopey: hey17:09
zygaEighth_Doctor: and parents-in-law17:09
Eighth_Doctorwoo17:09
popeyoh, or are they, no they are not17:09
zygaEighth_Doctor: and overeager police that fines you for taking your dog out on a bike17:09
popeynot *those* ones17:09
zygaEighth_Doctor: splendind :)17:09
zygaEighth_Doctor: we are lucky I have a job17:10
jdstrandzyga: I think I was wrong about suggesting ConditionPathExists: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8467#discussion_r40635123517:10
mupPR #8467: many: fix loading apparmor profiles on Ubuntu 20.04 with ZFS <Bug> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8467>17:10
Eighth_DoctorI'm lucky I still have a job17:10
Eighth_Doctorliving alone and not being able to meet people regularly has sucked17:10
zygajdstrand: ack17:10
popeyEighth_Doctor is this correct? https://snapcraft.io/docs/installing-snap-on-red-hat17:10
Eighth_Doctorpopey: yes17:11
popeyoh look https://github.com/canonical-web-and-design/snapcraft.io/issues/264617:11
popey:D17:11
Eighth_Doctorthat's why I didn't notice for months :D17:11
popeythanks for noticing now, anyway :D17:11
Eighth_DoctorI only noticed today when somebody asked me about adding snapd for EPEL 8, which I distinctly remember doing this last year17:12
Eighth_Doctorpopey: no problem :)17:12
zygajdstrand: maybe we should not change the cache for the point release17:13
zygajdstrand: I'm happy to do this for +117:13
zyganot sure17:13
zygamvo: ^17:13
Eighth_Doctorzyga: the loneliness and the fear of getting sick gets to me17:15
Eighth_Doctorbut I've been doing fine so far for the past month17:16
mvozyga: reading17:16
mvoEighth_Doctor: hey, great to hear that you are fine (but yeah, the loneliness part is depressing :(17:17
Eighth_Doctormvo: and my "community energy" is draining with nothing to refill it these days17:18
Eighth_Doctorno SUSECON, no CentOS Dojo, no Red Hat Summit, etc.17:18
* mvo nods17:18
Eighth_DoctorI'm just begging for Flock and oSC to not get canceled in the fall17:19
jdstrandzyga: it is up to you17:19
jdstrandzyga: your snapd-apparmor already assumes /var/cache/apparmor, so it is fine to just add /var/cache/apparmor to RequiresMountsFOr17:20
cachiozyga, #846817:20
mupPR snapd#8468 opened: tests: adding option --no-install-recommends option also when install all the deps <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8468>17:20
mupPR #8468: tests: adding option --no-install-recommends option also when install all the deps <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8468>17:20
cachiopleas could you take a quick look?17:20
jdstrand(ie, today, you aren't worrying about alternate locations and presumably not suffering bugs for it, so there is no need to change in the dot release)17:20
mvozyga: just to double check - the unit in 8467 does nothing if both are available? there will be no races or apparmor compiling the same profile in parallel or something (cc jdstrand)17:29
zygamvo: no because our service depends on the system service17:51
zygamvo: so in practice, if the system service loaded snapd profiles nothing new happens17:52
zygamvo: if it didn't we load the profiles17:52
zygamvo: *but* the new dependency from snap.foo.bar.service to snapd.apparmor.service means the boot race is over17:52
zygamvo: snapd.apparmor.service has After=apparmor.service, so they will be serialized17:52
mupPR snapd#8469 opened: snap: do not use os.Environ() in 2.44 <⚠ Critical> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8469>17:55
zygamvo: I'll adjust the PR once to get the cache recommendation from jamie and remove the changelog17:55
zygamvo: ah, thanks for that17:56
zygaI wasn't sure17:56
mvozyga: nice17:56
zygamvo: fix your PR please17:56
mvozyga: which one?17:56
zygahttps://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8469#pullrequestreview-39101049417:56
mupPR #8469: snap: do not use os.Environ() in 2.44 <⚠ Critical> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8469>17:56
zyga=17:56
mvozyga: fixing now, sorry17:56
ijohnsonwow zyga you beat me to that by 10 seconds17:57
zyga:D17:57
* zyga refrains from joking about stuff now17:57
* mvo hugs ijohnson and zyga - awesome team!17:58
ijohnson:-)17:58
mupPR snapcraft#3023 closed: pluginhandler: move attributes to PluginHandler <Created by sergiusens> <Merged by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3023>17:59
* mvo vanishes a bit while 2.44 builds are churning along18:01
jdstrandmvo: today, apparmor is looking at /var/lib/snapd/apparmor/profiles. if you can do a focal upload of snapd that makes you control it, I can do a focal apparmor upload that undoes it. Also, the snap-apparmor service is After=apparmor so there is no race. running one after the other is 'ok' because the speed at which the parser will load the cache into the kernel is essentially as fast as it can read from18:02
jdstrandthe disk, unless it recompiles policy. the 2nd run will never recompile policy since it is After=apparmor18:02
zygawe are *burning* through spread jobs today!18:03
jdstrandmvo: we can consider an apparmor SRU to stop looking at /var/lib/snapd/apparmor/profiles at some future point if desired18:03
jdstrandmvo: we would probably wait for a bigger SRU bug and piggyback on it though18:03
jdstrandmvo: it would be good if you could ping me on when you are going to do a focal upload so I can do the apparmor one after18:06
ijohnsonzyga: indeed, it is pretty responsive, and I even made the cardinal mistake of pushing an open PR branch 3 times in 5 minutes :-P18:06
zygare18:13
zygaok, back to branches18:13
mvojdstrand: I will do a focal upload tonight or tomorrow with the .3 fixes18:15
zygajdstrand, mvo: can we decide on the cache directory18:16
zygashall I change it from /var/cache/apparmor?18:16
jdstrandzyga: I agree to not change in this PR18:19
zygaOK18:19
zygaI'll adjust the RequiresMountsFor18:19
zygato add /var/cache/apparmor18:19
zygaand nothing else18:19
jdstrandyeah, just add /var/cache/apparmor to that18:19
zygais that ok? (I want to do only one push)18:19
zygaOK18:19
jdstrandzyga: actually18:20
zygayes?18:20
zyga(I won't push for a few more minutes so I'm open to changes :)18:20
jdstrandzyga: this will hit other releases of Ubuntu eventually. we should verify the cache locations of all of them18:21
jdstrandzyga: otherwise snapd-apparmor will fail on those where the cache isn't in /var/cache/apparmor18:21
zygajdstrand: snapd.apparmor.service is a .deb only feature so we can correct anything we want at the time we choose to dput to the archive18:22
jdstrandzyga: so, snapd hardcodes /var/cache/apparmor when compiling policy, no?18:22
zygajdstrand: having said that, you are right,18:22
zygajdstrand: can we use the location?18:22
* zyga checks18:22
zygayes18:23
jdstrandzyga: I think that is accurate (though, yes, please check :). if so, I think the only question would be if a release doesn't have /var/cache/apparmor, then we create it in the deb packaging rather than have snapd create it18:23
zygawe hard-code /var/cache/apparmor18:23
jdstrandok, good18:24
zygajdstrand: given that we use this location in 14.04 already I _think_ we are safe18:24
zygajdstrand: or are you saying we should mkdir the directory from the service to be safe?18:24
jdstrandok, then yes, don't change it cause like you said, deb only item and we can verify the other deb uploads18:24
jdstrandzyga: no, for focal, that is the location that apparmor creates18:24
zygajdstrand: oh, one thing before I forget: "systemd-analyze security"18:25
zygaI dind't know this before, perhaps it's new18:25
jdstrandzyga: I can look at the packaging real quick for all the releases18:25
zygathank you18:25
zygamvo, jdstrand: I pushed the updates to https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/846718:27
mupPR #8467: many: fix loading apparmor profiles on Ubuntu 20.04 with ZFS <Bug> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8467>18:27
jdstrandzyga: that is interesting. I wonder if it considers AppArmorProfile=.... today, it seems to primarily (understandably) care about its own nspawn/etc directives18:27
zygajdstrand: I didn't look at what it checks but it's true that systemd has grown considerable vocabulary of sandboxing features over the years18:28
mvozyga: ta18:28
zygajdstrand: I would say it rivals snapd in some ways so it's a nice selection18:28
zygaLucy has fever, oh buy18:29
zygaboy*18:29
zyga:/18:29
jdstrandzyga: ok, the apparmor package creates /var/cache/apparmor all the way back to trusty18:29
zygagood18:29
zygaso we're good18:30
zygaI think it's safe to keep this as-is for 2.44.318:30
jdstrandyeah. just normal QA18:30
zygawe can do more in 2.45 without a time pressure18:30
* jdstrand nods18:30
zygawe are at 25/32 workers so the changes should proces quickly18:30
zygabut I anticipate a small queue for about an hour while we go through the stuff that will spawn stable and unstable tests18:31
zygamvo: I think we should aim for tomorrow morning18:31
zygamvo: unless you want to dput at ~ 2218:31
zygaand I'll just get back to work to work on the feedback from jdstrand18:31
zygabtw, jdstrand are you available tomorrow?18:31
jdstrandzyga: I am working tomorrow, yes18:32
zygaok18:34
zygamvo: shall I stick around or are you OK for today?18:34
mvozyga: all good for today18:41
zygaOK, signing off :)18:41
* zyga EODs18:42
mupPR snapd#8465 closed: tests: update snap-preseed --reset logic to acommodate for 2.44 change <Simple 😃> <⚠ Critical> <Created by stolowski> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8465>18:43
mupPR snapd#8470 opened: tests: update snap-preseed --reset logic to acommodate for 2.44 change (2.44) <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8470>18:47
mupPR snapd#8466 closed: tests: backport partition fixes to 2.44 <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8466>18:48
pstolowskimvo: thanks for merging my test fix!19:13
pstolowskimvo: and for the herry pick! huh, what are those all failures there19:16
pstolowskiah, i see another PR19:17
mvopstolowski: yeah, some fallout from the divergence of 2.44 and master19:18
mvopstolowski: I will wait for the tests and do the release tomorrow, I think its getting a bit too late19:19
mupPR snapcraft#3024 opened: tests: remove usage of FakeApt fixtures in lifecycle <Created by cjp256> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3024>19:23
mupPR snapcraft#3025 opened: tests: move FakeApt fixtures into deb tests <Created by cjp256> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3025>19:32
mupPR snapd#8469 closed: snap: do use os.Environ() in 2.44 <⚠ Critical> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8469>19:52
mupPR snapd#8471 opened: many: fix loading apparmor profiles on Ubuntu 20.04 with ZFS (2.44) <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8471>19:55
mupPR snapd#8470 closed: tests: update snap-preseed --reset logic to acommodate for 2.44 change (2.44) <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8470>20:21
mupPR snapd#8472 opened: tests: disable some problematic tests for 2.44 <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8472>20:21
mupPR snapd#8467 closed: many: fix loading apparmor profiles on Ubuntu 20.04 with ZFS <Bug> <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8467>20:24
mupPR snapcraft#3024 closed: tests: remove usage of FakeApt fixtures in lifecycle <Created by cjp256> <Merged by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3024>21:05

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