[00:07] <mup> PR snapd#9073 closed: release: 2.45.3.1 <Created by pedronis> <Merged by cmatsuoka> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9073>
[05:57] <mborzecki> morning
[07:23] <mup> PR snapd#9075 closed: daemon/api: use pointers to time.Time for debug seeding aspect <Preseeding 🍞> <Simple 😃> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9075>
[07:28] <pedronis> hello
[07:32] <pedronis> gah
[07:33] <mborzecki> pedronis: hey
[07:47] <pedronis> mborzecki: hi, can we chat after the desktop meeting?
[07:47] <mborzecki> pedronis: yes
[07:48] <mborzecki> pedronis: that unit test failure is only when building debs?
[07:48] <mborzecki> pedronis: i don't see it locally
[07:48] <mup> PR snapd#9076 opened: interfaces: make the unmarshal test match more the comment <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9076>
[07:49] <pedronis> mborzecki: I opened this ^
[07:49] <pedronis> to tweaks the test because it wasn't actually testing what it said, but also add more debugging
[08:00] <mborzecki> pedronis: interesting, spread tests don't complain either, do you have more of a log where the failure occurred?
[08:01] <pedronis> mborzecki: there's only false,
[08:01] <pedronis> that's why I did we need more debugging
[08:01] <pedronis> see my PR
[08:01] <pedronis> *I think
[09:19] <mup> PR snapd#9076 closed: interfaces: make the unmarshal test match more the comment <Created by pedronis> <Merged by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9076>
[10:34] <mup> PR snapd#9077 opened: boot: add current recovery systems to modeenv <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9077>
[10:45] <mborzecki> pedronis: ^^
[11:19] <mup> PR snapd#9078 opened: [RFC] boot: fancy marshaller for modeenv values <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9078>
[11:24] <pedronis> mborzecki: thx, finishing lunch break and then I will look
[12:08] <pedronis> mborzecki: I reviewed #9074 , I dismissed Ian's review though becuase it has changed in some significative ways
[12:08] <mup> PR #9074: bootloader: extend managed assets bootloader interface to compose a candidate command line <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9074>
[12:22] <mborzecki> damn gofmt
[12:28] <mborzecki> pedronis: thanks for the review, i'll poke ijohnson or cmatsuoka when they are online
[12:28] <mborzecki> pedronis: #9077 should hopefully be easy
[12:28] <mup> PR #9077: boot: add current recovery systems to modeenv <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9077>
[12:29] <pedronis> yes, I will look at it next
[12:49] <mborzecki> cmatsuoka: hey, do you have the script for booting in secure mode? something does not work in my setup and i'm not sure why
[12:49] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: sure, just a sec
[12:50] <mborzecki> it's clearly doing something because the vm is significantly slower and getting stuck on low entropy occasionally
[12:50] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/mRHs9rx5QM/
[12:54] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: don't forget to re-sign shim with the snakeoil key
[12:54] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: this is Ian's script to do that: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/4CczzWSHzR/
[12:54] <mborzecki> cmatsuoka: thanks!
[12:59] <mborzecki> cmatsuoka: which ovmf do you use?
[12:59] <mborzecki> (i mean version)
[12:59] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: the one from the focal archive
[12:59] <mborzecki> cmatsuoka: hmm so it should be the same, idk i'm getting dropped to efi shell now
[13:00] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: I'll check my steps here after the SU
[13:35] <mup> PR snapcraft#3237 opened: spread: use host pip <Created by cjp256> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3237>
[13:42] <ijohnson> seems I forgot to leave lunch mode yesterday haha
[13:47] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: dropping to efi shell happened to me if I didn't re-sign shim IIRC
[13:48] <mborzecki> cmatsuoka: ok, that would make sense, another question then, where do i get that snakeoil cert/key? or do you have a scipt to generate a custom one
[13:48] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: it's in the ovmf package
[13:49] <mborzecki> ijohnson: can you take a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9077 ?
[13:49] <mup> PR #9077: boot: add current recovery systems to modeenv <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9077>
[13:49] <ijohnson> mborzecki: sure
[13:50] <ijohnson> mborzecki: you can also get that snakeoil cert/key from the gadget snap repo in snapcore/pc-amd64-gadget
[13:51] <mborzecki> ijohnson: cmatsuoka: thanks, i see it in the ovmf package
[13:51] <mborzecki> heh funny how that package ships usr/share/OVMF and usr/share/ovmf
[13:52] <mborzecki> ofc both directories have differnt content
[13:53] <mborzecki> and a key with a password
[13:53] <cmatsuoka> it's "snakeoil"
[13:54] <mborzecki> yup, found that in docs
[13:57] <mborzecki> hmm still getting dropped to efi shell
[13:58] <mborzecki> btw. there's a problem with lxd tests, they reach kill timeouts, no matter the host (ubuntu, fedora etc)
[14:01] <mborzecki> yay, works with secure boot now
[14:02] <cmatsuoka> \o/
[14:03] <mborzecki> cmatsuoka: i didn't have unit=0, unit=1 for the CODE/VARS entries, although code was listed first
[14:11] <mborzecki> hmmm Retrieving image: rootfs: 1% (99.00kB/s)
[14:14] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: what's the thing about gofmt 1.9 in the Modeenv struct initialization?
[14:14] <cmatsuoka> I mean, what does it complain about?
[14:15] <mborzecki> cmatsuoka: gofmt changed the maximum line length around 1.9/10 iirc, so 1.n+1 formatting is different from earlier versions
[14:15] <cmatsuoka> ah ok
[14:15] <mborzecki> cmatsuoka: or not the max line length, but the maximum empty whitespace run, something like that
[14:17] <mborzecki> wow, gcp is also getting same downlaod speeds of lxd images: Retrieving image: rootfs: 3% (95.97kB/s)
[14:17] <mborzecki> wasn't there like a different remote rpeo we could use to get the images?
[14:19] <cmatsuoka> mborzecki: I had this kind of download rate with snaps some time ago, and it possibly triggered that write loop issue
[14:20] <zyga-x240> mborzecki: yes but it has different images
[14:21] <zyga-x240> mborzecki: ubuntu/foo
[14:21] <zyga-x240> mborzecki: vs foo IIRC
[14:21] <zyga-x240> mborzecki: those images don't have snapd and have other tweaaks
[14:21] <zyga-x240> *tweaks
[14:21] <mborzecki> zyga-x240: hm well, the ubuntu repo is super slow atm, tests are failing
[14:21] <zyga-x240> try lxc remote list
[14:22] <zyga-x240> there are images/ubuntu-abc
[14:22] <zyga-x240> and there's ubuntu/foo
[14:22] <zyga-x240> and ubuntu-daily/foo
[14:22] <zyga-x240> IIRC images is very fast
[14:23] <mborzecki> zyga-x240: it is, but our tests don't use that ;)
[14:23] <zyga-x240> they could but they would need to be adjusted to cope with the different environment
[14:24] <cachio> cmatsuoka, about the reboots
[14:24] <cachio> cmatsuoka, could be possible we are rebooting the instace because of a race?
[14:24] <cachio> cmatsuoka, is it possible to track that?
[14:25] <mborzecki> wonder what's causing the load on cloud-images.ubuntu.com, boothole updates?
[14:25] <cmatsuoka> cachio: in our side? I don't think we're doing it
[14:26] <zyga-x240> mborzecki: IIRC it was never fast
[14:26] <cmatsuoka> cachio: otherwise it would log something, there it looks like the VM is simply "power-cycled"
[14:26] <zyga-x240> it was just some what okay
[14:32] <cachio> cmatsuoka, yes, makes sense
[14:32] <cachio> trying a new configuration now, I had 1 run without any reboot
[14:32] <cachio> but perhaps it was just lucky
[14:32] <cachio> I was
[15:17] <ogra_> jdstrand, so it looks like we wont need any specific pcscd interface at all ... just an approved content interface (i.e. https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/auto-connections-for-pcsc-daemon/19170 ) should be enough ...
[15:25] <mborzecki> errands, bbl
[15:31] <ogra_> jdstrand, also https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/module-blacklisting-interface/19171 ...
[15:31] <ogra_> as requested 🙂
[15:32] <ogra_> (and i know you are busy with grub fixing ... so feel free to ignore as needed 😉 )
[15:49]  * cachio lunch
[15:56] <ijohnson> cachio: I think 9027 is probably ready to be merged when it's green
[15:56] <ijohnson> I responded to your comment there
[16:10] <mborzecki> ijohnson: meh, hardly anything is green now
[16:10] <ijohnson> haha yeah probably
[16:11] <ijohnson> mborzecki: your fancy modeenv marshalling/unmarshalling looks good to me
[16:11] <ijohnson> mborzecki: I am going to do another pass on 9074 just so I can understand, but feel free to merge without my +1
[16:11] <mborzecki> ijohnson: thanks, i think it'll be easier to put more complex things there
[16:11] <ijohnson> yeah
[17:11] <mup> PR snapd#9074 closed: bootloader: extend managed assets bootloader interface to compose a candidate command line <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by cmatsuoka> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9074>
[17:21] <mup> PR snapd#9079 opened: gadget/install: retrieve command lines from bootloader <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by cmatsuoka> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9079>
[17:37]  * cachio afk
[18:24] <mup> PR core20#79 opened: Add secureboot-db package, try #2 <Created by xnox> <https://github.com/snapcore/core20/pull/79>
[18:36] <mup> PR snapd#9077 closed: boot: add current recovery systems to modeenv <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by cmatsuoka> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9077>
[19:01] <mup> PR snapcraft#3237 closed: spread: use host pip <maintenance> <Created by cjp256> <Merged by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3237>
[19:01] <cachio> cmatsuoka, hey
[19:01] <cachio> I see this error: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/pFMF5NJdDn/
[19:02] <cachio> related to tpm
[19:02] <cachio> is it something expected?
[19:03] <cmatsuoka> let me see...
[19:05] <cmatsuoka> cachio: this is strange indeed
[19:06] <mup> PR snapcraft#3236 closed: snap: use python3-apt stage-package <maintenance> <Created by cjp256> <Closed by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3236>
[19:11] <cmatsuoka> cachio: was it a normal installation run, or did you do something unusual in this test?
[19:11] <cmatsuoka> (like not clearing the tpm or something like that)
[19:11] <cachio> I am manually running
[19:13] <cachio> cmatsuoka, this is the full log https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/MVQCNz4RF3/
[19:16] <cmatsuoka> cachio: the two error messages are different, so it failed twice?
[19:18] <cmatsuoka> cachio: the second one suggests that the tpm was not cleared before installing
[19:19] <cachio> sorry, the second was my fault
[19:19] <cmatsuoka> the first one is not something i've seen before
[19:19] <cmatsuoka> is it reproducible?
[19:21] <cachio> cmatsuoka, https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/zg3gKVQN5C/
[19:21] <cachio> I am trying again
[19:21] <cmatsuoka> cachio: the last paste is a tail -f command :)
[19:22] <cachio> few lines before it is the error
[19:22] <cachio> this is the full log for that error
[19:23] <cmatsuoka> cachio: I mean, there's only a tail command in the paste
[19:23] <cmatsuoka> google-nested:ubuntu-20.04-64 .../tests/nested/core20/tpm# tail -f /tmp/work-dir/serial-log.txt
[19:23] <cachio> cmatsuoka, perhaps hte error was caused because a reboot
[19:23] <cachio> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/zg3gKVQN5C/
[19:23] <cachio> I see the full log there
[19:23] <cachio> line 2982
[19:23] <cachio> cmatsuoka,
[19:24] <cmatsuoka> cachio: ah ok I got it, sorry
[19:24] <cmatsuoka> there's a lot of empty lines there
[19:25] <cmatsuoka> let me see where the reboots happened...
[19:27] <cmatsuoka> cachio: yes, maybe the crashes placed the tpm in some inconsistent state?
[19:27] <cmatsuoka> but that shouldn't happen, it's strange
[19:28] <cachio> cmatsuoka, how should I clean tpm
[19:28] <cachio> forgot that
[19:29] <cmatsuoka> you can delete the "permall" file in /var/snap/swtpm-mvo/current
[19:30] <cachio> thanks
[19:30] <cmatsuoka> tpm2-00.permall, but I think the number may change if you have more instances
[20:36] <mup> PR snapcraft#3235 closed: tests: fix assert ordering for error format tests <maintenance> <Created by cjp256> <Merged by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3235>
[21:01] <cmatsuoka> cachio: did you reproduce that error?
[21:03] <cachio> no
[21:04] <cachio> cmatsuoka, I was running the whole afternoon and didnt see that error again
[21:04] <cmatsuoka> hm interesting, ok, let me know if that ever happens again
[21:05] <cmatsuoka> in this case it seems that it was caused by the random reboots, which is also strange but...
[21:47] <mup> PR snapd#9080 opened: osutil/disks: use xerrors to indicate a fs label wasn't found <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9080>
[22:22] <mup> PR snapd#9081 opened:  secboot,cmd/snap-bootstrap: cross-check partitions before unlocking, mounting <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9081>
[22:47] <mup> PR snapd#9082 opened: interfaces/system-key: in WriteSystemKey during tests, don't call ParserFeatures <Bug> <Simple 😃> <Test Robustness> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9082>