[05:37] <mborzecki> morning
[06:48] <mborzecki> mvo: hey
[06:51] <mvo> good morning mborzecki
[06:53] <mborzecki> mvo: i've pushed an update to arch, and working on updates for fedora
[06:55] <mvo> mborzecki: nice, thank you
[07:05] <pstolowski> morning
[07:07] <mborzecki> pstolowski: hey
[07:32] <jamesh> mvo: it looks like the edge channel for the core snap hasn't published for a while, and doesn't seem to reflect master.  Is that a known problem?
[07:37] <mvo> jamesh: we need jdstrand to unblock publication, the review tools flaged edge incorrectly
[07:37] <mvo> jamesh: or some other store reviewer for that matter
[07:42] <mup> PR snapd#8917 closed: osutil/disks: add mock disk and tests for happy path of mock disks <Squash-merge> <UC20> <⛔ Blocked> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8917>
[08:36] <zyga> good morning
[08:36] <zyga> mvo I'm filing the paperwork now
[08:37] <mup> PR snapd#9088 opened: cmd/snap-preseed: use snapd from the deb if newer than from seeds <Preseeding 🍞> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9088>
[08:39] <zyga> pedronis thank you! :)
[09:22] <pedronis> mvo: I approved that core revision
[09:22] <mvo> pedronis: thank you
[09:31] <mvo> pedronis: there might be more to approve https://dashboard.snapcraft.io/snaps/core/revisions/9810/
[09:33] <pedronis> there's a lot of them
[09:33] <pedronis> let' see
[09:34] <mvo> pedronis: yeah, I think you will have to approve 5 or so and then it should have recovered (one approval for each arch)
[09:47] <pedronis> mvo: I think now I approved all archs once, let's see
[09:50] <mvo> pedronis: thank you! fwiw, I'm working on 8982 right now, it needs some tweaks for not leaking FDs in the error case now that the export is split
[09:53] <ijohnson> morning folks
[09:54] <mvo> good morning ijohnson
[09:54] <ijohnson> hey mvo
[09:55] <ijohnson> mvo: thanks for merging 8917, but I don't suppose you saw the squash merge label for that PR ?
[09:55] <ijohnson> it's not a big deal, just a little messy now IMHO
[09:57] <pedronis> mvo: the subsequent revisions are getting green on their own now
[09:57]  * pedronis lunch
[09:58] <mvo> ijohnson: oh no, sorry for that
[09:58] <mvo> pedronis: great, thank you
[10:00] <ijohnson> mvo: no worries, just my OCD wanting to have a clean git history without all my silly "merge feature X into feature Y" and "merge master into feature Y" commits
[10:04] <pstolowski> hey ijohnson !
[10:04] <ijohnson> hey pstolowski
[10:04] <ijohnson> did you try out the ubuntu-bartender thing at all? no worries if you didn't, happy to show you how I debugged things with that in a little bit
[10:14] <pstolowski> ijohnson: no, not yet, since you mentioned you needed manual hacks i assumed it makes sense to wait for you
[10:15] <ijohnson> pstolowski: sure, do you wanna join the SU HO in 45 minutes ?
[10:15] <pstolowski> ijohnson: yes, sure
[10:15] <ijohnson> sounds good
[10:20] <jamesh> The access check attributes on snapFileCmd ("/v2/snaps/{name}/file") don't really make sense.  From what I can see, the polkit action it specifies will never be used
[10:55] <pstolowski> ijohnson: i've a small interruption here, may need 15 or so, can i ping you when ready for HO?
[10:55] <ijohnson> sure no worries
[10:57] <zyga> o/
[10:57] <ijohnson> hey zyga how are you feeling ?
[10:57] <zyga> I'm in the office, training my legs to stand and ... just do that
[10:57] <zyga> much better, stronger by the day
[10:58] <ijohnson> nice that's really great to hear
[10:58] <zyga> still pathetically weak but making progress :)
[10:58] <zyga> starting Wednesday I should be able to sit for more than half an hour, or so the doctors tell me
[10:58] <zyga> how have you guys been?
[10:58] <ijohnson> things are going well I think, not too many fires
[10:59] <zyga> that's great
[10:59] <zyga> how are tests?
[10:59] <zyga> is everything working okay?
[10:59] <zyga> I rebooted our instance after boot loader patches went out
[10:59] <ijohnson> not too bad actually, not that much "actions missing in action" kinda thing
[11:00] <ijohnson> still some red from uc20 prepare and store 408s randomly
[11:00] <ijohnson> but the tests seem to be syncing up properly which is good
[11:01] <zyga> ok
[11:01] <zyga> that's great to hear
[11:01] <zyga> my goal for today is to sent some docs to mvo
[11:01] <zyga> (done)
[11:01] <zyga> and to exercise (in progress)
[11:01] <ijohnson> nice
[11:01] <zyga> and to see a bit more about my branches (bonus)
[11:01] <zyga> I'll try to address the feedback you gave me
[11:01] <zyga> I'm off until Thursday
[11:01] <zyga> but I'll try to help a little
[11:06] <pstolowski> hey zyga, glad to hear your condition is improving
[11:06] <zyga> yeah, :-)
[11:07] <zyga> my daughter told me that I move like my father (who is old and moves slowly :)
[11:08] <pstolowski> ouch
[11:27]  * zyga break 
[11:27] <zyga> tired o/
[11:41] <pstolowski> ijohnson: sorry, it took a bit longer; can we talk now?
[11:41] <ijohnson> pstolowski: sure, give me 5 minutes I want to start flashing my SD card, it takes a bit to finish
[11:41] <pstolowski> ijohnson: sure
[11:46] <ijohnson> pstolowski: ok ready joining the HO now
[11:46] <pstolowski> ijohnson: ok
[12:01] <mborzecki> pedronis: 13 files changed, 315 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) just the writer & bits in gadget/install, devicestate install and stubs in boot
[12:01] <mborzecki> pedronis: not great, but not horrible either
[12:02] <mborzecki> the tests inflate the diff a bit
[12:02] <pedronis> mborzecki: sounds ok
[12:09]  * pstolowski lunch
[12:33] <mup> PR snapd#9089 opened: many: introduce content write observer, install mode glue, intial seal stubs <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9089>
[13:34] <mborzeck1> pff chrome died at the end of standup
[13:47] <mup> PR core20#79 closed: Add secureboot-db package, try #2 <Created by xnox> <Merged by xnox> <https://github.com/snapcore/core20/pull/79>
[14:00] <jdstrand> mvo: I'm looking and it looks like Samuele approved core so you are set. you said it was flagged incorrectly, but it dropped a file. I think the review-tools dtrt?
[14:00] <mvo> jdstrand: yeah, all good, thanks!
[14:04] <mvo> jdstrand: (in a meeting, will get back to you)
[14:06] <jdstrand> mvo: no worries, just wanted to make sure everything was ok. thanks!
[14:08] <mvo> jdstrand: yeah, I think the issue was that edge go a (much older) core and then we got the new version. this lead to the review-tools flagging I think
[14:09] <jdstrand> mvo: yes, that can definitely happen as the review-tools (and the store at the point that the tools are run) have no concept of 'edge' or 'stable'
[14:10] <jdstrand> mvo: we now have a role rotation for store manual reviews, so we should in theory be more proactive, but you can always reach out :)
[14:19] <mborzeck1> hmm 2020-08-04T13:37:42.0599670Z 	Failed for "gopkg.in/yaml.v2" (failed to clone repo): exit status 128
[14:21] <mborzeck1> 2020-08-04T13:28:36.1975163Z fatal: unable to access 'https://github.com/snapcore/go-gettext/': transfer closed with outstanding read data remaining
[14:21] <mborzeck1> is github going down again?
[14:28] <pedronis> pstolowski: I added a question to #9087, we can chat tomorrow if it needs discussion
[14:28] <mup> PR #9087: o/snapstate: check available disk space before downloading a snap on install (4/N) <Disk space awareness> <Needs Samuele review> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9087>
[14:28] <pstolowski> pedronis: ok
[14:30] <pstolowski> pedronis: hmm i didn't think of multi snap install, i think you're right
[14:30] <pedronis> pstolowski: well also refreshes, this code is used by refreshes too
[14:31] <pedronis> there's some questions there as well
[14:31] <pedronis> pstolowski: we we should have a chat
[14:31] <pedronis> tomorrow or when it makes sense for you
[14:32] <pedronis> pstolowski: I mean, if you are busy with other things, this can probably wait a bit
[14:32] <mup> Issue core20#80 opened: networking does not persist in a reboot loop on arm64 pi4 <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/core20/issues/80>
[14:33] <pstolowski> pedronis: sure, let's see how it foes with xenial+squashfs problem on preseeding
[15:06] <pedronis> pstolowski: about seeeding error, one option could also be to look at in Error changes, when we do the in flight check in ensureSeeded
[15:07] <pedronis> but is not optimal
[15:08] <pstolowski> pedronis: indeed, that would work. but yes
[15:12] <pedronis> pstolowski: though maybe it's just enough to go over the changes in the api code
[15:13] <pstolowski> pedronis: we exit on task errors when preseeding. snap-preseed could inspect state by itself if exit status != 0
[15:13] <pstolowski> pedronis: it was commit 24d77f474dc53846a16289d19721292d16832cd8
[15:13] <pedronis> pstolowski: this is not about preseed, it's about finishing the seeding
[15:13] <pstolowski> pedronis: ah you're right
[15:15] <pedronis> yea, I think the option I prefer is just going over the changes in getSeedingInfo if seeded is false
[15:16] <pedronis> it's very self contained and less risky
[15:17] <pstolowski> pedronis: yes that's ok
[15:27] <ijohnson> pedronis: given the email from CPC, should we adjust `snap debug seeding` output to be more "yaml", I see for example right now if we can't calculate a time and output "-", that makes it invalid yaml
[15:27]  * cachio lunch
[15:28] <ijohnson> pedronis: because otherwise it's all valid yaml
[15:29] <ijohnson> but maybe there are other edge cases I don't see that are not valid yaml
[15:33] <mup> PR snapd#8998 closed: tests/cmd/snap-bootstrap/initramfs-mounts: add test case for empty recovery_mode <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8998>
[15:54] <pedronis> ijohnson: sorry, I forgot, we have special support in the unicodeMixin to emit things that are valid yaml for out patterns
[15:54] <ijohnson> mmmm, so the current code is buggy then
[15:55] <pedronis> ijohnson: look at .dash in cmd_info.go for example
[15:55] <ijohnson> ah so if we use "–" instead of "-" then yaml is happy
[15:55] <ijohnson> yeah I see it now
[15:56] <pedronis> well, it's a bit more complicated than that, but yes, there are helpers to pick things
[15:56] <ijohnson> pedronis: ok, given this is it okay if I respond to CPC's email with instructions on how to use snap debug seeding with the caveat that we found a bug just now where it's not always valid yaml ?
[15:57] <pedronis> well, we need to add error too
[15:58] <ijohnson> sure, but that won't change the formatting will it?
[15:58] <ijohnson> I was assuming if seeding error'd then we would just exit with non-zero exit code and add something else to the yaml output
[15:58] <pedronis> yes, but I would prefer to send one email with all the bits
[15:58] <pedronis> instead of many
[15:58] <ijohnson> ok, that's fine
[15:59] <ijohnson> I can file a PR to fix the unicode yaml issue then
[15:59] <pedronis> basically I we should first get closer to what we want in .4
[15:59] <pedronis> and then mail them
[16:00] <ijohnson> yes makes sense I will not email them
[16:14] <mup> PR snapd#9090 opened: cmd/snap/debug/seeding: use unicode for proper yaml <Preseeding 🍞> <Simple 😃> <⚠ Critical> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9090>
[16:14] <ijohnson> pedronis: pstolowski: I opened ^ which fixes the yaml issue for snap debug seeding
[16:15] <pedronis> ijohnson: thx, pstolowski:  I'm looking into adding seed-error
[16:15] <ijohnson> nice
[16:15] <pstolowski> pedronis, ijohnson thanks!
[16:44] <mup> PR snapcraft#3238 opened: db: introduce generalized datastore <Created by cjp256> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3238>
[16:57] <ijohnson> jdstrand: regarding https://bugs.launchpad.net/snapd/+bug/1889695, do you anticipate you will have a fix ready in the next few days ? we would like to include that in the next point release of snapd 2.45.4
[16:57] <mup> Bug #1889695: [k8s-support] permission denied error when calling readlink on /proc/1/ns/pid <snapd:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1889695>
[17:00] <jdstrand> ijohnson: I could fix that, but they need the other things I'm doing for microk8s. I won't have that done for 2.45.4 and was planning 2.46. if it goes fast, *maybe*, but I doubt it will go fast
[17:04] <pedronis> ijohnson: I have code, I will post a PR after dinner
[17:19] <ijohnson> jdstrand mmm I see, so the issue is that I assume a new version of various $CONTAINER_TECHNOLOGIES is what is causing the problems?
[17:20] <ijohnson> jdstrand also I don't know how critical the k8s thing is for field, I would recommend asking Tony about the priority of that
[17:28] <pedronis> ijohnson: I proposed #9091
[17:28] <mup> PR #9091: cmd/snap: display the error in snap debug seeding if seeding is in error <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9091>
[17:28] <ijohnson> pedronis ack I will take a look
[17:29] <mup> PR snapd#9091 opened: cmd/snap: display the error in snap debug seeding if seeding is in error <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9091>
[17:59] <cachio> ijohnson, hey
[18:00] <cachio> I see the cgroup test failing in debia
[18:00] <cachio> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/9rk24R2265/
[18:00] <cachio> I tried and it is easy to reproduce
[18:01] <cachio> do you know something about that? what could be the route cause?
[18:01] <ijohnson> Let me look
[18:03] <ijohnson> cachio: no I don't know what that issue is
[18:04] <cachio> it is failing in debian sid
[18:04] <cachio> not sure if it is because an update on a dependency
[18:08] <jdstrand> ijohnson: well there are a number of things. new workloads aren't working right and I need to investigate the best fix for that, then there are various access issues, and then there is the different behavior depending on the kernel version
[18:10] <ijohnson> jdstrand ack makes sense
[18:10] <zyga> I've released 2.45.3.1 to openSUSE
[18:10]  * zyga gets out of office
[18:10] <ijohnson> cachio: yeah I kinda suspect an upstream change in Debian here
[18:11] <cachio> ijohnson, yes, I don't see any change in our side which could be affecting that
[19:38]  * cachio afk