mupPR snapd#9576 opened: [RFC] snap-bootstrap: be more robust for recover mode, ignore some errors <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9576>02:13
mupPR snapd#9577 opened: many: seal a fallback object to the recovery boot chain <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by cmatsuoka> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9577>02:18
mupPR snapcraft#3344 closed: pyproject: add isort with black-compatible configuration <Created by cjp256> <Merged by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3344>03:18
mupPR snapd#9570 closed: gadget/internal: tune ext4 setting for smaller filesystems <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9570>06:24
zyga-mbpmvo my last day06:54
mvogood morning zyga-mbp06:54
mvozyga-mbp: yes, sad but true06:55
zyga-mbpI think I got a cold though, last evening I felt terribly weak06:55
zyga-mbpI'll get to finish what I worked on with pedronis yesterday now06:55
mvothanks zyga-mbp ! let me know if I can help in any way06:59
zyga-mbpmvo how do I sign the CLA?07:01
mvozyga-mbp: should be super easy, just go to https://ubuntu.com/legal/contributors07:04
mvozyga-mbp: and navigate to https://ubuntu.com/legal/contributors/agreement07:04
mvozyga-mbp: and the rest is hopefully straightforward07:04
mvogood morning mborzecki07:08
mvomborzecki: there are some questions from ian in 9565, I would have pushed myself but I'm unsure about the devicestate_test.go questions, could you please have a look? I think this is ready otherwise (and we can always land tweaks in a followup, will make other PRs easier :)07:09
mvomborzecki: just to be clear, if this pr just needs tiny tweaks I would merge and do a followup to avoid the spread run time overhead :)07:10
mborzeckimvo: i'll push those fixes and we can let it run once more07:12
mborzeckiand then land :P07:12
mvomborzecki: ok07:12
mborzeckimvo: hm let me check whether the little tweak in the test is actually making anything different07:13
mvomborzecki: sounds good07:13
zyga-mbpgood morning mborzecki07:15
* zyga-mbp goes to the office07:15
mborzeckimvo: yeah, i've restarted the run which shuld be quick now since most jobs were green, and we can land it07:16
mborzeckizyga: heya07:16
mborzeckizyga: so, when is the farewell party? :P07:19
zygamborzecki, I can drop for a beer to Frankfurt next year ;)07:20
mborzeckizyga: sgtm ;) guess many old colleagues would love to have a beer with you07:20
mvomborzecki: oh, it was just ubuntu-18.04 failing, that was a misconfigured apt-get afaict, I can force-land this (unless there is more than this one 18.04 error?)07:21
mborzeckimvo: already restarted07:21
mvozyga: +1 for FRA07:21
* mvo nods07:24
mvomborzecki: no worries, will be quick :)07:24
mupPR snapd#9565 closed: overlord/devicestate: bind mount ubuntu-save under /var/lib/snapd/save on startup <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9565>07:45
mborzeckibrb, graphics corruption on 5.9.1 strikes again07:57
zygamborzecki, did you consider reverting to an older kernel?08:02
mborzeckizyga: 'the arch way' there is only one kernel version08:03
mvomborzecki: welcome back08:03
zygamborzecki, nkvd would approve, march forward ;-)08:03
zygamborzecki, but not even the previous kernel you mean?08:04
mborzeckizyga: no, there's just one kernel package version eg. `linux`, you can have other kernels, eg `linux-lts` which is the latest LTS, but who runs that? :P08:05
mborzeckizyga: iirc manjaro does something funny, they have linux59, linux58 and so on08:05
mborzeckizyga: on the rpm side, the kernel is also a 'special' package iirc and you can have more than one08:06
zygamborzecki, I wish we can do linux snap for ubuntu classic for 22.0408:06
zygaincluding a way to pick one of the supported LTS kernels, upstream kernels, etc08:06
zygaI would *love* that08:06
zygaeven though OMG DRAGONS apply08:07
mborzeckiheh, hwe/upstream kernels would be great08:07
zygamborzecki, yeah, I think so, though I don't know how that is implemented08:07
mborzeckiit's a bummer when an lts release does not even boot08:07
zygalong term unsupported release08:07
* zyga suspends and reboots for OS update08:10
zygaand back08:14
zygaI love this part of VMs08:14
zygalike suspending a lisp image08:14
mupPR snapd#9578 opened: o/devicestate: unit test tweaks <Simple πŸ˜ƒ> <Skip spread> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9578>08:15
mupPR snapd#9579 opened: tests: rename hasHooks to hasInterfaceHooks in the ifacestate tests <Simple πŸ˜ƒ> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9579>08:25
mupPR snapd#9575 closed: testutil, cmd/snap/version: fix misc little errors <Simple πŸ˜ƒ> <Test Robustness> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9575>08:35
pedronismborzecki: hi, I tried to answer your question09:06
mborzeckipedronis: ok, i got confused with the last commit where IsDirectory() got removed, but didn't notice save avaialble is set to true int he branch where there is no mount09:08
mborzeckiok, and keypair manager creates the path, so we're not blocked by https://github.com/snapcore/core20/pull/91 being available09:11
mupPR core20#91: hooks: add /var/lib/snapd/save <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by xnox> <https://github.com/snapcore/core20/pull/91>09:11
mborzeckiand i clearly need more coffee09:12
pedronismborzecki: the IsDirectory was a left over for when your PR was running that code also on UC16/UC1809:13
mborzeckiah, i see09:14
mupPR snapd#9566 closed: boot: store the TPM{PolicyAuthKey,LockoutAuth}File in ubuntu-save <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9566>09:20
zygapedronis, I've updated the export manager09:28
zygapedronis, some comments are still TODOs on my side but the main change is in place09:29
pedroniszyga: thanks, special.go is quite simpler now09:33
zygapedronis, I think the only thing we need to think about now is the instance case09:34
zygapedronis, do we want .../export/snap_key/revision/set09:34
zygaor .../export/snap/revision_key/set09:35
pedronisah sorry09:35
pedronisI mean the former: /export/snap_key/revision09:35
zygaso the more direct09:36
pedronisbecause of where we put current09:36
zygasure, I'll do that shortly09:36
pedronisit's the only reasonable thing09:36
zygawith the re-mapping layer we will need anyway this is easier and less surprising09:36
zygaand even less special cases I think09:36
zygaI tried adding some more tests but there's at least one missing still09:36
zygacoverage is good but some specific cases have no explicit tests09:37
zygaeven though it doesn't show up as missing coverage09:37
pedronismborzecki: are you looking at #9560 again?09:39
mupPR #9560: gadget/many: drop usage of gpt attr 59 for indicating creation of partitions <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9560>09:39
mborzeckipedronis: yeah, it's on my list for today09:39
mupPR snapd#9580 opened: [RFC] store: download timeout <Bug> <Needs Samuele review> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9580>09:45
pstolowskipedronis: ^09:45
pedronispstolowski: thank you, I don't think I'll get to it before I'm back next week though09:46
pstolowskipedronis: sure09:47
mvopstolowski: 9580 looks pretty neat from a first glance10:04
pstolowskimvo: thanks, it's tricky stuff, so i'm cautiously optimistic ;) and looking forward to full spread runs10:05
mupPR snapd#9578 closed: o/devicestate: unit test tweaks <Simple πŸ˜ƒ> <Skip spread> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9578>10:05
mupPR snapd#9579 closed: tests: rename hasHooks to hasInterfaceHooks in the ifacestate tests <Simple πŸ˜ƒ> <Created by stolowski> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9579>10:05
mvopstolowski: yeah, it looks like a winner but I have not really digged deep yet, just a first feeling from reading it :)10:09
pedronismvo: I tried to answer you questions in #9573, but I'm probably confused10:12
mupPR #9573: o/devicetate,dirs: keep device keys in ubuntu-save/save for UC20 <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9573>10:12
mvopedronis: look but it's probably me being confused, I don't/did not had the full picture but let me read first10:13
mvopedronis: what's the longer term plan with "saveAvailable"? will we dynamically umount /save or mount it RO or is the fact that we have /save pretty static? sorry, maybe that was the missing piece for me10:15
pedronismvo: I don't know, but otoh I expect a limited set of very structured places to care about that flag or final flaggs10:16
pedronisif we get m.saveAvailable everywhere we are doing it wrong10:16
pedronisyou proposal seems more going into let's ask about save a bit everywhere10:17
mvopedronis: ok and it's "static" in the sense that other parts of snapd will not mess with /save (umount,remount) without this part knowing?10:17
pedronismvo: yes, if you look at that my other PR, my main idea is that there will be with* helpers for each things that needs touching save10:17
mvopedronis: my proposal would use saveAvailable() the same amount of times as we check the boolean, I was mostly wondering if it might be a TOCTOU issue10:17
pedronismvo: what I'm confused, is that sounds you expect the flag to change at random places10:18
pedronisI would expect to have "one" place to do mount unmount, touch flag10:18
mvopedronis: not the flag, but potentially the state of /var/lib/snapd/save10:18
mvopedronis: aha, ok10:18
pedronismvo: but we control the state10:19
mvopedronis: then we should be fine. I was worried because we set it three times to true currently but yeah, this makes sense10:19
mvopedronis: let me re-read it again with the added context, thanks for explaining this10:19
pedronisif we are worried about the mount state to change behind our back, and then yes we need to do something else10:20
pedronismvo: to be clear I mostly did the flag as a flag atm because it covers: let us return an error if something tries to use a save helper on UC16/UC1810:20
zygapedronis, used snap.Revision now, only the instance key remains10:20
pedronisthat's probably clearer in the ollow10:20
pedronis*follow up10:20
mupPR snapd#9581 opened: tests/nested/core20/save: check the bind mount and size bump <Run nested> <Simple πŸ˜ƒ> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9581>10:20
mvopedronis: ta10:21
* mvo reads 9574 too10:21
zygameh gofmt10:22
pedronismvo: but you are probably right that the TODO on saveAvailable is probably too specific10:22
zygapedronis, a pass over https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9546 would be good now10:30
mupPR #9546: overlord: add inert export manager <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9546>10:31
zygaI only want to add more tests10:31
zygaand there's the question of ErrNoState and not returning that in a specific case that I think is okay but you should respond to that point explicitly10:31
pstolowskiabeato: hey, maybe you have thoughts about https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9580#discussion_r514990758 ? this PR introduces download timeout and as is, it requires average speed of 256 bytes/sec, measured over 5-minute time windows10:37
mupPR #9580: [RFC] store: download timeout <Bug> <Needs Samuele review> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9580>10:37
abeatopstolowski, I've not followed the bug too much tbh, but sometimes they have cellular connections that might dropt and could cause this sort of problem10:48
pstolowskiabeato: ok, good to know. do you have any thoughts about realistic throughputs from the field?10:49
pedroniszyga: I did another pass10:50
abeatopstolowski, don't know the throughput, but something that can happen very realistically is that suddenly the modem is not able to rx/tx packets anymore but it won't drop the connection immediately. Effectively that means that suddenly you get zero bandwidth10:50
pedroniszyga: and answered your question10:50
abeatoand it can take a long time until something puts the interface down...10:51
pstolowskiabeato: right, the explains the issue i'm trying to fix10:52
zygathanks, looking10:52
abeatopstolowski, so, the safeguard you are implementing seems to me like a very good thing to have10:52
abeatopstolowski, and not only for this customer10:52
pstolowskiabeato: yes, we have seen it once on desktop10:53
pstolowskiabeato: we just need to be careful no to go overboard with this10:53
abeatopstolowski, right - also I think cellular is usually the hardest case, where you can have more issues10:54
abeatopstolowski, which is of course a quite frequent setup in IoT10:55
pedronismborzecki: fsck-on-boot failed here:  https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9573/checks?check_run_id=1331162810 don't think is related to the PR but anyway annoying11:05
mupPR #9573: o/devicetate,dirs: keep device keys in ubuntu-save/save for UC20 <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9573>11:05
pedronismborzecki: on 18.0411:05
mborzeckihmm `umount: /boot/grub: target is busy`11:07
mborzeckimaybe snapd was writing something there?11:07
zygapedronis, updated some, replied to others11:15
pedroniszyga: I re-replied11:16
zygaoh that was quick :)11:16
pedronismborzecki: mvo: I'll force merge 9573, I'll work some tweaks in 7411:16
mvopedronis: ta11:17
mvopedronis: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9573#discussion_r515005938 would be nice to get a yes/no or followup :)11:17
mupPR #9573: o/devicetate,dirs: keep device keys in ubuntu-save/save for UC20 <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9573>11:17
pedronismvo: I answered to it11:19
pedronismvo: core20 will ship with /save precreated11:21
mupPR snapd#9573 closed: o/devicetate,dirs: keep device keys in ubuntu-save/save for UC20 <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by pedronis> <Merged by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9573>11:21
pedronisright now it works anyway because a couple of path will auto-create it anyway11:21
mvopedronis: sorry, one more question - when you write "11:21
mvoin the final world it will always come from core20 itself" do you mean the core20 snap? asking because this is on the writable partition11:21
pedronisyes, the core20 snap11:21
pedronismvo: core18 and core20 come with a bunch of defined dirs in /var/lib/snapd11:22
pedronismborzecki has a PR to do add /save to core2011:22
pedronisI think it was even merged11:22
pedronisnot sure if it's on some channel yet or not though11:22
mvopedronis: ok, then we are good. thanks11:23
zygaI wonder if there's a subtle mistake in this logic11:25
zygasnapstate.CurrentInfo requires the snap to have a current revision11:26
pedronisthat's correct11:26
pedronissnaps always have a current revision11:26
zygaI check for NotInstalledError11:26
pedronisor they are not installed11:26
zygaso perhaps that's fine11:26
pedronisthey might not be active though11:26
zygaI was wondering if this worked because we are not hitting the path for snapd in practice11:27
pedronisbeing active and having a current revision is orthogonal11:27
pedronisif something is inactive11:27
zygaah, I didn't realize this, that's much better then11:27
pedronisthen the curren revision is the last active revision11:27
zygabecause it has to work for inactive case as well11:27
zygathat's okay then11:27
mborzeckipedronis: yes, it was merged, but the latest edge is from 10.27, so still without the change11:27
zygapedronis, pushed again11:31
zygaI'll rebase the full branch on this and see if everything passes11:32
pedroniszyga: the helper to remove the full export/snap is the rest? for remove?11:33
pedronis*is in the rest11:34
zygapedronis, hmm, sorry, which helper exactly?11:34
zygapedronis, all of the export manager is in in the smaller PR11:34
pedroniszyga: when we remove a snap we need to remove the export/snap dir? unlink just remove a version? not current for example11:35
zygathe unexport-content task removes that11:35
zygait is in this branch, but it is not used until the full branch11:35
zygathe helper to remove the content is here as well, we simply remove the manifest serialized in the state IIRC11:36
pedronisI'm probably confused11:36
pedronisthere is something wrong or I'm misunderstanding11:36
zygathe function that removes files for a given manifest is removeExportedFiles11:36
zygait is called from doUnexportContent11:36
zygawhich is the handler for unexport-content task11:37
zygais that what you were expecting?11:37
zygagood morning ijohnson11:38
pedroniszyga: I think it depens on order of things I suppose11:39
pedronisI think the bits are there11:40
pedroniszyga: I suppose the issue, is that actual I don't when we unexport content, we do it after we switched it, right?11:40
zygain the sense of task ordering, the remove-content runs after unlink-snap, ensuring we, by that time, have picked a new current symlink (or removed it)11:40
pedronis*actually I don't know11:40
zygaall content with corresponding snaps is on disk11:41
pedronisthen I think this should work11:41
zygawe rewrite the current symlink before we remove the content11:41
* pedronis lunch11:41
zygaI'll break for coffee while tests run11:41
mupPR snapd#9582 opened: [RFC] gadget/quantity: introduce a new package that captures quantities  <Simple πŸ˜ƒ> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9582>11:46
zygahey cachio12:04
cachiozyga, hey12:04
zygacachio, my last day :)12:04
zygacan I review anything for you?12:05
cachiozyga, yes, I know :(12:05
cachiozyga, #952412:05
mupPR #9524: tests: new boot state tool <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9524>12:06
cachiothat one that you already started12:06
zygasure, let me look12:06
mupPR snapcraft#3345 opened: project_loader, formatting_utils: take empty env values into account <Created by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3345>12:14
zygacachio, https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9524#pullrequestreview-52060733412:25
mupPR #9524: tests: new boot state tool <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9524>12:25
cachiozyga, looking12:26
mupPR snapd#9583 opened: features: enable classic-preserves-xdg-runtime-dir <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9583>12:31
dot-tobiasogra: Do you have a tip how I can improve build time for the WPE kiosk snap on ARM? Building on a Pi 4 with 4GB RAM in an LXD container fails most of the time (β€œunexpected EOF”), I guess its too resource-intensive. Launchpad works, but aborts after ~6 hours because of https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/1885164 (reported by cjp256). Next escalation step would be to attempt cross-compilation …12:46
mupBug #1885164: snap builds: network access timeout <build-infrastructure> <buildfarm> <lp-snappy> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1885164>12:46
ogradot-tobias, add swap ?12:47
zygabuy 8GB riscv board and cross-compile (/me runs)12:47
dot-tobiasogra: That is … something I completely overlooked πŸ™ˆ12:53
ogradot-tobias, also, make sure your storage pool is large enough to write all temporary files during build ... this error sounds more like there isnt enough disk space ...12:55
dot-tobiaszyga: Nice, but still would require to read up quite a bit on cross compiling to do it right and not sink in more days than necessary πŸ˜… <joke>I just came here to package a web app!</joke> πŸ˜„12:55
dot-tobiasogra: I'm using the β€œdir” storage, followed your blog article https://ograblog.wordpress.com/2020/07/10/building-snap-packages-on-ubuntu-core/ β†’ default lxd snap configuration. I thought that meant it can use 100% of the host resources, which is a 64GB SD card12:57
cachiozyga, #9524 updated, thanks for the review12:59
mupPR #9524: tests: new boot state tool <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9524>12:59
ograah, that might be fine then ...12:59
zygacachio, looking12:59
zygacachio, +113:02
zygacachio, I'd call the command functions cmd_ ... so that they stand out a little bit more but meh :)13:02
zygait's internal now13:02
zygapart of the benefits of having programs13:02
zygamborzecki, could you help me with the selinux denial in https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9530/ please?13:06
mupPR #9530: interfaces: share /tmp/.X11-unix/ from host or provider <Needs security review> <Squash-merge> <⚠ Critical> <β›” Blocked> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9530>13:06
zygaspecifically in centos7 only13:07
mborzeckizyga: sure, let me see13:09
pedronismborzecki: I'm looking at Ian RFC PR, and now I'm very confused,  where do we mount save in initramfs?  we mount to /run/mnt/ubuntu-save, right?13:12
zygaI'll pick up https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/920413:15
mupPR #9204: sandbox: track applications unconditionally <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9204>13:15
pedronisijohnson: your RFC PR seems quite confused about the 2nd argument to maybeMountSave13:16
ijohnsonpedronis: in meeting let's talk in our meeting later13:18
niemeyer/ ExecutableExists returns whether there an exists an executable with the given name somewhere on $PATH.13:18
zyganiemeyer, that an an an mistake :D13:20
pedroniszyga: well the doc document it that way, so I suppose it was intentional13:24
zyga    # we are expecting the test to fail on a cgroup v2 system13:24
pedronisit's very oddly placed though13:24
zygathis is why the xdg-settings test was failing :)13:24
zygait's fixed now13:25
zygapedronis, "there an exists" => "there exists" perhaps13:25
pedronisah, that as well13:25
pedronismy point is that it's in stat.go13:26
zygaI only meant the typo13:26
pedronisI see, I thought the question was more that FileExists and ExecutableExits are very different beasts similarly named13:27
zygamborzecki, there's some SNAFU in centos-7 now13:28
zygathat is from https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9546/checks?check_run_id=133173211513:29
mupPR #9546: overlord: add inert export manager <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9546>13:29
zygathere's no selinux-policy-base 3.13.1-26813:29
zygaarchive skew?13:29
zygamborzecki, woot, https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9204 should now pass13:40
mupPR #9204: sandbox: track applications unconditionally <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9204>13:40
zygahave a look at the last patch, it's pretty much what was expected13:40
zygaI didn't notice this part of the test before, how silly of me13:41
zygajamesh, note that https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9204 tweaks the set of allowed dbus-daemon processes (in the invariant checker), IIRC one of your pull requests also did something similar13:43
mupPR #9204: sandbox: track applications unconditionally <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9204>13:43
mborzeckizyga: sorry, didn't look, got distracted doing reviews13:43
zygamborzecki, no worries13:43
mborzeckizyga: but it looks like the epel package was built against a newer selinux-policy than is availble in centos repos13:43
mborzeckizyga: keep in mind that centos is suppsod to sync from rhel and rebuild packages, although it's unclear how laggy that process is (apparently quite laggy)13:44
mborzeckiand epel packages are built against rhel :P13:44
zyga-mbpthey should have called it EEL packages, enterprise extras for linux ;-)13:46
zygaone more patch for today https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/958413:54
mupPR #9584: tests: fix rare interaction of tests.session and specific tests <Test Robustness> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9584>13:54
mupPR snapd#9584 opened: tests: fix rare interaction of tests.session and specific tests <Test Robustness> <Created by zyga> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9584>13:56
mupPR snapd#9581 closed: tests/nested/core20/save: check the bind mount and size bump <Run nested> <Simple πŸ˜ƒ> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9581>14:32
zyga-mbpI'll join my last tgif early, if you want to talk about anything I'm there14:52
mvozyga-mbp: still in a meeting :(15:01
mupPR snapd#9585 opened: interfaces/builtin: Add LVM interfaces <Created by fnordahl> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9585>15:12
zygapstolowski, https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/install/authenticode15:23
zygathat's what I thought about but that's for drivers15:23
pedronismvo: mborzecki: ijohnson: I defconflicted and updated #957415:42
mupPR #9574: o/devicestate,a/sysdb: make a backup of the device serial to save <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9574>15:42
mvopedronis: thank you!15:52
ijohnsonpedronis: ack will take another look15:53
zyga-mbppedronis if you do another pass over export manager I can make more progress on this last day, if not that's fine as well and I fully understand15:55
* cachio lunch15:59
ograxnox, ijohnson perhaps one of you can point this guy to the right place to modify the kernel cmdline in UC20 (do we have any docs how to do this, given thats rather essential at times to initialize peripherials etc) https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/configure-grub-with-ubuntu-core-20/2083516:40
ijohnsonogra: yeah I will respond, it's sad and messy atm if they want fde16:41
ijohnsonand actually even if they don't want fde it's still sad and messy16:41
ograoh my16:41
ograwe should just have switched everything to u-oot πŸ˜›16:41
ogra(or port ondra's LK stuff to x86 !!)16:42
ijohnsonwe should chain load u-boot to grub to lk back to grub and then throw in the pi bootloader just for fun at the end16:42
mvoijohnson: if you could review 9574 at some point today, that woudl rock16:55
ijohnsonmvo: sure16:55
mvoijohnson: thank you!16:55
* mvo if off for dinner and one last time hockey before all is shut down16:56
ijohnsonmvo: also I just reviewed #955516:56
mupPR #9555: asserts: implement "storage-safety" in uc20 model assertion <Skip spread> <UC20> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9555>16:56
ijohnsona couple of comments for you but nothing major hopefully16:56
ijohnsonI like the prefer-unencrypted option now though, thanks for getting that addressed16:56
* cachio afk -> errands17:14
zygathanks ijohnson18:10
zygaI was surprised by the volume of red there18:10
zygaand I realized I force-pushed an earlier version18:10
zygalaptop repo vs desktop repo18:11
ijohnsonI've done that kind of error before :-)18:11
* zyga goes afk for the evening18:12
zygaijohnson, star trek discovery day :D18:12
zygato boldly reherse the same old story with new cast and different starship design18:12
zyga(spoken with honest trailers voice)18:12
mupPR snapd#9583 closed: features: enable classic-preserves-xdg-runtime-dir <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9583>20:23
mupPR snapd#9584 closed: tests: fix rare interaction of tests.session and specific tests <Test Robustness> <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9584>20:23
mupPR snapcraft#3346 opened: Fix rosdep ROS_PYTHON_VERSION <Created by artivis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3346>21:46

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