[00:16] <mup> PR snapd#9636 opened: cmd/snap-bootstrap: add readme for snap-bootstrap + real state diagram <Documentation> <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9636>
[01:52] <mup> PR snapd#9637 opened: cmd/snap-bootstrap, secboot, tests: misc cleanups, add spread test <Run nested> <Simple 😃> <Test Robustness> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9637>
[03:19] <jamesh> amurray: if you're happy with https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8943 now, could you approve it?  This would be helpful in getting the branch landed.
[03:19] <mup> PR #8943: wrappers: generate D-Bus service activation files <Created by jhenstridge> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8943>
[05:28] <mup> PR snapd#9635 closed: many: merge current master into 2.48 <Run nested> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9635>
[06:41] <mborzecki> morning
[06:43] <mvo> good morning mborzecki !
[06:54] <zyga> mvo congratulations on the release!
[06:54] <mvo> zyga: ha! thank you :) it's ~pre1 at this point but we are getting closer and closer, I *hope* -final is just that with some extra spread tests
[06:55] <zyga> fingers crossed
[06:55] <zyga> I hope that in a week or two the team is less stressed
[06:55] <mvo> zyga: should be, again, fingers crossed
[06:56] <zyga> I'm writing some test infrastructure in go, right now nothing you could use but in about two weeks there's something that may be of value to each snapd developer
[06:56] <mvo> oh, nice
[06:56] <mvo> do you have more details?
[06:57] <zyga> yesterday I was amazed to cross-compile the executable from linux to windows
[06:57] <zyga> copy it to my corp laptop
[06:57] <zyga> and see it work out of the box
[06:57] <mvo> yeah, the go cross build story is strong
[06:57]  * mvo needs to be afk for some minutes but will read backlog
[06:57] <zyga> mvo: automated reflashing of attached devkits, including pi
[06:57] <mvo> I did the same a while ago for macos
[06:57] <mvo> nice
[08:02] <pstolowski> morning
[08:07] <mvo> good morning pstolowski
[08:08] <pstolowski> o/
[08:08] <zyga> hey pstolowski
[08:09] <mborzecki> pstolowski: zyga: hey
[08:11] <zyga> hey :)
[08:12]  * zyga cannot find a piece of essential wiring 
[08:12] <pstolowski> mborzecki: i've improved services after-before spread test; my services PR fixes stop/start case, but not 'snap restart' (it's not preserving order in master too)
[08:13] <mborzecki> pstolowski: that's good and at least we ahve a workaround for snap restart
[08:14] <mup> PR snapd#9637 closed: cmd/snap-bootstrap, secboot, tests: misc cleanups, add spread test <Run nested> <Simple 😃> <Test Robustness> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9637>
[08:15] <pstolowski> mborzecki: yep. we're not passing startupOrdered to wrappers.RestartServices; at this point I'll address it separately from main services PR
[08:19] <mup> PR snapd#9638 opened:  cmd/snap-bootstrap, secboot, tests: misc cleanups, add spread test (2.48) <Run nested> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9638>
[08:24] <pstolowski> mvo: can services PR land today once green?
[08:25] <mvo> pstolowski: +1
[08:25] <mvo> zyga: any concerns about 9204 ? if not I enable it now too
[08:28] <pstolowski> mvo: yay
[08:28] <mvo> pstolowski: feel free to merge anytime
[08:28] <pstolowski> ty
[08:28] <mvo> pstolowski: if you feel it's ready of course, you mentioned you wanted to look at things (?)
[08:28] <mvo> pstolowski: once it's in I willresurrect one of my PRs on top of this
[08:29] <mup> PR snapd#9595 closed: interfaces/greengrass-support: add additional "process" flavor for 1.11 update <Needs Samuele review> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9595>
[08:29] <pstolowski> mvo: yes as mentioned above 'snap restart' doesn't preserve after-before order of services, but this isn't a regression, we don't do this in master. i'll address it in a followup
[08:30] <mvo> pstolowski: cool
[08:30] <mvo> pstolowski: I will check https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8929 on top of this
[08:30] <mup> PR #8929: many: add new "install-mode: disable" option <Needs Samuele review> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8929>
[08:51] <pstolowski> i'm seeing a lot of red, is store having issues?
[08:53] <pedronis> pstolowski: can be
[08:54] <mvo> pstolowski: it had issues yesterday, today was better (at least in the early morning)
[08:55] <pstolowski> mvo: ok, i'm actually be looking at yesterday's evening runs
[08:55] <pstolowski> *i may
[09:05] <mvo> amurray: if you have some capacity a review for 9627 would be great, super short and looks uncontroversial to me but maybe I'm missing something
 zyga: any concerns about 9204 ? if not I enable it
[09:16] <zyga-x240> mvo: sorry, I didn't knotice konversation was closed
[09:16] <zyga-x240> mvo: looking
[09:16] <mvo> zyga-x240: any concerns about 9204 ? if not I enable it
[09:16] <mvo> zyga-x240: no worries
[09:17] <zyga-x240> no, please go ahead
[09:17] <zyga-x240> it's really great to see this making progress
[09:19] <mup> PR snapd#9639 opened: interfaces: add XXX to greegras attr naming <Needs Samuele review> <Skip spread> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9639>
[09:24] <mup> PR snapd#9204 closed: sandbox: track applications unconditionally <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9204>
[09:27] <zyga-x240> mvo: I can propose a draft that enables r-a-a by default and see what's missing then
[09:29] <mborzecki> spread variant names can be only [a-zA-Z] ?
[09:36] <mvo> zyga-x240: yeah
[10:03] <zyga-x240> pedronis: good morning
[10:03] <zyga-x240> pedronis: do you think you will have time for the export manager next week?
[10:04] <pedronis> hopefully
[10:09] <mup> PR snapd#9640 opened: tests/nested/manual/core20-save: verify handling of ubunut-save with different system variants  <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9640>
[10:09] <mborzecki> mvo: ^^
[10:10] <mvo> mborzecki: nice \o/
[10:10] <mborzecki> guess we can slowly start looking at those TODO:UC20 tags we sprinkled all across the code
[10:11] <mborzecki> mvo: there's a typo in commit title in #9639 hope it won't mess up the changelog
[10:11] <mup> PR #9639: interfaces: add XXX to greengrass attr naming <Needs Samuele review> <Skip spread> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9639>
[10:18] <mvo> mborzecki: uh, I guess I can force push
[10:34] <mup> PR snapd#9638 closed:  cmd/snap-bootstrap, secboot, tests: misc cleanups, add spread test (2.48) <Run nested> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9638>
[10:39] <mup> PR snapd#9641 opened: o/servicestate: preserve order of services on snap restart <Bug> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9641>
[11:06] <pedronis> mborzecki: yes about TODO:UC20 but we probably need to discuss overall priorities
[11:11] <mborzecki> pstolowski: added some comments in https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9617#pullrequestreview-529970856
[11:11] <mup> PR #9617: tests: compare options of mount units created by snapd and snapd-generator <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9617>
[11:12] <mborzecki> pedronis: shall we have a chat before/after the stanup then?
[11:39] <mborzecki> pstolowski: so #8960 is good for landing after mvo merges master to 2.48?
[11:39] <mup> PR #8960: o/snapstate,servicestate: use service-control task for service actions (9/9) <Needs Samuele review> <Services ⚙️> <Squash-merge> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8960>
[11:41] <mvo> mborzecki: I did this already, 2.48 will from now on only recieve targeted PRs or cherry picks
[11:41] <mborzecki> mvo: oh cool, pstolowski ^^
[11:44] <pstolowski> mborzecki: yes i know, clarified this morning
[11:44] <pstolowski> if only things stopped being red for random reasons...
[11:48] <pstolowski> oh it's actually green now
[11:51] <pstolowski> merged \o/
[11:55] <mup> PR snapd#8960 closed: o/snapstate,servicestate: use service-control task for service actions (9/9) <Needs Samuele review> <Services ⚙️> <Squash-merge> <Created by stolowski> <Merged by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8960>
[12:24] <pstolowski> mborzecki: would you take a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9641 ?
[12:24] <mup> PR #9641: o/servicestate: preserve order of services on snap restart <Bug> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9641>
[12:24] <pstolowski> rebased now and much smaller
[12:28] <mborzecki> pstolowski: sure, will do
[12:28] <pstolowski> ty
[12:30] <mup> PR snapd#9642 opened: boot: add scaffolding for "fde-setup" hook support for sealing <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9642>
[13:05] <mup> PR snapcraft#3378 opened: storeapi: allow revision entries without a base set <Created by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3378>
[13:35] <mup> PR snapd#9643 opened:  bootloader: use ForGadget when installing boot config  <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9643>
[13:50] <mup> PR snapcraft#3377 closed: launchpad tests: mock git source handler <Created by cjp256> <Merged by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3377>
[13:53] <ijohnson> pedronis: morning, do you want to chat about Greengrass after the SU?
[13:54] <pedronis> ijohnson: yes
[13:55] <ijohnson> Sounds good
[13:58] <mborzecki> ehh google-nested:ubuntu-20.04-64:tests/nested/manual/refresh-revert-fundamentals:base seems broken again since the same revision of core20 is in beta and edge
[14:13] <zyga-x240> key kenvandine
[14:44] <mborzecki> #9644 should fix tests/nested/manual/refresh-revert-fundamentals:base on master (unless a new core20 is pushed to the edge)
[14:44] <mup> PR #9644: tests/lib/nested: poke the API to get the snap revisions <Run nested> <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9644>
[14:44] <mborzecki> cachio: mvo: ^^
[14:46] <mup> PR snapd#9644 opened: tests/lib/nested: poke the API to get the snap revisions <Run nested> <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9644>
[14:49] <mvo> mborzecki: \o/
[14:49] <mvo> mborzecki: thank you
[14:49] <mvo> cachio: good news, core with 2.48~pre1 should be ready any minute now
[14:50] <cachio> mvo, nice
[14:52] <mvo> cachio: 3 arches have it, the other should be ready within hte next 10in
[14:52] <cachio> mvo, perfect
[14:53] <kenvandine> hey zyga-x240!
[14:58] <pedronis> ijohnson: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9643 changes what you talked about bootloaders, mborzecki asked your review there
[14:58] <mup> PR #9643:  bootloader: use ForGadget when installing boot config  <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9643>
[14:59] <ijohnson> pedronis: ah great, I will have a look
[14:59] <ijohnson> thanks mborzecki
[15:21] <mup> PR snapd#9617 closed: tests: compare options of mount units created by snapd and snapd-generator <Created by stolowski> <Merged by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9617>
[15:32] <Nemesis> Hello everyone, yesterday i asked if someone know something about why most of the snap packages does not work on fresh Manjaro install (lateset version of manjaro). there is 2 logs what i see on apps that dont start http://ix.io/2DVd http://ix.io/2DVe
[15:32] <Nemesis> i can install for test few more apps snap
[15:34] <zyga-x240> Nemesis: hey
[15:34] <zyga-x240> looking
[15:35] <zyga-x240> Nemesis: weird, can you cat /etc/os-release
[15:35] <zyga-x240> I cannot make any sense of the failures
[15:35] <zyga-x240> but I recall, long time ago, where some snaps would run in a wrong mode, because they confused the distribution ID
[15:38] <Nemesis> zyga-x240: http://ix.io/2E1y
[15:38] <zyga-x240> this looks good
[15:38] <zyga-x240> mborzecki: ^ do you know of any weirdness that may affect those snaps on manjaro?
[15:38] <zyga-x240> can you try the pair on your arch system
[15:39] <Nemesis> zyga-x240:  i installed few programs, one of them works on manjaro - postman - atleast loaded without issues - never get in to it to see how it works
[15:39] <Nemesis> just i know that sucessfully started
[15:40] <Nemesis> ok seems that postman works normally.
[15:41] <Nemesis> I think i am going to try few more packages, but I alredy have most of the things installed via pacman/flatpak
[15:41] <zyga-x240> in general, everything should work
[15:41] <zyga-x240> sometimes there are mistakes in snapd
[15:41] <zyga-x240> or regressions in stuff we talk to via IPC or shared files
[15:42] <zyga-x240> sometimes there are packageing mistakes, especially in classic confinement snaps
[15:43] <Nemesis> ok, shall we try? i will install 6-7 different packages and see if they work, if they work i will try with those i had issues (yet i have issue with 2 already + something i wanted to try "netflix-viewer" which is available in snap and i installed it).
[15:45] <zyga-x240>  try but it'd be best if you could work with mborzecki on that, perhaps two you should arrange for a moment,
[15:45] <zyga-x240> I need to run shortly
[15:46] <Nemesis> mborzecki: hi, do you have time now ? do you think you can help me?
[15:47]  * cachio lunch
[16:08] <ijohnson> mvo: pedronis: I updated 9639 as we discussed
[16:08] <ijohnson> I figured we can just use the same PR
[16:08] <mvo> ijohnson: \o/ thank you
[16:10] <ijohnson> mborzecki: feel free to adjust the layout of the states in the state diagram, but I moved things around for like half an hour and couldn't make it so that the lines don't overlap and we still have done at the very bottom
[16:11] <ijohnson> mborzecki: if you want to try and fix it, I'd say go ahead but I at least don't think I can make it lay out nicely
[16:12] <ijohnson> also degville did you get a chance to take a look at the wording in 9636 ? it's not super urgent, just curious if what I put there makes sense to you
[16:17] <degville> ijohnson: sorry - looking now!
[16:18] <ijohnson> thanks!
[16:37] <pedronis> ijohnson: thanks for changing the label, I +1ed it
[16:37] <ijohnson> thanks
[16:38] <ijohnson> pedronis: anything in particular I should work on today? should I make a pass at triaging all the uc20 todo's too so we all have at least kinda looked at them before meeting on monday ?
[16:38] <ijohnson> or should I press on with trying to simplify degraded mode state machine or just write more tests for it ?
[16:39] <pedronis> ijohnson: triaging is good, about the SM,  tests for some of the "err-*" states would be good
[16:39] <ijohnson> ok
[16:40] <pedronis> ijohnson: another small thing that we still have to do (is not super important but is confusing as is) is EnsureNextBootToRunMode(systemLabel string)
[16:40] <pedronis> if you remember
[16:40] <ijohnson> ah yes I think I actually started a branch for that
[16:40] <ijohnson> I can try to revive that work today shouldn't be too much work
[16:41] <pedronis> ijohnson: related to that, basically if you could do a pass over the bootloader cleanup doc and mark what was already done, it would be great
[16:41] <ijohnson> got it
[16:41]  * ijohnson hopes that he is able to use gdrive to actually find the doc :-)
[16:42] <pedronis> ijohnson: see pm
[16:42] <ijohnson> got it thanks
[16:42] <ijohnson> pedronis: strike through the done items ?
[16:42] <ijohnson> or highlight ?
[16:42] <pedronis> strike through seems fine
[16:43] <ijohnson> 👍
[16:44] <ijohnson> pedronis: oh about the greengrass thing, am I good to merge that now since you approved it? or do I need a 2nd review still
[16:44] <pedronis> a 2nd review is probably good, I really skimmed it tbh
[16:44] <pedronis> not that is complicated
[16:45] <ijohnson> ok, maybe I can quick grab somebody for a review today and get it merged
[16:47] <mborzecki> mvo: can you merge https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9644 ? the failures are unrelated, the affected tests are passing
[16:47] <mup> PR #9644: tests/lib/nested: poke the API to get the snap revisions <Run nested> <Simple 😃> <Test Robustness> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9644>
[16:49] <ijohnson> hey mborzecki got a quick minute to approve https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9639 pretty please :-) ?
[16:49] <mup> PR #9639: interfaces: fix greengrass attr naming <Needs Samuele review> <Skip spread> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9639>
[16:52] <mborzecki> ijohnson: done ;)
[16:52] <ijohnson> awesome thank you!
[16:52] <pedronis> mborzecki: done the merge
[16:52] <mborzecki> pedronis: thanks!
[16:56] <mup> PR snapd#9639 closed: interfaces: fix greengrass attr naming <Needs Samuele review> <Skip spread> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9639>
[16:56] <mup> PR snapd#9644 closed: tests/lib/nested: poke the API to get the snap revisions <Run nested> <Simple 😃> <Test Robustness> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9644>
[17:06] <mvo> mborzecki: ha, too late it seems
[17:16] <mup> PR snapd#9636 closed: cmd/snap-bootstrap: add readme for snap-bootstrap + real state diagram <Documentation> <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9636>
[18:32] <ijohnson> cachio: does the snapd snap get re-built from master to be released to edge on a daily basis?
[18:33] <ijohnson> cachio: i.e. I see that snapd was already re-built today from de22e00, but I'm wondering if it will get re-built tomorrow again or if we have to wait til Monday to see new changes on master after de22e00
[19:17] <mup> PR snapd#9645 opened: bootloader/grub: replace old reference to Managed...Blr... with Trusted...Blr <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9645>
[19:32] <zyga-x240> ijohnson: I saw 2.49 branch notification, is uc20 released?
[19:33] <ijohnson> zyga-x240: well 2.48 beta is cranking out through the release things and I think we are done, but me personally, I'm gonna wait til the announcement is made :-)
[19:34] <ijohnson> I think also we are waiting to release until the uboot bug you found is SRU'd so that can be included in uc20 1.0 :-)
[19:34] <cachio> ijohnson,  hey, sorry, didn't see the notification
[19:34] <ijohnson> no worries
[19:34] <cachio> ijohnson, it should be once a day Iirc
[19:34] <ijohnson> cachio: but it should run on Saturdays right ?
[19:35] <cachio> yes
[19:36] <ijohnson> great thanks for confirming
[19:36] <cachio> yaw
[19:37] <zyga-x240> ijohnson: woot, fingers crossed it passes QA
[19:37] <zyga-x240> ijohnson: that's great, I'd love to see a fresh install devoid of that problem
[19:37] <ijohnson> indeed!
[19:38] <zyga-x240> I've published my first FOSS project in H
[19:38] <zyga-x240> but I need to clear if the URL is fine next week, so it's private for the moment
[19:39] <ijohnson> nice, I'm curious to read about what you've been up to :-)
[19:39] <zyga-x240> I plan to blog about it soon
[19:39] <zyga-x240> it's pretty crazy and exciting
[19:39] <zyga-x240> and messy too :)
[19:39] <zyga-x240> like landing in a new land, nothing exists
[19:39] <zyga-x240> plenty of things to build
[19:39] <zyga-x240> bare essentials
[19:46] <zyga> ijohnson sorry, my thinkpad has acpi issues and keeps crashing
[19:46] <zyga> ijohnson I was in a funny call today, where everyone had some liaro or canonical history
[19:48] <ijohnson> oh really that's funny, but not totally unexpected I think these companies are all a bit of a revolving door situation
[19:48] <zyga> I think so, yes
[19:48] <zyga> :-)
[19:49] <ijohnson> which is a good thing I think
[20:56] <mup> PR snapcraft#3378 closed: storeapi: allow revision entries without a base set <Created by sergiusens> <Merged by sergiusens> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3378>
[21:33] <mup> PR snapd#9646 opened: tests/many: enable some uc20 tests, delete old unneeded tests or TODOs <Run nested> <Test Robustness> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9646>