[03:26] <jamesh> amurray: if you're happy with https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8943, could you mark your review as approved?
[03:26] <mup> PR #8943: wrappers: generate D-Bus service activation files <Created by jhenstridge> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8943>
[04:22] <mup> PR snapd#9647 opened: vendor: upgrade to godbus v5.0.3 <Created by jhenstridge> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9647>
[06:52] <mborzecki> morning
[07:21] <zyga> good morning
[07:28] <mborzecki> zyga: hey
[08:08] <pstolowski> morning
[08:09] <mvo> hey pstolowski
[08:24] <mborzecki> mvo: pstolowski: hey
[08:27] <pstolowski> o/
[08:28] <mvo> good morning mborzecki !
[08:28] <mvo> mborzecki: anything I should review urgently?
[08:28] <mborzecki> mvo: not really, nothing urgent to review
[09:03] <mup> PR snapd#9645 closed: bootloader/grub: replace old reference to Managed...Blr... with Trusted...Blr <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9645>
[09:05] <mvo> mborzecki: I removed "blocked" from 7614 but it does need a security review, yes?
[09:06] <mvo> zyga: 9384 has some conflicts now, should I merge master and de-conflict?
[09:08] <mborzecki> mvo: it was reviewed by amurray, or you mean we need another pass before landing?
[09:09] <mvo> mborzecki: oh, I did not see his +1
[09:10] <mvo> mborzecki: the discussion is long, if it did got a security review I will remove the label. I guess it means we can merge this now, yes?
[09:11] <mborzecki> mvo: yes
[09:13] <mvo> cool
[09:18] <mup> PR snapd#7614 closed: cmd/snap-confine: implement snap-device-helper internally <Needs security review> <Created by zyga> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7614>
[09:18] <zyga> mvo: wooooooooot
[09:55] <mborzecki> is the store flaky again? tests are failing randomly
[10:06] <pedronis> mborzecki: it's possible
[10:18] <mup> PR snapd#9648 opened: spread: UC20 no longer needs 2GB of mem <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9648>
[10:38] <mup> PR snapd#9649 opened: seed: make a shared seed system label validation helper <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9649>
[11:03] <mup> PR snapd#9648 closed: spread: UC20 no longer needs 2GB of mem <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9648>
[11:22] <pstolowski> mborzecki: one remark re #9649
[11:22] <mup> PR #9649: seed: make a shared seed system label validation helper <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9649>
[12:39] <mup> PR snapd#9650 opened: tests: skip boot state test on arm devices <Simple 😃> <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9650>
[12:55] <mborzecki> looks like f33 switched to systemd-resolved completely
[12:59] <mup> PR snapd#9643 closed:  bootloader: use ForGadget when installing boot config  <Run nested> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9643>
[13:05] <pedronis> mborzecki: I commented on https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9649
[13:05] <mup> PR #9649: seed: make a shared seed system label validation helper <Simple 😃> <UC20> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9649>
[13:19] <mborzecki> pedronis: thanks, you mean `^[a-zA-Z0-9](?:-?[a-zA-Z0-9])*$` then?
[13:23] <mborzecki> hm `^[a-zA-Z0-9]+(?:-[a-zA-Z0-9]+)*$` a model name maybe by model-like-names separated with dashes
[13:26] <pedronis> mborzecki: look again, sorry, formatting issues
[13:27] <pedronis> mborzecki: also I remembered something, this might need a tweak, a different tweak :/
[13:41] <pedronis> mvo: I reviewed #9555
[13:41] <mup> PR #9555: asserts: implement "storage-safety" in uc20 model assertion <Needs Samuele review> <Skip spread> <UC20> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9555>
[13:42] <pedronis> mborzecki: can you join the standup a bit earlier to talk about labels?
[13:42] <mborzecki> pedronis: sure
[13:42] <ijohnson> morning folks
[13:44] <zyga_> ijohnson: hey
[13:44] <ijohnson> hey zyga_
[13:59] <mup> PR snapd#9651 opened: tests: fix basic20 test on arm devices <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9651>
[14:48] <mup> PR core20#95 opened: Rpi kernel names <Created by xnox> <https://github.com/snapcore/core20/pull/95>
[14:48] <xnox> waveform:  https://github.com/snapcore/core20/pull/95/files this seems to work, and do the right thing on rpi2, 3, 4 did a subset of models.
[14:48] <mup> PR core20#95: Rpi kernel names <Created by xnox> <https://github.com/snapcore/core20/pull/95>
[14:49] <xnox> waveform:  will build that into a core20 image and will attempt deployment via testflinger, if that is good, will merge that.
[14:52] <pstolowski> hmmm lxd-services-smoke failed in https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9556 too
[14:52] <mup> PR #9556: tests: testing new fedora 33 image <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9556>
[14:55] <cachio> mvo, hi
[14:55] <cachio> mvo, I see this https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/RkNGtbMFYc/
[14:55] <cachio> in pi4
[14:57] <cachio> mborzecki, ~
[14:57] <cachio> no more info in dmesg and journal logs
[14:59] <mvo> cachio: oh, interessting. I have not seen this one yet
[14:59] <cachio> mvo, not sure where else I could check
[15:00] <mvo> cachio: not sure either, have a meeting now unfortunately
[15:00] <cachio> mvo, ok, np, I'll continue the research
[15:00] <cachio> tx
[16:11]  * cachio lunch
[16:13] <pstolowski> aaah i see the bug in services
[16:19] <pstolowski> doServiceControl keeps state locked when calling wrappers
[16:38]  * zyga EODed his day job
[16:38] <zyga> well,  a while ago, now fixed wifi
[16:38] <zyga> pedronis did you have the time to look at export manager patches?
[16:39] <pedronis> zyga: not today
[16:39] <zyga> that's okay, if you can make a review pass by EOW I can spend some time on it this weekend
[16:39] <zyga> I think it's close, the "cork" patch, and the rest should be easier to work with
[16:54] <mvo> pstolowski: I updated 8929 (install-mode: disable), I think it needs some more tests but a quick check if it looks sane (it's short) woudl be great
[16:54] <mvo> pstolowski: no rush, does not have to be today of course
[16:55] <pstolowski> mvo: ok
[16:55] <mup> PR snapd#9625 closed: snap: add new "fde-setup" hooktype <Simple 😃> <Created by mvo5> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9625>
[17:04] <pedronis> pstolowski: I reviewed #9580
[17:04] <mup> PR #9580: store: download timeout <Bug> <Needs Samuele review> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9580>
[17:04] <pstolowski> pedronis: ty
[17:10] <mup> PR snapd#9652 opened: o/servicestate: unlock state before calling wrappers in doServiceControl <Bug> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9652>
[17:18] <pedronis> pstolowski: ^ I left something there too
[17:18] <pstolowski> pedronis: good point, thanks
[20:30] <ijohnson> cachio: when you get a chance could you take a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9646 too ?
[20:30] <mup> PR #9646: tests/many: enable some uc20 tests, delete old unneeded tests or TODOs <Precious Logs> <Run nested> <Test Robustness> <UC20> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9646>
[20:30] <ijohnson> I just reviewed #9651 for you, I think you can borrow some of the checks I wrote there
[20:30] <mup> PR #9651: tests: fix basic20 test on arm devices <Simple 😃> <Created by sergiocazzolato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9651>
[20:44] <cachio> ijohnson, sure
[20:44] <ijohnson> thanks
[20:49] <cachio> ijohnson, left a comment
[20:49] <cachio> let see if the results
[20:50] <cachio> tests are apssing
[20:50] <cachio> passing
[20:51] <cachio> there is a weir error building arch
[20:52] <cachio> it is not related to this change
[20:54] <ijohnson> cachio thanks I responded
[20:55] <ijohnson> Yeah I'm looking into the other errors there they are all unrelated afaict
[20:56] <cachio> today I was working with the test core/fsck-on-book
[20:57] <cachio> ijohnson, for uc20 on arm64
[20:57] <cachio> It is trying to umount umount /run/mnt/ubuntu-seed/systems/*/snaps/snapd_*.snap but it doesnt exist
[20:57] <cachio> I update that to umount /run/mnt/ubuntu-seed/snaps/snapd_*.snap instead
[20:57] <cachio> on arm
[20:58] <cachio> but still the appearing the text "Volume was not properly unmounted" after reboot
[20:58] <cachio> ij do you have any idea about how to make he umount on arm?
[20:58] <cachio> ijohnson,
[21:04] <ijohnson> cachio: hmm that's interesting
[21:05] <ijohnson> cachio: on such a system what is `snap list` and `cat /var/lib/snapd/modeenv` ?
[21:16] <cachio> ijohnson, let me reserve one
[21:16] <cachio> because I dont have a pi4 here
[21:17] <ijohnson> cachio: ok, I imagine that what is probably happening is that /run/mnt/snapd is only mounted on the very first boot, and on subsequent boots it is not mounted at all
[21:17] <ijohnson> the logic should be smart enough to avoid that but it might not be
[21:19] <cachio> ijohnson, the test has this comment
[21:19] <cachio> # FAT uses a specific byte to effectively indicate that the file system is
[21:19] <cachio>       # dirty. The precise details as to how this byte is used by each system vary,
[21:19] <cachio>       # but Linux sets it on a non-read-only mount, and clears it on unmount. We
[21:19] <cachio>       # can set it manually, verify it when the image is mounted and observe fsck
[21:19] <cachio>       # clearing it. Note that larger block devices use FAT32 and the offset
[21:19] <cachio>       # differs. FAT12 and FAT16 uses 37 while FAT32 uses 65.
[21:19] <cachio> so it does the umount and reboot
[21:19] <cachio> but next time the dirty byte seems to be set again
[21:20] <cachio> but that works fine on amd64
[21:20] <ijohnson> well if the umount fails then the dirty byte will be set
[21:20] <cachio> the umount does not fail
[21:20] <cachio> I fixed that
[21:20] <cachio> the umount is done correctly
[21:21] <cachio> so
[21:21] <cachio> it is a bug or I am not umounting correctly
[21:21] <cachio> not sure which one
[21:22] <ijohnson> hmm
[21:22] <ijohnson> let me look at the test again
[21:23] <ijohnson> cachio: ah I see the problem
[21:23] <ijohnson> cachio: the test does this:
[21:23] <ijohnson>       dd if=one of=/dev/sda2 seek=65 bs=1 count=1 conv=notrunc
[21:24] <ijohnson>  /dev/sda2 is wrong there on arm devices, the actual partition that it should be using is ubuntu-seed, which on a pi using an SD card is probably /dev/mmcblk0p1
[21:24] <ijohnson> cachio: probably you should instead just do the easy thing and instead change that line to something like
[21:24] <ijohnson>       dd if=one of=/dev/disk/by-label/ubuntu-seed seek=65 bs=1 count=1 conv=notrunc
[21:25] <ijohnson> cachio: same for the line below it too
[21:25] <ijohnson>       dd if=/dev/sda2 of=dirty skip=65 bs=1 count=1 conv=notrunc
[21:25] <ijohnson> that should become
[21:25] <ijohnson>       dd if=/dev/disk/by-label/ubuntu-seed of=dirty skip=65 bs=1 count=1 conv=notrunc
[21:26] <cachio> nice, I'll try that
[21:26] <cachio> ijohnson, thanks
[21:29] <cachio> ijohnson, is this the same for all the arm devices right?
[21:29] <cachio> pi2 pi3 on uc16 and uc18?
[21:29] <ijohnson> cachio: if you use the /dev/disk/by-label/ubuntu-seed, that location will be correct for all uc20 devices, amd64 or arm64 or armhf, etc.
[21:29] <ijohnson> cachio: for uc16 and uc18 it would be a different label
[21:29] <ijohnson> cachio: for uc16 and uc18 you would need to use something like this:
[21:30] <ijohnson> dd if=/dev/disk/by-label/system-boot ...
[21:30] <ijohnson> because the vfat partition on uc16 / uc18 is with the label system-boot
[21:31] <cachio> ijohnson, nice, thanks