=== jamesh__ is now known as jamesh [01:54] Issue core20#98 closed: add btrfs-progs to core, please? [06:13] PR snapd#9774 closed: o/snapshotstate: don't set auto flag in the snapshot file [08:01] morning [08:08] pstolowski, hey, good morning [08:40] mvo, good morning :) [08:40] zyga: good morning to you too! [08:47] hey mvo [08:49] hey pstolowski ! good morning [08:53] pstolowski: 9429 looks good, if it needs a force-merge just let me know (looks like tests are still running though) [08:53] pstolowski: thanks for updating the tests :) [08:54] mvo: sure, thanks for suggestions [10:29] so classic/hotplug issue was apparently an issue with the image that got fixed [11:10] pstolowski: that is good to know [11:13] i'm preparing a pr that will improve diagnosing such issue [11:19] pedronis: fun! trying to workaround issue #13 first killed dbus and now crashed my session. "assertion 's' failed on src/core/service.c:3223 in systemd. we are having fun here [11:19] PR #13: Bugfix/review tools reenable [11:38] mvo: I reviewed #9791 [11:38] PR #9791: devicestate: implement checkFDEFeatures() [11:40] pedronis: thank you [11:51] hmm gdrive/google acting up [11:56] hmm and www.googleapis.com/compute [11:57] yeah, seems all og google services [11:57] *of [12:01] thanks for confirmation [12:02] google is having problems: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25415989 [12:03] at least their search still works (probably fell back to the bing backend) [12:03] ahaha! [12:10] PR snapd#8620 closed: spdx: add GPL-3.0-or-later license <⛔ Blocked> [12:12] #9778 needs 2nd reviews [12:12] PR #9778: asserts/repair.go: add "bases" and "modes" support to the repair assertion [12:15] pstolowski: what should we do with https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/8532 ? [12:15] PR #8532: tests: install new snapd deb into preseed image [12:16] pedronis: i need to think. i'm slightly inclined to close it [12:18] that's fine if you think we don't need it or doesn't help enough [12:29] not a great start to the day, my internet speed is at like kilobits and on top of this google is down [12:29] * ijohnson considers going back to bed and trying again later [12:30] ijohnson: we'll have a solar eclipse here in a few hours. it's the end of the world [12:31] cmatsuoka: haha nice [12:38] ijohnson: hey ijohnson . yep, i also saw 500s on github [12:38] hey pstolowski [12:39] yeah feels like a "week before holiday break" kind of week :-P [12:41] lol [12:41] the end of 2020 is when google deletes all gmail databases [12:42] ijohnson: thanks for reviewing #9790, it needs a 2nd review now [12:42] PR #9790: gadget: move BuildPartitionList to install and make it unexported [12:42] ijohnson: #9789 could also use a review [12:42] PR #9789: many: separate consistency/content validation into gadget.Validate|Content [12:42] pedronis: yes it's in my queue for today [12:45] PR snapd#9793 closed: tests: add os query commands for subsystems and architectures [12:45] PR snapd#9794 opened: daemon: start moving implementation to api_snaps.go [12:53] hello, I've developed a few small games and published them as snap packages, 4yrs ago. [12:53] now, I am updating them and it needs manual review. Should I just wait or ask for review ? [12:59] Also, it relies on SDL2 libs, and it isn't fully fonctionnal: since, it can't access libGL with dlopen, there is no hardware rendering, [12:59] and fallback to software rendering which is slower and looks bad for some points. [12:59] This was the case before, not sure how it's has improved now ? [13:15] slvn_: what kind of errors are triggering the manual review? depending on that you might need to change some things or to ask for extra permissions through the process https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/process-for-aliases-auto-connections-and-tracks/455 , in case of doubt the expedient things would be to explain the issues within a forum post [13:23] pedronis, re-doing the snap-review in console, it says: [13:23] - declaration-snap-v2:plugs_installation:1bsyl:unity8 [13:23] human review required due to 'allow-installation' constraint (bool) [13:23] ok, not sure why I have this plug set. I struggle a little bit to recompile the snap [13:24] it's a legacy plug at this point, a snap shouldn't need it [13:25] PR snapd#9795 opened: tests: improve hotplug test setup on classic [13:26] I'll remove it and retry then. I think because the former version was published with unity7 plug [13:26] anyone now if there is a work-around for SDL2 using libGL within snap ? [13:27] I found this: https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/how-best-to-link-to-sdl2/5721/3 [13:28] I don't understand the last message: "At my end, this works properly with the LD_LIBRARY_PATH set by desktop-launch script from snapcraft-desktop-helpers" [13:54] pedronis, I removed the unity8 plug and the snap-review passed [13:55] it makes me rememeber that maybe unity7 plug one was added because sdl2 access mir on ubuntu 16. [13:56] so I am not even sure that the snap would still work on ubuntu 16, any idea how i could test this ? [14:36] pedronis, mvo : i'm going to address this comment in the existing snapshots PR: "instead of failing we also have the option to change import to return the old ...". anything else missing for the existing PR to land? The "// XXX: deal with import in progress..." would be a followup [14:39] pstolowski: deal with import in progress should be a followup yes, no opinion on the other one [14:48] ijohnson: 9787 is ready for a re-review [14:48] great [14:50] oooh github has a dark mode now [14:50] fancy [14:51] mvo: +1 [14:54] thank you! [14:54] also 9769 needs reviews :) [15:10] added that one to my queue as well :-) [15:15] ijohnson: thank you! [15:16] yaw [15:16] pedronis: I replied to 9791, not 100% sure I got what you had in mind [15:19] mvo: I maybe confused but I looked again and errors from there seems to be eaten and just turn into false, nil one level up? [15:20] pedronis: oh, sorry, let me double check [15:20] pedronis: I think you are right, the code is confusing [15:21] maybe we should log one level up? [15:21] pedronis: yeah, I think we also not log seccomp errors there :/ [15:22] pedronis: so let me add logging and a test [15:36] pstolowski: is there any reason in theory we couldn't do `snap debug state --timings file.json` like `snap debug timings` but for local offline state.json ? does debug timings rely on snapd being active ? [15:38] pedronis: what is your sense, should we log the tpm/fde errors as debug or notice? right now I have debug [15:39] mvo: this is for install right? I would say notice [15:39] pedronis: yes, install [15:39] pedronis: sounds good to me, thank you! [15:41] ijohnson: there is not reason, can be done. it's just historical, timings were implemented long before the idea for offline debug [15:41] *no reason [15:41] nice [15:41] yeah it would be useful to do offline debugging for this very slow system we are debugging right now [15:41] maybe I'll have a quick stab at it if I get bored [15:47] ijohnson: the only slightly annoying detail is that the api side of debug takes care of combining timings with task doing/undoing, nothing complex about that, but it's slightly more convoluted than just printing timings [15:47] hmm I see, perhaps we could push that code into the client for `snap debug state ...` specifically [15:47] or share that code [15:48] yes sharing would be nice, otherwise a lot needs to be duplicated [15:48] and yes, offline timings would be nice imho [15:51] PR snapd#9787 closed: boot: tweak resealing with fde-setup hooks [16:30] PR core20#99 opened: hooks: update xdg-settings to support subcommands [16:39] PR core18#175 opened: hooks: update xdg-settings to support subcommands [17:05] ... some follow-up, I fix my issue: passed review, access to libGL and audio, and now I am trying my updated snap to an old ubuntu 16 machine [17:06] and I got this failing message when installing: [17:06] PR snapd#9791 closed: devicestate: implement checkFDEFeatures() [17:06] snap assumes unsupported features: command-chain (try new ubuntu-core) [17:07] it works on ubuntu 20, but no 16 [17:07] slvn_: what is `snap version` ? [17:07] ijohnson, what do you mean ? [17:07] slvn_: on the system that you try to install the snap on, can you run the command `snap version` ? [17:07] unknow command on ubuntu 16 [17:08] :) so quite old [17:08] snap --version: [17:08] 2.16 [17:08] wow, yeah that's positively ancient [17:08] you will need to do `snap install core` I think [17:08] ok [17:10] ijohnson, done, but the version of snap hasn't changed [17:10] and still not working [17:11] slvn_: what is `snap list` ? [17:11] ubuntu-core 16-2 [17:11] and core 16-2 [17:11] core 16-2.48 [17:11] can you try `sudo apt update && sudo apt install snapd` [17:11] mvo: did you forget to push to #9791 ? [17:11] PR #9791: devicestate: implement checkFDEFeatures() [17:12] pedronis: yeah I didn't see the code that was mentioned either [17:13] ijohnson, snapd is already the newest version 2.16 [17:13] slvn_: but that's not the newest snapd ... package, what is `cat /etc/os-release` ? [17:13] ubuntu 16.10 [17:13] ah [17:14] I'm try on an old ubuntu my updated snap [17:14] you are using an eol distro and so there are no more updates [17:14] pedronis: silly me, I push an updated PR [17:14] it's ok but bit confusing :) [17:14] slvn_: you should really upgrade to 18.04 or an ubuntu series that is still supported, 16.10 is no longer supported at all [17:14] sorry, I am away [17:14] ijohnson, I try a regression to test my snap on an older VM [17:17] pedronis: pushed 9796 [17:21] PR snapd#9796 opened: devicestate: log checkEncryption errors via logger.Noticef [17:27] mvo: commented [17:28] pedronis: reviewed #9789, seems we lost a couple tests ? [17:28] PR #9789: many: separate consistency/content validation into gadget.Validate|Content [17:29] ijohnson: yes, a couple of tests were removed as they don't apply anymore [17:30] so we don't validate the bootloader setting in the gadget.yaml ? [17:30] that doesn't seem like an expected chagne [17:30] *change [17:30] ijohnson: we do [17:30] there's more tests [17:30] where ? [17:30] you need to consider the tests that are there [17:30] are you looking at the tests or just the diff? [17:31] I searched the full file where you deleted that test from and couldn't find one which checks for an invalid bootloader setting in the gadget.yaml [17:31] are you saying the existing test is in a different file? [17:31] ijohnson: notice that per comment &gadget.ValidationConstraints{} and nil are not equivalent [17:32] ijohnson: gadget_test has tests about that [17:33] ijohnson: Validate doesn't redo the job of InfoFromGadgetYaml given that now it takes a parsed gadget.Info [17:39] pedronis: I responded in the pr with a new comment [17:39] I see the tests now [17:44] ijohnson: I tried to answer [17:50] pedronis: I responded with another suggestion, my concern is really that the behavior to a casual reader/reviewer is non-standard and thus subject to bugs where folks don't fully comprehend the change they are making [17:51] pedronis: mvo: are there any other pr's that I should review in my afternoon, I think I have reviewed them all except #9780 which I think can wait a bit if not until after the break at least tomorrow/wednesday [17:51] PR #9780: many: use ResolvedSource() from gadget content when writing boot assets [17:54] ijohnson: I will push something shortly to workaround the systemd-run issue in initrd [17:54] ijohnson: it will be a bit ugly [17:55] mmm ok [18:00] ijohnson: not from me, my follow up in gadget probably is better submitted after we have landed the rest [18:01] ok === ijohnson is now known as ijohnson|lunch [18:05] pedronis, ijohnson|lunch I pushed 9797 as a draft but I really hope to land 9769 soon so that the diff is nicer to read [18:05] sounds good to me [18:06] PR snapd#9797 opened: secboot: add workaround for snapcore/core-initrd issue #13 [18:16] PR snapd#9769 closed: tests: add nested spread end-to-end test for fde-hooks [18:21] pedronis, ijohnson|lunch 9797 is updated, I will look at 9796 after dinner === ijohnson|lunch is now known as ijohnson [20:11] ijohnson: I call it a day now, feel free to apply tweaks/fixes etc to 9797 as needed, it's the last PR for 2.48.2 we really need (same for 9796 but that is slightly less critical) [20:11] mvo: ok, sounds good I am reviewing it now [20:11] I will push any suggestions I ahve [20:11] \o/ [20:11] *have [20:12] cool [20:13] thank you! [20:14] I asked some questions there, in 9797 [20:33] pedronis: is it okay to address the things you mentioned in a push to mvo's branch ? [20:33] I responded to you points in 9797 [20:35] ijohnson: thanks, yes I think it's ok to try to push forward there [20:35] pedronis: ack will push in a little bit [20:38] ijohnson: preopening the files seems the path forward, I see *Mode options for directories but not for those files [20:39] at least pre-creating doesn't sound wrong [20:39] also because by default systemd doesn't truncate them according to docs [20:58] right [21:52] pedronis: if you're still around I pushed a couple fixes to 9797 [21:52] spent a bit of time writing an overly paranoid unit test which may have been overkill, but I don't think it hurts [21:56] ijohnson: thx, it's slightly late for me to do a poper review but I'll try to do it first thing in the morning [21:56] *proper [21:56] sounds good [21:56] have a nice evening, ttyl [21:57] thx, same to you [23:18] PR snapd#9790 closed: gadget: move BuildPartitionList to install and make it unexported [23:58] PR snapd#9798 opened: o/{device,snap}state: enable devmode snaps with dangerous model assertions