| === popey8 is now known as popey | ||
| === jwheare_ is now known as jwheare | ||
| === benfrancis5 is now known as benfrancis | ||
| mup | PR snapd#9939 opened: RFC: Vendor apparmor3 for improved cross-distro/platform support and easier ongoing maintenance <Created by alexmurray> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9939> | 06:05 |
|---|---|---|
| mborzecki | morning | 07:14 |
| mborzecki | mvo: hey | 07:49 |
| mvo | hey mborzecki ! | 07:49 |
| mup | PR snapd#9940 opened: boot: cmd/snap-bootstrap: handle a candidate recovery system v2 <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9940> | 07:51 |
| pstolowski | morning | 08:04 |
| mvo | good morning pstolowski | 08:10 |
| mup | PR snapd#9901 closed: o/devicestate,many: introduce DeviceManager.preloadGadget for EarlyConfig <Created by pedronis> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9901> | 08:21 |
| mborzecki | hmmm | 08:22 |
| mborzecki | that labeler does silly things sometimes | 08:22 |
| mborzecki | https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9940#event-4345279407 | 08:22 |
| mup | PR #9940: boot: cmd/snap-bootstrap: handle a candidate recovery system v2 <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9940> | 08:22 |
| zyga | o/ | 08:33 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: hi, I'm looking at #9940, it feels weird that we need to check that new flag in so many places? am I missing something? | 08:44 |
| mup | PR #9940: boot: cmd/snap-bootstrap: handle a candidate recovery system v2 <Run nested> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9940> | 08:44 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: you mean the flat to not allow fallback keys? | 08:45 |
| pedronis | yes | 08:45 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: hm i guess i could simplify that to do the check only in the fallback* state handlers | 08:47 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: we are probably misunderstanding each other on something else | 08:49 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: quick chat? | 08:49 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: I have a meeting in 10 | 08:50 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: after the meeting then? | 08:51 |
| pedronis | I need to chat with mvo after the meeting | 08:52 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: what I don't understand is also why we don't finish early in this mode? | 08:52 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: we do, right after the initramfs mounts state machine finishes | 08:53 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: but shouldn't the state machine finish early too? | 08:53 |
| pedronis | maybe | 08:53 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: it's done after mounting save | 08:55 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: anyway we should find a way to reduce the ifs and diff size, maybe we'll also need less tests then | 08:58 |
| pedronis | *fewer | 08:58 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: added something to the calendar to discuss it, maybe i missed something | 08:59 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: also why the mountsErr vs err thing ? | 09:00 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: here? https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9940/files#diff-aec04aa8357bab6140f694de4af1f79a69d615f74585f349e7a389fb43e975d8R1029 | 09:01 |
| mup | PR #9940: boot: cmd/snap-bootstrap: handle a candidate recovery system v2 <Run nested> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9940> | 09:01 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: well a bit everywhere | 09:01 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: also do we stop asking for the recovery key? | 09:01 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: yes, the handling returns early if fallback keys are to be skipped | 09:04 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: I mean the user input recovery key, not the fallback keys to be clear | 09:05 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: yes, that place is not reached, but yeah, i see now how moving the check to the fallback state handler would make it clearer | 09:07 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: yes, moving the fail to the actual states we don't want, instead of all the places that call them would be much easier | 09:11 |
| mup | PR snapd#9941 opened: Snapshot save fails with sockets in folder <Created by mapero> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9941> | 09:11 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: i've added quick sync at 1030 after the desktop meeting | 09:12 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: as I said I should sync with mvo at that time | 09:14 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: ah ok, got a quick errand at 11, so 12 then? | 09:15 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: maybe you have already input now anyway? | 09:15 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: my main ask it to make the diff smaller and less churny | 09:15 |
| pedronis | *enough input | 09:16 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: ok, let me work on this for a bit then and push something, and then we can discuss | 09:17 |
| mborzecki | quick errand, back in 30 | 09:56 |
| mborzecki | re | 10:50 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: i'm thiniking, i could split the boot bits into a separate pr, should make the whole thing easier to review hopefully | 10:53 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: yes, that is also true | 10:54 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: just the tests in s-b are like 350+ inflating the whole thing a lot | 10:54 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: I still hope the diff of cmd_initramfs_mounts.go itself can be shrunk | 10:55 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: it is a bit smaller now: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/compare/master...bboozzoo:bboozzoo/uc20-recovery-mgmt-sb-try-handling-v2-wip#diff-aec04aa8357bab6140f694de4af1f79a69d615f74585f349e7a389fb43e975d8 | 10:58 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: yes, it looks a bit easier to review without getting lost at least | 11:01 |
| mborzecki | tests are still large, but sadly there's lot of state to mock :/ | 11:01 |
| mup | PR snapd#9942 opened: boot: helper for checking and marking tried recovery system status from initramfs <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9942> | 11:01 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: just the boot bits ^^ | 11:01 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: that's ok, at the end of the day the code needs to look right first even before considering the tests | 11:02 |
| mborzecki | in the meantime, not sure how gorename ended up renaming so many bits to mountsErr, hmm | 11:04 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: ah, well that was messy | 11:05 |
| mborzecki | it's not even gorename, but godoctor rename | 11:05 |
| pedronis | ok but for sure didn't win points :) no cookies for that tool | 11:06 |
| mborzecki | hahah that's true | 11:11 |
| mborzecki | surprising golsp doesn't have that functionality yet | 11:12 |
| pstolowski | pedronis: i've updated #9930 but I'm going to remove bulk.go changes from it and work on it in a separate PR | 11:53 |
| mup | PR #9930: asserts: pool changes and RefreshValidationSetAssertions method for validation-sets <Needs Samuele review> <validation-sets :white_check_mark:> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9930> | 11:53 |
| pstolowski | (overlord/assertate/* will be moved to a separate PR) | 11:54 |
| pedronis | pstolowski: sounds good | 11:55 |
| pedronis | pstolowski: let me know when it's ready to review | 11:56 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: I will start with 9942 but is 9940 also re-ready for review? | 11:58 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: yes, i've updated it | 11:58 |
| pedronis | thx, I will look in a bit | 11:58 |
| pstolowski | pedronis: it is now | 12:04 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: wondering, shall we s/good_recovery_sytems/verified_recovery_systems/ or does verified imply too much here? | 12:14 |
| * cachio afk | 12:17 | |
| mvo | pedronis: I updated 9907 with the most simple version of a filter func, please have a look (not urgent) and if it looks too simplistic I will have to do a version of mountedfilesystemwriter that also takes the filter func (separate PR as discussed). thanks again for all your suggestions | 12:39 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: it implies the wrong things, we use verify for the checks we do based on assertions, and we really never boot something that is not verified | 12:44 |
| mborzecki | ack | 12:45 |
| pedronis | or at least shouldn't | 12:45 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: I did a pass on 9942 | 13:27 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: thanks, finishing the modeenv bits and will take a look after | 13:28 |
| pedronis | mvo: I commented on #9907 | 13:40 |
| mup | PR #9907: gadget,devicestate: perform kernel asset update for $kernel: style refs <UC20> <Created by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9907> | 13:40 |
| mup | PR snapd#9943 opened: boot: introduce good recovery systems, provide compatibility handling <Run nested> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9943> | 13:47 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: hopefully this one is simpler ^^ | 13:47 |
| mup | PR snapd#9944 opened: github: temporarily disable action labeler due to issues with labels being removed <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9944> | 13:57 |
| mup | PR snapd#9905 closed: asserts: validation sets WIP <Skip spread> <validation-sets :white_check_mark:> <⛔ Blocked> <Created by stolowski> <Closed by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9905> | 14:12 |
| mborzecki | heh, so now i know why my spread test didn't work, ofc boot-state is completely unaware of grubenv being somewhere else, especially not under /run/mnt/ubuntu-seed.. | 15:42 |
| mborzecki | mvo: debian testing is getting installed in a vm | 15:43 |
| ijohnson | thanks mborzecki | 15:51 |
| ijohnson | mborzecki: I made a spreadsheet to track the testing on debian, I'll PM it to you | 15:51 |
| mborzecki | ijohnson: thanks, i'l try to run some tests today, if not then tomorrow morning | 15:52 |
| ijohnson | great! | 15:52 |
| mborzecki | ijohnson: s/debian 10/debian 11/ in the spreadsheet right? | 15:53 |
| ijohnson | ah yeah probably | 15:53 |
| ijohnson | I made it during another meeting so typos 🤷♂️ | 15:53 |
| mvo | mborzecki: \o/ you rock | 15:57 |
| * cachio afk & lunch | 16:03 | |
| pedronis | pstolowski: I made maybe a simplifying suggestion in #9930 | 17:02 |
| mup | PR #9930: asserts: pool changes for validation-sets <Needs Samuele review> <validation-sets :white_check_mark:> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9930> | 17:02 |
| pstolowski | pedronis: ty, looking | 17:02 |
| pstolowski | pedronis: sounds sensible, i'll see how it goes, thanks | 17:04 |
| kkoukiou | Hi :) I want to ask if there is plan/interest for resolving https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/snapcraft/+bug/1714941 ? In cockpit [1] we have a udisks2 UI where we display available volumes, and we got one issue about it [2] | 17:43 |
| kkoukiou | [1] cockpit-project.org/ | 17:43 |
| kkoukiou | [2] https://github.com/cockpit-project/cockpit/issues/14424 | 17:43 |
| mup | Bug #1714941: mounts should hint ignore <snapcraft (Ubuntu):Confirmed> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1714941> | 17:43 |
| === ijohnson is now known as ijohnson|lunch | ||
| mup | PR snapcraft#3438 opened: flutter: Specify arch specific bundle dirs fixes LP:1915991 <Created by kenvandine> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3438> | 19:06 |
| diddledan | kkoukiou: I've remapped that bug to snapd because it isn't related to the snapcraft utility that is for building snaps | 19:10 |
| lord4163 | Hi | 20:52 |
| lord4163 | I have lxd installed as a snap on raspbian and I try to import a qcow2 image using `lxc image import <image>`, but it fails... Error: exec: "qemu-img": executable file not found in $PATH | 20:53 |
| lord4163 | I have qemu and qemu-utils installed as regular packages | 20:53 |
| === ijohnson|lunch is now known as ijohnson | ||
| ijohnson | lord4163: that's probably a bug with the lxd snap, try the #LXD channel | 21:08 |
| ijohnson | cc stgraber ^ | 21:08 |
| mup | PR snapcraft#3439 opened: Don't error out if font cache generation fails. This can cause <Created by kenvandine> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3439> | 21:11 |
| diddledan | ijohnson: as you're around, and I don't know who to ping, can you point a security person at https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/cve-2021-3177/22843 who can advise as to the processes in place for Ubuntu and the base snaps (separately) | 21:36 |
| ijohnson | haha I literally _just_ replied to that :-D | 21:37 |
| ijohnson | but thanks for the ping diddledan | 21:37 |
| diddledan | haha | 21:37 |
| diddledan | I see it now :-) | 21:37 |
| * diddledan clicks the heart | 21:38 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!