[05:17] morning [05:55] hey mardy [05:56] zyga: 'morning! [07:14] morning [07:17] pstolowski: zyga hey [07:18] pstolowski, mborzecki: hey guys! [07:41] good morning pstolowski and mborzecki and zyga ! [07:42] mvo: hey, can you land https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10249 ? [07:42] PR #10249: tests: adding support for fedora-34 [07:45] hey mvo, how was the mini-vacation? [07:47] pstolowski: very nice, thank you! surprisingly much catchup to do though :) [07:49] mvo: thanks! [07:49] mborzecki: I replied to your question about the missng kernel commandline for 2.50, I think we need this, do you have a PR already? is it straightforward, should i look? do we have a spread test for this in 2.50? [07:49] mvo: this is the PR: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10265 [07:49] PR #10265: many: backport kernel command line for 2.50 <⛔ Blocked> [07:50] mvo: and there's a spread test too [07:51] mborzecki: you rock! [07:51] PR snapd#10249 closed: tests: adding support for fedora-34 [07:51] mborzecki: *urgh* that's giantic, sorry for that, that was probably a lot of work :/ [07:52] mborzecki: did it all cherry pick cleanly or did you had to resolve conflicts? [07:52] mvo: yes, it took a while to assemble everything, things were landing independently mostly, so there was very little conficts, tracking down all the patches in the right order was the most complicated bit [07:53] mvo: and it was mentioned here that the branch worked for the reporter: https://github.com/snapcore/pc-amd64-gadget/issues/48#issuecomment-841353547 [07:53] fwiw the spread test is passing too [08:06] mborzecki: nice! just to double check, there were conflicts but with the right patches no manual conflict resolving was needed? (asking because merging back will be harder if there is manual conflict resolving) [08:07] mvo: iirc there was one conflict that i had to fix manually, which also had to be fixed when merging master to the branch in the PR that proposed the original change, but the code should be identical to what we have in master atm [08:11] mborzecki: cool, thanks [08:20] is pedronis off today still? [08:26] pstolowski: should be here today according to the calendar [08:35] ack thanks [08:38] pstolowski: can you take a look https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10268 ? [08:38] PR #10268: overlord: mock logger in managers unit tests [08:39] mardy: want to do a review too? ^^ :) [08:41] +1 [08:41] PR snapd#10268 opened: overlord: mock logger in managers unit tests [08:48] meh: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/KXJqZwVhq6/ [08:53] mborzecki: meh indeed [08:59] mborzecki: yes, I'll review that soon -- I'm still changing the tests in my PR as you suggested [08:59] mvo, mborzecki #10187 and #10182 need 2nd reviews if you have a moment (longer moment for 10182 ;)) [08:59] Bug #10187: debconf fails to install [08:59] PR #10187: o/hookstate, o/snapstate: print revision, version, channel with snapctl --pending [08:59] Bug #10182: Can not logout of gnome when xcompmgr is running [08:59] PR #10182: o/snapstate: autorefresh phase1 for refresh-control [09:05] mvo, hey mvo :) [09:12] mvo: hm debian 9 still appears as required? [09:13] mborzecki: hm, let me try to fix that, I though I had already [09:13] mvo: it's listed as required in https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10268 [09:13] PR #10268: overlord: mock logger in managers unit tests [09:14] mborzecki: should be fixed now [09:14] mvo: yay, it is, thank you [09:15] mborzecki: I will probably push two small fixes from sergio to make the nested tests fully pass in 10265, hope that is ok (spread is running now to test if I got all the required parts) [09:16] mvo: that's fine, didn't want to push those as they were a bit unrelated to the cherry pick ;) [09:16] mvo: do you have the relevant commits? [09:16] PR snapd#10268 closed: overlord: mock logger in managers unit tests [09:16] mborzecki: yeah, just gives me this warm and fuzzy feeling to see nested fully green .) [09:17] mborzecki: I have them locally already, just running the spread test [09:17] mvo: i have fa4780d971ef68824bc5326f1e0ee16097fef293 in my notes, and probably one more which i forgot to list [09:17] this one https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/commit/fa4780d971ef68824bc5326f1e0ee16097fef293 [09:18] mborzecki: this one and the "New buckets for snapd-spread project on gce" [09:18] mborzecki: is what I have right now running, I will explore if more is needed [09:18] i think this shoudl be all [09:18] pedronis: hey [09:19] hi [09:20] hey pedronis [09:29] eh must be doing something wrong, there's a snap-declaration signed by the mocked store, then i generate snap-revision signed by the same mocked store, lastly pass it to assertstate.Add() [09:49] pedronis: will you have some time to talk about holding today? [10:16] PR snapd#10263 closed: interfaces: fix linter issues [10:51] * pstolowski lunch === pedronis_ is now known as pedronis [11:18] pstolowski: we can chat after the standup? [12:28] re [12:29] pedronis: thanks for the review in 10253 [12:40] mvo: can you take a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10253 ? [12:40] PR #10253: boot: helpers for manipulating current and good recovery systems list [12:53] mborzecki: sure [13:00] pedronis: ok [13:07] PR snapd#10269 opened: overlord: unit test tweaks, use well known snap IDs, setup snap declarations for most common snaps [13:14] http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/QnQypCgvgT/ [13:15] Is there any way to install flatpak without snapd? [13:15] in Debian it works (10 and 11) [13:15] erle- try --no-install-recommends [13:15] perhaps it's pulled in via a recommends on the gnome side [13:29] zyga-mbp, thanks, I will try [14:09] mborzecki: so, it appears that the order of parameters to "systemctl show" can change (see https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10266#discussion_r633388813). My strong preference would be removing all traces of "systemctl show ..." from the log, so we only compare the change-performing actions [14:09] PR #10266: wrappers/services.go: do not restart disabled or inactive services [14:10] of course, we can also sort the parameters when logging them, but I'm not sure it's worth it [14:50] mborzecki, centos 7 is maintained in EPEL, right? no need to use any COPR repos? [14:51] zyga-mbp: what do you mean? snapd? [14:51] yeah [14:51] sorry, I thought I said snapd even though I did not [14:51] mardy: ah, yeah, info.Apps() is a map, so iteration order is undefined [14:51] zyga-mbp: yes, it's in epel7 [14:51] mborzecki is the update schedule there fairly normal? it's currently on 2.49 [14:53] zyga-mbp: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-6900c9fed4 please test and post karma :P [14:53] mborzecki we will :) [14:53] thanks! [14:53] fedora packages already moved to stable, but epel has 2w of 'testing' [14:54] understood [14:54] thanks [14:54] long story but we got one server with only centos available so we dropped lxd on top to run ubuntu vms [14:58] mborzecki: yep. So, what do you think about just excluding the "show" commands from the log? [15:01] hmm hmm [15:02] mardy: on the one had the advantage of having all those listed is that it's obvious what gets called [15:03] (also other tests usually list all calls) [15:07] mborzecki, hey [15:08] this test is failing after update ubuntu-18.04-64 [15:08] https://github.com/snapcore/spread-cron/runs/2597567225#step:3:349 [15:08] should I promote the image and then fix the test? [15:09] mount option on /boot/efi changed dmask= parameter [15:09] I'd upgrade and fix the test, seems harmless [15:09] hey cachio_ :) [15:09] hey zyga-mbp [15:09] thanks for the confirmation [15:13] cachio_: yeah, i suspect this got changed in the distro [15:14] mborzecki, nice, updating the image [15:24] mardy: meh, with the preivous way the services were logged the problem still existed, didn't it? the code uses info.Services(), which comes from a map, what makes its order random [15:25] mardy: so i'm thinking, maybe you could just explicitly pass a a list of service names to wrappers.RestartServices() in the order you want? [15:26] (or sort the output of info.Services() in the test) [15:28] cachio__: I approved https://github.com/snapcore/core-initrd/pull/19 [15:28] PR core-initrd#19: Use github actions for testing instead of travis [15:41] pedronis: mvo This PR is ready to land, the failures are unrelated: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10262 [15:41] PR #10262: tests/nested/manual: add test for install-device + snapctl reboot [15:45] oh I guess I forgot I asked cachio__ to review that one, not sure if we want to wait for another review or not [15:45] ijohnson, checking right now [15:45] thanks cachio__ [15:52] ijohnson, 2 minor comments added inline [15:55] Thanks I'll have a look at addressing those [15:59] ijohnson, already gave +1 [15:59] ijohnson: in meetings all afternoon, please ping me again [15:59] thanks for the change [15:59] most important is to clean up jq because it could break a following test [16:01] * cachio__ lunch [16:06] cachio__: I addressed both of your comments, if you could +1 when you are back that would be great [16:16] ijohnson: let me know if I can help with force-merge or anything else, my meetings are now done for today [16:17] mvo: ok, hold off on merging 10262, I pushed changes that Sergio requested and want to wait to see that they work as intended [16:17] but otherwise I am not blocked on merging anything at the moment [16:19] ijohnson: thanks! just ping me if you need anything [17:11] mvo: pedronis if y'all are still doing reviews (or if you want to queue it up for tomorrow morning that's fine too), #10217 is ready again [17:11] Bug #10217: ubuntu ignores my second disk on install [17:11] PR #10217: o/servicestate: restart slices + services on modifications

[17:37] hey ijohnson :) [17:37] long time no see [18:05] hi folks, could i do anything to help expedite the 'ManualReviewPending' of our newly-submitted jami-gnome snap? [18:37] pfsmorigo: ^ [19:13] PR snapd#10270 opened: tests: update mount-ns test to support changes in the distro [20:36] ijohnson, hey [20:36] https://github.com/snapcore/spread-cron/runs/2596853931#step:3:4330 [20:36] this test failed google-nested:ubuntu-20.04-64:tests/nested/core/core20-kernel-reseal [20:37] I don't know if this is a problem === cachio__ is now known as cachio [21:01] cachio: I'll take a look in a little bit, is this from master ? [22:14] PR snapd#10271 opened: tests: simplify the tests.cleanup tool [22:15] ijohnson, yes === RzR is now known as rZr