| mborzecki | morning | 06:05 |
|---|---|---|
| mardy | 'morning! | 06:18 |
| mborzecki | mardy: hey | 06:26 |
| mborzecki | hmm i have surprisingly few prs open, time to fix that | 06:51 |
| mborzecki | mvo: hey | 06:59 |
| pstolowski | morning | 07:03 |
| mborzecki | pstolowski: hey | 07:04 |
| mvo | good morning mborzecki and pstolowski | 07:09 |
| mborzecki | anything intersting happened during the long weekend or yesterday? | 07:10 |
| mborzecki | mvo: do you have more info from pedronis about the lxd issue mwhudson had on thursday? | 07:33 |
| mborzecki | there seems to have been some confusion about / not being shared and the tricks that we do to fix it | 07:34 |
| mborzecki | pstolowski: can you take a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10338 ? | 07:49 |
| pstolowski | mborzecki: sure | 07:49 |
| mborzecki | thanks! | 07:50 |
| mborzecki | quick errand, back in 30 | 07:53 |
| mborzecki | re | 08:45 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: hi, you saw I commented on golangci-lint again, my worry about goimports is when our current gofmt and goimports will disagree on new code | 09:19 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: I also created this: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10345 | 09:20 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: yes thanks, i'll be looking at this next, wanted to push out the tweaks to #10338 | 09:21 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: as for gofmt, not sure what going on there, i suppose we can either ignore it or disable goimports, although it's quite useful even if there's some misdetection | 09:22 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: as I said we could switch to use it instead of gofmt ourselves, but we need to compile it like golangci-lint does | 09:22 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: tbh maybe there's anothe imports linter, bit unfortunate that goimports does the same as gofmt, otoh they do mention it | 09:30 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: fwiw, there's https://github.com/daixiang0/gci which doesn't try to do it all | 09:32 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: but then is not compiled into golangci-lint, no? | 09:32 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: it is | 09:33 |
| pedronis | confused :) | 09:33 |
| pedronis | I pushed anothe daemon refactor PR, this one is very small: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10356 | 09:35 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: look at the output at the bottom https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/VVQM9TSYkF/ almost ok, the line number seems to be n+1, but emacs highlights it correctly for some reason | 09:38 |
| mborzecki | that's with gci instead of goimports | 09:39 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: pushed out a change to use gci with a canary in the file that was flagged due to non-gofmt formatting to https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10082 | 09:52 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: so in theory after this if we add to ignore the currently non-compliant testpackage files, we should be ok? | 09:58 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: yup, but let's see what the github run shows | 09:59 |
| pedronis | ok, almost lunch time here | 09:59 |
| mborzecki | nice, the note was added after github run finished | 10:18 |
| mardy | github avatars are currently broken, and possibly something else too: https://www.githubstatus.com/ | 10:35 |
| mardy | time to switch to gitlab... | 10:47 |
| mardy | ...except that it's also affected: https://status.gitlab.com/ | 10:48 |
| mardy | :-) | 10:48 |
| mborzecki | mvo: pstolowski: can you take a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10357 ? | 10:51 |
| mborzecki | afaict we're not locking the mutex again, once defers run there's an attempt to unlock it again | 10:52 |
| mborzecki | also a missing test case, i'll try to add one now | 10:52 |
| mborzecki | anyone recall whether there's a common way to inject backend errors in snapstate tests? | 11:09 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: it's not used a lot but SetSnapManagerBackend exists | 11:38 |
| pedronis | in export_test.go | 11:38 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: i've pushed a little hack in https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10357 | 11:41 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: suggested a little comment tweak in https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10345 otherwise it looks good to me | 12:11 |
| mardy | any hints on how to debug a configure hook? I'd like to see its stderr and stdout | 12:41 |
| mborzecki | mvo: can you land https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10338 ? | 12:42 |
| mborzecki | mardy: hm the output should be collected in task log, `snap change <id>` ? | 12:42 |
| mvo | mborzecki: sure | 12:43 |
| mvo | mborzecki: done | 12:43 |
| mborzecki | mvo: thanks! | 12:48 |
| mardy | mborzecki: nope, that only shows that the hook was executed, but it does not show its output | 12:58 |
| ogra | mardy, it usually just goes to the journal ... but only if it exited nonzero ... else you have to use logger inside the hook to get output | 12:59 |
| mardy | ogra: ah, I see, thanks! | 13:25 |
| pstolowski | ijohnson: i updated #10290 | 13:50 |
| ijohnson | pstolowski: thanks I'll have another look | 13:58 |
| pstolowski | ijohnson: i hope my explanations make sense. btw i wouldn't necessarily go with hold/gating renaming right now because it would probably mandate changes in other places too (and this PR is close to land). I can propose a separate PR to unify the naming when the feature is close to completion | 14:04 |
| ijohnson | pstolowski: yeah that's fine to not rename things in the PR, I just meant it more as a general comment about the concept in general | 14:06 |
| ijohnson | pedronis: I'm going to wait for your review before merging #10354 just FYI since there was confusion there before | 14:10 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: going to do some reviews now including your PRs, had quite a few meeetings so far | 14:35 |
| ijohnson | pedronis: no worries thanks for the reviews | 14:35 |
| ijohnson | pstolowski: thanks for the explanation I think it makes sense now, just one clarifying comment about how gating is organized | 14:37 |
| ijohnson | but the PR has my +1 now | 14:37 |
| pstolowski | ijohnson: thanks! | 14:42 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: I did review a couple of PRs, the next one will need the prereq to land and a master merge then I will re-review it | 14:58 |
| ijohnson | pedronis: thanks looking now | 14:58 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: what's the status https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10241 ? did it ever get the change to apparmor cpu use merged into it? | 14:59 |
| pedronis | https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10345 needs 2nd reviews | 15:01 |
| ijohnson | pedronis: regarding conflicts, I was hoping to first land the task handlers and wire them up to be used, then after that to add the conflict checking code, is that okay? | 15:04 |
| ijohnson | otherwise 10347 will get big again | 15:05 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: yes | 15:14 |
| ijohnson | ok, thanks | 15:14 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!