=== benfrancis29 is now known as benfrancis2 === not_phunyguy is now known as phunyguy === not_phunyguy is now known as phunyguy [05:15] morning [05:29] mborzecki: hi! [05:49] mardy: hey [05:53] mardy: i think it's what/where, mount seems to be defined as list [05:55] mborzecki: ouch, I now realize that the formatting in the commend was lost [05:57] mborzecki: you mean, that for specifying multiple mounts, there should be a single plug, with a list of what/where fields inside the "mount" attribute? [06:05] gh is kinda slow [06:08] mardy: yes, if i'm reading this right, there's supposed to be a `mount` attribute which has a list of mappings [06:15] mardy: tbh, wondering if there will be like an 'unmount' attribute too, or does it already imply that a snap can mount & unmount? [06:15] i guess it wouldn't be named mount control then [06:28] morning [06:34] pstolowski: hi! [06:34] mborzecki: I would say that umount should also be implied [06:37] good morning [06:38] pstolowski: hey [07:04] zyga-mbp: hey [07:05] hey :-) [07:08] mvo: morning [07:08] good morning mborzecki and zyga-mbp [07:09] mvo: hi! [07:10] I see in the content interface, that it appends a "-[0-9]*" to the apparmor rules for accessing the target mount point: anyonw knows why? [07:10] emit(" mount options=(rprivate) -> %s{,-[0-9]*}/,\n", target) [07:14] hey mvo, hey mardy :) [07:14] mardy I may know [07:14] mardy so [07:15] it's the auto-unclashing system [07:15] there is a test for that as well [07:15] let's say you have a slot that accepts content in $SNAP/plugins [07:15] and then you have two other content interfaces that offer plugs that contain the plugin name [07:15] but due to some mistake, they have the same name "foo" [07:16] the mount backend will rename one of the plugs to "foo-1" [07:16] mardy hth :) [07:18] zyga-mbp: thanks!, makes sense. [07:18] hello, reminder I need reviews for https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10458 [07:19] meh, assertions, in managers tests, `s.brands.AccountsAndKeys("can0nical")`, tells me that there's no such key, so how come a model assertion for that brand can be generated? [07:20] unless that's a different list of thing again [07:20] hi mardy! good morning too you too [07:22] mardy: iirc if multiple things are mounted at the same location, then content will be named foo, foo-1, foo-2 [07:23] mardy: that's probbaly done by snap-update-ns but the content iface could use a comment about that behavior if there isn't one yet [07:24] mborzecki that's done in snapd proper, snap-update-ns just executes the orders [07:24] it's done in the mount backedn [07:24] *backend [07:24] mborzecki: the store account is not registered with the others, you need to find it on the store stack itself or fix this [07:24] mborzecki: only signing with it is supported atm as a convenience [07:27] this is also because there can be more than one key tied to it, while the rest of that code assumes one key usually for the accounts [07:30] mborzecki: tbh if you working a bit with assertstest nowadays I just recommend reading it maybe [07:33] pedronis: started looking at it, but got buried with assertions in managers [07:34] pedronis: btw. i think i'm getting a hold of it now, had to tweak seedtest a little as it's doing a bit to much for my use case [07:35] pedronis: well, at least it isn't complaining about account id, models and so on, i can open a quick PR with thw tweaks so that you can tell whether those make any sense [07:36] mvo: about the mount-control interface: the plug definition only specifies what mount operations are allowed, so that the application can call mount/umount itself, or are these mount points expected to be automatically mounted, when the plug gets connected? [07:36] or pedronis ^ [07:50] do we have any doc/tutorial about building a minimal and functioning base snap and its requirements? anything more than https://snapcraft.io/docs/base-snaps ? [08:01] mardy: just permissions, nothing happens on connection. that's the case for most interfaces, they given permissions, don't have side effects, with few exceptions [08:02] mardy: (sorry, mvo was in a meeting with me) [08:08] content is one of those exceptions for example, but mount-control is meant to be just permissions [08:10] pstolowski: there's test-snapd-bare-base and bare [08:10] those are minimal and tested [08:15] pedronis: i had something similiar but my hook wouldn't work (i was getting an error about snap-exec) [10:17] could someone please eyeball 10456? it's for the 2.51.2 backport of the pi-config fixes [10:17] and 10455 [11:36] mvo: done [12:45] pstolowski: \o/ [14:50] cachio__: hi! So, the problem I'm having with the fake store is that I create a package with make_snap_installable_with_id, but installation fails: [14:50] - Fetch and check assertions for snap "microk8s" (1) (cannot find supported signatures to verify snap "microk8s" and its hash (account (developer1) not found)) [14:50] mardy, hi, can you show me the test please? [14:50] do you have a link? [14:51] cachio__: here's the preparation code: https://github.com/anonymouse64/snapd/blob/feature/snap-microk8s-shared-system-usernames/tests/main/system-usernames-microk8s/task.yaml#L35-L42 [14:51] mardy, tx [14:51] I'll have a look [14:52] cachio__: thanks! [14:54] * mvo switches network and will be off for some minutes [14:56] mardy, where make_snap_installable_with_id is defined? [14:56] found it [14:58] cachio__: ah, I think I got it: I was just calling "snap ack" on the account assertions for developer1, but I also need to copy them under the store's assertions dir [14:58] yes [14:58] look at the test [14:58] set-proxy-store [14:59] there you have an example [14:59] mardy, [15:00] cachio__: I see, thanks! I see that most other tests, however, keep the assertions separate (they use cp and not cat), but I guess it's equivalent [15:01] it should be the same [15:10] pstolowski: I reviewed the wait-chain PRs [15:15] pedronis: ty [15:23] pstolowski: cachio__: it seems some image has changed now we get core20 instead of core18, this makes the preseed test fail, see here for example: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10458/checks?check_run_id=2943137639 [15:23] pedronis, ah, ok, I'll update that [15:23] it happens 20.10 and 21.04 [15:23] I just updated last week one test with this problem [15:24] thx [15:24] yaw [15:25] thanks [15:30] * pstolowski errand, eod [15:34] .o/