[05:43] morning [05:49] <_moep_> good morning mborzecki [05:50] _moep_: morning [06:04] morning [06:44] pstolowski: hey [06:58] good morning [07:32] mardy is on vacation right? [07:42] meh, i need to run some errands today :/ [08:17] mborzecki: yeah [08:38] re [08:42] <_moep_> wb [09:19] damn, services are complicated [09:31] pstolowski: haha damn right :) [09:32] zyga: btw. i've updated the bpf program to support matching any minor number in device cgroup (similar to eg. `c 1:*` to allow all char devs with major 1): https://github.com/bboozzoo/snapd/commit/ad3ad5c76cf1535d9554dc88abc1f60377b73539 turned out to be quite easy actually once the verifier was happy [09:44] mborzecki, nice :) [09:44] mborzecki, how close is full v2 support? [09:45] zyga: a branch with some refactoring is up [10:42] hmm error: cannot refresh "lxd": unexpectedly empty response from the server , it's the 2nd time i see this today on github [10:53] errand, back in 1h [11:23] morning folks [11:23] pstolowski: hey thanks for #10551, so is that PR sufficient to fix the failing spread test I proposed ? [11:23] or is that PR a pre-req to be able to fix the failing spread test [11:24] ijohnson[m]: hey [11:26] ijohnson[m]: i think it needs snapctl side fix, but need to think a bit more. if it passes then it may be by luck [11:27] interesting, I would have thought that since snapctl just creates service-control tasks that it would fix it [11:28] ijohnson[m]: it gets tricky wrt to explicit services vs disabled services [11:28] ah I see [11:29] ijohnson[m]: if snapctl passes foo (as opposed to snapname.foo) it won't get onto explicit services list afaiu. but i need to double check, this stuff is tricky [11:29] indeed it is tricky [11:29] and everything being strings makes it harder [11:29] I'll give this PR a review now and then I'll try to review your auto-refresh one today I started a bit yesterday [11:30] thanks [11:30] * pstolowski lunch [11:30] ijohnson[m]: see also my comments under mardy's pr [11:30] ack [11:44] re [13:10] pstolowski: quick thought, maybe we should have separate types for those strings? [13:11] mborzecki: yeah, i was moaning about that in the su notes [13:12] mborzecki: i think that's not for now, but would be nice when we do further changes wrt to pedronis' plan [15:13] * cachio lunch === futuretim_ is now known as admin === admin is now known as futuretim_ === futuretim_ is now known as futuretim