[05:06] morning [05:41] hi mborzecki, zyga-mbp [05:41] hey mardy [05:41] rainy cold morning here [05:42] * zyga-mbp writes some status reports today [05:42] mardy: zyga-mbp: hey [06:27] omg github ux has changed again, before when i clicked on a patch in a PR it would take me to that patch view, if there's just one it the same as I would be reviewing the whole PR [06:28] now you have to go to 'files changed', otherwise just clicking on a patch shows the patch in the fork repository, and comment added get added to that fork :/ [07:02] morning [07:34] PR snapd#10792 closed: packaging: backports of golang-go 1.13 are good enough [07:38] mvo: hi, can you land https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10781 ? [07:38] PR #10781: tests: fix tests for 21.10 [07:39] PR snapd#10785 closed: tests: add test for store.SnapAction() request timeout [07:39] PR snapd#10786 closed: tests: print user sessions info on debug-each [07:40] thanks! [07:42] mborzecki: my pleasure, let me know if there is more that I overlooked :) [07:42] pstolowski: and good morning ! [07:42] mborzecki: and good morning to you as well :) [07:44] PR snapd#10781 closed: tests: fix tests for 21.10 [07:51] mvo: hmmm, looks like https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10785 should have landed as the new unit test failed there, but I can't repro this failure locallly [07:51] PR #10785: tests: add test for store.SnapAction() request timeout [07:51] *shouldn't have [08:00] pstolowski: uh, silly me [08:02] pstolowski: silly me indeed, it's just the "" that are different in latest go and current go, should be an easy fix. sorry for that [08:03] mvo: no worries, I'll prep a fix [08:19] PR snapd#10793 opened: tests: fix regex of TestSnapActionTimeout test <⚠ Critical> [08:49] hmm https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/2yRyJBKKK6/ failed twice in a row? [08:50] mborzecki: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10793 [08:50] PR #10793: tests: fix regex of TestSnapActionTimeout test <⚠ Critical> [08:50] mborzecki: but it seems it still needs a tweak [08:52] heh 1.17.x thing [08:52] pushed one more tweak [09:00] pstolowski I think the regex fix is missing a " before the first colon. The test fails for me at least [09:00] miguelpires: even after the tweak i pushed a few minutes ago? [09:01] Yes [09:02] miguelpires: ah, there, i see [09:03] i'm slightly confused about the diff, i'm running 1.13.8 and we've 1.13 [09:24] PR snapd#10794 opened: build-aux: fork snapcraft.yaml for riscv64 [09:41] mvo: can you merge https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10793 and https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10784 please? [09:41] PR #10793: tests: fix regex of TestSnapActionTimeout test <⚠ Critical> [09:41] PR #10784: o/snapstate: add ChangeID to conflict error [09:49] miguelpires: sure [09:49] PR snapd#10784 closed: o/snapstate: add ChangeID to conflict error [09:49] PR snapd#10793 closed: tests: fix regex of TestSnapActionTimeout test <⚠ Critical> [10:30] Bug #1925167 changed: Path to uefi-fw-tools binary file not created [10:33] Bug #1925167 opened: Path to uefi-fw-tools binary file not created [10:45] Bug #1925167 changed: Path to uefi-fw-tools binary file not created [10:46] hm this failed on LP: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/9FtG8BrWN8/ related to the change ID error change from miguelpires ? [10:54] PR snapd#10795 opened: o/assertstate: check installed snaps when refreshing validation set assertions [10:55] mborzecki: yes, that's related to my PR. Thanks for pointing, I think I made the test flaky [10:55] *pointing it out [10:55] mborzecki: hmm looks like there was an unexpected change in state, so id ended up being 2 [10:58] yeah, miguelpires does it reproduce locally with -count ? [11:00] yes, I can trigger it locally with just a few tries [11:19] PR snapd#10796 opened: o/devicestate: fix flaky test remodel clash [11:22] mvo: hey, could you please land https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10782 ? [11:22] PR #10782: o/ifacestate: do not create stray task in batchConnectTasks if there are no connections [11:31] miguelpires: silly question there (i'm not familiar with details of remodelling) [11:37] pstolowski: I don't see your question in the PR [11:37] miguelpires: grr i did it again and forgot to submit the review; now [11:45] PR snapd#10797 opened: usersession/client: refactor doMany() method [12:08] pstolowski: is there anything else we can do in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/snapd/+bug/1922293 or can it be closed now? [12:08] Bug #1922293: Snaps appear broken on 21.04 Beta with ZFS [12:10] mborzecki: i think it can be closed [12:33] mvo: can you merge https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10796 please? [12:33] PR #10796: o/devicestate: fix flaky test remodel clash [12:40] miguelpires: sure [12:45] PR snapd#10796 closed: o/devicestate: fix flaky test remodel clash [13:20] PR snapd#10798 opened: github: do not fail when codecov upload fails [13:20] trivial PR ^^ [13:45] mvo: can you take a look and land? ^^ [13:45] (fwiw codecov uploads are failing atm) [14:07] cachio_: hey have you seen either of these failures before ? https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/vccF9HBJjB/ and https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/cRPHmRQPZV/ [14:11] https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10799 will help unbreak master [14:11] PR #10799: tests/main/preseed: update for new base snap of the lxd snap <⚠ Critical> [14:15] PR snapd#10799 opened: tests/main/preseed: update for new base snap of the lxd snap <⚠ Critical> [14:16] PR core#125 opened: Copy dpkg.yaml for LP Buildd [14:17] PR core18#181 opened: Copy dpkg.yaml for LP Buildd [14:26] PR core20#113 opened: Copy dpkg yaml for buildd [14:50] do we know if the failure to upload to codecov is a temporary failure on their side, or are there some keys that expired? [14:53] mardy_2nd: that's all there is in the log: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/Z6T8N9YCQp/ do we need some token? ijohnson do you remember if we had to get one? [15:00] bboozzoo: we didn't use to need a token, maybe we do now all of a sudden ? [15:01] PR core20#113 closed: Copy dpkg yaml for buildd [15:02] PR core18#181 closed: Copy dpkg.yaml for LP Buildd [15:11] mardy I never saw any codecov keys to begin with, perhaps just a temporary fluke? [15:16] ijohnson: ok, let's wait until tomorrow, maybe it's just temporary outage 🙂 unless we're run though our trial period or sth [15:17] that would be very 90's of them though :P [16:00] ijohnson[m], no, didn't see those errores [16:00] mborzecki: sure, lnaded, sorry for the slow reply [16:00] PR snapd#10798 closed: github: do not fail when codecov upload fails [16:01] * cachio_ lunch [17:37] https://status.codecov.com/ all is green [17:38] but they did some release today, and maybe the last one fixes the issue: https://github.com/codecov/uploader/releases [17:39] mardy: looks like they do a release on every PR, probably not a "stable" release [22:32] PR core20#114 opened: Fix riscv64 build