[00:50] does our cross toolchain stuff really have to be as brain-bending as it is === guiverc2 is now known as guiverc [05:39] can anyone show me the command ubiquity uses to format the ESP? (presumably using mkfs.fat ?) [05:39] As when I look at mine with 'file -s' or 'minfo -i'... you can see a value called 'reserved' (which I've seen examples of 'reserved=0x0', 'reserved=0x1' and 'reserved=0x3')... what the heck is that? the man/docs don't explain it! [08:31] stevenm_: it'll be in partman-efi somewhere i guess [08:33] stevenm_: https://git.launchpad.net/ubiquity/tree/d-i/source/partman-efi/commit.d/format_efi [08:36] Hmm, with the latest ubuntu-dbgsym-keyring update in jammy I see "The following signatures were invalid: BADSIG C8CAB6595FDFF622 Ubuntu Debug Symbol Archive Automatic Signing Key (2016)" [08:37] That seems reproducible on a new container, but I feel that I can't be alone with that yet I found no report e.g. on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-keyring/+bugs - does anyone have a pointer if this is already tracked/discussed? [08:40] hmm, deleting the key and reinstalling the keyring helped - but I'm not yet convinced this doesn't have a root cause that would be worth to understand [08:49] well, no more reproducible ... giving up but at least updated 1920640 [08:54] mwhudson, nah it's not - i already looked there [08:54] got the answer anyway... it only appeared when it's mounted... I think it's a flag used to know if it was properly unmounted or not (e.g. for windows chkdsk) [08:55] oddly that source you linked to... it's weird how it uses fat16 if the arch isn't amd64/i386 - a very arbitrary decision [08:56] you'd think it'd be based on the size of the ESP that it picks fat12/16/32 (as a standards compliant UEFI supports all 3) [08:57] in fact I've the UEFI firmware for the pi 4 doesn't support fat16 properly - so ubiquity (and d-i that it's based off) would probably fail on that === sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie === sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie [11:55] Afternoon all. [11:55] when building a ubuntu / debian .deb package you can use a preinst script to run first. [11:55] Does this script HAVE to be bash? [11:55] Can it be python for example? [12:00] It can, but then you need to pre-depend on python, which can make upgrades more complex / cause them to break [12:00] Generally maintainer scripts should have the smallest dependencies possible. *especially* preinst [12:01] I hear that, but I need to do a lot of modification to netplan and systemd-resolve beforehand as I'm building an appliance. [12:01] everything relies on python anyway. [12:02] does that really have to happen before the package gets unpacked? [12:03] Partly, yes because I install dnsmasq which needs systemd-resolve's config to be changed so as to free up port 53 before it can even install the .deb package for it [12:04] I guess i could write the priinst in bash and at the end have it kick off a python script. [12:04] that's functionally equivalent in terms of dependencies [12:04] ok, i'll give that a go. [12:05] also ... it should not be *bash* but POSIX shell code 😉 [12:05] (ubuntu uses dash as /bin/sh, not bash) [12:41] Trevinho: hi, ping about https://code.launchpad.net/~rs2009/unity/+git/unity/+merge/429299/comments/1135951 [12:41] mitya57: hey, I've it in the radar, but I've to finish some glib stuff first [12:41] Ok, thanks! [13:16] Hi all. I have built a .deb file that uses the Depends: line in the control file, but rather than install the dependancies, it just fails saying that they need to be installed. [13:17] Can anyone help me understand why this is as this has not been my experience of use any other standalone deb with dpkg -i .deb [13:17] That's what dpkg does. If you want something to automatically grab and install dependencies, use apt. [13:19] Note though that this channel is supposed to be for development of Ubuntu itself. #ubuntu-packaging is for people writing packages *for* Ubuntu. [13:24] oh right on thanks for the heads up. [14:51] Can a core-dev please retry these tests? These are historically flaky. retry-autopkgtest-regressions --blocks systemd -s jammy | grep -E "udisks|gvfs" [15:01] enr0n: looking... [15:07] enr0n: done, and what about systemd's own test on ppc64el? [15:08] ginggs: thanks! I was going to retry that one locally first, but I am fine with it being retried anyways [15:10] enr0n: retried that one as well [15:10] ginggs: thanks again! === genii_ is now known as genii [16:43] Does anyone have an idea on whether preseeding snaps in an install chroot is documented? [16:44] I see quite a bit of autogeneration for the seed.yaml in livecd-rootfs, while I can use the snap command line to perform all those steps in one locally. I can't be the only one with this use case and it took me too long not to share my steps somewhere [16:45] tsimonq2, snapd des not run in chroots ... [16:45] *does [16:46] so you can not actually use "the snap command line" [16:46] Well, you can use it on the host with the mount point if you use the model from snap known model [16:46] That sets up the preseed in the chroot which I later plan on booting [16:47] (So the chroot step is simply prep, I'm recreating a smaller version of livecd-rootfs for my own install essentially, skipping the entire ISO creation step and using debootstrap on my already-partitioned drive) [16:48] In livecd-rootfs, instead of using snap generate-image (recalling from memory...) it manually downloads the snaps and creates the yaml file [16:48] right, but all processing happens on first boot [16:50] (because on the build servers we can not just "use it on the host with the mount point" so there is nothing else implemented in livecd-rootfs beyond crafting the seed.yaml and putting the snap files where snapd will find them on first boot [16:50] ) [16:51] Right, so my question is essentially, why not let snap generate the yaml file instead of generating and validating it manually in livecd-rootfs? [16:52] because yu can not run snap inside the build chroot (unless you hack arund it like you do at home currently) [16:52] snap known model > /tmp/generic.model && sudo snap prepare-image --arch amd64 --classic /tmp/generic.model --snap=core --snap=firefox=latest/edge --snap=core22 --snap=core20 --snap=gtk-common-themes --snap=gnome-3-38-2004 --snap=bare --snap=newsboat --snap=chromium --snap=thunderbird=latest/beta --snap=lxd /mnt [16:52] snap is just interfacing with snapd ... if snapd does not run you wont get anything from it [16:54] ogra: The snap command is already ran in livecd-rootfs to get the model: https://git.launchpad.net/livecd-rootfs/tree/live-build/functions#n675 [16:55] yes, some special commands are local to the snap binary ... but i.e. snap install is not [16:55] prepare-image, version, known and pack are distinct functions of the snap binary ... everyting else is calls to the snapd REST API [16:57] When generating ISOs, would prepare-image not do the trick, rather than a manual download + add to the yaml file? I mean, it's essentially what prepare-image does on classic images, yeah? [17:54] ginggs, kanashiro: IS just made a change to the network in bos01 which shouldn't negatively affect autopkgtests but if you see something strange in your +1 shift please let me know! [17:55] It'd most likely appear as proxy errors. [18:52] bdmurray: Is there a known issue with swapfiles being too small (e.g. defaulting to 1024) and overfilling? [18:54] Eickmeyer[m]: not that I can recall immediately but I might have heard vorlon talking about it [18:57] bdmurray: Thanks. We (kfocus) just ran into an issue with a system that had a 1024 swapfile that couldn't unpack nvidia drivers due to OOM on a full swapfile. I was a bit taken aback when I got the report this morning. [19:11] Eickmeyer[m], bdmurray: would need more info here. We don't automatically increase size of swapfiles on upgrade, though in principle we could; and 22.04.1 in particular has refactored its minimum swap calculations but that only matters if you're using ubiquity from 22.04.1 [19:12] vorlon: These are brand-new installs for the most part. [19:12] As of 22.04.1 the minimum allocated by ubiquity is 8GiB RAM+swap [19:12] brand-new with what vintage installer though, and how much RAM? etc [19:13] We're not seeing that. The swapfile on 16GB RAM was showing as 1GB. [19:14] not seeing what? [19:14] 16GB RAM + 0 swap >= 8GiB RAM+swap [19:15] Ok, I'll back-up. This is on 22.04.1, Kubuntu, new install, no encryption. 16GB RAM, default whole disk install, swapfile came to 1GB. [19:15] which all sounds reasonable to me [19:16] a package upgrade alone is not going to run you out of memory on a system with 17GiB of virtual memory [19:16] Right, but when nvidia was installed after-the-fact later as an eGPU, it filled the swapfile upon unpack. [19:17] "filled the swapfile" makes no sense [19:17] the kernel manages momery [19:17] memory [19:17] I'm just telling you what was reported to me. Looks like it filled RAM and then swapped-out and went OOM. [19:18] well the nvidia package installation is not RAM-intensive [19:18] so this is not a very good bug report :) [19:18] Eickmeyer: Is this something I can reproduce on my own NVIDIA hardware? Install Kubuntu without installing proprietary drivers, then attempt to install the driver after-the-fact, with 16 GB RAM? [19:18] (My NVIDIA card is internal.) [19:18] arraybolt3: You can give it a shot. [19:18] * arraybolt3[m] takes RAM sticks out of desktop and begins investigation [19:18] This was all tested on an Intel NUC. [19:19] mmikowski: When you have a minute, please reply to vorlon above. [19:23] Eickmeyer[m], mmikowski: some analysis of *what* is consuming memory when the system OOMs would be useful; e.g. a snapshot of top -o RES, or pmap -x output; and dmesg output telling what processes were killed by the oom manager [19:45] Eickmeyer: Were you using OEM install mode by any chance? I'm about to do a standard installation and I don't know if that's right or not. [19:45] arraybolt3: Yes. [19:46] Eickmeyer: Thanks, let's see if that triggers it. (I've not yet done the normal install, but may as well give the bug the greatest chances of appearing, right?) [19:48] arraybolt3: That's my thought. [19:49] Eickmeyer: Also, when did you try to install the NVIDIA drivers? Did you do that during the OEM setup mode after initial installation, or was this after having finished the end-user setup? [19:50] arraybolt3: After the end-user setup. === arraybolt3_ is now known as arraybolt3 [19:57] Eickmeyer: Possibly a little late, but did you install updates during the installation procedure, or later? Or were they installed at all before trying to install the drivers? [19:58] During. Just no 3rd party drivers during install. [19:58] Alright, that's what I just finished doing, so we're on track. [19:58] coo coo [20:03] Eickmeyer: Last bits of details to extract out of you - should I reboot after finishing end user configuration, or go right to installing the drivers? And, should the drivers be installed via software-properties-kde, or using the command line? [20:04] arraybolt3: Just fully update, reboot, then install the drivers and see what happens. [20:04] Yeah, install the drivers via software-properties-kde. That's fine. [20:05] Make sure your'e not on secure boot. [20:07] OK, good. Then the moment of truth has arrives. [20:08] Yes, has arrives. Because I can't type. [20:08] s/arrives/arrived/ [20:11] vorlon: Hi, this is mike. Eickmeyer[m] asked me to giv you a bump. [20:12] So we had an issue with initramrd on boot the system provided an 'out of memory' condition. This was an Intel NUC (Kubuntu Focus NX) and appeared to have been triggered by a Kernel update. [20:13] We had been using it to test an Nvidia eGPU, so the initramrd was very big, and that resuted in the 'out of memory' error on boot and drop into a rescue shell. I added xz compression to initramrd and that fixed the issue. [20:14] That sounds very different that what Eickmeyer[m] described [20:14] The swap file was 1GB. [20:14] I think it's just a case of telephone. Hi Brian! :) [20:14] swap files are not used in the initramfs [20:14] What mmikowski is describing sounds like bug 1842320 [20:14] Bug 1842320 in OEM Priority Project "Can't boot: 'error: out of memory.' immediately after the grub menu" [Critical, Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1842320 [20:15] right [20:15] A bad game of telephone [20:15] ubottu: That definitely is the error. [20:15] Let me check the bug... [20:16] the issue is the initramfs being too big for the space allocated by firmware for it [20:16] The bug looks correct. [20:17] how big is "very big" for your initramfs? [20:17] I [20:17] will look it up ... [20:17] I don't know why nvidia eGPU should increase the initramfs size [20:17] Eickmeyer: Could not reproduce issue. [20:18] arraybolt3: Thanks. The issue was miscommunicated and/or I misunderstood anyhow. I've got the horse's mouth in here talking about it. Thanks for the test! [20:18] only video drivers should be copied to the initramfs because video output needs to be correct in early boot [20:18] I believe I can reproduce here with the NUC. I just need to turn off xz compression. [20:18] My initrd size on the test system is 106.2 MiB. [20:19] ls -alh initrd.img-5.17.0-1016-oem [20:19] -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 165M Sep 1 19:50 initrd.img-5.17.0-1016-oem [20:19] (Note I'm using a totally different test system than mmikowski, so my input may be of limited usefulness - internal NVIDIA card on a relatively old desktop.) [20:19] Nvidia drivers 510. [20:20] I used a rescue disk and chroot environment to update the build config per https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1842320/comments/41 [20:20] Launchpad bug 1842320 in OEM Priority Project "Can't boot: 'error: out of memory.' immediately after the grub menu" [Critical, Triaged] [20:22] I believe this along fixed it; I have the NUC right here and I can determine how to reproduce. I expect turning off xz compession will be enough; I don't believe I enlarged the swap file. But I could test that as well. [20:22] * this along fixed it = this alone fixed it. [20:23] swap file has zero relevance [20:23] No worries vorlon. That was just speculation about what memory was being used. [20:24] bdmurray: Good to see you too :) [20:58] arraybolt3[m]: As always, thank you for your help. I am working on recreating here and testing through hypothesis. Sorry, the original bug was a transient impediment I had to get through before getting other work done, so the documentation wasn't stellar. === justache is now known as justache_test === justache_test is now known as justache [21:51] enr0n: I didn't notice the systemd TEST-58-REPART was also enabled in jammy-proposed by slyon, for that to work on ppc64 you'll need to backport https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/8e65d93e85f06e3f2 [21:51] Commit 8e65d93 in systemd/systemd "test: do not assume x86-64 arch in TEST-58-REPART" [21:53] I've just checked 1013 kernel does not have the issue; 1016 does. Asooubling swapfile size to 2GB does not resolve issue. @bdmurray @ubottu @vorlon @Eickmeyer[m]. [21:55] To clarify these are oem-5.17.0-1013 through oem-5.17.0-1016 kernels. This behavior does seem to be device specific, and discussed above. [21:58] Booting through from 1013 kernels up and will report in bug. [22:51] Eickmeyer: it looks like ffmpeg2theora, recommended by ubuntustudio-video, is obsolete; ffmpeg itself supports theora as a codec now, and ffmpeg2theora hasn't seen upstream activity since 2016. Drop from the seed for kinetic? [22:51] Eickmeyer: (I took a stab at porting it, but then hit the inner loop of avcodec_decode_video2() that needs porting and decided life's too short) [22:56] vorlon: Yeah, that sound fine. UNRELATED (perhaps tangentally): still watching digikam and uploading git snapshots periodically in hopes that something stabilizes. [22:57] Eickmeyer[m]: shall I drop ffmpeg2theora from the ubuntustudio seed? [22:57] vorlon: I can do it, I'm in the seed right now and that way I can update the meta too. [22:57] ok [23:07] vorlon: Done.