[11:03] <bdrung> @pilot in
[16:28] <bdrung> @pilot out
[17:00] <kanashiro[m]> @pilot in
[17:47] <krytarik> Btw, the topic should be updated to now say "Focal-Lunar" wrt support in #ubuntu
[17:55] <ahasenack> juliank: hi, around? What's up with the "lunar new" task in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fwupd-efi/+bug/2011808 for fwupd-signed?
[17:55] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2011808 in fwupd-signed (Ubuntu Lunar) "[SRU] [HWE] fwupd-efi/1:1.4-0ubuntu0.1 tracker" [Undecided, New]
[17:55] <ahasenack> and for mantic (main task), that is also in new?
[17:56] <juliank> ah
[17:56] <juliank> ahasenack: sorry forgot to include the LP entry in changelog in lunar
[17:56] <juliank> That got inherited to mantic
[17:56] <ahasenack> lunar has 1.52, same as mantic indeed
[17:57] <ahasenack> so released
[17:57] <ahasenack> ?
[17:57] <juliank> Yeah just fixed the state
[17:57] <juliank> Wrote the SRU bug after the upload to devel which was lunar at the time 🤷‍♂️
[17:58] <ahasenack> juliank: another question: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/firmware-updates states some test cases in "Full QA Process across stable releases" that I don't think were run. Specifically, "fwupdmgr.sh in fwupd-tests deb", and the "dbus interface" paragraph, and the GUI portions in the last bullet point
[17:59] <ahasenack> I'm assuming this wiki page applies, because it's a version update, and not just patches
[17:59] <juliank> ahasenack: I am not aware of this page
[17:59] <ahasenack> the only release missing seems to be focal, on the other hand. THe rest was released
[18:00] <ahasenack> juliank: I got to it from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#fwupd_and_fwupdate under "fwupd and fwupdate"
[18:00] <ahasenack> (ah, the link is direct already)
[18:01] <juliank> I brought the fwupd-efi bits into sync with the process for grub, as that's now all special
[18:02] <ahasenack> hm, so "fwupd" is not related to that page at all?
[18:02] <ahasenack> since the bug is about fwupd-efi and fwupd-signed?
[18:02] <ahasenack> I may be mixing them
[18:02] <juliank> fwupd-efi bits now have to go via ubuntu-uefi-team instead of OEM team
[18:02] <juliank> As we revamped signing and introduced a same signed binary across releases policy
[18:02] <juliank> Like signing goes via PPA now
[18:03] <juliank> I think we don't have proper SRU procedures for UEFI components
[18:04] <juliank> Anyway I think Microupdates to fwupd-efi probably need a different process than testing all the userspace components
[18:06] <juliank> Like we only changed the UEFI capsule helper so we only need to test OEM capsule support
[18:06] <juliank> Which was validated on a certified machine
[18:06] <ahasenack> this is 1:1.2-3ubuntu0.2 to 1:1.4-0ubuntu0.1, is that micro?
[18:06] <ahasenack> (for fwupd-efi in focal)
[18:06] <juliank> It was like a handful minor Bug fixes yeah
[18:08] <ahasenack> well, and NX
[18:08] <juliank> Yes but that's setting a bit in te binary
[18:09] <juliank> It's just saying it's NX compatible, not needing any work
[18:09] <juliank> https://github.com/fwupd/fwupd-efi/compare/1.2...1.4
[18:10] <ahasenack> any idea why focal was skipped on the 12th, this monday? Just forgotten?
[18:10] <ahasenack> all others were released
[18:11] <ahasenack> bionic I'm assuming will be left alone, so maybe we should add the block-proposed tag for it
[18:11] <ahasenack> leave it there for the esm people to pick it up whenever needed
[18:11] <juliank> bionic is the most important one really
[18:12] <juliank> We're still finishing the publishing of the shim update there
[18:12] <ahasenack> what does that mean?
[18:12] <juliank> Which depends on the fwupd-efi 1.4 because the previous is signed with the old key
[18:13] <juliank> So we fix that in the main archive but somehow it stalled again
[18:13] <juliank> I think sil2100 just ran out of time in the SRU shift when it came to focal
[18:13] <juliank> You need to release them, wait a publisher run, then release the next series or launchpad fails
[18:14] <juliank> Because fwupd-efi is binary copied and it was in publishing in one series
[18:14] <ahasenack> oooook :)
[18:14] <ahasenack> I think I'll leave this one alone then
[18:14] <ahasenack> too many moving parts I'm not familiar with
[18:21] <ahasenack> juliank: in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnu-efi/+bug/2011804, you say "We will test NX support when we work on the NX supported shim."
[18:21] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2011804 in gnu-efi (Ubuntu Kinetic) "[SRU] [HWE] gnu-efi 3.0.15" [Undecided, Fix Committed]
[18:21] <ahasenack> does that mean this update depends on another one that hasn't landed yet?
[18:22] <ahasenack> or specifically fwupd-efi that we just talked about?
[18:22] <juliank> Well no the future shim update depends on those one
[18:22] <juliank> Well not strongly depends
[18:22] <juliank> But I mean no firmware that requires the NX bit is going to load fwupd if it can't load shim because that doesn't have the bit
[18:23] <ahasenack> well, fwupd-efi is already in kinetic-updates
[18:23] <juliank> Yeah it's fine
[18:23] <ahasenack> does this mean gnu-efi can now have an extra test, now that fwupd-efi with NX is in updates?
[18:24] <juliank> Oh gnu-efi should have been released with fwupd-efi because fwupd-efi built using it
[18:24] <juliank> But no we can't test NX yet because we need the shim
[18:25] <ahasenack> yeah, you called out something like this in the "other info" of fwupd-efi
[18:25] <ahasenack> no, "see also"
[18:25] <juliank> The gnu-efi update was done as a build-dep for the new fwupd-efi
[18:25] <ahasenack> next time perhaps call this out more specifically: update X needs to be landed at the same time, or something
[18:26] <ahasenack> but it's how I got to the gnu-efi bug, via your "see also" remark
[18:28] <ahasenack> so why are we releasing updates with a feature we cannot test yet? Why not do it after this new shim is available?
[18:28] <ahasenack> chicken-and-egg problem?
[18:29] <juliank> There were some other interesting fixes for hardware support in there
[18:30] <juliank> But mainly the goal is to ship signed components in the same version
[18:30] <ahasenack> I see, everybody got 1.51.1
[18:31] <juliank> You can go find FO100 specification, it specifies the signed boot asset policy I'm working on/with
[18:31] <juliank> But yes it probably should have a SRU policy page too
[18:32] <juliank> But the whole thing developed in a security update
[18:32] <ahasenack> such specs don't look like they are a light read
[18:33] <juliank> Anyhow I hope this addresses the questions, I do suggest leaving boot stuff to vorlon or sil2100 as they have more context
[18:33] <ahasenack> yep
[18:33] <juliank> I need to resume my EOD star trek snw watching, take 3 ;)
[18:34] <ahasenack> I might sign up for paramount+ just because of that. It used to be free with my broadband contract, but isn't anymore
[18:54] <vorlon> We grabbed a free trial of Paramount+ to binge Picard now that it's complete.  Our free 1-week trial turned into a free 2-month trial, because due to terrible UI I wound up accidentally starting trial accounts both on my desktop and on the TV, then tried to cancel the one from my desktop, so they offered me more free time
[18:54] <vorlon> (and the I was able to cancel the TV-only trial and link the TV to the other one)
[19:18] <ahasenack> I was wondering about waiting for all episodes to be available, and then get a trial
[19:18] <ahasenack> but if it's one week only, that would not be enough
[19:18] <sarnold> pick the right week? :)
[19:19] <ahasenack> at the very end, yeah
[19:19] <ahasenack> or just pay up one month, that's also not too bad
[19:19] <ahasenack> but waiting all this time is bad
[19:19] <ahasenack> (for snw)
[19:19] <ahasenack> I really enjoyed the 1st season
[19:19] <ahasenack> felt like ST back to its roots of exploration
[21:05] <kanashiro[m]> @pilot out
[21:57] <vpa1977> Hi, I am looking for a review and sponsorship of openjdk-21 early access merge. https://code.launchpad.net/~vpa1977/ubuntu/+source/openjdk-21/+git/openjdk-21/+merge/444680. All changes from Ubuntu were integrated in Debian, but I had to regenerate the control file to get the correct dependencies, so it is technically a merge. Thank you!!!!
[22:02] <robert_ancell> @pilot in