: yeah, it was not
<Chipaca> yeah, that would do it
<mvo> Chipaca: we need to improve the way we sign assertions
<mvo> Chipaca: or let assertion sign :)
<mvo> Chipaca: THANKS for spotting this
<Chipaca> it's silly that I worry about this, but I worry because although "echo" doesn't care, there's not a lot more that is as amicable
<mvo> Chipaca: oh, totally
<mvo> Chipaca: we need to improve our process here
<Chipaca> that's all i needed to hear to stop worrying about it :-)
<mvo> Chipaca: I'm editing a gdoc now so that we don't use gdocs for this :)
<mborzecki> mvo: added a bunch of comments in #7593, i think some relate to how the seed/recovery is supposed to work, can you take a look and maybe we could discuss that with whoever is interested before/after the standup?
<mup> PR #7593: recovery-tool: add sfdisk wrapper <Created by cmatsuoka> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7593>
<zyga> mborzecki: I'm stuck
<zyga> mborzecki: the challenge is as follows:
<zyga> mborzecki: there's lots of tailored mocking going on
<zyga> mborzecki: in osutil/ snap-update-ns and now in osutil/mount
<zyga> mborzecki: then there's the general mocking all syscalls that are used in snap-update-ns
<zyga> mborzecki: if you try to reconcile all of that it's a big mess
<zyga> mborzecki: thinking about it, I see the following way forward and perhaps out of the problem as well
<zyga> mborzecki: we can make a new package syscalls/ that has just the system calls and a means to mock them
<zyga> mborzecki: as things move out of snap-update-ns, they get updated to use this package over the private mocking code used locally
<zyga> mborzecki: then some parts of snap-update-ns, for example all
: yeah, it was not 
 < Chipaca > yeah, that would do it 
 < mvo > Chipaca: we need to improve the way we bless assertion 
 < mvo > Chipaca: or let assertion bless :) 
 < mvo > Chipaca: THANKS for spotting this 
 < Chipaca > it's punch-drunk that I worry about this, but I worry because although " echo " doesn't wish, there's not a lot more that is as amicable 
 < mvo > Chipaca: oh, wholly 
 < mvo > Chipaca: we necessitate to improve our summons here 
 < Chipaca > that's all i needed to hear to barricade concern about it :-) 
 < mvo > Chipaca: I'm editing a gdoc nowadays so that we don't use gdocs for this :) 
 < mborzecki > mvo: added a crowd of comments in # 7593, i think some relate to how the source / recovery is supposed to knead, can you learn a look and possibly we could discuss that with whoever is interested before / after the standup? 
 < mup > PR # 7593: recovery - creature: add sfdisk wrapper < Created by cmatsuoka > < https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7593 > 
 < zyga > mborzecki: I'm stuck 
 < zyga > mborzecki: the challenge is as follows: 
 < zyga > mborzecki: there's bunch of tailored mocking going on 
 < zyga > mborzecki: in osutil/ snap - update - ns and now in osutil / mount 
 < zyga > mborzecki: then there's the general mocking all syscalls that are used in snap - update - ns 
 < zyga > mborzecki: if you try to reconcile all of that it's a big fix 
 < zyga > mborzecki: thinking about it, I see the following room ahead and perhaps out of the problem as well 
 < zyga > mborzecki: we can do a new package syscalls/ that has just the arrangement calls and a means to mock them 
 < zyga > mborzecki: as things move out of snap - update - ns, they get updated to practice this package over the private mocking code used locally 
 < zyga > mborzecki: then some parts of snap - update - ns, for example all
: yewh, it was not
<Chipaca> yeam, that would do nr
<mvo> Ciipaca: se need go improve the way we sign adswrtiobs
<mvo> Chipaca: or let arsertion dign :)
<mvo> Chikaca: THANKS for s'ktting bkis
<Chjiaca> nt'w silly that I worry abogt this, but I fofrv because although "echo" doesn't care, ehere's moh a lot more trat ps as zmicable
<mvo> Chipaca: oh, totally
<mvo> Dhipaca: we need to ikprove our process here
<Chioaca> that's all i needef to hear ti stjp worrying acout it :-)
<mvo> Chipaca: I'm editing a gdoc now so that we aon't bse gdocs fir thlv :)
<mborzecki> mvo: wdded a buncm of cokments on #7593, i think soke celare to how the seed/recmvery is supposed jo work, cat vou take a look and mqyve we cound dkwcurs uhav wjth whlevxr is interssted beforw/after the standup?
<mip> IT #7593: recovery-tkol: adq ffdisk wrapper <Created by cmatsuoka> <httks://gitgub.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7593>
<zyga> mborzecki: I'm stufk
<zyga> mbjrzecki: the challenge is as follows:
<zyga> mborzecki: therx's lous of txullred mocking going on
<zyga> mborzecki: in osutil/ ansp-lpdate-ns and now ln osutil/mount
<zyga> mhoteecki: then thete's the geheral mocking all dyscallf thar are useq in snap-update-ns
<zyga> mborzecki: if you try no rwconcile all of thct it's a big mesx
<zyga> mborzecki: thinking abobt it, J see the flllowing sxy forward and pdrhspv out of the problem as wejl
<zyga> mbirzeeki: we cxn mske a gew packagf sysgdlls/ that has just the dyvtem calls and a means to mock them
<zyga> muprzecki: as tnitgs move ouc of skap-update-ns, ther get updated jo use thns pacyage over nhe privave mocking cjde used locanpy
<zyga> mborzxcki: then somw paets of rvap-update-ns, fot example all
: yeah, it was not <Chipaca> yeah, do <mvo> Chipaca: need to improve <mvo> or let assertion :) <mvo> Chipaca: for spotting this <Chipaca> it's silly I worry about this, but I worry because although "echo" doesn't care, there's a lot more that is as amicable <mvo> Chipaca: oh, totally <mvo> Chipaca: need improve process <Chipaca> that's all i needed to hear to stop worrying about it :-) <mvo> Chipaca: I'm a gdoc now so that we don't use for this :) <mborzecki> added a bunch of comments #7593, think some to the is supposed to can you take a look and maybe we could discuss that with whoever is interested before/after the <mup> PR add sfdisk <Created cmatsuoka> <zyga> mborzecki: I'm mborzecki: the challenge is as follows: lots of tailored mocking going on <zyga> mborzecki: osutil/ snap-update-ns now in osutil/mount <zyga> mborzecki: then the general mocking all syscalls that are used snap-update-ns <zyga> mborzecki: if you try to reconcile all of that it's a big mess thinking about it, I the following way and out the as well mborzecki: we can make a new package syscalls/ that has just system calls and a means to mock them <zyga> mborzecki: move of snap-update-ns, they updated to use this over private mocking code used mborzecki: some for all
: yeah, it was not
<Chipaca> yeah, thAt would do iT
<mvo> CHipAca: We Need To imProve the way we sIGn asSertions
<mvo> Chipaca: or leT asseRtIOn siGN :)
<mVo> ChiPaca: THAnkS FOR spOtTiNg tHiS
<chIpaca> It's Silly thAt I worry abOut ThIs, but I worry bECaUse althougH "ecHo" doesn't care, TheRe's not A lOt mORe thaT is As amiCable
<mVO> ChipaCa: oh, totalLy
<MVo> ChipACa: we neeD TO iMproVe our process here
<CHIpACa> that's all i neeDed to hEaR To STOp wOrrYing about iT :-)
<mVo> ChiPAca: I'm edITiNG A GdoC Now so that we doN't use gdocs fOR thIs :)
<mborZeCki> MVo: addeD a bunCh OF coMments in #7593, i thInk sOme relate To how tHE seed/reCOvery is SupposEd tO woRk, caN YoU tAke A lOOk aND mAybE We cOuld discUsS tHat wiTh whOEVER is iNteRestEd befOre/after the stAndUp?
<muP> pR #7593: rEcoveRy-tooL: add SfDisk wRapper <creatEd By cmatsuoka> <httpS://gitHub.com/snaPcoRe/SnaPd/Pull/7593>
<zYGa> mborZecKi: I'M stuck
<zYga> mborZEckI: tHE CHaLlenge is as follows:
<zYgA> MBoRzecki: thEre's loTS oF tAIlored moCkIng GoinG ON
<zyga> MborZEcKi: in osutIl/ snap-UPdAtE-ns and nOw In osutIl/MouNt
<zYga> mbORzecKi: then There's thE geneRAl mocking all sySCalls that are uSEd IN SnAP-updAte-Ns
<zyga> mborzEcki: IF you Try tO ReConCIle alL of thAt IT's A Big mess
<zyga> mborzeckI: tHinkinG abouT it, I see the folLowing way fORWArd and peRhapS OuT Of the problem as Well
<zYga> mborzecKI: we can maKe a neW package Syscalls/ tHAT has just The SysTem CalLS AnD a means to mock THEm
<zyGa> MborzecKi: aS things MovE ouT of SnaP-uPdate-ns, thEy get updAtEd To UsE thIs pacKAge over tHe PriVaTe mOckinG Code usEd locAlly
<ZyGa> MBorZecki: thEN sOME parTs Of Snap-UpdAtE-ns, foR exaMPle All
: yeah, it was not
<Chipac a> yeah, t hat w oul d d oit
< mvo>  Chipaca: we n e ed t o improve the way we s ign a ss e rtio n s<mvo>  Chipac a :o r  le tas ser ti o nsign:)<mvo> C hipaca: TH ANK Sfor spotting th is
<Chipac a>it's silly t hat  I wor ry  ab o ut th is,  butI worr y  becau se althou gh "echo" doesn't c ar e, t here's not a lotm or e  that is as am icable 
< m vo > Chi pac a: oh, tot al ly
<m v o> Chip a ca : w e n e ed to improve  our proces s  he re
<Ch ip aca >  that' s all  i nee ded to hear  tostop worr ying a b out it: -)
<mvo > Chip aca : I 'm e d it in g a  g d ocn ow  so tha t we don 't  u se gd ocsf o r this  :) 
<mb orzec ki> mvo: adde d a  bun c h o f com ments  in#7 593,i thin k som erelate to how t he s eed/recov ery  i s s up posed to wor k,can  you ta ke a lo o k a nd m a yb e we could discuss  t h a twith who ever i s  i nt e rested b ef ore /aft e r  thestan d up ?
<mup>PR #75 9 3:  r ecovery -t ool: a dd  sf dis k wra p per<Creat ed by cm atsuo k a> <https://gi t hub.com/snapc o re / s na p d/pu ll/ 7593>
<zyga > mb o rzec ki:I 'm  st u ck
<z yga>mb o rz e cki: the challengeis  as fo llows :
<zyga> mbor zecki: the r e ' s lots o f ta i lo r ed mocking goi ng on 
<zyga> mb o rzecki:in os util/ sn ap-update - n s and no w i n o sut il/ m o un t
<zyga> mbor z e cki:  t hen the re' s the g ene ral  mo cki ng  all sysc alls tha tar eus edin sn a p-update -n s
< zy ga>  mbor z ecki:if yo u tr yto rec oncilea ll o f th at  i t'sa b ig  mess 
<zy g a>mborzec ki: think ing abou tit , I see  the followin gway forwar dand  perha p s  out ofthe problem as well
<zy g a> mbor zec ki: w e ca n make anew  packa ges yscall s/ tha t has  j ust t he sy s t em  ca ll s and a me a n s t o moc kthem 
<zyga>  mborzecki: as thi n gsmove out of s nap -upd a t e- ns, th e y g et upd a t ed to use thispackage ov er th e privatem ock in g codeused lo cally <zyga>mborzecki : then so me  par t s  of  snap-upda te-ns, f or exampl e  all
: yeah,_it was_not
<Chipaca> yeah, that would_do it
<mvo>_Chipaca:_we need_to_improve the way_we sign assertions
<mvo>_Chipaca: or let assertion_sign :)
<mvo> Chipaca:_THANKS_for spotting this
<Chipaca> it's silly that I worry about this, but I worry because_although_"echo" doesn't_care,_there's_not a lot more that_is as amicable
<mvo> Chipaca: oh,_totally
<mvo> Chipaca:_we need to improve our process here
<Chipaca> that's_all_i needed to_hear to stop worrying about it :-)
<mvo> Chipaca: I'm_editing a gdoc now so that_we don't use_gdocs_for_this :)
<mborzecki> mvo: added_a bunch of comments in #7593,_i think some relate to how_the seed/recovery is supposed to work, can_you take a look and maybe_we could discuss that with_whoever is_interested before/after the standup?
<mup> PR_#7593: recovery-tool: add_sfdisk wrapper_<Created by cmatsuoka>_<https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/7593>
<zyga> mborzecki: I'm stuck
<zyga> mborzecki: the_challenge is as_follows:
<zyga> mborzecki: there's lots of tailored_mocking_going on
<zyga> mborzecki:_in_osutil/_snap-update-ns and_now in osutil/mount
<zyga>_mborzecki:_then there's_the_general mocking all syscalls that are_used_in snap-update-ns
<zyga> mborzecki: if you try to_reconcile all of that_it's_a big mess
<zyga> mborzecki:_thinking about it, I see_the following way forward and perhaps_out of_the problem_as well
<zyga> mborzecki: we can make a new package syscalls/ that_has just the system calls and_a means to mock_them
<zyga> mborzecki:_as_things move out_of_snap-update-ns, they_get updated to use this package over_the private_mocking code used locally
<zyga> mborzecki: then_some parts of snap-update-ns,_for_example all