16:01:12 <bcotton_> #startmeeting Prioritized bugs and issues
16:01:12 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Jan 13 16:01:12 2021 UTC.
16:01:12 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:01:12 <zodbot> The chair is bcotton_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:01:12 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:01:12 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'prioritized_bugs_and_issues'
16:01:13 <bcotton_> #meetingname Fedora Prioritized bugs and issues
16:01:13 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_prioritized_bugs_and_issues'
16:01:25 <bcotton_> #topic Purpose of this meeting
16:01:27 <bcotton_> #info The purpose of this process is to help with processing backlog of bugs and issues found during the development, verification and use of Fedora distribution.
16:01:28 <bcotton_> #info The main goal is to raise visibility of bugs and issues to help  contributors focus on the most important issues.
16:01:30 <bcotton_> #link https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/program_management/prioritized_bugs/#_process_description
16:01:35 <bcotton_> #topic Roll Call
16:01:49 <bcotton_> who's feeling buggy today?
16:01:58 <gbcox> I'm here for any questions on 1912046
16:01:59 <mhroncok> me
16:02:15 <bcotton_> welcome gbcox and mhroncok
16:02:25 <gbcox> good morning
16:02:28 <decathorpe> .hello2
16:02:29 <zodbot> decathorpe: decathorpe 'Fabio Valentini' <decathorpe@gmail.com>
16:02:34 <bcotton_> hi decathorpe
16:02:40 <mhroncok> oh, so many people!
16:02:44 * bcotton_ nudges mattdm from his slumber
16:02:46 <mattdm> i am here too!
16:02:50 <bcotton_> hey hey!
16:02:58 <decathorpe> hey bcotton :)
16:03:08 <mattdm> my desktop pc is unresponsive for some reason. yay
16:03:23 <mhroncok> mattdm: contact your software vendor
16:03:26 <bcotton_> mattdm: that sounds like a prioritized bug ;-)
16:03:44 <mattdm> think it's a hardware problem. sigh.
16:03:49 <bcotton_> okay, let's get it started in here
16:03:56 <bcotton_> #topic Nominated bugs
16:03:58 <bcotton_> #info 2 nominated bugs
16:03:59 <bcotton_> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__&f1=flagtypes.name&f2=OP&list_id=10871664&o1=substring&query_format=advanced&v1=fedora_prioritized_bug%3F
16:04:04 <bcotton_> #topic BASH_FUNC environment variables reigning havoc and it just keeps getting worse
16:04:05 <bcotton_> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1912046
16:05:34 <mhroncok> too long, didn't read
16:05:58 <mattdm> So, my impression here is that zbyszek is On It
16:06:23 <bcotton_> my read is that zbyszek is saying "it's not systemd, it's the desktop environment"
16:06:40 <bcotton_> particularly the last part of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1912046#c18
16:06:48 <gbcox> maybe so, maybe no.  one thing I've noticed is most bugs stay in new status, no one takes ownership
16:06:57 <mattdm> yeah. with some fixes
16:07:05 <mattdm> gbcox: there's a LOT of bugs
16:07:20 <gbcox> well yeah, but someone has to solve them
16:07:22 <mattdm> that's one reason we have this process
16:07:31 <jonaslb> As it relates to variable handling in KDE, i contributed a patch upstream today: https://invent.kde.org/plasma/plasma-workspace/-/merge_requests/569
16:07:38 <mattdm> gbcox: in general, they tend towards progress :)
16:07:41 <mattdm> jonaslb++
16:07:41 <zodbot> mattdm: Karma for jonaslb changed to 1 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
16:07:55 <jonaslb> But the issue is really rooted in systemd imo - that is only a workaround
16:08:07 <gbcox> I opened this to hopefully get everyone on the same page and address the root cause
16:08:11 <mattdm> gbcox++
16:08:11 <zodbot> mattdm: Karma for gbcox changed to 1 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
16:08:18 <gbcox> it's been going on in some form for over a year
16:08:23 <gbcox> hence the title of the bug
16:08:33 <mattdm> yeah. I think we should accept this as prioritized, and see if we can get a meeting with some people from systemd, kde, and gnome
16:08:36 <bcotton_> jonaslb++
16:08:49 <bcotton_> gbcox++ for using the prioritized bugs process
16:09:08 <bcotton_> oh yeah, zodbot doesn't know who i am :-)
16:09:09 <gbcox> I've keep the kde informed, but they haven't responded for about a week, so I'm not sure how they are choosing to hand this
16:09:28 <bcotton_> any objections to accepting this as a prioritized bug?
16:09:36 <gbcox> I would hope the systemd and desktop folks would huddle and come out with a satisfactory strategy going forward
16:09:39 <mhroncok> no objections
16:09:52 <mattdm> gbcox: kde upstream or kde in fedora? this is probably somtehing best for the upstream
16:10:02 <mattdm> action bcotton_ to organize that meeting? :)
16:10:09 <gbcox> both, I've been speaking to upstream also
16:10:52 <bcotton_> #agreed BZ 1912046 is accepted as a priortized bug
16:11:03 <mattdm> gbcox: cool
16:11:15 <bcotton_> #action bcotton to arrange a meeting of the minds between systemd, gnome, and kde
16:11:30 <bcotton_> #action bcotton to break mattdm's #action button :-)
16:11:51 <bcotton_> anything else on this one?
16:12:04 <mattdm> lol but seriously :)
16:12:06 <gbcox> nope, sounds perfect
16:12:15 <bcotton_> #topic firefox exposes private libraries in Provides:
16:12:16 <bcotton_> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1582116
16:12:30 * mhroncok here to answer questions
16:12:52 <bcotton_> i was all set to say "eh, what's the problem" and then mhroncok said "distro wide breakage" and that got my attention :-)
16:13:03 <mattdm> hahahahah
16:13:17 <mhroncok> elevatro pitch: this is not breaking anything *now*, but is extremely fragile to break the distro once firefox decides to bundle anything
16:13:42 <mhroncok> before the holidays, this happened
16:13:55 <mattdm> I see the distro-wide breakage potential right from the title -- basically, something could accidentally think its deps are filled when they aren't
16:14:05 <mhroncok> it was fixed by reverting the bundling
16:14:10 <mhroncok> mattdm: exactly
16:14:15 <decathorpe> does this commit fix it? https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/firefox/c/442afe94ba93892db3e77c17f5c1c548690d319e?branch=master
16:14:29 <decathorpe> I'm not familiar with all the generator knobs
16:14:54 <mhroncok> decathorpe: this is the old macro without filter_setup, IMHo it does nothing
16:15:25 <decathorpe> so that is no bueno
16:16:05 <mattdm> ok, so, has anyone talked to martin?
16:16:42 <mhroncok> there was an attempt in the "distro wide breakage" bugzilla, but it felt like going nowhere
16:17:04 <mhroncok> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908791
16:17:50 <mhroncok> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908791#c16 and later
16:18:20 <mattdm> it sounds like in that case adam said building against system nss was the correct thing to do anyway andthat's what shut down the conversation
16:18:27 <mattdm> not in a bad way -- it was urgent
16:19:02 <decathorpe> I've only ever used __provides_exclude_from, but wouldn't that be the correct thing here too?
16:19:13 <mhroncok> mattdm: that happned, yes. I proposed solutions, but my PRs got immediatelly conflicitng becasue different things got pushed :(
16:19:39 <mattdm> yeah, emergency. so now emergency is over so there's more time to be careful.
16:19:46 <mhroncok> decathorpe: yes, but it has a slight problem: if you just filter provides, suddenly, firefox starts to depend on those and no longer installs
16:20:07 <bcotton_> so it sounds like we should accept this as a prioritized bug. doesn't sound like the maintainer is opposed to fixing it, more that it just got deprioritized once the fire was out
16:20:16 <mattdm> bcotton_ exactly
16:20:22 <decathorpe> does /usr/bin/firefox depend on the private libs? that should be fixed as well ...
16:21:00 <mhroncok> decathorpe: yes, but how... one of my attempts was https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/firefox/pull-request/23 -- but it doesn't scale
16:21:17 <decathorpe> right
16:21:19 <mhroncok> bcotton_: more or less
16:21:25 <bcotton_> any objections to accepting it? we'll let martin et al have some time to fix it how they see fit and if it's not fixed at the next meeting, turn up the heat :-)
16:21:39 <mhroncok> the latest commit seems like there is at least some attempt to solve this
16:22:20 <mattdm> +1 bcotton_
16:22:25 * mhroncok is more than happy to explore options... but only if firefox maintainrs are interested
16:22:45 <mattdm> It did not sound to me like they were disinterested
16:22:56 <bcotton_> #agreed BZ 1582116 is accepted as a prioritized bug
16:24:00 <mhroncok> mattdm: I must have misunderstood the silence then :)
16:25:27 <bcotton_> okay, moving on to the old bugs
16:25:38 <bcotton_> #topic Accepted bugs
16:25:40 <bcotton_> #info 2 accepted bugs
16:25:41 <bcotton_> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__&f1=flagtypes.name&f2=OP&list_id=10871665&o1=substring&query_format=advanced&v1=fedora_prioritized_bug%2B
16:25:48 <bcotton_> #topic Secure Boot fails to boot F33 Beta image
16:25:50 <bcotton_> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1883609
16:26:11 <mhroncok> no updates since early November
16:26:15 <bcotton_> i'm not sure how much is NDA'ed here, so i'll just say "yep. it's being worked on"
16:26:28 <mattdm> yeah. I have some information that I'm not sure I can share either.
16:26:49 <mattdm> The current recommendation I have is that we are not likely to need a F33 respin, though.
16:27:07 <mhroncok> that is good news
16:28:33 <mattdm> ok next? :)
16:28:34 <bcotton_> #topic Search settings from no longer apply to tracker / tracker3, resulting in scanned Downloads
16:28:36 <bcotton_> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1900227
16:28:38 <bcotton_> #info Accepted as a Prioritized Bug on 2020-12-02
16:28:47 <bcotton_> so this one just straight up got dropped by me because $holidays
16:28:48 * Southern_Gentlem respins happen anyways
16:29:03 <mattdm> Southern_Gentlem++
16:29:03 <zodbot> mattdm: Karma for jbwillia changed to 5 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
16:29:30 <mattdm> (although they won't help until we get the updated bootloader stuff)
16:29:39 <bcotton_> there's been no activity, so i'll nudge the assignee and see where we stand
16:30:11 <mhroncok> does anybody know if the GNOME folks have seen this? IIRC they proudly ignore bugzilla
16:30:44 <bcotton_> mhroncok: you may be correct on this :/
16:31:00 <mattdm> It's not proudly, it's just overworkédly
16:31:24 <bcotton_> i'll email the assignee directly and go from there
16:31:28 <mattdm> bcotton_++
16:31:35 <decathorpe> well I proposed this as priority bug since I consider it a security risk and / or privacy relevant
16:32:40 <mhroncok> mattdm: well, I should have said "they declared they ignore bugzilla" instead of proudly
16:33:02 <bcotton_> anything else on this one?
16:33:46 <decathorpe> it seems like at least something has happened upstream
16:34:15 <decathorpe> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-control-center/c/69242d195b7bf6eaf8950c6a66e86f212dbece5a?branch=f33 this fixes the missing settings from G-C-C
16:36:16 <bcotton_> from kalev's comment on https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-control-center/-/issues/1173#note_966343 this may already be fixed in the repos?
16:36:19 <mattdm> ok, so I propose -- check back next meeting?
16:37:07 <decathorpe> fine with me
16:37:29 <bcotton_> sounds good. decathorpe, can you check to see if the latest g-c-c fixes the issue? i'll hold off on nudging people until you have a chance to test
16:38:08 <decathorpe> bcotton_: it seems to fix the broken settings paths mismatch, unsure whether it fixes tracker scanning Downloads yet.
16:38:26 <bcotton_> cool
16:38:43 <bcotton_> speaking of next meeting...
16:38:45 <bcotton_> #topic Next meeting
16:38:47 <bcotton_> #info We will meet again on 27 January at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting
16:39:00 <bcotton_> anything else for this time around?
16:40:52 <bcotton_> that sounds like a "no"
16:40:54 <bcotton_> thanks everyone!
16:40:56 <bcotton_> #endmeeting