<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:05:09
!startmeeting F40-blocker-review
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
17:05:09
Meeting started at 2024-02-12 17:05:09 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
17:05:09
The Meeting name is 'F40-blocker-review'
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:05:13
!topic Roll Call
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:05:32
welcome to the adam and meetbot show, er, I mean, the first F40 blocker review meeting, folks
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:05:35
who's around to review some blockers
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:05:47
Present
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:05:48
!hi
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:05:49
!hi
<@pboy:fedora.im>
17:05:57
!hi
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:05:59
hmm, do we need the other bot too?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:06:04
yes
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:16
Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:16
Peter Boy (pboy)
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:16
Geoffrey Marr (coremodule)
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:16
Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:16
Peter Boy (pboy)
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:17
Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:06:25
it's a bot party!
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:06:33
done goto done
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:06:40
maybe i'll just get a bunch of chatgpt instances in to run the meeting and do the voting and we can all go to the beach
<@gui1ty:fedora.im>
17:07:02
and freeze your butt off ...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:07:22
Conan Kudo: look, i told you not to install rawhide on your pacemaker
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:07:38
uhhh
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:07:52
isn't that what fiot is for?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:08:06
AdamGPT
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:08:25
Conan Kudo: my lawyers have advised me not to answer that question
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:08:55
alllrighty, let's get going before the medical malpractice lawyers wake up
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:08:57
!topic Introduction
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:04
Why are we here?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:08
!info Our purpose in this meeting is to review proposed blocker and nice-to-have bugs and decide whether to accept them, and to monitor the progress of fixing existing accepted blocker and nice-to-have bugs.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:11
!info We'll be following the process outlined at:
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:14
!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:16
!info The bugs up for review today are available at:
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:19
!link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:22
!info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:26
!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:29
!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Beta_Release_Criteria
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:31
!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Final_Release_Criteria
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:09:35
it's OK if you have a transactional update system, provided you extend it to also snapshot your body :P
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:49
!info for Beta, we have:
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:52
!info 5 Proposed Blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:55
!info 2 Accepted Blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:09:58
!info 1 Accepted Previous Release Blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:10:01
!info 6 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:10:04
!info for Final, we have:
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:10:13
!info 3 Proposed Blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:10:27
i will now open the betting on how many times i type `#` instead of `!` by mistake
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:11:13
who wants to be the secretary?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:11:25
coremodule: were you here?
<@coremodule:fedora.im>
17:11:37
I'll do it
<@coremodule:fedora.im>
17:12:42
I'll do it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:12:51
both of you! great
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:12:59
!info coremodule will be the secretary
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:13:09
alrighty, let's get going
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:13:28
oh, also, thanks to kparal for updating all the templates to matrix format
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:13:58
!topic Proposed Beta blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:14:00
!topic (2263871) Creating a 1 MB partition creates a 999 MB partition instead
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:14:03
!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2263871
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:14:06
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1457
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:14:09
!info Proposed Blocker, cockpit, POST
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:14:13
!info Ticket vote: BetaBlocker (+1,0,-0) (+nielsenb)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:14:36
my first question is "you can create a 1MB partition"?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:14:49
sure, biosboot
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:15:05
this is with the new cockpit ui that's replacing blivet-gui, right Kamil Páral ?
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:15:14
yes
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:15:16
we need to update all the criteria and test cases for that, sigh
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:15:29
but for now let's read all instances of 'blivet-gui' as applying to it, that seems the sensible policy
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:15:46
if you read the upstream issue, the problem is actually that if you change the TB/GB/MB dropdown, the value is updated, but not displayed
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:15:54
so this is not related to biosboot
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:16:08
Which makes it worse
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:16:11
oh, i was misreading conan's question
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:16:21
change GB to MB and the value gets multiplied by 1000, but not changed in appearance
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:17:00
oof
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:17:04
that's actually pretty severe
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:17:27
also given the fact that all disk changes are applied immediately 🙂
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:17:39
what?!
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:17:43
oh, so if you change the dropdown to MB first then type a value it works as expected, but not if you do ti the other way around?
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:17:53
that's what it says
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:17:58
in UI
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:18:04
oh god
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:18:09
that's horrifying
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:18:17
that should be correct
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:18:19
we literally are back to the 90s
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:18:31
"!@#$ it, we're doing it live", the installer experience
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:18:31
alright, everybody save the freakout for later
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:18:56
this is definitely blockery
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:19:06
especially with the *shudders* implications
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:19:12
+1 BetaBlocker
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:20:43
+1 BetaBlocker
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:21:22
But can someone file a bug to get batched changes made to the disk and raise THAT as a blocker oto?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:21:28
But can someone file a bug to get batched changes made to the disk and raise THAT as a blocker too?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:21:30
+1
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:21:41
please!
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
17:21:52
is that planned at all? I don't think it is
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:22:04
BetaBlocker +1
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:22:11
IMHO, if that's not part of this, they need to roll back to blivet-gui...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:22:28
i think this might have Political Aspects, but we can at least trigger the conversation
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:22:58
oh joy
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:23:09
+1 beta blocker
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
17:23:11
yeah, anaconda guys sit about 15 meters from me, I'll make posters and place them around their cubicle :D
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:23:19
I think I'm glad I haven't opted in to the new UI for KDE yet
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:23:22
that's really scary
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:23:34
Can Taylor comment about queuing disk changes at the big sportsball game?
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:23:38
Or is it too late for that
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:23:48
lol
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:24:13
this is what I see, notice the message at top: https://i.imgur.com/GRcefkH.png
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:24:25
yeah, i saw it in the screencast
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:24:26
anyhow
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:24:30
but I haven't investigated it closer, whether it really writes the changes immediately
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:24:30
let's handle this bug for now
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:24:42
Kamil Páral: the screencast rather looks like it does
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:25:07
oh lord
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:25:28
Someone file a bug and we'll discuss it there. Let's not block the blocker meeting :)
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:25:56
I just tried, it really performs changes live
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:26:02
proposed !agreed 2263871 - AcceptedBlocker (Beta) - this is accepted as a violation of "When using both the installer-native and the blivet-gui-based custom partitioning flow, the installer must be able to: Assign sizes to newly-created storage volumes and containers". technically it *can* do that, but not in a way that makes any sense to a user. We are considering cockpit to be the 'installer-native' custom partitioning flow for current Workstation live images
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:26:16
Most exciting installer experience in recent memory
<@kparal:matrix.org>
17:26:22
ack
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:26:26
ack
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:26:27
ack
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
17:26:28
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:26:39
!agreed 2263871 - AcceptedBlocker (Beta) - this is accepted as a violation of "When using both the installer-native and the blivet-gui-based custom partitioning flow, the installer must be able to: Assign sizes to newly-created storage volumes and containers". technically it can do that, but not in a way that makes any sense to a user. We are considering cockpit to be the 'installer-native' custom partitioning flow for current Workstation live images
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:27:12
!info 2243872 has +4 votes in the ticket so it should be accepted already, skipping (I will mark it accepted)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:27:20
!topic (2259050) Workstation Live boots to corrupted desktop display
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:27:23
!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2259050
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:27:27
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1455
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:27:30
!info Proposed Blocker, mutter, NEW
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:27:32
!info Ticket vote: BetaBlocker (+0,0,-2) (-tablepc, -nielsenb)
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
17:28:23
As I recall I haven't seen this in anyh of the last drops I tested
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
17:28:54
I'll ask lbrabec to take a look in the office tomorrow or Thursday whenever he's coming
otherwise, it seemed like to affect radeonsi gpus (I probably did something wrong when atempting to use amdgpu there)
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:28:57
Are you testing with fairly old AMD graphics hardware?
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
17:29:36
no Intel moderate age
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
17:30:05
about 6 years old
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:30:34
I'd suggest deferring this until we understand if it's affecting common hardware.
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:30:49
I don't fully understand why a fix to the linked Mutter bug fixes the issue as I see it, but it does
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:31:03
I'm pretty sure the card supports hardware cursors
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:31:05
At the moment, I rather expect that by the time we release F40, the affected hardware may in fact just finish crumbling into dust :-P
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:31:21
we have time to punt, so let's do that
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:31:34
Brandon Nielsen: are you sure it's the mutter update and not a new kernel build that fixed it?
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
17:31:39
I am not sure about that, the hw was sold around 2010s, people use even far older hw
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:31:46
The display on the afflicted laptop appears to be molding, so you might not be wrong.
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:31:57
I am not sure, but I don't see a linked kernel bug.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:32:21
Brandon Nielsen: we certainly don't track everything that gets fixed in the upstream kernel downstream
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:32:49
I know, but without the context of a bug, I'm unlikely to be real sure what I'm looking at in the kernel change
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:32:59
sure
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:33:04
But you are right in that I don't know which change fixed it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:33:04
but hey, if it's fixed it's fixed!
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:33:34
you can always try booting an old kernel and/or downgrading mutter if you want to figure out what fixed it, i guess
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:35:56
or we can just say "meh it's fixed" and focus on the other stuff :)
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:36:26
Yeah, I'm inclined to say we just look the other way for now, see if it's fixed on the other hardware (or creeps up elsewhere)
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
17:37:52
I don't think it will go unnoticed
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:39:20
proposed !agreed 2259050 - punt (delay decision) - there are strong indications that this is fixed by a recent kernel, mesa and/or mutter update, so we are punting in the expectation it will be closed as fixed with confirmation from lbrabec soon. If not, we will reconsider it next time
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
17:39:30
ack
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:39:36
ack
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:39:54
ack
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:39:57
ack
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
17:40:03
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:40:05
!agreed 2259050 - punt (delay decision) - there are strong indications that this is fixed by a recent kernel, mesa and/or mutter update, so we are punting in the expectation it will be closed as fixed with confirmation from lbrabec soon. If not, we will reconsider it next time
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:40:27
!topic (2236356) the software raid disk becomes unusable after click "Rescan" twice
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:40:30
!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236356
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:40:34
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1321
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:40:37
!info Proposed Blocker, python-blivet, ASSIGNED
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:40:39
!info Ticket vote: BetaBlocker (+2,0,-0) (+nielsenb, +geraldosimiao)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:42:55
that's... special
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:43:03
+1 BetaBlocker
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:43:30
this of course kinda exposes another issue with webui going to cockpit
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:43:47
we can't stop caring about blivet issues, because all blocking images except workstation live still use it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:44:03
so we now have even more storage flows to keep track of
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:45:28
I can think of a way to make this worse, but I shan't speak it aloud so hopefully it doesn't happen
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:45:46
please don't help
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:45:47
:P
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:46:38
hmm, it seems it was a little difficult to be sure if this is webui-specific
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:47:09
by the looks of it, my best interpretation of lnie's comments is that this is kinda specific to webui, the old ui implementation behaves differently
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:47:53
but i am not too sure about that, tbh, especially given lnie's later comment
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:48:06
it might be worth trying to get further clarification about this
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:53:28
proposed !agreed 2236356 - punt (delay decision) - with webui currently using cockpit, it would be helpful to clarify for sure what exactly the status of this issue is with webui/cockpit, webui/blivet and the current ui
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
17:53:34
ack
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:53:42
ack
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
17:55:14
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:56:43
!agreed 2236356 - punt (delay decision) - with webui currently using cockpit, it would be helpful to clarify for sure what exactly the status of this issue is with webui/cockpit, webui/blivet and the current ui
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
17:56:58
!info 2259264 had +4 in ticket votes, I have marked it as accepted
<@jkonecny:fedora.im>
18:01:22
Just for clarification. The "do the partitioning yourself" solution you see is existing project Cockpit Storage which is integrated into Anaconda. The point of the integration was to make it obvious to people that this is an external tool and not a part of Anaconda. For that reason changes are applied immediately. The plan is that only a fraction of users should use this tool but most of the users should be covered by automatic "smart" guided partitioning. This Guided partitioning should be our main focus. At the end the goal is to simplify partitioning for users and make it easier to use Anaconda and install Fedora.
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:02:54
I don't think you can just ignore the flow established users, or users switching that want to preserve their data, might use.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:03:08
we don't need to argue about that in this meeting, though
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:03:11
let's keep it focused
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:03:17
honestly, it's pretty bad form that Cockpit Storage does that at all.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:03:25
but anyway, not something for here
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:03:30
Right
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:04:35
I don't think we can just ignore the flow established users, or users switching that want to preserve their data, might use.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:05:10
!topic Proposed Final blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:08:03
!topic (2247872) Don't write /etc/lvm/devices/system.devices when not doing an end-user install
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:08:07
!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247872
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:08:10
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1438
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:08:13
!info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, POST
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:08:15
!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-nielsenb)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:08:25
Peter Boy: around? i think your thoughts on this have developed?
<@pboy:fedora.im>
18:09:25
Soprry<, yes
<@pboy:fedora.im>
18:10:30
We are sure, we have a solution, but not tested yet. So we should postpone to next week. We may see clearer.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:10:57
seems like your last comment is a summary of what you'd like to do - ensure none of the images we release have a `/etc/lvm/devices/system.devices` in them , make the installer write it for the installed system at install time, and then adjust the arm image installer script to cope with the system it's running from potentially having one, right?
<@pboy:fedora.im>
18:11:03
Otherwise +1 Blocker
<@pboy:fedora.im>
18:11:26
right, yes
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:15:41
alright, i guess we can give it a week to clarify things here...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:16:07
proposed !agreed 2247872 - punt (delay decision) - pboy is working through the plan and the implications here, we will delay the decision for a bit so we have a clearer picture
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:16:20
ack
<@pboy:fedora.im>
18:16:30
ack
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
18:19:37
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:19:51
!agreed 2247872 - punt (delay decision) - pboy is working through the plan and the implications here, we will delay the decision for a bit so we have a clearer picture
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:20:01
sorry, i'm trying to manage a few things aside from this meeting atm...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:20:06
!topic (2245371) [x86 MacBook Pro] iso stuck at "Booting a command list"
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:20:10
!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2245371
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:20:14
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1418
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:20:16
!info Proposed Blocker, grub2, NEW
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:20:19
!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+2,0,-0) (+osalbahr, +nielsenb)
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:22:27
Seems fixed?
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:22:33
Guess I didn't notice that when I voted
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:28:12
yeah...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:28:20
I'll ask the reporter for info
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:29:41
proposed !agreed 2245371 - punt (delay decision) - it seems this may be resolved already, we will delay the decision while we wait for confirmation from the reporter
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:30:32
ack
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
18:30:39
ack
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
18:33:56
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:35:22
!agreed 2245371 - punt (delay decision) - it seems this may be resolved already, we will delay the decision while we wait for confirmation from the reporter
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:35:23
okay, last one
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:35:28
!topic (2248071) systemd-oomd doesn't kick in on high memory pressure, leading to system lockup
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:35:32
!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2248071
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:35:33
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1454
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:35:35
!info Proposed Blocker, systemd, NEW
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:35:38
!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-nielsenb)
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
18:37:12
What's considered min memory lately
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:38:18
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/latest/release-notes/welcome/Hardware_Overview/ says 2GB minimum, 4GB recommended
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:38:32
i say good luck using a modern web browser with less than 8, heh
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
18:39:01
My test machine has 8GB so I'll never see this.
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:39:14
I tested in a 4 GB VM, couldn't reproduce
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:39:33
I guess I could try again in a 2 GB VM
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
18:40:41
I keep my other machines at 32GB I have no problem using Browser on my test machine
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:47:37
i can very easily get to OOM conditions with 8G, heh
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:47:39
Worked as I would expect with 2 GB in a VM too
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:47:48
in fact i had to stop using one laptop i have here because of that...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:49:53
i agree we might need more testing here
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
18:52:28
Perhaps changing the recommended min to 8GB would be good.
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
18:55:49
Maybe 4GB to 8GB range
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:56:25
i don't think that's really the answer to a bug like this, though
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:56:47
i just tried the reproducer, and i'm...not sure whether i reproduced it or not. :D added a comment
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
18:56:51
You're right I understand.
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:57:40
Did you get "killed" in the terminal?
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
18:57:50
I just doubt anyone can do much with a 2GB machine
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:59:32
sure, but it's not like oom is impossible to trigger with 4G, or 8G, or 16G, or even 32G, depending what you're doing
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:59:41
run enough VMs, open enough browser tabs...
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
19:00:35
Yes I run some simulation the should trigger OOM oon my 8GB machine
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
19:01:31
The linked github issue seems to point the finger at ZRAM being the difference between Fedora and "other"
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
19:01:50
Wonder if that somehow keeps systemd-oomd from behaving "correctly" in some instances
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:07:12
anyhow...punt for testing?
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
19:07:22
+1 for punt
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
19:07:44
+1 for Punt
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
19:08:05
I guess?
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
19:08:26
Can't say I have a better idea
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:13:11
we're out of time it seems?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:13:41
yeah, sorry
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:14:33
proposed !agreed 2248071 - punt (delay decision) - we agreed this bug could do with further testing for a more complete understanding of whether systemd-oomd really isn't working at all, or is not kicking in in certain circumstances, or what. I will post a request for testing
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
19:14:47
ack
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
19:14:57
ack
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
19:15:15
ack
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:23:10
ack
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
19:29:30
Have a Great rest of your day!
<@tablepc:matrix.org>
19:32:09
!bye
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:35:52
thanks, sorry folks
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:35:57
trying to pilot too many chats at once :(
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:36:01
!agreed 2248071 - punt (delay decision) - we agreed this bug could do with further testing for a more complete understanding of whether systemd-oomd really isn't working at all, or is not kicking in in certain circumstances, or what. I will post a request for testing
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:36:14
!endmeeting