2025-03-10 16:01:09 <@kparal:matrix.org> !startmeeting F42-blocker-review
2025-03-10 16:01:11 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-03-10 16:01:09 UTC
2025-03-10 16:01:11 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'F42-blocker-review'
2025-03-10 16:01:16 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic Roll Call
2025-03-10 16:01:38 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-03-10 16:01:39 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-03-10 16:01:39 <@kparal:matrix.org> hello, who's here for your favorite blocker review relaxation time?
2025-03-10 16:01:55 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-10 16:01:57 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Brandon Nielsen (nielsenb)
2025-03-10 16:02:14 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> !hi
2025-03-10 16:02:15 <@zodbot:fedora.im> No Fedora Accounts users have the @lbrabec:matrix.org Matrix Account defined
2025-03-10 16:02:23 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-10 16:02:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Aoife Moloney (amoloney)
2025-03-10 16:03:10 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-10 16:03:11 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Christopher Boni (boniboyblue)
2025-03-10 16:03:18 <@derekenz:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-10 16:03:19 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Derek Enz (derekenz)
2025-03-10 16:03:37 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-10 16:03:38 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) - he / him / his
2025-03-10 16:05:05 <@kparal:matrix.org> let's start
2025-03-10 16:05:11 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic Introduction
2025-03-10 16:05:17 <@kparal:matrix.org> Why are we here?
2025-03-10 16:05:21 <@kparal:matrix.org> !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.
2025-03-10 16:05:24 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info We'll be following the process outlined at:
2025-03-10 16:05:26 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
2025-03-10 16:05:29 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info The bugs up for review today are available at:
2025-03-10 16:05:32 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
2025-03-10 16:05:35 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
2025-03-10 16:05:38 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria
2025-03-10 16:05:41 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_42_Beta_Release_Criteria
2025-03-10 16:05:44 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_42_Final_Release_Criteria
2025-03-10 16:06:32 <@kparal:matrix.org> Today we have:
2025-03-10 16:06:35 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info 0 Proposed Blockers
2025-03-10 16:06:39 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info 5 Accepted Blockers
2025-03-10 16:06:41 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info 0 Accepted 0-day Blockers
2025-03-10 16:06:44 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info 0 Accepted Previous Release Blockers
2025-03-10 16:06:47 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info 3 Proposed Freeze Exceptions
2025-03-10 16:06:49 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info 9 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
2025-03-10 16:07:23 <@kparal:matrix.org> since we have no proposed blockers, let's start with proposed freeze exceptions
2025-03-10 16:07:51 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic Proposed Beta Freeze Exceptions
2025-03-10 16:07:58 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic (2347151) use entire disk by default seems risky
2025-03-10 16:08:01 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2347151
2025-03-10 16:08:03 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1787
2025-03-10 16:08:06 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, anaconda-webui, POST
2025-03-10 16:08:08 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Ticket vote: BetaFreezeException (+1,0,-0) (+kparal)
2025-03-10 16:09:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> this seems sensible and changing the default option should be low risk
2025-03-10 16:09:29 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> What was the anaconda default?
2025-03-10 16:09:43 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> Erase everything / Automatic setup.
2025-03-10 16:10:36 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I suppose the merit of a change is somewhat orthogonal to its freeze status
2025-03-10 16:11:06 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> From a freeze standpoint, I can't see this breaking anything else
2025-03-10 16:11:29 <@kparal:matrix.org> oh, I forgot, we need a secretary. Fortunately, we seem to have a volunteer in Lukas Brabec , right Lukas? 🙂
2025-03-10 16:12:25 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> you seem to be deliberately misunderstanding what volunteering means, but yes :-)
2025-03-10 16:12:32 <@kparal:matrix.org> Awesome!
2025-03-10 16:12:47 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Lukas Brabec will act as the secretary
2025-03-10 16:13:09 <@kparal:matrix.org> so, any FE votes here?
2025-03-10 16:13:23 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> +1 for me.
2025-03-10 16:13:26 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2025-03-10 16:13:29 <@derekenz:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2025-03-10 16:13:34 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> If people want this change, I have no issue with it going in
2025-03-10 16:13:38 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> I don't understand why this should be FE... 
2025-03-10 16:13:42 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> BetaFE+1
2025-03-10 16:13:47 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I do think ultimately no default will satisfy everyone
2025-03-10 16:14:30 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> True but if the user then proceeds to wipe their other OS it'll be by their own doing.
2025-03-10 16:14:33 <@kparal:matrix.org> I think because we want to lower the number of people who erasing their disk by accident, by not reading correctly and clicking Next every time
2025-03-10 16:14:45 <@kparal:matrix.org> I think because we want to lower the number of people who erase their disk by accident, by not reading correctly and clicking Next every time
2025-03-10 16:14:48 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Making a destructive action a deliberate choice makes sense to me. 
2025-03-10 16:14:54 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> sure I understand that and I agree
2025-03-10 16:15:14 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> but why FE?
2025-03-10 16:15:25 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> That's where I'm at, if we're going to change the default, might as well change to something non destructive
2025-03-10 16:15:27 <@kparal:matrix.org> are you suggesting this to be a blocker?
2025-03-10 16:15:38 <@kparal:matrix.org> if this should go into Beta, it needs to be one or the other
2025-03-10 16:16:54 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> well I don't think it needs to go to beta... there is window between beta and final, right?
2025-03-10 16:17:01 <@kparal:matrix.org> sure, if it doesn
2025-03-10 16:17:07 <@kparal:matrix.org> doesn't go into Beta, it will land later
2025-03-10 16:17:37 <@kparal:matrix.org> anaconda devs proposed it as a FE, so they would like to have it in Beta, is my understanding
2025-03-10 16:18:06 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> okay then, +1 BetaFE
2025-03-10 16:18:18 <@kparal:matrix.org> ok, thanks
2025-03-10 16:18:30 <@kparal:matrix.org> proposed !agreed 2347151 - Accepted as a Beta Freeze Exception - This seems very low risk, and the new default to make a destructive action a deliberate choice makes sense to us.
2025-03-10 16:19:21 <@kparal:matrix.org> (ack/nack/patch)
2025-03-10 16:19:30 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 16:19:34 <@derekenz:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 16:20:25 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-03-10 16:20:38 <@kparal:matrix.org> !agreed 2347151 - Accepted as a Beta Freeze Exception - This seems very low risk, and the new default to make a destructive action a deliberate choice makes sense to us.
2025-03-10 16:20:52 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic (2351031) Update the Asahi audio stack for Fedora Linux 42
2025-03-10 16:20:55 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2351031
2025-03-10 16:20:58 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1786
2025-03-10 16:21:01 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, asahi-audio, NEW
2025-03-10 16:21:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Ticket vote: BetaFreezeException (+3,0,-0) (+lruzicka, +lbrabec, +kparal)
2025-03-10 16:22:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> looks safe to me, and Asahi is really trying to follow the same lifecycle as Fedora. Seems OK to push these stable for them.
2025-03-10 16:22:55 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> yeah. BetaFE+1
2025-03-10 16:23:02 <@derekenz:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2025-03-10 16:23:05 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> BetaFE +1
2025-03-10 16:24:08 <@kparal:matrix.org> proposed !agreed 2351031 - Accepted as a Beta Freeze Exception - This seems low risk and will help Asahi downstream.
2025-03-10 16:24:34 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 16:24:35 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-03-10 16:24:37 <@derekenz:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 16:24:38 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 16:25:15 <@kparal:matrix.org> !agreed 2351031 - Accepted as a Beta Freeze Exception - This seems low risk and will help Asahi downstream.
2025-03-10 16:26:05 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic (2349606) GTK3-based apps' menus are glitched on KDE, potentially causing the whole app to become unresponsive
2025-03-10 16:26:08 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2349606
2025-03-10 16:26:11 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1775
2025-03-10 16:26:13 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, gtk3, NEW
2025-03-10 16:26:16 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Ticket vote: BetaBlocker (+2,0,-6) (+ngompa, +geraldosimiao, -kparal, -lruzicka, -lbrabec, -adamwill, -derekenz, -boniboyblue)
2025-03-10 16:26:19 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Ticket vote: BetaFreezeException (+3,0,-0) (+nixuser, +nielsenb, +kparal)
2025-03-10 16:26:32 <@kparal:matrix.org> this was already rejected as a blocker, and reproposed as a FE
2025-03-10 16:26:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I'm fine with it as an FE
2025-03-10 16:26:47 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> +1 BetaFE
2025-03-10 16:26:54 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> yeah, BetaFE+1
2025-03-10 16:27:05 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> +1 BetaFE
2025-03-10 16:27:07 <@derekenz:fedora.im> +1 BetaFE
2025-03-10 16:27:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> there is a slight chance that the gtk3 fix might do something else, but OTOH in workstation everything should be mostly gtk4
2025-03-10 16:27:22 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> +1 BetaFE
2025-03-10 16:27:45 <@kparal:matrix.org> we'll pull it in if we see no bad behavior elsewhere, so after some feedback
2025-03-10 16:28:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> (but there's no update proposed yet)
2025-03-10 16:28:58 <@kparal:matrix.org> proposed !agreed 2349606 - Accepted as a Beta Freeze Exception - We would like to fix certain GTK apps misbehaving in KDE Plasma.
2025-03-10 16:29:18 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 16:29:21 <@derekenz:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 16:29:23 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-03-10 16:29:30 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 16:29:41 <@kparal:matrix.org> !agreed 2349606 - Accepted as a Beta Freeze Exception - We would like to fix certain GTK apps misbehaving in KDE Plasma.
2025-03-10 16:31:18 <@kparal:matrix.org> hmm, I wonder whether we now review accepted beta blockers or vote for proposed final blockers
2025-03-10 16:32:16 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic Accepted Beta Blockers
2025-03-10 16:32:44 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic (2349658) anaconda text mode installer fails to run on fallback
2025-03-10 16:32:46 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2349658
2025-03-10 16:32:48 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1776
2025-03-10 16:32:51 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, VERIFIED
2025-03-10 16:32:55 <@kparal:matrix.org> this one is verified, but not closed
2025-03-10 16:33:31 <@kparal:matrix.org> I think we can just close this, all relevant builds should be stable already
2025-03-10 16:33:50 <@kparal:matrix.org> Lukas Brabec: thoughts?
2025-03-10 16:35:26 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info This looks like it can be just closed as fixed.
2025-03-10 16:35:52 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic (2350605) The dev-gpt-auto-root.device times out and makes system not bootable.
2025-03-10 16:35:56 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2350605
2025-03-10 16:35:59 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1783
2025-03-10 16:36:02 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Accepted Blocker, systemd, NEW
2025-03-10 16:36:16 <@kparal:matrix.org> this is our current room-on-fire
2025-03-10 16:37:05 <@kparal:matrix.org> Adam CCed people who should be able to change the default boot args, hopefully that will be enough to get it fixed
2025-03-10 16:37:30 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info this waits on devs to adjust default boot args
2025-03-10 16:38:18 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> There is a comment "This update has been unpushed.", is that relevant for us?
2025-03-10 16:38:33 <@kparal:matrix.org> that's because a newer anaconda replaced it, I hope
2025-03-10 16:39:20 <@kparal:matrix.org> ok, let's go on
2025-03-10 16:39:34 <@kparal:matrix.org> don't fall asleep just yet, we go to another set of proposed blockers!
2025-03-10 16:39:47 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic Proposed Final Blockers
2025-03-10 16:39:56 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic (2349754) dnf system-upgrade no longer accepts --allowerasing
2025-03-10 16:39:59 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2349754
2025-03-10 16:40:01 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1778
2025-03-10 16:40:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Proposed Blocker, dnf5, POST
2025-03-10 16:40:06 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+2,0,-0) (+boniboyblue, +nielsenb)
2025-03-10 16:40:23 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Yeah this is bad from a UX perspective
2025-03-10 16:40:29 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> FinalBlocker +1
2025-03-10 16:40:42 <@kparal:matrix.org> note that we don't have a criterion for it
2025-03-10 16:40:59 <@kparal:matrix.org> so if we agree we want to block on this, we need to come up with one
2025-03-10 16:41:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> not right now, of course
2025-03-10 16:41:25 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> "upgrade doesn't work" isn't a blocker? :D 
2025-03-10 16:41:56 <@kparal:matrix.org> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_42_Beta_Release_Criteria#Upgrade_requirements
2025-03-10 16:42:02 <@kparal:matrix.org> "For each one of the release-blocking package sets, it must be possible to successfully complete a direct upgrade from a fully updated, clean default installation of each of the last two stable Fedora releases with that package set installed. "
2025-03-10 16:42:25 <@kparal:matrix.org> that will not hit that issue, and if it does, we just fix the deps, so --allowerasing is never needed in this case
2025-03-10 16:42:40 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> (given the amount of times that --allowerasing is required to make upgrade work at all, I mean - it *shouldn't* be needed, but it often is)
2025-03-10 16:43:09 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> and upgrade path / fedora-obsolete-packages is a bit of a whack-a-mole game 
2025-03-10 16:43:23 <@kparal:matrix.org> we would need to say that a method for dealing with broken dependencies (e.g. by removing affected packages) must be available and working in dnf for system upgrades
2025-03-10 16:43:49 <@kparal:matrix.org> or, we can wait a week or two and the devs might fix it by then and we don't need to define a new criterion, at least for this cycle 😄 
2025-03-10 16:45:07 <@kparal:matrix.org> so, any other thoughts?
2025-03-10 16:45:43 <@kparal:matrix.org> are we in general for blocking on this? I can punt it at the moment, given that we don't have the criterion, and see what happens  in a week
2025-03-10 16:45:50 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I'm still on team block, and update criteria
2025-03-10 16:45:51 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Punt+1 :) 
2025-03-10 16:46:15 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> And if we don't block, update criteria with a footnote making it clear this isn't a blocking case
2025-03-10 16:46:40 <@kparal:matrix.org> It is clear that this is not covered, at least in my view
2025-03-10 16:46:56 <@kparal:matrix.org> not at the moment
2025-03-10 16:46:57 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> If the DNF5 functionality is not there, we cannot enforce it.
2025-03-10 16:47:09 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> That's fair
2025-03-10 16:47:26 <@kparal:matrix.org> the functionality is disabled by accident
2025-03-10 16:47:55 <@kparal:matrix.org> of course if they insisted that they don't want to support it, then it would be a different conversation
2025-03-10 16:48:46 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> The bug does not say it is by accident. It only says it could be useful.
2025-03-10 16:49:18 <@kparal:matrix.org> It was there and it dropped out when they refactored their whole cmdline interface in DNF5
2025-03-10 16:49:53 <@kparal:matrix.org> also, it's already merged
2025-03-10 16:50:06 <@kparal:matrix.org> ah, actually even built in rawhide
2025-03-10 16:51:13 <@kparal:matrix.org> proposed !agreed 2349754 - Punt - People are in general in favor of blocking on this, but there's no direct criterion for it. It seems it will be fixed soon anyway, let's wait a while before potentially proposing a criterion (if we decide to block on it). 
2025-03-10 16:51:56 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> If this is already merged, why do we need to punt?
2025-03-10 16:52:01 <@lruzicka:matrix.org>  Why no FE?
2025-03-10 16:52:14 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Why not FE?
2025-03-10 16:52:17 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> frankly I don't think we should let this by without having a criterion defined
2025-03-10 16:52:18 <@kparal:matrix.org> this will go into F40 and F41, not F42
2025-03-10 16:52:36 <@kparal:matrix.org> it can only be a 0 day blocker
2025-03-10 16:52:42 <@kparal:matrix.org> so no FE
2025-03-10 16:53:26 <@kparal:matrix.org> I do believe that a Beta 0 day blocker would be too harsh at this point
2025-03-10 16:53:37 <@kparal:matrix.org> so Final, if we have a criterion and it's not still fixed
2025-03-10 16:53:57 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> I do not think this should be a blocker. This will go away, when it hits former releases and it will also become part of F42 so that we will not have the same sitation with F43.
2025-03-10 16:55:34 <@kparal:matrix.org> Even if it's fixed, we can always propose a criterion later. We just must not forget (and find the time).
2025-03-10 16:55:56 <@kparal:matrix.org> ok, so, any votes towards the Punt proposal above?
2025-03-10 16:56:11 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I'm fine with punt?
2025-03-10 16:56:13 <@derekenz:fedora.im> Punt
2025-03-10 16:56:14 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Punt +1
2025-03-10 16:56:32 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack punt
2025-03-10 16:57:05 <@kparal:matrix.org> !agreed 2349754 - Punt - People are in general in favor of blocking on this, but there's no direct criterion for it. It seems it will be fixed soon anyway, let's wait a while before potentially proposing a criterion (if we decide to block on it). 
2025-03-10 16:57:23 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic (1801539) ostree-based systems deployed with blivet can't fstrim LUKS-encrypted partitions of SSD hard drive by default
2025-03-10 16:57:26 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801539
2025-03-10 16:57:29 <@kparal:matrix.org> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1782
2025-03-10 16:57:32 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Proposed Blocker, python-blivet, POST
2025-03-10 16:57:35 <@kparal:matrix.org> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-nielsenb)
2025-03-10 16:58:05 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Did we not need to ack the punt?
2025-03-10 16:59:16 <@kparal:matrix.org> I took your +1 punt as acks
2025-03-10 16:59:22 <@kparal:matrix.org> was it not meant that way?
2025-03-10 16:59:38 <@derekenz:fedora.im> just in case ack
2025-03-10 17:00:10 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> It's fine with me, I was just making sure we didn't miss anything
2025-03-10 17:01:36 <@kparal:matrix.org> sorry I still haven't read this one, just reading it
2025-03-10 17:03:51 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> Annoying issue that I've had on my own hardware.
2025-03-10 17:04:00 <@kparal:matrix.org> so it looks like the only release-blocking image this affects is IoT, but only if it has full disk encryption enabled?
2025-03-10 17:04:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> how frequent is that, Lukas Brabec ?
2025-03-10 17:04:28 <@kparal:matrix.org> also, do SDcards (often used in IoT, right) support trim anyway?
2025-03-10 17:04:40 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> I don't think so
2025-03-10 17:05:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> jkonecny: are you here?
2025-03-10 17:07:14 <@kparal:matrix.org> I believe this one should definitely be documented as a CommonBug. But at this moment I don't see a good argument for blocking on it. IoT doesn't seem to be likely affected by this. And we don't block on Silverblue.
2025-03-10 17:08:37 <@kparal:matrix.org> also, we've shipped it this way for at least 5 years. It sucks, but weakens the blocker proposal even more.
2025-03-10 17:09:50 <@nielsenb:fedora.im>     I agree
2025-03-10 17:09:54 <@kparal:matrix.org> I'm currently mostly -1 blocker on this. And I'm saying that as someone who wouldn't run a system without fstrim.
2025-03-10 17:09:57 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> -1 FB
2025-03-10 17:10:16 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I agree
2025-03-10 17:10:32 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the fstrim service isn't required for anything using btrfs, fwiw
2025-03-10 17:10:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> since btrfs does trim on its own
2025-03-10 17:12:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> Conan Kudo: but this is about disk encryption, and if you have btrfs on top of it, any discard call won't be forwarded through LUKS anyway
2025-03-10 17:12:30 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> oof
2025-03-10 17:12:56 <@cmurf:fedora.im> it should pass through LUKS
2025-03-10 17:12:56 <@kparal:matrix.org> but only for ostree deployments
2025-03-10 17:13:37 <@kparal:matrix.org> it should, if you allow it, and that's what this bug is about - the config files doesn't work on ostree installs. Or am I reading it wrong?
2025-03-10 17:14:15 <@kparal:matrix.org> "It seems that somehow LUKS (dm-crypt) in Silverblue is not properly configured to pass discard commands."
2025-03-10 17:14:42 <@kparal:matrix.org> and then details about crypttab etc
2025-03-10 17:14:48 <@cmurf:fedora.im> Oh I see right. Adding `discard` to `/etc/crypttab` may be implemented by Anaconda. So everywhere else it's probably the cryptsetup default which is no discard.
2025-03-10 17:14:57 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> Not helpful for us but the workaround is pretty simple - pretty sure it's just one terminal command.
2025-03-10 17:15:35 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we could flip the default in cryptsetup?
2025-03-10 17:15:47 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it doesn't seem like a good default currently
2025-03-10 17:15:58 <@kparal:matrix.org> it's being discussed in there
2025-03-10 17:16:14 <@kparal:matrix.org> but not really important for this decision, I think
2025-03-10 17:16:21 <@kparal:matrix.org> blocker decision, I mean
2025-03-10 17:16:40 <@kparal:matrix.org> so right now I see -3 blocker votes, -2 here and -1 from the vote ticket
2025-03-10 17:16:51 <@derekenz:fedora.im> FinalBlocker -1
2025-03-10 17:16:52 <@cmurf:fedora.im> Well the logic behind the default is it's more secure to not put TRIM "holes" in the media which I guess some crypto folks think makes it easier to infer what's on the drive (?) Not my area.
2025-03-10 17:16:56 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> FinalBlocker -1
2025-03-10 17:17:31 <@cmurf:fedora.im> yeah -1 since I'm here babbling anyway 😂
2025-03-10 17:19:35 <@kparal:matrix.org> proposed !agreed 1801539 - Rejected as a Final Blocker - Silverblue is not a blocking deliverable, so we can't consider it here. IoT should be affected by this in theory, but in practice it seems unlikely that full disk encryption is used at scale there, by our estimate. Also, many SD cards (used in IoT) might not even support trim. Additionally, this problem has been around for 5 years already, further weakening the blocker proposal. We will document this as a CommonBug instead.
2025-03-10 17:20:00 <@derekenz:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 17:20:03 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 17:20:18 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2025-03-10 17:20:58 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-03-10 17:21:48 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack
2025-03-10 17:22:33 <@kparal:matrix.org> !agreed 1801539 - Rejected as a Final Blocker - Silverblue is not a blocking deliverable, so we can't consider it here. IoT should be affected by this in theory, but in practice it seems unlikely that full disk encryption is used at scale there, by our estimate. Also, many SD cards (used in IoT) might not even support trim. Additionally, this problem has been around for 5 years already, further weakening the blocker proposal. We will document this as a CommonBug instead.
2025-03-10 17:23:15 <@kparal:matrix.org> !topic Open Discussion <your bugs here>
2025-03-10 17:23:31 <@kparal:matrix.org> That's all! Is there anything else to discuss?
2025-03-10 17:24:04 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Not at the moment.
2025-03-10 17:24:08 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> nope
2025-03-10 17:24:12 <@derekenz:fedora.im> nope
2025-03-10 17:24:32 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Not from me
2025-03-10 17:25:08 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> Nothing from me.
2025-03-10 17:25:26 <@kparal:matrix.org> Thanks everyone for coming and helping out, then! See you next time 🙂
2025-03-10 17:25:32 <@kparal:matrix.org> !endmeeting