77 Replies
@Noel @Kyle Gospo @j0rge
ok what do I need to test?
I'm already testing Bazzite in a VM to see if it will install.
Bazzite ISO. From today
Bluefin 39 ISO would be a good double check
I would do a Bluefin 40 ISO to see if the issue is there too.
ok, I'll doublecheck both bluefins
But I haven't had an issue with it when I did the Aurora install.
We haven't respun ISOs yet I think
You could spin one up in testing.
logic should be there for it.
I'm starting on: https://download.bazzite.gg/bazzite-stable.iso
Yepp Aurora and Bluefin are still on pre bootc for latest.
Bluefin GTS would have bootc but I didn't have issue with last use....
Definitely want to get the just iso command working now from this.
Before I say anything more, I want to confirm it is broken.
installing flatpaks, should be installing the bootloader soon.
yes, it's broken
gonna take a look at logs.
I'm just getting to the flatpaks now
Let me revert main
we will need to rebuild the world.
I'll work on that
ya'll keep debugging
If you can fpaste the logs I can also review
smoking gun:
I'm going to loop @Skynet in on this. Nothing that can really be done I don't think regarding this.
We'll need to test the bluefin GTS iso now as well
It's been on bootc for awhile unless the issue is caused by version difference between the two
main is off and running, ~15 or so until hwe rebuild.
Could be anaconda related.
not 100% sure on that.
Is there a version difference on anaconda between 39/40?
I can't remember if @Skynet if we are using the same version of Anaconda or not for all images being built.
Anaconda calls bootctl
main done, on hwe now
Order of operations:
1. Build Main (Done)
2. Build HWE (Done)
3. Build Bazzite (In Progress)
4. Build New Bazzite ISOs (Not Started)
5. Test Bazzite ISOs (Not Started)
speaking off, if fedora moves forward with diffed updates with the spec they have posted on github
thsi whole chain wont support them
where was that standard again?
i was looking at buildah today
it supports ztd:chunked compression but i dont know how to apply it
if it could recompress the image that'd be viable
I appreciate the conversation about this stuff, but could we do it in a different thread perhaps?
sure
Thanks.
More important than anything is getting ISOs that work again for Bazzite.
Not sure if Aurora and Bluefin are fully affected or not.
we only build ISOs on sundays so no need to worry about that now
get ready to fire off bazzite
hwe is almost done
I need to take over with kids in about 20 minutes. Who can own the rest of the tasks on the list?
I'll do it
Thanks
Bazzite kicked off, after that ISOs, which will be the long one
yeah, we don't have to wait for the whole task to finish, just the upload to cloudflare. Still will take about 30 minutes though.
Do we want to put out a post in the Bazzite channel? or do we think that's not neccessary? I can update the folks that have been affected by it.
I'll post the run URL
and be like "if you're affected wait until this is green then redownload"
Yeah. That should be good.
It would be only people who downloaded the ISO in the past 6 hours or so
Right. I'm glad we caught it quickly.
I'm more curious on the difference between 39 and 40 right now
I can only speculate it's the version of Anaconda being used.
it could be that it's more picky.
39 has been on bootc since we had ISOs and it was by happen chance that it wasn't included on 40
They probably had to retool quite a bit of stuff in Anaconda to support bootable containers.
which probably broke other things.
Yeah. That makes sense.
I'm speculating though.
also worthwhile mention that this is another time anaconda ate the error
and threw a generic one
My hope is once everything gets a little bit more standardized regarding bootc, this stuff won't come up.
The atomic desktops are in a weird spot.
I did reach out to Timothee on it and he is part of the initiative to get everything in line.
whatever we can do to help that team is very much appreciated.
Potential data point: last night I was trying to use ISO installers built from custom layers over base-main and bluefin, and they both had this same "failed to write boot loader configuration" error message when built for Fedora 40 but not for Fedora 39
That's a useful data point
Yeah, so there is something different in 40.
It is my opinion we should wait on bootc in 40 until things are sorted out upstream. We may have some major retooling ahead of us which I'm going to be poking at with the fedora-bootc container images.
@j0rge @M2 I'm going to test this when it is merged, but @Skynet was able to build an ISO for fedora-bootc that is working. So we may be able to add bootc back in once I confirm this new version works with the changes.
I just need to wait for https://github.com/JasonN3/build-container-installer/actions/runs/9021682692 to pass. The previous run passed all of the tests, but I made a couple of minor changes. I expect this one will pass too, but just want to let it run. Once it's done running, I can merge it
GitHub
All Tests · JasonN3/build-container-installer@52679d6
Creates an ISO for installing a container image as an OS - All Tests · JasonN3/build-container-installer@52679d6
Does this effect 39 at all?
39 should continue to work the same as before. It should also have the ability to use bootc. Most of the changes in the PR are just about the matrix that runs the tests. The bootc support comes from updates to Anaconda
ah ok so the fix is in anaconda? no changes needed on our part?
Correct. Other than using a newer version of the build-container-installer image since the image contains the packages
I will want to do some testing with the new main branch. But hopefully this should fix it when we update to a new release.
bootc support has been added to build-container-image on the main branch. Feel free to test away and submit issues if there's something not working
https://github.com/JasonN3/build-container-installer
GitHub
GitHub - JasonN3/build-container-installer: Creates an ISO for inst...
Creates an ISO for installing a container image as an OS - JasonN3/build-container-installer
Testing building a Bluefin Latest ISO with Bootc on the testing branch.
We'll see if things crash and burn or not 😄
Let's try putting the metadata create script before the initramfs to see if it crashes and burns or not
Let's talk about this in the PR as well as the main issue: https://github.com/ublue-os/bluefin/pull/1285 https://github.com/ublue-os/main/issues/572
GitHub
Add Bootc to Bluefin by noelmiller · Pull Request #1285 · ublue-os/...
Upstream Issue
ublue-os/main#572
Purpose
We would like to test adding bootc to bluefin before adding it to main. Ideally, we should be able to test it here and then implement in main.
Things that n...
GitHub
Add Bootc to Fedora 40 Based Images · Issue #572 · ublue-os/main
Purpose We want to add bootc to our images to start utilizing it. This is the direction things are going with the creation of new upstream images that rely on bootc. We reverted PR #570 due to issu...
bootc still doesnt have a progress bar
it shows a progress bar when downloading layers
It does
Just not for the install part
1) thats not a progress bar
2) the second part takes more than half of the time
but hey it only takes 1 min in my testing
the progress bar is per layer
I filed an issue about it
https://github.com/containers/bootc/issues/515
local iso builds should be working here shortly. Need to figure out how to open browser for people
So hopefully we can locally test ISOs now
It appears to work. Apparently I don't have flatpaks bundled in yet. But this is a locally built iso from current working branch.
@Noel hopefully this should help with testing. Flatpaks will need to be sorted out. But you can run a just command and get an iso to build and then run.
and flatpaks are now working as well.
