yeah, i just came here to say... i think those betting on red owe me
yeah, i just came here to say... i think those betting on red owe me
Bnot that i had anything to do with it being green 
JThere's plenty left to go wrong lol
JBut you're probably right
Bmain is all green 39/40, hwe 40 is all green and i'm re-running hwe 39 misc failures
Bwhich i think was all due to a main-base 39 failure which i reran
JBazzite green as my lawn!!!
Rstill no bluefin 40 run
Rim batting on the libxml2 issue still being there
B
well, main/hwe are all green... in time for bluefin run to happen
KBazzite 3.1.0 soon???
Rsecureblue 3.0 featuring bazzite spins, soon 
R
Roh shit
Rit's fixed
R:beagle:
NIn all for this
Pwhat will be diffrent?
FGitHub
Fixes #255. Allows users to create files within /usr/lib/bootc/kargs.d with kernel arguments. These arguments can now be applied on a switch, upgrade, or edit.
General process:
use ostree commit o...
General process:
use ostree commit o...
Joh yeah!
Jexamples ^
KDoes this allow us to change kargs without a new image?
Jit let's use declare it at build time
JSeems like 6.9.X kernel broke secure boot
Rthis requires ublue to switch everything over to bootc, right?
Ris there an issue for that already
Jyeah
Kwait, where's the kargs defined now?
Krpm-ostree kargs?
Kyes
Jthere's all sorts of issues open for switching to bootc but I don't understand why we haven't merged it yet
Rfor bluefin i think there's a job that sets them after the first boot
Rjust upgraded, getting this also
Rwhy did you delete the photo lol
JGood waa trying to isolate more factors before making the final conclusion
Rit's broken
JThat seals it then 
Rshim signature invalid
R
JIs that a fedora issue or ublue related?
KFedora issue
JGotcha, pinned the prev deployment untill its fixed in upstream
Roof
Ris there an issue / ticket tracking it?
Rlet me check bugzilla
R
KGitHub
Current workaround See #543 (comment) Original issue text Describe the bug Trying to rebase an existing SB39 to SB40 fails to boot showing vmlinuz-6.8.1-300.fc40.x86.x64 has invalid signature. you ...
