The patch and upload look good. Thanks! > To my knowledge, there is not a 100% reproducer for gvfs from userspace as this is a probable lock-ordering issue in lower-level code. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/issues/1941 contains a reproducer for the underlying glib issue.
I appreciate the difficulty, and we can be pragmatic about not requiring 100% verification. But then what exactly is the test plan? How do you propose to verify that the issue is at least _likely_ to be fixed before we release the fix into focal-updates? What steps, if any, are you proposing to take, exactly? Are you proposing not to test it at all? Or just to test that basic functionality in the affected areas still work, and if so, what would that cover exactly? Or are you going to attempt to trigger the race and if unsuccessful some number of times then call it good? Or some combination? I'd like for expectations to be clear, and the plan agreed, before accepting this into focal-proposed. Once a test plan (or lack thereof) is agreed, then +1 to accept this into focal-proposed. ** Bug watch added: gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/issues #1941 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/glib/-/issues/1941 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to gvfs in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1927100 Title: Slow file dialogs, open and save To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gvfs/+bug/1927100/+subscriptions -- desktop-bugs mailing list desktop-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/desktop-bugs
