NCommanderIs there any repo software that handles udebs properly and sanely beside dak and soyuz?01:00
NCommandercjwatson, ^01:06
TheMusoNCommander: cjwatson would be in bed now. As for software, what about falcon?01:19
NCommanderDoes it properly create the installer-*arch* dist files?01:20
TheMusoNCommander: I don't know, I just know it can allow you to create an archive.01:20
cjwatsonNCommander: afraid I have no idea; when I need third-party archives I use dpkg-scanpackages or apt-ftparchive :-) I've never managed a big third-party archive11:02
cjwatsonNCommander: I would be surprised if any software other than dak and Soyuz processed raw-installer uploads correctly (for installer-$ARCH); I wrote the code for both of those and I guess you could rip it out of dak11:03
CIA-3tasksel: cjwatson * r1387 ubuntu/ (Makefile debian/changelog): Point Ubuntu task update script at jaunty.11:06
CIA-3tasksel: cjwatson * r1388 ubuntu/ (debian/changelog ubuntu-seeds.pl):11:54
CIA-3tasksel: Add an ubuntu-tasks/README file to explain that the files in11:54
CIA-3tasksel: ubuntu-tasks/ are autogenerated.11:54
CIA-3tasksel: cjwatson * r1389 ubuntu/ (Makefile debian/changelog): Remove obsolete kubuntu-kde4 tasks.11:56
CIA-3tasksel: cjwatson * r1390 ubuntu/ (8 files in 2 dirs):11:59
CIA-3tasksel: Update Ubuntu tasks from seeds, renaming mobile-mobile to11:59
CIA-3tasksel: mobile-netbook-remix, adding mobile-live, adjusting description of11:59
CIA-3tasksel: mythbuntu-live, and removing Seeds field from mythbuntu-live.11:59
CIA-3tasksel: cjwatson * r1391 ubuntu/debian/changelog: releasing version 2.73ubuntu1312:01
CIA-3ubiquity: cjwatson * r2961 ubiquity/ (debian/changelog scripts/install.py): Make sure that only one of grub and lilo is installed (LP: #314004).13:45
CIA-3debian-installer: cjwatson * r1016 ubuntu/debian/changelog:14:08
CIA-3debian-installer: No-change rebuild with new kernel, including some crypto bits built as14:08
CIA-3debian-installer: modules again, and with any luck enough support to let us build on14:08
CIA-3debian-installer: armel.14:08
CIA-3debian-installer: cjwatson * r1017 ubuntu/debian/changelog: releasing version 20081029ubuntu915:17
tjaaltonalternate installer stops at the partitioner, shows a help screen and selecting 'continue' only brings it back15:51
saispocjwatson: debian-installer_20070308ubuntu40.7 will be moved into hardy-updates ?15:57
cjwatsonat some point yes15:58
cjwatsontjaalton: logs?15:58
saispocjwatson: no idea when ? :)15:58
cjwatsonsaispo: it needs the corresponding kernel to be moved to hardy-updates first, which was blocked on verification of a whole load of SRU bugs last I checked16:00
saispoi don't understand somethings... i need to add proposed to debian-cd for building a good cd. if i not add proposed it use the kernel 2.6.24-19 and have 2.6.24-22 modules16:02
saispo(on the cd) why ?16:02
saisponormaly i just have main, update and security for building my cd16:03
cjwatsonthat should have been fixed a little while back; the debian-installer corresponding to -22 was moved to hardy-updates16:04
cjwatsonfew days ago, I think16:04
saispooh ok :)16:05
saispomaybe my mirror have not catched it16:05
tjaaltoncjwatson: http://users.tkk.fi/~tjaalton/foo/partman http://users.tkk.fi/~tjaalton/foo/syslog16:09
tjaaltonneither have anything suspicious16:10
tjaalton(the wget error isn't)16:10
cjwatsontjaalton: you might need to run with DEBCONF_DEBUG=developer16:10
tjaaltonyeah, will try16:11
tjaaltoncjwatson: ok I found out why it fails.. it didn't detect the disk16:15
cjwatsonah, that would do it16:16
tjaaltononly the card reader16:16
cjwatsonwhich would explain why it didn't give you an error16:16
tjaaltonnow the obvious question, why does it fail?-)16:20
* cjwatson blames the kernel, as usual for hardware detection problems :)16:20
cjwatson(once in a blue moon this turns out to be wrong)16:20
tjaaltonhmm ok, I'll just leave it there for now16:22
kirklandcjwatson: \o/17:09
kirklandcjwatson: today's iso works for me, encrypted home directory17:09
kirklandcjwatson: has the kernel module/built-in dust settled?17:10
kirklandcjwatson: or am i still working because the modules are built-in?17:10
cjwatsonthe CD you're using predates the build of d-i against the new kernel with those modules built-in17:10
cjwatsonso partman-crypto will still fail17:10
cjwatsontomorrow's image will be the real test I think17:11
kirklandcjwatson: cool, i'll pull again tomorrow17:11
kirklandevand: fwiw, the encrypted home setup on the server daily cd finally works17:11
kirklandevand: it's probably time to revisit the graphical installer enablement17:11
kirklandevand: or, perhaps after tomorow's "real test", per cjwatson's last comment17:12
evandmpt: any thoughts on the UI for that?17:12
cjwatsonkirkland: graphical installer> blocked on figuring out the gtk/directfb bustage17:12
cjwatsonkirkland: assuming you mean gtk d-i17:12
kirklandcjwatson: no, ubiquity17:12
cjwatsonoh, what, seriously?17:12
kirklandcjwatson: or whatever the handler is for the desktop installer17:12
cjwatsonhow are you going to have it install packages?17:13
cjwatsonubiquity's not really designed for flexibility in terms of what gets installed ...17:13
* kirkland yields to evand 17:13
cjwatsonand in particular has no hooks into debootstrap or anything like that for base system installation, so you'd need a live filesystem17:13
cjwatsonindeed you'd need one anyway to run ubiquity in17:14
kirklandcjwatson: i figured if space on the CD is an issue, such that ecryptfs-utils won't fit, i was going ask if it could be added to the DVD installer?17:14
cjwatsonwhich seems like it'd crowd a bunch of other stuff off the CD?17:14
cjwatsonoh, hang on17:14
cjwatsonI thought you meant enabling ubiquity on the server CD17:14
cjwatsonyou mean enabling ecryptfs in ubiquity, don't you :)17:14
* cjwatson belays panic17:14
kirklandcjwatson: yessir :-)17:14
* kirkland let's out a laugh17:15
kirklandcjwatson missed a lot at UDS :-)17:15
cjwatsonyou never know what people are going to come up with ;-)17:15
kirklandcjwatson: as you requested, we discussed a bit of the actual interface with mpt at UDS17:15
kirklandcjwatson: he drew up a few picture boards17:16
kirklandcjwatson: evand and i looked at it17:16
cjwatsonit's a checkbox and an initially-hidden password entry box, isn't it?17:16
kirklandcjwatson: i actually have some ideas on paper (not yet in code) for how to do a migration of a non-encrypted-directory to encrypt-my-home17:16
kirklandcjwatson: if space really became a blocker, i think it could be something we could empower users to "turn on" after install17:17
kirklandcjwatson: well, a little different than that17:17
kirklandcjwatson: for one thing, we're going to autogenerate the mount passphrase17:17
kirklandcjwatson: simplifies our validation thereof17:17
cjwatsonI don't think disk space is a major problem for ecryptfs-utils17:18
kirklandcjwatson: and re: checkbox, it will need to operate a little more like a radio button, mutually exclusive with the AutoLogin feature17:18
kirklandcjwatson: it might still look like a checkbox, but checking one of those two will need to uncheck the other17:18
kirklandcjwatson: which, technically is how a radio button works, i suppose17:18
cjwatsonpresumably it could be made to work with autologin, it's just kinda stupid?17:19
kirklandcjwatson: but i think mpt frowned upon radio buttons17:19
cjwatsonradio buttons here feel a bit weird to me given that they aren't really obviously connected (to an end user)17:19
kirklandcjwatson: hmm, i don't think encrypted home could work with autologin ...  encrypted ~/Private can work with autologin17:19
kirklandcjwatson: for encrypted home to work with autologin, we'd need some generic skeleton for gnome17:20
mptevand, my first request was to keep it out of the installer. Failing that, I drew up a couple of possible layouts, but I don't have those drawings here a.t.m.17:20
kirklandcjwatson: i haven't really thought that through17:20
kirklandcjwatson: but encrypting Private + autologin is actually a really cool combination, the way I set up my parent's laptop17:20
mptevand, oh wait, yes I do. One of them uses radio buttons:17:20
kirklandcjwatson: allows them to secure some stuff, and enter a passphrase on accessing that17:21
mpt( ) Log in as freddo automatically17:21
mpt( ) Require a password to log in17:21
mpt( ) Require a password to log in and to decrypt your home folder17:21
cjwatsonwhy doesn't home directory encryption belong in the installer? it seems like the sort of thing you naturally want to do strictly before doing anything potentially sensitive in the directory17:21
mptor something like that17:21
cjwatsonwhich would lead to it being an option in (a) the installer and (b) users-admin17:21
mptcjwatson, firstly because you might install Ubuntu months or *years* before you realize you're going to be doing something sensitive in your home folder.17:22
cjwatsonmpt: I agree that it also needs to be something you can convert to afterwards (assuming that's practical)17:22
mptcjwatson, secondly because you might not be the user who installed Ubuntu on this computer.17:22
cjwatsonwhich means that oem-config might want to allow it17:22
kirklandcjwatson: that's on my plate, "Live migration to encrypting home" was something sabdfl specifically asked me to figure out17:22
cjwatsonagain, doesn't really seem to indicate against the installer providing the option17:22
kirklandcjwatson: i think i can solve it with a couple of rsync's17:23
cjwatsonkirkland: have you tested that the bits from /etc/skel are copied into the encrypted home directory rather than into the underlying unmounted directory?17:23
kirklandcjwatson: yup17:23
kirklandcjwatson: working beautifully in today's iso ;-)17:24
mptcjwatson, true, but I think that's a slippery slope which the "Who are you?" page goes a little way down17:24
NCommandercjwatson, how's d-i on ARM coming?17:24
kirklandcjwatson: i have a 600M kvm image i can upload to people.ubuntu.com, if you'd like to see17:25
cjwatsonkirkland: down a 600Kbit pipe? probably not :-)17:25
kirklandcjwatson: ;-)17:25
mptcjwatson, for example, if Users & Groups gets the ability to take a photo of you for your account picture, should the installer acquire a (probably somewhat inconsistent) interface for doing that too? How about an interface for setting up an IM account? etc17:25
cjwatsonmpt: while I sympathise with the slippery slope argument to some extent, I think those are very clearly distinct; those are attributes of your account, rather than a specification of how your data is stored, and furthermore migrating to encrypted-home later is always going to have some inherent problems (for example, I expect that you would need to have at least as much free disk space available as you have data in ...17:27
cjwatson... your home directory17:27
mptcjwatson, the same applies even to Windows migration (why yes I do want to migrate Windows files from my other computer, but that's in my parents' house and I'm not), which is partly why I suggested earlier to evand that Windows migration be split out of the installer too17:28
mpt(and I'm not ... visiting them again until next week, for example)17:28
kirklandi see a difference between stuff that needs to be setup (bootstrapped) from the beginning of the install, and stuff that's easier to do later17:29
cjwatsonthat's an excellent argument for making m-a available from outside the installer, but not an argument for removing it from the installer17:29
cjwatsonthose two things need to be considered separately and not conflated17:29
kirklandsetting up an IM account and uploading your picture is something that doesn't really benefit from happening on installation17:29
cjwatsonm-a is useful in the installer because it is likely to deal with properties you want to be set up before you start using your computer in earnest17:30
mptcjwatson, the general argument for not having, in the installer, anything that should be available elsewhere and doesn't *need* to be in the installer, is that it avoids having two inconsistent interfaces for the same function17:30
cjwatsonfor example, you want to migrate firefox properties over before you start to use firefox if possible, otherwise you have to figure out how to merge them17:30
cjwatsonand I don't think that's a good argument, honestly17:30
cjwatsoninterfaces should be available in the installer if they're significantly more painful to do later17:30
mptand it avoids misleading people into thinking that the installer was the only way of accessing those functions and oh, it's too late now17:31
cjwatsonthat's only a problem if the desktop is crap, frankly17:31
cjwatson(and we could always note that sort of thing in the installer somehow)17:31
cjwatsonhere is a logical consequence of your argument that I think is undesirable17:32
cjwatsonthere is an interface for adding users outside the installer (that some people fail to discover, for one reason or another)17:32
cjwatsonit is not the same as the interface for adding the first user in the installer, since it offers more features such as adding multiple users17:32
cjwatsontherefore the installer should not add any users at all, and should instead drop you into a guest account kind of thing post-install with users-admin popped up for you17:33
cjwatsonthe reason I think this is undesirable is that it conflicts with the principle that the installer should give you a usable system with no further fuss17:33
cjwatsonNCommander: I set the build to retry earlier, haven't checked back on it17:35
cjwatsonNCommander: you can monitor it yourself on LP17:35
evandwell, m-a does merge settings, but probably a moot point17:35
mptcjwatson, I broadly agree with that principle but I think it focuses a little too much on "the installer" as an executable17:36
cjwatsonright, but what if you set it up from scratch again and typed in something slightly different17:36
cjwatsonI think it does make sense to set as much up to start with as is reasonable17:36
cjwatson(and yes, these are all slightly-conflicting principles that we have to balance, which is why reasonable people can end up disagreeing!)17:36
cjwatsonmpt: I'm focusing on it as a user-visible phase, rather than as an executable; I think users are quite likely to perceive rebooting as the end of installation, which I think is pretty reasonable ...17:37
mptcjwatson, if you're going to restart the computer anyway to check the installation has worked, I think it's quite reasonable for a user setup to appear then17:37
cjwatsonand I think that's superior to the alternative of rebooting in the middle of the installation process, which (from Windows experience) induced a feeling of despair17:37
cjwatson"oh god, how much longer is this going to take"17:38
cjwatsonmpt: ah, see "reasonable people disagreeing" :-) I think it's better to do user setup first17:38
mptbecause that same user setup is relevant to every user account, even if it's created months or years later.17:38
mptSome of the users of the system you're installing may not even be born yet.17:38
cjwatsonmpt: the clearest reason I can articulate for this is that it means more questions in the installation process are asked up-front, rather than with a long delay between questions17:38
cjwatsonagain, I'm not arguing for the removal of users-admin! I think it should be made *more* discoverable17:39
cjwatson*you're* arguing for a single interface, I'm not17:39
cjwatsonand I think the mindset one is in when installing the computer to start with is different from the mindset one is in when adding a new user17:39
cjwatsonin the first case, the primary goal is "give me a usable computer" (subgoal: set up for me while we're there)17:40
cjwatsonin the second case, the primary goal is "my wife wants to use the computer"17:40
mptOne case I have in mind is where you're installing the system for someone else, and you don't really want to get involved in setting up a dummy password for them if they're going to have to change it anyway17:40
cjwatsonand I think those differing mindsets *can* indicate a different UI design17:40
cjwatsonI think we should rebrand oem-config for that sort of purpose17:40
cjwatsonbut I don't think it's good to redesign the installation process for everyone based on that theory17:40
cjwatsonOEMs installing systems that they then sell is a major case; users installing systems for themselves (and their families) is a major case. I honestly think that person X installing a system for person Y who isn't present (and so can't be called over to type in their password) is a niche case17:42
cjwatsonI've been in the situation of being person X installing a system for person Y, but in all cases they were in the next room and I just called them over at the user setup stage17:43
CIA-3usb-creator: evand * r70 usb-creator/ (6 files in 3 dirs):17:43
CIA-3usb-creator: * Mark more strings for translation. Thanks István Nyitrai (LP: #310804).17:43
CIA-3usb-creator: * Change the Debian maintainer to the Ubuntu Installer Team.17:43
mptcjwatson, setting up multiple users is actually the exception to my one-interface-per-setup-task principle I'd be most comfortable with, because "Who will will be using this computer?" would better encourage people to have separate accounts. But Ubiquity (except with m-a) doesn't allow for multiple users *anyway*.17:45
cjwatsonwhereas I see that as optimisation for the common case17:45
mpt(Windows XP asks for multiple account names during installation. I don't remember what Vista does.)17:46
evand(we abandoned the multiple user model in m-a a release or two ago.  You can only import into the account you are setting up at install, though it still supports multiple accounts under the hood.)17:46
cjwatsonI could come down on either side of the how-many-users-during-installation question; I came down on the one-user side initially since it involved fewer interaction steps and was easier to implement, really17:47
mptYou mentioned rebranding oem-config17:48
cjwatsonI agree that it seems likely to produce a different psychology, although I must say that I have never done any user observation to see how they react to it17:48
mptIf we did that, when and how would it be invoked?17:48
cjwatson(the only case I've observed was my parents, and they viewed it as somewhat ridiculous for the two of them to have different accounts given that they'd been married for 30+ years)17:49
cjwatsonwell, despite the name and modulo some details, oem-config is essentially a way to install a system but defer answers to user-specific questions until a bit later17:50
cjwatsonso it's an "I'm installing a system for somebody else" mode17:50
cjwatsonit is (I think intrinsically) more awkward17:50
mptSo do the user-specific questions appear on first login?17:50
cjwatsonfor example, you might not even have the same preferred language as the other person17:50
cjwatsonright, the current scheme is that you install a system with a dummy 'oem' account which the OEM can use to customise things (this is the part I think is unnecessary if you're just ordinary person X installing for person Y), then after the OEM says "I'm done now", user-specific questions are asked at the next boot17:51
cjwatsonlanguage, location, keyboard layout, user stuff17:52
mptI'm trying to imagine how that would coexist on a CD where standard Ubiquity was also available17:52
cjwatsonit does, right now17:52
cjwatsonthere's an option on the CD boot menu to invoke it17:53
cjwatsonit's currently somewhat hidden since we don't want to confuse ordinary people into using it, since it has this customisation stage17:53
mptok, make that "coexist prominently" :-)17:53
cjwatsonso it's on F4 "OEM install (for manufacturers)" or some such17:53
cjwatsonhow about user page has a thing at the top saying "I am installing this system for somebody else; ask me later"17:54
cjwatsonthe installer doesn't really need to know before that17:54
cjwatsontechnical effect of that would be that oem-config is installed and configured to run on the next boot17:55
cjwatsonand I suppose no account would be created, or maybe some kind of dummy account17:56
cjwatsonbut at any rate it wouldn't ask for a password17:56
mptthat seems reasonable18:01
cjwatsonNCommander: damn, didn't work, I've sent a patch to kernel-team to actually try to build udebs :-/18:04
NCommandercjwatson, I can build the ARM kernel here18:04
cjwatsonNCommander: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2009-January/004042.html18:04
cjwatsonif you can test that and follow up, go for it18:04
NCommanderSure, no problem, I can even get it merged if need-be18:04
cjwatsonthat isn't usually a problem, but sure18:05
cjwatsonI expect all it needs is for somebody to have test-built it18:05
NCommandercjwatson, roughly speaking, how much work do we have in porting d-i to a new subarchitecture?19:02
cjwatsonNCommander: d-i itself? shouldn't take more than an hour or so plus hanging around for build tests. also add whatever time is needed to write bootloader installation/configuration code19:03
cjwatsonbut actually getting the d-i build system to build for a new subarchitecture is pretty trivial19:03
NCommandercjwatson, I was considering packaging the freescale kernel so we could use it as a basis to port d-i so when the final kernel arrives, its a config file update and rebuild.19:04
NCommanderthe only problem is we need a nice place to hang all the udebs and such since I don't think we want the freescale kernel in the archive19:05
cjwatsonoh, just bung 'em in build/localudebs/ for local build-testing19:06
NCommanderAw, thats no fun ...19:06
cjwatsonor put them in a temporary archive and fiddle build/sources.list.udeb.local19:06
NCommander*gunned down*19:06
NCommanderI need to work out how to create a flash map with redboot first anyway; am I correct in assuming d-i knows how to handle writing an initrd to flash (I know it works right on the NSLU2)19:07
cjwatsonI'm not quite sure how it works for NSLU2 but the usual approach is that you have a "bootloader installer" component that does the work19:08
cjwatsonI believe that the flash-kernel package does it19:09
cjwatsonit may need a trivial tweak19:09
NCommanderI know d-i on NSLU doesn't touch the flash19:09
cjwatsonor maybe not so trivial19:09
cjwatsond-i on NSLU2 has a bunch of code that fiddles with mtd19:10
cjwatsonand says "Flashing kernel:"19:10
NCommanderWell, we can get mtd going on the Babbage19:10
cjwatsonso not sure I agree :)19:10
NCommanderThat isn't very difficult (I just need to work out the specifics of flash mapping)19:10
cjwatsonhave a look at flash-kernel, anyway19:10
cjwatsonthat's the main thing to port19:10
NCommanderAh, sounds like fun19:11
NCommandercjwatson, if you could get me a list of udebs ARM d-i wants, I can make sure they're all built19:11
cjwatsonI'm pretty sure they already are19:12
cjwatsonwe'll find out once the kernel's in place19:12
cjwatsonat this point it's less tedious to just test-build19:12
NCommanderworks for me19:12

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!