[02:28] <jfalco> anybody in here???
[03:43] <jfalco> Anybody here????
[07:15] <ara> morning all!
[09:00] <thekorn> hi, I would like to test jaunty on my 10'' eeepc, are there any special test cases for this kind of devices?
[09:01] <davmor2> thekorn: if it works
[09:01] <davmor2> thekorn: what are you testing on it unr
[09:02] <thekorn> unr?
[09:02] <thekorn> oh you mean this netbook remix
[09:03] <davmor2> thekorn: Ubuntu Netbook Remix yes
[09:03] <thekorn> well I just downloaded the desktop live cd, so I would like to start with this one, but can try UNR later
[09:04] <thekorn> or is a non UNR installation for such devices not officially supported
[09:05] <davmor2> thekorn: In that case just that it work.  Check wifi and bluetooth if it has it.  Other than that just that everything runs on it okay.  Make sure that windows don't go off the screen that kinda thing :)
[09:06] <thekorn> ok, so lets start
[09:06] <thekorn> thanks davmor2
[09:21] <thekorn> oh, ubiquity does not fit on the screen
[09:23] <davmor2> thekorn: That would be a bug a then :)
[09:27] <thekorn> yeah, /me checks if this one has already been filed
[09:29] <thekorn> it is, bug 325958
[09:29] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 325958 in ubiquity "Jaunty Alpha 4: Ubiquity windows does not fit on 1024x600 screen" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/325958
[09:52] <thekorn> cjwatson, I can reproduce bug 325958 with todays daily, what kind of information (logs,...) is needed to push this one to triaged?
[09:52] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 325958 in ubiquity "Jaunty Alpha 4: Ubiquity windows does not fit on 1024x600 screen" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/325958
[09:54] <cjwatson> thekorn: none, but I'm not sure it's a ubiquity bug
[09:55]  * cjwatson fixes the bug statuses to stop people whining incessantly on the bug
[09:56] <thekorn> hehe, ok, thank you
[09:56] <cjwatson> thekorn: it'd be interesting to know whether other applications have the same problem
[09:56] <cjwatson> i.e. same large font size, not necessarily failure to fit on the screen
[09:57] <thekorn> cjwatson, the font in the panel looks big, but let me check other applications
[09:59] <davmor2> cjwatson: It was one of the things I asked him to look out for :)
[10:00] <thekorn> cjwatson, the font in general looks big to me, and baoab is one of the other applications which does not fit on the screen
[10:00] <thekorn> baobab, strange name
[10:04] <asac> thekorn: high
[10:04] <asac> thekorn: so you see regression on eepc?
[10:04] <asac> fontsize wise?
[10:05] <thekorn> asac, hi, fonts are looking big to me
[10:05] <thekorn> and some applications do not fit on the screen
[10:08] <thekorn> asac, is there any kind of logs etc. I can help you with, and what is the master bug for this kind of issue
[10:09] <asac> thekorn: did this start today?
[10:09] <davmor2> asac: He is running a standard install on a netbook :)
[10:10] <asac> davmor2: yeah. thats good
[10:10] <thekorn> asac, don't know, my first live cd install of jaunty on this netbook
[10:10] <asac> thekorn: ok. wait a sec
[10:10] <thekorn> on intrepid everything looked fine
[10:11] <asac> thekorn: can you open gconf-editor?
[10:11] <thekorn> sure, it' open
[10:11] <asac> /desktop/gnome/interface/font_name
[10:11] <asac> what do you have there?
[10:11] <asac> also
[10:11] <asac> /desktop/gnome/font_rendering/dpi
[10:11] <asac> also on terminal:
[10:11] <asac> xdpyinfo | grep resolution
[10:12] <thekorn>   /desktop/gnome/interface/font_name   sans 10
[10:12] <asac> ok
[10:12] <asac> and dpi?
[10:12] <thekorn>   /desktop/gnome/font_rendering/dpi  <kein wert>
[10:12] <asac> 130?
[10:12] <asac> ok
[10:12] <asac> xdpyinfo?
[10:13] <asac> (resolution)
[10:13] <asac> so seems you dont see a regression from yesterdays upload
[10:13] <thekorn>  117x117 dots per inch
[10:13] <asac> rather you see the bug were trying to fix
[10:13] <asac> your daily build seems to not yet have our changes
[10:13] <asac> thekorn: please change the sans 10 to "sans 13.333px"
[10:14] <asac> is that better (in general)?
[10:14] <asac> its odd that your dpi has no value though
[10:17] <thekorn> asac, yes, 13.33px is looking better, but still ubiquity does not fit on the screen
[10:17] <cjwatson> thekorn: can I have a quick screenshot maybe?
[10:18] <thekorn> sure, just a bit
[10:19] <asac> thekorn: good
[10:19] <asac> in general fonts are not the way to make stuff fit on a small screen
[10:19] <asac> of course sudden huge fonts will make all tuning senseless. lets hope we can stick to the new "px" unit
[10:19] <asac> which is dpi sensitive
[10:22] <thekorn__> cjwatson: http://ubuntu-pics.de/bild/11245/bildschirmfoto_8e7pk8.png
[10:27] <cjwatson> ok, it could be that some later bit of the UI doesn't fit
[10:27] <cjwatson> that certainly doesn't look unreasonably large
[10:28] <thekorn> oh, this is with font_name = sans 13.133px
[10:29] <asac> thekorn: you should also fix the window title font
[10:30] <asac> thekorn: /apps/nautilus/preferences/desktop_font -> 13.333px
[10:30] <asac> /apps/metacity/general/titlebar_font -> 10.666px
[10:30] <asac> /desktop/gnome/interface/document_font_name 10.666px
[10:30] <asac> /desktop/gnome/interface/monospace_font_name 10.666px
[10:31] <asac> thekorn: ^^
[10:31] <asac> those numbers are probably what we want in the end. if you could check them on your netbook that would be great
[10:32] <thekorn> ok, let me change this values
[10:33] <asac> thekorn: thanks. they wont help you much for the overall dialog size. but at least window titles and the terminal shouldnt be so huge anymore ;)
[10:35] <thekorn> asac, cool, everything looks better now, but the installer is still looking bad
[10:36] <thekorn> looks like they are using fixed sizes there
[10:36] <asac> thekorn: hmm. the screenshot didnt look that bad
[10:36] <asac> i mean the installer dialog
[10:37] <asac> thekorn: you have a screen of a bad fontsize in it?
[10:39] <thekorn__> asac: http://ubuntu-pics.de/bild/11246/bildschirmfoto_1_o1tzqH.png
[10:40] <thekorn> "willkommen" in the header is now partly hidden
[10:40] <asac> thekorn: fonts are ok. the Wilkommen title probably is too big
[10:40] <asac> cjwatson: how do you set font size for that?
[10:40] <cjwatson> asac: I wasn't aware I did
[10:41] <cjwatson> ubiquity uses its own session implementation, but otherwise is just a glade application
[10:41] <asac> cjwatson: yeah. so that "Willkommen" is just a glade text widget?
[10:42]  * asac gets ubiquity
[10:42] <cjwatson>                 <property name="label" translatable="yes">&lt;big&gt;&lt;b&gt;Welcome&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/big&gt;</property>
[10:42] <thekorn__> the title in pidgin chat windows is also too big: http://ubuntu-pics.de/bild/11247/bildschirmfoto_2_J6obXK.png
[10:42] <cjwatson> so the <big/> will crank up the font size
[10:42] <cjwatson> weird that it's being misrendered like that though
[10:43] <asac> yeah. that should be ok
[10:43] <asac> i mean <big> hopefully does just add a factor to the absolute font size and doesnt mess up our dpi sensitive base
[10:44] <thekorn> for me it looks like the underlying vbox has a fixed size
[10:45] <cjwatson> well, it's then reset while doing translation
[10:45] <cjwatson>             if 'heading_label' in name:
[10:45] <cjwatson>                 attrs = pango.AttrList()
[10:45] <cjwatson>                 attrs.insert(pango.AttrScale(pango.SCALE_LARGE, 0, textlen))
[10:45] <cjwatson>                 attrs.insert(pango.AttrWeight(pango.WEIGHT_BOLD, 0, textlen))
[10:45] <cjwatson>                 widget.set_attributes(attrs)
[10:45] <cjwatson> thekorn: we have hardly any fixed-size widgets in ubiquity, I'd be surprised
[10:45] <asac> hmm
[10:45] <cjwatson> I was quite careful about that
[10:46] <cjwatson> gui/glade/stepLanguage.glade is the relevant glade page
[10:46] <asac> yeah i saw that
[10:46] <cjwatson> and the vbox definitely isn't fixed-size
[10:46] <asac> hopefully pango.AttrList starts with the system defaults
[10:46] <cjwatson> that's certainly what I expected
[10:46] <asac> so our "absolute" selection from 13.33px stays "absolute"
[10:46] <cjwatson> I mean, it ought to be equivalent to instantiating a label by <property/>
[10:47] <asac> yeah. but the fact that its not visible is something else anyway
[10:47] <cjwatson> (the reason for ubiquity's weird translation handling is essentially that it needs to switch language on the fly, which gtk is generally not smart enough to do well)
[10:49] <asac> the title is even crunched when i open it in glade-3
[10:50] <asac> the label itself is even not expanding
[10:51] <asac> kind of gtk bug maybe
[10:53] <asac> cjwatson: seems "Single Line Mode" is broken
[10:53] <asac> cjwatson: to workaround i can use Line Wrap Mode: Word
[10:53] <asac> could be a problem of course
[10:53] <asac> but at least in glade the label takes proper space then
[10:54] <cjwatson> mm, single line mode was an intentional choice and made it look a bit nicer
[10:54] <cjwatson> so obv. I'd rather gtk were fixed :-)
[10:54] <asac> cjwatson: of course. it would be a workaround if we dont find the fix
[10:55] <asac> lets give that to seb ;)
[11:01] <thekorn> ok, I've to run in a bit, thanks for your help, and thanks for trying to fix it
[12:20]  * ara -> lunch
[13:30]  * davmor2 lunch
[16:19] <davmor2> fader: welcome back :)
[16:20] <fader> davmor2: thanks :)
[17:50] <cjwatson> fader|lunch: at some point, would it be possible for you to run a cert test with grub2?
[17:51] <cjwatson> fader|lunch: the relevant preseed is 'd-i grub-installer/grub2_instead_of_grub_legacy boolean true' and only works with netboot installs (so probably not on the usual mounted-CD-image setup, although we could make it work on a DVD)
[17:53] <fader|lunch> cjwatson: You just caught me :)  Let me kick off the reset of that machine and get it to a state that I'll be able to reproduce the bug... that'll take 30 minutes or so I think and then I can try grub2
[17:53] <cjwatson> fader|lunch: I wasn't thinking of the machine we were talking about yesterday, specifically
[17:54] <fader|lunch> cjwatson: And I'll hang out in #ubuntu-installer if I need to bug you or vice-versa :)
[17:54] <cjwatson> this is definitely a separate thread from that
[17:54] <fader|lunch> cjwatson: Ah, okay, I'll grab a different one and kick it off
[17:55] <cjwatson> we'd like to investigate moving to grub2 in a future release, and one of the most effective pieces of input we could get would be an across-the-board cert test
[17:56] <fader|lunch> cjwatson: Ah... so you're looking to test this across the whole environment?
[17:56] <cjwatson> right, as a one-shot
[17:57] <cjwatson> it's in universe right now, though I think a netboot install would use it anyway
[17:57] <fader|lunch> cjwatson: At the moment we don't get very good feedback if an install fails, but I believe cr3 is adding some reporting around that
[17:57] <fader|lunch> cjwatson: So we might get better results if you can wait a week or so
[17:57] <fader|lunch> (If not we can still do it, but it'll be a manual process of checking to see if the machines installed)
[17:58] <cjwatson> fader|lunch: that's ok, this is a "sometime before jaunty" kind of thing rather than a "right now" kind of thing
[17:58] <cjwatson> just wanted to float it with you
[17:58] <cr3> fader|lunch: I would say more than a week to get proper install reporting
[17:58] <fader|lunch> cjwatson: Cool, I'll put it on the List Of Things To Test. :)
[17:58] <fader|lunch> cr3: okay, sorry -- I thought that was one of the quick one-offs... my mistake
[17:58] <fader|lunch> cr3: (Or maybe I just assumed you'd stop sleeping for a while ;) )
[17:58] <cr3> fader|lunch: nah, I need to decouple tests from results during the submission phase for that
[17:59] <cr3> fader|lunch: I'm giving up smoking so that I can save 15 minutes a day to implement those features you keep requesting
[17:59] <fader|lunch> Okay, sounds like we may just want to do this test by hand for Jaunty then.  I'll look at setting up some scripts to do this and walk through them a few machines at a time.
[17:59] <fader|lunch> cr3: :)
[18:00] <cr3> fader|lunch: by the way, when you said "adding some reporting around that
[18:00] <cr3> fader|lunch: ..., you meant reporting errors during install, right?
[18:00] <fader|lunch> cr3: right
[18:00] <cr3> fader|lunch: are you bringing up this topic because you found the reason we didn't get test results for 20090319?
[18:01] <fader|lunch> cr3: No, unfortunately... I've been on phone calls all morning.  I'm going to dig into that once I get some food in me
[19:27] <mrooney> Should bugs in the hardware test be filed against hwtest or checkbox? I assume checkbox?
[19:28] <mrooney> and specifically I also think bug 345548 is a dupe, yes?
[19:28] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 345548 in ubuntu "ubuntu system testing tool ignores system proxy settings, and try to submit report via direct connection" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/345548