[11:56] <lool> Does someone reproduce https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/358961 with a desktop daily on !armel?
[11:56] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 358961 in ubiquity "Broken window icon in top left corner" [Undecided,New]
[11:57] <persia> lool, Yes: I'm looking at it now.  I'll confirm.
[11:57] <lool> On armel or !armel?
[11:57] <persia> armel
[11:57] <persia> Sorry.  I'll try another arch right now.
[12:07] <lool> I'd suspect the new libglade personally
[12:07] <persia> lool, I ran into another issue in my first test on i386, but at least the questions had the icon.
[12:13] <jtholmes> davmor2, mornin
[12:13] <davmor2> jtholmes: Morning
[12:14] <jtholmes> you asked about the bars yesterday and I found that side by side goes away and never comes back
[12:16] <davmor2> jtholmes: yes it a bug it's not meant too
[12:16] <jtholmes> ok i am downloading dailys now will check things out
[12:17] <davmor2> jtholmes: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/358519
[12:17] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 358519 in ubiquity "Jaunty: Ubiquity-frontend-kde step 4 should display bars for partitioning" [Undecided,New]
[12:17] <davmor2> I don't think it got fixed yesterday
[12:19] <jtholmes> i knew i had seen the bars on a previous daily but could not find the one that worked correctly
[12:20] <jtholmes> now with VM i can keep several days iso's in diff VM's and refer back to check on previous behaviors
[12:20] <jtholmes> the VM is a little slow loading etc. but allows me to keep several days of dailys ready to run etc.
[12:21] <persia> jtholmes, You might consider just keeping the dailies as files, and then loading those ISOs into the VMs, rather than keeping the installed results laying about.
[12:21] <persia> The ISO should only be ~700MB, but the installed target is more likely to be close to 2GB.
[12:23] <persia> lool, I can reproduce in i386 reliably now: that I couldn't reproduce before it probably related to the other issues I had with that install.
[12:23] <jtholmes> persia, well i have about 65G for the VM and so far it am only using about 20% of it with 4 dailys loaded
[12:23] <lool> Then I'll target the bug
[12:23] <jtholmes> i just wish the VM was faster loading and starting
[12:24] <persia> jtholmes, Well, that's up to you.  That's 13G.
[12:25] <jtholmes> i may change that approach if disk space get used up faster than i want but thanks for the heads up
[12:25] <persia> My local iso directory typically has between 6 and 10 different images (I don't keep historical copies), so for me, it's easier to replicate the install (doesn't take that long), or replicate in a live environment.
[12:26] <jtholmes> from start to finish how long does your VM take to install and load one iso mine takes about 35 min
[12:26] <jtholmes> and thats on a fast machine
[12:26] <persia> about the same for a full install.
[12:26] <persia> The live environment is usually available in a couple minutes, and that sufficies for most replication.
[12:27] <jtholmes> ok just wanted a watermark
[12:27] <persia> If you want faster VMs, you want *lots* of RAM and very fast disks.
[12:28] <persia> I understand an install can be done in about 15 minutes, if one both reads from and writes to cache, rather than actual disk reads.
[12:28] <jtholmes> have fast disks plan to add more memory today or tomorrow
[12:29] <jtholmes> i can bring up live cd to start of install in about 5 mins is that pretty standard
[12:29] <persia> Right.
[12:29] <jtholmes> starting with a new VM that is
[12:29] <jtholmes> ok
[12:30] <persia> I'm surprised it takes that long with fast disks though: I can get about that with a laptop.
[12:30] <davmor2> persia: I cheat I use hardware :D
[12:30] <jtholmes> yes it is a litle slower than i thought i currently have 2G mem
[12:31] <persia> davmor2, I use hardware sometimes, but I find it slower, because it takes longer for me to burn CDs or USB keys than to launch a VM :)
[12:31] <davmor2> persia: I know but I get really issues that aren't apparent in vm so swings and roundabouts
[12:32] <persia> jtholmes, That's probably the limiting factor then.  For fastest VM, you want enough ram for your normal environment, plus enough for the size of the install media, plus enough for the environment in the VM plus enough for the disk cache in the VM for the 2GB being copied, plus enough to cache the virtual disk onto which you are installing.  That's usually at least 8GB.
[12:32] <persia> davmor2, Yep.  That's why I also use hardware :)
[12:33] <persia> My experience is that 80% of issues can be replicated in a VM, but only 80%, and none of them related to the kernel.
[12:34] <jtholmes> hmm 8G well i might give that a try i was going to bump to 6 but might go 8 thanks
[12:36] <davmor2> persia: I currently have a nice setup that I want to increase.  I need ati gfx base unit to round off the 3 major gfx bases.  I got 32 and 64bit machines.  I got bought and home buit units, laptops and netbooks.  I got a machine specifically for testing ltsp oh and a huge electric bill :)
[12:37] <persia> davmor2, That sounds like a decent setup.
[12:37] <jtholmes> yikes!
[12:38] <persia> Mine is different (2 lpia, 3 armel (one for which we no longer ship kernel), 2 amd64).  My powerpc is sadly dormant.
[12:38] <persia> But I tend to test different things :)
[12:38] <davmor2> persia: like I say I just want an ati base unit then I intel, nvida and ati :)
[12:38] <davmor2> persia: I test everything bar armel
[12:39] <persia> You ought be able to grab a relatively inexpensive ati card somewhere.
[12:39] <davmor2> persia: yeah but I need the base unit too :)
[12:42] <davmor2> persia: probably need a bigger kvm too then :)
[12:51]  * davmor2 -> Off out for a bit see you's latter
[12:53] <jtholmes> davmor2, whoever fixed something
[12:54] <jtholmes> no more side by side, no more use largest free area
[12:54] <jtholmes> only use entire disk, and manually but the bars are there on step 4
[12:55] <jtholmes> and they took the Bang Icons off the WHo are you page, yeah
[13:16] <jtholmes> it appears that there is a ubuntu alternate and a kubuntu alternate is that correct?
[13:16] <persia> jtholmes, Yes.
[13:17] <jtholmes> thanks
[13:17] <persia> The difference is the set of packages available in the pool, the default tasks, and the preseeding.
[13:17] <jtholmes> good to know
[13:17] <persia> So, while it's possible to install Xubuntu from the Kubuntu alternate CD, one ends up downloading a fair number of packages (and one has to fiddle the defaults).
[13:19] <jtholmes> is alternate for those machines that seem to choke on other iso's for one reason or another
[13:20] <persia> Well that, or to support certain classes of automated installs, or for different sorts of accessibility, or just more control over the installation process.
[13:20] <jtholmes> got it
[13:21] <persia> There are things one can do with alternates that one can't do with the live images, in terms of package selection, etc.
[13:21] <persia> So, for example, the Server CDs are *all* alternates, because it's impossible to know which kind of server is being installed, and nobody wants an unmaintained webserver installed on their mailserver.
[13:23] <jtholmes> good good
[16:17] <jtholmes> persia, ping
[16:18] <jtholmes> does anyone know if today is a holiday in Europe as it is in most of the USA
[16:19] <stgraber> it's
[16:19] <jtholmes> thank you
[17:07] <davmor2> persia: you about still?
[17:07] <charlie-tca> Hello, davmor2
[17:07] <davmor2> Hello charlie-tca :)  How's things stateside?
[17:08] <charlie-tca> Looking good, I think.
[17:09] <charlie-tca> Not making any bets, though, today
[17:10] <davmor2> :)
[17:27] <jtholmes> davmor2, do you have the bug number for side by side partitioning failing?
[17:28] <jtholmes> i cant find it in lp
[17:29] <davmor2> jtholmes: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/358519
[17:29] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 358519 in ubiquity "Jaunty: Ubiquity-frontend-kde step 4 should display bars for partitioning" [Undecided,New]
[17:29] <jtholmes> thanks
[17:51] <jtholmes> is there a timestamp file in each iso telling when it was created  date/time etc.
[17:54] <davmor2> jtholmes: What for?
[17:55] <jtholmes> so i can positively identify an iso image
[17:55] <jtholmes> other that lsb-release file which has no date/time
[17:56] <davmor2> jtholmes: you can use md5sum to track images
[17:56] <jtholmes> true but was looking for simpler method, but that will do
[17:57] <davmor2> jtholmes: you could right click on it and look at properties
[17:58] <jtholmes> btw  #339308 is in  4/10/9  daily-live  dont believe it was ever fixed i attaching bug trace
[17:58] <jtholmes> yes hadnt thought about properties
[17:58] <jtholmes> i am attaching  ubiquity -d  files to the bug for devel
[17:59] <davmor2> jtholmes: they know about it it's just a mtter of tracing back to when it first happened
[17:59] <jtholmes> ok thanks
[18:15] <cjwatson> jtholmes: .disk/info
[18:22] <jtholmes> cjwatson, stepped away for lunch will find it and include it also
[18:24]  * sbeattie writes a todo to himself to get apport to include it if ubuntu-bug is invoked from a livecd.
[18:25] <cjwatson> I don't think we need further information on 358519, if that's the one you're talking about
[18:25] <cjwatson> I could reproduce it myself
[22:34] <jtholmes> is there something similare to ctrace for python
[22:35] <jtholmes> similare similar