[07:07] <ara> good morning all :)
[08:21] <davmor2> Morning all
[13:07]  * davmor2 lunch
[14:09] <davmor2> morning fader_ cr3
[14:09] <fader_> davmor2: Howdy
[14:09] <fader_> How's tricks?
[14:11] <davmor2> vista bug is annoying as cjwatson is too busy to look at it right now :( .  Wubi is working up till you reboot then grub is screwed you need to manually edit it.  My machine with the ati card still can't load the desktop but I think I'm lowering down the cause slowly.  Other than that fine thanks you?
[14:12] <davmor2> fader_: did you find out if those machines that failed to produce results had ati gfx cards?
[14:12] <davmor2> fader_: in fact do any of them?
[14:14] <fader_> davmor2: Heh, I didn't realize I'd get a full brain dump :P
[14:15] <fader_> davmor2: Anyway, no, I haven't been seeing ATI-related issues in submitting results
[14:15] <davmor2> hey you asked dude :)
[14:15] <fader_> :)
[14:15] <cr3> davmor2: yo mama
[14:15] <fader_> I'm looking at the systems that were borked and I think they both have nvidia... I need to go make sure I'm looking at the right systems though
[14:17] <davmor2> cr3, fader_: bug 423415
[14:17] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 423415 in xserver-xorg-video-ati "Ati driver issues when logging into desktop" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/423415
[14:18] <davmor2> there have been at least 3 people affected by it
[14:19] <fader_> davmor2: Once cr3's migration scripts finish I think I'll be able to search all our hardware for systems with ATI cards... then we can do some targeted testing
[14:19] <Form0_> I havent gotten to desktop for like a week? :)
[14:19] <fader_> Form0_: Who needs the desktop when you have a few virtual terminals, right? ;)
[14:20] <cr3> davmor2: I've seen it
[14:20] <Form0_> yes! desktop is overrated :P
[14:20] <cr3> davmor2: is there anything you would like me to do on the machines affected by this problem?
[14:21] <davmor2> cr3: install live and see if you get a desktop up.
[14:22] <davmor2> cr3: kubuntu works so I'm assuming that this is an xsplash issue but need to lower it down a bit
[14:22] <cr3> davmor2: you mean "install from live" or "boot from live"? if I recall, I only encountered the problem after rebooting into the installed system, but that might be because my installation was fully automated
[14:23] <davmor2> cr3: yes sorry boot from live and see if you get a desktop
[14:23] <Form0_> But what I found disturbing was that I could get to root terminal without any password through recovery mode
[14:23] <davmor2> Form0_: That's deliberate
[14:24] <davmor2> you only go into it to fix your system
[14:25] <fader_> Anyone with physical access to a system can be presumed to have root access anyway, no matter the OS, and the recovery console is local-only
[14:25] <fader_> (Physical access trumps digital security, just by the nature of computers being physical devices.)
[14:26] <Form0_> yea..
[14:26] <Form0_> That's why it's good to encrypt your data I guess
[14:27] <fader_> Form0_: And lock your computer in a secure area if the data is really sensitive.  (Just remember that lead pipe decryption is cheap: http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/security.png ;) )
[14:28] <Form0_> :D
[14:35] <davmor2> fader_: xrandr -q should provide a list of available resolutions correct?
[14:37] <fader_> davmor2: Correct
[14:37] <fader_> I take it that it isn't?
[14:38] <davmor2> fader_: so why do I get "Can't open display"  even though ALT+CTRL+F7 has a display?
[14:39] <fader_> davmor2: You're not ssh'd somewhere else by mistake, are you?
[14:39] <davmor2> fader_: I'm on the box I have access to it :)
[14:40] <fader_> (Seeing as how I got the same thing when verifying 'xrandr -q' before realizing that I had ssh'd somewhere in that terminal :) )
[14:40] <fader_> davmor2: What does 'echo $DISPLAY' say?
[14:41] <davmor2> fader_: a blank line
[14:41] <fader_> Hmm.  Are you running this from within X or from just a VT?
[14:42] <fader_> If this is a VT, that would be why.  If this is in an xterm, then something is seriously weird on that system.
[14:43] <davmor2> ah that's why then I'll try again from xterm session
[14:43] <fader_> davmor2: Or try this: "DISPLAY=:0.0 xrandr -q"
[14:43] <fader_> If everything is reasonably defaultish and X is running that should work
[14:43] <fader_> on a VT
[14:44] <davmor2> fader_: got it from xterm session
[14:44] <fader_> Okay.  I wasn't sure if you had some issue that prevented X from being usable
[14:45] <fader_> You know, now that I think about it, I should ensure that $DISPLAY is set in the checkbox tests that call xrandr.
[14:45]  * fader_ files a bug.
[14:50] <davmor2> fader_: so the res is correct, hertz correct, and is displaying xterm ok.  It's not xsplash as I purge removed it.  It just doesn't like the gnome desktop
[14:51] <fader_> davmor2: Does your system have a KDE sticker on it by any chance? ;)
[14:51] <davmor2> Form0_: is this ati box you got a main pc or is it a test box
[14:51] <Form0_> it's one of my mains
[14:52] <davmor2> Form0_: I was going to suggest you try kubuntu on it it works here on my test box
[14:52] <fader_> davmor2: I'm a little unclear from the bug description on what's happening... is it that you're getting the display and everything but the panel and nautilus don't load?
[14:52] <Form0_> Ok, I'll do that when I get home
[14:53] <davmor2> fader_:  I get the initial xsplash screen, it fades displaying the default icons on the desktop before cycling back around to start xsplash again
[14:54] <davmor2> the desktop never actually appears as such
[14:55] <fader_> Huh, that's a weird one
[14:58] <davmor2> fader_: I'm thinking I might video it and add it to the bug
[14:59] <fader_> davmor2: Add a cool soundtrack to make it more popular
[14:59] <davmor2> doctor horrible
[15:00] <fader_> :D
[15:30] <davmor2> fader_: you can now grab it amazingly slowly from http://www.davmor2.co.uk/login.avi
[15:31] <fader_> davmor2: Hmm, have you tried that link yourself?
[15:32] <fader_> It returns a brief chunk of HTML with your name in it, content-type'd as an AVI :P
[15:32] <davmor2> fader_: hang on
[15:33] <davmor2> fader_: try again now
[15:33] <davmor2> fader_: or try bug 423415 it has just finished uploading
[15:33] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 423415 in xserver-xorg-video-ati "Ati driver issues when logging into desktop" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/423415
[15:33] <fader_> davmor2: Nope.  Permissions maybe?
[15:33] <fader_> Okay, I'll look there
[15:34] <davmor2> fader_: permission are rw-r--r--
[15:35] <fader_> Huh.  Meh, no worries as I'll grab it from LP
[15:37] <fader_> So I take it that the first session was the failsafe terminal session and the second was the default gnome session?
[15:38] <davmor2> fader_: did you read the text in the bug ;)
[15:38] <davmor2> yeah
[15:39] <davmor2> first was xterm session second gnome
[15:39] <davmor2> with no xsplash so it's not xsplashes fault :)
[15:39] <fader_> Hehe
[15:40] <fader_> davmor2: Is there anything in ~/.xsession-errors?
[15:40] <fader_> (I *think* that's the right filename)
[15:41] <davmor2> fader_: to add insult to injury Xubuntu works fine too so it is literally just gnome
[15:42] <davmor2> fader_: rebooting now
[15:42] <fader_> davmor2: When you tried KDE, did you do it by apt-get install kde or did you reformat and install with kubuntu?
[15:43] <davmor2> fader_: just installed Kubuntu I was testing at the time for a5 so hadn't got time to fanny arse around
[15:43] <fader_> It might be interesting to apt-get install kde on the box showing the problem (or apt-get install gnome if you've got xubuntu or something on there now)
[15:44] <fader_> That would let us know if it were something weird in gnome or something weird in that disc image
[15:44] <davmor2> fader_: it's been happening since the latest ati driver went in on the wednesday or tuesday last week
[15:45] <jtatum> greetings
[15:47] <fader_> davmor2: I'm not sure how the disc builds work; I just was hoping to verify that the bug can definitely be traced to gnome and not an old driver package or something that's gotten somehow stuck on the ubuntu disc
[15:47] <fader_> jtatum: Hello
[15:47] <davmor2> fader_: it worked fine on the older version
[15:47] <davmor2> hello jtatum
[15:48] <fader_> davmor2: Hey, I'm starting to think it's a PEBKAC issue now :P
[15:49] <davmor2> fader_: I'd love to say it is too but it works on everything else only gnome fails dismally
[15:49] <jtatum> hi davmor2, fader_
[15:49] <fader_> Yeah, I'm not serious.  Believe it or not, I trust that you know how to do an install by now ;)
[15:49] <davmor2> fader_: you'd hope so wouldn't you really :)
[15:50] <davmor2> nothing special in .xsession-errors
[15:50] <fader_> davmor2: Well, the installer is as easy as they can make it O:-)
[15:50] <fader_> Hmm, well there goes that theory
[15:51] <davmor2> fader_: when was the last time you tried an expert install on alternate :P
[15:51] <fader_> davmor2: jaunty RC :)
[15:52] <fader_> davmor2: Does the 'failsafe gnome' session exhibit the same behavior?
[15:52] <fader_> (Assuming it's still a default session; I haven't looked)
[15:52] <davmor2> fader_: what failsafe gnome there is gnome or xterm
[15:53] <fader_> Ah, okay, I was afraid of that.  There used to be a "Failsafe GNOME" session provided that ran minimal applications but still launched the panel and nautilus
[15:53] <davmor2> no gone :(
[15:53] <davmor2> no bryce either
[15:54] <fader_> I'm just trying to figure out what the gnome startup is doing that kde/xfce aren't, and all I can think of is something like calling xrandr or some wrapper for it
[15:54] <fader_> Though I guess it could be anything, really... X is too complex for my weak brain to fully understand
[15:55] <jtatum> jcollado: checkbox and checkbox-test or mago and mago-test? :)
[15:55] <jcollado> jtatum: Should be mago and mago-test. I need a rest (he, he).
[15:55] <davmor2> fader_: we know it's not gdm now cause xubuntu uses it
[15:56] <davmor2> so I'm wondering if it's some daft exit code or something
[15:56] <fader_> davmor2: Right; from your video it looks like something getting hit when it launches gnome
[15:56] <jtatum> jcollado: no worries, i think everyone knew what you meant :) Gonna poke at those packages later I hope. Lots on the list though
[15:56] <fader_> If it were something simple like an exit code I'd expect it to hit everybody, not just ATI
[16:00] <davmor2> fader_: no I mean the exit code is also an ati command or something daft
[16:00] <fader_> Ahh, gotcha
[17:31] <ara> Hello all :-)
[17:31] <mikefletcher> Hi.
[17:31] <ara> Anybody for the automated testing meeting=
[17:31] <ara> ?
[17:32] <mikefletcher> Hmm.  Might be a quick meeting.  I was just going to lurk.
[17:32] <ara> mikefletcher, hehe
[17:33] <ara> eeejay, jtatum, cgregan ?
[17:33] <ara> marjo, ?
[17:33] <jtatum> hi!
[17:33] <ara> Well, we are not many, but growing ;-)
[17:33] <ara> Let's start
[17:34] <ara> [TOPIC] Mago pending merges
[17:34] <ara>     *
[17:34] <ara>       Skip test cases
[17:34] <ara> I haven't had the time to review this merge request. Have you?
[17:35] <ara> While people answer, I would like to thank mikefletcher and jtatum for their contributions
[17:35] <ara> Thanks guys! You rock!
[17:35] <mikefletcher> No problem.
[17:36] <jtatum> I have reviewed it. It looks pretty great, especially for test development. The long term broken tests cases is a good one as well
[17:37] <ara> jtatum, OK, I don't know if I will have time to review in the mean time, but the merge comments look good. I will ask jcollado to merge the changes
[17:37] <ara> [TOPIC] Mago packaging
[17:37] <ara>     * Daily Builds update - jcollado
[17:38] <ara> Reproducing jcollado comments, as he couldn't attend
[17:39] <ara> The basic idea is that I wanted a jaunty package to make easier to run tests on
[17:39] <ara> different machines without having to deal with bazaar. Hence, I created mago
[17:39] <ara> and mago-test packages.
[17:39] <ara> mago package should contain the same files as in karmic, while mago-test
[17:39] <ara> should contain all the test cases in trunk. Otherwise, please let me know. Since
[17:39] <ara> both packages are generated using the latest version in trunk, I've also made
[17:39] <ara> them available for karmic just in case someone finds it useful.
[17:39] <ara> Despite I'm interested in using reasonably up-to-date packages, I'm not exactly
[17:39] <ara> looking for generating them on a daily basis so I'll upload new versions
[17:39] <ara> periodically depending on the amount of changes in trunk.
[17:39] <ara> I think this is great, thanks jcollado
[17:40] <jtatum> +1
[17:40] <ara> I was talking to james_w to see if we could have a machine to have fully automated builds
[17:40] <ara> I will keep you guys posted about this
[17:41] <jtatum> I guess I have a question about adding dependencies. As we merge them in, should we propose merges to the packaging?
[17:42] <ara> jtatum, sure, you can request merges into jcollado branches (I will ask him to change the ownership to mago-contributors)
[17:42] <ara> or use the karmic code at
[17:42]  * ara checks
[17:43] <ara> https://code.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mago
[17:43] <jtatum> OK, great. I'll make an action item to note this process on the Wiki somewhere. As you mentioned on the mailing list, there's a distinction between requires and suggests depending on whether it's 'core mago' or part of a test
[17:44] <ara> jtatum, yes, I think it is best like that
[17:44] <ara> jtatum, if not, mago will end with one of the packages with the longest dependencies in Ubuntu :D
[17:44] <jtatum> haha
[17:45] <ara> jtatum, can you take that as an action?
[17:46] <ara> jtatum, to write a page about that process in the mago wiki?
[17:46] <jtatum> ara: yes.
[17:46] <ara> jtatum, cool
[17:46] <ara> jtatum, last item
[17:46] <ara> [TOPIC] Mago roadmap
[17:46] <ara>     * Should this be on the mago wiki or should this be in the LP roadmap system? - jtatum
[17:47] <ara> I think that a combination of both should work better
[17:47] <jtatum> This is just my ignorance probably. I have only skimmed the LP roadmap system so I'm probably just not aware of the challenges.
[17:48] <ara> blueprints in launchpad are not that useful for small features
[17:49] <ara> we can use a combination of wiki (to have a common place to go) + links to bugs for small features, or blueprints for large features
[17:50] <jtatum> OK. Sounds good.
[17:50] <ara> Good
[17:50] <ara> any other topics?
[17:51] <ara> OK, I think we can wrap up
[17:51] <ara> I will send the notes to the list
[17:51] <ara> thanks!
[17:51] <mikefletcher> fyi, i'm going add a Tomboy Test Suite to the roadmap and write my name beside it.
[17:51] <ara> mikefletcher, nice!
[17:52] <jtatum> Sounds good, mikefletcher. I'm not sure of priorities really. There are a lot of applications on the test cases wiki with no coverage, and a lot of tests that need to be updated for Karmic
[17:53] <mikefletcher> Well in this case my priorities are the apps I want tested the most :).
[17:53] <jtatum> Absolutely. Personal priorities come first :) Just thinking out loud. I want to go in a million directions with Mago and welcome guidance :)
[17:56] <mikefletcher> jtatum: After I have the Tomboy tests in (probably for Karmic+1) I would like to work on getting them packaged so that anyone can pickup a livecd, run the tests on their own hardware and produce usefull bug reports.
[17:56] <mikefletcher> jtatum: I expect that will take until Karmic+2 or Karmin+3 to finish.  I have a day job :).
[17:57] <jtatum> mikefletcher: Same here :) Have you seen eeejay's work on the mago livecd?
[17:58] <mikefletcher> jtatum: I read about it.
[17:59] <mikefletcher> jtatum: The livecd was testing the installer right?  I cannot remember.
[18:05] <jtatum> mikefletcher: Hmm, I think you're right. And now I see that a lot of the scripts involve getting a PXE boot and NFS, which wouldn't apply to your use case. Sounds like jcollado's packaging will help more perhaps
[18:08] <mikefletcher> jtatum: Yeah, packaging would be absolutly necessary.  And Checkbox would need to be able to run mago tests.  And apport needs to somehow include information on the broken tests from mago when its started by checkbox.
[18:09] <mikefletcher> jtatum: I imagine something where a community tester would have a recipe like 'apt-get install all-mago-tests && checkbox'.
[18:10] <jtatum> mikefletcher: I'm guessing that karmic+1 will have at least some of that. Interesting idea on apport. That would be really neat.
[18:10] <mikefletcher> jtatum: and then checkbox starts.  A failed test would open apport with a description of what failed.  Then the tester could retry the test, look at what failed, etc, etc.  Bug goes off.
[18:13] <jtatum> mikefletcher: Neat. That would be really slick. Definitely a lot of possibilities out there. Fun :)