[06:31] <skaet> cjwatson - Bug #717699 showed up on the iso tracker for 10.04.2, can you have a look?
[06:31] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 717699 in casper (Ubuntu) "Lucid 20110211.1-desktop and 20110211.3-alternate amd64, gfxboot bug (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/717699
[08:17] <apw> cjwatson, is that not the bug triggered when the usb device is built on a system which is too far away from the system on the image ?  the gfxboot option thingy
[09:31] <ev> might I kindly ask that someone NEW oem-config-slideshow-ubuntu
[09:40] <cjwatson> skaet: what apw said.  I've duped it
[09:40] <cjwatson> not a bug in 10.04.2 as such, more a bug in later releases
[09:44] <apw> cjwatson, is this somewhere that the dreaded hybrid thingy might hep
[09:45] <apw> help
[09:45] <cjwatson> yes, but it's not quite that simple either - ev has been wrestling with it
[09:46] <cjwatson> we still (potentially) have to make some modifications to the image
[10:07] <cjwatson> ev: done
[10:07] <ev> cjwatson: thanks bunches
[10:55] <cjwatson> skaet: lucid DVDs are in place now
[10:55] <cjwatson> jibel: ^-
[10:55] <cjwatson> (for i386 too, I mean)
[11:01] <jibel> cjwatson, thanks, syncing.
[11:02] <jibel> skaet, there's no upgrade test cases on the tracker ?
[13:53] <jibel> cjwatson, skaet , xubuntu i386 images failed to boot, with no bootable medium found.
[13:54] <cjwatson> odd error.  can anyone else reproduce that?
[13:54] <jibel> charlie-tca reproduce that
[13:55] <cjwatson> it'll be three hours absolute minimum before I can look, as I'd already started rsyncing another image
[13:55] <cjwatson> perhaps somebody else can track down what's wrwong?
[13:55] <cjwatson> *wrong
[14:00] <charlie-tca> bug 718749
[14:00] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 718749 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) "Xubuntu i386 Lucid 10.04.2 images will not boot (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Critical,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/718749
[14:02] <cjwatson> not a ubiquity bug
[14:02] <cjwatson> it's only a ubiquity bug if it actually gets as far as the installer
[14:02] <cjwatson> (for the record)
[14:02] <charlie-tca> sorry, I didn't know which package it was for sure
[14:04] <cjwatson> install dumpet, see what it says for that image
[14:05] <cjwatson> (dumpet -i foo.iso)
[14:11] <charlie-tca> desktop image - does not contain an El Torito bootable image. BootRecordIndicator: 2
[14:12] <ev> that would do it
[14:12] <charlie-tca> alternate 386 is the same
[14:25] <cjwatson> the only obvious thing that might have gone wrong is that it *really* doesn't like -joliet-long
[14:25]  * cjwatson digs up the build logs
[14:25] <cjwatson> oh shit
[14:25] <cjwatson> +    echo -n "-joliet-long " > $N.mkisofs_opts
[14:26] <cjwatson> > is NOT the same as >>
[14:26] <cjwatson> sorry folks, mea culpa
[14:26] <cjwatson> i386 DVD will be affected too
[14:27] <charlie-tca> Thanks for looking
[14:28] <cjwatson> thanks for spotting it.  will fix ASAP
[14:29] <cjwatson> rebuilds in progress
[14:32] <ogra> hmpf, someone edited the cdimage branch directly on antimony
[14:33] <cjwatson> the branch, or the working tree?
[14:33] <ogra>  /srv/cdimage.ubuntu.com shows me a diff
[14:34] <ogra> in buildlive and publish-release
[14:34] <cjwatson> yes, those are long-standing, please leave them in place until I figure out what to do about them
[14:34] <ogra> hmm, and the buildlive change is from last year (!)
[14:34] <ogra> ah, k
[14:35] <ogra> if its on purpose i'm fine
[14:35] <cjwatson> I know about it, at least
[14:35] <ogra> k
[14:48] <skaet> cjwatson, which images are slated for rebuild at this time?  (looks like some need to be marked rebuilding on the tracker, ubuntu DVD, Xubuntu, ???)
[14:48] <cjwatson> I'll mark them now
[14:48] <cjwatson> just Xubuntu plus Ubuntu DVD i386
[14:49] <cjwatson> and DVDs weren't posted anyway
[14:51] <skaet> Xubuntu marked now for rebuild
[15:15] <skaet> jibel, upgrade test cases added for all except xubuntu,  will add those with the new images
[15:15] <skaet> thanks for catching it.  :)
[15:19] <jibel> skaet, seen that. Thanks.
[15:22] <jibel> skaet, we have verified all the images excepted server. 2 major issues have been identified so far: bug 718749 (rebuilding in progress) and bug 645818 (not a bug in lucid)
[15:22] <ubot4> jibel: Bug 718749 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/718749 is private
[15:22] <ubot4> jibel: Bug 645818 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/645818 is private
[15:22] <jibel> ubot4, you're wrong
[15:22] <ubot4> Factoid "you're wrong" not found
[15:23] <jibel> skaet, I've run the upgrades for K/Ubuntu desktop last week without any problem.
[15:23] <charlie-tca> argue with the 'bot? ;-)
[15:25] <skaet> jibel, thanks for the update.   Can someone with an existing lucid system confirm they can make usbs/cds and install a 10.04.2 system that way?  (ie. not impacted by 645818)
[15:26] <jibel> sure, we'll find a volunteer :-)
[16:36] <jibel> skaet, I'll change the notice on the tracker to mention the issue with USBs created on 10.10+, do you agree ?
[16:38] <skaet> jibel,  good idea.  :)
[16:44] <apw> skaet, this lbm filename limit prob, is there a bug for that ?
[16:45] <skaet> cjwatson, ^^?
[16:47] <apw> skaet, and can you remind me why this puppy is even on the CD ?
[16:48] <skaet> apw,  its the image from bjf and sconklin we'll be using for 10.04.2
[16:49] <apw> skaet, LBM seems a strange package to end up on a CD ever ?
[16:50]  * skaet puzzles, and goes back to check some IRC logs...  LBM?
[16:50] <apw> linux-backport-modules-*
[16:52]  * skaet nods
[16:56] <skaet> apw, bjf - [01:01] <cjwatson> genisoimage: Error: CD1/pool/main/l/linux-backports-modules-2.6.32/linux-backports-modules-compat-wireless-2.6.34-2.6.32-28-generic_2.6.32-28.27_i386.deb and CD1/pool/main/l/linux-backports-modules-2.6.32/linux-backports-modules-compat-wireless-2.6.34-2.6.32-28-generic-pae_2.6.32-28.27_i386.deb have the same Joliet name
[16:56] <skaet> [01:01] <cjwatson> Joliet tree sort failed.
[16:56] <tgardner> skaet, why are LBM packages being seeded on the CDROM ?
[16:57] <cjwatson> phone, minute
[16:58] <skaet> tgardner, will let the expert comment.  :)
[16:59] <apw> skaet, the problem is that the meta packages are also too long in some cases,
[16:59] <apw> so changing their name without a transitional package seems a problem
[17:00] <apw> but having the transitional package will trigger the same problem
[17:00] <tgardner> apw, those are _new_ meta packages since Lucid was released, right?
[17:00] <apw> tgardner, the too long ones are new yes
[17:01] <apw> in all cases the names which are too long were not in the -release pocket
[17:02] <cjwatson> the DVD includes practically everything that's in supported
[17:02] <cjwatson> (technically, supported-common, which includes supported-kernel-common)
[17:02] <cjwatson> so linux-backports-modules has been there for a long time
[17:04] <cjwatson> skaet: anyway, the new DVDs haven't finished building yet
[17:04] <cjwatson> -joliet-long should have worked around all this
[17:04]  * skaet will keep fingers crossed
[17:04] <apw> cjwatson, ok so if we rename shorter which isn't impossible, what can we do about transitional pacages
[17:04] <apw> packages, to pull people to the new names, is there some way we can exclude those from the CD?
[17:05] <apw> DVD
[17:05] <cjwatson> sure, but why don't we just ignore the problem for lucid
[17:06] <apw> cjwatson, i am all for ignoring it :)
[17:06] <cjwatson> and then we shouldn't have to worry about it since we don't do transitionals for LBM for lucid->? anyway
[17:06] <tgardner> cjwatson, correct
[17:06] <apw> ok as there is no point release maverick we only have to worry about natty
[17:06] <apw> and we can fix these names before we do lbm for there
[17:06] <cjwatson> we can just make sure that package names are unique in the first 64 characters in the future
[17:07] <cjwatson> I only applied the debian-cd change for lucid i386, so it'll blow up on us in the future again if we violate that
[17:07] <cjwatson> (and TBH, it may not be a massive problem as Joliet is just for Windows compat, but we should probably be a little careful in case we happen to change something that might affect Wubi - this shouldn't, though)
[17:07] <apw> cjwatson, cool
[17:08] <tgardner> cjwatson, we'll take steps to correct the meta package names for Natty and announce on ubuntu-devel, etc
[17:08] <apw> cjwatson, is there an LP bug for this puppy?
[17:08] <cjwatson> doesn't look like it
[17:08] <cjwatson> I didn't mention one in the debian-cd commit message, anyway
[17:08] <apw> cjwatson, ok don't think we need one just wanted to hoover it up if it was there
[17:16] <skaet> apw, ack
[17:16] <apw> skaet, so i think we have a plan... do nothing and don't mess up natty
[17:31] <skaet> apw,  heh,  "do nothing" seems a bit ambiguous.  I read it as no change for lucid, email to u-devel about 64 char restriction so we don't mess natty.  ;)
[17:32] <apw> yeah do nothing for existing releases, email out a warning for natty, and then get natty right
[17:32] <skaet> :)
[17:33] <cjwatson> since this is the first time it's bitten us in 6+ years, I'm not desperately worried about it being a pervasive problem
[17:36] <apw> cjwatson, yeah, though it is always that annoying kernel team pushing the boundaries
[17:43] <tgardner> apw, I pushed a patch to ubuntu-natty-meta that sets the format for future LBM compat-wireless package names
[17:43] <apw> tgardner, you are a star
[17:46] <tgardner> apw, which reminds me, we need to upload an LBM soon just as a placeholder or we'll end up having to write a MIR after the fact.
[17:46] <apw> tgardner, ok ... what do we have which it would produce
[17:46] <tgardner> apw, its always empty to begin with.
[17:46] <apw> no compat wiress, no also, i guess smb's input might exist
[17:47] <tgardner> I guess, if it hasn't gone upstream
[17:47] <apw> if we didn't have to bump abi on all of these packages, it owuld be nice for them to be separate source
[17:48] <tgardner> apw, don't go there :) way too much work.
[17:48] <apw> yeah i konw, well unless we could make them dkms packages
[17:49] <apw> we have 11.10 to think about that for
[17:49] <Riddell> cjwatson: I removed a language pack from kubuntu lucid live if you want to respin it to stop oversizing
[17:49] <skaet> cjwatson, pitti,  for the release change log,   should it be since 10.04.1 or since 10.04 - what's the precedent?
[17:50] <cjwatson> since 10.04.1
[17:51] <skaet> cjwatson,  thanks
[17:52] <cjwatson> Xubuntu reposted
[17:52] <charlie-tca> thanks
[17:52] <cjwatson> er, oops, wrong version
[17:53] <cjwatson> not December yet
[17:53] <cjwatson> ok, fixed, and Ubuntu DVDs posted
[17:53] <cjwatson> Riddell: ok, thanks - shall I just respin i386, since that's the only one affected?
[17:54] <Riddell> cjwatson: yes
[17:55] <cjwatson> ok, respinning
[18:10]  * skaet -> lunch,  biab
[18:23] <charlie-tca> Xubuntu amd64 desktop image should be okay now, did not resize the ppc images
[18:25] <charlie-tca> Can respin that image only, please.
[18:26] <cjwatson> to clarify: respin Xubuntu desktop amd64?
[18:26] <charlie-tca> please. It should no longer be oversize
[18:26] <cjwatson> Riddell: Kubuntu still oversized
[18:47]  * skaet back
[20:39] <marjo> skaet: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/usb-creator/+bug/645818
[20:39] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 645818 in usb-creator (Ubuntu Natty) (and 3 other projects) "10.04.1 image created in Maverick does not boot in my Dell Mini9 (affects: 58) (dups: 4) (heat: 178)" [Critical,Triaged]
[20:40] <skaet> marjo,  yes?  jibel has documented workaround on isotracker.
[20:40] <marjo> skaet: ack
[20:42] <marjo> skaet: just FYI, per jibel's request,  I created a 10.04.2 bootable USB with usb-creator-gtk on Lucid. I was able to boot to a live session with this USB image.
[20:42] <marjo>  System that booted is an Acer Aspire One Model ZA3.
[20:42] <skaet> marjo,  excellent thanks - good to know.  :)
[20:48] <ScottK> skaet: But the bug was for an image created on Maverick, not an image created on Lucid?
[20:49] <skaet> ScottK,  yes,  I plan on marking it invalid, after I put out the release notes.   Just wanted it to show up so it didn't get overlooked.
[20:49] <skaet> I put a comment in the bug to that effect.
[20:50] <ScottK> Ah.  I see.
[21:01] <cjwatson> skaet: please don't mark the bug invalid for natty
[21:01] <cjwatson> we still want to figure something out for that - it's just hard
[21:01] <cjwatson> (and maverick too)
[21:08] <skaet> cjwatson,  ack, was just planning on it for lucid