[13:17] So still no new images. What gives? Where does one ask after them? [13:19] It is alpha2 testing, no new images during the testing days. New images should be out on Friday, but if you need a re-spin, ask in #ubuntu-release [13:20] charlie-tca: Ahh... okay then. But there were new ones for Xubuntu, at least for yesterday. We did not get images for 20110705 at all. [13:21] I don't see any for ubuntustudio for the 5th. Last spin for the testing is marked july 4 [13:22] are those not usable? [13:22] * charlie-tca will push a re-spin if needed [13:23] Xubuntu got new ones yesterday because I got pushy [13:25] That's what I said, we didn't get any yesterday. And yeah, it failed on me for a vbox install. [13:26] And zsync just said it wasn't updated after I got it, so it looks like I'm pretty much screwed until new images are being spun. [13:30] re-spinning now [13:32] Getting new images done now [13:33] astraljava: sorry, I should have looked at the date yesterday. I did look that the tracker had you in there [13:45] charlie-tca: Ooh, super! Thanks! :D [13:45] charlie-tca: Yeah I've been lacking in attention now, I'm like out of my comfort zone since all my regular machines are in the old apartment still. :) [13:46] You know how it is, when you can't do your regular routines... [13:48] workflow, was the word I was looking for, but instead had to settle for routine [13:51] np [13:51] This is a big learning process, we will get you there [14:03] astraljava: images are ready now [14:08] charlie-tca: Excellent! Thanks! [17:13] astraljava: is the image working now? [17:16] charlie-tca: Haven't had time to test yet, but will fire vbox up in a few minutes, I'll let you know soon enough. [19:54] charlie-tca: Looks like it went past that stage now, so thank you _very_ much for re-spinning the discs! [19:54] err... images. [19:54] You are welcome [19:55] We have to hope :) [20:00] Did you get the request through in #ubuntu-release, or where? [20:01] Well, now it fails in a much later stage, but still, good to have it done. [20:02] in-target: gnome-panel: Breaks: libpanel-applet2-0 but 1:2.32.1-0ubuntu6.5 is to be installed [20:03] in-target: liblash-compat-1: Breaks: lashd but 0.6.0~rc2-5build1 is to be installed [20:16] Probably did it in #ubuntu-release [20:17] I get kind of pushy when they don't respin and it isn't our fault [20:17] Right, for a reason too. [20:18] Now I have to file the installer bug, too. Ubuntu 386 alternate won't even boot on one computer here [20:18] Ubuntu bug 386 in Baz (deprecated) "change to removed files does not conflict" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/386 [20:18] works on the other three [20:18] Haha! [20:19] Right. I'll file the ones above. [20:19] Okay [20:19] My installs are all on hardware here, so we will see what they do [20:20] so, you want me to select all the things or just the top one now? [20:20] Well, that's true. But I will of course state that these are on vbox. They can decide whether that's a problem or not. [20:20] charlie-tca: I always select them all, to get more coverage. [20:21] I don't what those things are, and I don't have any special audio/video stuff [20:21] charlie-tca: Shouldn't matter, isn't the point just to see whether the applications install at this point? [20:21] Okay, Picked all of them [20:22] As long as they don't require any special cards or anything [20:22] mythbuntu, for example, does require a tuner card to actually install [20:22] Ahh... right. [20:22] I don't think that holds for studio, though. [20:22] OkeyDokey [20:23] hm, you broke it [20:23] Every machine ought to have all the required components. [20:23] Did I? *damn* [20:23] What did I do now? [20:23] looking at the logs to find out [20:25] The following packages have unmet dependencies: [20:25] gnome-panel : Breaks: libpanel-applet2-0 but 1:2.32.1-0ubuntu6.5 is to be installed [20:25] liblash-compat-1 : Breaks: lashd but 0.6.0~rc2-5build1 is to be installed [20:25] There is the cause of the failure. It won't matter what is selected [20:25] I believed as much. [20:25] Did you file the bug yet? [20:25] Or should I? [20:25] So, why is gnome-panel still being installed? It's going away anyhow? [20:26] No I didn't. Wondering what to file it on. [20:26] because it is still seeded? [20:26] Right. [20:26] I will file one, then. Against Ubiquity, of course [20:27] Okay. I'll check the code. It's about time to get involved with that. [20:31] and it is both images [20:37] Well, they come from the same seeds, don't they? [20:38] Yup, there it is in the desktop file of the seed. *grumble* [20:39] But wait, that's all over gnome. What the hell? What am I missing here? [20:42] Right, it hasn't been updated to accommodate Xubuntu at all. Or is it being used in the first place? [20:43] astraljava: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/806672 [20:43] Ubuntu bug 806672 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) "UbuntuStudio images for Oneiric Alpha2 fail to install" [Undecided,New] [20:47] Okay. Ubiquity is a weird beast for me. How do I find out which seeds it uses for installation? [20:48] Wait a minute, Ubiquity? Isn't that the desktop installer? [20:48] I mean, not-the-alternate-installer? [20:52] crap [20:52] yes, I will change it to debian-installer [20:52] but it uses seeds that are decided here, probably scott [20:54] Yep. I'm a little behind on those issues, so I will wait for more acknowledged opinions on where to fix the seeds. [20:55] trying without any packages selected fails too [20:56] I notified skaet already, too [20:56] ScottL should know about the seeds [20:56] maybe ailo_ too, and persia [21:11] If using ubiquity, no seeds are used for installation: rather the contents of the live filesystem are simply copied. [21:12] The live filesystem is constructed from tasks, and the tasks are created from seeds, but we'd see the issue with the live filesystem failing to build, rather than with a failure to install on some device. [21:12] When using the alternate images, as we tend to do, the installation is driven by tasks. [21:13] persia: Right. And tasks are defined where nowadays? [21:13] The tasks are created from the seeds: our tasks should be created from https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntustudio-dev/ubuntu-seeds/ubuntustudio.oneiric [21:14] I *think* tasks are defined in tasksel, but derived from the seeds. Unless something drastic has changed, we shouldn't care except about the seeds. [21:14] In this case, I suspect the desktop seed ( http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntustudio-dev/ubuntu-seeds/ubuntustudio.oneiric/view/head:/desktop ) [21:15] Right, so I was looking at the correct place. [21:15] And it seems the seed hasn't been updated to reflect the changing to Xubuntu base. [21:15] It doesn't look very much like http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~xubuntu-dev/ubuntu-seeds/xubuntu.oneiric/view/head:/desktop [21:15] Indeed. [21:15] No point in Alpha-2 testing, then. [21:16] Well, could fix it. [21:16] Can? [21:16] Sure. [21:16] We have a few hours, if they can do the re-spin while armel is building [21:17] Ah, it probably can't be fixed in that timeframe. [21:17] I have machines to test with [21:17] Would need a meta upload, a cron.germinate run, and then a rebuild. [21:18] Adding to seeds is quick. Removing from them less so. [21:18] That said, it's worth doing the work to fix it anyway, so that it's ready for next time. [21:18] Well, we did try to get this done [21:18] * persia isn't quite sure which parts of "desktop" should match xubuntu, and which other bits are needed [21:18] not sure Xubuntu should even have the alpha2, at this point. [21:26] That's the problem, I don't either. Cory has done some application-checking between what we had and what Xubuntu has, and I believe Scott participated. But I have no idea about any logs of such sessions.