[02:20] <cSquall> exit
[02:23] <skaet> jibel,  thanks for publishing those images.
[02:28] <hggdh> potential blocker for server: bug 813266
[02:28] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 813266 in eucalyptus (Ubuntu) "eucalyptus fails to start instances (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Critical,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/813266
[02:29] <hggdh> skaet: ^
[02:30] <skaet> hggdh, thanks for flagging,  we'll need to make sure it gets infront of Daviey as soon as he wakes up.
[02:32] <skaet> heh,  have seen you've flagged it in ubuntu-server already.  excellent.
[02:43] <hggdh> :-)
[02:48] <hggdh> skaet: I will wake up early -- say, around 0400, to get with Daviey
[02:52] <skaet> thanks hggdh
[02:53] <skaet> I'm going to call it a night now too and try for early (although not as early as you ;) )
[07:47] <jibel> mvo, Hey
[07:48] <jibel> mvo, could you change lucid to 10.04.3 in meta-release files, please ?
[07:48] <mvo> jibel: sure, thanks. doing that now
[15:18] <jibel> anyone can help with ltsp tests on 10.04.3 alternate and Ubuntu Desktop Runonce tests ?
[15:19] <jibel> Daviey, anyone can do iscsi testing in your team ?
[15:30] <Daviey> jibel: potentially..
[15:30] <Daviey> What needs doing?
[15:32] <jibel> Daviey, iSCSI Authenticated and Unauthenticated on i386 and amd64 for 10.04.3
[15:32] <jibel> http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/result/6039/456
[15:32] <jibel> http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/result/6039/453
[15:33] <jibel> http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/result/6040/455
[15:33] <jibel> http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/result/6040/454
[15:33] <jibel> I'll check what were the results for 10.04.2
[15:40] <Daviey> jibel: Can anyone on QA help with the tests aswell?
[15:40] <jibel> hggdh, ?
[15:42] <jibel> I can do server upgrade
[15:42] <hggdh> heh. I am there, on the i386 LVM+cpryto
[15:42] <hggdh> jibel, Daviey ^
[15:45] <jibel> Daviey, so hggdh can finish encrypted (and raid1 ?) , I can do upgrade, no network and rescue, and there's someone missing to do iSCSI, and we'll be done with server (module the kernel bug of course)
[15:45] <jibel> module->modulo
[15:45] <hggdh> jibel: I can do raid1, but on KVM only
[15:45] <jibel> patrickmw, can you help with ltsp on alternate for 10.04.3 ?
[15:46] <patrickmw> jibel: sure can
[15:46] <jibel> patrickmw, Cool, many thanks!
[15:47] <jibel> hggdh, the only issue was the disk not recovering automatically after a disconnect/reconnect
[15:47] <jibel> what's left then ?
[15:48] <jibel> oh, all the Run once Desktop tests as I said above.
[15:48] <hggdh> jibel: will get to it after the i386 test
[15:50] <Daviey> jibel: so what do we need to do?
[15:50] <patrickmw> jibel, syncing
[15:54] <hggdh> Daviey: is it worth the time to run the UEC i386 now?
[15:55] <Daviey> hggdh: no, it's almost guranteed to fail
[15:55] <Daviey> better to wait for the new kernel.
[15:55] <Daviey> hggdh: The boxes you were using, i hijacked to verify apw's custom kernel.
[15:56] <Daviey> you can steal them back if needed.
[15:56] <hggdh> Daviey: no right now, no need
[16:23] <hggdh> hum. This is not good. I started the Raid1 test on two already-existing KVM disks. I had used these disks before for Raid1 tests, so they did have the setup
[16:23] <hggdh> I cannot delete and recreate the Raid/partitions
[16:23] <hggdh> Daviey: ^
[16:24] <jibel> even with the manual partitioner ?
[16:25] <hggdh> yes. I then deleted and recreated the partitions themselves (and swapped the position of root and swap). Cannot recreate/delete the Raid1 defs
[16:26] <hggdh> saved the part table, got an error stating I must reboot. Rebooted into d-i, got back to partman, raid device 1 is gone, there is only raid device 0
[16:26] <hggdh> and I cannot delete it
[16:27] <Daviey> that sounds familair.
[16:27] <hggdh> yes, I dimly remember something like that
[16:38] <hggdh> cannot find the bug, opening a new one
[16:45] <hggdh> later. I succeeded in deleting it
[16:54] <hggdh> huh. Is postfix now installed by default?
[16:57] <Daviey> shouldn't be, but a common dep of other stuff
[16:58] <jibel> Daviey, Is it known that an LVM encrypted system can't be upgraded from Hardy to Lucid ?
[16:58] <Daviey> jibel: I don't remember hearing of that.. is that using LUKS?
[16:59] <pedro_> QA Meeting at #ubuntu-meeting in ~2 mins!
[16:59] <jibel> Daviey, yes. The behavior is weird, I had to enter the password maybe 6 or 7 times before it was accepted.
[17:00] <Daviey> jibel: clumsy fingers? :)
[17:01] <jibel> Daviey, I don't think so,  with such a secured password
[17:01] <Daviey> heh
[17:02]  * Daviey looks at bug #544812
[17:02] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 544812 in cryptsetup (Ubuntu) "LUKS encrypted partition does not mount during boot (affects: 6) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/544812
[17:09] <jibel> Daviey, false alarm, it looks more like no more battery in my wireless keyboard :)
[17:10] <Daviey> :P
[17:44] <patrickmw> jibel, I had forgotten that I formated my laptop I used for iso testing.  I'm getting it all back in order so I can run the ltsp tests
[17:44] <patrickmw> well, rather never set it all up again :)
[18:02] <hggdh> jibel, Daviey: wasn't there a bug for rebooting on Raid1 in degraded=no?
[18:41] <hggdh> jibel: done, raid1 tested on both amd64 and i386 server
[19:35] <jibel> hggdh, thanks, upgrade is ok, excepted that it doesn't tell to the user his keyboard is out of battery.
[19:35] <jibel> patrickmw, ok
[19:35] <hggdh> jibel: oooohh, serious bug
[19:36] <jibel> So I was blaming the server team because the encrypted authentication failed 80% of the time.
[19:36] <jibel> :-D
[19:40] <hggdh> LOL
[19:40] <hggdh> OTOH, if someone must be blamed, why not the server team?
[19:43] <patrickmw> jibel, favor? can you try booting lucid-alternate-amd64 and try to run a basic install? let me know if you get an error right after selecting Install Ubuntu
[19:44] <jibel> patrickmw, uhoh, I tried so many time, what is broken ?
[19:47] <jibel> patrickmw, no error here, I have the 'Choose language' screen. What do you get ?
[19:48] <patrickmw> I am running a vm, it claims I am not running 64bit (which I am)
[19:49] <patrickmw> jibel^
[19:49] <hggdh> KVM or VirtualBox?
[19:50] <patrickmw> vbox :( I can certainly try with kvm.  i find testing ltsp easier with vbox (nice internal network feature)
[19:50] <hggdh> maybe the underlying VM def is set to i386
[19:50] <hggdh> are you reusing a VM?
[19:51] <patrickmw> no
[19:51] <hggdh> oh
[19:51] <hggdh> do you have the KVM modules loaded?
[19:51] <jibel> patrickmw, what is the output of 'arch' on the host ?
[19:51] <hggdh> and 'lsmod | grep kvm'
[20:00] <hggdh> patrickmw: ^
[20:00] <patrickmw> hggdh, sorry I see you guys.  just trying in kvm
[20:01] <hggdh> patrickmw: if you have KVM loaded, there will be a conflict with VBox for AMD64
[20:01] <patrickmw> hddgh, I removed vbox
[20:01] <patrickmw> no conflicts :)
[20:02] <hggdh> patrickmw: oh, OK, this will solve the issue ;-) what I do when I want VBox 64 is 'sudo rmmod kvm-intel;sudo rmmod kvm'
[20:02] <patrickmw> nice
[20:20] <patrickmw> hggdh, jibel: HA!  I'm running Oneiric on the netbook that pete sent us.  I was wondering if I needed to update thinking there might be a chance that would fix it.  Installed lots of updates...now no video display.  but I can get into VT
[20:23] <hggdh> LOL
[20:23] <hggdh> welcome to the bleeding edge
[20:24] <hggdh> you would have to find out what failed -- perhaps you can 'sudo stop lightdm; sudo start lightdm' and this will work
[20:25] <hggdh> otherwise you have to dig into the /var/log/Xorg.0.log to find out what happened
[20:25] <hggdh> BRB
[20:26] <jibel> patrickmw, you get the login box or it doesn't even reach that point ?
[20:27] <patrickmw> jibel, no login box. blank screen
[20:28] <patrickmw> jibel, i'm going to finish ltsp on another box, then troubleshoot later
[20:31] <jibel> patrickmw, nothing I seen on recent reports. That is worth filing a bug.
[20:31] <patrickmw> jibel, ack
[20:37] <patrickmw> jibel, just to verify. were you referring to the first or second language screen?
[20:38] <patrickmw> jibel, I have several other amd64 images running.  only lucid alternate is giving me a hard time
[20:40] <patrickmw> very odd
[21:03] <jibel> patrickmw, I was referring to the second.
[21:04] <jibel> patrickmw, could you check that in the settings of the VM
[21:05] <jibel> patrickmw, in 'General/Basic' Version is set to 'Ubuntu 64bit' (that will enable VTx automatically )
[21:05] <patrickmw> jibel, checked. it is
[21:05] <jibel> patrickmw, and in 'System/Acceleration' 'Enable VT-x' is enabled
[21:06] <jibel> patrickmw, also check that VTx is enabled in the BIOS (or whatever the manufacturer of your machine called it)
[21:07] <jibel> also as hggdh said, be sure to unload any other virtualization module that may conflict with VBox
[21:09] <patrickmw> jibel: i have a install running right now
[21:29] <Claudinux> hi all
[21:30] <Claudinux> I would like like to say if when i get an error like this i have to consider the test failed or not
[21:30] <Claudinux> bug 645818
[21:30] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 645818 in usb-creator (Fedora) (and 5 other projects) "Unknown keyword in configuration file: gfxboot (affects: 99) (dups: 7) (heat: 365)" [Unknown,Unknown] https://launchpad.net/bugs/645818
[21:30] <Claudinux> in this bug the problem is with usb-creator, not with the iso image...
[21:31] <charlie-tca> then the iso image did not fail
[21:31] <charlie-tca> It may not pass, though, you might not be able to do that test because the usb-creator fails
[21:31] <Claudinux> charlie-tca, the iso image fail if i use usb-creator, but if i use another usb creator it works
[21:32] <charlie-tca> The fail in in usb creator creating a valid image, is it not?
[21:32] <Claudinux> yes, it is
[21:33] <charlie-tca> as stated in comment #2 of the bug report, it is not the image failing
[21:33] <charlie-tca> it is usb creator itself failing to create a valid image, thus the test can not be done when trying to create the usb drive
[21:35] <Claudinux> ok charlie-tca , but if I write the same image on a CD it works
[21:35] <charlie-tca> That still doesn' t mean it failed with the usb image that is invalid
[21:36] <charlie-tca> The failure is still usb-creator, not the image itself.
[21:37] <Claudinux> so, on the iso tracker, the test is to be marked s passed or failed?
[21:37] <Claudinux> this is what i'm looking for...
[21:38] <Claudinux> *as
[21:38] <charlie-tca> The test is a pass if it passed using the cd
[21:38] <charlie-tca> Which test is it?
[21:39] <Claudinux> http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/result/6049/4
[21:40] <charlie-tca> so, are you creating the image on usb in 10.04.3?
[21:41] <charlie-tca> According to the bug report, you can not create the usb image in 10.04 and expect it to work, therefore, you will need to create in another release
[21:42] <charlie-tca> If you create it in 10.04 and it won't work, but a cd does work, it passes
[21:46] <Claudinux> otherwise, if the image won't work on usb or cd the is to be marked as "Failed"
[21:46] <Claudinux> ?
[21:46] <Claudinux> *test
[21:47] <charlie-tca> right
[21:47] <Claudinux> ok, thanks charlie-tca
[21:47] <charlie-tca> you are welcome. Thanks for helping with testing.
[21:48] <Claudinux> :-)