[08:21] <soren> Where is "in-target" defined?
[08:24] <cjwatson> soren: debian-installer-utils
[08:28] <soren> cjwatson: Ah. Thanks!
[08:30] <soren> Hm... That's weird. I'm setting a proxy in my preseed, but for a particular request in  my late_command, I need to not use the proxy. I'm doing this: http://paste.ubuntu.com/945349/
[08:30] <soren> So, running: http_proxy= https_proxy= in-target wget -O /home/localadmin/.ssh/authorized_keys http://172.20.231.32/jenkins.pub
[08:31] <soren> ..but somehow wget still uses the proxy.
[08:31] <soren> I was expecting in-target would reveal why that would be, but I'm a bit lost.
[08:32] <soren> Oh!
[08:32] <soren> chroot-setup.sh helpfully ensures that http_proxy is set.
[08:32] <soren> (and in-target sources chroot-setup.sh)
[08:35] <cjwatson> in-target env -u http_proxy -u https_proxy ...
[08:36] <soren> in-target http_proxy= https_proxy= [...] won't do?
[08:37] <soren> I guess I'll know in about 6 minutes.
[08:37] <soren> :)
[08:40] <cjwatson> no
[08:40] <cjwatson> shell doesn't chain that way
[08:41] <cjwatson> IOW $ sudo chroot /chroot/sid http_proxy= env
[08:41] <cjwatson> chroot: failed to run command `http_proxy=': No such file or directory
[08:41] <cjwatson> for basically that reason - you can't pass variable assignments direct to execvp, the shell has to translate
[08:43] <soren> I just wasn't sure if chroot execvp'd or ran a shell.
[08:44] <soren> I guess such smarts (execvp'ing if passed a pathname, calling a shell if not) don't belong in chroot.
[08:45] <soren> Yup. Just failed.
[09:01] <jibel> ev, the selection of the users in m-a behaves very strangely
[09:02] <ev> oh?
[09:02] <jibel> ev, here is a sequence of selection/deselection of the 2 users http://paste.ubuntu.com/945380/
[09:02] <jibel> ev, 0=jibel, 1 =ubuntu
[09:07] <jibel> for the 1rst user in the list selected state and state of the checkbox are inverted but the list of items to sync is always correct (empty or all)
[09:07] <jibel> for the second user it is different
[09:07] <jibel> first click on the user, selected state and items are correctly set
[09:08] <jibel> but on second click (uncheck) the selected state is still True while items to sync are emptied
[09:09] <jibel> and then next clicks, checkbox state and selected are inverted
[09:15] <ev> I'll have a look in a bit
[09:15] <ev> cheers for the investigation
[17:03] <bdmurray> cjwatson: is there enough information in bug 987956 to understand what happened?
[17:03] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 987956 in ubiquity "Installer Deletes Contents from Separate HOME partition without WARNING!" [High,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/987956
[17:07] <cjwatson> I'm afraid I'm not sure
[17:07] <cjwatson> It has the usual logs
[17:07] <cjwatson> Has anyone tested the scenario he describes?
[17:08] <cjwatson> i.e. choosing to mount home but not format it
[17:10]  * cjwatson starts off test installs to see
[17:12] <bdmurray> cjwatson: I haven't tested his exact setup yet
[17:16] <cjwatson> clear_partitions *looks* right in this situation to me
[17:27] <tasslehoff> Will any of the Ubuntu installers let me unlock and install to an already encrypted LVM volume?
[19:04] <tasslehoff> I know the fedora installer handles it, but haven't seen it in any earlier Ubuntu installers.
[19:05] <cjwatson> One moment
[19:06] <cjwatson> The alternate or server install CD in Ubuntu >= 11.10 should allow it, via "Configure encrypted volumes" -> "Activate existing encrypted volumes"
[19:06] <cjwatson> See bug 420080
[19:06] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 420080 in partman-crypto "Configure encrypted volumes destroys existing data" [Critical,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/420080
[19:06] <tasslehoff> cjwatson: great. thanks.
[19:13] <cjwatson> bdmurray: Well, I tried a straightforward test install of 11.10 with separate /home (/ and /home both ext4), created an empty file /home/cjwatson/x, then installed 12.04 over the top asking it to reuse the existing /home without formatting (using manual partitioning); /home/cjwatson/x was still there after the installation
[19:14] <cjwatson> bdmurray: So whatever it is, it isn't universal ... I'll try to think of how we could narrow this down
[19:14] <cjwatson> It's not encrypted home
[19:14] <cjwatson> At least judging from ubiquity removing ecryptfs-utils in th elog
[19:14] <cjwatson> *the log
[19:14] <bdmurray> cjwatson: I read that he'd chosen a side by side install
[19:15] <cjwatson> Doesn't look like it
[19:15] <cjwatson> There are the same number of partitions at the start and end of the partman log, with the same sizes
[19:15] <cjwatson> Pretty certain he used manual partitioning and asked it to reformat the previous /
[19:17] <bdmurray> ah, I see