=== Jacky is now known as jacky
=== jalcine is now known as jacky
=== jacky is now known as JackyAlcine
=== JackyAlcine is now known as Jacky
=== Jacky is now known as jacky
=== jacky is now known as JackyAlcine
=== JackyAlcine is now known as jalcine
=== jalcine is now known as siibot
=== siibot is now known as Jacky
=== Jacky is now known as siibot
=== siibot is now known as jacky
=== jibel changed the topic of #ubuntu-testing to: Welcome to Ubuntu QA and Testing | http://qa.ubuntu.com/ | Ubuntu 12.04 LTS (Precise Pangolin) is released! | http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
=== greyback is now known as greybacklunch
=== greybacklunch is now known as greyback|lunch
=== _salem is now known as salem_
=== greyback|lunch is now known as greyback
[16:00] <moah> hello #ubuntu, I have one problem: i got a new notebook and installed 12.04 on it. then I wanted to run the "ubuntu friendly" test on it, but failed for some reason, and it got submitted anyway, so there is now a bad result for that notebook in the database. I can not delete that wrong test and it wont let me submit repeated tests, any idea how to fix that problem?
[16:02] <wylde> moah, if no one is alive in here you could possibly get a response quickly using the mailing list too :) There's a link to the mailing list here >> http://qa.ubuntu.com/
[16:03] <moah> wylde, thanks again. ;)
[16:04] <wylde> moah: np :)
[16:13] <roadmr> moah: hello, I can help with Ubuntu Friendly
[16:14] <roadmr> moah: you should be able to remove the data files (remove or rename the whole .cache/checkbox directory) and rerun the tests
[16:14] <roadmr> moah: if it fails again on the same test, I'd appreciate if you file a bug about the test that's failing
[16:14] <roadmr> moah: which one is it, by the way?
[16:15] <moah> just a second.
[16:16] <roadmr> moah: thanks :)
[16:17] <moah> https://friendly.ubuntu.com/12.04/Hewlett-Packard/HP%20635%20Notebook%20PC/i:BZA:HQp:KHi:BEG:D8l:BFCp:h:B5G:BWJ:BFC/
[16:18] <moah> you can safely remove this from the DB, it results from an aborted test.
[16:18] <roadmr> moah: hm, there's no easy way to remove them from the database, but if you retest and resubmit it will overwrite this bad submission
[16:18] <roadmr> moah: I'll ask if it's possible to remove it anyway
[16:19] <moah> I'm retesting right now, so i'll tell you if it worked.
[16:20] <moah> (it would be a shame if a 1-star review stays for a notebook where everything "just works" out of the box.)
[16:20] <moah> (or everything i tested)
[16:21] <roadmr> moah: sure, let me know, I may be out (lunch!) but I'll be back in a short while
[16:22] <roadmr> moah: and yes, we're interested in getting good ratings for systems that work well :)
[16:22] <moah> guten appetit.
[16:35] <moah> okay, I've now deleted .cache/checkbox and then reran the test suite, clicked "submit", but nothing got submitted.
[16:36] <roadmr> moah: ?!
[16:37] <roadmr> moah: results take about an hour to appear in friendly.ubuntu.com
[16:37] <moah> an hour?!?
[16:37] <moah> ok, but that doesnt explain why the tests i similarly submitted yesterday didnt appear.
[16:37] <roadmr> moah: yes, well they get uploaded to launchpad.net and from there they get processed into friendly, the processing task runs once each hour
[16:38] <moah> okay, I'Ll check back later then whether it worked.
[16:39] <moah> I assumed they appear immediately because the aborted test appeared immediately.
[16:39] <roadmr> moah: hmm maybe you submitted right before the processing task ran, that would have given the illusion of fast processing :)
[16:39] <moah> probably i sent it right before the processing ran.
[16:39] <moah> yep.
[16:41] <moah> maybe a notice should be somwhere (for impatient people like me) that the results wont appear immediately.
[16:42] <roadmr> sure, sounds like a good idea! thanks for the suggestion
[16:45] <moah> also, the yes-no-question on whether to skip a test does not use translated/localized yes and no, but english ones.
[16:46] <roadmr> moah: yes, that's a known problem, there's a bug filed about it but we haven't gotten around to fixing it yet :/
[16:48] <czajkowski> .c
[17:00] <moah> roadmr: it of course also can be that the submitted 1-star test is correct, i.e. that something doesnt work, as the page says (memory, hard disk), that would then be an error in the test itself?
[17:56] <roadmr> moah: well if you know things work, we'd consider that a bug in the test itself, yes
[17:57] <roadmr> moah: you can look at the test report using firefox:
[17:57] <roadmr> moah: firefox .cache/checkbox/submission.xml
[17:57] <roadmr> you should see some more detail about why a test failed
[18:01] <moah> roadmr: i have "memory/info" failed because: "Meminfo total xyz kB, DMI total xyz kB, Accuracy: xy, Memory totals not close enough", whyt does that hint at?
[18:02] <roadmr> moah can you give me detail on the actual numbers? it may be that you're running a kernel that doesn't see all of your memory
[18:02] <moah> camera, although tested and working, fails because "job requirement not met: package.name == xawtv
[18:02] <roadmr> moah: what the test does is get the total installed memory amount as reported by DMI, and compare that to what the kernel is seeing, if there's too big a difference it fails
[18:03] <roadmr> moah: as for the camera, apt-get install xawtv and it should run, sorry about that one, it's a sucky dependency that we need to remove at some point :/
[18:03] <moah> Meminfo total: 3641428 kB, DMI total: 4096000 kB, Accuracy 88.00
[18:04] <roadmr> so you have 4 GB installed, right?
[18:04] <moah> yep.
[18:05] <roadmr> moah: could I trouble you to file a bug about that? ubuntu-bug checkbox, and please post this same text and if possible attach /var/log/dmesg, so we can see where the rest of the memory is going
[18:05] <roadmr> moah: we may have to lower the threshold a bit, it may be that some memory is being taken by the video card but with this info we should be able to determine what's happening
[18:06] <moah> no prob, as long as everything is "working" from a users pov, and for me it is, the test shouldnt fail like that.
[18:07] <roadmr> moah: yes, I agree, that's why I think it's a bug :)
[18:08] <roadmr> moah: yes, the current threshold is that memory seen by the kernel has to be within 90% of the installed total
[18:55] <moah> roadmr: how do I check whether the bug was successfully sent?
[18:55] <roadmr> moah: when you used ubuntu-bug checkbox, it should have popped up a browser window asking you for more details, did it?
[18:55]  * roadmr looks at checkbox bug reports to verify
[18:57] <roadmr> moah: I have no reports from today, the last one I have is from yesterday
[19:00] <moah> okay, so it requires an launchpad-account to submit, i paused at that point.
[19:00] <roadmr> moah: oh yes, that's a requirement :(
=== salem_ is now known as _salem