[01:25] <cjwatson> xnox: debconf is certainly not optional for anything remotely related to the installer; it's a core facility
[01:25] <cjwatson> However, debconf-set is not part of debconf :-)
[01:27] <CIA-62> ubiquity: cjwatson * r5485 trunk/debian/ (changelog ubiquity.install-any): Install debconf-set from debian-installer-utils, useful for preseeding.
[07:52] <xnox> cjwatson: aha =)
[08:49] <xnox> mpt: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Ubiquity/AdvancedPartitioningSchemes
[08:49] <xnox> mpt: https://picasaweb.google.com/105922848292507689403/Beginning?authuser=0&feat=directlink
[08:49] <xnox> mpt: https://picasaweb.google.com/105922848292507689403/SingleDiskStandardInstall?authuser=0&feat=directlink
[08:50] <xnox> please note this is just the first slideshow: the beginning steps & typical full-disk install
[08:51] <xnox> the screenshots do not always show every single click/tab, usually the default highlight is: "save option" (no, cancel, back, etc), simply the top option, rarely something useful (e.g. default to english keyboard).
[09:38] <mpt> xnox, great, thanks. Will you be around in 3 hours? What time zone are you in?
[09:38] <xnox> mpt: I am UK based. I will be around in 3 hours.
[09:39] <xnox> mpt: I have a meeting at 15:00 UK time (GMT+1 right now?!)
[09:39] <mpt> ok
[09:40] <xnox> mpt: I still need to do slideshows for the other cases. Were the first two ok?
[09:40] <xnox> as in would you still prefer video?
[12:38] <mpt> xnox, I don't see Raid or LVM in either of those galleries
[12:38] <mpt> xnox, yes, slideshows would be fine
[12:39] <xnox> mpt: I have added 'guided lvm' & crypt slideshows to the https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Ubiquity/AdvancedPartitioningSchemes
[12:39]  * mpt wonders wtf "relidaving" means in "Relidaving gnupg..."
[12:39] <xnox> RAID is still to do
[12:40] <xnox> mpt: link to all galleries: https://picasaweb.google.com/105922848292507689403
[12:42] <mpt> thanks
[12:51] <mpt> xnox, have you met (or talked to) Dustin Kirkland?
[12:52] <xnox> mpt: I know who he is. I have seen him at the UDS. I believe he is not aware who I am.
[13:09] <mpt> xnox, I'm still reading this stuff, but meanwhile, bug 791885 and bug 817507 look like they might be duplicates.
[13:09] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 791885 in ubiquity "Ubiquity crash with RAID 0 array - grub could not install" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/791885
[13:10] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 817507 in ubiquity "Grub-install fails on the RAID0 array" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/817507
[13:10] <xnox> ok thanks.
[13:10]  * xnox is considering to rename wiki page to Ubiquity/ThisStuff =)
[13:11] <mpt> "will not have swap or will use a swapfile"
[13:12] <mpt> cjwatson, iirc there's been a long-standing to-do to switch from using a swap partition to a swap file by default. Is that right?
[13:13] <xnox> mpt: yes, but it's not massive priority. The questions about hibernate/suspend are still not fully resolved, afaik.
[13:15] <cjwatson> Indeed, it's something we'd eventually like to do to simplify partitioning; hopefully this LTS cycle but it's not scheduled for 12.10
[13:15] <cjwatson> Given previous experience I'd not want to do it by default without explicit support time allocated from the kernel team
[13:16] <xnox> cjwatson: alternative & server d-i cd's are build from debian-installer package, ubiquity or somewhere else?
[13:18] <cjwatson> They contain objects from the debian-installer source package, but the ISO images themselves are built by a branch of debian-cd
[13:25] <mpt> xnox, do you have handy a screenshot of the current advanced partitioning step, so I can design something that doesn't require the new overall design?
[13:32] <xnox> cjwatson: ok.
[13:33] <xnox> mpt: you mean ubiquity's advanced partitioning?
[13:33] <mpt> xnox, yes
[13:33]  * xnox had to reboot due to X.org crashing. sorry for the delay.
[13:35] <xnox> mpt one moment
[13:42] <xnox> mpt: https://picasaweb.google.com/105922848292507689403/Ubiquity?authuser=0&feat=directlink
[13:43] <xnox> there are a few
[13:43] <mpt> eugh, there's something gone strange with that "Install this third-party software" checkbox
[13:44] <xnox> mpt: I think you need to allow 'download updates' before that one becomes active
[13:44] <xnox> no
[13:44] <xnox> you don't have to
[13:44] <xnox> it's simply 'gone ugly in a VM'
[13:46] <mpt> xnox, looks like a few of those dialogs have coped badly with being ported to GTK3
[13:46] <mpt> "Create a new partition" in particular
[13:46] <mpt> and "Create a new empty partition on this device?"
[13:46] <mpt> +table
[13:46] <xnox> mpt: =/ this is precise release image, not quantal's gtk3
[13:46] <xnox> in a VM
[13:46] <mpt> odd
[13:47] <xnox> I will try bare-metal boot and take screenshots again to check the quality
[13:47] <mpt> xnox, no, Ubiquity in 12.04 uses GTK3
[13:47] <xnox> oh ok.
[13:48]  * xnox was thinking about python3 (sorry) which is being ported in quantal
[13:48]  * xnox it must be friday
[13:50] <mpt> xnox, which varieties of Raid does the alternate installer currently allow?
[13:50] <xnox> mpt: I remember that cjwatson was saying something along the lines, that it should be possible to ctrl+click on devices and then "combine" them into RAID/LVM or convert it into encrypted volume.
[13:50] <cjwatson> Choices: RAID0, RAID1, RAID5, RAID6, RAID10
[13:50] <xnox> mpt: let me check, I think 0, 1, 5, 6. Plus it allows nesting raids to do 1+0 and 0+1.
[13:52] <mpt> My notes say "RAID 0 isn't really RAID at all, but a close alternative to LVM (bug 43453), though it is possible to run one on top of the other."
[13:52] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 43453 in ubiquity "live cd partitioner doesn't understand lvm properly" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/43453
[13:52] <mpt> Does that match your understanding?
[13:53] <cjwatson> It's not redundant, but it's also not best understood as an alternative to LVM
[13:54] <mpt> In what situations would you choose one or the other?
[13:54] <cjwatson> It's a method of aggregating multiple block devices into one by alternating blocks among the disks
[13:54] <cjwatson> You might use RAID0 if you just want a very low-performance-impact way to aggregate a bunch of disks together
[13:55] <mpt> So is LVM slower than RAID0?
[13:55] <cjwatson> Let me finish :)
[13:55] <mpt> sorry
[13:56] <cjwatson> What you get out of it is effectively a single partition whose size is the sum of all the components; but it still roughly behaves as a simple traditional partition
[13:58] <cjwatson> LVM is more a swiss army knife approach: you feed it a load of physical volumes (partitions) and it lets you create logical volumes on top without having to care very much about which disks they happen to live on; if for example you later need to replace a disk, you can say to LVM "please move all my data off this disk I'm about to remove" and then swap in a new one
[13:58] <cjwatson> I don't think there's a major performance difference, but RAID0 is very much simpler
[13:58] <mpt> xnox, no RAID 10?
[13:58] <cjwatson> RAID10 is there, I was quoting the code above
[13:59] <xnox> RAID 10 is same as RAID 1+0. FIrst you create RAID 1 from 2 disks (I) then another RAID1 from another 2 disks (II). Then assemble both I & II into RAID0.
[13:59] <xnox> (4 disks in total)
[14:00]  * xnox stacking like a matroshka doll ...
[14:00] <xnox> similarly you can do reverse, e.g. RAID 0+1 when you do it the other way around =)
[14:01] <cjwatson> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID_0 has some example applications
[14:02] <cjwatson> I do think it's kind of niche, but mostly it's there because there's not much cognitive difference between four choices and five, and it is something people occasionally ask for so I don't think it's worth the rather minor optimisation of removing it and making those people either redesign their workflow or go and assemble arrays by hand
[14:06] <mpt> thanks cjwatson
[14:12] <mpt> xnox, if you want something to do right now, I suggest choosing which thing you want to add first: (a) LVM, (b) RAID 0, (c) other RAID types. Then add a button at the bottom right of the partition table, for now labelled (a) "LVM Setup…", (b) "RAID 0 Setup…", or (c) "RAID Setup…", that opens an intro dialog.
[14:12] <mpt> xnox, then on Wednesday I'll finish the design of the intro dialog.
[14:12] <xnox> (a) LUKS (crypt)
[14:13] <xnox> (b) LVM
[14:13] <mpt> I was leaving out LUKS until you've talked with Dustin :-)
[14:13] <mpt> because he's been working on full-disk encryption, and I don't know whether it's the same kind
[14:14] <xnox> no it's not the same
[14:14] <mpt> and it would be annoying if we ended up with two kinds of full-disk encryption, neither of which you could switch to after installation
[14:16] <cjwatson> I think it'd be crazy to do full-disk encryption other than via cryptsetup
[14:17] <cjwatson> (i.e. LUKS)
[14:17] <cjwatson> No idea why Dustin wants to reinvent that wheel in a slightly different shape
[14:17]  * xnox away on a call
[14:25] <ev> any objections to a ubiquity upload?
[14:25] <cjwatson> None from me, was mostly holding off in case you had more to do with m-a
[14:26] <ev> nope
[14:26] <ev> sorting that now then
[14:26] <cjwatson> fixes one critical so we definitely should
[14:26] <cjwatson> ta
[14:27] <CIA-62> ubiquity: evand * r5486 ubiquity/ (d-i/manifest debian/changelog):
[14:27] <CIA-62> ubiquity: Automatic update of included source packages: base-installer
[14:27] <CIA-62> ubiquity: 1.122ubuntu8, flash-kernel 2.28ubuntu43.
[15:04] <CIA-62> ubiquity: evand * r5487 ubiquity/debian/changelog: releasing version 2.11.2
[15:43] <bdmurray> cjwatson: is it possible there was a bug in /etc/default/grub handling? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-meta/+bug/995555/comments/3
[15:43] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 995555 in ubuntu-meta "package ubuntu-standard 1.267 failed to install/upgrade: ErrorMessage: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured" [Low,Fix committed]
[15:43] <bdmurray> cjwatson: for CMDLINE_LINUX=" quiet splash"  e.g. with a space in the beginning?
[15:43] <cjwatson> Well, that isn't actually a bug
[15:44] <cjwatson> I mean, having the space there
[15:44] <cjwatson> Oh, but you mean if that's what the file is like on the way in?
[15:45] <roadmr> Hi again :) What should I use in a preseed's partman/early_command on Ubiquity in lieu of debconf-set? <- this doesn't seem to work on Ubiquity, only d-i
[15:46] <cjwatson> I fixed that in ubiquity 2.11.2.  You had quit IRC so I couldn't tell you at the time.
[15:46] <cjwatson> However, you can use this instead:
[15:46] <roadmr> cjwatson: oh! damn time zone differences :/
[15:46] <cjwatson> . /usr/share/debconf/confmodule; db_set partman-auto/disk /dev/sda
[15:47] <cjwatson> If that's part of a longer script, make sure that ". /usr/share/debconf/confmodule" is the very first thing in the script
[15:47] <roadmr> cjwatson: yes, it's a small script, I'll do that
[15:48] <roadmr> cjwatson: this solution is what we'll use probably, since we need it to work in older releases, so the 2.11.2 fix may not be available on those :9
[15:48] <cjwatson> Sure
[15:48] <roadmr> cjwatson: thanks :) as usual
[15:48] <cjwatson> bdmurray: Certainly there are multiple known bugs in /etc/default/grub handling anyway; it's a mess