[00:02] <darkxst> jbicha, so we will need to respin iso
[00:17] <darkxst> jbicha, so we need this http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~darkxst/junk/iso-build-efi/revision/29
[00:18] <everaldo> darkxst, with this we don't need the .signed right?
[00:18] <darkxst> I expect so, but havent tested that
[00:19] <nathaneltitane> back
[00:19] <everaldo> darkxst, why not just use th #28 from jbicha ? so we will be more like all other flavors?
[00:19] <darkxst> everaldo, this fixes the wont boot at all issue (no grub)
[00:19] <nathaneltitane> darkxst: indeed ^^
[00:20] <darkxst> everaldo, I dont think the official images have the signed file either?
[00:20] <nathaneltitane> they do
[00:20] <everaldo> humm, when it happens?
[00:21] <darkxst> when the efi firmware can't read ISO9660, it wont boot at all
[00:21] <darkxst> ISO9660 is not part of the efi spec, and only some firmware include the driver
[00:22] <darkxst> anyway if the official builds have .signed file, then keep r28
[00:22] <darkxst> but we still need to add the commands to geniso
[00:24] <darkxst> if you run 'dempet -i iso' you will see our current images are missing the efi boot entry
[00:24] <nathaneltitane> darkxst: i also suggest you respin with the newest ubiquity: it hangs for some reason, randomly
[00:24] <nathaneltitane> updating under live and then installing fixed it
[00:24] <darkxst> do you have bug #?
[00:24] <nathaneltitane> need to file
[00:24] <nathaneltitane> can'y find the bug list for this project.. link??
[00:24] <darkxst> well if they updated it, there must be a bug
[00:25] <darkxst> we use the ubuntu bug tracker
[00:25] <darkxst> since all our packages are in the archive anyway
[00:26] <nathaneltitane> #1059473
[00:26] <nathaneltitane> i think
[00:26] <nathaneltitane> similar ones show up with hangs at different stages of the install
[00:26] <nathaneltitane> mine was fairly early on
[00:26] <everaldo> darkxst, with #29 it still working on non efi systems?
[00:29] <darkxst> everaldo, yes
[00:53] <darkxst> everaldo, vmware efi boots fine without .signed, however I don't know if it was actually effected
[00:53] <darkxst> since it can't boot the released image at all ...
[01:08] <darkxst> we probably need this also https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/2.12.15
[01:23] <everaldo> darkxst, also, it is not working on macs :(
[01:25] <everaldo> brb, need to reboot
[01:28] <jbicha> darkxst: see my latest comment on bug 1069475
[01:28] <ubot5> Launchpad bug 1069475 in grub2 (Ubuntu) "grub fails to boot unsigned kernel" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1069475
[01:31] <everaldo> ok, our efi works on mac
[01:32] <everaldo> after #28
[01:32] <everaldo> but.. not with mac using Nvidia
[01:32] <everaldo> that because our xorg  don't works when using "nomodeset"
[01:32] <everaldo> :(
[01:36] <jbicha> everaldo: presumably that would fail with the flagship Ubuntu image too, right?
[01:36] <everaldo> jbicha, I am going to test it now
[01:37] <everaldo> also going to test amd64+mac
[01:37] <jbicha> everaldo: is your friend that you were talking about yesterday with the boot problems arvicolinae or is that someone else?
[01:37] <everaldo> no, he is Enrico Spinetta
[01:38] <jbicha> ok, can y'all please file the bug and give as much detail as possible about your hardware?
[01:38] <everaldo> jbicha, his bug is already fixed with #28
[01:38] <everaldo> now I am testing 3 different machines
[01:39] <everaldo> one normal PC with and without EFI
[01:39] <jbicha> right, but according to http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2012/10/21/%23ubuntu-release.html that may not be the right fix
[01:39] <everaldo> a Mac with Intel video board
[01:39] <jbicha> so please report and we'll follow up tomorrow to try to figure things out better
[01:40] <everaldo> jbicha, why not? Ubuntu uses the same approach
[01:40] <everaldo> yes, I am collenting information... right now, the only problem is the machine with nvidia and efi, is the only hardware that don't works with #28
[01:40] <jbicha> or you're welcome to follow up with slangasek and the others yourself if you like since you actually have efi hardware nearby
[01:41] <everaldo> jbicha, but I will collect as much information as I can tonight
[01:41] <everaldo> and fill a bug report or maillist
[01:41] <jbicha> I believe they expect grub2 boot with efi to work w/o that signed kernel thing as long as secure boot isn't enabled
[01:43] <everaldo> jbicha, do you know someone with secure boot machine?
[01:46] <jbicha> everaldo: nope, I've never seen one
[01:47] <everaldo> me neither
[01:47]  * everaldo needed another usb stick, 4 is not enought right now :)
[01:48] <everaldo> s/needed/needs/
[02:10] <darkxst> jbicha, my r29 fixes a different issue anyway, i.e. grub not booting at all on some efi firmware's
[02:13] <darkxst> jbicha, my r29 fixes a different issue anyway, i.e. grub not booting at all on some efi firmware's
[02:13] <darkxst> which includes vmware efi and what ever nathaneltitane has
[02:14] <everaldo> humm, interesting the ubuntu amd64+mac iso is just a normal ubuntu but without efi
[02:15] <darkxst> oh probably it uses the 'windows mode'
[02:16] <everaldo> yes
[02:17] <everaldo> but we don't need it
[02:17] <everaldo> the issue with efi/ubuntu/mac was fixed long time ago
[02:17] <everaldo> darkxst, with #28 and #29 I got better results here
[02:17] <everaldo> and only one machine don't works properly, the mac+efi+nvidia
[02:18] <everaldo> pc+bios - ok
[02:18] <everaldo> pc+efi - ok
[02:18] <everaldo> mac+bios+intel - ok
[02:18] <darkxst> yeh, the changes in r29 make the boot records the same as ubuntu images (bios + efi)
[02:18] <everaldo> mac+bios+nvidia - fail
[02:19] <darkxst> presumably the ubuntu images also fail?
[02:20] <everaldo> don't know, it is what I am testing now
[02:20] <everaldo> and tomorow I will test on a pc+bios+nvidia just to be sure
[02:20] <everaldo> I don't have one here
[02:21] <jbicha> yeah, maybe you guys should follow up on the issue as I believe you understand it better than I do
[02:21] <everaldo> jbicha, yes, but I will need to make more tests tomorow morning so we can have more scenarios
[02:21] <darkxst> jbicha, I can't help much with the .signed issue, both vmware and vbox correctly boot unsigned kernel
[02:24] <darkxst> everaldo, i have pc+bios+nvidia, but it has never booted the liveCD
[02:24] <darkxst> oh and it does have a fresh install on it though ;)
[02:25] <everaldo> darkxst, so, live don't works but install works?
[02:25] <everaldo> s/install/installation/
[02:25] <darkxst> everaldo, no
[02:25] <darkxst> everaldo, I installed in vmware
[02:26] <everaldo> darkxst, can you test if the installation and live works on your pc+bios+nvidia?
[02:26] <everaldo> don't need to install, just check if installation window appears
[02:26] <darkxst> yeh I will try later, can't often get a chance to reboot though
[02:28] <darkxst> that said I am pretty sure we would have heard about it by now, if that was a problem
[02:29] <everaldo> well, we never know :)
[02:30] <darkxst> but  pc+bios+nvidia is very common
[02:30] <darkxst> efi machines are relatively rare up to this point
[02:31] <everaldo> well, most of new machines here have support for both, efi and bios
[02:33] <darkxst> yeh and many of them run hybrid modes by default
[02:34] <everaldo> let me test ubuntu... brb
[02:40] <everaldo> darkxst, ok, ubuntu also fails with nvidia+efi
[02:40] <everaldo> mac+efi+nvidia
[02:40] <everaldo> so, with #28 and #29 we are in the same level of Ubuntu
[02:41] <darkxst> which is good! since they can't spin the 'unofficial distro' problem
[02:43] <darkxst> but I guess thats half the reason they have seperate mac images
[02:43] <darkxst> maybe
[02:43] <everaldo> no
[02:43] <darkxst> why?
[02:44] <everaldo> they have a mac image because in the past Ubuntu EFI rewrites mac firmware partition and causes people a lot of trouble
[02:44] <everaldo> because Mac EFI is a "little" different
[02:44] <everaldo> now it is fixed but looks like they still releasing amd64+mac that is just a image without efi
[02:45] <darkxst> ok, I don't use any Mac hardware, so don't follow it that closely
[02:46] <everaldo> darkxst, tomorow morning (now it is 00:46) I will go to a friends office
[02:47] <everaldo> and test UGR and Ubuntu on pc+efi+nvidia
[02:48] <everaldo> darkxst, in some cases is normal that amd and nvidia fails, on most distros (opensuse and fedora) we just use "nomodeset" kernel param
[02:48] <everaldo> but on UGR and Ubuntu the nomodeset causes Xorg to fail
[02:48] <everaldo> so... maybe we have a bug
[02:49] <darkxst> which drivers though?
[02:49] <darkxst> blobs should work fine with nomodeset
[02:49] <darkxst> OS drivers user KMS, so wont work with nomodeset
[02:50] <everaldo> humm
[02:50] <everaldo> you are right
[02:50] <everaldo> so... at least to get it working I can generate an image with nvidia drivers and it will works
[02:51] <everaldo> so my wife can get her iMac with Ubuntu 12.10 (currently running 12.04)
[02:54] <everaldo> darkxst, oh! just check now, that is how I installed 12.04, a custom image with nvidia drivers
[02:55] <everaldo> darkxst, it means that #28 and #29 is enough
[02:56] <everaldo> do you think we can provide custom images with nvidia included?
[02:56] <everaldo> or is it too much?
[02:57] <darkxst> probably not if we want to become an official flavour
[03:00] <everaldo> so bad, I will need to make a custom iso every time :(
[03:00] <everaldo> darkxst, any suggestions about how we can hell people with hardware like that?
[03:01] <everaldo> I mean, the solution is to build a custom iso
[03:01] <everaldo> but how to make it available for people that need it
[03:01] <darkxst> that is the only solution, nvidia blobs blacklist all other drivers once installed
[03:02] <darkxst> just provide a build script I guess
[03:04] <everaldo> darkxst, is there a bug report for #29 ?
[03:04] <darkxst> everaldo, no, we dont have a package to report bugs against for the build script ;(
[03:05] <darkxst> s/for//
[03:05] <everaldo> humm
[03:08] <darkxst> and really it was just an oversight on our part, that should have been picked up (*if* we had a QA team)
[03:09] <everaldo> yep
[03:11] <darkxst> unsurprisingly its really hard to fix bugs we don't even know about!
[03:11] <darkxst> and too many users these days, just winge on some forum or blog and never actually report the issues
[03:12] <darkxst> (that often applies even to authors of said blogs!)
[03:14] <everaldo> darkxst, do you know if we are going to have a QA for 13.04?
[03:18] <darkxst> I sure hope so and we have plenty of time, just really need someone to rally the troops and get some volunteers on board
[03:20] <everaldo> we don't looks like a big team right now
[03:20] <everaldo> theres lots of people on lauchpad group but...
[03:20] <darkxst> perhaps if someone wrote a "participating in UG" guide and got it spread across the news sites
[03:20] <everaldo> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-gnome
[03:20] <everaldo> 162 active members :)
[03:21] <darkxst> that is not many, I have seeded over 1000 images
[03:24] <everaldo> darkxst, just kidding because we have 162 active members but only a few on IRC :)
[03:24] <everaldo> 4~5 I think
[03:25] <darkxst> well the irc channel is not in the release notes
[03:25] <everaldo> oh! I just forget to put it, jbicha told me to put it there 2 days ago
[03:25] <darkxst> lol!
[03:25] <everaldo> oh man!
[03:26]  * everaldo going to wiki
[03:27] <everaldo> darkxst, 18 months support? or no support yet?
[03:28] <darkxst> anyway I think its worth a shot a doing a "participating" article, most likely people like phoronix, wogue, webupd8 etc would publish it
[03:28] <everaldo> yes, good idea
[03:29] <darkxst> everaldo, you want to write it?
[03:30] <everaldo> darkxst, my english is not good
[03:30] <everaldo> but I will write one in portuguese for local people
[03:30] <darkxst> your english is fine
[03:31] <everaldo> darkxst, ok, I will write then you guys can review
[03:31] <everaldo> task for tomorow
[03:31] <darkxst> if you write, I will proof read/edit for you
[03:31] <everaldo> nice, thanks!
[03:31] <everaldo> darkxst, btw, cant login on wiki
[03:32] <darkxst> oh maybe its behind the etherpad firewall
[03:33] <darkxst> in which case join ubuntu-etherpad
[03:33] <everaldo> where?
[03:34] <everaldo> ah, it works now after 3 "internal server error"
[03:34] <darkxst> ok
[03:34] <everaldo> darkxst, what is ubuntu-etherpad?
[03:35] <darkxst> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-etherpad/
[03:35] <darkxst> hint: you will want access to that if you plan to follow UDS sessions!
[03:36] <everaldo> darkxst, just join the team?
[03:37] <darkxst> yeh, then you will get access to etherpad
[03:37] <darkxst> where all the session notes go
[03:38] <everaldo> "You have successfully joined Users of the Ubuntu Etherpad instance."
[03:39] <everaldo> is there any address where I can logon to see etherpad sessions?
[03:42] <darkxst> hmm all the UDS once will be listed on the UDS site
[03:42] <darkxst> you probably need to be approved first though
[03:43] <darkxst> this was last years ubuntu gnome one http://pad.ubuntu.com/gnomebuntu-planning
[03:45] <everaldo> ah, so the address is pad.ubuntu.com
[03:45] <everaldo> "Either you have not been granted access to this resource or your entitlement has timed out. Please try again."
[03:45] <darkxst> you need to be approved first
[03:45] <everaldo> probably I need to wait for approval
[03:46] <darkxst> anyway I heading out for a bit
[03:46] <TheLordOfTime> you need to be part of the etherp-ad group
[03:46] <TheLordOfTime> etherpad*
[03:47] <darkxst> TheLordOfTime, he just joined that, but not approved yet, that is all
[03:47] <TheLordOfTime> ah, yeah he'll need to wait
[03:47] <everaldo> well, irc added to release notes
[03:47] <everaldo> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGNOME/ReleaseNotes/12.10
[03:47] <everaldo> support session
[03:48] <darkxst> I would have put it under the participate section
[03:49] <TheLordOfTime> i might be able to get a hold of jorge castro
[03:49] <everaldo> darkxst, the other release notes uses Support session
[03:49] <TheLordOfTime> might be able to expedite the joining
[03:50] <everaldo> I mean, the other flavors
[03:51]  * darkxst gone!
[03:54] <TheLordOfTime> i assume i'm allowed to give my comments on that etherpad?
[03:55]  * TheLordOfTime has etherpad access as a member
[03:55] <TheLordOfTime> either here or otherwise :P
[03:55]  * TheLordOfTime points at the "security responsibility" point there
[04:01] <everaldo> TheLordOfTime, so I can watch UDS from here?
[04:02] <TheLordOfTime> everaldo, some UDS stuff needs in-person, but a lot is audio-streamed
[04:02] <TheLordOfTime> and you can watch on the etherpad
[04:02] <TheLordOfTime> and usually in an IRC channel
[04:02] <TheLordOfTime> i've attened two UDSes remotely via IRC/Audio
[04:02] <everaldo> oh! nice... really nice
[04:02] <TheLordOfTime> but some of the sessions are in-person-needed
[04:03] <everaldo> let me put theses days in my calendar
[04:03] <TheLordOfTime> refer to the schedule and pick the ones out that you want to attend
[04:03] <TheLordOfTime> the sessions*
[04:05] <everaldo> don't need to register right?
[04:06]  * everaldo just found http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-r/
[04:15] <darkxst> TheLordOfTime, that pad is mostly out of date now, so if you want to give feedback on security reponsibility, I guess you could blame robert_ancell !
[04:15] <darkxst> (I have no idea about actual context of that comment however)
[04:49] <TheLordOfTime> *shrugs*
[04:50] <TheLordOfTime> well if this is discussed at UDS it won't be an issue.
[06:07] <darkxst> TheLordOfTime, well most of us wont be at UDS, atleast not in person
[12:31] <arvicolinae> hi all
[12:32] <smartboyhw> hi arvicolinae
[12:33] <arvicolinae> yesterday I tried to build my own daily built of the gnome remix but it failed in one of the last steps
[12:33] <smartboyhw> arvicolinae, oh?
[12:33] <smartboyhw> How did it fail?
[12:34] <arvicolinae> can I show you my log
[12:34] <arvicolinae> ?
[12:34] <arvicolinae> send it per email?
[12:34] <smartboyhw> arvicolinae, paste it to paste.ubuntu.com
[12:35] <arvicolinae> http://paste.ubuntu.com/1297372/
[12:35] <smartboyhw> God 6663 lines
[12:35] <arvicolinae> I think the last 20 or so are interesting
[12:35] <smartboyhw> That is pretty weird, never got that error before
[12:35] <arvicolinae> ok
[12:36] <arvicolinae> I think it's good to mention that I was trying on Debian 64 bit
[12:36] <smartboyhw> arvicolinae, now that is unrecommended:P
[12:36] <arvicolinae> ok
[12:37] <arvicolinae> cause I have no running ubuntu at the moment ;)
[12:37] <smartboyhw> arvicolinae, install one
[12:39] <arvicolinae> yes, I wanted to install the gnome remix but I got at first this error https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1069475, then I tried to build my daily build after someone recommended
[12:39] <ubot5> Ubuntu bug 1069475 in grub2 (Ubuntu) "grub fails to boot unsigned kernel" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[12:39] <arvicolinae> but now there is a workaraound I believe, only wanted to inform you ;)
[12:39] <smartboyhw> arvicolinae, oh?
[12:40] <arvicolinae> I'll test the workaround now
[12:40] <arvicolinae> see you later
[16:04] <everaldo> hey all
[16:05] <everaldo> jbicha, so, on tests here only an imac/efi/nvidia dont works after #28 ad #29
[16:05] <everaldo> but I got the same results on Ubuntu
[16:06] <everaldo> so, we are almost fine with this two patches
[16:07] <jbicha> everaldo: ok, please open the bug and then we'll start pinging people in either #ubuntu-devel or #ubuntu-release
[16:14] <everaldo> jbicha, open a bug where? we cant open a bug for iso-build
[16:14] <everaldo> :(
[16:16] <everaldo> is it possible to open a bug not related to any package?
[16:17] <jbicha> open against grub2 and it will get sorted from there
[16:23] <everaldo> ok
[18:04] <gareththered> Hi!  Anyone have a minute to answer a query?
[18:05] <everaldo> gareththered, just shot :-)
[18:05] <gareththered> Have you tried using a GSM modem?
[18:14] <everaldo> gareththered, not really :(
[18:15] <gareththered> Ok.  I can't get it to connect, while it worked on 12.04.  I'll download the full Ubuntu 12.10 (with Unity) and see if it works on there.  That way, I'll know if it's a Gnome Remix or Ubuntu 12.10 problem.  Thanks though.
[18:25] <everaldo> gareththered, it is probably a Ubuntu issued, not directly related to GNOME Remix
[18:25] <everaldo> it is managed by ModemManager/NetworkManager
[18:26] <gareththered> haven't seen any reports for it so far, which is why I thought I'd ask here.  I'll download Ubuntu as see what happens.  I maybe back soon, depending on how that goes ;-)
[18:28] <everaldo> gareththered, don't forget to let us know about your tests, could be nice if you starting with a bug report
[18:29] <everaldo> gareththered, fill a bug report right now so we can trac it
[18:30] <gareththered> I'll definitely file a bug report if I find any issues.  Shall I try Ubuntu first or even install a copy in VirtualBox to see if I can replicate it?  It might be a bad install?  Let me know what you want me to do.
[18:31] <everaldo> never see how modem works on VirtualBox
[18:32] <everaldo> gareththered, but you can fill a report right now, even if it is only Gnome Remix related
[18:32] <everaldo> btw, I think that you need to install VirtualBox extension
[18:32] <everaldo> to get usb working
[18:33] <gareththered> I had 12.04 working with the GSM modem on VirtualBox this afternoon, so I know it works.
[18:33] <everaldo> oh, nice to know
[18:35] <gareththered> Ubuntu Desktop is nearly downloaded - 5 min to go.  A little more time to install and I'll know if it's Gnome Remix related or not.  At least I'll know what to write on the bug report then!
[18:45] <everaldo> :)
[18:45] <everaldo> need to restart, brb
[19:18] <gareththered> everaldo.  Seems it's a Gnome-Remix issue :-(  It works on Ubuntu 12.10 Desktop.
[19:18] <everaldo> humm
[19:19] <everaldo> gareththered, please fill a bug report and tell us the number
[19:19] <everaldo> give it as much as details you can
[19:19] <everaldo> I am fixing a efi issue and can take a look in a couple of hours
[19:20] <gareththered> OK - I'll get onto it.  I might just install Remix on a VirtualBox, just in case I had a bad install.  I've quite a few extracts from syslogs; shall I include them in the initial report?
[19:22] <darkxst> gareththered, use 'ubuntu-bug modemmanager' that should collect required logs
[19:22] <gareththered> OK.  I'll leave you in peace now! Thanks for all your help.
[19:31] <everaldo> gareththered, please subscribe me to the bug (ecanuto)
[19:32] <everaldo> darkxst, the #28 need a complementary fix, will commit it in a few moments
[19:32] <everaldo> (iso-build)
[19:47] <darkxst> everaldo, btw I think the actual bug is "why do *some* non-secureboot efi systems want to boot a signed kernel"
[19:54] <everaldo> well, we can change the grub config file to use non secure
[19:54] <everaldo> but the ubuntu always use signed kernel on efi
[19:54] <everaldo> so, we must follow this rule
[19:56] <darkxst> that is not always true apparently, both vmware and vbox boot (using efi), using the unsigned kernel
[19:58] <everaldo> darkxst, not really, I checked the grub.cfg and it always use signed kernel
[19:58] <everaldo> darkxst, how did you get vbox use efi? It never works for me :(
[19:59] <darkxst> everaldo, settings -> motherboard -> efi
[19:59] <darkxst> it probably won't work if you set it after installation however
[20:13] <gareththered> eveeraldo.  I've raised a bug under #1070006 and attached an extract from the syslog of the Gnome Remix system.  Let me know what else you need from me.  I'm on UK time though and sleep a lot ;-)
[20:17] <everaldo> gareththered, looks like we miss something... will take a look when finish with efi
[20:17] <everaldo> thanks for report
[20:23] <darkxst> gareththered, does the modem show up in network settings?
[20:24] <darkxst> gareththered, if not try with this "nm-connection-editor"
[20:29] <darkxst> gareththered, also when you say "ubuntu desktop" you mean Unity?
[20:30] <everaldo> darkxst, maybe something is installed by default on Ubuntu that we don't have on UGR
[20:38] <darkxst> everaldo, sounds more like, gnome-shell did not detect modem and popup a dialog, but unity did
[21:21] <darkxst> everaldo, oh the daily cd's dont have any of the signed stuff (which is probably why they work fine in my VM's)
[21:31] <everaldo> darkxst, so, are we going to follow daily or release rules?
[21:32] <everaldo> if daily then we need also to change our grub.cfg
[21:33] <darkxst> I presume we will respin of the release image?
[21:33] <darkxst> jbicha, ^
[21:37] <jbicha> darkxst: well I was going to, but slangasek said it wasn't necessary
[21:37] <darkxst> jbicha, we have to
[21:37] <darkxst> jbicha, last image wont even boot at all on some efi systems
[21:37] <jbicha> darkxst: do you want to try to ping him about it then?
[21:38] <darkxst> actually I don't think it will boot at all on any efi system
[21:38] <darkxst> I presume you built the beta off dailys? and final off release?
[21:39] <darkxst> jbicha, I will ping him
[21:39] <jbicha> well daily=release at the end of last week, & cjwatson & others made a bunch of last-minute changes for secure boot
[21:40] <everaldo> darkxst, jbicha, we have two different problems
[21:40] <everaldo> one is EFI and other is security boot
[21:40] <everaldo> #28 and #30 (mi branch) cover the secure boot problem
[21:41] <everaldo> and #29 from darkxst cover the EFI stuff not boot at all
[21:41] <everaldo> to make it more clean, I will comment on bug report
[21:41] <everaldo> s/clean/clear/
[21:41] <everaldo> #29 we need to apply anyway
[21:42] <jbicha> it would also be good to clarify from the release team what needs to be done as if Canonical's changing the build process at the last minute, they really ought to announce that so derivatives don't get burned
[21:44] <darkxst> jbicha, daily's still dont have secure boot stuff in them
[21:45] <jbicha> I believe Wed & Thurs' dailies last week were the release image so that doesn't make sense
[21:45]  * everaldo downloading kubuntu just to check what they did
[21:48] <everaldo> jbicha, who we can speak from release team?
[21:48] <darkxst> jbicha, well the current Q daily certainly does not have the signed boot stuff in it
[21:52] <darkxst> everaldo, you did not push r30?
[21:55] <everaldo> darkxst, ops :)
[21:56] <everaldo> jbicha, where we can write notes/ideas/stuff for UGR 13.04?
[21:57]  * everaldo following darkxst messages at #gnome-devel
[22:01] <everaldo> jbicha, darkxst, kubuntu also don't includes .signed stuff, and they use a different grub.cfg that points to "casper/vmlinuz" indead of "casper/vmlinuz.efi.signed"
[22:04] <everaldo> let me check also, lubuntu and xubuntu
[23:39] <darkxst> everaldo, <cjwatson> darkxst: make sure you have grub-efi-amd64-signed and shim-signed as well
[23:42] <everaldo> darkxst, please read my comments at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1069908
[23:42] <ubot5> Ubuntu bug 1069908 in grub2 (Ubuntu) "Ubuntu GNOME Remix image don't boot on EFI systems" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[23:42] <everaldo> and comment it please
[23:42] <everaldo> we have two options, remove secure boot stuff or fix it (already fixed)
[23:48] <darkxst> everaldo, we should atleast try (it can't get anymore broken than the current released images!)
[23:48] <darkxst> <cjwatson> we ship grub-efi-amd64-signed and shim-signed as .debs outside the squashfs
[23:49] <darkxst> everaldo, can you check they ^ are correctly picked up during the build process
[23:50] <everaldo> darkxst, yes, I can check it
[23:51] <everaldo> darkxst, do we need also to ship it as .deb?
[23:51]  * everaldo reading #ubuntu-devel