[04:48] ok, pushed up a branch which should hopefully make amd64 precise ISO size again [04:48] *alternates [04:48] Alternates? [04:48] yeah, precise had them [04:48] Just noted, my bad. [04:54] knome: which of the following should I drop from i386 on precise: de fr bn hi zh-hans ja, not sure if I should go by size of population since we might have a lot of users in europe [04:54] everything else should be ISO size in the morning [04:56] knome: hrm, did we want the backport kernel on our ISOs? === jerem is now known as ljere [10:12] micahg, i'd say your call [10:12] micahg, are you on the xubuntu-users mailing list? [10:18] micahg, knome, mr_pouit: i know we've (kinda) discussed this several times (and i feel the ML is not the right place), but aren't you getting tired of fighting with iso-size for a few mbs all the time? /just_sayin [10:21] yes, but i don't think keeping precise SRU iso's is a matter for discussion [10:21] i'm not really referring to that (ofc that's what triggered my comment) [10:23] you might be right that it's not worth to try to target a CD for 14.04 [10:24] I suppose if you're not wanting to target users with hardware incapable of booting from other media than optical. [10:25] astraljava: dvds are also optical [10:25] ochosi: Ok, sorry. Yes, that's true. I should have included the "and with limited bandwidth." [10:26] well yeah, but limited bandwidth means you better order a cd/dvd anyway [10:26] But then of course it depends on how much larger you wanna go. [10:26] not sure 800mb vs. 1000mb is really the straw that breaks the camel's neck [10:26] i'd go for a 1gb image [10:26] no, definitely not [10:27] That much, not really, no. But when you let yourself loose, who's to say how rapidly it begins to increase. [10:27] i am. [10:27] astraljava: no reason to do that ;) [10:28] No, not really. But it happens. :) [10:28] knome: personally i'd consider trying out 1gb image-size with 13.10, as it's not lts we could gather some feedback and decide what's best for 14.04 [10:41] ochosi, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Xubuntu/Roadmap/Specifications/S/ISOSizeTransition [10:56] If we do that, should document how to use plop with Xubuntu, so they can boot from cd/iso of plop, then flash drive. [10:57] at least nobody is stopping anybody doing that :) [11:59] we can also document how to install xubuntu on top of xubuntu-server/minimal [11:59] eer [11:59] ubuntu-server [12:00] doesn't help those with low bandwidth though [12:01] well at some point they'll have to download packages [12:01] whether before installing or after installing isn't that important imo [12:01] sure. but you can't download packages as a torrent [12:03] true, but i don't see how that is different from getting updates later on [12:03] Someone ought to write a plugin for apt to do that. [12:05] not sure, maybe there is a way to combine mirrors in a torrent-y way [18:21] knome: not on xubuntu-users, I guess if we get the quantal backport stack for free, it's not bad [18:22] ochosi: well, I'm not the XPL [20:06] is there any reason why the 13.04 installer still says 12.10 when loading? [20:10] I forgot to bump the version in the xubuntu-text plymouth theme [20:11] (done now, thanks, will be part of the next xubuntu-artwork upload) [20:11] next question, why is there no installer background? [20:11] at least in Vbox [20:17] sorry to keep question spamming but, for a "light" distro, why does bug 1087409 exist? [20:17] bug 1087409 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) "*buntu dailys take 3 minutes to get to the next screen if install mp3 is selected." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1087409 [20:21] Noskcaj: do you happen to have graphics cards that require proprietary drivers? or can have them? [20:28] xnox, why? [20:32] xnox: does ubiquity wait to download the extra stuff? [20:41] xnox, i'm just running it in a VM, so will the info still help? [20:42] Noskcaj: sure. see my comment on the bug report. it's best to get the output from the user who saw 3 minute delay. [20:43] ok [20:43] Noskcaj: above command is just a theory as to why the next step is delayed. [20:43] it takes 11 second to run on my machine =/ but I don't know if it's parallelised or not [20:44] it's more sometimes, it just seems to be that it loads something fairly big then, rather than in the install [20:58] xnox, done [21:04] mr_pouit: maybe change the version output to be lsb_release based/ [21:10] Noskcaj: that's quite special =) I'm struggling to figure out how long it took in total. something like 1m21s? [21:11] ok, the bug is universal, but only shows up on slow machines, you can guess why [21:11] that's roughly how long === Noskcaj is now known as Noskcaj_afk [21:43] micahg: yeah, I know I should do that (but there's always someone to notice the version number and report it here so it's fine =) === yofel_ is now known as yofel [22:58] micahg: yeah i know you're not. just didn't feel like pinging only knome