[18:31] <adueppen> I need some help with reporting a bug. I'm doing some QA for Google Code-in and I was doing the test for installing the alternate amd64 ISO. the installation went successfully and showed no errors, but upon rebooting, I found that xorg and LXDE had not been installed whatsoever. Running `dpkg --get-selections | grep xorg` returns no results.
[18:57] <phillw> adueppen: did you run the self test on the iso before booting from it?
[19:46] <phillw> adueppen: it seems very broken....
[19:49] <phillw> I've reported it to Julien
[19:49] <phillw> wxl... "Hi Boss, just had an issue flagged up with the 64bit Alternate ISO... Doesn't boot into GUI and is missing things like startx, scp, man etc. Also apt-get cannot install anything such as apport (so I can use ubuntu-bug)"
[21:53] <adueppen> phillw: sorry for the late response, is the self-test checking the MD5? If so, I didn't do that. I tried to run apt and it requested the (non-existent) CDROM.
[21:56] <phillw> adueppen: is okay.. i use zsync, it does the self test for me. I can confirm your bugs. But the system is that broken instead of filing a minimal bug report which basically says "It's that broken, I cannot file a bug" I've let Julien (our head of Dev) know directly.
[21:56] <adueppen> phillw: OK thanks. Should I put in any bugs for the QA tracker?
[21:57] <phillw> I'll retry tomorrow, it could just be a miss match in the repos when the iso was made (they auto make on a cron job) they can be broken one day and working the next.
[21:58] <phillw> adueppen: not at present, I can pull files out of the broken VM if Julien needs any more information.
[22:00] <adueppen> phillw: I can send my VM state if that would help
[22:02] <phillw> adueppen: it's okay. I use guestfish to pull out any files that are requested. It's a handy addition for ISO testing and another reason most testers use KVM instead of vBox :)
[22:03] <phillw> I covered it very quickly a few cycles ago (the install command has changed).
[22:04] <adueppen> phillw: also I just checked the MD5 and it was fine, so definitely not an issue just us two are having
[22:04] <phillw> adueppen: also, there is some further information on the tracker page for using with VM's etc.  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Overview/Install_Bugs
[22:05] <phillw> but, with ubuntu-bug not there and not able to install apport, there is not a great deal extra we can do at present.
[22:06] <phillw> adueppen: "Hi Boss, just had an issue flagged up with the 64bit Alternate ISO... Doesn't boot into GUI and is missing things like startx, scp, man etc. Also apt-get cannot install anything such as apport (so I can use ubuntu-bug)"  In case you missed me posting up what I sent our Head of Dev.
[22:14] <adueppen> phillw: yeah I saw that, just wanted to check
[22:42] <phillw> adueppen: Julien will reply round about 27th / 28th Which is just in time for the A1 to be tested and approved. It's no big issue if we miss the Alpha 1 for all the IOS's. At this stage, we WANT to find issues :)
[22:42] <adueppen> phillq: OK I'll see if the issue happens for the other tests, which it probably will
[22:43] <phillw> it may affect the alternates as that uses a different seed to the desktop images
[22:43] <phillw> I'll update my 64 bit desktop image and throw it on the VM
[22:46] <phillw> having desktop and alternate as different build sequences does help lubuntu out at times if one does not play nicely (usually the PPC images).
[22:46] <phillw> Ad, of course, we have PPC images this cycle
[22:49] <phillw> adueppen: can you un-attach bug#1 from http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/351/builds/109239/testcases/1437/results, thanks.
[22:49] <adueppen> phillw: it won't let me not attach the bug and still mark it as a failure
[22:50] <phillw> adueppen: just leave it as testing in progress, which it currently is as I want to wait for tomorrows re-build of the iso to see if was just the repo out of sync.
[22:51] <adueppen> phillw: OK I'll do that
[22:53] <phillw> adueppen: you can a comment similar to mine and leave it as test in progress. It will be removed when the automatic rebuild takes place.
[22:54] <adueppen> phillw: done
[22:54] <phillw> adueppen: I'm going to do the Desktop amd64 iso install.
[22:55] <adueppen> phillw: if you have any issues with that, it's probably where it goes to a blank screen instead of telling you to remove the install media and press enter
[22:58] <phillw> I'm used to that one... Been a tester sine 10.04, hence my suggesting i let Julien know we had a real odd build (he has done work to have the ISO back CD sized again) and still allow the auto rebuild to occur ij case it is just a daily break.
[23:03] <phillw> grr @ timeout on ubiquity installer!
[23:04] <adueppen> phillw: one last question: should I still try the other tests to see if they produce a different result?
[23:07] <phillw> yes, but do do them to extent of relaxing on Christmas Eve. Regardless of what failures we find, I'm minded to not raise a manual bug until the respin tomorrow. If that still fails, I will raise a bug manually and include dump files from the VM.
[23:08] <phillw> *do not do them to the extent*
[23:08] <adueppen> OK
[23:08] <phillw> I've got 30 minutes to go before putting the oven for to cook the beef joint over night!
[23:13] <phillw> ahh, that answered that, it still uses zram :P
[23:16] <phillw> adueppen: the desktop ISO machine okay.
[23:18] <adueppen> phillw: ?
[23:19] <phillw> adueppen: desktop amd 64 image installed and boots up fine
[23:19] <adueppen> phillw: oh OK. must be an issue with the alt image(s) then
[23:20] <phillw> it would point to that, as I said - Julien has done some serious dieting of the alternate image and may have been a little too harsh in what he removed.
[23:21] <phillw> But, it could equally be a mis match in repos. Julien is pretty careful, so I'm not going to blame him outright!