[03:37]  * ianorlin really hopes this is not pebkac because Xorg is capitlaized in the package names
[03:37] <ianorlin> wait alternate bug ?
[19:31] <adueppen> phillw: any updates with the whole not installing X situation?
[19:33] <phillw> adueppen: yeah, Julien is away for Christmas and will look at it after the break. He is now aware of the issue.
[19:33] <adueppen> phillw: OK, should I just leave the in progress result as it is?
[19:35] <phillw> I'm going to do another one now the ISO has been spun to check if it was a repo mis-match
[19:36] <adueppen> phillw: OK, I'm moving on to today's ISO so I can complete the Code-in task
[19:37] <phillw> okies, I'll confirm it and will email the lubuntu-devel list so everyone knows of the status
[19:49] <adueppen> phillw: There seems to be something seriously wrong with the ISOs lately since this one is broken too
[19:49] <adueppen> having the exact same issue
[19:50] <phillw> adueppen: well, as it has not had any work done to fix it, as the developer is away for Christmas, this is to be expected :)
[19:50] <adueppen> phillw: oh ok
[19:51] <phillw> I will confirm the issue on the mailing list.
[19:51] <adueppen> phillw: has it been reported yet? or do I still have to mark the test as "in progress"?
[19:52] <phillw> let me have a quick think....
[19:58] <phillw> adueppen: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lubuntu-meta/+bug/1529285
[19:58] <ubot93> Launchpad bug 1529285 in lubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "Alternate installer leaves a very broken system" [Undecided,New]
[19:58] <phillw> please click on 'affects me'.
[19:59] <adueppen> OK
[19:59] <phillw> That way, we have a bug number that Julien can fix and mark as fixed.... (Looks good in the statistics). I'm pretty sure it is the meta that is broken, but Julien can change that if he needs to.
[20:00] <phillw> So,. you can mark is as a critical bug, with that bug number.
[20:00] <adueppen> phillw: OK, I'm guessing this will happen to all the tests, but I'll try it anyway
[20:01] <phillw> adueppen:  try the 32 bit alternate, that may be okay. If not, please add a comment to the bug that it also affects the 32 bit one as well. (it is called i386, that one)
[20:02] <adueppen> phillw: OK, the task I'm doing for GCI is for the amd64, so it'll be about 30 minutes before I do it.
[20:04] <phillw> okies, I'm chatting on another channel so am a bit behind you on the tests.
[20:05] <phillw> If you are only doing amd64 ones, then do not worry. I'll do the i386 one, but we do need it to see if it affects more than one alternate system. The other amd64 tests will fail, as all the difference is the partitioning of the drive.
[20:09] <adueppen> phillw: OK
[20:09] <phillw> zsync completed, starting the i386 test now.
[20:33] <phillw> adueppen: it also fails, same symptons. You will shortly have an email.
[20:34] <ianorlin> hmm for which alternate?
[20:34] <adueppen> ianorlin: amd64 and i386
[20:35] <phillw> ianorlin: bug 1529285
[20:35] <ubot93> bug 1529285 in lubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "Alternate installer leaves a very broken system with lubuntu 64 and 32 bit ISO's." [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1529285
[20:35] <phillw> ianorlin: you should have an email landing about now via lubuntu-devel ML
[20:36] <ianorlin> I think next thing is to try a server iso
[20:38] <phillw> ianorlin: it gets to the point of booting okay and can do update && upgrade, but lacks a lot of basics... I'll grab the server and try it out.
[20:41] <phillw> 4 mins for iso to arrive :)
[20:42] <phillw> wb wxl
[20:45] <ianorlin> argh I started writing some docs for how to solve this problem
[20:45] <ianorlin> it is a bear to figure out on your own for alternate ones but then I sort of had other things keep coming up
[20:45] <ianorlin> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/walterorlin/debugging-debian-installer
[20:46] <ianorlin> this will help stuff get fixed but I should probably contribute more not sure I made the wiki page in the right place but I tried to make it in my own sandbox as I write it
[20:46] <phillw> ianorlin: well not being able to apt-get apport etc is not fun, so a workaround is not really useful for an alpha1 :)
[20:46] <ianorlin> phillw: this is to get useful bug report info from alternate
[20:47] <ianorlin> so like the people -relase and stuff might not be so pissed at us
[20:47] <phillw> ianorlin: if I set the bug as debian-installer, the server guys will look into it :D
[20:47] <ianorlin> yeah this will sort of help them
[20:47] <phillw> ubuntu-server team is much larger than lubuntu :D
[20:48] <ianorlin> if you report a bug against the wrong package the is a button on launchpad to chage it
[20:48] <phillw> ianorlin: I know :D
[20:48] <ianorlin> there is not button to get the /var/log/syslog on launchpad from your machine as you install
[20:49] <phillw> but I can upload any file I want to  a bug :) This is where guestfish is so useful :)
[20:50] <phillw> As noted in the bug, I can upload any file a dev wants from the VM.
[20:50] <ianorlin> networking on the same machine was a bit tought in vbox last time I tried it but works great in kvm
[20:50] <ianorlin> so I can setup the save debug logs and wget -r them
[20:57] <phillw> that's why I say to use kvm and guestfish http://libguestfs.org/ and http://libguestfs.org/guestfs-recipes.1.html#export-any-directory-from-a-vm
[20:57] <phillw> as I use these for virgin installs, I just give them whole var/log  error and it saves them coming back and asking for a file I didn't upload :P
[20:58] <phillw> bodhi zazen was the wise master who tipped me off about guestfish. Once you use it you will wonder how you ever got along without it!
[21:09] <ianorlin> phillw I can understand I saw what it was but need to fully grok it
[21:10] <ianorlin> also examples of how to use it in the wiki with kvm for this would be awesome
[21:11] <phillw> ianorlin: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2013/06/28/%23ubuntu-classroom.html#t16:01
[21:13] <phillw> I did it back in Saucy cycle. You will bug master general's session a good resource for using ubuntu-bug http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2013/06/24/%23ubuntu-classroom.html#t21:30
[21:13] <ianorlin> I know that
[21:13] <ianorlin> not sure he has time to make apport guestfish though
[21:14] <phillw> well, it is for the QA team at ubuntu to add it, if they want it
[21:14] <ianorlin> or something that can report a bug on a package in a guest
[21:14] <ianorlin> that would be incredible
[21:15] <ianorlin> although some of the snappy development stuff might be a whole lot easier as you would not want to enter a bug report on launchpad from your fridge
[21:16] <phillw> ianorlin: depends how badly the install is dead. If it does not have tools needed to run apport / ubuntu-bug etc. Then guestfish will, as that tutorial said. get you /var/log/* out so you can post it up to a manually created bug report. This is not an ideal situation as they do prefer the fuller report that apport or ubuntu-bug can provide. But, it's better than "it doesn't work" :)
[21:18] <phillw> ianorlin: tasksel is there in server.
[21:19] <phillw> let's see what happens when I ask it install lubuntu-desktop
[21:27] <phillw> ianorlin: following on from a comment in #ubuntu-bugs I have a suspect....
[21:27] <phillw> phillw.net://sources.list
[21:28] <phillw> phillw.net/sources.list (even!!)
[21:29] <ianorlin> phillw do you get manual pacakge installation of say ubuntu-minimal?
[21:29] <ianorlin> and then try lubuntu-destkop
[21:29] <phillw> nope, it looks like the repos are missing
[21:30] <ianorlin> philw guestfs the sources.list out of a working vm for xenial then put on webserver wget that save as sources.list
[21:30] <ianorlin> then try apt?
[21:30] <phillw> ahh, nope.... it looks okay... http://phillw.net/sources.list
[21:30] <ianorlin> I think that may be to kludgy for even a workaround for alpha1
[21:30] <phillw> it worth a check.
[21:30] <phillw> it was worth a check.
[21:31] <ianorlin> that would make it seem like sources.list is the problem
[21:31] <phillw> no, the list looks okay now that I can fully view it
[21:31] <ianorlin> or if it did not have read permissions would be pretty sad way to break the isntaller
[21:32] <phillw> nope, 644 permissions :)
[21:34] <ianorlin> no finding what broke it is a good thing as that would be trivial for julien to fix
[21:34] <phillw> But, it cannot install ssh, which points to a debian-installer fuck up.
[21:45] <phillw> adueppen: are you still about?
[21:46] <adueppen> phillw: yeah I'm still here, just logged out on my other client
[21:46] <phillw> ianorlin: as you may see, I've raised teward who is looking into the matter for me now.
[21:46] <teward> no, you ended up having me stumble onto it
[21:46] <teward> with a hangvoer :p
[21:46] <teward> total coincidence
[21:47] <teward> but i'll see if i can't replicate as you described with the server ISO side, and then file a bug if there is such an issue
[21:47] <teward> ianorlin: unless you can give me better debug data / reproduction steps than phillw gave me?
[21:47] <ianorlin> I had some previous server problems that then seemed to go away whic is :(
[21:48] <ianorlin> with /var/log/syslog
[21:48] <ianorlin> but I think this might be different
[21:48] <phillw> teward: do want the /var/log directory?
[21:48] <teward> phillw: not really, i'd like reproduction steps, for now
[21:49] <phillw> install, let it reboot. sudo tasksel and ask it to install something from the list, such as the openssh package.
[21:49] <teward> got a few things to test then :P
[21:49] <teward> SSH + DNS + Custom (open-vm-tools lol)
[21:49] <teward> don't forget i VM test things :)
[21:49] <phillw> teward: while you do that, I'm going to destroy it and then re-install it pre-selecting ssh at install time
[21:50] <phillw> I use KVM, so have access to guestfish for poorly VM's :P
[21:50] <teward> :P
[21:50] <teward> i have a low-spec VMware VM that I use for QA testing of ISOs
[21:50] <teward> just destroy and redo the partitions xD
[21:50] <phillw> wilco
[21:51] <teward> *waits for installing*
[21:51]  * phillw pukes at VMware
[21:51] <teward> heh
[21:52] <teward> does Lubuntu alternate run tasksel at all?
[21:52] <teward> (I'm leaving standard system utilities on lol)
[21:52] <phillw> teward: as you're going to try with ssh etc... is it worth me asking the initial tasksell to install lubuntu desktop?
[21:53] <teward> phillw: i'm testing on Server, which as you said ianorlin explained Lubuntu alt is based off, but if it's a CD / apt sources issue it'd happen there too
[21:53] <phillw> teward: I reckon so, as I see it removed at the end of the install.
[21:53] <teward> then i'll pull the LUbuntu ISO
[21:53] <phillw> I have a failed VM of that which I can pull /var/log etc off.
[21:54] <teward> if you wish
[21:54] <teward> wouldn't hurt to have a compare
[21:54] <teward> ok booting now...
[21:55] <phillw> let me just get this new server VM instaling
[21:56] <phillw> is having the cd line in sources.list normal?
[21:56] <phillw> deb cdrom:[Ubuntu-Server 16.04 LTS _Xenial Xerus_ - Alpha amd64 (20151225)]/ xenial main restricted
[21:56] <phillw> coz that's what it's asking for
[21:58] <ianorlin> I don't think server pulls in universe by defualt
[21:58] <ianorlin> but not all of lxde is in main
[21:59] <ianorlin> phillw in the logs has it installed anything after the annoying http proxy setup button or did it not get that far
[21:59] <phillw> ianorlin: it offers lubuntu-core and lubuntu-desktop
[21:59] <teward> i think server does actually
[21:59] <phillw> ianorlin: it installs fully
[22:00] <ianorlin> phillw it installs fully then what happens?
[22:00] <phillw> ianorlin: and I got basic functions like scp, which is missing on lubntu-alternate
[22:00] <phillw> ianorlin: if you ask it to add anything it asks for the cd deb cdrom:[Ubuntu-Server 16.04 LTS _Xenial Xerus_ - Alpha amd64 (20151225)]/ xenial main restricted
[22:00] <teward> phillw: that's because /etc/apt/sources.list has it uncommented
[22:00] <phillw> which I don't think is correct.
[22:00] <teward> IIRC it's commented out after install
[22:01] <phillw> teward: indeed, so maybe comment it out and try again ?
[22:01] <teward> not sure what handles commenting out things on the sources.list at/after install
[22:01] <ianorlin> there was something wierd with reporting bugs from ubiquity in 14.04 that I think is why it lists that in sources
[22:02] <teward> well that appears to be the offending issue
[22:02] <ianorlin> that is a story for another time
[22:02] <teward> the rogue cdrom line
[22:02] <ianorlin> I wonder will this solve our freaking alternate point release issues for lts?
[22:02] <phillw> teward: wihle server gets up, let me see if I have vi
[22:03] <teward> not entirely sure where to file this bug :/
[22:03] <phillw> vi on the lubuntu file.
[22:03] <ianorlin> the tiny version
[22:03] <ianorlin> not the full thing
[22:03] <phillw> teward: it'd have to go as debian-installer ?
[22:04] <teward> as i said, not entirely sure what handles commenting it out
[22:04] <phillw> I know it is ubuntu fuck up, but that is using a basterdised debian-installer
[22:04] <phillw> teward: I'll know soon :)
[22:04] <ianorlin> what was the package that was the fix for the mtab bug
[22:04] <teward> wait
[22:05] <ianorlin> well launchpad has a button for changing what a bug is against
[22:05] <teward> okay...
[22:05] <teward> i may file a debian-installer bug...
[22:05] <phillw> let me see how server gets on with me asking it to add lubuntu at the stage it is still using the iso and internet.
[22:06] <phillw> ARGGHHH bloody HHTP proxy...... I hate that prompt with a passion usually reserved for Windows Vista
[22:09] <teward> hmm
[22:09] <phillw> okies, server does not give the option of the GUI *buntu's in the initial run.
[22:09] <teward> phillw: no, it doesn't.  tasksel *after* does
[22:09] <teward> but your issue is NOT a tasksel issue
[22:09] <teward> it's a sources.list problem
[22:09] <phillw> I'll install, and then comment out the cd line in sources.list
[22:09] <teward> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/debian-installer/+bug/1529297 is what i saw
[22:09] <ubot93> Launchpad bug 1529297 in debian-installer (Ubuntu) "[Xenial] 2015-12-25 ISO leaves 'deb' line for CDROM uncommented at install" [Undecided,New]
[22:10] <teward> updated title to match
[22:10] <phillw> teward: we can thank (19:41:20) tarpman: check your sources.list for that hint.....
[22:11] <teward> phillw: free to comment if you wish on the bug as such
[22:11] <teward> i don't see that line :)
[22:11] <teward> anywhere
[22:11] <phillw> yesterday :)
[22:12] <phillw> I was still thinking it was a simple repo mis-match that would correct. So did not too much more digging.
[22:13] <teward> cdrom line isn't a sources mismatch
[22:15] <phillw> i had not looked at sources.list yesterday, I just kept the tab open in case I needed to refer back to it today.
[22:15] <teward> :P
[22:15] <teward> well i used the US mirrors cause my location, but the issue stayed
[22:15] <teward> it's the cdrom line
[22:15] <teward> not the rest of the sources
[22:18] <phillw> in the lubuntu sources.list the lines are repeated. one is commented out, the other is not.
[22:19] <phillw> and.. it's now install lubuntu-desktop
[22:19] <teward> phillw: yes that's what i saw too
[22:20] <teward> phillw: hate to ask but can you *read* the bug I filed?
[22:21] <phillw> I'll rename the cause in bug 1529285 and point it as a dupe to your bug 1529297
[22:21] <ubot93> bug 1529285 in lubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "Alternate installer leaves a very broken system with lubuntu 64 and 32 bit ISO's." [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1529285
[22:21] <ubot93> bug 1529297 in debian-installer (Ubuntu) "[Xenial] 2015-12-25 Server ISO leaves 'deb' line for CDROM uncommented after install" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1529297
[22:26] <teward> http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/351/builds/109273/testcases/1337/results/ is where i put my testing :P
[22:28] <phillw> teward: our bug report is on the tracker, it will automatically point to the new bug. you will see that bug 1529297 has got a little more heat :D
[22:28] <ubot93> bug 1529297 in debian-installer (Ubuntu) "[Xenial] 2015-12-25 Server ISO leaves 'deb' line for CDROM uncommented after install" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1529297
[22:29] <teward> yep
[22:29] <teward> though i also added my bug to my testcase results :P
[22:35] <phillw> our bug was only on the lubuntu test cases, I never got as far as filing a 'fail' on ubuntu-server, but am quite happy to do so in order qa team know it has also been verified there.
[22:39] <phillw> I've marked it as a fail, as the installation does not behave upon 1st boot after install, which is covered in the notes for a fail in QA-testing.
[22:41] <teward> well, the testcase for Server is "Does it Install"
[22:42] <teward> at least, in my view of how to interpret it
[22:42] <teward> but i'm a very literal thinker :)
[22:43] <phillw> Does it install and is it usable is how I interpret it.
[22:44] <adueppen> stupid auto-away
[22:44] <phillw> And, as I'm famous to my self for forgetting to add in the ssh part for a remote server. It is simply not fit for release at present :)
[22:44] <phillw> adueppen: you should have an updated mail
[22:44] <adueppen> yeah I do
[22:45] <teward> phillw: well, it's only DECEMBER
[22:45] <teward> and not APRIL :p
[22:45] <ianorlin> I know but more time to fix things the better
[22:46] <ianorlin> time to release in monotonical decreasing
[22:46] <phillw> adueppen: if we get a bug-squad guy, we can chase a bug up very quickly :)
[22:46] <ianorlin> phillw: you know what teams teward is in right ;p
[22:46] <teward> yes he does
[22:46] <phillw> ianorlin: yes, the nginx team :P
[22:46] <teward> he's VERY familiar with what teams I'm in
[22:47]  * teward leaves this here: https://launchpad.net/~teward/+participation
[22:47] <ianorlin> oh I mistread philw comment at first
[22:47] <teward> :)
[22:48] <teward> ianorlin: i think he wants a dedicated Lubuntu person though
[22:48] <phillw> ianorlin: also, teward and myself go back a while... he can insult me anytime, and we do not have petulant fits :P
[22:48] <teward> ^ that
[22:48] <teward> well
[22:48] <teward> I might if drunk
[22:48] <teward> or without coffee for three days
[22:48] <phillw> as may I
[22:48] <teward> but that's not often :)
[22:51] <teward> phillw: the other reason I didn't mark failed?  Easy workaround
[22:51] <phillw> teward: that is an issue for the release notes :P
[22:52] <teward> phillw: if and only if it ends up in the actual release ;)
[22:52] <teward> pretty certian that's a big enough bug it'll get resolved
[22:52] <phillw> teward: A1 releases NYE (not sure who's bloody idea that was!!)
[23:04] <phillw> teward: adueppen the workaround for sources.list works fine and lubuntu-desktop can be installed.
[23:04] <adueppen> phillw: OK
[23:09] <phillw> adueppen: have you used vi before?
[23:10]  * tsimonq2 suggests nano :P
[23:10] <adueppen> phillw: A little bit, but I deleted the VMs to free up space
[23:10] <tsimonq2> or Atom for a GUI editor :P
[23:10] <phillw> adueppen: okies. no wories
[23:10] <phillw> tsimonq2: nano will not be there at initial install with the current bug.
[23:24] <tsimonq2> phillw: well I can compile it from source gosh darnit
[23:24] <phillw> not on the alternate lubuntu you could not.
[23:25] <phillw> as it lacks things like scp, man, tasksel and apt requires a CD inserting.. the workaround is to use vi.
[23:35] <ianorlin> or why not put a known good apt sources.list on a webserver and as root wget that as the sources.list
[23:41] <teward> and there went my internet >.>
[23:41] <teward> had to end up doing static IPs :/
[23:44] <phillw> ianorlin: you cannot do basic things... scp is not installed, and having something as basic as man missing, I'm not hopeful of having wget there either!
[23:45] <phillw> ianorlin: vi is there, and it is a very quick edit :D
[23:45] <teward> phillw: correct me if i'm wrong but isn't that 'basic system utilities', and if so why is the alternative iso for lubuntu NOT installing that by default
[23:45] <teward> (Server has that selected by default)
[23:46] <phillw> teward: I think it falls over before that, on ubuntu-server that is added at install time, just as I could likely add ssh in from the short list of what tasksel does.
[23:47] <phillw> teward: in any case, they are not there... So, vi is a reasonable work around for such a short edit.
[23:47] <phillw> I'm a nano user as choice, but know enough vi(m) to get by :)
[23:47] <teward> same
[23:48] <teward> though i'm more used to vim now :)
[23:48] <phillw> yum update && yum install nano
[23:48] <phillw> :P
[23:50] <teward> :P