Netboot

[Jackson Doak]

yes, i understand we still need some proper testcases though


On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Phill Whiteside <PhillW at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> Hi Jackson,
>
> Had a quick chat on -release... The reasoning is below:
>
> (23:32:04) phillw: stgraber: I've had a bug reported... all the network
> iso's are called mini.iso
> (23:32:20) stgraber: and why is that a bug?
> (23:32:44) phillw: well, try loading two of them, then using zsync?
> (23:32:55) phillw: i686 / AMD64...
> (23:33:22) stgraber: just store them on your machine with a different
> filename?
> (23:33:33) phillw:
> http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/raring/main/installer-amd64/20101020ubuntu195/images/netboot/mini.iso
> (23:33:33) stgraber: besides, you can't zsync them as they are on
> archive.ubuntu.com, not on cdimage
> (23:33:53) phillw:
> http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/raring/main/installer-i386/20101020ubuntu195/images/netboot/mini.iso
> (23:34:24) stgraber: sure, that's the filename that debian-installer has
> always been using for the netboot images, changing that would break a lot
> of things for close to no benefit
> (23:34:36) phillw: So, they are being built daily, but in a totally
> different naming schedule to the all the isos?
> (23:34:43) stgraber: they're not built daily
> (23:35:01) stgraber: they're built as part of a debian-installer package
> build, so they're built whenever someone uploads a new debian-installer to
> the archive
> (23:35:36) phillw: okies, thanks.. i'll be able to reply to the tester
> for which the names are causing problems
> (23:35:39) stgraber: and they're built through the package build process,
> not through the image build process, that's why they're on
> archive.ubuntu.com as are all binary packages and not on
> cdimage.ubuntu.com
> (23:35:55) cjwatson: And it's perfectly possible to supply a different
> output file name when using zsync.
> (23:36:26) cjwatson: Or rsync or whatever.
> (23:36:40) xnox: phillw: zsync -o flag or wget -O flag.
> (23:37:09) cjwatson: I'm responsible for those file names and I won't
> change them.
> (23:37:19) phillw: I see that they only have direct (http) entry for
> download... sorry.. i didn't look deep enough into the issue reported by
> the tester.
> (23:38:14) phillw: cjwatson: is it possible to zsync when there is no
> zsync link?
> (23:38:36) xnox: phillw: yes.
> (23:38:48) cjwatson: If it is, it will provide no meaningful benefit over
> just using wget.
> (23:38:49) xnox: phillw: it will redownload the whole file =)
> (23:39:33) phillw: okies, I'll mark it down as "won't fix" :) Thanks for
> clearing it up.
>
> So, they are not part of 'normal' builds. I hope the above explains the
> reasoning behind why it is done this way.
>
> Regards,
>
> Phill.
>
>
>  On 2 December 2012 22:06, Phill Whiteside <PhillW at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nicholas,
>>
>> following on from a quick IRC chat.. all the mini.iso's are called....
>> mini.iso.... This makes keeping track of which one you're testing a
>> nightmare! A couple of examples....
>>
>>
>> http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/raring/main/installer-amd64/20101020ubuntu195/images/netboot/mini.iso
>>
>> http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/raring/main/installer-i386/20101020ubuntu195/images/netboot/mini.iso
>>
>> http://ports.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-ports/dists/raring/main/installer-powerpc/20101020ubuntu195/images/powerpc/netboot/mini.iso
>>
>> This does not follow, in any way shape or form, the naming of the isos
>> that we use! Yes, I know that it could be somewhat of a nightmare... but
>> now is really good time to get it sorted :)
>>
>> If you could have a chat with the release team about having the cron job
>> be tweaked so that the 'unique' part of a build is put onto the iso instead
>> of the directory so that it follows what happens for other iso's.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Phill.
>>
>>
>> On 2 December 2012 19:42, Jackson Doak <doak.jackson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nio thats my problem as well, i'm just guessing. pssiva and jibel seem
>>> to have been doing it for a while so we need them
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Nio Wiklund <nio.wiklund at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-12-02 04:56, Jackson Doak wrote:
>>>> > This message is mainly for pssiva and jibel but we need the netboot
>>>> > testcases to exist on AMD64 and 32-bit. also the ppc one is outdated.
>>>> > Why am i the only one now who tests netboot?
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> Maybe because most of us don't know how to do it.
>>>>
>>>> If you write a short manual 'a how-to page' or refer to an existing one,
>>>> other people might come along and help you to test netboot.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ubuntu-quality mailing list
>>> Ubuntu-quality at lists.ubuntu.com
>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
>>>
>>> --
>>> <https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality>
>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-quality/attachments/20121203/70649eab/attachment-0001.html>