Ubuntu ISO Testing team: New build notification

[Scott Lavender]

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Len Ovens <len at ovenwerks.net> wrote:

>
> On Tue, November 29, 2011 8:00 am, qatracker at stgraber.org wrote:
> > A new build of Ubuntu Studio Alternate i386 is ready for testing!
> > Version: 20111129.1
> > Link: http://91.189.93.73/qatracker/milestones/205/builds/7263/testcases
> >
> > Testcases:
> >    - Install (auto-resize)
> >    - Install (entire disk with encryption)
> >    - Install (entire disk)
> >    - Install (manual partitioning) i386
> >
> > Build notes:
> > None
>
> Going to the page with instructions for testing shows a proceedure that
> will not work with UStudio. The instructions assume that once the install
> starts everything else will just happen. There is no mention of the jackd
> question or the workflow selection or the confirmation of the fonts
> licence. or for that matter the network setup. These are all places where
> there are more than one install option and where one choice is more likely
> to give a failure than another. For example choosing no work flows will
> mean the image will install and as far as I know (unless things have
> changed) choosing all of them will fail.
>
> Which way would you like me to test this iso?
>
> Also, is there any reason to test case two (encrypted disk)? It would seem
> to me that this would slow down disk access for things like streaming
> multi-tracks. Therefore, if I did test it, I would test it with a graphic
> workflow where it might make sense.
>
> --
> Len Ovens
> www.OvenWerks.net
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
>


hi len,

firstly i will mention that i appreciate your conviction on testing :)
that's awesome!

next, i want to say that i asked the release team to wave our alpha1
testing milestone because fundamentally the image is almost the same as the
oneiric image.  we haven't really done any engineering lately except one
bug update and the ia32-lib fix so i didn't want to unnecessarily tie up
people's time at this point.

this isn't to say that you can't test, just that this one isn't going to be
required as a milestone.  i'll be sending another email out to the list
just about this point.

you also bring up some good topics and i'll try to hit them in the order
you mention them.


Going to the page with instructions for testing shows a proceedure that
> will not work with UStudio.


i'll be honest, i'm not sure anyone had really used the test cases that
were linked before for ubuntu studio.  perhaps the link was not obvious or
the test cases before were rubbish.  you very well might be the first
person in some time to really give them a critical eye.


The instructions assume that once the install
> starts everything else will just happen. There is no mention of the jackd
> question or the workflow selection or the confirmation of the fonts
> licence. or for that matter the network setup. These are all places where
> there are more than one install option and where one choice is more likely
> to give a failure than another.


you seem very engaged and active, would you like to help or head up the
improvements of the test cases?  if so, let me know and we can make this
happen :)


For example choosing no work flows will
> mean the image will install and as far as I know (unless things have
> changed) choosing all of them will fail.
>

i think this should be fixed now.  if you feel like testing it, please do
and let me know how it works.

for those interested in what happened it was thus:  the ia32-libs are being
transitions to a mult-arch library (this means not having double the
maintenance for 32 and 64 bit) but the germination process during the iso
build was not picking up the dependency for amd64.  we were trying to ship
the dssi-vst package which depends on wine which depend on ia32-libs, and
since ia32-libs were not available this mean wine and dssi-vst were not
available.  this eventually also broke the meta packages as well.


Also, is there any reason to test case two (encrypted disk)?
>

i believe this had been either removed or moved to an optional test case.
perhaps moving to the new qa tracker has elevated this back into a required
test erroneously.  i'll talk to someone about this.


len, thanks again for you efforts and input.  it makes a big difference.

let me know about helping improve the test cases.  also the meta package
installation if you get to it.

scottl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-studio-devel/attachments/20111129/3115129d/attachment.html>