19:01:31 #startmeeting 19:01:31 Meeting started Mon Jan 11 19:01:31 2010 UTC. The chair is h01ger. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:01:31 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 19:01:32 huhu, MeetBot 19:01:34 h01ger: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress. 19:01:43 cheers 19:01:54 * pere = Petter Reinholdtsen 19:02:00 #topic 1. please indicate your presence - who will write the summary? 19:02:02 * vagrantc = Vagrant Cascadian 19:02:03 * debalance = Philipp Huebner 19:02:06 * h01ger = Holger Levsen 19:02:11 * Werner = Morten Werner Forsbring 19:02:20 * and1bm Andreas Mundt 19:02:40 debian-edu: 3 de-build-guest committed revision 61208 to debian-edu: automatic commit after build from lenny-test-dvd 19:03:10 any volunteers to write+post the summary? meetbot.debian.net will help you :) 19:03:46 hi OleA, the meeting hasnt really started yet. still looking for a volunteer to write the summary 19:04:03 http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Meeting 19:04:06 has the agenda 19:04:11 hi :) 19:06:09 * h01ger thinks fixing bugs and testing is more important than summary writing atm and proposes to do the meeting anyway. meetbot should give some summary too... 19:06:46 a meeting without a summary did not happen, so I see no point in calling random chatter a meeting when there is no summary. 19:07:02 meetbot provides one 19:07:02 h01ger: Error: "provides" is not a valid command. 19:07:09 :) 19:07:27 but ok, if we dont get started in the next 8min i'll watch some tv instead 19:07:46 i can't say my attempts have ever felt like adding much value to meetbot's summaries 19:07:47 s/watch tv/read a book/ ;-) 19:08:24 though i wouldn't say i've done it well, either 19:08:35 vagrantc: your summaries have been fine. :) 19:08:57 pere: it's pretty much just taking meetbot's results and pasting them into the wiki... 19:09:02 little formatting 19:09:10 and mailing to the list :) 19:10:20 I'll write the summary 19:10:39 \o/ 19:10:47 #info OleA will write the summary 19:10:59 #topic 2. lenny status 19:11:13 #topic 2.1 lenny status: #1409: Iceweasel does not save exception rule for https://www/lwat 19:11:33 * jever = Jürgen Leibner 19:11:50 hi jever 19:11:53 * OleA = Ole-Anders Andreassen 19:11:58 hi to all 19:12:22 * klausade = klaus ade johnstad 19:12:35 according to the ticket, there is still work to do for #1409 19:14:00 I suspect it is working now, but an error is logged during installation anyway. 19:14:09 * h01ger needs to update (read: reinstall) his test setup to be able to comment on this. and the last days there were too many changes to do that sensible :) 19:14:17 * klausade is insttalling lenny-test netinst from today. 19:14:18 debian-edu: 3 de-build-guest committed revision 61211 to debian-edu: automatic commit after build from lenny-test-amd64-i386-powerpc-netinst 19:14:51 next topic? 19:14:59 the error is from snakeoil-on-ice executed within ltsp-make-client, and it fail because http://www is unavailable. 19:15:21 suspect the check in snakeoil-on-ice simply is checking things in the wrong order or something. 19:15:51 next, yeah. 19:15:54 * h01ger nods. added to the ticket 19:15:55 #topic 2.2 status lenny: 1408: Diskless Workstation not working yet 19:16:15 this one seem to be the dumping ground for everything diskless related. 19:16:35 the original problem was ldap connection related, and I never figured out what was wrong. 19:16:54 I did however find a lot of bugs with dvd installs leading to broken diskless chroots. 19:17:09 I have fixed all of these, and believe dvd installs should be working. 19:17:19 * debalance will test 2morrow 19:17:27 should we close it or is it still useful? i dont think we should keep unreproducible bugs at p2 19:17:34 I suspect the original problem was with dvd installs, or with virtualbox installs, but do not know. 19:17:42 was never able to reproduce the original problem. 19:18:02 I was. always. 19:18:05 I hve not had any problem logging in to diskless workstations for the last 3 weeks 19:18:15 I'd suggest I test it 2morrow, with real hardware. 19:18:21 i'm with OleA. 19:18:30 debalance, even if you are. if you cannot make other people reproduce the problem, its not p2 19:18:42 I could 19:18:45 but only with vbox 19:18:56 * h01ger uses vbox and couldnt reproduce it 19:19:09 did anyone reproduce it with the netinst cd? 19:19:28 * debalance never tried 19:19:55 #info debalance will check if #1408 is still there tomorrow 19:19:56 pere: could not reproduce it with netinst. 19:19:56 i'll find out hopefully by the end of the meeting 19:19:58 my dvd installed diskless workstations now boots, so I believe that part is fixed, if it was the problem. 19:20:03 vagrantc, please update the bug then 19:20:04 with netinst 19:20:23 #topic 2.3 status lenny: 1138: We need to check and act on the non-free packages on the DVD 19:21:05 #info h01ger said he was going to look at this 19:21:34 #info I created a wiki page to keep information on what we figured out for each non-free package. 19:22:10 next? ;) 19:22:29 #link http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/NonFreePackages 19:22:34 * h01ger opens said wiki page to look at it later/tomorrow 19:22:46 I am sure h01ger would like help with the evaluation. 19:22:52 oh, yes! 19:22:59 I suspect we should keep those we can distribute and drop the rest. 19:23:18 having stupid packages asking license questions during installation is out of the question (ref sun java). 19:23:56 * h01ger nods 19:24:18 #topic 2.4 status lenny: 1415: Cannot unlock KDE lock session 19:25:36 totdays install didn't end normal, so I have to test again tomorrow 19:25:40 #info needs investigation, afaics 19:25:55 I suspect that was caused by me breaking diskless workstations several times the last few days. 19:26:19 some times cfengine would not run, the last bug gave failing boot sequence. 19:26:31 all these should be fixed, so check and see if the problem still exist. 19:26:36 there was a bug about missing /etc/pam.d/kde in Debian which caused the same behaviour 19:26:39 I was able to lock and unlock the root account, at least. 19:26:52 today after fixing the boot sequence. 19:27:07 root account was no problem on the same install 19:27:14 did not have time to create a non-privileged user, so I do not know if the problem only affected non-roots. 19:27:28 debalance, do you happen to remember the bug#? 19:28:16 if cfengine had not be running, pam would lack ldap setup. 19:28:36 not exactly, but I think I can find it again 19:28:37 but that would make it impossible to log in too, so I do not know what could cause this. 19:28:50 debalance, please add to the skole-bug... 19:28:57 the scenario of log-in working, but unlocking a session not, is when /etc/pam.d/kdm is there, but /etc/pam.d/kde is not 19:29:03 h01ger: as soon as I've found it agin 19:29:06 :) 19:29:09 thanks already 19:29:57 #topic 2.5 status lenny: 1412: Errors when building the LTSP chroot are not reported to the user 19:30:41 seemed to me that ltsp-build-client failed to return an error, and thus the udeb failed to pass the error on. :( 19:30:52 h01ger: #534714, it's filed against kdm4, but exactly same behaviour 19:31:21 pere, so still open? (the error reporting..) 19:31:59 debalance, hm 19:32:06 h01ger: I believe so. I had a download failure which failed to be reported, causing a broken ltsp chroot. 19:32:08 the problem is most likely due to ltsp-build-client running as a backgrounded process, and the hairbrained approach necessary to get a meaningful progress bar. 19:32:31 which *meaningful* progress bar? ;) 19:32:44 debian-edu: 3 de-build-guest committed revision 61214 to debian-edu: automatic commit after build from lenny-test-dvd 19:33:01 h01ger: the one causing users to not believe the installer is hanging when installing the ltsp chroot. 19:33:05 the ltsp-client-builder progress bar ... use to have two steps: 50% and 100% ... which would stall long enough that people thought it was broken. 19:33:32 so i managed to get it a little more fine-grained ... but it's tricky to do well. 19:33:40 pere, what vagrant says. it stays so long at 50% that *i* believe its broken... 19:33:46 alt+F4 gives hint about things that are happening ;) 19:33:50 aeh, missread.. 19:34:16 the chroot really takes a lot of time 19:34:53 we are talking about two different things, I believe. 19:34:56 yes 19:34:59 so i *fixed* that bug, but it seems it doesn't properly report errors now 19:35:07 today my install stalled at 54% ! Not 50% but 54% 19:35:10 (as in, for the last 6 months or so) 19:35:12 pere: when doing an ltspserver only install, will the chroot also be set up for diskless during installation? 19:35:14 the ltsp progress bar is fairly quick, while the diskless workstation step is horribly slow and stops at 54% for a long time. 19:35:29 debalance: yes, now all ltsp servers also support diskless workstations. 19:35:40 okay, good to know. 19:35:42 debalance: by default they boot thin clients, thought. 19:35:55 *documentation*? 19:35:56 we should document that and tell admins how to switch to diskless workstations. 19:36:10 so, the *bug* that we're talking about is a consequence of an improved progress bar 19:36:25 debalance, http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/Documentation/Lenny/HowTo/NetworkClients has some documentation 19:36:26 which is adding '3' to the kernel argument list to tell the client to use runlevel 3. 19:36:26 the bug being that it doesn't detect ltsp-build-client failures 19:36:55 vagrantc: perhaps. do not know the cause of this bug. 19:37:03 ok, /me concludes #1412 still needs some work 19:37:09 next? 19:37:44 or possibly that the debconf priority needs to be temporarily adjusted? 19:37:59 maybe it reports the error, but debconf just ignores it? 19:38:21 doesn't detect ltsp-build-client failures "every time" 19:38:58 well, most of the time, it works, yes? 19:39:08 that is my impression 19:39:22 so then this bug is hidden... 19:40:03 i'll try and do some more testing with the current udeb and see if i can reproduce it. 19:40:51 #topic 3. alpha3 19:41:10 lets copy an image tonite, test it, and call it alpha3 tomorrow? 19:42:08 its just needs a time when noone has changes pending, else its a bit pointless / less useful 19:43:13 it seems like there's been a lot of changes lately ... is that hopefully slowing? 19:43:59 h01ger: you called me 'debacle' in #1408 19:44:00 i think there's been at least 2 builds since i started testing this install, for example 19:44:08 * vagrantc chuckles 19:44:09 debalance, sorry :) 19:44:14 no problem ;) 19:44:37 * h01ger will try to find a good moment to make an alpha3 19:44:50 having an image is the first step, the 2nd is writing the announcemnet :) 19:45:30 #topic rc1 19:45:50 if alpha3 looks promising, i'd like to see rc1 RSN 19:46:32 where looks promising = not absolutly unreleasable. 19:47:05 :) 19:48:04 #topic 4. rc1 19:48:05 even 19:48:20 #topic 5. any other business 19:48:36 #topic 5.1 any other business: should we modify lwat to allow editing passwords per default 19:49:06 update the wiki about extending the range of statics? 19:49:26 its there, i think 19:49:39 5.1: if so, the password should not be displayed in cleartext IMO 19:49:56 debalance, i disagree 19:50:03 and a lot of other /!\ FIXME's 19:50:03 or asked for twice 19:50:35 people who want to set the password directly usually want to keep it, and thus not having others standing by see it 19:50:44 OleA, considering that the documentation for etch was (almost: a lot) worse, i dont think the documentation is a blocker per se. rather the opposite :) 19:51:49 another point of business: should we test stable-proposed-updates by default in the CD image? 19:51:58 h01ger, the documentation is in the local repo anyway, right? so it can be updated after the release? 19:52:01 #info no agreement how we should deal with lwat + changing passwords. needs more discussion, probably on the list. 19:52:03 debalance, yes 19:52:22 then it's definitely not blocking 19:52:24 #topic 5.2 AOB: should we test stable-proposed-updates by default in the CD image? 19:52:28 FIXME: add a pointer to DebianEdu/Documentation/Lenny/GettingStarted#DNSManagementwithlwat and describe it there. 19:52:53 i think i posted to the list about stable-proposed-updates ... 19:53:15 vagrantc, i thought its not worth bothering 19:53:33 vagrantc, the only interesting thing to test, imo, would be d-i upgrades 19:53:36 h01ger: my only fear is if there's an update in stable-proposed-updates, we release, and then it breaks something 19:53:37 FIXME: a chapter "DNS Management with lwat" needs to be written, or better, be incorporated in the above "machine management with lwat" chapter 19:54:12 but whats in proposed-updates is usually not important for us 19:54:29 vagrantc, i'm watching s-p-u via d-release@... 19:55:30 well, i brought it up, i'm not dead-set on it :) 19:55:34 :) 19:55:35 if it's not worth the trouble, so be it 19:55:42 #topic 6. next meeting 19:56:04 * janr thinks it woukd be wise to extend the max no. of statics from 50 to 200. this way slx will support larger schools out of the box running diskless 19:56:33 vagrantc, also more testing "maybe-stuff" might make us delay the release further. i'd rather release now and fix breackage tomorrow, then keep testing and not release while etch still has security support... 19:56:43 h01ger: i hear you 19:57:15 sorry, got a bit occupied here. 19:57:15 janr, please file a bug. but i wouldnt want to change that now, before the release. but squeeze is really near :) 19:57:24 (squeeze freeze scheduled in 2 month...) 19:57:34 pere, have fun with backlog :) 19:57:46 * h01ger suggests next monday, same time, for the next meeting 19:58:30 * debalance likes janr's idea, but thinks it belongs into the squeeze release 19:58:54 * h01ger likes the idea too... 19:59:08 #agreed next meeting, next monday, 19 utc 19:59:26 for certain values of "agreed" ;-) 19:59:43 thank you all for attending and fixing bugs and testing and working on the docs! 19:59:46 cheers! 19:59:47 the no massive dissent in a rapid fashion value 19:59:48 #endmeeting