lubuntu-qa team mailing list archive

["Ali Linx (amjjawad)" <amjjawad@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Jonathan Marsden <jmarsden@xxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> On 06/18/2013 05:59 PM, Ali Linx (amjjawad) wrote:
>
> >>>> I'd much prefer a test using the default install type.  ...
>
> >>> With all due respect, this will make no difference whatsoever,
> >>> IMHO. What this has to do with RAM Usage and zRAM and stuff like
> >>> that?
>
> >> It is possible that one path through the installer sets up the
> >> manually created swap partition sooner, or differently, than the
> >> path that automatically partitions the whole disk.
>
> > IMHO, we need an expert who can tell us that :D
>
> Or maybe a tester willing to read the code before stating "this will
> make no difference whatsoever" -- as you did earlier! You have a B.Sc.
> in Computer Science (just like me -- well, officially mine is B.Sc. in
> Computing and Information Systems), so you are clearly capable of
> reading that code if you really wanted to.  Just as I am.
>
>
Apparently, we are talking apples and oranges here so let's not carry on
with such kind of discussion. I got what you really want and I have done
that test 2 days ago but was so tired to send the email and I took an off
day yesterday which I was badly needed. I will send the report and the
result you were asking ;)



> > IMHO, testing will never prove or show us that.
>
> Sure it could.  If one code path delays use of swap, and so ends up
> using (say) 32MB more RAM than the other, then you could find that a
> 256MB machine would install fine on one code path, and run out of RAM on
> the other.  No expert needed.
>
>
By saying "code", I think you mean installation type, correct?
Anyway, never mind :)


> > I understand what you are saying, but for someone sitting and
> > watching what is happening on a monitor, won't notice or can tell
> > what is going on deep inside.
>
> You won't notice the difference between a successful install and a
> failed one?  I *hope* you would :)
>

I did not say that, you got it totally wrong. But yet again, let's drop
this, please :)
If I can't tell/notice the difference, why then I've been testing Lubuntu
for two years now? :)



> >> Second, if you are sure "it makes no difference whatsoever", why
> >> would you choose the manual partitioning way -- it needs more time
> >> and more mouse clicks, for what you say is "no difference
> >> whatsoever"?!
>
> > Because, I have two HDD (please check the report)
>
> I know... I didn't make a fuss about that, but testing with only one
> connected to the system would be a more common test configuration.
>
>
I know. I was lazy to open the case and disconnected my HDD because I was
doing that test very late at night and I was so tired. But never mind, I
re-did the test with only one HDD - will send the report soon - and I even
changed the jumper and made it a Master as it was Slave.



> > ... and I have Data on the first HDD (BUT NO SWAP Partition) and I
> > just did the manual approach and to be honest, as I said, 4 tests
> > were done via "Automatic" approach so, thought some kind of a change.
> > But, tell you the truth? I knew it you would disagree :D I was right
> > :D but yet again, because I have two HDD, I just wanted to do the
> > manual way.
>
> I want a documented and repeatable set of tests, that test what we are
> trying to test.  No more, no less.
>
>
Now, with my two reports I have sent, are you saying these steps are not
documented nor repeatable?
Trust me, I got your point :D

"I want a documented and repeatable set of tests, that test what we are
trying to test.  No more, no less." < Done ;)



> What are we testing for?  To determine RAM usage requirements of the
> default Lubuntu install from an Lubuntu 13.10 desktop i386 image, used
> by a novice user coming from Windows XP on a normal older PC machine.
>

Understood :)



>
> Why documented and repeatable?
>
> So that anyone reading your report can do the exact same test on their
> hardware, and get the same results.  That's what testing is all about if
> you want it to be useful.  That's why scientists need to document methdo
> as well as results, and why duplicating the results of an experiment
> someone else did is often considered very useful science!
>
> In the computing world, bug reports need "steps to reproduce", and tests
> need to be documented in sufficient depth that others can repeat the test.
>
>
Understood.
I made sure to be as simple as possible, as detailed as possible and as
repeatable as possible.
Unless you think my reports are less helpful/useless, that is something
else :)



> If you want to do whatever tests make you happy, with whatever
> variations you feel like at the time, well, that's up to you... but it's
> less helpful to the one single goal we are trying to reach regarding
> testing RAM usage requirements of the default Lubuntu install from a
> desktop i386 image, for someone coming from Windows XP on a normal older
> PC machine.


Understood.
Definitely, we are working in a team and we should show some team work
spirit. We must set our goals and work to achieve them. Personal Tests are
outside this topic :)


>> Don't lose sleep doing Lubuntu testing :)
>
> > How can I sleep and you are asking me for more tests? :P :P :P hehe
>
> No, I'm *not* asking you for more tests.  I'm just saying that the one
> you did is probably a little less useful and less repeatable than the
> test that I *thought* you were going to do.  As far as I know, I did
> *not* ask you to do the test again.  I really was suggesting that you
> don't replace sleep with Lubuntu testing!


I know, that was a joke so no worries :)
We are not getting paid for that, we do this because we love Lubuntu.

But I'm just wondering how is that my reports/tests are less repeatable? if
that because of 'Something Else' Installation Option, then pointed noted
and understood. If that is because something else, please tell me :)



> > Anyway, no promises here but if I get a chance, I will do it, just
> > for you despite the fact I'm not convinced at all.
>
> Thanks (remember, you are volunteering this, I am not asking!).  It
> probably will make no difference to the result.  But IMO it will be a
> much stronger, more useful result.
>
> Jonathan
>


The new report will be sent shortly :)
I finished the test 2 days ago as I mentioned but couldn't send it.


Thank you so much!


-- 

"All of us are smarter than any one of us."

*Best Regards,*
*amjjawad <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/amjjawad/>*
*Start Ubuntu<https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/CommunicationsTeam/WOWLubuntu/StartUbuntu>
*
*
*
*Test Machine1: ASUS F3F Laptop - Intel Core Duo T2350 @ 1.86GHz with 489MB
RAM*
*Test Machine 2: Desktop - Intel P4 Hyper Threading (2 Logical CPUs) @3GHz
- 512MB DDR 200MHz RAM*