On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Jonathan Marsden <jmars...@fastmail.fm>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*
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-qa Post to : lubuntu-qa@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-qa More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
