On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

new images are done. version: 2010.05.13

these are the images I want to rename to an official 2010.05 release after testing.

http://build.archlinux.org/isos/Changelog http://build.archlinux.org/isos/

how should they be tested?

for every file, that is:

archlinux-2010.05.13-core-dual.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-core-i686.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-core-x86_64.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-dual.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-i686.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-x86_64.iso

I want to get a report from someone that an installation went fine. what kind of install doesn't really matter. manual, automatic, autoprepare, net/core whatever. this has been tested enough before, so any kind of install with each single image.

On top of that, I want: A) confirmation for virtio_pci and virtio_blk on the install ISO's initramfs  http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/19401?project=6 B) at least one installation performed from a usb stick, using any of the above images.

So if you test: send a reply mentioning which file you tested, and optionally if you can confirm A/B

thanks for you help, Dieter

I just successfully installed arch64 from a usb stick, using archlinux-2010.05.13-core-dual.iso. Installed it with lvm on top of dmcrypt, without any problems.

Am 13.05.2010 16:54, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:

how should they be tested?

I can perform "Does it boot" tests on virtual hardware, and maybe also on real hardware, but that is more time-consuming.

for every file, that is:

archlinux-2010.05.13-core-dual.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-core-i686.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-core-x86_64.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-dual.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-i686.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-x86_64.iso

I want to get a report from someone that an installation went fine. what kind of install doesn't really matter. manual, automatic, autoprepare, net/core whatever. this has been tested enough before, so any kind of install with each single image.

On top of that, I want: A) confirmation for virtio_pci and virtio_blk on the install ISO's initramfs http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/19401?project=6

Booting with '-drive if=virtio,media=cdrom,...' now works in qemu, so that confirms that virtio works in initramfs. After initramfs completed, virtio always worked properly.

B) at least one installation performed from a usb stick, using any of the above images.

Again, I can offer boot-tests here, I may need to buy a new stick, as all of my current ones are in use somewhere. Tests I performed so far: Booting archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-dual.iso in i686 and x86_64 mode on qemu with a virtio CD drive and with an 'IDE emulation' CD drive. I don't have the time to actually test installations though. I performend an installation with an older AIF snapshot (end of Feb. or beginning of March), which was entirely fine.

On 05/13/2010 08:54 AM, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

new images are done. version: 2010.05.13

these are the images I want to rename to an official 2010.05 release after testing.

http://build.archlinux.org/isos/Changelog http://build.archlinux.org/isos/

how should they be tested?

for every file, that is:

archlinux-2010.05.13-core-dual.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-core-i686.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-core-x86_64.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-dual.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-i686.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-x86_64.iso

I want to get a report from someone that an installation went fine. what kind of install doesn't really matter. manual, automatic, autoprepare, net/core whatever. this has been tested enough before, so any kind of install with each single image.

On top of that, I want: A) confirmation for virtio_pci and virtio_blk on the install ISO's initramfs http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/19401?project=6 B) at least one installation performed from a usb stick, using any of the above images.

So if you test: send a reply mentioning which file you tested, and optionally if you can confirm A/B

thanks for you help, Dieter

archlinux-2010.05.13-netinstall-x86_64.iso archlinux-2010.05.13-core-x86_64.iso Both boot fine from usb. Later installed both with KVM. Boot with drive if=virtio,media=cdrom seems to be fine now.