Feature #9425

Enable Spice with an absolute pointing device in the test suite guest

Added by anonym 2015-05-18 15:32:51 . Updated 2015-07-03 03:36:35 .

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Test suite
Target version:
Tails_1.4.1
Start date:
2015-05-18
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Feature Branch:
test/9425-enable-spice-and-asbolute-pointing-device
Type of work:
Code
Blueprint:

Starter:
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:

Description

Initial results suggest that this greatly increase robustness when running the test suite in a nested VM setup (e.g. on lizard) or when using the snapshot improvements of Feature #8008/Feature #6094. Presumably the absolute pointer results in higher accuracy, and fewer lost (or “messed up”) mouse events.

Subtasks

History

#1 Updated by anonym 2015-05-18 15:49:11

  • blocks #8538 added

#2 Updated by anonym 2015-05-18 15:53:37

  • Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress

Applied in changeset commit:b81076a12cdb1273bbaabdab032ec79deee23d6a.

#3 Updated by anonym 2015-05-18 15:53:38

Applied in changeset commit:2dd9895c1e463a2ce0287b1e141f85e2492d669b.

#4 Updated by anonym 2015-05-18 15:56:27

  • Assignee changed from anonym to kytv
  • % Done changed from 0 to 50
  • QA Check set to Ready for QA
  • Feature Branch set to test/9425-enable-spice-and-asbolute-pointing-device

I already asked you to test Spice over IRC, and IIRC you didn’t have such good results. However, now with the blacklisting of the psmouse module you hopefully will get better results.

#5 Updated by kytv 2015-05-23 00:45:03

  • Assignee changed from kytv to intrigeri

I’m happy with the changes and I think it does make things better.

I still have the problem in feature/jessie:’s encryption.feature, causing me to need to double-click the key window in the key selection step and only there.

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2015-05-25 11:21:00

  • Assignee changed from intrigeri to anonym
  • QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Info Needed

I don’t understand why commit:2dd9895 is at the same time removing <input type='mouse' bus='ps2'/>, and stating that “it seems impossible to remove the ps2 mouse”. If the end result is that we’ll have the ps2 mouse anyway, what’s the value of removing it from the domain config? I find this misleading, as it may lead someone to believe (reading the domain config) that the system under test won’t have any ps2 mouse, which is wrong. What do you think?

Once done with that, please reassing to kytv, so that he can make it clear what exactly you tested (without local hacks) on a Tails/Wheezy ISO, with that branch merged in (I could not find this info above).

#7 Updated by anonym 2015-05-25 11:45:32

  • Assignee changed from anonym to kytv

intrigeri wrote:
> I don’t understand why commit:2dd9895 is at the same time removing <input type='mouse' bus='ps2'/>, and stating that “it seems impossible to remove the ps2 mouse”. If the end result is that we’ll have the ps2 mouse anyway, what’s the value of removing it from the domain config? I find this misleading, as it may lead someone to believe (reading the domain config) that the system under test won’t have any ps2 mouse, which is wrong. What do you think?

My take is rather that since we’re basing our virtual hardware setup on a machine template, the domain specification itself isn’t enough to look at. For instance, no keyboard device is listed either, but we still get the default (PS/2) keyboard from the template machine. Good enough?

> Once done with that, please reassing to kytv, so that he can make it clear what exactly you tested (without local hacks) on a Tails/Wheezy ISO, with that branch merged in (I could not find this info above).

The ball is back to you, kytv!

#8 Updated by intrigeri 2015-05-25 11:47:08

anonym wrote:
> Good enough?

Yes.

#9 Updated by kytv 2015-05-28 22:53:22

intrigeri wrote:

> Once done with that, please reassing to kytv, so that he can make it clear what exactly you tested (without local hacks) on a Tails/Wheezy ISO, with that branch merged in (I could not find this info above).

I had run with this merged into stable and without any local “hacks”.

I’m re-running all scenarios in stable with this branch merged in. Once this run is done I’ll send it back to intrigeri for merging if he’s happy with it.

#10 Updated by kytv 2015-05-29 10:35:17

  • Assignee changed from kytv to intrigeri
  • QA Check changed from Info Needed to Ready for QA

As far as Tails/Wheezy is concerned, I’m still happy with the changes. (All features were run without any “local hacks”)

#11 Updated by intrigeri 2015-05-29 11:41:32

  • Status changed from In Progress to Fix committed
  • % Done changed from 50 to 100

Applied in changeset commit:ade7bbadd3f18a5b0679ad50130d38a509459c14.

#12 Updated by intrigeri 2015-05-29 11:42:44

  • Assignee deleted (intrigeri)
  • QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Pass

Yay!

#13 Updated by intrigeri 2015-07-03 03:36:35

  • Status changed from Fix committed to Resolved