[01:49] gnomefreak: ok no problem ... i will have to upload tomorrow morning ... so nevermind ... sorry for the noise :) === smm [n=shane@12-216-188-54.client.mchsi.com] has joined #ubuntu-mozillateam === smm [n=shane@12-216-188-54.client.mchsi.com] has joined #ubuntu-mozillateam === smcgraw [n=shane@12-216-188-54.client.mchsi.com] has joined #ubuntu-mozillateam [08:31] hi [09:01] morning === asac_ [n=asac@debian/developer/asac] has joined #ubuntu-mozillateam === DarkMageZ [n=richard@ppp167-203.lns4.syd6.internode.on.net] has joined #ubuntu-mozillateam [10:13] bug 71702 bug 68265 bug 71712 [10:13] Launchpad bug 71702 in firefox "MASTER Firefox Crash [@js_FinalizeStringRT] [@js_atom_uninterner] " [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/71702 [10:13] Launchpad bug 68265 in nagios2 "Issues accessing /var/lib/nagios2/rw with www-data" [Undecided,Rejected] https://launchpad.net/bugs/68265 [10:13] Launchpad bug 71712 in firefox "firefox crash [@NSSRWLock_UnlockRead] [@__PK11_CreateContextByRawKey] " [High,Rejected] https://launchpad.net/bugs/71712 [10:13] opps... [10:14] bug 86265 [10:14] Launchpad bug 86265 in firefox "MASTER firefox crash [@totemScriptablePlugin::~totemScriptablePlugin] " [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/86265 [10:15] hmm 71712 is in the clue files..thats okay, i'll sort that out later.. [10:27] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Bugs/Bughelper/ClueFile [10:27] that was just updated by me...in need of it as well [10:42] Admiral_Chicago: any info needed from me? [10:43] not at the moment... [10:43] asac: http://admiralchicago.wordpress.com/2007/06/01/bughelper-clue-files/ [10:45] i finished my blog that took entire way too long... [10:53] time for bed.. [10:59] Admiral_Chicago: night [11:01] Admiral_Chicago: nice blogger you are :) [12:00] what is it with our patches and upstream releases :( [12:00] why do they take parts of patches not the whole damn thing [12:03] asac: same thing with iceape patches i know the one i added they changed part of the file so i have to regen it. but other patches look like they only accepted parts of it === gnomefreak looking to see if debian built it yet maybe steal a patch or two from them :( [12:06] nope they havent touched it yet [12:36] gnomefreak: isn't iceape updated in svn? [12:36] mike probably already did that [12:36] mike aka glandium [12:36] i didnt look in svn i look at ftp.debian.org [12:36] there is no new version yet? [12:36] hmm [12:36] not there [12:36] so what patches do fail? [12:36] i fixed them here i guess [12:36] i can send you [12:37] which do you need updated? [12:37] well the one failing last night seems to be working atm ill let you know. so far only my patch this morning [12:37] im gonna build orig.tar than do my patch over and see what happens (or should i do patch first? [12:41] ill do a build before adding patch i think to see if anyother issues are there === bluekuja [n=andy@ubuntu/member/bluekuja] has joined #ubuntu-mozillateam [12:47] asac: just to make sure its ok with you iceape version going to be 1.1.2+1-0ubuntu1 is ok? its higher than feisty repo will ever be even if i update it in feisty repo i was thinking of going to 1.1.2-0.mt# or something of the sort [12:48] or stick with 1.1.2+u1-0ubuntu1? [12:50] what is in feisty? [12:50] what is in gutsy atm? [12:50] 1.1.1-3.mt9 = feisty [12:50] both official + preview archive [12:50] that is preview [12:50] ok [12:50] gutsy? [12:50] 1.1.1+u1-0ubuntu1 [12:50] is it in? [12:50] gutsy [12:51] none are in official repos [12:51] is it available at all? [12:51] gutsy still hasnt been pushed [12:51] where is it stuck? [12:51] new still [12:51] probably hangs in binary new now [12:51] are the packages build? [12:51] please look in launchpad [12:51] how do i find out? [12:52] look at source page of firefox [12:52] there you can find the builds [12:52] two links you have to follow afaik :) [12:53] iceape source page has no builds [12:53] firefox source page only has ff [12:54] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/gutsy/+source/firefox [12:54] hmm right [12:54] i will try to take care [12:54] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox is wherer i am [12:54] oops guess gutsy would have helped [12:56] its not there anyway [12:57] nope. i think its just they dont want to push it from what i have seen [01:10] takes time [01:16] it does i agree but the 2 people you talked about htis with were agianst having it in repos to begin with. [01:16] hmmmmmmm dpatch seems very very slow here [01:17] ill be back i have to get ready for pysical theropy [01:37] lunch [01:41] ill be gone as well have a good lunch [02:18] gnomefreak: back ... cu === bluekuja [n=andrea@ubuntu/member/bluekuja] has joined #ubuntu-mozillateam [04:06] bluekuja: pushing [04:06] asac: great :) [04:06] asac: I move to kdiff [04:06] asac: it should use the same build system [04:06] asac: I'll take a look [04:09] uploading firefox to gutsy [04:10] if there are any regressions ... i am away this weekend :-P [04:12] asac: I'm away too [04:12] :) [04:28] ok im back [04:28] gnomefreak: firefox updated in gutsy and bzr [04:29] k ty [04:29] iceape uses dpatch (i can swear it does) :( [04:31] dpatch-edit-patch 82_prefs_ubuntu doesnt seem to want to play nicely [04:32] it tells me it cant open <30+dirs/file> because they are missing or are not there [04:32] he? [04:32] are you soure your iceape source tree is fine? [04:32] its not there so it will create one [04:33] in proper tree dpatch edit patch should work [04:33] than during copying* it hangs than finally says cant find [04:33] gnomefreak@Gutsy:~/gutsy_builds/iceape/ubuntu-1.1.x$ dpatch-edit-patch 82_prefs_ubuntu [04:33] if it breaks then it means that there is need to merge/drop/modify patch [04:33] dpatch-edit-patch: * /home/gnomefreak/gutsy_builds/iceape/ubuntu-1.1.x/debian/patches/82_prefs_ubuntu.dpatch does not exist, it will be created as a new dpatch. [04:33] dpatch-edit-patch: * Copying /home/gnomefreak/gutsy_builds/iceape/ubuntu-1.1.x to reference directory. [04:33] how long does that step take? [04:33] i mean "copying" [04:33] should take a fair amount of time [04:33] 1-2 minutes before it ends in failure [04:33] maybe more [04:34] what patch does fail to apply [04:34] ? [04:34] dont know trying to make one [04:34] to make what? [04:34] patch [04:34] there are patches, aren't there? [04:35] first you have to find which patch fails to apply [04:35] then you have to find a countermeasure for that [04:35] yes. the patch i added to 1.1.1 wont apply in 1.1.2 so im doing it over [04:35] its still at stage above [04:35] gnomefreak: if its the patch i gave you [04:35] dpatch command [04:35] ... you can take the exact same file i gave you [04:35] just drop it in debian patches [04:35] asac: no its the one i made [04:35] for what? [04:36] for the go button on the toolbar [04:36] ah [04:36] ok [04:36] then go ahead [04:36] works in 1.1.1 [04:36] just make iceape build cleanly ... then dpatch-edit-patch should work [04:36] did you figure out version for gutsy? [04:37] no :) [04:37] so i can build orig.tar (that may be why its failing [04:37] i havent built orig.tar [04:37] its probably the same version we have in feisty ... just +1 and reset to -0ubuntu1 [04:37] aeh same we have in gutsy i mean [04:37] ah [04:38] and use -0ubuntu0.mt1 if its for the mt archive [04:38] 1.1.1+u1-0ubuntu1 is in NEW in gutsy [04:38] actually i think you just have to use 1.1.2-0ubuntu0.mt1 [04:38] why do we have u1? [04:38] ah [04:38] right :) [04:39] now i remember ;) [04:39] i was hoping to drop the 1u [04:39] no way :) [04:39] ok [04:39] unless you use debian orig.tarball [04:39] 1.1.2+u1-0ubuntu1? [04:39] you could do that ... but then you would have to patch what is currently done during orig tarball setup [04:40] ... in a dpatch that would be [04:40] dpatch looks like its gonna drop me in /tmp/ so i should beable to get patch in and roll orig.tar after that [04:41] it drops you in /tmp/ for patch edit [04:41] to use that version i will have to patch something? [04:41] once you exit that shell [04:41] right [04:41] it generates patch in original directory [04:41] yes [04:41] you can also exit 12121 (some value i don't remember) ... to abort [04:41] edit file == 2 minutes if that [04:41] yes [04:42] thats why i hate dpatch for mozillas [04:42] ... and why i ended up using quilt for our packages [04:42] as you don't have to use cdbs-edit-patch (which basically does the same as dpatch-edit-patch) [04:42] right [04:45] can i exit 0? [04:45] dunno [04:45] ctrl-d i press to exit and update patch [04:45] ok [04:49] brb goes for smoke. im gonna assume fakeroot ./debian/rules source uses changelog to give orig.tar the version. and im thinking 1.1.2+u1-0ubuntu1 for version unless you would rather change it to something else. [04:56] i think it was corrupt, i think i cloned new before i left this morning and didnt do anything to it and it seems to work now. (i also had to clean up alot of stuff due to lose of disk space.) [04:58] oh [04:58] might be [04:58] it worked :) i have new patch created [04:59] great [05:00] merged from upstream? since we didnt use debians build? [05:03] what? [05:03] in changelog? [05:06] yes [05:07] i guess NEw upstream release since we already sent one release up [05:07] the more i think of it [05:08] ok lets see if orig builds [05:09] ut oh [05:10] i hate this frigging way to build orig [05:11] my fault i forgot to add something to changelog [05:37] yeah [05:37] its hard [05:37] if you move diff from debian orig vs our orig to a patch then you can just use debian's one [05:40] applying patch 20_visibility to ./ ... failed. [05:41] bunch of these too [05:41] dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'debian/patches/38_mips64_build.dpatch' will not be represented in diff [05:41] 1 for every patch it looks like [05:42] attempting to revert failed patch 20_visibility from ./: md5sums match, proceeding ... done (neither success nor failure guaranteed) [05:42] i cant even frigging clean [05:42] 2nd time clean worked [05:43] wtf am i missing [05:43] and i did move everything out of /mozilla/ [05:44] i did leave empty mozilla dir there though [05:45] i am out now [05:45] anything serious [05:45] ? [05:45] its failing to build [05:46] due to the above [05:46] you messed up your source tree state [05:46] 20_visibility from ./: md5sums match, proceeding ... [05:46] means that its already applied [05:46] you should have run clean before doing anything [05:46] 2nd clean fixed that [05:46] i did [05:46] yeah ... but now your underlying source is in wrong state [05:46] better start over [05:46] trying again to see if it fails again [05:46] btw visibility has to be dropped [05:47] its applied upstream [05:47] see the list i send you [05:47] about what to drop [05:47] those are definitly in there [05:47] what list? [05:47] i told you further above what patches need to be dropped [05:47] 7 hours ago or so [05:47] for ffox? or IA? [05:47] ia [05:47] ffox is all done [05:47] k ill scroll [05:48] the names might not be the same [05:48] but visibility is one of them [05:49] gnomefreak: 20_visibility.dpatch [05:50] i dont see any. you said you would send but you didnt [05:50] 25_gnome_helpers_with_params.dpatch [05:50] has to be replaced [05:50] by the one i gave you [05:51] looks like those are the ones you need [05:52] k ill try them [05:52] i think i still have the patch [05:54] you have to autoconf update the autoconf patch ... but that should automatically happen on clean [05:54] cu ... have to do something [05:54] k === Riddell [i=jr@kde/jriddell] has joined #ubuntu-mozillateam [06:13] i need to find debians build so i can steal a patch from them :( === gnomefreak wonders if they applied 15_gecko_1.8.1.3 patch upstream [06:50] ok im gone for a bit. asac if you come back can you check if that patch needs to be dropped. i havent found deians build for 1.1.2 so i cant see if mike dropped it or not, seeing as its a gecko patch im leaning towards it has been applied upstream [07:24] gnomefreak: you can find out [07:24] look at bonsai.mozilla.org [07:24] search on MOZILLA_1_8_BRANCH [07:24] for the file that has been modified [07:24] search for changes since beginning of time [07:25] and you will see all recent checkins === JenFraggle [n=jen@91.84.43.217] has joined #ubuntu-mozillateam [08:17] JenFraggle: did you see the planet [08:24] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-accessibility/2007-June/002210.html [08:24] i don't know how that ^^ will affect us / Fx3 / accessiblity in general [08:46] asac: looks like 1 or 2 of the files have been fixed (its hard to tell but im still looking) [08:49] ok looks like i can drop it. [09:00] Admiral_Chicago: can you summarize in one line? [09:00] fine [09:00] gnomefreak: ^^ [09:01] if you are sure ... drop it [09:01] asac: ibm is dropping official (i think paid devs) for accessibility on GNOME [09:12] 99% sure to drop it so i did. now i have to see if the other patch still fails and i doubt that site is gonne help but i will try if it fails [09:13] Admiral_Chicago: what did they achieve so far? [09:13] Admiral_Chicago: sorry for my ignorance :) i rarely use accessibility tools seriously [09:14] neither do i but there is some things about Fx accesiblity on linux [09:16] asac: 99_configure.dpatch looks like its only a local patch (it failied to apply but im trying again. [09:17] oh wait no thats right its ubuntu1.1.x/configure [09:19] you have to keep it [09:19] its regenerated on clean i guess [09:19] so you just have to run fakeroot ./debian/rules clean [09:20] if its not updated look in rules file to find the target that does that [09:20] (its easy to track) [09:21] so my patch/change that i made will show up in that patch? [09:22] if it modified configure.in, then yes [09:22] no my patch didnt modify anything in there (not so say the other patches didnt [09:22] gnomefreak: you dropped the visibility patch, which previously patched configure.in [09:22] thats why you definitly need to sync it [09:23] yep figured as much but for some reason i have to run clean more than once for things to take like that ive noticed [09:25] the gwget build that i gave up on, it was missing the patch that prevents the autoregen. [09:26] dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'debian/patches/35_zip_cache.dpatch' will not be represented in diff [09:26] yeah might be [09:26] i cant frigging win [09:26] if you keep your eyes open you should have seen that 99_configure has been regenerated [09:26] did you see that? === gnomefreak waits for the patch to fail again [09:26] dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'debian/patches/35_zip_cache.dpatch' will not be represented in diff [09:26] ^^^ thats not a problem at all [09:26] just ignore that [09:26] ok good [09:27] all patches leave that [09:27] it fails to apply again damnit [09:28] yeah [09:28] asac: where do i look for it to regen [09:28] in rules [09:28] there is a target [09:28] something like [09:28] TARGET: ... [09:28] and then there should be 99_configure..something [09:28] in proximity [09:29] i guess its clean [09:32] wanna laugh? [09:33] install -m 644 $(CURDIR)/dist/bin/.autoreg $(CURDIR)/debian/iceape.cfg $(TMP_DIR)/usr/lib/iceape [09:33] ^^ closest so far [09:34] cant find a target let alone a patch number [09:37] asac: its not in here at all from what i can see. heres full rules incase you dont have source: http://gnomefreak.pastebin.ca/529051 [09:38] gnomefreak: does everything else apply? [09:38] if so ... just do it manually: [09:38] dpatch-edit-patch 99_.... [09:38] then autoconf2.13 [09:38] and done [09:39] oh thats it? ill try it [09:39] yes its always that simple [09:39] if you cannot enter 99_confi... edit mode [09:40] then remove all content from that patch file ..., then enter edit shell, run autoconf2.13 and done :) [09:41] waiting for /tmp/ [09:41] i run autoconf2.13 when it drops me into edit mode? [09:43] dpatch-edit-patch: * /home/gnomefreak/gutsy_builds/iceape/ubuntu-1.1.x/debian/patches/99_configure.dpatch exists, this patch will be updated. << ignore that it says it will be updated and still run autoconf2.13 to be safe [09:43] installing autoconf2.13 as we speak :) [09:53] asac: firefox 0.4 hit and is upgrading :) thankyou [09:55] dpatch-edit-patch: * Applying current 99_configure.dpatch for editing. [09:55] applying patch 99_configure to ./ ... failed. [09:55] dpatch-edit-patch: Warning: Could not apply the patch we want to edit -- not aborting, as you may want to work with the .rejs. [09:55] that is bad IMHO asac [09:55] i ran it anyway so we will see [10:00] oh dapper ffox is out :/ [10:00] sit tight [10:00] :) [10:00] is out is good no? [10:00] gnomefreak: its ok [10:00] you just remove .rej files [10:00] and run autoconf2.13 [10:01] then you are done [10:01] where do i find .rej files? [10:01] search for them [10:01] your excersize to find them :) [10:02] ill try [10:02] :) [10:02] what are .rej files? [10:02] reject? [10:02] files showing what hunks have not been applied due to conflicts [10:02] yes [10:02] if a patch cannot apply some parts then it creates a .rej file next to the file that could not be patched [10:02] yes in patched [10:02] you can then look at it [10:02] dir [10:02] and manually do it [10:03] of course ... for configure looking at rej and doing manually doesn't make sene :) [10:03] gnomefreak: no not in patche [10:03] gnomefreak: no not in patched [10:03] in normal source [10:03] there should be reject [10:03] files [10:03] anyway [10:03] you have to remove them and run autoconf2.13 [10:03] then done === asac out for another hour [10:03] ok autoconfig in source dir? [10:39] it seemed to work after using dpatch-edit-patch after ctrl+d it updated it so i ran clean now build and they all applied :) [10:42] gnomefreak: congrats [10:42] document everything properly and commit to your private branch ... i can then review [10:43] ty [10:43] ok [10:44] use distinct checkins per issue you tackle [10:44] so i don't have to review one huge diff [10:44] k [10:45] ask me monday if you dont see it [10:45] y [10:46] do i have to commit each patch seperate or just debian/patches [10:47] you wont have it monday [10:47] i promise unless i get really lucky. it failed [10:48] /usr/bin/ld: libxpcom_compat.so: hidden symbol `nsHashtable::Get(nsHashKey*)' isn't defined [10:48] i have seen that before === gnomefreak doesnt remember what you did to fix that last time [10:56] im grabbing branch again i want to look through the patches that are gone to make sure nothing like that was in them [10:56] come to think of it i still have them incase of issues [10:59] im leaning toward the gecko patch since its full of .cpp hunks [11:04] i dont see anything like the errors i got in any of the xpcom nor the patches we dropped/replaced [11:13] gnomefreak: you don't have the latest [11:13] source [11:13] e.g. visibility.dpath is missing [11:13] which you dropped [11:13] at least parts apparently [11:14] so i have to re patch it with new patch? [11:15] no idea [11:15] you don't have latest sources [11:15] maybe they are not yet out [11:15] what are you doing? [11:15] i mean which tarball are you using? [11:15] to start with [11:15] 1.1.2 [11:16] from ftp.mozilla.org [11:26] hmm [11:26] interseting [11:27] just wait for mike ... he is often quick doing things anyway [11:27] maybe he already updated svn? [11:27] i havent seen an svn at all. when i go to it it lists 30 packages none of them are ice anything [11:28] i spent afternoon searching for debian svn [11:28] http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-mozilla/iceape/?rev=0&sc=0 [11:28] where is the problem :) [11:28] start at svn.debian.org :) [11:28] yeah went there and no iceape === gnomefreak saves this link [11:29] iceape is not fit for release [11:29] sunbird isn't as well [11:29] though i got a tiny window starting :) [11:29] not bad ;) [11:30] last change to iceape was 5 weeks ago from what i see [11:31] and he didnt drop patches from what i see but still looking around [11:32] yeah [11:32] he didn't update yet [11:34] oh well i tried to get it out. [11:47]