[14:55] <asac> Ubulette: i think xul is uploaded
[14:56] <asac> went pretty fast ... which is why i just think ;)
[14:57] <asac> Ubulette: let me know if you haven't received a confirmation mail in a few minutes
[14:57] <Ubulette> nothing so far
[14:58] <Ubulette> our gdk/glib is ugly
[14:58] <Ubulette> http://paste.ubuntu.com/1982/
[15:12] <asac_> 16:09 < asac> yeah
[15:12] <asac_> 16:10 < asac> ok upload failed
[15:12] <asac_> 16:10 < asac> lets try again
[15:13] <asac_> damn ... now i got disconnected :)
[15:14] <Ubulette> hmm, I still have 21 upgrades pending in hardy, some 2+ weeks old
[15:23] <asac_> Ubulette: xulrunner accepted
[15:25] <bluekuja> asac: is normal that the package didnt enter NEW queue already?
[15:29] <Ubulette> asac, got no email
[15:30] <asac> Ubulette: its ok ... i received it
[15:30] <asac> apparently the signer gets the mail in ubuntu ... which isn't the case in debian
[15:30] <asac> which is why i always get it wrong
[15:31] <bluekuja> asac: usually it was something automatic
[15:31] <Ubulette> so it was not a sponsored upload ?
[15:31] <bluekuja> asac: but I still cannot see anything
[15:31] <asac> Ubulette: read what i said :)
[15:31] <bluekuja> Ubulette, it is
[15:31] <bluekuja> Ubulette, just the package signer gets the mail back
[15:31] <bluekuja> not the changelog author
[15:32] <asac> Ubulette: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xulrunner-1.9/1.9~b1~rc3+nobinonly-0ubuntu1
[15:32] <bluekuja> asac: any idea?
[15:33] <asac> bluekuja: no idea ... maybe the sync host is down
[15:33] <asac> i know that debian has some issue with some hosts
[15:33] <asac> atm
[15:33] <asac> but no idea how it works
[15:33] <asac> you should receive a mail though
[15:33] <bluekuja> asac: yes, I received it
[15:33] <bluekuja> asac: but it doesnt appear on NEW
[15:34] <bluekuja> usually when you receive the mail, you see the package in NEW
[15:34] <asac> bluekuja: are you subscribed to debian-devel-announce?
[15:34] <asac> you should
[15:34] <asac> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/11/msg00001.html
[15:34] <asac> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/11/msg00002.html
[15:35] <bluekuja> asac: that's old
[15:35] <bluekuja> and has been fixed
[15:35] <asac> yes ... but it takes time to resume
[15:36] <asac> read second one
[15:36] <bluekuja> true
[15:37] <bluekuja> but we uploaded it after ries went up to normality
[15:37] <bluekuja> so should be faster
[15:37] <bluekuja> but as you said it might be a mirror sync problem
[15:38] <bluekuja> (I'm subscribed to that list it seems)
[15:38] <bluekuja> :)
[15:38] <bluekuja> and yes, I received that mail as well
[15:38] <bluekuja> thought it was a bit faster
[15:43] <bluekuja> asac: so we have to wait a bit more or it will need a re-upload?
[15:43] <bluekuja> having received the mail should be just a delay
[15:43] <bluekuja> on having it mirrored
[15:47] <asac> bluekuja: well ... i read from the mail the it needs to update db and al ... maybe that takes a few days
[15:57] <Ubulette> http://patches.ubuntu.com/by-release/extracted/ubuntu/f/firefox/
[15:58] <Ubulette> useful site :)
[15:58] <bluekuja> asac: don't know. I'll have to ask about it
[16:02] <bluekuja> asac: gambas2 got uploaded to NEW 28 minutes ago
[16:02] <bluekuja> and it appeared now
[16:02] <bluekuja> so our delay seems to be a problem
[16:02] <bluekuja> 2 hours
[16:08] <asac> meeting atm ... 30 min i hope
[16:08] <bluekuja> ok :)
[16:30] <Ubulette> mozilla bug 381206
[16:30] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 381206 in OS Integration "Tango Style theme for better Linux UI integration" [Enhancement,Assigned] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=381206
[16:37] <Ubulette> bug 157126
[16:37] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 157126 in mozilla-firefox "FF2 without default mozilla-five-home" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/157126
[16:39] <Ubulette> asac, please fix this one, it's creating troubles in other distro
[16:40] <asac> other distro?
[16:40] <Ubulette> bug 162430
[16:40] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 162430 in exaile "Fix for #136202 causes problems on non-Debian distros" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/162430
[16:40] <Ubulette> bug 136202
[16:40] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 136202 in exaile "Segmentation fault when clicked on Artist tab on Information page (dup-of: 123409)" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/136202
[16:40] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 123409 in exaile "[exaile/gutsy] crash in lib gtkembedmoz" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/123409
[16:47] <bluekuja> asac: found duplicate status token ('KEYEXPIRED').
[16:47] <Ubulette> asac, it's a trivial fix
[16:48] <Ubulette> LIBDIR is undefined
[16:48] <asac> bluekuja: where did you get that from?
[16:48] <bluekuja> asac: I was talking with anthony towns
[16:49] <asac> thats strange ... my key is still valid ... at least the sign subkey
 yeah, the upload key has expired, and if it's been refreshed, the refreshed key hasn't made it into the keyring yet
[16:50] <asac> strange
[16:50] <asac> bluekuja: maybe ask him which key the upload key is :/
[16:51] <asac> or if there is no valid encryption key anymore could cause this
[16:51] <bluekuja> asked, now he gives me
[16:51] <bluekuja> the ID
[16:52] <asac> ?
[16:53] <bluekuja> asac: http://pastebin.com/m15b5c1d
[16:54] <bluekuja> sub   2048g/BD94D82D 2003-08-15 [expired: 2006-07-05]
[16:54] <bluekuja>  sub   4096R/8D7621E6 2006-01-25 [expired: 2007-01-25]
[16:54] <bluekuja>  sub   4096R/9580ABA9 2006-11-15 [expired: 2007-07-13]
[16:54] <bluekuja>  sub   4096R/140C6664 2006-11-23 [expires: 2008-05-16]
[16:55] <bluekuja> asac: it looks like a parsing bug
[16:56] <bluekuja> gpg: NOTE: signature key 8D7621E6 expired Thu 25 Jan 2007 07:57:47 AM UTC
[16:56] <Ubulette> asac, https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xulrunner-1.9/1.9~b1~rc3+nobinonly-0ubuntu1/+build/444689
[16:57] <Ubulette> not our fault
[16:57] <asac> well
[16:58] <asac> bluekuja: where did you talk to aj?
[16:58] <bluekuja> asac: irc
[16:58] <asac> which channel?
[16:58] <bluekuja> asac: I ask him to come here?
[16:58] <bluekuja> via pm
[16:58] <asac> ok
[16:58] <bluekuja> just a sec
[16:59] <bluekuja> heya aj :)
[17:00] <aj> gpg: NOTE: signature key 8D7621E6 expired Thu 25 Jan 2007 07:57:47 AM UTC
[17:00] <aj> that message is the problem, i don't see why though
[17:00] <aj> asac:^
[17:02] <bluekuja> aj: is possible to have more than a key for uploads?
[17:02] <asac> aj: yes ... but i have another one .. and already did loads of uploads
[17:03] <aj> well, it's not giving that message for the other two expired keys
[17:03] <asac> why would gpg sign with an expired subkey when there is a valid one avail?
[17:03] <aj> it didn't -- gpgv says it used the current one
[17:05] <asac> hmmm the subkey that should be used is 140C6664 ... and i just checked that its used according to what is said when signing. so gpgv has a bug and chokes if there is any expired S key?
[17:05] <aj> gpg --list-sigs 140C6664 # why does that think 8D7621E6 is special enough to warrant a NOTE?
[17:05] <aj> aren't the other expired keys S keys too?
[17:07] <asac> http://paste.ubuntu.com/1984/
[17:07] <asac> just the one
[17:07] <asac> the other two are E
[17:08] <asac> what do you mean by gpg --list-sigs 140C6664 ... warrants a note?
[17:09] <asac> i don't see anything about 8D7621E6 in the  output
[17:09] <asac> aj: ?
[17:10] <aj> $ gpg --keyring /srv/keyring.debian.org/keyrings/debian-keyring.gpg -v --list-sigs 140C6664 | head -n1
[17:10] <aj> gpg: using PGP trust model
[17:10] <aj> gpg: NOTE: signature key 8D7621E6 expired Thu 25 Jan 2007 07:57:47 AM UTC
[17:10] <aj> pub   1024D/A824B93F 2003-08-15
[17:10] <asac> strange
[17:10] <aj> you're not getting that?
[17:11] <aj> $ gpg --version
[17:11] <aj> gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.6
[17:11] <aj> ii  gnupg          1.4.6-2        GNU privacy guard - a free PGP replacement
[17:11] <asac> i get that ... forgot the -v before
[17:12] <aj> oh, it doesn't show up without -v?
[17:12] <asac> yes
[17:12] <asac> its not there without -v
[17:23] <bluekuja> asac: problem fixed or still investigating?
[17:23] <asac> i don't think its fixed
[17:23] <asac> aj: what do you think?
[17:24] <asac> there should be others affected as well ... e.g. if they use subkeys for signing
[17:25] <aj> well, someone else's upload was blocked because of an expired key, but i hacked an update to thekeyring which made it work fine for that upload
[17:26] <asac> aj: maybe i should delkey the expired subkey?
[17:27] <aj> Torsten Werner
[17:28] <asac> aj: ok i delkey the bad subkey ... no the --list-keys doesn't show up the signature
[17:28] <asac> aeh the NOTE
[17:28] <aj> okay, using the old keyring, -v --list-keys gives me:
[17:28] <aj> gpg: NOTE: signature key C4CF8EC3 expired Wed 31 Oct 2007 07:08:33 PM UTC
[17:29] <aj> gpg: NOTE: signature key C4CF8EC3 expired Wed 31 Oct 2007 07:08:33 PM UTC
[17:29] <aj> after doing a --recv-keys for that key, that goes away though
[17:29] <aj> hrm, and the expired key disappears
[17:29] <asac> aj: i send my key to subkeys ... and keyring.debian.org
[17:29] <asac> (just sent) ... maybe we should wait till tomorrow and then we can retry?
[17:30] <aj> worth a shot; it might need elmo to do something manual to update the keyring though
[17:30] <aj> -rw-r--r-- 1 archvsync archvsync 23932393 2007-08-04 11:35 debian-keyring.gpg
[17:30] <aj> is the date of the last update
[17:30] <asac> in the end i think its gpgv that is buggy ... why would it care if there is an expired subkey?
[17:31] <aj> i don't know, but i can't trace the codepath to see what exactly it's complaining about
[17:31] <aj> and changing dak doesn't seem an option, because it can't tell which key the KEYEXPIRED message is for
[17:31] <aj> (so has to assume it's the one being used)
[17:32] <asac> right
[17:32] <asac> lets see if it goes away with the subkey deleted (if that propagates to the keyservers at all)
[17:32] <asac> aj: i'll ping you tomorrow. thanks so far!
[17:32] <aj> righto, ttyl
[17:33] <asac> bluekuja: so maybe i am not a DD anymore :)
[17:33] <asac> lets hope
[17:33] <bluekuja> lol
[17:33] <bluekuja> if it doesnt work, what happens?
[17:33] <asac> ask elmo to fix it
[17:33] <bluekuja> someone need to sign your key again?
[17:33] <asac> yeah :)
[17:33] <asac> i missed the chance to get loads of signatures
[17:33] <bluekuja> oh damn..
[17:33] <asac> in UDS :)
[17:33] <asac> in january i can get a bunch again
[17:34] <bluekuja> what should I ask to elmo?
[17:34] <asac> bluekuja: no ... don't ask ... i will ask once its clear that i need his help
[17:34] <bluekuja> asac: can aj ack the upload anyway?
[17:34] <asac> no
[17:34] <asac> bluekuja: if it doesn't work out tomorrow we have to get another sponsor for you
[17:35] <asac> :)
[17:35] <bluekuja> asac: and why this problem went out now?
[17:35] <asac> ask siretart :)
[17:35] <asac> he is your AM after all
[17:35] <asac> because they updated gpgv recently
[17:35] <bluekuja> yep, true
[17:35] <bluekuja> ah
[17:35] <asac> which appears to choke on things the previous version didn't
[17:36] <asac> lets wait till tomorrow
[17:36] <bluekuja> I'm lucky we have find out this problem
[17:36] <asac> well ... i am pretty unhappy about it
[17:36] <asac> Ubulette: ffox 3 is up
[17:36] <bluekuja> yes, but at least you know it
[17:36] <bluekuja> and it won't be a surprise
[17:36] <bluekuja> for another upload
[17:36] <asac> since we have versioned build-depends the buildd should try once xul is build
[17:37] <asac> if it doesn't happen you need to ping archive admins to give it back
[17:37] <Ubulette> asac, could you force a retry of xul lpia ? elmo just told me it's fixed
[17:37] <asac> Ubulette: ask an archive admin
[17:37] <asac> buildd admin to be correct
[17:38] <asac> doko seb128 pitti mithrandir
[17:38] <bluekuja> asac: but why did you set an expiry date for your keys?
[17:38] <Ubulette> done
[17:38] <asac> well i read somewhere its good practice to use subkeys and let them expire
[17:38] <bluekuja> actually my keys won't expire
[17:38] <bluekuja> to prevent this kind of problems
[17:38] <asac> yeah
[17:38] <Ubulette> all keys expire
[17:38] <asac> when?
[17:38] <bluekuja> Ubulette, not true
[17:39] <asac> my mainkey is set to expire: never
[17:39] <bluekuja> same
[17:39] <bluekuja> here
[17:39] <Ubulette> you asked for that
[17:39] <asac> which is why i use subkeys to reduce the amount of exposure that key gets
[17:39] <Ubulette> it's 1 year by default or something like that
[17:39] <bluekuja> Ubulette, ?
[17:39] <asac> yes by default it expires
[17:40] <asac> Ubulette: who did you ask to give back?
[17:40] <asac> don't see any message on -devel
[17:40] <bluekuja> asac: well, at least you know there is a problem
[17:40] <Ubulette> elmo on #lp
[17:40] <bluekuja> about them
[17:40] <asac> ah ok
[17:40] <bluekuja> and you won't find that out
[17:40] <bluekuja> with a REJECTED mail
[17:40] <asac> right
[17:40] <bluekuja> on another upload
[17:40] <bluekuja> ;)
[17:41] <Ubulette> any reason not to push ff 2.0.0.8+2nobinonly-0ubuntu2 to gutsy ? it will help tons of users for bug 157126
[17:41] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 157126 in mozilla-firefox "FF2 without default mozilla-five-home" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/157126
[17:41] <asac> Ubulette: i will fix this in next security upload
[17:41] <asac> it will take that much time anyways to go through proposed
[17:42] <asac> i have to be sure that this doesn't cause any regressions though
[17:42] <bluekuja> asac: and your main-key is not registered?
[17:42] <asac> bluekuja: it is ... but i don't sign with that
[17:42] <Ubulette> not having it sure causes issues
[17:42] <bluekuja> asac: ah damn
[17:42] <bluekuja> asac: so in fact you don't have to get signatures again
[17:43] <bluekuja> if the main-key is registered
[17:43] <asac> bluekuja: i hope not
[17:43] <bluekuja> I hope not too
[17:43] <bluekuja> ;)
[17:43] <asac> ok i have to pack my things ... will be back eventually tomorrow ... in holiday mode
[17:44] <bluekuja> lol
[17:44] <bluekuja> ok
[17:44] <bluekuja> :)
[17:48] <asac> Ubulette: so you already have three packages on your list in LP :)
[17:48]  * Ubulette is sending subliminal remained to bluekuja to complete the review of sm1...
[17:48] <asac> Ubulette: we should get prism in as well
[17:49] <Ubulette> gasp, remainder
[17:49] <bluekuja> Ubulette, I'll take a look at it tomorrow
[17:49] <bluekuja> I'm out this evening for a party
[17:49] <Ubulette> asac, i'll review the gasp with rhelmer debs later today
[17:49] <bluekuja> and will come back a bit drunk
[17:49] <asac> if you want to help .. we need to port yelp and devhelp to use XPCOM_GLUE
[17:49] <bluekuja> so won't touch the pc
[17:49] <bluekuja> :P
[17:49] <Ubulette> s/gasp/gaps/
[17:49] <asac> that should be fairly simple though
[17:49] <bluekuja> tomorrow I should make it
[17:50] <bluekuja> Ubulette, send me a mail please
[17:50] <bluekuja> with right details
[17:50] <asac> except that gtkmozembed is broken due to url-classifier ... but one can just do a testbuild without safe-browsing
[17:50] <asac> oh i have an idea
[17:51] <Ubulette> maybe open a bug upstream to attract attention to that
[17:51] <asac> well ... i will try to use --enable-url-classifier instead of safe-browsing on xulrunner side
[17:52] <asac> as xulrunner doesn't implement safe-browsing anyways
[17:52] <asac> maybe that makes a difference :)
[17:53] <Ubulette> I don't know if prism and other xulapps could use safe-browsing through xul
[17:54] <asac> no ... xulrunner doesn't ship any safe-browsing code
[17:54] <asac> its all in browser/ ... the toolkit only contains url-classifier
[17:54] <asac> i will see soon
[17:54] <asac> build is running
[17:55] <asac> i doubt it makes any difference except maybe breaking firefox safebrowsing code :) ... but well worth a try as it builds without me paying attention
[17:55] <asac> now of to packing
[18:04] <Ubulette> E: Package cdbs has no installation candidate
[18:04] <Ubulette> Package cdbs is not available, but is referred to by another package.
[18:04] <Ubulette> still lpia
[18:31] <asac> ok out ... i wouldn't bother too much about lpia now ... let the others do the frontier diggin ;)
[18:31] <asac> cu tomorrow
[18:33] <Ubulette> ++
[19:09] <rhelmer> Ubulette: cool let me know if you'd like to discuss the changes i made; the only thing i didn't get quite working was i'd like to be able to click on .webapps from firefox and have them launch with prism
[19:10] <rhelmer> Ubulette: it does work from nautilus however
[21:59] <rhelmer> the only problem is that firefox tries to do "prism whatever.webapp" not "prism -webapp whatever.webapp"
[23:20] <Ubulette> rhelmer, sorry, i've been busy with something else today
[23:20] <Ubulette> i've had a look at the licences
[23:20] <Ubulette> it seems it's only MPL 1.1
[23:21] <Ubulette> except dom inspector with is tri licenced MPL/GPL/LGPL
[23:21] <Ubulette> which is
[23:21] <Ubulette> would be nice to have the whole thing tri-licenced
[23:22] <Ubulette> i'm no expert in licences but I remember the debate with debian a while ago
[23:25] <rhelmer> Ubulette: yeah mark finkle says tri-license should be fine
[23:25] <rhelmer> i made a new patch to mozilla bug 403593
[23:25] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 403593 in Prism "prism on ubuntu should be in menu, have icons, file associations, etc." [Enhancement,New] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=403593
[23:25] <Ubulette> rhelmer, i see you're copying xulrunner-stub as prism-bin. Is there an advantage compared to just making a symlink like I did ?
[23:26] <rhelmer> Ubulette: hmm i must've misread, i thought yours just had a shell script which called xulrunner ?
[23:26] <Ubulette> (ie, to the script, not to -bin or -stub)
[23:26] <Ubulette> yes
[23:27] <rhelmer> if symlink instead of copy works that sounds fine
[23:27] <rhelmer> i am not sure if the LICENSE file i added is all done correctly but i'll find out :)
[23:27] <rhelmer> we may need to edit all the source files too, but i think the LICENSE overrides according to EXHIBIT A
[23:27] <Ubulette> i can do it, in fact, i've already made one
[23:28] <Ubulette> I'd prefer the sources to be changed upstream
[23:29] <Ubulette> i've derived my copyright file from the one i've made earlier for xulrunner 1.9
[23:29] <rhelmer> Ubulette: cool check out https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=288750
[23:30] <rhelmer> Ubulette: there is also a Makefile in there that you can do e.g. "make install PREFIX=whatever"
[23:30] <rhelmer> let me know if these things help
[23:30] <rhelmer> i haven't started working on the icon issues quite yet
[23:30] <Ubulette> usual debian way is a build system that honors DESTDIR
[23:31] <rhelmer> Ubulette: s/PREFIX/DESTDIR/ ? that's ok with me i thought PREFIX was the norm.. i have been trying to avoid autoconf for this as it seems overkill :)
[23:31] <Ubulette> PREFIX could be /usr then debhelper or cdbs could prepend DESTDIR = debian/tmp to make debian/tmp/usr/{bin,lib}/....
[23:36] <Ubulette> hold on, let me find a pointer explaining that
[23:36] <Ubulette> here is the proposed copyright file: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1989/
[23:38] <rhelmer> Ubulette: ok that sounds reasonable
[23:38] <Ubulette> rhelmer, what is your prism.keys file for ?
[23:39] <rhelmer> Ubulette: hmm is that needed anymore? i thought that's what update-mime-database used, or something
[23:39] <rhelmer> do we only need .desktop and .xml now?
[23:39] <rhelmer> (brb)
[23:40] <Ubulette> shared-mime-info wants the .xml
[23:40] <Ubulette> the desktop obviously is needed too
[23:42] <Ubulette> I need a better default icon, ie a prism with nice alpha colors. mine comes from xulrunner (the blue planet)
[23:42] <rhelmer> maybe keys is just cargo-cult; i followed some gnome howto to try to figure it out
[23:42] <rhelmer> Ubulette: i've got some, derived from the .ico; one is in my patch
[23:42] <rhelmer> that should really be the default xpm
[23:44] <rhelmer> hmm webrunner.xpm in svn is a transparent prism icon
[23:44] <rhelmer> app.xpm is the blue planet
[23:45] <Ubulette> cool. i'll use the one from sources and drop mine. we always prefer stuff from upstream
[23:46] <Ubulette> (don't tell debian guys, they should be mad about me for the rebranding ;)
[23:48] <Ubulette> hmm, now the .desktop file. %u %U %f %F is the question
[23:52] <rhelmer> heh
[23:52] <rhelmer> Ubulette: %F seemed to be the only one for work for me
[23:53] <Ubulette> for urls, shouldn't it be %U ?
[23:53] <Ubulette> well, i never remember
[23:58] <rhelmer> Ubulette: hmm doesn't prism only support files right now with -webapp?