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