[00:00] gnomefreak: for this issue you don't need to test a full rebuild [00:00] <]reed[> asac: hey, I just filed LP #162993 [00:00] Launchpad bug 162993 in ia32-libs "ia32-libs missing 32-bit gnome libraries needed for gtk stock icons" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/162993 [00:00] just build sources ...like what you upload and verify that it done right [00:00] its still building the tar.gx [00:00] bug 162993 [00:00] Launchpad bug 162993 in ia32-libs "ia32-libs missing 32-bit gnome libraries needed for gtk stock icons" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/162993 [00:00] <]reed[> what's the best way to get somebody to look at it? [00:00] not building diff [00:01] dpkg-source: building lightning-sunbird in lightning-sunbird_0.7+nobinonly-0ubuntu1.tar.gz [00:01] dpkg-source: building lightning-sunbird in lightning-sunbird_0.7+nobinonly-0ubuntu1.dsc [00:01] why the fuck is it building ubuntu1.tar.gz [00:02] rename the dir [00:02] to what? [00:02] mv lightning-sunbird_0.7+nobinonly lightning-sunbird-0.7+nobinonly [00:02] lightning-sunbird_0.7+nobinonly [00:02] ]reed[: usually you should try to ping the last uploader and usually subscribe him to that bug [00:02] tar cvzf lightning-sunbird_0.7+nobinonly.orig.tar.gz lightning-sunbird-0.7+nobinonly/*.tar.bz2 [00:02] it should be - not _ [00:03] why would dir be - when tarball is _ [00:03] the name of the tarball is right, the dir in it is not [00:03] ]reed[: but given the low bug count on that package it will probably get attention on its own. so maybe wait a few days [00:03] gnomefreak, look before the nobinonly: [00:03] ix:~/bzr/tarballs$ tar ztvf lightning-sunbird_0.7.orig.tar.gz [00:03] drwxr-xr-x fta/fta 0 2007-10-28 19:19 lightning-sunbird-0.7/ [00:03] -rw-r--r-- fta/fta 37292115 2007-10-28 19:18 lightning-sunbird-0.7/lightning-sunbird-0.7-source.tar.bz2 [00:04] so just reproduce with s/0.7/0.7+nobinonly/ [00:04] take extra care about "_" and "-" [00:05] you have to create APP_VERSION.orig.tar.gz containing APP-VERSION/something.tar.bz2 [00:06] why would dir matter in that instance since tarball is _ figured dir should be aas well [00:06] where APP is lightning-sunbird and VERSION is 0.7+nobinonly [00:06] ]reed[: i think a lot of kde users will complain if you pull in all those gnome libs [00:06] gnomefreak, try it [00:06] i am but i dont get why it matters [00:06] but you answere that [00:06] it's how dpkg-sources works [00:07] <]reed[> asac: well, we're requiring them for Firefox 3 on Linux [00:07] <]reed[> for now, at least [00:07] ]reed[: i doubt that all those libs are needed for gtk stock icons [00:08] <]reed[> we're open to help! [00:08] <]reed[> help us! :) [00:08] <]reed[> see mozilla bug 402742 [00:08] Mozilla bug 402742 in ImageLib "nightlies on Ubuntu 7.10 x64 do not show stock icons" [Major,New] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402742 [00:08] ]reed[: what kind of api do you use for stock icons? [00:08] <]reed[> see comment #29 [00:09] <]reed[> in that moz bug [00:09] Ubulette: how can i run lintian and/or linda on this now? [00:09] save me from uploading to find out errors [00:09] Ubulette: do we see those stock icons? === ]reed[ is now known as [reed] [00:10] in the file list ? yes [00:11] without gnome-support? [00:11] I have gnome support [00:11] the bule globe with or without [00:11] asac: iirc it doesnt matter its blue globe either way [00:11] oh, mine are orange, not yellow [00:12] yellow? [00:12] Ubulette: yeah its probably from your theme :) [00:12] Ubulette: can you try to uninstall xul-gnome-support and see if they go away as well? [00:12] i only have a8 build here on this system [00:12] i see the same icons as the mozilla bug has as attachments [00:12] i'm with b2pre [00:12] this is on a9 [00:12] a9pre [00:13] Ubulette: right ... please try :-D [00:13] Ubulette: bug was filed 06-11 ... so b2pre should be fine i guess [00:13] <[reed]> the new Linux theme just landed last night [00:13] <[reed]> that makes the main icons use stock icons [00:13] mine looks like https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=287563 [00:14] in help about [00:17] hold on, i'm gonna upgrade to 1.9~b2~cvs20071115t1439 [00:19] asac: lintian == no errors linda == waiting on it to install [00:19] grrrrrrr [00:20] if i remove debhelper from control linda complains if i add it linda complains [00:20] wonder if its linda [00:20] gasp, without gnome support, it's broken [00:20] but native is gone [00:21] not here [00:21] Ubulette: i dont have gnome-support for firefox-3.0a9pre and i get the fuse on the globe [00:21] assuming that is the correct icon [00:22] using defaul gnome icons here [00:22] <[reed]> no, you need to look at ftp listings [00:22] <[reed]> go to ftp://ftp.mozilla.org [00:22] <[reed]> do you see icons? [00:22] the folders and files yes [00:23] ugly as hell but yes [00:23] <[reed]> download ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/tinderbox-builds/fx-linux-tbox-trunk/firefox-3.0b2pre.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2 [00:23] <[reed]> unpack it and run it [00:23] http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/Minefield-without-gnome.png [00:23] <[reed]> Ubulette: yes, that's what people are reporting :0 [00:24] <[reed]> we'd like to fix it [00:24] ok it looks right here ill let you know when download is done what b2 looks like [00:24] readding gnome support does not change anything, it's still broken [00:25] <[reed]> Ubulette: does that include libgnomeui ? [00:26] what ? [00:26] ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/tinderbox-builds/fx-linux-tbox-trunk/firefox-3.0b2pre.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2 [00:26] shit [00:26] http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=81twl7d&s=1 [00:26] [reed]: ok ... the idea is to just use gtk_icon_theme_lookup_icon and guess the name from mime-type [00:26] that is a9pre [00:26] is that good enough? [00:26] waiting for b2 [00:27] <[reed]> asac: hmm, can you comment in the bug? [00:27] yes [00:28] http://paste.ubuntu.com/2016/ [00:28] well, that's with gnome-support but it looks like without [00:29] maybe a chrome reg [00:29] damn, it's borked [00:29] i can't stay like that [00:30] Ubulette: he? [00:30] look at my screenshot [00:30] i'm like that now [00:34] i've downgraded to b1 rc3, it's back in shape.. aaaahh, i feel better [00:35] testing upstream build waiting for it to open [00:36] i see icons [00:36] its using ubuntu themes [00:36] theme [00:36] i've upgraded again but this time with gnome support, i see the icons but my bmtoolbar is missing [00:37] post screenshot in a moment [00:37] Ubulette: i dont have -gnome-support for 3.0 installed [00:37] would it be using 2.0 gnome-support? [00:37] i wouldnt think so [00:37] http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/Minefield-with-gnome.png [00:38] gnomefreak, no, firefox-3.0-gnome-support & xulrunner-1.9-gnome-support [00:38] <[reed]> Ubulette: yeah, I think the bookmark toolbar issue is mozilla bug 403743 [00:38] Mozilla bug 403743 in Toolbars "Bookmark toolbar items don't show up even though they are accessible in the Bookmark Toolbar Folder" [Normal,Resolved: duplicate] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=403743 [00:38] i dont have neither [00:39] Error: uncaught exception: [Exception... "'[JavaScript Error: "this._result is null" {file: "chrome://browser/content/places/toolbar.xml" line: 357}]' when calling method: [nsIController::isCommandEnabled]" nsresult: "0x80570021 (NS_ERROR_XPC_JAVASCRIPT_ERROR_WITH_DETAILS)" location: "JS frame :: chrome://browser/content/places/controller.js :: updatePlacesCommand :: line 1644" data: yes] [00:40] ok, it's mozilla bug 403854 [00:41] Mozilla bug 403854 in Search "Removing searchbar or location bar breaks many things" [Normal,Assigned] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=403854 [00:41] <[reed]> yeah, so that should be reviewed and landed for tomorrow's nightliews [00:41] <[reed]> -w [00:42] i don't like the new icons at all [00:42] the two arrows look weird when you hover them [00:43] is it really supposed to look native ??? [00:43] <[reed]> the tab scrolling arrows? [00:43] <[reed]> or what? [00:44] <[reed]> what arrows? [00:44] <[reed]> back/forward? [00:44] b/f [00:45] <[reed]> what's the proper way of doing things? [00:45] <[reed]> you should file bugs :) [00:47] i can't take a screenshot showing that hovering thing [00:48] the border of the arrow when hovered is complete, the one of the smaller arrow on the right (for history) has only 3 sides [00:48] that looks weird to me [00:49] <[reed]> can you not use "Take Screenshot" and set a delay? [00:49] the close button of tabs disappear when hovered [00:49] even with delay, the hovering is not visible [00:50] i've tried twice [00:50] <[reed]> lame [00:50] sorry [00:50] <[reed]> so, you should file all these issues in bugzilla [00:50] <[reed]> so we can fix them :) [00:52] close button doesn't seem vertically centered: http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/tabs.png [00:53] firefox hates me [00:53] <[reed]> Ubulette: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org :) [00:53] <[reed]> please file [00:53] well, i have enough bugs opened everywhere. i usually don't care much about color/theme. Here, i was just used to the previous ones [00:54] <[reed]> well, people really want it native [00:54] <[reed]> so, that's what we're doing [00:54] <[reed]> with new Tango icons making up stuff that gtk stock icons doesn't have [00:54] <[reed]> http://tango.freedesktop.org/Firefox [00:55] no offense intended. i know it's important for end users. i'm just not representative of the mass ;) [00:55] http://i9.tinypic.com/7xui9w5.png [00:55] that is with b2 upstream [00:55] ubuntu doesnt use tango by default [00:56] atleast not yet [00:56] gnomefreak, yep, i see the same now. i fixed my toolbar by adding a search bar [00:56] toolbar wont fix your icons though [00:57] default ubuntu themes firefox 3.0* shows icons fine [00:57] flash is working on pissing me off something awfulol [00:58] http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/FF3-Unresponsive-script.png [00:58] this is weird too [00:58] its not 3.0 thats stuck its 2.0 here [00:58] cant do shit [00:58] tinypic is freezing me up [00:58] cant open term to kill ff [00:58] lol [00:59] <[reed]> Ubulette: yeah, we've had some people complaining that the unresponsive script thing comes up at odd times [01:00] i'm talking about the icons [01:00] stop is green and continue red ? [01:00] counter intuitive [01:02] <[reed]> Ubulette: oh, lol [01:02] <[reed]> I didn't notice that [01:03] ok asac sunbird is fixed firefox broken sb fixed :( [01:45] asac, I've patched xulrunner and seamonkey to ifdef that part [01:54] i've created mozilla bug 403994 [01:54] Mozilla bug 403994 in Build Config "Don't install nss headers when sysytem-nss is used" [Normal,Unconfirmed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=403994 [01:55] oops, sysytem [01:55] mozilla bug 403994 [01:55] Mozilla bug 403994 in Build Config "Don't install nss headers when system-nss is used" [Normal,Unconfirmed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=403994 [01:56] better [02:28] <[reed]> oh [02:28] <[reed]> that's you [02:28] <[reed]> :p [02:29] ? [02:29] <[reed]> Ubulette: so, you need to request review [02:29] erm...how do i run firefox-3.0? i'm getting an error [02:29] Could not find compatible GRE between version 1.9a8 and 1.9a8. [02:29] (hardy) [02:30] you probably have a bad xul install [02:30] how would i go about fixing that? [02:31] which version of xulrunner-1.9 do you have ? [02:31] (dpkg -l xulrunner-1.9) [02:31] Setting up xulrunner-1.9 (1.9~b1~rc3+nobinonly-0ubuntu1) ... [02:31] oh [02:31] not up to date? [02:32] it's just that firefox-3.0 b1 rc3 has not been built [02:32] it's still stuck in the merge flood [02:32] Installed: 3.0~alpha8+nobinonly-0ubuntu1 [02:32] yep [02:32] oh, crumbs you're right [02:32] that's why [02:32] ok, will try to shove. i want buildd admin powers dammit. [02:32] https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+builds?build_text=firefox-3.0&build_state=all [02:33] damn edge. stop timing out on me! [02:34] [reed], i never know which knob to select so i usually wait forever :p [02:34] hehe [02:34] * Hobbsee is too familiar with edge :( [02:34] but as i merge my patches directly here, it doesn't matter much [02:34] Hobbsee ?? [02:35] it often times out on me. [02:35] <[reed]> Ubulette: it matters to us [02:35] Ubulette: right, problem solved. [02:36] Ubulette: btw, you had a dpkg patch ages ago. iwj told me some stuff about it, but i've no idea what it was - about why some parts werent wise. [02:36] you may want to ask him [02:36] Hobbsee, i have tons of patches everywhere, most of them are beeing ignored [02:37] are the sponsorship teams subscribed to them? [02:37] i have no idea [02:37] if not, that's why. [02:37] as i run my patches anyway [02:37] i have my own builder [02:37] (ubuntu-universe-sponsors, ubuntu-main-sponsors, as the package requires) [02:38] hardly helpful for anyone else, though. [02:39] well, i file bugs and post patches, that should be enough. if maintainers don't care to even have a look, why should i ? [02:39] all my patches are public [02:39] ubuntu doesnt have maintainers. i thought you'd been around enough to know this. [02:39] that's *why* we have a sponship queue [02:40] i'm running linux since 1991 so I know [02:40] at last count, i think everyone in ~ubuntu-dev (and not all are active), have around 800 packages each. [02:40] and debian since 1996 [02:40] oddly enough, they probably don't see all of them. [02:40] i'm surprised you don't file to debian, as they do actually have maintainers. [02:41] i'm no longer interested by debian. [02:42] i'm still running it on a dozen servers but no more on desktops [02:42] * Hobbsee wonders just how many patches there are which arent on the sponsorship queue. [02:43] no idea [02:43] 1425, apparently. [02:43] modulo dupes, and not-real-patches. [02:44] good, ff3 is building now. did you do something or is it just happening now ? [02:44] yes, i poked the relevant people [02:45] it wasn't going to happen for ages, otherwise. [02:45] excellent [02:45] thx [02:46] no problem. things work well, when done in effective ways [02:50] fortunately, ff3 is fast to build now [02:50] 3 or 4 minutes instead of 1 hour [02:51] wow, 8 mins. [02:51] that's mostly the chroot upgrade + builddeps install [02:51] I build locally in 1 minute [02:51] yup [02:52] * Hobbsee ponders. wait for the binaries to become available, or nuke the debs. [02:53] <[reed]> you build a clobber build in 1 minute? [02:55] <[reed]> oh, huh [02:55] ff with libxul [02:55] xul still takes 1h though ;) [02:56] <[reed]> k, thought so :p [02:58] ok, pushing seamonkey2 to my ppa, and going to bed, it's 4am here [03:00] <[reed]> [ Alexander Sack ] [03:00] <[reed]> * Use granparadiso branding for alpha and beta builds and official branding [03:00] <[reed]> for final builds: [03:00] <[reed]> - update debian/rules [03:00] <[reed]> asac: er? [03:00] <[reed]> why Gran Paradiso branding on beta? [03:01] <[reed]> official builds will be official branding [03:01] <[reed]> for betas [03:01] that's what I've said too [03:01] but it's b1 rc3, so asac prefered to revert my change [03:02] <[reed]> well, it's just going to make you all look odd! [03:02] <[reed]> :p [03:02] b1 final will automatically have the official branding [03:02] <[reed]> ah [03:02] <[reed]> and how will rc3 be different from final? [03:03] we don't know. we'll see when the tarball will be available [03:03] here, I just fetched the rc3 tag from cvs [03:04] problem is, there's no official tarballs for xulrunner [03:06] ooh, shiny :) [03:06] does it work ? [03:08] yeah [03:08] themes and such arent updated, though [03:08] most are just not compatible so they are there but disabled [03:09] i wonder if it can be fooled with the nightly tester tools, as 2.x was [03:09] you can fool that with a key [03:10] haha, nice. [03:10] new about:config window warning. [03:11] Ubulette: presumably extensions.lastAppVersion? [03:12] nope, that didn't work [03:12] which key do i want? [03:19] i don't remember and the about:config is broken in minefield. cpu over the roof [03:19] hm. [03:19] * Hobbsee assumes that the current minefield is quite far aawy from the beta, then. [03:19] <[reed]> ? [03:19] <[reed]> not reall [03:19] <[reed]> really [03:19] <[reed]> Ubulette: about:config wfm [03:20] <[reed]> Minefield doesn't have many problems [03:20] it's the 1st time is doesn't work [03:20] woot! extensions! [03:20] switftabs, how i love thee! :D [03:21] [reed], cpu rockets for a while, then the popup asks me if I want to continue or kill the script [03:21] <[reed]> strange [03:21] <[reed]> any extensions? [03:22] not much, mostly tabmix+ and adblock+ [03:22] erk, tabmix+ [03:23] <[reed]> adblockplus is compatible with Minefield [03:23] * Hobbsee had that crashing even on 2.0 [03:23] <[reed]> is tabmix+ ? [03:23] the dev one is in sync with trunk usually [03:32] uh oh, apparently using history tab complete is a bad idea. [03:32] tabs look weird in trunk... or at least, different. maybe it's tabmix+ fault. i'm daily building firefox so i'll see if it improves :) [03:33] bed time for me. 'night guys [04:52] Is this a chan to ask questions on Thunderbird? [05:02] PoofDaddy: it's mostly development-related, actually, but given that nobody's having real discussions right now, I guess you could try. (#ubuntu-offtopic, oddly enough, is often successful for TB stuff too) [05:03] I'll give it try. === asac_ is now known as asac === asac_ is now known as asac === \sh_away is now known as \sh [11:31] Ubulette, are you around? [11:50] HI [11:50] bluekuja, ping [11:51] Ubulette, heya [11:51] can you please test something for me? [11:51] it's a 5 min work [11:51] so I can finally move to sm [11:53] tell me [11:53] download http://incoming.ibluepaper.com/diff-ext_0.2.3-2_i386.deb [11:53] then [11:53] install it [11:53] then do [11:53] killall nautilus [11:53] and then right click on a folder/file [11:53] does it crash or works fine? [11:53] :) [11:54] does is matter if i run nautilus HEAD ? [11:54] I guess no [11:54] i'm far ahead of hardy for most of gnome [11:54] ok, give me 5 min, i was on something. [11:55] ok [12:03] done [12:03] no crash [12:03] but it does nothing. [12:04] i right click on a file, select "Compare later" [12:04] right click another file, select "Compare to my1stfile..." [12:05] nothing happens [12:05] bluekuja, ^^ [12:05] yes, it's ok [12:05] :) [12:05] but no crashes? [12:05] right? [12:07] you need to setup everything [12:07] to have it working [12:08] ? it's not automatic ? [12:10] nope [12:10] you have to select a file comparison tool [12:11] from the configuration program [12:11] how am i supposed to know ? [12:11] by reading docs [12:11] ^^ [12:12] you should provide a default conf that does something [12:12] here, it's just confusing [12:12] I gonna add a README then [12:12] do you know many users who read docs ? I don't [12:12] they should [12:12] lol [12:12] lol [12:13] i started the setup tool (difficult to find), clicked on about, I can't close the about dialog [12:13] it's a known bug [12:13] will be fixed [12:13] :) [12:16] setting /usr/bin/diff didn't work. should it be a gui ? [12:16] yes [12:16] so i'm doomed [12:16] lol [12:17] it have to be a gui [12:17] you can use meld [12:17] it works fine [12:17] brb -- lunch [12:27] bak [12:27] *back [12:27] Ubulette, anyway the docs are inside [12:27] and usually an user is supposed to read them [12:27] before using an application [12:27] if not why ppl include them? [12:28] ;) [12:29] as you want, i just think that it should work by default [12:29] actually I cannot say an user what's the best diff comparison tool to use [12:30] and plus it should depends on tons of packages [12:30] so avoid ppl to search them [12:31] but it's just a 2 steps work [12:31] 1) configure [12:31] 2) compare [12:31] not really hard [12:32] not much, it's a an for nautilus which is already heavy on deps. so just dep on meld | diff-gui, let meld have a diversion to diff-gui and just pre configure diff-gui as default diff for your extension. any other differ could implement the same diversion [12:33] s/a an/an ext/ [12:33] that's true as well [12:33] I should ack upstream files [12:33] to get a default configuration [12:33] I'll talk with the main developer [12:33] to see what he thinks about that [12:34] it's a packaging decision. upstream should not be concerned/impacted much [12:34] yes, but having a default configuration [12:34] should concern modifing upstream files [12:34] we do that for everything [12:34] yep [12:35] Ubulette, do you have a debian unstable machine as well? [12:35] not anymore [12:35] just servers [12:36] ah damn [12:36] my own desktops were debian unstable for 10 years [12:36] really? [12:36] yes [12:38] I never had to reinstall the system. just regular upgrades [12:38] amazing [12:38] :) [12:38] sometimes dirty ones but i always managed [12:40] same for ubuntu. I've jumped on the dev ones the day they opened [12:41] anyway, no crash with your stuff [12:41] perfect [12:41] now I need an unstable test [12:41] and It can be uploaded [12:45] damn, another lang pack flood in the ppa [12:45] aww [12:48] ~500 debs [12:48] 0_0 [12:48] not debs but packages [12:59] [reed], i've tried to ask for review for my nss patch from yesterday. not sure i did it right [13:00] damn, seamonkey2 i386 is stuck in the flood in ppa. [13:02] rhelmer, do you have any idea if there's an ETA for prism 0.9 ? [13:03] rhelmer, I want to have a release for ubuntu hardy as cvs is not welcome [14:31] asac, http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=614647 [14:38] bluekuja, any progress with sm1 ? [14:39] Ubulette, for this evening [14:39] yes [14:39] ok [14:43] Ubulette: ffox 3 is built [14:43] you probably already noticed ;) [14:43] i know [14:44] Hobbsee wanted it yesterday so he pulled the right string [14:44] Hobbsee == she [14:45] she is buildd admin as well from what i know [14:45] she ? really ? excellent [14:45] yeah [14:45] sarah hobbs [14:56] Ubulette: i think we should make libxul*pc Require: mozilla-nss and then create a link mozilla-nss.pc => nss.pc in case we use system-nss/nspr [14:57] otherwise the headers are missing in epiphy [14:58] so you want to hack the pc files using debian/rules ? [14:58] not sure ... i think in that way we can contribute it upstream [14:58] or patch the .pc.in files [14:59] including xul headers without nspr usually means build failure ... so having it without that Requires is just good luck that in some cases the nspr/nss headers are shipped in the same directory [15:00] that kind of things is distro specific, i don't see how upstream could accept that [15:06] Ubulette: its not really upstream specific... its just out of luck that they ship the headers in the same directory [15:07] maybe that could be changed [15:07] its not the default for them, but it semantically makes sense ... they ship mozilla-nss.pc ... and -nspr.pc so why not express the dependency properly [15:08] they ship mozilla-nss.pc ? you sure ? [15:08] well .. its not invented by us ... we just run make install and have it, right? [15:21] hmm, no anymore [15:21] http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvsview2.cgi?diff_mode=context&whitespace_mode=show&file=Makefile.in&branch=&root=/cvsroot&subdir=/mozilla/build/unix&command=DIFF_FRAMESET&rev1=1.29&rev2=1.30 [15:21] asac, this is mozilla bug 389673 [15:21] Mozilla bug 389673 in Build Config "Fix "make install" to copy from dist/ rather than recursive makefile traversal" [Normal,Resolved: fixed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=389673 [15:22] s/no/not/ [15:22] (i really need a new keyboard and a new mouse) [15:22] and new hands too to come with those ;) [15:23] hehe [15:24] Ubulette: when was that checkin? [15:24] Ubulette: i mean i still have that .pc files installed from what i know [15:24] 2007-08-03 07:46 [15:24] i think that patch is just to remove the manual make install thing [15:25] i still see xulrunner-1.9-1.9~b2~cvs20071115t1159+nobinonly/mozilla/xulrunner/installer/mozilla-nss.pc.in but it's no longer installed/used [15:25] well, maybe it is, but not with system nss [15:26] yes ... but for that case its like i proposed :) [15:26]