[00:05] <asac> armin76: ok, then pulling in the SetUnichar function and using that instead hopefully fixes it
[00:12] <Ubulette> asac, you should retrigger a build of epiphany, it has been built against nspr/nss from xul (not system) so it's linked against .so, not against .so.[01].d
[00:19] <asac> system xul is not yet in archive :)
[00:20] <Ubulette> damn
[00:20] <asac> once its in everything needs a respin
[00:20] <Ubulette> remember you missed nssutil
[00:21] <asac> i asked you if that causes any issues
[00:21] <asac> i don't see any
[00:22] <Ubulette> it did for me in xul trunk weeks ago, that's how i found out
[00:32] <asac> which symptoms?
[00:32] <Ubulette> missing symbols
[00:32] <Ubulette> moved in nssutil
[00:33] <asac> for which operations? it works here well
[00:33] <asac> for xul 1.9 + ffox + gtkmozembed
[00:33] <Ubulette> build time
[00:43] <Ubulette> oh, i see. epiphany is broken because you did   -L/usr/lib/xulrunner-devel-1.9b1/lib -lplds4 -lplc4 -lnspr4
[00:44] <Ubulette> there're only .so in there even if system nspr is also installed
[00:44] <Ubulette> too bad
[00:51] <asac> i don't see the point you are trying to make
[00:52] <Ubulette> nm
[00:53] <asac> unfortunately ephy needs to link nspr directly ... which causes all this
[00:54] <Ubulette> it could have worked with xul b1 + regular nspr using a different linking order
[00:56] <Ubulette> but nm, it's not my mess^Wbusiness
[04:51] <extracted> any one here know anything about subnetting ?
[05:45] <tonyyarusso> extracted: um, some, but why asking here?
[10:39] <armin76> asac: shrug, so i'm going to do that stuff
[11:50] <armin76> asac: seems to work fine, let me paste you the patch
[11:54] <readyx> give it to me baby - aha - aha!
[12:08] <armin76> asac: http://rafb.net/p/gOCIKj67.html
[12:34] <asac> armin76: is the GetUnichar part needed?
[12:34] <asac> anyway: rock!
[12:44] <armin76> asac: http://rafb.net/p/Pf6NJO18.html <- like that?
=== \sh_away is now known as \sh
[12:49] <asdsadsda> :D
[13:05] <asac> armin76: no idea :) ... does it work?
[13:12] <asac> i can upload to debian ... finaly!!!
[13:12] <asac> (again)
[13:25] <CheGuevara> congrats :P
[13:30] <asac> armin76: :) ... looks good ... if you don
[13:31] <asac> t get bus errors we should update the bugzilla bug
=== asac_ is now known as asac
[14:39] <armin76> asac: the latest patch seems to work fine
[14:40] <asac> @time
[14:40] <ubotu> Current time in Etc/UTC: December 29 2007, 14:40:10 - Next meeting: Edubuntu meeting in 3 days
[14:40] <asac> armin76: the one without GetUnichar?
[14:40] <asac> great!
[14:40] <armin76> yeah
[14:40] <asac> please test a bit longer ... who knows if the <<get>> bus error might be harder to trigger
[14:41] <armin76> sure, doing that atm
[14:41] <armin76> although without the patch it takes some seconds, maybe 30
[14:43] <asac> no idea if it makes a difference, but try to visit unicode sites too
[14:46] <armin76> sites with special characters like üéíóú?
[14:47] <asac> depends ... they might use latin encoding ... at best go for some example unicode sites
[14:47] <asac> http://www.alanwood.net/unicode/#links
[14:48] <asac> http://www.alanwood.net/unicode/thai.html
[14:48] <asac> http://www.alanwood.net/unicode/cjk_compatibility.html
[14:48] <armin76> http://www.i18nguy.com/unicode-example.html <- i was using that
[14:49] <armin76> those links work fine as well
[14:49] <asac> ok looks good then ... do you use pango?
[14:50] <armin76> yup
[14:52] <asac> Ubulette: btw, i have permission to update kaze in debian
[14:53] <asac> did we go ahead in ubuntu? or did we wait for debian? (can't remember exactly)
[14:54] <armin76> asac: do you use external cairo?
[14:55] <asac> for 2.x? yes!
[14:55] <asac> for 2.x: pending
[14:55] <asac> (waiting for someone to let new nss into the archive)
[14:56] <asac> s/2.x: pe/3.x: pe/
[14:56] <asac> cairo in ubuntu is ready for system-cairo on ffox 3
[14:56] <armin76> remember to test my patch :P
[14:56] <asac> sorry i forgot :(
[14:57] <asac> which?
[14:57] <asac> is there a bug?
[14:58] <armin76> lame :P
[14:58] <armin76> mozilla bug 409976
[14:58] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 409976 in GFX: Thebes "Cairo in trunk gives SIGBUS on SPARC" [Normal,New] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=409976
[14:59] <asac> no idea how to test :)
[14:59] <armin76> well, just apply to your firefox tarball, compile with internal cairo, and try
[14:59] <asac> we can include the patch if you want ... but we appear to have close to zero sparc desktop users
[14:59] <asac> the "and try" is my problem
[14:59] <asac> i have no access to sparc desktop
[15:00] <welpie> well, but test on whatever you can
[15:00] <asac> ah
[15:00] <welpie> i know it works on sparc, but i don't want to break other arches
[15:00] <asac> welpie: ?
[15:00] <asac> hehe
[15:01] <welpie> yeah, it's me
=== welpie is now known as armin76_
[15:01] <asac> i thought so :)
[15:01] <armin76_> testing ff on sparc :P
[15:03] <asac> armin76_: i think attaching the actual patch might help :)
[15:04] <armin76> nod
[15:05]  * asac out shopping + food et al
[15:21] <CheGuevara> has anyone tried building xulrunner against latest glib
[15:37] <Ubulette> hi
[15:39] <Ubulette> CheGuevara, which glib ? i use the lastest in hardy, ie 2.15.0
[15:40] <armin76> asac: i attached the patch
[15:41] <Ubulette> asac, about epiphnay, even with a respin, it will ftbfs
[15:41] <CheGuevara> Ubulette: yeah
[15:41] <CheGuevara> does it build fine?
[15:41] <CheGuevara> because we just encountered a problem when building kmplayer
[15:41] <CheGuevara> which should affect glib as well
[15:41] <CheGuevara> i mean
[15:42] <CheGuevara> xulrunner as well
[15:42] <CheGuevara> http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/glib?view=revision&revision=6185
[15:42] <Ubulette> CheGuevara, sure. http://launchpadlibrarian.net/11086860/buildlog_ubuntu-hardy-i386.xulrunner-1.9_1.9~b2%2Bnobinonly-0ubuntu1~fta2_FULLYBUILT.txt.gz
[15:43] <Ubulette> oh, that looks like my bug 179119
[15:43] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 179119 in glib2.0 "glib 2.15 not clean with -pedantic" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/179119
[15:43] <CheGuevara> very likely :P
[15:44] <CheGuevara> i am building an updated glib right now
[15:46] <CheGuevara> Ubulette: do you mind looking at debdiff when its done building, since i am not exactly the packaging master
[15:48] <Ubulette> sure, but remember i can't sponsor you
[15:49] <CheGuevara> yeah i know :)
[15:50] <CheGuevara> now at least it closes a bug :P
[15:50] <Ubulette> asac, for epiphany, you need to patch m4/gecko.m4, or improve you xul1.9 patch a bit further
=== \sh is now known as \sh_away
[15:55] <CheGuevara> Ubulette: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/11089726/glib.debdiff
[15:58] <Ubulette> looks good. i would have named the patch differently but it's ok
[16:00] <CheGuevara> ok thanks Ubulette
[16:13] <Ubulette> asac, what about kaze ?
[16:14] <Ubulette> btw, 0.5.1 has been released today
[16:25] <asac> Ubulette: build error?
[16:25] <asac> (ephy)
[16:32] <Ubulette> asac, you will get that:
[16:32] <Ubulette> checking whether we have a gtk 2 gecko build... yes
[16:32] <Ubulette> checking whether we have a gecko debug build... no
[16:32] <Ubulette> checking whether we have a xpcom glue... yes
[16:32] <Ubulette> checking for gecko version... 1.9
[16:32] <Ubulette> checking nspr in gecko... no
[16:32] <Ubulette> checking nspr in system... yes
[16:32] <Ubulette> checking whether we can compile and run XPCOM programs... no
[16:32] <Ubulette> configure: error: Cannot compile and run XPCOM programs
[16:33] <Ubulette> it's because the last test never uses -I/usr/include/nspr detected earlier
[16:34] <asac> Ubulette: ah right
[16:34] <asac> ok
[16:34] <asac> i think thats fixed here already
[16:35] <asac> Ubulette: you started to port kaze once ... can you give me what you got so far?
[16:41] <Ubulette> hmm, i can't find my branch, neither on lp nor locally
[16:41] <Ubulette> wtf?
[16:54] <asac> Ubulette: http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/ephy.ubulette.patch
[16:54] <Ubulette> updated patch ?
[16:54] <asac> yes
[16:54] <asac> its not clean
[16:54] <asac> the interdiff is:
[16:55] <asac> http://paste.ubuntu.com/3091/
[16:55] <asac> the important part for you is most likely line 30
[16:55] <asac> and line 51-
[16:55] <asac> if you xul has the fixed mozilla-nspr patch from the mozillateam branch then line 30 should be enough for the nspr thing
[16:56] <asac> the rest was just some dirty hacking i did before i decided to fix xul .pc
[16:57] <asac> (no clue which patch seb used ... i think he used something between this and the patch in gnome (which is the old.patch in the diff)
[16:57] <asac> anyway ... replacing the full patch with this new one should be fine for system-nspr
[16:58] <asac> well ... dpatch hell of course :)
[16:58] <asac> aka no fold avail
[16:59] <asac> no idea why interdiff strips whitespaces though :/
[17:00] <Ubulette> http://paste.ubuntu.com/3093/
[17:01] <Ubulette> between seb and your new patch
[17:02] <asac> you didn't use interdiff, right?
[17:02] <Ubulette> no
[17:02] <asac> yes ... but should be ok i guess
[17:03] <asac> though unsure why seb does have the doc/reference/Makefile.am patch
[17:03] <asac> i remember that i developed that for him in order to build the docs
[17:03] <asac> doc/reference/tmpl/ephy-embed.sgml -> garbage of course
[17:04] <asac> we need a fix for mozilla bug 408791
[17:04] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 408791 in Password Manager "nsLoginManagerPrompter.js does not work with TestGtkEmbed prompt." [Normal,New] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=408791
[17:05] <asac> so if you have some splendid idea :)
[17:09] <armin76> http://dev.gentoo.org/~armin76/ffdialog.png <- i need a fix for that when compiling against xulrunner :P
[17:10] <asac> could be everything
[17:10] <asac> xul 1.9 + ffxo 3?
[17:10] <armin76> yep
[17:10] <armin76> however building it without a shared xulrunner, works fine
[17:11] <armin76> weird, huh?
[17:11] <asac> armin76: do you have all our patches?
[17:12] <armin76> for xul? i have a lot :P
[17:12] <CheGuevara> asac: is it possible for you to sponsor a glib2.0 upload, or do you only stick to mozilla stuff
[17:13] <asac> CheGuevara: depends on what kind of fix it is
[17:13] <CheGuevara> asac: bug 179119
[17:13] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 179119 in glib2.0 "glib 2.15 not clean with -pedantic" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/179119
[17:15] <asac> +-      // g_print ("LOOPSTATE: subtest_running=%d subtest_io_pending=%d\n", subtest_running, subtest_io_pending);
[17:16] <asac> is that really C99 ?
[17:16] <CheGuevara> / comments are not allowed in C99
[17:16] <CheGuevara> umm // i mean
[17:17] <asac> you mean "not allowed in C95" =
[17:17] <asac> ?
[17:17] <asac> aeh whatever was before 99 :)
[17:18] <CheGuevara> i am honestly not sure
[17:18] <CheGuevara> i always thought that // was only dis-allowed in C99 though
[17:20] <CheGuevara> oooh i am talking rubish
[17:20] <asac> well ... i think its just the ;
[17:20] <CheGuevara>  // was introduced in C99
[17:20] <asac> the rest is glib code-convention
[17:20] <CheGuevara> i was getting it the other way around
[17:20] <asac> yeah ... thats what i mean ... but i am not even sure about that
[17:20] <CheGuevara> C99 standard says it is :P
[17:20] <CheGuevara> / style comments, ala C++, are now available in C99. A comment of this form starts with // and ends at the end of the line.
[17:20] <CheGuevara> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/techtalk/c99/#slashslashcomments
[17:20] <asac> ok
[17:21] <CheGuevara> kmplayer fails to compile with
[17:21] <CheGuevara> /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gtestutils.h:108: error: expected identifier or '(' before '/' token
[17:21] <CheGuevara> /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gtestutils.h:109: error: expected identifier or '(' before '/' token
[17:21] <asac> probably was available everywhere before it was standardized :)
[17:21] <asac> they use -ansi ?
[17:21] <CheGuevara> yeah
[17:22] <CheGuevara> most weir thing kmplayer compiles perfectly fine locally with pbuilder
[17:22] <CheGuevara> but fails on ubuntu build servers
[17:23] <asac> hmm ... maybe you still have old compiler?
[17:23] <asac> and 4.2 became more anal about this?
[17:24] <CheGuevara> its a hardy pbuilder chroot
[17:24] <CheGuevara> so it should be same as there :P
[17:25] <CheGuevara> but the patch is basic and straight from upstream svn, so it shouldn't do any harm
[17:25] <Ubulette> pedantic is anal about C using // which is supposed to be C++ only
[17:26] <CheGuevara> yep
[17:26] <asac> i wait a few minutes to see if someone from desktop team replies
[17:26] <asac> otherwise i will sponsor this thing
[17:26] <CheGuevara> weirdest thing we don't use pedantic in kmplayer
[17:26] <CheGuevara> but it still fails
[17:26] <CheGuevara> thats what puzzles me most
[17:26] <asac> well ... pedantic in c++ appears to choke because of ;
[17:26] <Ubulette> what other flags do you have ?
[17:26] <asac> plain C appears to be pedantic when using -ansi
[17:27] <CheGuevara> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/11089417/buildlog_ubuntu-hardy-i386.kmplayer_1%3A0.10.0c-0ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[17:27] <asac> Ubulette: could build ephy?
[17:27] <asac> with pre3?`
[17:27] <asac> b3pre
[17:27] <CheGuevara> yeah it must be -ansi then
[17:29] <Ubulette> asac, locally yes. I've pushed it to my ppa
[17:29] <CheGuevara> which still on't explain why its doesn't fail locally :P
[17:31] <asac> Ubulette: fine ... does it work?
[17:35] <CheGuevara> does gcc 4.2 set ansi by default?
[17:40] <armin76> asac: i get unaligned access on ia64 with 3.0
[17:40] <asac> armin76: in cairo?
[17:40] <armin76> no
[17:40] <armin76> cairo is okay, tested on ia64 and alpha, checking with amd64
[17:41] <armin76> but it doesn't matter, on ia64 it doesn't segfault
[17:41] <armin76> http://rafb.net/p/y1747Y58.html
[17:45] <asac> CheGuevara:  ls -l /etc/alternatives/c89
[17:46] <asac> maybe your alternative points somewhere else? or CC=c89 is used on buildd by default ... otherwise: no clue :)
[17:46] <CheGuevara> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 2007-12-29 13:58 /etc/alternatives/c89 -> /usr/bin/c89-gcc
[17:47] <CheGuevara> $magic++
[17:47] <CheGuevara> :P
[17:48] <CheGuevara> asac: let me know when you upload please
[17:51] <asac> CheGuevara: sure ... doing a testbuild of ice*
[17:52] <CheGuevara> kk thanks :)
[18:34] <asac> CheGuevara: uploaded
[18:39] <asac> lets see how quick the idle buildd's kick in :)
[18:43] <Ubulette> hope it's faster than ppas
[18:43] <Ubulette> 1h15 avg in ppa just to enter the queue
[18:45] <CheGuevara> w00t
[18:45] <CheGuevara> thanks a lot asac
[18:47] <Ubulette> asac, http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=652917
[18:54] <asac> no idea ... didn't change a thing
[18:57] <Ubulette> could be anything
[19:19] <asac> Ubulette: does ephy work?
[19:23] <Ubulette> asac, http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/epihany.png
=== \sh_away is now known as \sh
[19:24] <asac> Ubulette: does the homepage work?
[19:24] <Ubulette> homepage ?
[19:25] <asac> do forms work? e.g. password manager
[19:25] <asac> well ... you have the ubuntu homepage ... i don't have that because locale is not properly recognized
[19:25] <asac> but my build might just be too old and %l is fixed upstream most likely
[19:27] <Ubulette> i can login on lp
[19:29] <asac> well ... does it remember your credentials?
[19:29] <Ubulette> lp, yes.
[19:30] <Ubulette> but seb complained about htaccess, not cookies auth
[19:32] <Ubulette> hmm self signed certificates.. I get the same error as ff3 but how do I add the exception in epiphany ??
[19:34] <Ubulette> crash
[19:36] <asac> Ubulette: yes he complained about http auth ... but auto password in forms didn't work either
[19:36] <Ubulette> start epiphany-browser, Edit / Personal data => click on properties => crash
[19:36] <asac> most likely fixed by microb backout ... which is why i asked
[19:37] <Ubulette> backout was post b2, i'm still running b2 here
[19:37] <asac> great chpe landed a bunch of the xul fixes
[19:37]  * asac updating patch
[19:39] <Ubulette> strange, update manager still wants to upgrade epiphany-gecko
[19:40] <Ubulette> http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/Update-Manager.png
[19:40] <Ubulette> over and over again
[19:43] <asac> maybe let him do it?
[19:44] <Ubulette> i did
[19:44] <Ubulette> same for apt-get
[19:44] <Ubulette> Preparing to replace epiphany-gecko 2.21.4-0ubuntu2+fta2 (using .../epiphany-gecko_2.21.4-0ubuntu2+fta2_i386.deb) ...
[19:49] <asac> no idea ... if it doesn't go away by doing the upgrade
[20:53] <asac> damn thing ... try to convince someone who didn't even try to build against xr 1.9 that we have no real choice but use the glue :)
[21:16] <Ubulette> who ? mike ?
=== \sh is now known as \sh_away
[21:37] <asac> no chpe
[21:37] <asac> he has no idea ... at least caillon stated that he wants -embedding in the end as well ... but fedora needs to figure out some things for lib32/lib64 mixed setups
[21:41] <Ubulette> miro is damn too slow.
[21:41] <Ubulette> 15~20sec of intense disk activity to have the 1st window
[21:42] <asac> with the miro patch i provide?
[21:44] <Ubulette> yes, but even without it. it's by design
[21:44] <asac> ok
[21:44] <asac> then i feel good
[21:50] <asac> Ubulette: tbird is up ... sorry for the branch mess btw, but you started on top of a lame branch that didn't have all revisions
[21:52] <asac> http://paste.ubuntu.com/3105/
[21:53] <asac> you didn't have any missing symbols in pre?
[21:53] <Ubulette> damn, i was about to push the pedantic thing
[21:53] <asac> he?
[21:53] <asac> the pedantic thing isn't needed anymore
[21:53] <Ubulette> was test building from scratch
[21:53] <asac> i didn't include it
[21:53] <Ubulette> you could have told me you were working on that
[21:53] <asac> Ubulette: what do you mean?
[21:54] <Ubulette> i've lost 1h once again
[21:54] <asac> on what?
[21:54] <Ubulette> tb
[21:54] <asac> sorry ... don't get what you were working on
[21:54] <asac> dropping -pendantic change?
[21:55] <Ubulette> yes, and testing it
[21:55] <Ubulette> all for nothing :(
[21:55] <asac> ok ... sorry about it ... i said above that i will do test builds before sponsoring ... you probably missed that :(
[21:56] <Ubulette> no, i didn't
[21:56] <Ubulette> you never mentioned tb
[21:56] <asac> yeah ... i now see that that comment was in motu (because CheGuevara pinged me there)
[21:57] <Ubulette> i've waited for glib to hit the repo, then i've updated & rebuilt tb, and i was about to push
[21:58] <asac> yeah ... but the branch was lost anyway, because it started in the past
[21:58] <Ubulette> I used your most recent public branch
[21:58] <asac> which could have been prevented if you'd told me that you start working on a new tbird branch :)
[21:59] <Ubulette> if you don't push your stuff, how people are supposed to know ?
[21:59] <Ubulette> grrr, i'm pissed
[21:59] <Ubulette> nm
[21:59] <asac> your work has been reused ...  i cherry-picked the patches et al
[22:01] <Ubulette> but once again, you took ownership while i requested sponsorship. tell me if you don't want to sponsor me.
[22:02] <asac> and remember that i would have preferred to just use your branch ... so i suffered already from my lameness of not pushing the stable branch
[22:25] <asac> i really don't get what you complain about ... your contributions are clearly acknowledged in the changelog
[22:29] <asac> maybe its launchpad that leads you to the false impression that contributions within one changelog are worth less or something. this is a deficiency of launchpad for sure. Usually in team-maintenance people commit and add their changes to changelog. the one who uploads signs the release off by using dch -r
[22:31] <Ubulette> it's not the 1st time that i complain about the exact same thing. if you're not happy with something, you should tell it publicly and give a chance to the contributor to fix it, instead of redoing it silently on your side and at the same time gaining ownership of almost everything. that's frustrating.
[22:32] <Ubulette> i feel spoiled
[22:32] <asac> i don't get ownership of anything
[22:32] <Ubulette> where are my commits ?
[22:32] <Ubulette> even from the changelogs, you did 2.0.0.9
[22:33] <asac> and?
[22:34] <Ubulette> and nothing. i just don't like that kind of practice
[22:34] <Ubulette> i won't work on that ever again
[22:35] <asac> so you would have preferred if i had told you that you need to redo everything based on the branch i forgot to push?
[22:35] <Ubulette> yes
[22:35] <Ubulette> at least ask me if i would like to do it
[22:36] <asac> but again ... the name in the changelog just means: uploader
[22:36] <asac> what is done by whome is annotated _in_ the changelog
[22:36] <Ubulette> I remember i've asked you to sponsor it, you never said the branch was wrong or anything
[22:37] <asac> yes ... because i didn't want to waste your time with these messy things
[22:37] <Ubulette> but forget it, you clearly protect your job, i can understand it