[00:00] <Ubulette> at least it works fine :)
[00:00] <asac> does babelfish translate that? :)
[00:00] <Ubulette> the 2nd yes, the 1st no, i don't speak tamil
[00:00] <asac> yay, tomboy notes crashed again
[00:07] <asac> gnome bug 519667
[00:07] <ubotu> Gnome bug 519667 in General "ctrl+w, close on file menu, close button on tab don't work." [Normal,Unconfirmed] http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=519667
[00:07] <Ubulette> good, i've fixed seamonkey 2, at last
[00:08] <asac> thats reported against b4pre 2802
[00:08] <asac> Ubulette: was it broken?
[00:09] <Ubulette> i still have weird message in the console but now, it's usable again
[00:09] <Ubulette> messageS
[00:09] <Ubulette> it was unable to display anything
[00:09] <Ubulette> just blank pages
[00:10] <asac> upstream bug?
[00:10] <Ubulette> installer
[00:11] <asac> ah
[00:11] <Ubulette> like the one rejected by thunderbird
[00:11] <asac> you have bug id?
 asac, thunderbird guys recommend us to build everything with --enable-static, incl ff3, xul
 see mozilla bug 420391
[00:11] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 420391 in Build Config "unix/packages-static for thunderbird (trunk)" [Normal,New] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=420391
 i will rename my file to unix/packages and keep it in my branch as they seems reluctant to accept it
 it works for me (tm)
[00:12] <Ubulette> damn xchat can't copy timestamps
[00:12] <asac> if am not mistaken 18 feb 2300 utc works as well
[00:13] <asac> no lets see 19 :)
[00:14] <asac> i just hope that i didn't mess up anything when testing the 20th feb
[08:44] <jtv> carlos: I want to cancel that export request that keeps failing.  See anything wrong with this SQL (apart from it returning the same value again and again for each requested file)?
[08:44] <jtv> https://pastebin.canonical.com/3192
[08:44] <carlos> jtv: wrong channel...
[08:46] <jtv> carlos: whoopsie
[08:46] <jtv> (damn rearranging tabs)
[10:07] <asac> [reed]: its strange. if i use nsILocaleService g
[10:07] <asac> to GetLocaleComponentForUserAgent
[10:07] <asac> its not the same value that is in user agent
[10:07] <asac> for instance: install de.xpi
[10:07] <asac> export LANG=de_DE
[10:08] <asac> firefox
[10:08] <asac> you will see that the user-agent has _just_ de
[10:08] <asac> but the function about returns de-DE
[10:09] <asac> this is confusing
[11:23] <asac> bug 201753
[11:23] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 201753 in mozilla-devscripts "[MIR] please promote mozilla-devscripts to main" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/201753
[11:23] <asac> Ubulette: ^^^
[11:24] <asac> hehe
[12:00] <asac> !package mozilla-devscripts
[12:00] <asac> !mozilla-devscripts
[12:00] <asac> hmm
[12:01] <asac> !info mozilla-devscripts
[12:01] <ubotu> Package mozilla-devscripts does not exist in gutsy
[12:01] <asac> !info mozilla-devscripts/hardy
[12:01] <ubotu> Package mozilla-devscriptshardy does not exist in gutsy
[12:01] <asac> !info hardy mozilla-devscripts
[12:01] <ubotu> Package hardy does not exist in gutsy
[12:01] <asac> !info mozilla-devscripts hardy
[12:01] <ubotu> mozilla-devscripts (source: mozilla-devscripts): Collection of dev scripts used by Ubuntu Mozilla packages. In component universe, is optional. Version 0.05 (hardy), package size 14 kB, installed size 108 kB
[12:01] <asac> ha
[12:01] <asac> i made it ;)
[12:02] <asac> bug 201753
[12:02] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 201753 in mozilla-devscripts "[MIR] please promote mozilla-devscripts to main" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/201753
[12:02] <asac> Ubulette: ^^^
[12:02] <asac> ok ... so there are no constraints anymore
[12:02] <asac> everything can use it
[13:39] <Dat1> Hi Guys, I have a quick question: Will firefox 3 beta 4 come to hardy? If yes, when?
[13:41] <Dat1> Also, what is the firefox 3 inclusion process for hardy? Is Firefox final version going to be released before the release of hardy? If not, will it be included via an SRU? I am just asking out of curiosity...
[13:58] <Dat1> hmm, nobody there...
[14:22] <asac> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=303214
[14:22] <asac> Dat1: as soon as we have sorted a regression
[14:22] <asac> caused in epiphany by it
[14:22] <asac> the package is ready (on its own)
[14:33] <Dat1> asac: Thx a lot for the info!
[14:33] <asac> Dat1: not sure about the final release
[14:34] <asac> but most likely we will release with an RC
[14:34] <asac> of course we will update that through security once final becomes available
[14:34] <asac> afaik there is also a hardy update scheduled a few month after release.
[14:34] <asac> e.t. 8.04.1
[14:34] <asac> that will include latest as well
[14:37] <Dat1> Ah, great. I am new to the ubuntu community and it is always great to get further information on the developing process!
[14:37] <Dat1> As far as I am informed, you are the one responsible for the mozilla stuff in ubuntu, right?
[14:37] <Dat1> You're doing a great job!
[14:56] <armin76> i am!
[14:56] <armin76> not for ubuntu, though *g*
[15:12] <asac> Dat1: yes
[15:12] <asac> Dat1: thank the whole team
[15:27] <xhaker> asac: you forgot to update the version of the ubufox extension, it still shows up as beta1 in firefox
[15:28] <xhaker> asac: also, i'm interested in this latest change that directs the user to google when connected.
[15:31]  * xhaker built it here.
[15:34] <xhaker> install.rdf states beta2 :S
[15:37]  * xhaker looking into bzr commits
[15:38] <asac> xhaker: he?
[15:39] <asac> you sure you don't have a local install ?
[15:39] <asac> if you can uninstall in addons manager, you have a local version
[15:40] <xhaker> i've built the package myself and installed. I've just removed the .mozilla folder and will check. orig.tar.gz contained the correct version string in the .rdf
[15:40] <asac> xhaker: most likely you had a ubufox install in your profile
[15:40] <xhaker> ^and will check if it works now
[15:40] <asac> (which will always win)
[15:42] <xhaker> ahh, bummer. firefox doesn't pick it up. now ubufox is not in the list
[15:42] <asac> xhaker: firefox 2?
[15:42] <xhaker> 3
[15:43] <asac> is it in /usr/lib/firefox-addons/extensions/ ?
[15:43]  * xhaker dpkg -L
[15:43] <xhaker> heh. doesn't seem to be
[15:44] <asac> he?
[15:44] <asac> you sure you built the right package?
[15:45] <asac> xhaker: is the package already built in launchpad?
[15:45] <asac> can you try to install that .deb?
[15:45] <asac> (ubuntu2)
[15:45] <xhaker> http://pastebin.com/d1884adaf
[15:45] <asac> its installed
[15:48] <xhaker> strange.. it doesn't show up on the list. The startpage is even the firefox branded one.
[15:48] <xhaker> on a new progfile
[15:49] <asac> well if its not used you get the upstream behaviour
[15:49] <asac> so that is expected
[15:49] <asac> try to remove all extension.* files in your profile
[15:49] <asac> and start firefox again
[15:49] <xhaker> i've removed .mozilla/
[15:51] <xhaker> asac: i think i'll test again with the package from the buildd but i've built this in pbuilder. don't think it will be diferent :D
[15:51] <asac> sounds strange
[15:52] <xhaker> should ubufox@ubuntu.com be a folder?
[15:52] <asac> no  a link to a folder
[15:52] <xhaker> oh.. then that's it!
[15:53] <asac> hmm
[15:53] <asac> is that a folder?
[15:53] <xhaker> ls -l says so :) and it got nothing inside
[15:53] <asac> k
[15:54] <xhaker> should it link to /usr/share/ubufox ?
[15:54] <asac> yes
[15:56] <xhaker> great! testing before it hit the repositories
[15:56] <asac> yeah
[15:56] <asac> well its a bug
[15:56] <asac> i should remove those dirs in preinst
[15:56] <xhaker> asac: this was a project idea from GSoC, that I wrote
[15:56] <asac> i thought i did that already
[15:56] <asac> oh cool
[15:57] <xhaker> glad to see it implemented. i though of doing some integration with n-m though. but the effect is the same
[15:57] <xhaker> from where did you get this idea?
[15:58] <xhaker> s/though/thought
[16:01] <asac> its not my efford. its been discussed with google. no idea how it started
[16:01] <asac> i just implemented it on firefox side
[16:02] <xhaker> asac: no related blueprint ?
[16:02] <asac> no idea ... sorry ;)
[16:04] <asac> xhaker: can you purge the ubufox package
[16:05] <asac> then install the previous one
[16:05] <asac> and test the latest from bzr in a minute please?
[16:07] <asac> xhaker: bzr is updaed
[16:08] <asac> xhaker: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubufox/ubuntu
[16:14] <asac> xhaker: ?
[16:26] <asac> Ubulette: so what is about reporter.jar? is that build by accident?
[16:28] <[reed]> heh, who broke Hardy? :)
[16:28] <asac> me?
[16:28] <asac> [reed]: how?
[16:28] <asac> still works for me
[16:29] <[reed]> I see this mail to ubuntu-devel-announce
[16:29] <asac> no time to read mails right now :)
[16:29] <asac> can you summarize?
[16:29] <[reed]> lp bug 201673
[16:29] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 201673 in glibc "REGRESSION: glibc 2.7-9ubuntu1 NSS module broken due to toolchain changes" [Critical,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/201673
[16:29] <asac> k
[16:29] <asac> appears to be fix released ;)
[16:32] <asac> luckily i aborted the upgrade because i needed to install something else
[18:07]  * asac sport
[18:48] <Ubulette> hi
[18:48] <armin76> yo
[18:49] <armin76> Ubulette: btw, the dialog thing got fixed with b4
[18:49] <armin76> the ssl stuff
[18:49] <armin76> didn't try with an snapshot yet
[18:51] <Ubulette> b5pre, no, no time those days... and my .head branches are/were stuck with b4
[19:14] <xhaker> asac: i'm testing the upgrade from ubufox. ubuntu2 -> ubuntu3. sorry to have disappeared earlier, some business partner showed up at my house
[19:18]  * xhaker has to fake the situation.
[19:21] <xhaker> asac: the new ubufox preinst fixes the upgrade :) thanks
[19:31] <arno_> hi
[19:51] <Ubulette> asac, <asac> sport <= what kind of sport do you do ?
[19:52] <Ubulette> [reed], http://glandium.org/blog/?p=183

[19:52] <[reed]> he's been much more helpful lately
[19:52] <[reed]> used to be a pain to deal with
[19:53] <[reed]> but he's actually been pretty responsive
[19:53] <[reed]> which makes it much easier for me to help him out
[19:53] <[reed]> Ubulette: Thanks for letting me know about that.
[19:53] <[reed]> :)
[19:54] <Ubulette> he also updated one of my patches that you committed afterwards
[19:55] <[reed]> cool
[20:00] <arno_> I'd like to package a firefox extension for ubuntu. But I don't use ubuntu myself. So, I'd like to known if some of you have the experience of packaging for ubuntu while using debian, and if so, what are the main differences and the main things to care about ?
[20:01] <Ubulette> we have our own way to package extensions
[20:02] <Ubulette> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Firefox3Extensions/Packaging
[20:06] <Ubulette> asac, your email is parsed, mine isn't: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/firefox-3.0/3.0~b4+nobinonly-0ubuntu1
[20:06] <arno_> Ubulette: ok
[20:25] <arno_> that seems to work fine, I could build an extension package
[20:30] <Ubulette> arno_, why would you want to do that if you don't even use ubuntu ? (just curious)
[20:34] <arno_> Ubulette: because I usually make personal packages of extensions I use (mainly to get them easily when I create a new profile)
[20:34] <arno_> and I discovered ubunt mozilla-devscripts, and now, I want to package my extensions that way
[20:35] <arno_> Then, I feel it would not be much effoter to make at least one them a real ubuntu package
[20:35] <arno_> much *effort*
[21:20] <Ubulette> asac, please push your last changes to ff3.head
[21:22] <asac> oh didn't i?
[21:22] <asac> let me first repair my system
[21:22] <asac> which is busted due to a bad upgrade
[21:22] <asac> i cannot sign ... cannot start desktop applications
[21:28] <asac> lets hope
[21:28] <asac> rebootin
[21:29] <asac> system was completely trashed
[21:30] <arno_> how do I generate source package with XPI.TEMPLATE ?
[21:30] <asac> create an upstream branch
[21:31] <asac> branch from that an ubuntu branch
[21:31] <asac> copy the debian/ directory from XPI....
[21:31] <asac> and adapt the debian/rules debian/control debian/copyright
[21:31] <asac> arno_: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Firefox3Extensions/Packaging
[21:32] <arno_> I mean: I've followed that tutorial except I don't use a version control. I can run debuild -b, but debuild fails
[21:33] <asac> arno_: if you want to upload that extension to ubuntu, please consider to use bzr
[21:33] <asac> arno_: hard to say without a message3
[21:33] <asac> (error message)
[21:34] <asac> arno_: we have the firefox-extensions project in launchpad and it would be beneficial to have all packaged extensions in there
[21:34] <arno_> ok
[21:35] <asac> arno_: anyway ... if you show me the error i can probably tell whats going on
[21:35] <arno_> I just want to check the feasability first, but I've found the solution anyway:
[21:35] <asac> sure
[21:35] <arno_>  create a orig.tar.gz with just the .xpi in it
[21:48] <asac> arno_: ?
[21:48] <asac> Ubulette: ok let me look
[21:49] <arno_> asac: when using debuild, I could not produce a source package because there was no orig.tar.gz file
[21:49] <asac> Ubulette: can you merge  back from .dev? we have a missing changelog entry on .head (vs .dev)
[21:49] <asac> if you want i can do that
[21:50] <Ubulette> if dev is in sync, i can do it
[21:50] <asac> Ubulette: ffox head pushed
[21:50] <asac> let me see whats up with xul
[21:50] <Ubulette> ok
[21:50] <Ubulette> xul is ok i guess
[21:50] <asac> rev 197
[21:50] <asac> no xul has diverged
[21:50] <asac> i probably uncommitted
[21:51] <asac> most likely just the release changelog entry
[21:51] <Ubulette> oh, then trash my b5, i'll redo it
[21:51] <asac> Ubulette: ok thanks
[21:51] <asac> sorry. there was something that needed a fix ...  ah right bumping of build requirements
[21:52] <asac> ok xul.head is now rev 187
[21:53] <Ubulette> mozilla bug 422538
[21:53] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 422538 in DOM: HTML "Ogg Theora backend for HTML5 video element" [Enhancement,Assigned] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=422538
[21:54] <asac> Ubulette: ok i intentionalls didn't fix the upstream version of nspr
[21:54] <asac> Ubulette: is everything sorted for you now?
[21:54] <asac> (e.g. versioning) ... or do we need discussion
[21:55] <asac> arno_: you most likely have glitch in the file name of the orig.tar.gz you produced
[21:55] <asac> it has to be PACKAGENAME_UPSTREAMVERSION.orig.tar.gz
[21:56] <Ubulette> asac, we need more discussion. I can't tie the xul version within nss/nspr versions using mozclient as it's not taggued that way at all
[21:59] <asac> the xul version was mikes idea afafik
[21:59] <asac> we could use the ffox version
[22:00] <asac> (which is used to tag )
[22:04] <Ubulette> we can't. no file in the nss/nspr trees are taggued with this
[22:04] <Ubulette> only client.mk
[22:05] <Ubulette> i mean, if you fetch the tip of nss or nspr, there's no way to find a FF tag
[22:07] <Ubulette> http://paste.ubuntu.com/5663/
[22:07] <Ubulette> you can't just pick up a random tag
[22:08] <Ubulette> bug 201961
[22:08] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 201961 in firefox-3.0 "firefox-3.0 dependency on xulrunner-1.9 isn’t strict enough" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/201961
[22:12] <arno_> bad luck: the extension I'm working on not compatible with firefox 3b :)
[22:18] <armin76> eh? ff-2.0.0.13 again? sigh
[22:18] <armin76> you guys know if it contains security fixes?
[22:18] <armin76> [reed]: ?
[22:22] <asac> arno_: did you try to force compatibililty?
[22:23] <asac> arno_: btw, if you work on an extension, please add that to the firefox3extension wiki page
[22:23] <asac> even if the outcome is that its not compatible ... we have a table for that as well there
[22:23] <asac> and adding it there helps others to not look at it again
[22:24] <asac> arno_: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Firefox3Extensions
[22:25] <asac> arno_: on that page is a trick to force compatibility (so you can test if it works without coding)
[22:25] <arno_> asac: no, it does not work by bumping maxversion, if I have time in the next few days, I'll try to investigate more
[22:25] <asac> arno_: what do you mean?
[22:25] <asac> aeh sorry
[22:25] <arno_> I'll add it to the list on the wiki
[22:25] <asac> that was armin76 ^^^^
[22:25] <asac> arno_: thanks
[22:26] <asac> arno_: yes. but most likely its a good idea to ahead and package anothe rextension
[22:26] <asac> there should be plenty available that are compatible already
[22:26] <asac> arno_: for instance: all-in-one-sidebar
[22:27] <asac> armin76: write a mail to dveditz@cruzio.com ... and ask to be added to the security-announce list (tell him that you are the gentoo mozilla maintainer)
[22:27] <asac> Ubulette: you sure?
[22:28] <asac> afaik they tag nspr/nss for release with the FIREFOX version
[22:28] <asac> (and use that tag in client.mk to checkout)
[22:28] <Ubulette> you don't get what I mean
[22:29] <asac> sorry, maybe rephrase
[22:29] <Ubulette> I want to package nss~cvs so I don't have access to any other sources
[22:29] <asac> yes
[22:29] <asac> thats true
[22:29] <Ubulette> so to extract the nss version, I need it to be somewhere in that source tree
[22:30] <Ubulette> and 1.9bx is nowhere
[22:30] <Ubulette> it's taggued with that at the last minute
[22:31] <asac> yes. but can't we assume that current head is going to be tagged like the next release?
[22:31] <Ubulette> and the tag is not on HEAD but at some older point in time
[22:32] <asac> yes. but it would be conservative approach to use the _next_ beta /rc release?
[22:32] <asac> i mean its either that or a ahead
[22:33] <asac> so choosing the next beta should safe because users can still be upgraded (which is effectively downgrading)
[22:33] <asac> anyway ... all this is what i ment when i questioned the feasibility of nss/nspr HEADs
[22:34] <asac> (for packaging)
[22:34] <asac> as long as we don't need to patch xul for changes in nss we are safe
[22:34] <asac> but once that happen putting that change in xulrunner.head might be wrong
[22:35] <Ubulette> it was often needed, ie when nss is bumped in trunk between two releases, you can no longer build xul with system xul if you don't bump nss too
[22:35] <asac> Ubulette: yes. but why not just track the TAG in client.mk
[22:35] <asac> instead of the HEAD
[22:36] <asac> at least if the purpose to track nss is xulrunner/firefox (and not nss) itself ... it would be a compromise
[22:36] <Ubulette> because it's not possible either
[22:36] <asac> why?
[22:36] <asac> you could checkout HEAD of client.mk. look at the tag in there and use that?
[22:37] <Ubulette> sure but you'll get that:
[22:37] <Ubulette> NSPR_CO_TAG          = NSPR_4_7_1_BETA1
[22:37] <Ubulette> NSS_CO_TAG           = NSS_3_12_BETA2
[22:37] <asac> right
[22:38] <asac> we could say that our nspr.head and hss.head branch will always package the tags in client.mk
[22:38] <Ubulette> that's no longer head
[22:39] <asac> its a compromise :)
[22:39] <Ubulette> i have another idea
[22:39] <asac> nss realhead is something that might just not be usable in combination of our xul.head branc
[22:39] <asac> h
[22:39] <asac> ?
[22:39] <Ubulette> fetch head nss + mozilla/config/milestone.txt head
[22:40] <Ubulette> mozilla/config/milestone.txt gives me the gecko version in trunk
[22:40] <asac> yes ... thats how we could guess a conservative version
[22:41] <asac> however we still don't know if we are ahead of release
[22:41] <asac> as long as you don't need to change xul for that its fine imo
[22:41] <asac> but once that happens we have a problem
[22:41] <Ubulette> today, it will give me 1.9b5pre so I could do 4.7.1~beta~1.9b5~cvsXXXXXXXX
[22:41] <asac> right
[22:42] <asac> but what would you do if xul doesn't build anymore with that?
[22:42] <asac> will you stop and wait till xul upstream catches up?
[22:43] <Ubulette> so far, it happened only once and i fixed xul
[22:43] <asac> well .. but then we cannot use that xul branch for next release anymore
[22:43] <asac> (at least if we are out of luck)
[22:43] <Ubulette> we did
[22:43] <asac> most likely we had luck and xul catched up _before_ release?
[22:43] <Ubulette> you even took the patch in ff2
[22:44] <asac> hmm
[22:44] <asac> ff2 is something different
[22:45] <asac> Ubulette: my whole point is: as long as we don't run ahead of the _final_ release i am fine with everything
[22:45] <asac> i just want to preven that we end up in final hardy with nss/nspr that isn't ment to be shipped with ffoc 3
[22:46] <Ubulette> why would we run ahead? we don't push random versions to hardy
[22:46] <asac> we would run aheade on the .head branch
[22:46] <Ubulette> no, I will, you wont
[22:46] <asac> so the model we currently use for xul and ffox doesn't work ...
[22:46] <asac> e.g. develop towards next release ... then merge down and release
[22:47] <asac> thats all ok. it just means that .head and .dev branch will diverge and most likely won't be really usable to merge down
[22:47] <asac> (its just that we have to remember when doing that)
[22:48] <Ubulette> it will ftbfs anyway
[22:50] <asac> can we figure which cvs version was used to tag?
[22:51] <Ubulette> we just have a revision, but it's often reassigned
[22:52] <arno_> bad news again: I don't think there would be an easy fix to make chromatabs work with firefox 3b :(
[22:56] <arno_> asac: I don't use all in one sidebar. I prefer to package an extension I use
[23:11] <Ubulette> asac, nspr_4.7.1~beta~1.9b5~cvs20080310t1054.orig.tar.gz
[23:14] <Ubulette>       nspr_4.7.1~beta~1.9b4.orig.tar.gz
[23:14] <asac> arno_: sure
[23:15] <asac> arno_: can you contact the devs of chromatabs?
[23:15] <asac> arno_: maybe they have a cvs or svn and already have it fixed there?
[23:16] <arno_> asac: ok. Otherwise, I think, I'll package console2, it works fine with checkCompatibility to false
[23:17] <asac> cool
[23:17] <asac> remember to check licensing if possible
[23:19] <arno_> yes, chromatabs and console2 are trilicensed
[23:19] <asac> perfect
[23:19] <asac> is there even a license file in source/xpi?
[23:20] <arno_> console2: there is a licence file
[23:20] <arno_> chromatabs: there is a licence file with only mpl, but source files contain tri-licence headers
[23:20] <arno_> hmm, may be something to ask them when I write them ...
[23:21] <arno_> just to clarify: is it trilicence or mpl
[23:21] <asac> yes
[23:21] <asac> in worst case mpl is ok as well
[23:21] <asac> trilicense is of course preferred
[23:21] <asac> as MPL is a somewhat crappy license ;)
[23:22] <asac> arno_: please remember to add that info to the wiki page (even if you don't package it)
[23:22] <asac> helps a lot if someone wants to check in future
[23:22] <arno_> ok
[23:22] <asac> and package it
[23:22] <arno_> should I put my name as ubuntu qa contact ?
[23:23] <arno_> or someone else ?
[23:48] <Ubulette> Bug 201993
[23:48] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 201993 in firefox-3.0 "search function in firefox 3 does not work" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/201993
[23:48] <Ubulette> anyone seeing this ? I can't reproduce here
[23:52] <asac> is that b4?
[23:52] <asac> no i can't
[23:53] <asac> almost certainly an extension issue
[23:53] <asac> he should try to start in -safe-mode
[23:53] <asac> and see if its fixed
[23:53] <asac> then disable extensions one by one ... and so on
[23:53] <asac> i have a script for such kind of bugs
[23:55] <asac> http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/try-extdisable.py
[23:55] <asac> Ubulette: ^^
[23:56] <Ubulette> Bug 201997
[23:56] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 201997 in firefox-3.0 "Source code window is empty" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/201997
[23:56] <Ubulette> probably the same
[23:56] <asac> yes. if its unreproducible then almost certainly
[23:56] <asac> 90% of the bugs firefox sees are extension related
[23:56] <asac> its somewhat important to get the info which extension caused it
[23:57] <asac> maybe we should create a list about extensions and known symptoms
[23:57] <asac> i was pretty bad aobut that for firefox 2
[23:57] <asac> e.g. setting up a list
[23:57] <asac> only the most nasty ones i have in mind
[23:58] <asac> Ubulette: finally i added the apport hook py script in this upload
[23:58] <Ubulette> yes, i've seen it
[23:58] <asac> so if you see bug reports without ExtensionSummary.txt attached ... closing bugs
[23:58] <asac> and asking to resubmit through Help -> Report a Problem is the way t got
[23:59] <asac> http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/resubmit-bug-menu.py