=== shiris1 is now known as shirish === asac_ is now known as asac [06:50] <[reed]> so, I guess Hardy is shipping b5? [06:51] [reed]: its not in my hand ;) [06:52] [reed]: or is there a chance that rc1 is out by 21st apr? [06:53] <[reed]> 11 days... dunno [06:53] <[reed]> people are saying "late April" [06:53] <[reed]> dunno what that means [06:53] we release on 24th [06:53] 22nd would be good i guess [06:54] [reed]: for me its much more important that we release something that is guaranteed to be string frozen [06:54] e.g. no _new_ keys [06:54] <[reed]> well, we're string frozen right now [06:55] i doubt that b5 is really hard string frozen [06:55] <[reed]> b5 isn't [06:55] <[reed]> but we are string frozen now [06:55] so what strings were added? [06:55] after b5? [06:55] <[reed]> http://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/Firefox_3.0rc1 [06:55] <[reed]> umm, you'd just have to look at one of the l10n repos [06:56] this all wouldn't be much a problem if strin bundles could fall back to en-US if they are only partially translated [06:56] but they don't do that and so the UI ends up being busted [06:56] <[reed]> http://bonsai-l10n.mozilla.org/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=all&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=l10n%2Fen-GB&file=&filetype=match&who=&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=explicit&mindate=2008-03-21+00%3A00%3A00&maxdate=2008-04-10+00%3A00%3A00&cvsroot=%2Fl10n [06:56] <[reed]> those? [06:57] looking [06:57] ok lets hope for RC1 then [06:58] hmm ... but thats en-GB [06:58] sure that the strings really landed after b5 for en-US :? [06:58] hmm [06:59] ill talk to blizzard about RC1 [06:59] [reed]: how many things usually land after tree closes for baking? [07:00] <[reed]> we have a ton to go [07:00] <[reed]> we're not really "baking" per se [07:00] <[reed]> we basically just went into drivers-have-to-approve-everything mode [07:00] <[reed]> even blockers have to be approved now [07:00] welll ... code hand-off to build means release [07:00] :) [07:00] for me [07:00] ;) [07:00] <[reed]> yeah, well [07:01] just two steps away [07:01] guess those are big steps [07:02] <[reed]> I see 131 blockers left [07:02] P2? [07:03] <[reed]> all blockers [07:03] <[reed]> we're not doing it by priorities anymore [07:04] ok . sounds like not all will get fixed then ;) [07:06] <[reed]> well, they all have to be fixed [07:06] <[reed]> by RC1 [07:07] OTOH, 131 is still managable [07:07] :) [07:07] its not like you only have 4 developers ;) [07:07] (i hope [07:07] ) [07:07] <[reed]> hah [07:07] <[reed]> yeah, and most blockers already have patches [07:07] wow ... thats a trick ;) [07:09] [reed]: do you know of any hard regressions in current trunk over b5? [07:10] <[reed]> not anything that really sticks out [07:10] <[reed]> nope [07:10] [reed]: nevermind. i am sure that string freeze doesn't guarantee me that no new strings are added :( [07:10] <[reed]> why not? [07:10] which is what causes me restless nights right now [07:10] id consider to ship rc1pre if that means frozen strings for sure [07:11] <[reed]> like, we're _really_ string frozen... it'll have to be an act of God before we had another string [07:11] well ... i read that you can still request approval from mconnor to breach new strings [07:11] <[reed]> add* [07:11] <[reed]> where? [07:11] <[reed]> where do you see that? [07:11] on some mailing list [07:11] let me search [07:13] That's the last string freeze for Firefox 3, if you have patches with [07:13] string changes, make sure to have the late-l10n keyword set, and ring [07:13] all bells and whistles to get the bugs triaged. [07:13] no idea [07:13] what late-l10n is empowered to [07:13] i will ping mconnor again [07:13] he didn't answer two days ago [07:13] http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/msg/211615c0ace0c1ce [07:19] [reed]: if no strings were removed i could punch the latest strings into translations [07:19] (after b5) [07:20] <[reed]> well, some were removed, as when we change a string, we "rev the entity", which means renaming the entity, which removes a string and adds a new one, basically [07:20] <[reed]> but localizers are supposed to be done with all their work by today (Thursday) [07:21] <[reed]> so, again, it'll be an act of God before we change another string [07:21] [reed]: yeah ... point is that if we ship b5 we will have issues upgrading our translations. [07:21] so ... option is to ship rc1pre [07:21] <[reed]> rc1pre isn't that bad [07:22] yeah i know ;) [07:22] <[reed]> it's a risk, yes [07:22] question is if the risk is higher than shipping b5 [07:22] :) [07:22] <[reed]> but a pretty well calculated and controlled risk [07:22] maybe ill ask for permissions to name it 3.0ubu1 [07:22] :) [07:23] so far our management chewed that we ship b5. but i think they are still digesting so its open if they get sick [07:25] <[reed]> well, talk to blizzard and mconnor [07:25] will do. have no choice i guess [07:25] lets hope they have a minute for me ;) [07:51] asac: we're close to have ubuntu-it-menu, you said to move bzr repo to ~ubuntu-dev, is it enough to reparent it and adjust entry in debian/control accordingly, or there's something else to do? [07:53] DktrKranz2: the entry in control is already fixed afaik [07:53] you just need to branch volans .ubuntu branch and push that to ~ubuntu-dev instead [07:54] DktrKranz2: please hurry. i thought you already uploaded that yesterday [07:54] ill prod archive admins today to do a last round of NEW processing for ffox extensions ;) [07:55] asac: sure. I'll do right now. [07:55] DktrKranz2: do a last commit on top that reads "* RELEASE VERSION to ubuntu/hardy" [07:55] just adapt changelog date to qualify a commit [07:55] thanks [07:55] thank *you* [07:55] (maybe he still has UNRELEASED in changelog ... switch that to hardy" [07:55] in that commit [07:55] ) [07:55] in a couple of minutes, it will be in NEW [07:55] gogogo :-P [07:56] great [07:56] let me know [07:56] sure [08:02] [reed]: read ... can you test something for me? [08:03] [reed]: personally i ave no issues to use flashplugin without libflashsupport together with ESD(pulseaudio) in hardy [08:03] can you confirm that everything works for you as well? [08:03] fta: ^^ can you please test the behaviour you experience with that combination? [08:03] <[reed]> can't test tonight [08:03] ok [08:03] <[reed]> maybe tomorrow [08:04] * asac joins #ubuntu-testing [08:08] lets see what that channel is worth [08:25] asac: done! [08:25] DktrKranz2: thx [08:26] now it's in the hands of a-a guys [08:37] carlos: morning ;) [08:37] asac: morning [08:37] carlos: looking at the translation page there it reads "Used in firefox in Ubuntu Hardy package "firefox-3.0" by Alexander Sack (asac: 142348) [ubuntumembers] [ubuntu-dev] [ubuntu-bugcontrol] [ubuntu-core-dev] on 2008-04-07" [08:37] asac: all patches are now on production [08:37] does that mean that the template is already imported? [08:38] asac: URL? [08:38] carlos: https://translations.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/xulrunner-1.9/+pots/xulrunner/de/+translate?show=untranslated&start=60 [08:39] every entity is now used by ffox 3 on 7th apr [08:43] asac: that just says that you translated that message [08:43] or that someone uploaded a .po file using your name as the translator [08:44] asac: beta5 is not yet uploaded, though. I'm trying to fix a problem with the import queue (related with oo.org) [08:44] carlos: ok [08:44] and then, beta5 should be imported [08:44] carlos: could we punch in the template at least? [08:45] it don't need translations right now, but getting all strings would help me prepare initial langpacks for b5 [08:45] asac: the problem is the same for template and translations, so I need to fix that problem first (waiting for approval from management people to get that applied) [08:45] ok [08:46] thougth you might influence the import queue to do the template in between processing ooo translations ... but fine [08:50] asac: the problem is that I don't have such direct control [08:50] asac: I need to request raw DB command execution, which is the 'fix' I just requested to speed imports anyway... [08:50] carlos: ah ok. ill stop bothering you then ;) [08:51] sorry [08:51] don't worry, you don't know the internals of our procedures so is not a problem to clarify it to you [09:04] asac: btw, almost all times I visit planet.ubuntu.com my firefox dies [09:04] asac: is that a known bug? [09:04] asac: I'm with Hardy [09:05] carlos: flashplugin-nonfree? [09:05] installed? [09:05] yeah, I have it [09:05] carlos: ok ... good then you are th enext tester ;) [09:06] * carlos hides ... [09:06] please move away your /usr/lib/libflashsupport.so [09:06] :-D [09:06] and see if its gone [09:06] restart everything to be sure [09:06] everything == my session? [09:06] carlos: do you have sound server enabled in sound prefs [09:06] or just be sure that firefox is not really running? [09:06] asac: yes, I do [09:06] carlos: to be safe yes. its important to see that no firefox nor flash is running anymore [09:06] so its not required to restart session [09:07] only instruction i have to rule out any leftovers though [09:07] ok [09:07] 'ps' and 'kill' should help here ;-) [09:07] yeah ... but you never know ;) [09:08] carlos: maybe its also important to see that noone has a file handle open on libflashsupport anymore (but not sure) [09:08] ok [09:08] asac: btw, why does it only happen with planet.ubuntu.com? [09:09] carlos: not sure if its the same issue ... does it help at all? [09:09] it died again [09:10] and lsof doesn't show to me any libflash file open [09:10] then its something different [09:10] asac: the interesting bit is that when I restart firefox [09:10] carlos: start firefox -safe-mode [09:10] Ubuntu's planet loads well [09:11] he? [09:11] the problem seems to be my usual combination of pages [09:11] planet.gnome.org, barrapunto.com, planet.ubuntu.com [09:11] then, crahs! [09:11] asac: should I select any option in that dialog I get from -safe-mode ? [09:12] carlos: no [09:12] let me test [09:13] carlos: i don't see that crash :( [09:14] trying to reproduce it now with the -safe-mode [09:14] ok ... lets wait for that then [09:17] asac: hmm, nothing breaks with -safe-mode [09:17] carlos: ok ... its either an extension or plugin then [09:17] carlos: is flash enabled in -safe-mode? [09:17] can you see flash content? [09:18] asac: given that I removed the library... I don't think so [09:18] but let me check [09:18] carlos: ok, if it really crashed without flash its probably an extension [09:19] what are you using? [09:20] asac: it died again... let me do the other check you asked me... [09:20] asac: firebug and addblocker [09:20] asac: firebug was installed manually not from a package [09:21] asac: safe-mode does include flash plugin [09:21] include == keep enabled? [09:21] carlos: ok we have firebug in a package ... can you try that? [09:21] asac: yes [09:21] even if I removed that library you asked me to remove [09:22] carlos: libflashsupport? [09:22] asac: does it work with firefox 3 ? [09:22] thats not flash thats just the pulse audio fix for it [09:22] carlos: firebug in the archive should work [09:22] asac: I had to manually install it because the package in Ubuntu was not compatible [09:22] asac: ah, ok [09:22] ok, let me check [09:22] asac: btw, should I restore that library? [09:23] carlos: no ... that library is bogus and causes crashes anyway ;) [09:23] so better keep it removed [09:24] carlos: ok, so if hte crash really reappears without -safe-mode it is an extension you can figure by disabling your extension and restarting and trying to reproduce [09:24] asac: I'm installing now the firebug extension from the archive [09:24] great [09:27] same problem with the one from the archive [09:27] * carlos starts disabling extensions... [09:32] asac: seems to work if I disable firebug extension [09:33] intersting [09:33] carlos: maybe it interferes with adblock? [09:33] are you using adblock-plus from the archive? [09:33] (or from addons.mozilla.org) [09:33] adblock-plus over adblock (plain) [09:34] from the archive [09:55] carlos: so does it still crash with firebug enabled, but with adblock disabled? [09:55] sorry, got distracted with something else [09:55] let me check... [09:56] no problem ;) [10:09] asac: yeah, seems to be a problem having adblockplus and firebug enabled at the same time [10:12] carlos: hmm. ok [11:50] asac: just as a followup, I got a crash again with adblockplus disabled and firebug enabled [11:51] asac: so maybe is just firebug [11:51] carlos: ok. thanks for the info. please file one [11:51] not the combination of both [11:51] carlos: do you have a .crash that you could submit? [11:51] where is it stored? [11:51] in /var/crash [11:51] submitting by double clicking would submit it [11:52] oh, the bug reporting tool in Ubuntu found it [11:52] there might be some private data in the coredump obviously, but the bug is private until we reviewed the backtrace and removed the coredump [11:53] that was what I was going to ask you [11:54] will cookies and cached password appear there? [12:12] carlos: they might. apport submitted crashes are private. we can instantly take a look and remove any sensitive parts before we open it up [12:12] ok [12:49] asac: dude, I'm still uploading the core... [13:40] hi [13:40] bug 49613 [13:40] Launchpad bug 49613 in flashplugin-nonfree "flash plugin always rendered on top of html" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/49613 [13:41] asac, any idea why this bug is back ? [13:41] bug 177856 [13:41] Launchpad bug 177856 in nspluginwrapper "Gutsy 64: nspluginwrapper errors with flashplugin-nonfree 9.0.115" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/177856 [13:45] mozilla bug 427385 [13:45] Mozilla bug 427385 in GFX: Thebes "april 6th ff3 trunk crash when opening this huge PNG [XError: 'BadAlloc (insufficient resources for operation)']" [Critical,Assigned] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=427385 [13:51] carlos: please dn't cancel the upload ;) ... otherwise we won't get any backtrace ;) [13:55] fta: i think its your bug and except crashing firefox it just crashes flash leaving a grey area [13:56] ? [13:56] bug 49613 ? [13:56] Launchpad bug 49613 in flashplugin-nonfree "flash plugin always rendered on top of html" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/49613 [13:56] i confirm this one is back [13:57] no you didn't paste that one [13:57] bug 49613 that was never gone. i think its waiting for the fix on flash side [13:57] Launchpad bug 49613 in flashplugin-nonfree "flash plugin always rendered on top of html" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/49613 [13:58] [Thu 14:41] bug 177856 [13:58] ah i misread [13:58] Launchpad bug 177856 in nspluginwrapper "Gutsy 64: nspluginwrapper errors with flashplugin-nonfree 9.0.115" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/177856 [13:58] i read: [13:58] 14:41 < fta> asac, any idea why this bug is back ? [13:58] 14:41 < fta> bug 177856 [13:58] ;) [13:58] k [13:59] strangely, trunk in wine / vista is almost perfect :) [14:00] i expected it to break everywhere (because of wine) but it's clean [14:02] he? [14:02] you mean running firefox 3 .exe? [14:02] yes [14:03] i need to run a windows app needing shockwave, it doesn't work out of the box so i installed ff3 inside wine and let it install shockwave from inside wine [14:04] (as installing directly from the setup.exe didn't work at all) [14:05] it installed fine, yet my app still complain about missing shockwave 10 (i've installed the current one, ie 11) [14:12] asac: I didn't cancel it, but it failed (after more than 30 minutes...) [14:13] carlos: damn ;) [14:13] carlos: you could install xulrunner-1.9-dbgsym and firefox-3.0-dbgsym and run firefox in gdb to get a backtrace as well [14:14] carlos: the apt lines for dbgsym packages is in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProgramCrash [14:14] s/gutsy/hardy/ i guess [14:14] fta: crazy [14:14] ok [14:15] maybe we should drop ffox from distribution and run wine ;) [14:16] asac, i don't need ff3 in wine, i just need a shockwave recognized by a w$ app [14:16] yeah i got that ;) [14:16] still it works which is really great imo [14:18] maybe it's a 64b issue (my laptop) as i don't remember having to do that when I setup the same app on my (32b) desktop months ago [14:20] hmm. yeah does wine run 64b? [14:22] donno [14:22] oops, ff3 crash [14:23] youtube, login, login with google account, boom [14:23] yeah if youtube is involved everything can happen [14:23] if flashsupport is used [14:24] nope, seems to be another nss crash [14:25] fta: can you pleas move libflashsupport.so away and give me an update what works and what not with most recente flash + PA ? [14:25] I've had no crash flash related since yesterday's flash update [14:26] fta: well it works here too [14:28] fta: looking at flashsupport code right now. i think the ssl backtraces you got are really related to flashsupport [14:28] fta: i tried openssl it didn't help for the crashes [14:28] and those are nss symbols [14:28] only thing i could imagine is that flash keeps using file descriptors that are already used somewhere else [14:29] http://paste.ubuntu.com/6699/ [14:29] fta: the ticket that covers our crash in flashssuport is: [14:30] http://www.pulseaudio.org/ticket/225 [14:30] i thought this PORT_ZFree_Util() crash was fixed 2 days ago.. hm [14:31] "Opened 3 months ago" [14:48] damn dbgsym, my upgrade was incomplete [14:54] fta: hmm likely not because of ffox+xul dbgsym? [14:55] i had nss dbgsym from my previous update but not for the last one [15:03] asac, it seems i need backup from a cannonical guy to have dbgsym in ppa [15:03] see #lp [15:04] fta: thats has been frequently requested by other canonical guys alrady. such things take ages [15:04] just read the last few lines.. [15:05] i am not in that channel ... just joined now [15:05] asac, http://paste.ubuntu.com/6700/ [15:13] er, 200+ rss news every 6h those days, I can't cope with that [15:54] fta: ill ask around, but i think that distro team already expressed their interest in this [15:55] ok, thanks [16:21] Volans: hi. i think your extension has been newed [16:22] archive admins pointed out that you ship as GPLv2 or later, but some files are already GPLv3 [16:22] Hi asac, yes, DktrKranz has uploaded it, is in the queuq [16:22] *queue [16:22] Volans: it should already be source newed [16:22] what files are GPL3 ? [16:22] it will get in, but we should upload an update that names the GPLv3 files in debian/copyright or upgrade everything to GPLv3 [16:22] Volans: some .js files [16:24] I'm checking [16:24] Volans: [16:25] 12:36 < seb128> content/ubuntuit files are GPL 3 or newer too [16:25] 12:36 < seb128> chrome/content/ubuntuit files are GPL 3 or newer too [16:25] mmmh I have found! I have copied into any code files the preamble of the GPL license copied from the GPL site that now show the 3 version [16:25] and I have forgot to change the number from 3 to 2, but the link below point to the GPLv2 license... [16:25] Volans: [16:25] 12:35 < seb128> asac: defaults/preferences/ubuntuit.js is GPL 3 or newer, as are build.xml chrome.manifest install.rdf and the debian/copyright says it's GPL 2 or newer [16:26] yeah, I see, ig mistake, my fault, sorry [16:26] How I can solve this? put all in GPL 2 correctly is not possible now? [16:27] Volans: well ... its your decision. either upgrade everything to GPLv3 or later or use GPLv2 everywhere [16:27] Volans: id suggest to use GPLv3 :) [16:27] could someone update adblock-plus, 0.7.5.4 is out upstream [16:28] tell that rainCT [16:28] upgrade .upstream ... merge to .ubuntu and bump the log [16:29] asac: the gnome icon theme that I use is GPL version 2 only [16:29] as I see in /usr/share/doc/gnome-icon-theme/copyright [16:32] Volans: ok. fix the licensing in .upstream to use GPLv2 or later everywhere [16:33] and then merge that over to .ubuntu and bump upstream version with new changelog entry [16:33] thanks [16:33] carlos: maybe the trnaslation tar.gz didn't arrive because it was stuck in queue NEW? [16:34] carlos: its definitly in the uploaded firefox binary changes [16:34] carlos: so maybe its there now? [16:34] (queue is now empty) [16:34] RainCT: i think we can upgrade adblock if we can declare this a mere bug fix release :) [16:35] at best today as the archive is not yet locked [16:35] asac: did you upload an update? [16:35] carlos: no ... the last firefox upload [16:35] asac: any licensing issues with ubuntu-it-menu? a-a accepted it, so probably it's ok for them ATM [16:35] i referred to [16:35] carlos: i just wanted to point out that it might have been stuck i nQUEUE for a day or two ... so maybe it arrived later than xulrunner [16:36] DktrKranz2: they complained about the GPLv3 GPLv2 mix and accepted it based on the promise that we fix it [16:36] asac: let me check... [16:36] DktrKranz2: and it now turned out that GPLv3 is not ok because of GPLv2 only of icon theme :( [16:37] asac: ah... do they want to be fixed right now, or we can dalay to new upstream? [16:37] DktrKranz2: we should fix the .upstream branch, bump the upstream version and merge that to ubuntu branch to bake a new upload [16:37] so its a minor new upsream bump [16:37] and we should do that now (in cooperation with Volans) [16:38] and just to fix licensing issues, so I guess it won't hurt motu-release [16:38] yes, I can update the .upstream and .ubuntu branches in a few minutes [16:38] DktrKranz2: they delagated the approval to me [16:38] for extensions [16:38] Volans: yeah. just remember to use bzr merge ../*upstream in the .ubuntu branch ;) [16:39] but i guess you know how to merge :) [16:39] thanks [16:39] asac: ah, right. I forgot. [16:39] asac: no, it didn't appear [16:40] carlos: pitti said that its a problem on your side because its in .changes [16:40] let me search for the changes uploaded [16:40] carlos: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/13136097/firefox-3.0_3.0~b5%2Bnobinonly-0ubuntu1_i386.changes [16:40] ad96449821055225ed3702820e885aa7 34922 raw-translations - firefox-3.0_3.0~b5+nobinonly-0ubuntu1_i386_translations.tar.gz [16:40] hmm [16:41] asac: well, I don't see it in people.ubuntu.com/~lamont/translations [16:41] and that's from buildd [16:41] carlos: how does it get there? [16:41] before we really get it in Launchpad [16:41] asac: some 'magic' from buildd [16:41] ok lets ask lamont then i guess ;) [16:41] I don't know that process [16:42] asac: I know that we had a bug in Launchpad that was ignoring .xpi files [16:42] that's already fixed on production [16:42] carlos: ok. lets see if he has an idea [16:42] i prodded him in -devel now [16:42] so next upload should show it if we really are getting it from buildd [16:42] ok [16:46] carlos: oh the ffox template was imported? [16:46] ? [16:46] i have "red" section on translation page again (which wasn't there before) [16:46] hmm .. .maybe not. [16:46] just confused [16:47] asac: what you suggest for the license due to the fact that gnome-icons are GPL 2 only. Is better that I release my code under GPL 2 only or GPL 2 and newer? and the global package can ge gpl 2 or newer or must be gpl 2 only? [16:48] Volans: definitly "or later" [16:48] only is always a lock in and removed flexibility without reason [16:48] ok, for my cose I use the standard form: "either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version." [16:48] asac: this is what you should care of: https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/firefox-3.0/+imports [16:48] you can use GPL 2 or later ... the icons will make it implicitly GPL 2 only ... but if you switch icons they will be GPL or later [16:48] s/cose/code/ [16:48] argh, CVS is a mess :/ [16:48] asac: until it's not empty or with the entries in 'Imported' it's not yet handled [16:49] Volans: maybe name the icons that are GPLv2 only explicitly (like exception) [16:49] quite all the icons are GPL2 only.... :( [16:49] carlos: ok :( [16:49] carlos: i desperately need those ;( [16:49] * asac whining mode [16:49] thanks [16:50] asac: we already fixed the problem with oo.org [16:50] Volans: yes. thats a shame, and probably due to folks not knowing what they are doing [16:50] asac: so it's just now a matter of wait for the queue to handle those [16:50] Volans: but you have to accept their decision :) [16:55] ok off for a while travelling the world :) [16:55] be back later [16:55] Volans: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-it-menu/1.0.6-0ubuntu1 [17:02] any idea why the version file in adblock-plus's CVS still says 0.7.5.3 (http://www.mozdev.org/source/browse/adblockplus/src/version?rev=1.27;content-type=text%2Fplain) ? [17:02] (s/any idea/is that normal) [17:03] donno, on AMO, it's 0.7.5.4 [17:03] fta: yes, on adblockplus.org too, but not on the CVS [17:03] or at least on the versions file [17:03] perhaps they just forgot to change it there.. [17:09] asac: btw, adblock-plus is also compatible with Thunderbird. Do we want the package to work with it? [17:09] oh, the latest flash update was a security update. hmm. http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2008/04/security-update-for-adobe-flash-plugin/ [18:02] asac: I have uploaded to upstream the files with the correct license preamble, due to the GPLv2 only for Gnome icons I have changed the LICENSE file, can you see it here: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~volans/firefox-extensions/ubuntu-it-menu.upstream [18:02] maybe can you check it? [18:49] asac, fta: bug 215201 [18:49] Launchpad bug 215201 in adblock-plus "New adblock-plus version: 0.7.5.4" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/215201 [18:54] RainCT, no debdiff ? [18:54] (debian/* only) [18:56] RainCT: i added the info about FFe bug to bug [18:56]