[00:00] <gnomefreak> they have to change code anyway since rc1 should say that in help and on top panel
[00:00] <gnomefreak> so in theory the code is gonna change anyway
[00:01] <gnomefreak> weather they call it final or rc2 noone knows until they do it
[00:01] <gnomefreak> but i agree 100% that bug is  a blocker
[00:02] <gnomefreak> ok rc1 is gonna be blessed final as in it wont be branded as rc
[00:03] <gnomefreak> i think that is where the original post came from
[00:03] <gnomefreak> so they were just talking within the build being branded as final :)
[00:05] <gnomefreak> ok back to work around here so i can get to sleep tonight
[01:43] <danage> hello! you will hate this question, but is there an ETA to fix flash?
=== asac_ is now known as asac
[07:26] <futtta> morning all
[07:31] <futtta> quick question: i noticed ff3b5 in hardy is faster then ff3rc1 from mozilla in the sunspider tests. is this because the hardy ff3b5 has been optimized?
[07:34] <futtta> no-one awaky? :)
[07:35] <futtta> awake that is
[08:05] <asac> futtta: it is?
[08:05] <asac> interesting
[08:05] <asac> maybe its because b5 still used jemalloc
[08:13] <mconnor> we turned off jemalloc on Linux?
[08:13] <futtta> back
[08:14] <futtta> asac; yep, according to a quick-and-dirty test i did anyhow
[08:14] <futtta> cfr. http://blog.futtta.be/2008/05/19/firefox-3rc1-shines-in-javascript-benchmark/
[08:14] <mconnor> hmm
=== fta2 is now known as fta
[08:14] <mconnor> oh
[08:14] <mconnor> asac: what' gcc are you guys shipping?
[08:15] <mconnor> 4.3 is supposed to be about 10% faster than the 4.1 we're using
[08:16] <mconnor> futtta: about:buildconfig in b5?
[08:17] <asac> mconnor: not sure if you turned jemalloc off ... at least its not linked statically into libxul anymore
[08:17] <mconnor> oh, didn't we fix that for you guys?
[08:17] <asac> right. but in b5 we still kept it enabled
[08:17] <asac> well .. at that point it was still linked in
[08:18] <asac> in hardy we have gcc (GCC) 4.2.3 (Ubuntu 4.2.3-2ubuntu7)
[08:18] <asac> in intrepid (current development) its 4.3
[08:18] <mconnor> hmm
[08:18] <mconnor> that's still going to be faster
[08:18] <mconnor> 4.1 kinda sucked
[08:19] <asac> yes. afaik ew somewhat skipped 4.1
[08:21] <asac> futtta: could you try the preview of RC1 we have in https://edge.launchpad.net/~fta/+archive to see if the performance gap is gone?
[08:21] <futtta> mconnor: i'm at work now, but i'll reboot into ubuntu later today to check about:buildconfig
[08:21] <futtta> asac: same, i'll check that later today
[08:21] <asac> thanks
[08:22] <asac> let us know
[08:22] <fta> we have issues with mozilla tools built with gcc 4.3 in intrepid. See the bottom of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CompilerFlags
[08:23] <asac> yeah .... but those compiler flags were added by ubuntu to improve security mostly
[08:24] <mconnor> futtta: its ok, 4.2.3 would explain it
[08:24] <fta> asac, yet it shows issues either in xul or in libc
[08:24] <asac> right
[08:25] <asac> i guess we should get a backtrace with debug symbols from it
[08:25] <mconnor> if there's an upstream bug, bsmedberg is pretty decent about fixing stuff like that
[08:25] <fta> those are aborts, not crashes
[08:26] <asac> right
[08:26] <asac> buffer overflow ;)
[08:26] <mconnor> and, really, one wonders if we should use those flags ourselves
[08:26] <fta> the 1st abort has a decent trace, the other aborts had corrupted stacks
[08:26] <mconnor> but I don't know how well supported they are
[08:27] <asac> mconnor: i can try to get our security guy in contact with you ... or with whoever is best suiteable to discuss this
[08:27] <asac> s/try//
[08:44] <futtta> some people seem to be arriving on my blog when searching for 'ubuntu firefox 3rc1' in google, what are the plans on pushing rc1 to hardy-users?
[08:44] <asac> futtta: working on it .... takes quite a bit of QA to do this transition obviously
[08:46] <futtta> that makes sense :)
[08:47] <asac> futtta: basically the ffox and xul bits are ready, but we still need to transition some rdepends as it breaks ABI and translations
[08:47] <wgrant> asac: Are fta's the most officially blessed packages? I might as well upgrade and try to break things.
[08:47] <wgrant> asac: Oh dear, please don't tell me xulrunner broke ABI....
[08:47] <asac> wgrant: we dont really encourage to use them if you are not a developer
[08:48] <asac> but otherwise yes. those are more or less the most officially blessed packages we have from the mozillateam that track the trunk
[08:48] <wgrant> I was in ~motu last time I checked. Or do you mean Mozilla devs?
[08:51] <asac> wgrant: no thats fine. just remember to check here if you see wierd things
[08:51] <asac> ok  moving to another room
[08:52] <wgrant> asac: Of course.
[08:59] <[reed]> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=434592
[08:59] <ubottu> Mozilla bug 434592 in Phishing Protection "Safe browsing doesn't work on libxul-sdk builds" [Major,New]
[09:03] <wgrant> The AwesomeBar seems faster.
[09:05] <mconnor> wgrant: it probably is
[09:06] <mconnor> also, breaking ABI between beta and final, well...
[09:24] <e-gandalf> hi
[09:30] <e-gandalf> [reed]: ping
[09:31] <[reed]> e-gandalf: pong
[09:31] <e-gandalf> will you help me write a short summary of the SSO idea for weave team?
[09:32] <[reed]> for .moz or ubuntu.net stuff?
[09:33] <e-gandalf> yea
[09:36] <e-gandalf> and if you're attending the mozilla upstream talk?
[09:36] <e-gandalf> I could you some help here too
[09:43] <[reed]> e-gandalf: yeah, I'm in the Mozilla upstream talk
[09:43] <[reed]> if you have questions for your current talk, you can ask here, and I can try to answer
[09:44] <e-gandalf> well, I'm just planning to write up a short summary of each talk for our team
[09:44] <e-gandalf> what was there important for Mozilla, what have we learnt
[09:44] <e-gandalf> etc
[09:44] <e-gandalf> I'm in the SSO talk right now
[09:44] <e-gandalf> but it's not too active I must say
[09:44] <e-gandalf> they probably discussed it yesterday
[09:45] <[reed]> yeah
[09:46] <[reed]> two hour talk