[00:01] <asac> hmm
[00:02] <asac> most likely a good topic to ask during platform/foundations team meeting tomorrow ;)
[00:02] <asac> or well ... not ask, but reraise that this still isnt fixed
[00:02] <fta> ?
[00:03] <fta> asac, which topic ?
[00:04] <asac> lcd
[00:05] <fta> the bug above is fixed, i'm trying to fix fontconfig as apparently, the problem is there, not in cairo
[00:06] <fta> well, cairo assigned a different value compared to our patch so we need to tweak fontconfig to restore our old behavior, or rewrite the font pref UI
[00:08] <asac> fta: yes. fontconfig is supposed to get better support for upstream dropped patches
[00:10] <fta> fta@ix:~ $ lsof -np 2665 | grep -c /tmp/jemalloc
[00:10] <fta> 215
[00:11] <fta> a few sec after a restart
[00:12] <fta> asac, is it me or is this ugly: http://paste.ubuntu.com/47606/
[00:13] <fta> i mean, patches *and* direct in-source changes
[00:14] <kgoetz> morning all
[00:14] <asac> kgoetz: night
[00:15] <kgoetz> hah.
[00:23] <asac> kgoetz: this guy is ridiculous
[00:24] <asac> i ate tons of bits yesterday to finally upload a iceowl which fixes all outstanding RC things
[00:24] <asac> and had a glitch in a maintainer script
[00:24] <asac> one minute later someone posts a debdiff for the trivial fix and says "i will NMU this ..."
[00:24] <kgoetz> asac: was iceowl one of the packages hit by the buidd bug?
[00:24] <asac> yeah
[00:24] <asac> i ate tons of uploads yesterday
[00:25] <kgoetz> asac: ouch, thats a bit ... yeah. pity theres only /so much/ smacking you can do
[00:25] <asac> i admit that the package is in bad state ... but that is just provocation. especially since i am always in #debian-devel
[00:25] <asac> well. i thought it was a problem on my side
[00:25] <asac> first upload failed
[00:25] <asac> second upload aborted (dcut yay)
[00:25] <asac> third upload claimed that the bits are already there
[00:26] <asac> dcut uploaded again
[00:26] <asac> (failed because there were no bits)
[00:26] <asac> bumped version to 0.8-5;)
[00:26] <asac> and everytime uploading all the heavyweight mozilla bits ;)
[00:26] <asac> (including binaries of course)
[00:27]  * kgoetz should check if 0.8-5 changelog has a rude comment about buildds in it ;)
[00:28] <asac> hehe
[00:28] <asac> no
[00:28] <asac> i didnt
[00:28] <asac> i still thought it was all my fault
[00:28] <asac> oh right
[00:28] <asac> first upload aborted in the middle of the upload
[00:28] <asac> then dcut
[00:28] <asac> then i uploaded with "sid" as distribution ;)
[00:28] <asac> which apparently broke the queue :)
[00:28] <asac> at least it failed like that upload broke the queue ;)
[00:29] <asac> s/failed/feeled/
[00:30] <kgoetz> hehehehe -> < asac> which apparently broke the queue :)
[00:30] <kgoetz> i'm sure i'm in here just for the stories ;)
[00:30] <kgoetz> asac: i'm starting to think i should upgrade to testing/sid now.
[00:31] <asac> hehe
[00:31] <asac> i wish i still had a debian install :) ... i am breathing through chroots until i find time to resurrect my system ;)
[00:32] <kgoetz> do you hae hardware to put the install on, or do you vm it?
[00:33] <kgoetz> atm i'm the other way around - i only have etch, everyware, and i do any ubuntu bits in chroots.
[00:33] <asac> kgoetz: i want to put it on real hardware. but i also have a VM ... which is broken since i upgraded to intrepid
[00:33] <kgoetz> s/ubuntu/ubuntu and gnewsense/
[00:33] <asac> not sure if i can ever resurrect that
[00:34] <kgoetz> you upgraded the host, and the vm died? thats a bit ... nasty
[00:35] <asac> yeah. the host doesnt have a compatible module anymore
[00:35] <asac> at least even when i build that with module-assistant and load it
[00:35] <asac> it still complains about that
[00:35] <asac> most likely they just broken something
[00:35] <asac> i should actually file a bug about that
[00:38] <kgoetz> just NMU it  :p
[00:39] <asac> he
[00:39] <asac> its in ubuntu
[00:39] <asac> or is vm host the vm system
[00:39] <asac> then i mixed that up
[00:39] <asac> my bug is: "i cannot start debian in VM anymore" ;)
[00:39] <asac> because VM cannot start anything ;)
[00:39] <kgoetz> hehehe
[00:40] <asac> at least nothing that was setup before
[00:41]  * kgoetz afk - works just found work for me to do :\
[00:48] <asac> oh dear
[00:48] <asac> didnt know that the flashplugin-nonfree postinst is _such_ a mess
[00:53] <fta> lcd issue fixed for me
[00:53] <fta> :)
[01:29] <fta> maybe not completely, filter is active now, but it's not as before, maybe cairo after all
[01:30] <asac> maybe _before_ was wrong ;)
[01:32] <fta> i was happy before, now, regular text looks good but bold text is blurry
[03:37] <wgrant> Do I read Mitchell's blog correctly? They gave in?
[08:36] <[reed]> wgrant: "gave in"?
[08:36] <[reed]> such poor choice of wording
[08:36] <[reed]> and wrong, too
[08:38] <[reed]> just trying to do a more innovative method of explaining the terms/license as well as the service-specific rights/agreements
[08:39] <wgrant> I'm not sure I'd call that innovation.
[08:39] <[reed]> there's more to come
[08:40] <wgrant> Displaying the EULA was innovative within the FLOSS world.
[08:41] <[reed]> there's nothing wrong with the EULA itself if you actually read it
[08:41] <wgrant> WHAT DID YOU SAY?
[08:41] <wgrant> THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT, RIGHT.
[08:41] <[reed]> all these complaints about the EULA making Firefox non-free are silly
[08:41] <[reed]> and please stop shouting
[08:42] <gnomefreak> [reed]: is there a link to the EULA for Mozilla?
[08:42] <wgrant> I never asserted it was non-free.
[08:42] <[reed]> gnomefreak: sure, www.mozilla.com/legal/eula/
[08:42] <wgrant> The EULA shouts at me, I'll shout at people who says the EULA is fine.
[08:42] <[reed]> wgrant: yeah, well, the HTML version of the EULA uses bold
[08:42] <wgrant> It's not non-free, but it's not fine.
[08:42] <[reed]> instead of all caps
[08:43] <gnomefreak> [reed]: thanks, and i dont condicer it free software i think its more "restricted" than "free"
[08:43] <[reed]> not sure why or how Canonical got their copy
[08:43] <[reed]> of the EULA they used
[08:43] <wgrant> gnomefreak: It's certainly leaning towards restricted.
[08:43] <[reed]> since that's clearly not the right one for HTML
[08:43] <[reed]> (I should know... I put those EULA pages together myself) ;)
[08:43] <wgrant> I daresay that's not something to admit to.
[08:45] <[reed]> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/legal/eula/firefox3-en.html <-- that's probably what Canonical should have used
[08:45] <[reed]> anyway, EULA is being changed
[08:45]  * gnomefreak waits to read it but as i understand it is about not being able to use branding if source is modified
[08:45] <[reed]> well
[08:45] <[reed]> gnomefreak: correct
[08:45] <[reed]> it's mostly about trademarks, normal MPL stuff, and other services (like safe browsing)
[08:45] <wgrant> Why do our users need to see that?
[08:45] <gnomefreak> [reed]: than what is the issue, doesnt MPL pretty much state that?
[08:45] <wgrant> Normal MPL stuff doesn't need to be there.
[08:46] <wgrant> The other services are legitimate issues.
[08:46] <wgrant> They do need to be displayed somewhere.
[08:46] <[reed]> MPL doesn't mention the trademark stuff either (as far as how it's being used here)
[08:46] <[reed]> afaik, that is... been a little while since I read the entire MPL
[08:46] <[reed]> IANAL :)
[08:47] <[reed]> wgrant: users need to be made aware of their rights (and non-rights, I guess)
[08:47] <gnomefreak> If you do not agree to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, do not click the "Accept" button, and do not install or use any part of the Mozilla Firefox Browser.
[08:48] <wgrant> [reed]: Trademarks don't affect people who don't modify, do they?
[08:48] <gnomefreak> that really doesnt work for Ubuntu
[08:48] <wgrant> And people who modify should be looking further than the start page.
[08:48] <wgrant> gnomefreak: Lies! It's FINE! FINE I TELL YOU!
[08:49] <gnomefreak> wgrant: in Ubuntu you install firefox than first launch it gives you the EULA
[08:49] <gnomefreak> oos
[08:49] <gnomefreak> [reed]: ^^^
[08:49] <[reed]> wgrant: if you are using the browser branded "Firefox" with unmodified source, you don't have to worry about the trademark, as you're not breaking any laws
[08:49] <wgrant> [reed]: Right.
[08:49] <dholbert> gnomefreak: s/Ubuntu/Ubuntu 8.10 alpha/
[08:50] <[reed]> wgrant: people still need to be made aware, though, as we take our trademark seriously
[08:50] <wgrant> So why do our users need to be tortured with the legalese if they're not going to be affected even by this overly-restrictive trademark enforcement?
[08:50] <[reed]> they are affected... it means they can't modify the source and redist it as Firefox
[08:50] <gnomefreak> dholbert: its not just intrepid
[08:51] <gnomefreak> its FF3 not Ubuntu
[08:51] <wgrant> [reed]: But I can't distribute my modified version without agreeing to the MPL and other legalise.
[08:51] <wgrant> s/legalise/legalese/
[08:51] <wgrant> So it should be presented there.
[08:51] <wgrant> Not elsewhere.
[08:51] <dholbert> gnomefreak: If i understand correctly, it's specifically Intrepid's way of packaging FF3
[08:51] <[reed]> dholbert: not really
[08:52] <[reed]> it's Canonical's custom extension
[08:52] <gnomefreak> dholbert: its not Ubuntu its mozilla
[08:52] <dholbert> gnomefreak: RE "not just intrepid" -- I'm running hardy right now, and if I make a new profile & run "firefox-3.0" in it, no EULA pops up
[08:52] <[reed]> Canonical modified its "ubufox" to display the EULA in this way, as Firefox itself doesn't have the capabilities to display the EULA in a tab
[08:52] <gnomefreak> [reed]: cant be ubuntu since other distros have smae thing and i saw it in my hardy install with ff3a4
[08:52] <[reed]> dholbert: yes, Ubuntu disabled the EULA
[08:52] <[reed]> which was wrong
[08:53] <[reed]> if you get rid of ubufox
[08:53] <[reed]> it'll show it
[08:53] <[reed]> I think
[08:53] <dholbert> ah, interesting
[08:53] <[reed]> gnomefreak: the EULA popup is very different from what happened with Intrepid's Firefox
[08:53] <[reed]> they are two different display types of the EULA
[08:53] <wgrant> Ooh, those evil Canonical people. Disabling a EULA which can legally be disabled. How dare they.
[08:53] <gnomefreak> [reed]: maybe not show it but i would have to try it to be for sure
[08:54] <[reed]> wgrant: it can't be legally disabled
[08:54] <[reed]> not without disabling safe browsing, that is
[08:54] <wgrant> [reed]: The code isn't released under the dreaded EULA, is it?
[08:54] <[reed]> "the code"?
[08:54] <[reed]> you mean Firefox source?
[08:54] <[reed]> or safe browsing?
[08:54] <[reed]> or what?
[08:54] <[reed]> Firefox source is tri-licensed
[08:55] <[reed]> MPL/GPL/LGPL
[08:55] <wgrant> The Firefox source.
[08:55] <wgrant> I'm quite aware.
[08:55] <wgrant> None of those say that I can't remove the EULA.
[08:55] <[reed]> if you are using a product called Firefox, you have to agree to the EULA
[08:55] <wgrant> And we don't use the MoCo binaries. I hope.
[08:56] <wgrant> So there is an arbitrary restriction that users of the trademark must present the EULA. Great.
[08:56] <[reed]> you're not using the direct MoCo binaries, but Canonical is under agreement with Mozilla on the use of the Firefox trademark
[08:56] <[reed]> etc.
[08:56] <[reed]> wgrant: Things will get better soon, I promise you. :)
[08:57] <dholbert> yup.  this will all be pretty moot soon I hope
[08:57] <wgrant> [reed]: Better how?
[08:57] <Jazzva> [reed], if I understood you correctly, the unbranded version has to show EULA too because of the safe browsing feature?
[08:57] <[reed]> Jazzva: no, that was a bug, which has been fixed
[08:58] <dholbert> [reed]: fixed as in safe browsing is disabled in unbranded versions, since they haven't agreed to EULA?
[08:58] <[reed]> wgrant: A much more innovative way of dealing with the rights/non-rights that come with the Firefox name is coming.
[08:58] <Jazzva> [reed], ok, thanks :)
[08:58] <[reed]> dholbert: no, safe browsing is still active, but the EULA isn't displayed
[08:58] <dholbert> [reed]: how does that work legally then?
[08:58] <[reed]> (I don't know how that works legally)
[08:58] <dholbert> haha
[08:58] <[reed]> lol
[08:58] <dholbert> k
[08:58] <[reed]> you can read the bug if it helps
[08:59] <[reed]> mozilla bug 443918
[08:59] <wgrant> [reed]: I'm not sure I like the idea of calling new ways of imposing braindead restrictions innovativ.
[08:59] <gnomefreak> Jazzva: mostly just the branding if used branding if you change branding you have to change name of it as well
[08:59] <Jazzva> [reed], and what about this "it can't be legally disabled not without disabling safe browsing, that is"?
[08:59] <dholbert> Jazzva: I just asked that :) we're not sure how that works legally
[08:59] <gnomefreak> [reed]: how do you remember bugs
[09:00] <Jazzva> dholbert, ah. I missed it. Sorry, woke up few minutes ago :)
[09:00] <[reed]> gnomefreak: I don't. I have a good memory for parts of the summary, and both my e-mail client and the awesome bar help me out a lot.
[09:00] <[reed]> ;)
[09:00] <gnomefreak> it should ask during install so you have choice to install it or use abrowser
[09:00] <gnomefreak> [reed]: ah
[09:00] <gnomefreak> cheater
[09:01] <wgrant> gnomefreak: No, it shouldn't do that. It shouldn't need to do that. That is a compromise.
[09:01] <[reed]> wgrant: again, please be patient. More information will come within the next few days that I think you will find sufficient.
[09:01] <[reed]> :)
[09:02] <[reed]> don't think of MoCo as some big corporate entity where everybody is a lawyer and that we all hate Linux, because that just isn't true
[09:02] <wgrant> [reed]: It seems Mozilla Corporation felt it would be sufficient to impose lovely legalese on everyone. I don't think it likely that what MoCo suggests might be sufficient is.
[09:02] <[reed]> wgrant: Canonical wasn't supposed to use that particular legalese that was used
[09:03] <[reed]> that was an error (on somebody's part -- dunno if Canonical or MoCo)
[09:03] <[reed]> a new EULA was being written
[09:03] <wgrant> [reed]: Even the revised one isn't great.
[09:03] <[reed]> yeah, well
[09:03] <[reed]> a better idea is coming up shortly :)
[09:03] <gnomefreak> wgrant: it gives user choice if they want to agree to it if they feel they dont want to they should beable to choose a browser they want instead. but installing ff than when first start you disagree to it firefox has some depends that are needed in Ubuntu (removing ff remove yelp and fried as well
[09:04] <wgrant> gnomefreak: Yes, but that is a compromise. It shouldn't be necessary in the first place.
[09:04] <asac> hi
[09:05] <wgrant> Evening asac.
[09:07] <gnomefreak> brb smoke but mozilla wont change it either we drop Mozilla(bad idea) or we should have choice during install either in d-i or during install of package if it really is ubufox that can be changed AFAIK if it is just Ubuntu. but i thought mozilla decided it should be shown. like i said removing firefox removes alot of needed packages (last i heard 6 or so) one eing ubuntu-desktop. if you have to reinstall *-desktop package than ff
[09:07] <gnomefreak> brb smoke
[09:07]  * asac reading backlog
[09:08] <wgrant> gnomefreak: No, I have no Firefox branding on my system.
[09:08] <wgrant> I have ubuntu-desktop installed.
[09:08] <wgrant> Anything that needs Firefox installed is a bug.
[09:10] <asac> wgrant: its a bug that it gets displayed with 100%-free branding
[09:11] <[reed]> asac: which has been fixed, as of today! :)
[09:11] <[reed]> (and has absolutely nothing to do with the recent Ubuntu fiasco, for the conspiracy theorists out there)
[09:11] <wgrant> asac: I'm aware; I filed it and cjwatson assigned it hours later.
[09:12] <[reed]> wgrant: Canonical didn't fix it...
[09:12] <[reed]> we fixed it
[09:12] <[reed]> upstream
[09:13] <wgrant> [reed]: I didn't debate that. I just said that I filed the bug in Ubuntu and it was assigned by a god some hours later, thus proving that it was actually a bug.
[09:13] <gnomefreak> ill cheaking but i thought abrowser help>about still lists it as Mozilla Firefoxbut cheaking
[09:13] <gnomefreak> nevermind
[09:13] <wgrant> gnomefreak: It mentions the Firefox trademarks as being trademarks, but it doesn't use the Firefox logo.
[09:13] <gnomefreak> wait yes it does
[09:13] <gnomefreak> wgrant: yep
[09:13] <[reed]> wgrant: sure, we (Mozilla) didn't dispute it was a bug
[09:14] <gnomefreak> and i would rather it use abrowser instead of web browser if we keep abrowser as name of package
[09:17] <gnomefreak> but i do agree if we cant prompt user aaat install (d-i or install package) should be able to decline or have a choice.
[09:17] <gnomefreak> maybe ubuntu-desktop depends on xulrunner instead of ff now
[09:18]  * gnomefreak hates broken packages that are not held back
[09:18]  * gnomefreak goes to look for mvo
[09:28] <armin76> lolz, what happened? :D
[09:28]  * armin76 blames asac 
[09:31] <gnomefreak> yay i might get a package in debian ;)
[09:33]  * gnomefreak has to learn debian's bug tracker 
[09:38] <asac> armin76: back from holiday ?
[09:38] <armin76> lol
[09:38] <armin76> i read it :P
[09:38] <armin76> i just woke up
[09:39] <armin76> see, that happens when everyone uses a distro :D
[09:40] <armin76> it was about time ubuntu did same as debian :)
[09:41] <gnomefreak> Jazzva: asac are we pakaging non-free extensions? im temped to not package them
[09:41] <[reed]> armin76: did you see http://quotes.burntelectrons.org/3976 ?
[09:42] <Jazzva> gnomefreak, non-free? I think not...
[09:42] <Jazzva> gnomefreak, what is non-free about it?
[09:42] <gnomefreak> non-free as in its not opensource
[09:42] <gnomefreak> Jazzva: foxmarks
[09:43] <Jazzva> gnomefreak, I don't think we can package that.
[09:43] <gnomefreak> i figurd since im doing it for debian i would add it to us but i just heard its not opensource
[09:43] <Jazzva> gnomefreak, what we could do is to do something like flashplugin-nonfree. Make a script to download the xpi and install it. But I don't think it's a good idea to package something like that
[09:43] <gnomefreak> Jazzva: ok thanks i will ask on the debian bug but im going to recommend not to package it
[09:44] <armin76> [reed]: yup
[09:44] <gnomefreak> Jazzva: updated too soon
[09:44] <Jazzva> ok
[09:44] <gnomefreak> so i will tell him we rather not
[09:44] <Jazzva> off to school... see you later
[10:13] <gnomefreak> bug 270073
[10:18] <Cimi_> kwwii told me he asked you for the firefox patch to have rounded entry. I would like to be informed when it will be applied so I will add some fixes in the gtk+ engines
[10:18] <asac> i Cimi_
[10:18] <asac> hi
[10:18] <asac> ;)
[10:18] <Cimi_> hi asac ;)
[10:18] <asac> well. that bug is currently milestoned for beta
[10:18] <asac> so i will look at that once alpha-6 is out
[10:21] <asac> Cimi_: did ken give you the bug id?
[10:22] <Cimi_> if you could poke me when it is merged, it would be simpler :)
[10:22] <gnomefreak> i think we should drop mozilla-bookmarksftp since they dont update it often, im looking into what can replace it with more oftrn updated upstream and provides same/more features so we dont lose anything.
[10:31] <asac> Cimi_: i most likely will forget
[10:31] <asac> Cimi_: subscribing to bug is easier to not forget :)
[10:32] <asac> gnomefreak: so 3.0 still not supported for bookmarksftp?
[10:33] <gnomefreak> asac: havent tried it but i can today or tomorrow but its still an old version
[10:33] <gnomefreak> im looking at the wiki atm to fill in details and see what is next on my list
[10:34] <gnomefreak> isnt beagle add on for mozilla already in repos?
[10:34] <gnomefreak> mozilla-beagle - Beagle extension for Firefox
[10:35] <gnomefreak> why would we want http://beagle-project.org/Main_Page
[10:38] <asac> gnomefreak: sounds like an interesting project
[10:38] <gnomefreak> asac: as we should have both?
[10:39] <asac> what is bookmarksftp about?
[10:39] <asac> do we have a similar page?
[10:39] <asac> for that?
[10:39] <gnomefreak> asac: its a bookmark sync extension
[10:39] <asac> thats a different use-case then what beagle provides. isnt it?
[10:40] <gnomefreak> asac: not bookmarksftp but mozilla-beagle - Beagle extension for Firefox
[10:40] <gnomefreak> asac: someone wwanted to have a simulur package
[10:40] <asac> gnomefreak: right. but you asked "do we want both"
[10:40] <asac> gnomefreak: which?
[10:40] <gnomefreak> beagle
[10:41] <asac> he?
[10:41] <asac> isnt mozilla-beagle the same?
[10:41] <gnomefreak> we have mozilla-beagle - Beagle extension for Firefox in repos someone wanted to add beagle-project.org in repos as well
[10:41] <asac> maybe it just doesnt work on ffox 3 yet and thats what the user asks?
[10:41] <asac> i fail to see that those are two different projects
[10:41] <asac> do they have the same name but different project pages?
[10:42] <asac> do we have an url for the mozilla-beagle project?
[10:42] <gnomefreak> yes
[10:43] <gnomefreak> asac: not atm but let me see if i can find it but here is the beagle addon that he wants to add ok wtf
[10:43] <gnomefreak> please see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Extensions/List#preview look at sugested extensions for beagle. he used beagle as source package
[10:44] <gnomefreak> its the same this
[10:44] <gnomefreak> the exact same thing
[10:44] <asac> ok. then its just confusion
[10:44] <gnomefreak> i am removing it
[10:44] <asac> does beagle work in ffox 3 for us?
[10:45] <gnomefreak> asac: i dont know i havent seena bug that it doesnt
[10:45] <asac> or is that something we have to look into? the project sounds interesting and i would love to be sure it works
[10:46] <gnomefreak> asac: no we shouldnt need to since its in repos already ive never used it nor do i use beagle at all its slows my pc down way too much
[10:46] <gnomefreak> https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/beagle
[10:48] <gnomefreak> i dont see any reason for it to be under suggeste extensions if its part of beagle and in repos for a while
[10:48] <gnomefreak> if it doesnt work it falls under ubuntu-mono team (anyone can work on it but they are maintainers of it
[10:48] <gnomefreak> )
[11:09] <gnomefreak> is there a way to just download a firefox extensions from the addons.mozilla site? i want .xpi but i dont want to install it just download
[11:10] <gnomefreak> the website just makes you go to addons page to download
[11:10] <asac> gnomefreak: you can usually right click on the link and say: "save as ..."
[11:10] <gnomefreak> if i do it downloads a file with the addon number
[11:12] <gnomefreak> yep just a text file
[11:12] <IntuitiveNipple> grab the URL and use wget?
[11:12] <gnomefreak> IntuitiveNipple: tried
[11:12] <gnomefreak> IntuitiveNipple: same thing
[11:12] <IntuitiveNipple> gnomefreak: can you give an example page URL I can try from?
[11:13] <gnomefreak> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/424
[11:13] <gnomefreak> thats the one i want
[11:13] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: can I test your brain with a PPA build failure for xulrunner-1.9 that builds okay in a pbuilder?
[11:13] <gnomefreak> Length: unspecified [text/html]
[11:14] <gnomefreak> IntuitiveNipple: did you upload mozilla-devscripts?
[11:14] <gnomefreak> you need it or PPA fails to build due to depends not met
[11:14] <IntuitiveNipple> gnomefreak: http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/addons/424/wizz_rss_news_reader-3.0.0.2-fx.xpi
[11:14] <gnomefreak> i havent gotten around fixing that in my PPA yet
[11:15] <gnomefreak> where did you get that?
[11:15] <gnomefreak> IntuitiveNipple: nope it didnt work
[11:16] <gnomefreak> wait it should be a folder not a file right?
[11:16] <IntuitiveNipple> gnomefreak: Would they cause the problem with it reporting "debian/rules:148: *** EM_TRANSLATION_VERSION=1.9.0.1 LOCALE_VERSION=1.9.0.2+build3+nobinonly-0ubuntu2ppa1h" at the very end of the packaging process?
[11:16] <IntuitiveNipple> gnomefreak: It worked here with wget
[11:16] <gnomefreak> IntuitiveNipple: is it a file or folder?
[11:16] <IntuitiveNipple> gnomefreak: An .xpi file
[11:16] <gnomefreak> its a file here (white not green in color
[11:16] <IntuitiveNipple> gnomefreak: 11:14:47 (139.54 KB/s) - `wizz_rss_news_reader-3.0.0.2-fx.xpi' saved [222208/222208]
[11:17] <gnomefreak> 2008-09-17 06:15:15 (102 KB/s) - `wizz_rss_news_reader-3.0.0.2-fx.xpi' saved [222208/222208]
[11:17] <gnomefreak> can you unpack it?
[11:18] <IntuitiveNipple> yes
[11:18] <IntuitiveNipple> unzip wizz_rss_news_reader-3.0.0.2-fx.xpi
[11:18] <gnomefreak> IntuitiveNipple: ah ok i thought the term would have marked it as  afolder
[11:18] <gnomefreak> IntuitiveNipple: thanks
[11:19] <IntuitiveNipple> It needs a sub-directory creating first, saves it polluting the working directory
[11:22] <asac_> bug #270918
[11:24] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: Any clues why the PPA build of xulrunner-1.9 fails at the very end of packaging (pbuilder test worked) with "debian/rules:148: *** EM_TRANSLATION_VERSION=1.9.0.1 LOCALE_VERSION=1.9.0.2+build3+nobinonly-0ubuntu2ppa1h. You need to explicitly adjust the translation version and min/max bounds..  Stop."
[11:25] <asac_> IntuitiveNipple: what changes do you have?
[11:25] <asac_> IntuitiveNipple: the xulrunner-1.9.head branch appears to build properly
[11:25] <asac_> (this most likelyhas something to do with the version synax you have choosen)
[11:27] <IntuitiveNipple> Very minimal patch (4 lines) to a file in the mozilla/uriloader/exthandler/ directory, and updated version string in debian/changelog, the patch-file, update to debian/patches/series, and maintainer in debian/control
[11:27] <asac_> IntuitiveNipple: show the complete diff
[11:27] <asac_> IntuitiveNipple: why update maintainer?
[11:27] <IntuitiveNipple> I'm confused as to why the build test I did on a hardy pbuilder worked :p
[11:28] <asac_> cant tell without looking at the full diff
[11:28] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: I usually do when I publish a PPA build since changes are down to me
[11:28] <IntuitiveNipple> okay hang on
[11:28] <asac_> IntuitiveNipple: no need to do that. changelog entry should make that clear enough
[11:28] <asac_> and if you put your nick in the package revision even better
[11:29] <asac_> but i dont care ;)
[11:29] <asac_> just was curious why you did that
[11:30] <IntuitiveNipple> oh hang on... I *might* know what happened! There were two pbuilders running at the same time, one with the hardy source, and one with intrepid. My build_test script saves the debian/changelog to /tmp/changelog.XXX - the version suggests the hardy package somehow picked up the intrepid changelog
[11:30]  * IntuitiveNipple kicks self and laughs
[11:31] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: My PPA versions are always ~ppa[:digit:][f|g|h|i] - works with my automated build-test scripts :)
[11:34] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: ok. you could replace ~ppa with ~yournick in future ;)
[11:35] <asac> for instance: ~nm are builds i do in network-manager PPA ... ~asac are builds in my ppa .. and ~mt in mozillateawm ... ~fta is in fta ppa
[11:35] <asac> but well. as long as there is ~ppa we can easily see that its not an official build
[11:36] <IntuitiveNipple> yup.
[11:36] <gnomefreak> ~jjv for me ;)
[11:36] <IntuitiveNipple> I've always changed the maintainer since it's my package branch, not official.
[11:36] <Kamping_Kaiser> IntuitiveNipple, *nod* me to
[11:37] <asac> thats fine. but i dont mind if you keep the "ubuntu" maintainer in there
[11:37] <IntuitiveNipple> ok, deleted the bad PPA hardy package... uploading again :)
[11:37] <asac> since you are somewhat active in this channel thats ok ;)
[11:38] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: ok. so lets see
[11:38] <gnomefreak> ok breakfast for me before i start the template
[11:38] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: I've always seen it as my responsibility once I make changes to a package... once they get out in the wild the last thing we want is someone using my package and then reporting bugs to 'official' packages
[11:39] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: the maintainer field wont change that much imo
[11:39] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: Mike Hommey is reporting my patches to xulrunner also solve his mozilla bug #444440
[11:39] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: if people dont understand that they are using an unofficial build they will hardyl check the Maintainer field before filing bugs
[11:40] <IntuitiveNipple> I've booked it into mozilla as mozilla bug #455626
[11:40] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: why didnt you submit the patch?
[11:40] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: Hopefully in that case they won't know how to ad my PPA :)
[11:40] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: submit where?
[11:40] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: you said you did a patch
[11:40] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: but in that bug you didnt post it
[11:40] <IntuitiveNipple> I only just got it finalised, and am building these PPA packages for people to test it and confirm there are no regressions
[11:40] <asac> so mike hommey had to redo everything you commented
[11:41] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: You've lost me
[11:41] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: wasnt that duplicated effort then? from what i understood in bug mike hommey alrady updated his patch according to your comments
[11:41] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: can you confirm that the latest patch from mike hommey fixes all?
[11:42] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: No, his patch didn't solve the issue and it introduced a regression when I tried it, it was also far too invasive in my opinion, especially for an Ubuntu patch.
[11:42] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: did you try his patch from 15th sep?
[11:43] <asac> e.g  patch v4
[11:44] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: ok.
[11:44] <IntuitiveNipple> asac: 444440 comment #27, patch v4 doesn't solve it
[11:44] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: ok
[11:44] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: so are you happy with your patch?
[11:44] <asac> or is there something that needs to be fixed?
[11:45] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: if you are happy with it you have to request review
[11:45] <IntuitiveNipple> I am... it is very light-touch, and it doesn't introduce major changes, it simply ensures that once the correct mime-type is known, GetFromType() is called.
[11:45] <asac> ok i confirmed the bug for now
[11:45] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: please double check that the current patch is really the version that you want to see landed
[11:46] <asac> when that is done, please ask review from bz
[11:46] <IntuitiveNipple> There was a comment by MH on 455626 that it probably isn't appropriate for 'trunk' since ... other changes... As I'm not into the state of mozilla development I have no idea if that is something to take account of for Ubuntu
[11:46] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: you request review by editing the patch details and flipping review to ? and putting bz's email in the field
[11:48] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: yeah. we need a trunk patch
[11:48] <IntuitiveNipple> Yeah, I got that last night. I'm going to wait until some Ubuntu users have confirmed the fix works with no apparent regressions in handling first. MH mentioned one from his test-suite but, having seen the state of the moz handler-code, I'm surprised there aren't more! It's a terrible mess!
[11:48] <asac> IntuitiveNipple: in any case ... ask for review and explicitly state that this is ment to be a minimal intrusive solution for 1.9.0 branch
[11:48] <IntuitiveNipple> I've wasted a week on it, and most of that is because of the obtuse code.
[11:48] <IntuitiveNipple> Right, will do
[11:49] <asac> and then try to ask mike hommey if he will address your changes in his patch or if he wants you to make a patch on top of his patch (or a completely different one)
[11:49] <asac> for trunk
[11:49] <IntuitiveNipple> I think they should remain separate, his patch is hideously messy, ripping large bits out, I examined it and decided quickly to stay away.
[11:51] <IntuitiveNipple> The root cause of most of the helper issues is the fact that two separate strands of code (at download launch, and again at completion) try to work out which handler to use. It should be done once, at launch, and then just acted on later.
[12:31] <Ampelbein> hmm. opinions on bug 270894 ?
[12:33] <Kamping_Kaiser> imo its correct, but theres been bugs about it before, so i expect that will be another WONTFIX
[12:34] <Ampelbein> i also think the reporter got a point there.
[12:34] <gnomefreak> asac: can i change wizz_rss_news_reader to wizz-rss in control and changelog?
[12:35] <gnomefreak> everyone has opinions on that and there is a big bug on it already
[12:36] <gnomefreak> see bug 269656
[12:37] <gnomefreak> bug 269656
[12:37] <gnomefreak> huh
[12:37] <Kamping_Kaiser> wth
[12:37] <gnomefreak> ok lets go find out
[12:37] <gnomefreak> brb
[12:37] <Kamping_Kaiser> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.0/+bug/269656
[12:38] <Kamping_Kaiser> just for easy reference (which is cited in thebug Ampelbein meantions)
[12:38] <gnomefreak> bug 269656
[12:38] <gnomefreak> it works in -ops
[12:38] <gnomefreak> there it it
[12:38] <Kamping_Kaiser> ah, wb ubottu
[12:40] <gnomefreak> anyway that is the bug that is all about ff and freinds
[12:44]  * Kamping_Kaiser -> bed.
[12:44] <Kamping_Kaiser> catch you later all
[12:44] <gnomefreak> bye
[12:48] <gnomefreak> i guess its lunch time
[12:48] <gnomefreak> for him
[12:57] <asac> no i got distracted
[12:59] <gnomefreak> ah
[13:00] <gnomefreak> can i shorten the package name to wizz-rss instead of wizz_rss_news_reader
[13:01] <gnomefreak> i think ill update XPI.TEMPLATE while i at it changes: standard version bump and iceweasle and abrwoser
[13:01] <gnomefreak> only spelled right
[13:08] <gnomefreak> asac:  you might want to either merge my XPI.TEMP to mt or i will just push the changes up to you
[13:15] <gnomefreak> i will finish this extension sometime today i need to lay down im feeling nausus(however its spelled) i wonder if i can get a spell check for irssi
[13:19] <asac> gnomefreak: show me the diff you prepared for XPI.TEMPLATE ... if thats ok you can just push to ~mozillateam
[13:28] <fta> http://paste.ubuntu.com/47757/
[13:31] <asac> fta: random crash or doing something specific?
[13:32] <asac> this crash probably cannot be nailed down unless we know what triggers this (because its a nativeevent that was triggered async)
[13:34] <fta> asac, it's on shutdown, it never returns and takes all the cpu (or crashes). I interrupted it, it's stuck in NS_ShutdownXPCOM_P
[13:34] <asac> fta: ah ... right its SIGINT
[13:35] <fta> just open the browser, visit a page and shut it
[13:35] <asac> fta: one potential reason might be a hidden window still dangling somewhere
[13:35] <asac> hmm
[13:35] <asac> fta: doesnt matter what kind of page?
[13:35] <asac> or flash again?
[13:35] <fta> not sure
[13:35] <fta> 61 tabs
[13:36] <asac> well. then "just open the browser, visit a page and shut it" isnt accurate
[13:36] <fta> looks like a dead lock to me
[13:36] <asac> so unless proven differently its flash causing this
[13:36] <fta> i've been suffering from that for months
[13:36] <asac> well ... most likely not dead lock, but just a not cancelled even source
[13:37] <asac> that eventsource could be a dangling window
[13:37] <asac> but lots of other things as well
[13:37] <fta> how could i know ?
[13:37] <asac> maybe some event fails and instead of cancelling its retried to process endlessly ;)
[13:38] <asac> fta: 1st. the obvious first step is to disable flash and see if it still happens
[13:39] <asac> fta: if it doesnt see if using nspluginwrapper will make that go away. this would mean that its probably a flash event source directly ... rather than something from mozilla that doesnt get removed when flash fails in some wierd way
[13:39] <asac> or if you use nspluginwrapper see if not using it will fix that
[13:39] <asac> but since you see that for month it doesnt look like its nspluginwrapper
[13:40] <asac> fta: also you might have some extension installed ... try to disable all extensions ;)
[13:40] <fta> gasp
[13:40] <fta> http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/corruption.png
[13:41] <asac> yeah. so 1st. try iif it happens without flash
[13:41] <asac> if so its almost certainly an extension looping around or something
[13:43] <fta> funny http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/corruption.gif
[13:46] <asac> xdriver?
[13:46] <fta> http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/corrupted2.png
[13:46] <fta> this is https://launchpadlibrarian.net/7592385/breezy_cof-mugshot.png
[13:47] <asac> looks normal to mee
[13:47] <asac> nvidia?
[13:47] <asac> is that reported to bryce?
[13:47] <asac> or tjaalton?
[13:47] <asac> i assume that pic is from a bug report
[13:47] <fta> http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/corrupted3.png
[13:48] <fta> no, from https://edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntumembers
[13:48] <asac> k
[13:48] <asac> please make sure that bryce knows about it and if wwants a new bug
[13:49] <asac> thats again a driver issue
[13:49] <asac> i dont see it so i cannot report it unfortunatelly
[13:53] <fta> this with 3.1
[13:53] <fta> is
[13:54] <gnomefreak> asac: http://pastebin.mozilla.org/538399 diff for XPI.TEMPLATE
[13:55] <asac> fta: so you dont see that on 3.0?
[13:55] <asac> gnomefreak: typo alarm ;)
[13:55] <fta> hm, empty session in 3.0, looks ok
[13:56] <gnomefreak> where?
[13:56] <asac> iceweasel is wrongly spelled
[13:56] <gnomefreak> damn
[13:56] <asac> gnomefreak:  ... | abrowser | iceweasle
[13:56] <gnomefreak> ill fix it
[13:56] <asac> gnomefreak: can you move all browsers to the front and the "mail clients" to the back?
[13:57] <asac> e.g. make thunderbird the last in that list
[13:57] <asac> gnomefreak: also we need to adjust the variable used in rules
[13:57] <XioNoX> Hi!
[13:57] <gnomefreak> asac: what one?
[13:57] <asac> gnomefreak: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mozillateam/firefox-extensions/XPI.TEMPLATE/annotate/10?file_id=rules-20080221120129-aifetlupiq8reqgv-6
[13:57] <asac> gnomefreak: search for thunderbird
[13:58] <asac> we need to add iceweasel
[13:58] <asac> also when we add iceweasel we should also add icedove
[13:58] <asac> (in both places)
[13:58] <gnomefreak> k no need to add abrowser?
[13:58] <asac> abrowser doesnt need to be added to rules though (because it shares the same path as firefox-addons)
[13:58] <asac> gnomefreak: only need to be added to control ... not to rules
[13:58] <asac> yyes
[13:59] <gnomefreak> ok
[13:59] <asac> gnomefreak: maybe also extend the comment for that #MOZ_XPI_MOZILLA_DIRS to explain that when the extension doesnt work in tbird that they should remove thunderbird and icedove from Depends: in control
[13:59] <asac> but thats not high prio
[13:59] <asac> its an example template after all
[14:00] <gnomefreak> ok easy enough
[14:06] <gnomefreak> can the depends field in control span over 2 lines?
[14:09] <gnomefreak> asac: the new diff http://pastebin.mozilla.org/538412
[14:10] <asac> fta: i will test 3.1 in next free minute ;)
[14:10] <gnomefreak> Depends in control are on 2 lines due to the 80 char rule
[14:10] <asac> gnomefreak: yeah maybe also make:
[14:10] <asac> firefox-addons - set if compatible with Firefox 3
[14:11] <asac> -> firefox-addons - set if compatible with Firefox 3 or A Browser 3
[14:11] <gnomefreak> A Browser not abrowser?
[14:11] <asac> gnomefreak: also i think you have a missing line break at:
[14:11] <asac> +# Don't forget to adjust Depends field in debian/control If the extension doesnt work # with Thunderbird or Icedove!
[14:11] <fta> i'm testing with a nightly from upstream
[14:11] <asac> gnomefreak: whatever you prefer
[14:11] <gnomefreak> ok
[14:11] <asac> fta: your PPA build doesnt have that issue?
[14:12] <asac> gnomefreak: line break -> before the  '# with Thun....'
[14:12] <fta> i mean, i'm testing with a nightly from upstream now, my ppa is impacted
[14:12] <asac> gnomefreak: also ... why i | icedove in a new line in control?
[14:12] <asac> fta: ah ok.
[14:12] <asac> i am going to lunch now
[14:12] <asac> almost starving
[14:12] <asac> bbl
[14:12] <gnomefreak> asac: 80 char rule
[14:12] <asac> gnomefreak: that doesnt apply to depends lines
[14:13] <asac> if so we should make it one entry for each line
[14:13] <asac> and you need a "tab" infront of every new line
[14:13] <gnomefreak> asac: the line beak in rules is also due to 8- char
[14:13] <asac> gnomefreak: dont bother with 80 char rule
[14:13] <gnomefreak> lol
[14:13] <asac> we can clean that up in a second step
[14:13] <gnomefreak> ok
[14:13] <asac> gnomefreak: as i said there is no 80 char rule for Depends: line
[14:14] <asac> so ;)
[14:14] <asac> ok
[14:14] <asac> off for eat
[14:17] <fta> upstream nightly also impacted, using a copy of my 3.1 profile
[14:17] <fta> so this is not our cairo
[14:19] <asac> fta: ok. maybe try "nv" driver anyway (just startup X see if it still exists)
[14:19] <asac> now lunch for real
[14:40] <gnomefreak> asac: ok its pushed to both branches. i have to go laydown now still feeling kind of sick. please dont forget to check firegpg and chatzilla so far here they both work fine. and ill try to have wizz finished today but we will see
[14:42] <asac> fta: 3.1 works here too for https://launchpadlibrarian.net/7592385/breezy_cof-mugshot.png
[14:42] <asac> so a combination of 3.1 + nvidia
[14:43] <asac> let me know once you have tested nv
[14:44] <gnomefreak> 3.1 was working on my nvidia but im asuming this is new bug with newest nightly
[14:44] <fta> i'm testing various older snapshots
[14:44] <gnomefreak> oh
[14:45] <gnomefreak> well ill be back a bit later
[14:46] <fta> firefox-minefield_3.1~b1~build20080901020950-1_i386.deb OK
[14:47] <fta> firefox-minefield_3.1~b1~build20080917020400-1_i386.deb NOK
[14:51] <fta> firefox-minefield_3.1~b1~build20080909020352-1_i386.deb OK
[14:58] <fta> firefox-minefield_3.1~b1~build20080912020354-1_i386.deb NOK
[15:05] <fta> firefox-minefield_3.1~b1~build20080911020347-1_i386.deb OK
[15:05] <fta> hmm
[15:07] <fta> [reed], do you have hourlies for moz-central ?
[15:09] <asac> so regressed in 20080911020347 <-> 20080912020354
[15:10] <fta> apparently, yes
[15:10] <fta> the hourlies i know are only for the 3.0 branch :(
[15:11] <asac> fta: Bobby Holley - Turning color management on by default - bug 418538. r=vlad
[15:11] <fta> oh, i remember that one
[15:12] <asac> Bobby Holley - Fixing some endian-ness bugs for color management - bug 439704. r=vlad
[15:12] <asac> looks like the only checkin reviewd by vlad in about that period
[15:13] <fta> btw, the issue on shutdown is also in upstream builds
[15:13] <fta> but not in 3.0
[15:13] <asac> http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/e7c6d7843e81
[15:14] <asac> fta: try gfx.color_management.mode = 0
[15:14] <asac> in about:config
[15:14] <fta> yep, i know, i was restarting with a NOK version
[15:15] <asac> http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/raw-file/e7c6d7843e81/modules/libpr0n/test/reftest/pngsuite-ancillary/ccwn3p08.html
[15:15] <asac> thats the reftest
[15:15] <fta> good, that's the one
[15:15] <asac> does it reveal that bug too?
[15:15] <fta> nope
[15:15] <asac> http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/raw-file/e7c6d7843e81/modules/libpr0n/test/reftest/pngsuite-ancillary/ccwn2c08.html
[15:15] <asac> and that?
[15:16] <asac> (of course with color management mode = 1)
[15:16] <fta> in fact, i was using gfx.color_management.mode = 1, now it's 2 by defaut
[15:16] <asac> he?
[15:17] <asac> so does 2 or 0 fix it?
[15:17] <asac> or both?
[15:17] <asac> maybe also introduced by Bobby Holley - Fixed a cms bug involving side effects and early return - bug 454747. r=vlad
[15:18] <asac> http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/22a82f07723d
[15:18] <asac> which landed after thee other patch
[15:18] <fta> http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2008/09/color-profiles-turned-on-for-firefox-31/
[15:18] <asac> fta: ok ... so 2 might remove random issues
[15:19] <asac> maybe thats good enough until the drivers are fixed
[15:19] <asac> but maybe it didnt see it beacuse of 2
[15:19] <asac> let me check again
[15:19] <fta> yes
[15:20] <asac> nope ... also works here with 1
[15:20] <asac> so a driver issue ... triggered by color management
[15:20] <asac> nice
[15:20] <asac> we should definitly ask vlad if he is aware ... but then 2 should be ok i guess
[15:21] <asac> or doesnt that fix most issues for you?
[15:21] <asac> (most likely only the tagged images - where is an example? - would fail then)
[15:24] <fta> gr, crash on startup in jit
[15:24] <fta> (tracemonkey)
[15:24] <asac> fta: is jit build-time?
[15:24] <asac> or runtime switch?
[15:25] <fta> runtime
[15:25] <asac> environment variable of config?
[15:25] <fta> config
[15:25] <fta> it's off by default
[15:26] <asac> but restart required i guess
[15:26] <asac> trying content now ;)
[15:26] <fta> http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/47780/
[15:27]  * asac runs sunspider ;)
[15:33] <asac> http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B414,410,405,404,405%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B398,414,425,409,410%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B311,348,311,323,326%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B139,137,139,137,140%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B728,748,727,726,728%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B474,422,395,392,400%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B259,255,263,260,279%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B235,234,235,235,243%5D,%22bi
[15:33] <asac> oops ;)
[15:33] <asac> that is quite long :)
[15:33] <asac> http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B404,408,421,405,401%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B404,406,429,408,403%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B299,298,298,308,297%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B145,136,155,210,142%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B683,658,663,656,661%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B421,392,401,394,426%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B293,272,269,268,232%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B238,219,221,220,222%5D,%22bi
[15:33] <asac> first is 3.0 ... second 3.1 with content jit
[15:33] <asac> on sunspider 0.9
[15:34] <asac> changes are not that significant
[15:34] <asac> but maybe sunspider gets slowed down by jit more than it helps
[15:35] <asac> fta: 3.1 doesnt update location bar for me
[15:35] <asac> only what i typed is there
[15:35] <fta> ?
[15:35] <asac> fta: http://www.gmail.com -> redirects -> location bar stays untouched
[15:36] <asac> e.g. doesnt represent the current page ... which it has to
[15:36] <fta> it does for me
[15:36] <fta> error console ?
[15:47] <fta> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080917045510597
[15:53] <fta> asac, FIREFOX_3_0_2_BUILD6
[15:53] <ken> Hi all. Question: what should I do when FF301 cannot connect to a server, while ping and tracert find it?
[15:53] <ken> The server in question is server2.be.
[15:54] <asac> ken: reasons can be various
[15:54] <asac> port blocked
[15:54] <asac> http proxy required
[15:54] <asac> and such
[15:54] <psyke83> ken: it could be packet fragmentation (wrong MTU)
[15:54] <asac> its usually a setup issue of your network
[15:54] <asac> fragmentnation could be a problem. but havent seen such problems for ages
[15:55] <ken> asac: this just popped up. Yesterday it worked fine. How can I check the network?
[15:55] <ken> FYI: I do have internet on this computer. Using it right now.
[15:55] <psyke83> me neither, but my previous wireless router (a 3com model), pinging worked, but it timed out when connecting to several sites (e.g. msn.com), and it turned out to be an MTU issue.
[15:56] <ken> Psyke83: how can I check MTU in Ubuntu?
[15:56] <ken> Of should I check it in the router?
[15:56] <Volans> ken: first check if is a DNS issue with: host server2.be and try to ping the server
[15:56] <Volans> I have try now and both works
[15:56] <Volans> (the server replay to the ping)
[15:57] <asac> ken: is firefox in offline mode?
[15:57] <asac> e.g. File -> Offline Mode
[15:57] <asac> err File -> Work Offline
[15:58] <ken> Volans: host server2.be gives me 74.208.57.196
[15:58] <Volans> is correct
[15:58] <asac> ken: check for offline as i said
[15:58] <ken> Volans: ping to this number gives me time=131ms
[15:59] <asac> ken: if you are on hardy and use some manually setup ppp its likely that firefox thinks that you are offline on startup
[15:59] <Volans> ken: ok, so your network seems to be ok
[15:59] <ken> asac: FF is not offline. news.bbc.co.uk comes up correctly.
[15:59] <ken> asac: also just emptied the cache. No difference.
[15:59] <asac> ken: look in file menu
[15:59] <asac> to be sure
[16:00] <asac> is "Work Offline" checked?
[16:00] <asac> or unchecked?
[16:00] <ken> asac: is unchecked.
[16:00] <ken> asac: I am on Hardy.
[16:00] <Volans> ken: http://server2.be/ is a 302 redirect to http://server2.be/ss/v2/
[16:00] <asac> ken: ok. then either you are using a transparent proxy for port 80 traffic
[16:00] <Volans> you can open the latter
[16:00] <Volans> ?
[16:01] <asac> ken: or you have a bad extension
[16:01] <asac> firefox on its own doesnt have that problem
[16:01] <asac> ken: try to open the same site with konqueror
[16:01] <asac> or with a console browser like links
[16:01] <asac> or w3m
[16:01] <ken> Volans: I cannot open the latter.
[16:02] <Volans> what is the error message of firefox?
[16:02] <ken> asac: installing links
[16:02] <ken> Volans: Failed to connect. Though the site seems valid...
[16:02] <Volans> asac: maybe blocked IP?
[16:02] <asac> ken: while installing: try to disable all extensions you have installed
[16:03] <asac> for now i'd say either transparent proxy that is fucked or broken extension
[16:03] <ken> asac: links gives me Error loading. Connection refused.
[16:03] <asac> ken: yeah. then its not firefox
[16:03] <asac> complain with your provider
[16:04] <asac> or try to get a new IP and see if its really blocked IP
[16:04] <ken> asac: you think the provider has blocked the ip number?
[16:04] <Volans> no the site has blocked the IP that your provider have assigned to you
[16:04] <Volans> you know if your provider use NAT?
[16:05] <ken> Confused: the internet provider has blocked the ip of the hosting provider? Or the other way around?
[16:05] <asac> ken: no. i think your provide rhas a transparent proxy
[16:05] <ken> I don't know about NAT
[16:05] <asac> which they do to safe money/traffic and to filter out some sites (sometimes)
[16:06] <ken> asac: waht is a "transparent proxy"?
[16:06] <asac> ken: a http proxy ... but on provider side
[16:06] <asac> they cache the content for you and dont allow you to connect directly to the website
[16:06] <asac> for traffic on port 80
[16:06] <ken> asac: thank you. What do I do?
[16:06] <asac> most likely something like that is done by discount providers
[16:07] <asac> ken: as i said: try to get a new IP ... if that doesnt help complain with your provider
[16:07] <Volans> ken: or try to open the site with an online proxy like http://www.geekproxy.com/ digit the  http://server2.be/  address in the form and click surf
[16:07] <ken> asac: we are talking about the internet provider? Of the hosting provider?
[16:07] <asac> or change provider (verify that it works if you connect to a friends network)
[16:07] <asac> ken: i am talkinga bout internet provider here
[16:07] <asac> ken: except for the IP option
[16:07] <asac> but i think its unlikely that the webserver blocks any specific IPs
[16:08] <ken> Volans: geekproxy gives me the site...
[16:08] <ken> asac: the internet provider is Telenet Belgium.
[16:08] <asac> ken: cant help you more than i already did ... really
[16:09] <ken> Volans: what is your opinion.
[16:09] <asac> thats all i know and can say
[16:09] <asac> maybe its a misconfiguration on your internet providers site (e.g. of the transparent proxy) and it will be resolved automatically
[16:09] <ken> Asac: thank you very much for the assist! Take care!
[16:09] <asac> but really try to reconnect to get a NEW IP to rule that out
[16:09] <asac> then complain with your provider
[16:09] <Volans> ken: if you want I can try something more on query, I think here is not the right place ;)
[16:09] <asac> ... call them, thead them with cancelling your contract and so on ;)
[16:10] <asac> ok ... meeting time for 1h
[16:10] <ken> Volans: what is query?
[16:11] <fta> mozilla bug 454406
[16:12] <fta> i guess we need a new nss before 3.0.2
[16:13] <asac> Volans: feel free to discuss everything with ken here in the channel ;)
[16:13] <asac> its just that i think i have said everything i can ;)
[16:13] <asac> fta: why before?
[16:14] <Volans> I'me helping him to change IP, is not matter of mozillateam :)
[16:14] <asac> yeah ;)
[16:14] <asac> ok
[16:14] <asac> thanks Volans
[16:14] <ken> Asac: again, thank you for your help.
[16:14] <fta> the cert regression that triggered build6
[16:14] <asac> welcome.
[16:23] <fta> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=921567
[16:25] <asac> fta: well kubuntu doesnt even have pulseaudio
[16:25] <asac> so he has different issues
[16:39] <psyke83> asac: I don't have an amd64 system to test the flash plugin, so perhaps someone should test it against the latest ia32-libs release? Of course libflashsupport needs to go away, but there could be additional libraries needed
[16:40] <psyke83> i.e. just a basic test to check that "ldd libflashplayer.so" doesn't throw errors
[16:41] <asac> psyke83: i think i looked at that yesterday and there were no errors either
[16:41] <asac> (e.g. looking at the release done a few days ago)
[16:41] <asac> psyke83: but i can check
[16:42] <asac> remind me in 20 minutes in case you dont get an answer ;)
[16:42] <psyke83> ah, alright. I would recommend that you ensure you check the "wrapped" library, in case nspluginwrapper adds libraries that are necessary. I got concerned by this message: http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=5806205&postcount=29
[16:45] <asac> psyke83: the installer fails: $ ./adobeair_linux_b1_091508.bin
[16:45] <asac> Error loading the runtime (libxcb-render-util.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory)
[16:46] <asac> too bad
[16:48] <psyke83> asac: hmm, I guess new dependencies were added to the latest updatelibraries
[16:50] <psyke83> \sh has more work to do, I guess ;). I'll try to determine all the new dependencies for flash
[16:52] <[reed]> fta: can you change http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/eula.png to show what is actually being shown on Intrepid?
[16:52] <[reed]> rather than the internal Firefox pop-up
[16:53] <asac> [reed]: you want to see?
[16:53] <asac> [reed]: http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/mozeula.html
[16:54] <asac> thats the document shown in a tab ;)
[16:54] <[reed]> that would be nice, but I'm just trying to get trolls to stop saying that Ubuntu is showing the pop-up
[16:54] <asac> so opening that page gives you the right impression
[16:54] <[reed]> which is wrong
[16:55] <asac> [reed]: i doubt that you can stop them. they hardy read, nor do they ever try themselves
[16:55] <asac> [reed]: why do you say its wrong?
[16:55] <asac> [reed]: its wrong that that happened yes. but its the truth that its there for now ;)
[16:55] <asac> [reed]: ah sorry
[16:55] <asac> you referred to the pop-up
[16:55] <asac> yes. but my opinion is that the people saying that wont read anything anyway.
[16:55] <asac> and only  a few try to provide evidence in form of a screenshot ;)
[16:55] <asac> most just say: "its that way ... cry, cry! ";)
[16:55] <[reed]> hehe
[16:56] <asac> [reed]: most likely nobody commenting runs intrepid
[16:56] <asac> so they dont even see it
[16:56] <asac> and they dont see the difference of putting something into a development release and releasing that as the final product
[16:57] <asac> ;)
[16:57] <asac> so they see nothing, except what they think they know for sure
[16:57] <[reed]> hah, I see where Shuttleworth just made a comment about the Ubuntu Code of Conduct
[16:57] <asac> in the bug?
[16:57] <[reed]> yes
[16:58] <[reed]> too bad you all don't seem to ban repeat offenders ;)
[16:58] <asac> [reed]: we cant because launchpad is more than ubuntu
[16:58] <[reed]> (we ban people on bmo if they continue to disregard the Bugzilla Etiquette)
[16:58] <asac> launchpad needs a feature to ban individuals from certain projects i think
[16:58] <[reed]> then you all need a Launchpad Code of Conduct ;)
[16:58] <asac> but maybe that feature exists and we really dont ban anyone
[16:59] <[reed]> this is my favorite comment so far:
[16:59] <[reed]> "If I was a Mozilla person reading this bug report, I could easily take
[16:59] <[reed]> the position that the Ubuntu community is nasty, ill informed,
[16:59] <[reed]> insulting, childish, and selfish. If that were true, then Ubuntu would
[16:59] <[reed]> also not be relevant for very long, so I would have no incentive to
[16:59] <[reed]> address their concerns. Careless words in this public forum will only
[16:59] <[reed]> serve to reduce the seriousness with which Mozilla will take this matter."
[17:01] <[reed]> oh, and some user apparently believes the EULA impedes upon his right to hack on Firefox
[17:01] <[reed]> lol
[17:01] <[reed]> don't people even read it?
[17:01] <[reed]> It says nothing of the sort.
[17:01] <asac> yeah
[17:01] <asac> people find the url
[17:01] <asac> click on it
[17:01] <asac> comment
[17:01] <asac> well ... create account in between ;)
[17:02] <asac> maybe delaying account creation by 5 hours or so in such times would be good :)
[17:02] <asac> "Resolutions to this sort of debate never come from abusive commentary.
[17:02] <asac> They just NEVER do. Venting and insulting someone else may make you feel
[17:03] <asac> immediately better, but so does relieving yourself on your own doorstep."
[17:03] <asac> thats cool ;)
[17:03] <asac> (from mark)
[17:03] <[reed]> yeah
[17:07] <fta> i wish ff was able to should resources consumption per tab, i'm sick of flash
[17:08] <fta> -should+show
[17:08] <fta> i wish someone steal that idea from chrome
[17:09] <[reed]> fta: I've heard it tossed around
[17:09] <[reed]> especially wrt plugins
[17:09] <fta> where ? where ? where ? :)
[17:09] <asac> it has been discussed for plugins for ages
[17:09] <asac> but nothing happened
[17:09] <asac> thats why there exists nspluginwrapper -> fta
[17:09] <asac> use that ;)
[17:10] <fta> it made things even worse for me
[17:10] <asac> in 1.1.0 yes.
[17:10] <asac> on amd64 it certainly didnt make anything worse
[17:10] <asac> because otherwise it wont work on 64-bit ;)
[17:10] <asac> but well i get you point.
[17:11] <asac> 1.1.0 is still buggy ... but its also by coincident that flash 10 is really buggy still ;)
[18:08] <asac> Volans: i just figured that you send me a memo in jul ;)
[18:08] <asac> didnt even know about that service until i spotted it right now ;)
[18:09] <Volans> in july??? :)
[18:09] <Volans> about what?
[18:09]  * Volans seaching on sent mail
[18:09] <asac> i am now trying to get that from the memoservice ;)
[18:09] <asac> Volans: sent mail?
[18:09] <asac> thats on irc ;)
[18:09] <asac> Volans: -MemoServ(MemoServ@services.)- - 1 From: Volans Sent: Jul 02 12:48:04 2008 [unread]
[18:09] <Volans> sorry
[18:10] <asac> Volans: why sorry?
[18:10] <asac> i am sorry that i didnt read it ;)
[18:10] <asac> its about autosend alert ;)
[18:10] <Volans> because I have understand that was an email :)
[18:10] <asac> Volans: fun ;)
[18:11] <Volans> sincerly I remember do have sent it, but what I can have said
[18:11] <Volans> LOL
[18:11] <Volans> /do/to/
[18:11] <Volans> ohhh (19:09:54) MemoServ: (notice) asac has read your memo, which was sent at Jul 02 12:48:04 2008
[18:11] <asac> crazy
[18:11] <asac> thats privacy?
[18:11] <asac> i better dont read memos in the future ;)
[18:12] <asac> Volans: did you also get a message that i deleted that memo?
[18:12] <Volans> I think is pretty the same as the read notification in emails
[18:12] <Volans> asac: no
[18:12] <Volans> only that you have read it
[18:12] <asac> yeah. but i wasnt warned about that
[18:12] <asac> (but i dont mind ;))
[18:14] <Volans> nor the  "/msg MemoServ help read"  command say that
[18:15] <asac> yeah :)
[18:15] <asac> good that i tried it with you
[18:15] <asac> otherwise i probably never would have known that
[18:15] <Volans> ahahah
[18:16] <Volans> AFAIK memo is used for offline users and cit.:"When they come online they will be told they have messages waiting for them and will have an opportunity  to read your memo."
[18:16] <Volans> the problem is that you are always online so I think freenode don't have alert you
[18:17] <asac> yay ... the eula bug has reached half the amount of comments that bug 1 has ;)
[18:18] <Volans> LOL
[18:18] <Volans> also ubottu refuse to read too lot data
[18:19] <Volans> and the EULA did it in a couple of days... very impressive
[18:19] <asac> yeah 418 vs. 836 or something ;)
[18:19] <asac> of course next other half is quite hard to reach ;)
[18:37] <Volans> asac: I'm working to imporve mirros.sh following your suggestions, the DIRECTORY should be created if not exist or the script should assume that already exist?
[18:38] <Volans> (and only check that exist)
[18:43] <asac> Volans: create it if it doesnt exist
[18:43] <asac> thats my guess. but that doesnt mean there is any reason that thats good
[18:43] <Volans> recursively? (the whole path)
[18:43] <asac> Volans: maybe fail ;)
[18:45] <Volans> depends if we want to trust in the master script (that will create all the folder hierarchy) or not :)
[18:49] <Volans> I think that fails on non existent directory is better, you agree?
[19:02] <fta> asac, i've improved mozclient to support external project files
[19:03] <asac> fta: ok. so we use external project files instead of env vars. fine.
[19:03] <asac> fta: whats the parameter to hook it in?
[19:04] <asac> are those conf files supplemental? e.g. can i say: use firefox-3.0.conf, _but_ overload values defined in mybrowser-3.0.conf ?
[19:04] <fta> http://paste.ubuntu.com/47847/
[19:04] <fta> no, global or local, not both
[19:05] <asac> doesnt that put a maintenance burden on someone who just wants to tweak one value? e.g. POST_CO_CMD for injecting branding
[19:05] <asac> i mean you have to track mozclient configs then
[19:05] <fta> overloading one value is different
[19:06] <asac> which can become hairy in cause mozclient changes its layout a bit and you cannot build with mozclient 0.13 because you have the 0.11 copy
[19:06] <fta> i was targeting downstream
[19:06] <asac> fta: oh
[19:06] <asac> fta: yes.
[19:06] <asac> fta: thats where is see the "partly overloading" quite helpful (for downstreams)
[19:07] <asac> fta: what files are required in a "projectdir"?
[19:07] <asac> is it just a .conf file?
[19:07] <fta> see my paste
[19:08] <fta> only the .conf file is mandatory, everything else is optional
[19:08] <asac> ok. if just .conf file is required we can probably add some syntax later to "include" base/system confs
[19:09] <asac> fta: why is there the myproject-remove.binonly.sh ?
[19:09] <asac> isnt that done through something like POST_CO?
[19:09] <asac> or is that more deeply entrenched in mozclient?
[19:09] <fta> to augment the main remove.binonly.sh
[19:10] <asac> aha. so for remove binonly sh it uses global as a base, but for the .conf not?
[19:10] <fta> see /usr/share/mozilla-devscripts/mozclient/flock-remove.binonly.sh
[19:10] <fta> yes
[19:10] <asac> ok. Id say that "partially .conf" is then just a missing feature
[19:10] <asac> ok
[19:11] <asac> could be done in the same way later
[19:11] <asac> fine
[19:12] <Volans> asac: mirror.sh impr ovements pushed
[19:12] <asac> bug 271443
[19:13] <fta> http://codereview.chromium.org/2929
[19:16] <Volans> ah asac, I have used the -nc option in wget so it will not download already downloaded xpis
[19:19] <reed_> This makes me laugh:
[19:19] <reed_> "And the matter of the trademarked artwork has not been addressed yet.
[19:19] <reed_> Basically, the artwork hasn't been released under a free software
[19:19] <reed_> license. So Mozilla has the right to block any revision that Ubuntu
[19:19] <reed_> makes. That's not in the spirit of free software. And that essentially
[19:19] <reed_> makes the Firefox binary non-free."
[19:19] <reed_> when will people learn?
[19:21] <reed_> " oooo, oooo, Mozilla wants to protect its trademark -- obviously that's against free software / open source, so we should get rid of Firefox!!!!1111!1!11!"
[19:21] <reed_> (paraphrasing)
[19:50] <fta> reed_,  do you have hourlies for moz-central somewhere?
[20:25] <asac> http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/09/17/mock-ups-available-for-notices-previously-was-eula/
[20:28] <fta> asac, are you the one he's talking about ?
[20:29] <pwnguin> "he"
[20:31] <asac> fta: who is talking where?
[20:31] <fta> "Obviously, we’ve been working with Canonical to get this worked out", or "We’ll likely see the first implementation of this in the Ubuntu builds"
[20:33] <asac> fta: there were plenty of people involved
[20:34] <fta> http://lockshot.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/licensing-proposal-notice-page-screen-shot/
[20:36] <Volans> asac: for the get-install-rdf-version.sh (or what name you want to use), how (or where) it should return the version string?
[20:36] <asac> fta: yes. thats the content ;)
[20:41] <reed_> :)
[20:42] <reed_> wgrant: see above blog posts ;)
[20:56] <[reed]> fta: does hourly-archive.localgho.st have any?
[20:56] <fta> only 3.0
[20:57] <[reed]> ah, lame. I'll ask the owner of that to add more stuff
[20:57] <fta> and plz preserve the files longer
[21:10] <asac> Volans: not sure. just the version?
[21:10] <asac> or key=value?
[21:11] <asac> Volans: i think _just_ the version should be good enough for now
[21:11] <Volans> the script do some checks and atm it will output 3 or 4 lines to stdin
[21:11] <asac> Volans: you mean stdout?
[21:11] <Volans> one of those atm is:
[21:11] <Volans> get-install-rdf-version.sh: VERSION=1.0.6.2
[21:11] <Volans> sure :)
[21:11] <asac> Volans: please use stderr for log output
[21:12] <asac> you can write a function like
[21:12] <asac> log () {
[21:12] <asac> ...
[21:12] <asac> }
[21:12] <Volans> ok
[21:12] <Volans> so output just 1.0.6.2 to stdout?
[21:12] <Volans> or VERSION=1.0.6.2 ?
[21:16] <Volans> asac: and for the next one, newer.sh output a list of:
[21:16] <Volans> filename.xpi 1.0.6.2
[21:16] <Volans> filename2.xpi 1.0.8.2
[21:16] <Volans> can be godd?
[21:16] <Volans> *good
[21:18] <Volans> and, lasti thing for today, I should use stderr also for --help output?
[21:19] <asac> Volans: can you name that "get-new-imports.sh ..:" ?
[21:20] <Volans> newer.sh -> get-new-imports.sh? sure
[21:20] <asac> Volans: --help to stderr i think
[21:20] <asac> also on error return a non-zero exit code
[21:20] <Volans> alredy done
[21:21] <Volans> *already
[21:21] <Volans> but on --help return 0
[21:22] <asac> why?
[21:22] <asac> ah
[21:22] <asac> well if that doesnt mean that 0 is returned on "usage"
[21:22] <asac> then fine
[21:22] <Volans> ehm... what do you mean?
[21:27] <asac> Volans: dont bother ;)
[21:27] <asac> details that are probably obvious anyway :-P
[21:28] <Volans> I was meaning that if you run script.sh --help I will output the usage and some instruction and do exit 0
[21:28] <asac> right
[21:28] <asac> all fine
[21:28] <Volans>  I can send the --help output to stderr or stdout as you prefer
[21:29] <asac> stdout
[21:29] <asac> but usage (in case of wrong error ... to stderr)
[21:29] <asac> err, s/wrong error/wrong parameter/
[21:29] <Volans> ok, all clear now!
[21:29] <asac> ;)
[22:01] <Volans> I have to go... see you later, probably with the third script ready ;)
[22:01] <Volans> bye bye
[23:00] <asac> hmm ... lp offline
[23:02] <asac> debian bug 498258
[23:03] <wgrant> [reed]: That looks a bit less foul! Yay!
[23:04] <[reed]> wgrant: :)
[23:04] <wgrant> That one can be read without getting a headache.
[23:07] <fta> asac, bzr too ?
[23:08] <fta> damn, yes
[23:16] <asac> fta: really?
[23:16] <asac> wow
[23:16] <asac> thought that at least ssh access woul d still work
[23:17] <fta> maintenance
[23:17] <fta> ssh: connect to host bazaar.launchpad.net port 22: Connection refused
[23:17] <asac> yeah
[23:17] <wgrant> asac: It's all DB-based.
[23:17] <asac> wgrant: bzr trees? i dont think so
[23:17] <wgrant> Access to bzr trees.
[23:17] <wgrant> SSH keys.
[23:17] <asac> ok
[23:19] <fta> "Launchpad is going down from 22:00 UTC until 23:59 UTC for a code update"
[23:19] <fta> asac, i have ff 3.1a2 ready too now
[23:20] <asac> is the final thing in your ppa?
[23:20] <asac> oh wait
[23:20] <asac> you are ahead
[23:20] <fta> ppa is ahead
[23:20] <asac> put it in mt :)
[23:21] <asac> which remind me that we should probably do a major cleanup there
[23:21] <asac> too bad we cant look now ;)
[23:21] <fta> i assume ppa are down too
[23:21] <asac> fta: the upload ftp server is most likely still up
[23:21] <asac> just no incoming queue processing
[23:21] <wgrant> I don't believe so.
[23:22] <wgrant> Hm, maybe.
[23:22] <wgrant> Odd.
[23:22] <asac> well. ftp is just too rudementary
[23:22] <asac> its just a folder where you can put files
[23:23] <wgrant> Except in Soyuz's case it's somewhat special.
[23:23] <asac> not the ftp server i hope
[23:23] <asac> what comes then ... sure
[23:24] <wgrant> It's no normal FTP server.
[23:25] <wgrant> Much like the SSH server is no normal SSH server.
[23:26] <asac> wgrant: well. ssh server is most likely normal
[23:26] <asac> you can plugin auth-mechanisms
[23:27] <asac> but i wouldnt consdier that not a normal ssh server
[23:27] <wgrant> No.
[23:27] <wgrant> It's completely strange and Conch-based.
[23:27] <fta> noone sponsored my fontconfig fix today :P
[23:27] <asac> fta: *freeze*
[23:28] <fta> got tons of updates today
[23:28] <asac> fta: if you want to get something in today that is on CD you need to ask RMs
[23:28] <asac> fta: sure ... RM only hunts people for things that are on the CD
[23:29] <asac> if they breech the freeze
[23:29] <asac> and a bunch of things are also pre-signed off
[23:29] <fta> fontconfig is not on the cd ?
[23:29] <asac> but usually we ask him to allow
[23:29] <asac> fta: it is. thats why it cant be uploaded
[23:31] <asac> but most updates you get today are usually universe or main packages not on cd
[23:31] <asac> at least i would guess ;)
[23:32] <fta> just got ubufox
[23:32] <asac> yeah. QA found a bug and i then asked for permission to upload
[23:35] <asac> so this is an explicit exception. we have to hold back build6 because of that for instance
[23:36] <fta> you were supposed to finish something in it too
[23:36] <asac> yes
[23:36] <asac> restart
[23:38] <fta> hm, trunk bumped pixman to 0.11.10
[23:38] <asac> before or after color regression?
[23:39] <fta> just now
[23:39] <asac> good lets hope that gives massive speedup
[23:39] <fta>      2.7 -  pixman (pixman-0.11.8-17-gf9d3f37)
[23:39] <fta>      2.8 +  pixman (pixman-0.11.10-8-g7180230)
[23:39] <fta> that's mainly for arm
[23:40] <asac> i think pixmap is named in first group when it comes to finding something to blame for performance issues ;)
[23:40] <asac> sad
[23:40] <asac> what is our system pixman?
[23:40] <fta> 0.11.8
[23:40] <asac> 11.8
[23:40] <asac> k
[23:41] <fta> mozilla bug 451621
[23:41] <asac> what does -17 mean? in their version?
[23:41] <fta> git snapshot
[23:42] <fta> cairo and pixman are always snapshots in trunk
[23:43] <fta> gasp.. http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/9fec6819ebe8361923dae6002549d22563b45b67
[23:44] <fta> not good for us, well, it will do nothing for us
[23:51] <fta> http://blog.mozilla.com/rob-sayre/2008/09/17/mozilla-is-linux/
[23:54] <fta> asac, btw, i've updated prism yesterday, the version in intrepid is old, i'd like to update it, is it still possible ?