[03:24] asac: you 'bout? === vk5foss is now known as kgoetz [07:47] Morning everyone [09:20] armin76, http://jldugger.livejournal.com/19151.html [09:23] * armin76 yawns [09:24] switch [10:19] yay lots of OO.o-3.0 updates :) [10:34] asac: when i run autoconf2.13 no matter what dir im in it tells me it cant read changelog [10:34] using dpatch [10:36] gnomefreak: autoconf2.13 doesnt read changelog at all ;) [10:36] i know hence the problem [10:36] hi [10:37] i run dpatch-edit-patch it puts me in tmp/* and no matter where i go gives me same error [10:39] i ran it both ways with patch name and without i get same thing, when im in tmp/* im supposed to run it in mozilla dir. but i cant cd into mozilla dir. [10:48] asac: fta2 here are commands and dir listed something isnt right here for some reason i cant enter mozilla dir. to run autoconf [10:48] http://pastebin.mozilla.org/544534 link << [10:49] what do you have inside ubuntu-0.x/ ? [10:50] same issue if i run it in mozilla dir. for some reason dpatch is removing build-area all to gether [10:50] fta2: debian [10:50] do a ls -l after line 73 [10:50] no tarball? [10:51] total 4 [10:51] drwxr-xr-x 6 gnomefreak gnomefreak 4096 Sep 26 09:36 debian [10:51] fta2: its in tarballs dir [10:51] then you forgot to merge, is that from a branch? [10:51] fta2: debian is yes [10:51] bzr bd --merge [10:51] then go to build-area and edit your patch [10:52] k ill try [10:52] asac, did you have a look at my QT page? [10:53] i dont want it to build yet :( [10:53] i guess it has to [10:54] doesn't matter, interrupt it [10:54] just after the patches are applied [10:54] so if it's an embedded tarball, it will be already unpacked [11:02] fta2: http://pastebin.mozilla.org/544553 [11:02] i should not get that error at all [11:03] run it two levels above [11:03] fta2: qt? [11:03] it is looking for the debian dir, not mozilla [11:04] ah [11:04] asac, Sep 28 20:34:51 asac, i've experimented a bit with the QT support in 3.1. I've drafted my ideas on the wiki: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/QT please let me know what you think [11:04] ok, lunch time, cu [11:05] * gnomefreak thought mozilla was working on porting QT [11:05] read 1st :) [11:05] waiting for it [11:05] it didn't do the port myself, i'm not crazy enough [11:07] we cant just add ...-qt to control i guess [11:10] running dpatch-edit-patch in ~/lightning-sunbird-builds/work/build-area/lightning-sunb [11:10] ird-0.9~cvs20080922t0147+nobinonly [11:10] removes mozilla dir [11:17] ah its not using a patch system i misread .patch for .dpatch [11:20] it is using quilt but i dont rememmber quilt using series file [11:31] fta2: why do we need a new source package for ffox 3.1? [11:38] ok fuck sunbird for now i have to fix a patch or 2 and cant do it now, ill be back later i have to clean carpets [11:38] asac, how do you do a build-dep of xul-qt vs xul-gtk then? [11:45] fta2: why is firefox build depending on qt/gtk peculiarities? [11:45] fta2: my quess is that a ffox buil against -gtk _should_ work against -qt [12:47] well, i didn't try that yet. [12:47] i will [12:47] but not today [16:37] asac: do you guys have a specific person that looks after thunderbird or is it a general team effort? [16:44] reconnect [16:45] 17:37 < jcastro> asac: do you guys have a specific person that looks after thunderbird or is it a general team effort? [16:45] 17:42 < asac> jcastro: anything specific? [16:51] asac: yeah just a few questions - which is the preferred source name, thunderbird or mozilla-thunderbird? [16:51] we have 2 [16:52] jcastro: mozilla-thunderbird is the _old_ one [16:52] thunderbird the new one [16:52] ok [16:52] and thunderbird-3.0 will be tbitrd 3.0 [16:52] in the end it will be like firefox [16:52] k [16:53] are you guys making an effort to open upstream tasks as you triage? [16:55] jcastro: the answer is obvious isnt it ;) [16:55] well, I meant "from now on" :p === asac_ is now known as asac [16:56] fta2: why is NSS_DYNAMIC_SOFTOKN set to 0 using the patch .is it something to do because we don't build it as static but as shared ? [16:56] asac: [16:57] jcastro: personally, i cannot really commit that. we dont have the resources to properly triage all bugs - as sad as it is. we would need support from QA here. [16:57] asac: *nod* [16:57] jcastro: so what we do is to try to spot serious bugs [16:57] and work on those [16:58] jcastro: if firefox would be split in multiple packages [16:58] that would be better [16:58] launchpad is just not usable anymore for that package [16:58] i mean, i see a bug ... then i get another mail about a dupe and i cannot find the other bug anymore [16:59] I suspect it's the same thing with the kernel team [17:00] jcastro: so on top of lack of time we are also struck by the fact that launchpad isnt really good at doing large packages with lots of bugs [17:00] jcastro: yeah. i think linux probabyl gets even more bugs [17:01] ok so really, the lack of upstreamable tasks is just a symptom of a larger problem, is what you're trying to say? [17:01] but the bugs can be much easier isolated ... like bug in driver X, Y, Z .... so it might be even easier for new folks to help [17:01] jcastro: there are multiple things: [17:01] 1. too many bugs [17:02] 2. too many low severity bugs or wishlist bugs [17:02] 3. too many unreproducible bugs [17:02] (this is a *serious* issue ... most bugs are just not reproducible and without that you cannot forward) [17:04] 4. hard upstream bug process [17:05] jcastro: and maybe as a higher reason: too high noise for anyone [17:07] jcastro: we might be able to streamline the community better [17:08] but then someone has to take the lead on it ... e.g. constrantly blog how to triage firefox bugs et al ... and so on [17:08] yeah [17:14] jcastro: i just picked a random bug: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.0/+bug/200344 [17:14] Launchpad bug 200344 in firefox-3.0 "firefox 3.0 gets mixed up with fonts" [Undecided,Incomplete] [17:15] I see [17:17] jcastro: though this is certainly one of the bugs with the higher likelyhood to get to something when properly triaged [17:18] jcastro: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-mozillateam-bugs/2008-September/thread.html [17:19] ok that month had the eula bug ;) [17:19] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-mozillateam-bugs/2008-August/thread.html [17:20] so 2.5k - 3k mails a month [17:21] _all_ on mostly the same package ... not like gnome or other componentized software projects where each package buglist can mostly be seen on 1-3 bug pages [17:21] nod [17:22] so: launchpad + high bug load + high bar to effectively triage bugs ... are the factors that make firefox-3.0 a bug mess ;) [17:22] ok ;) [17:22] hope thats enough [17:23] wow in may we had 4500 bugmail ;) [17:23] 4774 [17:24] i guess thats the month that killed all our efforts to keep on top firefox-3.0 [17:24] or, so in normal english, basically, you're drowning in bugs and the last thing you need is someone telling you to make the process longer. :) [17:25] jcastro: yeah. ... at least when we dont want to cause pain on mozilla side [17:26] * jcastro nods [17:26] jcastro: i could easily say for each incoming bug: please test with upstream build [17:26] jcastro: and then tell him to forward upstream on his own ;) [17:26] jcastro: or tell the community triagers to do that [17:26] jcastro: but in the end they most likely will start posting the initial bug reporters description upstream [17:27] and not following up in upstream tracker [17:27] ok [17:27] that doesnt make sense [17:28] jcastro: actually i am not that concerned about not many bugs getting forwarded. i am concerned about the bug flood making it hard to spot the important bugs and gems and forward them [17:53] asac, so, what about bug 274187 now? [17:53] Launchpad bug 274187 in ubuntu "FFe - firefox 3.1 and xulrunner 1.9.1 for intrepid/universe" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/274187 [17:53] fta2: you know I like bleeding edge but what sense does it make to have 3.1 alpha in intrepid? [17:55] asac: so do you think the firefox "project" should be like split up into other components? Or will that make it worse? [18:00] sebner, just read the first 2 comments on the bug [18:01] fta2: ok but it's still an alpha [18:01] sebner, beta 1 is expected soon [18:01] fta: ah, I see. so thumps up :D [18:01] and the package is ready and usable as it is [18:02] i'm working on the kde version too but that's not what i want to push now [18:03] fta2: I know that it is usable. I'm using your ppa version :P [18:04] i know, a lot of people are using my ppa apparently. would be nice to have some real stats from lp [18:06] * sebner is wondering if we have something like debian popcon in general for ubuntu [18:07] in a way, it's also a problem... i can't experiment as much as i want to and push everything i do/touch [18:07] fta2: sure but it's alpha software and a private PPA. f*ck them who complain when something is b0rken [18:07] i guess popcon doesn't make the difference between ppa and repo [18:08] i often see my ppa in blogs, in the forum, even in bugs [18:09] fta2: the software is cool and your packaging skills great. your fault :P [18:10] yahh [18:10] ok, going for a beer, friends waiting [18:10] cu [18:35] jcastro: the project wont help ... we need that split on the package [18:35] jcastro: let me think [18:35] jcastro: i think we could do all triage in multiple upstream products [18:35] but i doubt that that is feasible as we have to also maintain the package task status [18:36] and projects in launchpad are quite heavy weight ... e.g. i cannot search for bugs in selected multiple projects [18:38] jcastro: so yes, i like the idea, but no, i dont think that that helps ... the split helps but we get other burdens that will annihilate the win of the split [22:19] cdbs is not very friendly when you want more than 1 build :( [22:49] asac, http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=933429 [22:54] fta: at lesat not a problem due to this security update round [22:56] hm [22:57] http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/61642beb4c16fc1e5140ae96bceb5743ae0bab08 ??? [23:05] fta: not sure what that means [23:10] <[reed]> fta: it was a screw-up [23:11] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=412610#c20 [23:11] Mozilla bug 412610 in Startup and Profile System "MAXPATHLEN too small for glibc's realpath()" [Normal,New] [23:12] [reed], what is that UPDATE_PACKAGING_R5 tag for? [23:13] or which project? [23:13] <[reed]> build automation [23:16] ok