[00:22] <fta> chromium is messing iup with zlib and libpng symbols, like mozilla, i can't use the system ones, at least not without further tweaks
[00:27] <tonyyarusso> Ugh.  I still have no idea why KompoZer is so horribly broken in 8.10 compared to previous releases.
[00:31] <fta> isn't KompoZer dead ?
[00:33] <tonyyarusso> well, I haven't heard much from the dev in a long time, so perhaps, but until 9.10 it's the best we have.
[00:34] <asac> fta: isnt that just a define?
[00:34] <asac> zlib/png
[00:34] <fta> yes
[00:34] <asac> ok
[00:35] <asac> thats at least easy to switch then in theory
[00:35] <fta> zlib: symbols are remapped to MOZ_Z_xx for libpng
[00:35] <fta> libpng: problem with undefined references to lots of webkit_png_* symbols
[00:35] <asac> in chrome?
[00:35] <fta> yes
[00:35] <asac> ok so they copied the mozilla code ;)
[00:36] <fta> yes, parts of it
[00:36] <asac> shouldnt that be solved in webkit package already?
[00:37] <asac> or is png shipped in chrome itself and not  by webkit?
[00:37] <fta> both
[00:37] <asac> cool ;)
[00:37] <fta> third_party/zlib
[00:37] <fta> third_party/WebKit/WebCore/platform/image-decoders/zlib
[00:37] <asac> ok
[00:38] <asac> in theory they ship their own widget thing right?
[00:38] <asac> fta: did you sponsor gnomefreaks extensions yet?
[00:38] <asac> just remember that he said a had a bunch ready ;O)
[00:38] <fta> hm, no, i don't remember him asking me anything
[00:39] <fta> http://paste.ubuntu.com/70237/
[00:40] <asac> your patch=?
[00:40] <fta> yep
[00:40] <asac> submit it ;)
[00:41] <fta> i will, it's not complete yet
[00:41] <asac> kk
[00:42] <fta> well, maybe it is, but my build is still in progress
[00:50] <asac> bug 28479
[00:50] <asac> they want a firefox32
[00:55] <fta> asac, my notes so far: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Chromium
[00:55] <fta> not much
[01:02] <mconnor> asac: where's the intrepid patches list?
[01:02] <fta> mconnor, what for ?
[01:02] <mconnor> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mozillateam/firefox/firefox-3.0.intrepid/changes is not easy to follow
[01:03] <mconnor> fta: you know, so I can yell at you guys again
[01:03] <mconnor> or something
[01:03] <mconnor> remember, I hate freedom and everything
[01:04] <fta> http://patches.ubuntu.com/by-release/extracted/ubuntu/x/xulrunner-1.9/1.9.0.3+nobinonly-0ubuntu1/
[01:04] <fta> http://patches.ubuntu.com/by-release/extracted/ubuntu/f/firefox-3.0/3.0.3+nobinonly-0ubuntu2/
[01:05] <fta> 1.9.1/3.1 are now in there yet, you have to use the branches
[01:05] <fta> -now+not
[01:05] <mconnor> s'ok, I just need to have a baseline
[01:05] <mconnor> fta: thanks
[01:06] <fta> mconnor, all those named bzXXX_ are supposed to be upstreamed
[01:06] <fta> one day
[01:07] <mconnor> uh
[01:07] <mconnor> drop_bz418016.patch
[01:07] <mconnor> you have jemalloc disabled?
[01:08] <fta> hm, i don't think so
[01:08] <mconnor> that patch kinda makes it look that way
[01:09] <mconnor> anyway, I should do this after I finish reviewing blockers
[01:09] <fta> i have it in 3.1 for sure, i'm spamed with zillions of /tmp/jemalloc.XXXX files
[01:09] <mconnor> heh
[01:10] <fta> $ lsof -p 9989 | grep -c /tmp/jemalloc
[01:10] <fta> 283
[01:11] <fta> deleted but still opened so this is vicious
[01:11] <mconnor> uh
[01:11] <mconnor> weird
[01:11] <mconnor> never heard of that
[01:12] <fta> firefox-3 9989  fta  DEL    REG        8,1          35160076 /tmp/jemalloc.EfHUUh
[01:12] <fta> firefox-3 9989  fta  DEL    REG        8,1          35160073 /tmp/jemalloc.32yXGC
[01:12] <fta> firefox-3 9989  fta  DEL    REG        8,1          35160071 /tmp/jemalloc.sWt2vX
[01:13] <fta> maybe a leaked filehandle or something
[01:13] <mconnor> hmm
[01:13] <mconnor> look for an upstream bug?
[01:13] <mconnor> I doubt its just you
[01:13] <mconnor> also, http://patches.ubuntu.com/by-release/extracted/ubuntu/f/firefox-3.0/3.0.3+nobinonly-0ubuntu2/ubuntu_no_app_updates.patch
[01:13] <mconnor> why not just set the pref and be done with it?
[01:14] <mconnor> and that, uh, doesn't change the pref?
[01:15] <fta> not my patch
[01:17] <mconnor> man...
[01:17] <mconnor> this is not going to go quickly, is it?
[01:18] <mconnor> ok, I'll do it tomorrow
[01:18] <mconnor> where I can yell at asac directly
[01:18] <fta> ok
[01:18] <mconnor> (this is the overdue approval round for branding stuff, its so much cleaner than Fx2!)
[01:19] <asac> mconnor: i am on holiday ;)
[01:19] <asac> mconnor: the drop patch isnt applied. you have to look at the series file
[01:20] <mconnor> asac: where is the series file?
[01:20] <asac> mconnor: the pref isnt for app updates isnt enough ... users must not enable app updates
[01:20] <mconnor> asac: so lock the pref
[01:20] <mconnor> that should work just fine
[01:20] <asac> mconnor: lock prefs is something that admins have to use
[01:20] <asac> we used that in the past
[01:20] <mconnor> no
[01:21] <mconnor> why do you think that's true?
[01:21] <asac> because you can only have one lock file?
[01:21] <mconnor> er
[01:21] <mconnor> sec
[01:22] <asac> i think we have developed a patch that allows you to do locks in all pref files ... but the app updates patch probably predates that
[01:23] <asac> pristine behaviour is that you can configure one general.config.filename ... and in that file you can have lockPref
[01:23] <asac> mconnor: the series file in only in the branch or package source ... in debian/patches directory.
[01:24] <asac> there also are all the patches so you dont need to switch to the patches.ubuntu.com site and just can navigate there.
[01:24] <mconnor> link me please?
[01:25] <asac> mconnor: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mozillateam/firefox/firefox-3.0.intrepid/files
[01:25] <asac> there you can navigate the tree
[01:25] <asac> go to debian/patches/
[01:27] <mconnor> asac: hmm
[01:27] <mconnor> what's the branding stuff?
[01:30] <asac> mconnor: we provide that for downstreams and oems that need a different branding (on a packaging level)
[01:33] <mconnor> mmm, so you can package up another branding jar without having to rebuild the package, I assume?
[01:33] <asac> mconnor: right ... so what we do is have firefox-3.0-branding package ... if you install that you get all firefox ... if you install abrowser-3.0-branding ... everything uses the example "alternative" branding
[01:34] <mconnor> hmm
[01:34] <mconnor> intriguing
[01:35] <asac> mconnor: its ment to be the answer to the critique:
[01:35] <asac> "mozilla provides a simple configure switch to use your own branding ... what do you do for packages?"
[01:36] <asac> but we are still learning on this, so its definitly not perfect yet.
[01:36] <mconnor> asac: yeah
[01:36] <fta> mconnor, here is the content of the firefox-3.0-branding package: http://paste.ubuntu.com/70260/
[01:36] <asac> but we are searching for better way then just providing iceweasel or something
[01:36] <mconnor> I mean, I think there's a nicer way to do that
[01:36] <asac> i appreciate any feedback
[01:36] <mconnor> fta: I can entirely predict that
[01:37] <fta> which is a good thing i assume :)
[01:37] <mconnor> I'm the one who added the /unofficial directory so people could see how easy it was to have alternate branding :)
[01:37] <fta> we had to split browser.jar though
[01:38] <fta> that should be "upstreamable" :)
[01:39] <asac> welll ...
[01:39] <fta> the split should not hurt
[01:39] <asac> yeah
[01:39] <asac> just like i said, we are still somewhat learning how to do this best for all the eventual cases
[01:40] <fta> that sub jar and the icons could also be regrouped in a branding directory, that would help too
[01:40] <asac> but keeping the branding in a separate chrome jar is probably part of the final solution ... though not 100% sure. maybe it can be better supported in a different way
[01:41] <mconnor> hmm
[01:41] <mconnor> I thought we kept stuff in a separate jar already
[01:41] <mconnor> fair
[01:41] <asac> mconnor: nope ... browser.jar
[01:41] <asac> and some stuff directly in APP/GRE dir
[01:42] <mconnor> huh
[01:42] <mconnor> man
[01:42] <mconnor> all of the things I don't think enough about :-/
[01:42] <asac> hehe
[01:43] <asac> well. its understood that alternate branding is probably not a core feature ;)
[01:43] <mconnor> on a product level, no
[01:43] <mconnor> on a code level, it kinda is
[01:44] <mconnor> it has been for a very long time, really
[01:44] <asac> mconnor: there are also other minor issues, like the user-agent string
[01:44] <asac> mconnor: some might want to use their own product in that id
[01:44] <asac> mconnor: but most probably want to keep firefox in order to be not locked out of some sites
[01:44] <mconnor> that should just work, aiui
[01:44] <mconnor> well
[01:44] <asac> mconnor: i think it encodes the appname
[01:44] <asac> during build
[01:44] <mconnor> yes
[01:44] <mconnor> I think I remember where, even
[01:45] <mconnor> but
[01:45] <mconnor> we're trying to teach the world to sniff Gecko versions
[01:45] <asac> yeah ;)
[01:45] <asac> but the world is not enough :)
[01:45] <mconnor> yeesh
[01:46] <asac> mconnor: how about a campaign: "randomize your user agent parts" ;) ... and then complain to websites
[01:46] <asac> hard to guess how to best teach MS to make hotmail work
[01:47] <asac> they even stop providing full service if ubuntu is properly encoded
[01:48] <mconnor> that's just them being dicks ;)
[01:49] <asac> i wouldnt be shocked if they looked through the navigator.plugins array and downgrade their service when they find an openoffice doc plugin installed ;)
[05:58] <gnomefreak> i really hate "at"
[06:23] <gnomefreak> ok firegpg is set for intrepid in my PPA i am gonna rebuild all of them with target jaunty tonight or tomorrow
[06:58] <gnomefreak> fta: support for Jaunty isnt in PPAs yet, they say they uploaded but PPAs are not showing them anywhere.
[10:41] <asac> gnomefreak: ok thanks
[10:41] <asac> gnomefreak: if there are things to upload and i am not here, ask fta too ;)
[10:47] <armin76> asac: gentoo bug 234110
[10:47] <armin76> any clue why it would hang?
[10:47] <armin76> bah
[10:47] <armin76> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=234110
[10:52] <asac> hmm gentoo still has no cert ;)?
[10:52] <armin76> it has a cacert one
[10:53] <asac> ok
[10:53] <armin76> brb, kernel upgrade, have a look and let me know :)
[12:22] <asac> kernel upgrades appear to take ages on gentoo ;)
[12:22] <asac> gtk
[12:47] <asac> tell armin that i don't know ... only thing i could imagine is either cruft in the pkglibdir, a missing .autoreg or i dont know ;)
[12:52] <asac> ok off for a while again ;)
[12:58] <sebner> asac: gentoo .. :P
[12:58] <sebner> asac: hf
[13:13] <fta> dh_strip debug symbol extraction: ignored packages:
[13:13] <fta> objcopy:./usr/lib/chrome/stiAjXMz[.debug_loc]: No space left on device
[13:13] <fta> :(
[17:33] <[reed]> sheesh, travel plans are going to be the death of me
[17:33] <fta> ?
[17:40] <[reed]> fta: finalizing UDS travel and such, as I finally got approval from one of my professors to move an exam :(
[17:41] <fta> [reed], i need to finish mine too. i totally forgot
[17:41] <[reed]> lol
[17:43] <fta> a matter of direct flight more expensive than alternatives through 2 or more hops
[17:52] <[reed]> yeah, the proposed flight for me is pretty hoppy, too
[21:29] <mconnor> fta: 2 hops or two connections?
[21:30] <mconnor> a-b-c is ok, a-b-c-d is pushing your luck :)
[21:31] <[reed]> I'm a-b-c-d
[21:31] <[reed]> where 'a' is my home airport, and 'd' is SFO
[21:32] <fta> i have a-b, a-b-c and a-b-c-d,
[21:32] <fta> a = paris
[21:34] <fta> i have the choice for the connection(s), Toronto, Chicago/Frankfurt, Newark, Cinncinnati, Philadelphia, Detroit, ...
[21:43] <fta> http://www.sofaraway.org/ubuntu/tmp/src.png
[21:50] <fta> most are tests
[21:51] <mconnor> [reed]: your home airport is weird though
[21:51] <[reed]> yeah
[21:51] <[reed]> mconnor: are you going to come to any part of UDS?
[21:51] <mconnor> [reed]: tbd
[21:52] <mconnor> depends on how today goes
[21:52] <[reed]> what's special about today?
[21:52] <mconnor> because today I'm looking at the intrepid patchset
[21:52] <[reed]> ah
[21:52] <mconnor> and if I find something that causes problems, I'm sure I'll get lynched
[21:52] <mconnor> ;)
[21:53] <[reed]> hehe
[21:54] <fta> but intrepid is already out.. so why now?
[21:55] <mconnor> because we're actually going to have a formal trademark usage agreement, rather than just ad-hoc stuff
[21:55] <fta> oh
[21:56] <mconnor> also, because we've always required that, even without contracts, as a prereq
[21:56] <mconnor> that we haven't done it yet kinda sucks
[21:56] <mconnor> just because the horse has left the barn doesn't mean you can't put the horse back in the barn, you just can't close the door and do any good
[22:34]  * mconnor grumbles a little
[22:34] <fta> ?
[22:35] <mconnor> seeing stuff in a patches list for a bug that was resolved invalid a year ago is slightly frustrating
[22:35] <mconnor> especially when the patch was rejected
[22:35] <fta> which one ?
[22:35] <mconnor> sec
[22:35] <mconnor> bz386904_config_rules_install_dist_files.patch
[22:35] <mconnor> see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=386904
[22:36] <mconnor> the patch is wrong, and no longer needed in any case
[22:36] <mconnor> bad asac, no donut
[22:36] <[reed]> are you sure it's being used? there are patches in the repo that aren't used
[22:36] <[reed]> also, make sure to look at both firefox and xulrunner patches
[22:37] <[reed]> two different patch sets
[22:37] <mconnor> its in the series file
[22:37] <[reed]> ok
[22:37] <mconnor> also, seriously, are you telling me how to do my job? :P
[22:37] <mconnor> this isn't my first time at this here rodeo
[22:38] <mconnor> and I haven't looked at the xulrunner patches because, for the most part, I don't care
[22:38] <[reed]> no, just offering helpful suggestions in case you didn't know
[22:39] <mconnor> [reed]: see, that's what you _think_ you're doing... :P
[22:39] <fta> hm, we have that patch since trunk 20070703
[22:42] <mconnor> that was before the upstream bug got filed
[22:42] <mconnor> and bsmedberg rejected the patch two weeks later
[22:42] <[reed]> mconnor: just checking actual patches or ubufox too?
[22:42] <mconnor> and it got left anyway
[22:42] <mconnor> [reed]: ubufox is tomorrow
[22:42] <mconnor> yay me
[22:42] <[reed]> k
[22:43] <mconnor> you're doing a bad job of being on sabbatical, btw
[22:43] <fta> mconnor, i think asac just forgot about it, no evil intention here
[22:43] <mconnor> fta: I'm not saying evil
[22:43] <mconnor> I'm saying "this is frustrating"
[22:44] <mconnor> because he would have gotten mail explaining why that patch was wrong, and he did nothing about it
[22:45] <mconnor> fta: btw, where are the build configs stored?
[22:45] <fta> in debian/rules
[22:47] <mconnor> ow
[22:47] <mconnor> that's so... elaborate
[22:47] <fta> :)
[22:48] <mconnor> why do you guys specify so many build flags explicitly?
[22:48] <mconnor> also, why do you disable reporter?
[22:49] <mconnor> oh, you ship it with xulrunner
[22:49] <mconnor> oy, ok
[22:49] <fta> because we have apport pushing core dumps to launchpad, where they are retraced by a bot and published in a bug
[22:51] <mconnor> not crashreporter
[22:51] <mconnor> though, really, I still wish you wouldn't do that
[22:51] <mconnor> but that's a separate discussion about how to not have linux distros hiding their crash data from us
[22:51] <fta> what? crashreporter ?
[22:52] <[reed]> I don't think they're hiding it... just think that we need to integrate better
[22:52] <fta> we had several discussions about that
[22:52] <fta> including at the last uds
[22:52] <mconnor> hiding is pejorative
[22:53] <mconnor> I mean that we don't have a unified view of crashes
[22:53] <mconnor> because every distro does something different
[22:53] <mconnor> and we can't roll that up easily
[22:57] <mconnor> I also wish you guys ran unit tests
[23:01] <fta> it's not something our builders can do. we need dedicated boxes.
[23:01] <fta> i'm not canonical, but i think asac discussed that internally with the ubuntu QA team
[23:02] <fta> unfortunately, nothing happened since
[23:05] <mconnor> you have an hppa build?
[23:07] <fta> yes, but not officially supported
[23:07] <fta> i.e. best effort
[23:07] <mconnor> ok
[23:08] <mconnor> there's a newer version of the patch in the bug
[23:08] <mconnor> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=436133
[23:08] <mconnor> which is on trunk already
[23:09] <mconnor> at least that was r+ ;)
[23:10] <mconnor> do all of these changes have launchpad numbers somewhere?
[23:10] <mconnor> and the convention is just old?
[23:10] <mconnor> er, new?
[23:11] <fta> lpxxxx mean there's a bug in launchpad
[23:11] <fta> means
[23:11] <mconnor> yeah, and bz is bmo, but there's a bunch that have neither
[23:12] <mconnor> and I don't have good details on those if I can't look stuff up
[23:14] <fta> well, those without lp or bz are explained somewhere in debian/changelog
[23:24] <mconnor> fta: except without actually being linked to the patch itself, in many cases
[23:25] <mconnor> really, I should just give you guys a list and ask what's up
[23:26] <fta> you should find a "add debian/patches/whatever" somewhere in debian/changelog, at least if it's from asac or me, we are really consistent about that
[23:27] <fta> but a list of questions would be fine too
[23:27] <mconnor> what emails should I use?
[23:28] <[reed]> fta@ubuntu.com, asac@ubuntu.com, probably... and CC me if you want me watching/poking, too
[23:28] <fta> yes
[23:28] <mconnor> ok
[23:29] <mconnor> http://people.mozilla.com/~mconnor/trademark-review/Ubuntu/Round%201/ is basically what I'm doing
[23:29] <mconnor> (also, boy is omnioutliner nice for this)
[23:31] <fta> ftbfs-with-branding-dir is no longer needed, i thought i already removed it
[23:32] <fta> installer_shouldnt_copy_xulrunner got a r- from bs, the feature is needed but not that way
[23:33] <fta> installer_use_stdout_for_missing_files got a r+ from bs and landed in trunk
[23:33] <fta> [reed], do you have the bug # ?
[23:34] <[reed]> looking
[23:34] <fta> nspr_flags_by_pkg_config_hack is needed because we use system nspr and we don't have the nspr sources in the xul/ff tarballs
[23:34] <fta> mconnor, ^^
[23:35] <mconnor> w00t, awesome
[23:35] <[reed]> 460911    	nor  	--  	fta+bugzilla@sofaraway.org  	RESO  	FIXE  	Linu  	  	Make the installer complain about missing files on stdout
[23:35] <[reed]> 460913 	nor 	-- 	fta+bugzilla@sofaraway.org 	ASSI 		Linu 		Installer shouldn't copy xulrunner files into Firefox install directory
[23:35] <[reed]> 460915 	nor 	-- 	asac@jwsdot.com 	RESO 	INVA 	Linu 		Build problem when using --with-branding-dir
[23:35] <[reed]> 460917 	maj 	-- 	asac@jwsdot.com 	ASSI 		Linu 		New plugins only recognized after restarting Firefox
[23:35] <fta> dont_depend_on_nspr_sources, same thing
[23:35] <mconnor> ew
[23:35] <mconnor> paste-nasty
[23:36] <fta> (looks fine here)
[23:36] <fta> mozilla bug 460911
[23:36] <fta> mozilla bug 460913
[23:36] <fta> mozilla bug 460915
[23:36] <fta> mozilla bug 460917
[23:36] <mconnor> fta: I'm using irssi, it doesn't like some things
[23:39] <fta> regarding 460913, i need to work in this, i have it in ff3.0/ff3.1/prism/fennec/xul-explorer/instantbird/bluegriffon
[23:40] <mconnor> bluegriffon?
[23:40] <fta> the new nvu from glazou
[23:40] <mconnor> ah
[23:41] <fta> i have experimental packages for all those
[23:43] <mconnor> fwiw, my goal here is to minimize the "special" patches distros end up with
[23:44] <mconnor> because really, other than maybe build config stuff, and some alternate bookmarks, I don't see why everything else can't just live in mozilla.org Hg
[23:44] <fta> i agree
[23:45] <mconnor> hmm
[23:45] <mconnor> Dave Townsend's comment in the plugin reload bug is apt
[23:46] <mconnor> in 460917
[23:47] <fta> patch from asac, i don't know the details behind this one
[23:49] <mconnor> ok
[23:49] <mconnor> I mean, this is a process, not a binary decision
[23:50] <mconnor> I'm not, despite what some would think, trying to do bad things :)
[23:50] <fta> [reed], you guys should have a builder tracking the qt build, it doesn't even build
[23:50] <fta> mconnor, i'm sure you're not evil :)
[23:51] <[reed]> file a bug :)
[23:51] <fta> [reed], i have
[23:51] <[reed]> to get a qt build machine?
[23:51] <fta> not, the build issue
[23:51] <fta> -not+no
[23:52] <mconnor> builders for new platforms are unlikely to happen until January or so
[23:52] <mconnor> we're still working on getting builds on Mercurial fully automated
[23:52] <mconnor> and stabilizing our unit test infrastructure
[23:52] <fta> [reed], i just didn't have time to produce a patch so far
[23:52] <fta> mozilla bug 463872
[23:53] <fta> it's not fixed
[23:54] <mconnor> also, its qt
[23:54] <mconnor> so... meh ;)
[23:54] <[reed]> then reopen?
[23:54] <fta> i'm trying to have a build for both qt and gtk in the same (3.1) branch
[23:55] <fta> some kde users are producing rogue packages
[23:57] <mconnor> rogue packages?
[23:57] <mconnor> using unofficial branding, I hope!