[04:46] <[reed]> mozilla bug 486966
[04:46] <[reed]> :)
[09:12] <rzr> hi
[09:13] <asac> rzr: hi. i will check you thing after mail batch ;)
[09:14] <rzr> ok i am around
[10:20] <rzr> damit kvm b0rken in jaunty
[10:55] <asac_> @time
[11:19] <fta> grrr, http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=9007
[12:31] <gnomefreak> somwthing wrong with gwibber daily's?
[12:31] <gnomefreak> s/sonwthing/something
[12:32] <gnomefreak> i havent had a gwibber update in a while (1 week maybe)
[12:52] <gnomefreak> that was an easy fix :)
[13:02] <gnomefreak> bug 239763
[14:24] <gnomefreak> asac:  when you get a minute can you accept the nominations on bug 356274 its a bit early but just using it as a reminder
[15:19] <gnomefreak> !info google-gadgets-common hardy
[15:38] <asac> gnomefreak: we already have 1.1.16 ... so lets just upload that to jaunty
[15:39] <gnomefreak> asac: no we dont we have 1.1.15
[15:39] <gnomefreak> 16 hasnt been released yet
[15:39] <asac> gnomefreak: well. we have all the patches that .16 has
[15:40] <asac> ok approved jaunty task
[15:40] <gnomefreak> asac: still cant grab 1.1.16 using ./debian/rules ect
[15:41] <asac> why would you want to ?
[15:42] <gnomefreak> asac: why wouldnt i? it adds nobinonly and such why would i want to grab package from upstream and manualy change it?
[15:43] <gnomefreak> it looks like the fix for right click bug has been checked in but im betting not for 3.0
[15:43] <asac> its not fixed in 3.0
[15:43] <asac> i would think
[15:45] <gnomefreak> im thinking it wont be unless we cherry pick the patch but i dont think it meets SRU standards
[15:45] <gnomefreak> oh thats what you added to 1.1.15
[15:45] <gnomefreak> the 2 patches
[15:47] <gnomefreak> if those 2 CVE's is it than we should only add it to Jaunty than deal with the overflow of "why doesnt hardy intrepid have latest version :) but lets wait until they are done with testing, Im thinking you grabed those patches from firefox nightly
[16:00] <gnomefreak> bug 348316
[16:14] <asac> gnomefreak: yes i patched the security issues for now
[16:17] <asac> gnomefreak: you have to drop those patches on the jaunty branch
[16:17] <asac> if you pull the 16 tag
[16:18] <gnomefreak> k i didnt think you added them to Jaunty version
[16:21] <asac> i added them everywhere
[16:21] <asac> you need to drop them when next upstream release is coming
[16:38] <gnomefreak> asac: ok will do.
[19:01] <fta> [reed], http://paste.ubuntu.com/145617/
[19:07] <gnomefreak> fta: daily gwibber bot down?
[19:08] <fta> no
[19:09] <gnomefreak> im not getting an updates from it
[19:09] <gnomefreak> maybe a week or 2
[19:11] <fta> which version do you have?
[19:13] <gnomefreak> 1.0.1~bzr280-0ubuntu1~daily1 and it still crashes and is unusible
[19:13] <fta> works for me
[19:13] <fta> 280 is the freshest upstream has: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~gwibber-committers/gwibber/trunk
[19:14] <gnomefreak> it crashes when i try to input my info same as all other versions
[19:14] <fta> file a bug then
[19:15] <fta> did you try the stable version in universe? 0.9.1~*
[19:16] <fta> gnomefreak, btw, the bot will only package stuff when upstream *or* the packaging branch has something new, no need otherwise
[19:17] <[reed]> fta: still having issues?
[19:17] <gnomefreak> fta: i know i figured upstream would release daily
[19:17] <[reed]> looks like hg repo just corrupt
[19:17] <[reed]> like, your local repo
[19:17] <gnomefreak> fta: i tried 0.8 0.9 and 1.* none work
[19:21] <fta> file a bug, with the output of what you see when you start gwibber in a shell.
[19:21] <fta> maybe BUGabundo already saw that
[19:22] <fta> [reed], strange, i don't see why/how my local tree could be corrupted
[19:22] <[reed]> it's hg
[19:22] <[reed]> :p
[19:26] <gnomefreak> damnit now it works :( ok marking invalid
[19:29] <fta> [reed], ?
[19:31] <fta> asac, what about gtk? (bug 190227)
[19:41] <[reed]> fta: meaning, I've seen weird repo problems like that before with hg
[19:41] <[reed]> try a fresh clone
[20:17] <fta> [reed], in fact, i don't keep a local branch for comm-central, so if it's corrupted, it's on the server, I'll retry
[20:37] <fta> FIREFOX_3_0_9_BUILD1, already?
[21:27] <fta> [reed], http://launchpadlibrarian.net/24903117/buildlog_ubuntu-jaunty-amd64.xulrunner-1.9.2_1.9.2~a1~hg20090406r26991%2Bnobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[21:28] <[reed]> fta: file a bug under Core :: ImageLib ?
[21:28] <[reed]> or track down the regressor
[21:29] <fta> [reed], not brilliant: https://edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-mozilla-daily/+archive/ppa?field.name_filter=xulrunner-1.9.2&field.status_filter=any&field.series_filter=jaunty
[21:31] <fta> 26915..26939
[21:31] <rzr> is back
[21:36] <fta> [reed], i'd say mozilla 423756
[21:40] <fta> [reed], should I just add a comment in that bug?
[21:42] <[reed]> fta: yeah, and if that doesn't work, reopen it
[21:43] <fta> [reed], done, still closed though
[22:45] <gnomefreak> asac: is it you or mike that handle iceape in debian?
[22:48] <gnomefreak> on the maintainer spage it shows both of you with iceape