[07:43] asac: if I were to be interested in doing what you talked to about Jazzva yesterday... is there any kind of RSS feed that can notify me whenever a new revision pops up? [10:55] Hi, is firefox intergration with notify-osd being worked upon and where? [11:36] what app is used to shut down? hal? [12:07] asac: have you been doing dailies by hand? or did fta get back? [12:24] clearscreen: i dont think so. let me check [12:24] gnomefreak: we fixed dailies [12:24] asac: ah ok :) [12:24] fta isnt needed as the uploads happen automatically [12:25] asac: also, when can we expect Fx3.5 showing up on testing repository? :) [12:25] clearscreen: what is "testing" repository? [12:25] clearscreen: maybe check if you can subscribe to PPA of https://edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-mozilla-daily [12:26] Well I used to run Debian, but I was refering to karmic on ubuntu [12:26] clearscreen: karmic already has ffox 3.5 [12:26] asac: I wasn't aware of that :) [12:26] also jaunty has [12:27] jaunty has some pre b4 snapshot (will be updated to b4 soon) [12:27] karmic has b4 [12:27] I see [12:29] asac: I'm relatively knew to its development process; so why is there active development in both 3.0x (3.1?) and 3.5? I'm trying to put this into perspective.. [12:29] clearscreen: so i dont see how to subscribe to ppa mails ... the best way to do it is to load the page https://edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-mozilla-daily/+archive/ppa at ~8pm UTC [12:29] clearscreen: thats when builds should have finished [12:29] Other than security fixes obviously [12:29] clearscreen: 3.0 is security only [12:30] 3.5 is active development. we provide the packages as previews [12:30] but [12:30] we also made the step and allow you to install both in parallel [12:30] and so on [12:30] for us its firefox-3.0 and firefox-3.5 [12:30] and not firefox [12:30] (package name) [12:30] debian doesnt do that [12:30] we also have firefox-3.6 ;) [12:30] which is trunk [12:31] trunk is always good [12:31] aha. [12:31] ^^ [12:31] yeah. the dailies definitly rock [12:32] Also, is Fx3.5 called shiretoko because of the stuff that went on with mozilla <-> debian? [12:32] to some degree yes [12:32] we could call it firefox, if its a milestone release [12:32] but not for snapshots [12:32] so we dont bother [12:32] Alright [12:36] I'm a relatively new C++ programmer, and been considering getting involved in some open-source project, but most interesting projects have huge codebases and it would take ages to familiarize myself with them, I guess... [12:36] clearscreen: so the answer is: we dont want to bother with trademark stuff for anything except the default browser :) [12:36] which is ffox 3 atm [12:37] clearscreen: yeah [12:37] clearscreen: its a bit hard to just jump into mozilla code base [12:37] same for other big things [12:37] * gnomefreak working on seamonkey [12:37] be back in a bit i have hardy and intrepid building [12:38] And even if I were familiar with the codebase, I'd probably produce suboptimal code.. so yeah, not a very good idea for me at the time :D [12:38] clearscreen: i would think that going for C is better as those code bases in the linux stacks are usually much cleaner ;) [12:38] clearscreen: well. the suboptimal code argument doesnt count much [12:38] clearscreen: of course you need some basic skills [12:39] but then you need to produce code and get it reviewed by senior developers to get the final tuning of your skills [12:39] Sorry got to break up this conversation, need to go to work :( some PHP job, *sigh* [12:39] bb [12:39] hehe [12:39] enjoy [12:39] today is public holiday [12:39] so i might not be available all the time [12:40] going out to sun soon [12:55] at least you have sun, it looks like rain here [13:30] Hi i'm having some trouble with firefox [13:31] would anyone be able to help me out? [13:37] be patient folks ;) [13:45] * gnomefreak not really here but "having trouble with firefox" is a bit too general :( [14:00] heh [14:19] reconnect while scp'ing a huge file ... bad [14:29] this is taking forever [14:30] sm? [14:30] what are you doing? does it fail again? [14:31] sm2 builds for karmic jaunty intrepid hardy [14:32] asac_: no more failures :) [14:32] gnomefreak: heh. why do you build locally? [14:32] are you trying to improve packaging? [14:32] or just for fun [14:32] ? [14:32] asac_: no im updating my PPA [14:33] k === asac_ is now known as asac [14:34] mozilla bug 485052 [14:34] Mozilla bug 485052 in Security: PSM "Embed a list of default OCSP Responder URLs for certain CAs" [Normal,Resolved: fixed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=485052 [14:35] ah ok ive seen that one already [14:38] down to last build :) [14:47] and last one is uploaded waiting for PPA to start on it :) [14:54] good afternoon [14:54] hi gnomefreak [14:54] what's up with fta? [14:54] hi BUGabundo [14:54] BUGabundo: he took a few weeks off i thought [14:55] ah ok [14:55] !info flight-of-the-amazon-queen [14:55] flight-of-the-amazon-queen (source: flight-of-the-amazon-queen): a fantasy adventure game. In component universe, is optional. Version 1.0.0-5ubuntu2 (jaunty), package size 35682 kB, installed size 53028 kB [14:55] not seen him a while [14:55] what a longgggg name [14:55] thats why i wanted to see what it was :) [14:58] gnomefreak: apt-cache not good enough? [15:00] too hard i have 5 terminals open [15:07] asac: we will not build with PGO unless upstream provides builds for it right? [15:45] ok branhes and packages are done now updates [15:56] !info firefox hardy [15:56] firefox (source: firefox-3.0): meta package for the popular mozilla web browser. In component main, is optional. Version 3.0.10+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.8.04.1 (hardy), package size 64 kB, installed size 120 kB [15:59] finally my bug is fixed [17:44] asac: I have no clue why, but firefox built in like 5-10 min instead of the 30-40 of yesterday [17:45] clearscreen: firefox is tiny ... xulrunner takes long [17:45] firefox builds in 2-5 minutes usually [17:45] asac: oh. right, stupid me.. didnt realize I didnt build firefox yesterday [17:46] asac: I applied to the group @ launchpad, although I'm not entirely sure what I should do when the build breaks [17:47] and does karmic come with daily? or do I have to pull it from somewhere else [17:47] clearscreen: karmic needs to be setup. however, the guy driving the bot is a bit away ;) [17:47] clearscreen: so for now there are no karmic dailies [17:48] clearscreen: i dont think joining the team would be right when you get started [17:48] That's fine, I just though that was part of the procedure [17:50] clearscreen: i think the right way is that the daily team gets its build mail sent to mailing list [17:50] that team is more a bot team without real members [17:52] where do I subscribe? and dont all the packages in PPA need to be built? (I dont even see Fx3.0 in that list) [17:52] clearscreen: we currently only build the branches that you see there [17:53] clearscreen: we dont have a mailing list setup yet ;) [17:53] i have to check something [17:54] clearscreen: ok i applied for maling list [17:54] Sorry for all the questions, but will I need deb (for build-dep libs) or would deb-src suffice? [17:55] build-dep you need both [17:55] ok [17:56] clearscreen: remember me to write something about our dailies to the wiki or something [17:56] i will see if i can do that soonihs [17:56] Ok [17:59] Another question, can I tell apt somehow to keep older libs when installing a later one? between 3.0 and 3.5 builds it will constantly try to remove older/newer xulrunner-dev [17:59] I can manually remove those with deborphan whenever I feel like it [18:00] clearscreen: you cannot have multiple versions of -dev at the same time for xulrunner [18:00] the reason is that we share the same .pc filenames so they conflict [18:00] heh, k [18:00] this gives us the ability to respin xulrunner depends by just flipping build-depends [18:00] and see where they break [18:01] otherwise you would always need to patch any app that uses xulrunner-dev [18:01] which is cumbersome and sometimes non-trivial [18:01] (configure systems have grown to bad beasts for lots of gecko clients :)) [18:02] http://paste.ubuntu.com/162359/ < my uber leet build script [18:02] clearscreen: so if you want to build against xulrunner 1.9.2 you cannot have the 1.9 dev at the same time [18:02] asac: aha ok [18:02] clearscreen: well. actually thats not the preferred way of building our packages [18:03] (for development) [18:03] asac: I'm open for suggestions, heh [18:03] so what you need are the packaging branches [18:03] create a directory: mt-bzr (mozillateam bzr) or something [18:03] and branch [18:03] the .head branches for the respective packages [18:03] you can find them here: [18:04] https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~mozillateam/ [18:04] there are quite a few. just look for those with .head at the end [18:04] like xulrunner-1.9.2.head [18:04] https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~mozillateam/xulrunner/xulrunner-1.9.2.head [18:04] so you just branch them to the directory [18:05] and when a daily fails you change the debian/changelog version to just match the one that failed [18:05] (well not the ~umd.. suffix) [18:05] and use bzr-builddeb to build it [18:06] stupid question again, do I need to grab these with git? [18:06] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Build/Bzr [18:06] clearscreen: no with bzr [18:06] ;) [18:06] clearscreen: dont do step #2 OPTIONAL: initialize that directory as a bzr repository: [18:07] and dont use midbrowser ;) [18:07] * asac thinks this should be updated for our firefox/xulrunner apps ;) [18:08] that wiki page is real crap ;) [18:08] heh [18:09] clearscreen: so just branch the branch ... change the changelog version to the latest that was build in daily [18:09] ah, I suppose I get it [18:09] clearscreen: and run: bzr bd --merge --dont-purge --builder='debuild -b' [18:09] thats all [18:09] how do I upgrade my local copy of the branch? [18:09] it will automagically grab the orig.tar.gz and so on nowadays [18:10] clearscreen: local copy? [18:10] clearscreen: did you use bzr branch to get it? [18:10] if so you just run bzr pull [18:10] to get latest [18:11] Well basically what I meant is.. can I just bzr pull over the same branch when there's a new revision available [18:11] clearscreen: what exactly do you mean by "new revision available" ? [18:11] you only need to update the branch if there are new commits [18:11] we only commit when we either change something in the packaging [18:11] Yeah, commit = revision++ :P [18:11] _or_ if a patch or something failed [18:12] clearscreen: yes. you just run bzr pull [18:12] ah ok [18:12] that will update to latest [18:12] kk [18:12] what's head.genericbranding [18:13] I keep asking questions, I apologize :) [18:13] welcome [18:14] clearscreen: that was a topic branch i created to test something. that has been merged in the meantime [18:14] clearscreen: i should have mark the branch accordingly [18:14] e.g. its clutter that should not show up in the list [18:14] doing that now [18:14] alright [18:15] i shouldnt have pused it to ~mozillateam in the first place (rather ~asac) [18:19] alright, I got all head branches [18:19] some that were last-modified 50 weeks ago, but yeah :) [18:20] hehe [18:20] thats too much [18:20] for now only the .head branches of what is in dailies makes much sense [18:20] ;) [18:20] lp:~mozillateam/iceape/ubuntu-1.1.x 1 Development 2007-04-24 11:57:10 CEST [18:20] 105 weeks ago [18:20] ;)( [18:20] 105 weeks [18:21] fun [18:21] heh :D [18:21] By dailies you mean the PPAs on the launchpad page I suppose? [18:22] and maybe Im dumb, but I dont see firefox 3.5 / firefox 3.6 in this branch lsit [18:22] list* [18:22] clearscreen: sorry for the confusion [18:22] those branches have been reversioned upstream [18:22] so its still 3.1/3.2 for us ;) [18:24] oh ok [18:27] also some that are in dailies have no head branches (FF3.1 and Prism on first glance), should I get the -dev branches? [18:27] clearscreen: ffox 3.1 has a .head branch [18:28] prism just has lp:~mozillateam/prism/prism [18:28] the .dev is dead [18:28] let me remove that [18:29] I must be blind but there's no firefox-3.1.head in that list [18:29] had to manually modify the url :) [18:30] got it now [18:30] thats odd [18:30] clearscreen: oh its lp:firefox on the page [18:30] ;) [18:30] tricky [18:31] ahw [18:32] thats because someone marked that branch as the "main developmenet" series or something [18:32] which makes not much sense imo [18:32] but well [18:32] doesnt reall hurt [18:33] i suppose [18:38] asac: bzr doesn't have a bd command [18:38] install bzr-builddeb package [18:49] clearscreen: so does it work ;)? [18:49] asac: yeah it's building 3.1 now [18:50] or 3.5, whatever [18:50] clearscreen: good [18:50] clearscreen: did you change the changelog version? [18:50] clearscreen: or are you building unmodified? [18:51] clearscreen: the idea is to change the changelog version to whatevert is currently in daily ppa [18:51] clearscreen: simulating that you want to fix something that happens in current daily [18:51] So how exactly would I go about doing that [18:52] clearscreen: just open debian/changelog. there are two cases [18:52] either the topmost changelog entry is targetted for UNRELEASED or for jaunty [18:52] (karmic, etc.) [18:52] if its UNRELEASED you just change the upstream version in the first line [18:53] e.g. replace 3.1~b4 with 3.4~b5~hg.... [18:53] if its jaunty or something it means that you need to create a new topmost changelog ... for that you do: [18:53] dch -i [18:53] and write something in the changelog [18:53] and change the changelog version of topmost line like you would do for UNRELEASED [18:54] clearscreen: so for testing assume its UNRELEASED (3.1 is currently jaunty, but that doesnt matter) [18:54] change the first line to match whatever is in PPA [18:54] ;) [18:54] and try to build [18:56] bzr: ERROR: Unable to find the needed upstream tarball: firefox-3.5_3.5~b5~hg+nobinonly.orig.tar.gz. [18:56] heh [18:57] ahw .. it doesnt say UNRELEASED, nvm me [19:00] Am just confusing myself, time for a drink [19:44] clearscreen: the version is not complete [19:45] clearscreen: the hg... also has a date behind it [19:45] be sure that you use exactly the same upstream version that was built in ppa [21:39] hmm. seems like ftas bot uploaded, but somehow ppa rejected that [21:40] lets see if it happens again tomorrow. for now lets assume launchpad ate them ;) [21:46] eheh