[00:04] <mbana> well i've got ia32 but what's this gre.d?   i don't know to configure that
[00:22] <mbana> there's already a file named 1.9.1b4pre.system.conf
[00:22] <mbana> $ firefox-3.5
[00:22] <mbana> Could not find compatible GRE between version 1.9.1b4pre and 1.9.1b4pre.
[00:22] <mbana> the message is not that helpful
[00:23] <fta> your firefox version doesn't match the xulrunner version
[00:23] <fta> are they both b4pre ?
[00:36] <mbana> $ ls *xul*
[00:36] <mbana> xulrunner-1.9.1_1.9.1~b4~hg20090330r24021+nobinonly-0ubuntu1_i386.deb
[00:36] <mbana> xulrunner-1.9_1.9.0.10+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.9.04.1_i386.deb
[00:36] <mbana> xulrunner-1.9.1-gnome-support_1.9.1~b4~hg20090330r24021+nobinonly-0ubuntu1_i386.deb
[00:36] <mbana> xulrunner-1.9-dev_1.9.0.10+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.9.04.1_i386.deb
[00:36] <mbana> xulrunner-1.9-gnome-support_1.9.0.10+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.9.04.1_i386.deb
[00:36] <mbana> shall i install all of those?
[00:37] <mbana> i've looked at the gre.d files and they seem almost identical expect for the x86_64 part
[00:50] <mbana> can anyone confirm please
[00:50] <fta> is your firefox 3.5 also ~b4~hg20090330r24021* ?
[00:51] <mbana> yes, i've installed firefox-3.5_3.5~b4~hg20090330r24021+nobinonly-0ubuntu1_i386.deb
[00:52] <mbana> i'm just worried if i should install xulrunner-1.9.1_1.9.1~b4~hg20090330r24021+nobinonly-0ubuntu1_i386.deb or not, as it's already installed
[00:53] <BUGabundo> night
[00:53] <nhandler> Night BUGabundo
[00:53] <fta> i'm not multitasking well at 2am :P
[00:56] <nhandler> Then go to bed fta ;)
[01:27] <fta> jcastro, we don't have binutils-gold, not even in karmic. it's in debian experiental.
[01:29] <jcastro> fta: ah
[01:29] <fta> jcastro, just discussed with the chromium guys, they would like to have it
[01:32] <jcastro> oh cool
[01:33] <jcastro> are you planning to put it in universe?
[01:34] <mbana> any thoughts before i head of to bed
[01:35] <fta> jcastro, it's part of binutils so i figure it's a matter of letting it enter the repo. maybe i'm wrong
[01:36] <jcastro> fta: so is it like, binutils-gold or something?
[01:36]  * jcastro makes a mental note to ask someone at UDS
[01:36] <fta> http://packages.debian.org/experimental/binutils-gold
[01:37] <fta> looking at our source package
[01:37] <jcastro> fta: I noticed the chrome part of chromium matches my gtk color thing now
[01:37] <fta> Package: binutils-gold
[01:37] <fta> Architecture: amd64 i386 lpia powerpc sparc
[01:37] <jcastro> instead of being blue
[01:37] <fta> it's a mistake, because of transparency
[01:37] <jcastro> ah
[01:37] <fta> should be fixed with the next successful build
[01:39] <jcastro> it's coming along pretty nicely
[01:40] <fta> our package looks ok. maybe ask the archive admins why binutils-gold is not in, maybe it's blacklisted or just needs to be manually added
[18:07] <fta> brb
[18:16] <asac> fta: yeah huge build numbers
[18:17] <asac> asked cjwatson if he does a full archive rebuild on ppas or something ;)
[18:19] <fta> asac, https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20090513
[18:19] <asac> oh so they just show up there
[18:20] <asac> crazy stuff ;)
[18:20] <fta> no idea why he wants to do that
[18:21] <asac> well. they do that regularly
[18:21] <asac> to discover packages that now fail to biuld et al
[18:21] <asac> its just that previously you didnt see that i think
[18:26] <fta> we already have that http://people.ubuntu.com/~ubuntu-archive/testing/karmic_probs.html
[18:27] <asac> fta: thats the result of those rebuilds i think
[18:27] <asac> fta: thats installability ... not build failures
[18:27] <fta> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/26725584/buildlog_ubuntu-karmic-lpia.firefox-3.5_3.5~b5~hg20090514r25181%2Bnobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[18:27] <fta> pooff
[18:27] <asac> yeah gnomefreak had that today as well
[18:27] <asac> transitional issue most likely
[21:03] <fta> i guess i can fall back to gcc 4.3 for now
[21:30] <BUGabundo> hi everyone
[21:36] <fta> lo
[21:48] <BUGabundo> fla hi
[22:09] <BUGabundo> fta I mean
[22:09] <BUGabundo> eheh
[22:22] <fta> at last
[22:22] <BUGabundo> fta: ping
[22:22] <fta> openoffice.org-l10n is finally ok
[22:22] <BUGabundo> fta: what can you tell me about chromium vs google chrome
[22:23] <fta> google chrome is chromium + some non-free stuff from google
[22:23] <BUGabundo> and what is the chromium project?
[22:24] <BUGabundo> is it mantained/founded by Google?
[22:24] <fta> where?
[22:24] <fta> on lp?
[22:24] <BUGabundo> no
[22:24] <BUGabundo> on google code
[22:24] <BUGabundo> or where it is hosted
[22:24] <fta> it's where open development happens
[22:25] <BUGabundo> is it mantained/founded by Google?
[22:25] <fta> well, yes
[22:26] <BUGabundo> oh so its not Community?
[22:26] <fta> it is
[22:26] <fta> someone has to host it
[22:26] <BUGabundo> now you got me lost....
[22:26] <BUGabundo> so is it mantained by both google devs and community members?
[22:26] <BUGabundo> like yourself ?
[22:27] <fta> yes
[22:27] <BUGabundo> ah great
[22:27] <BUGabundo> mundano: are we clear now?
[22:28] <fta> http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved
[22:28] <mundano> yes
[22:32] <BUGabundo> thanks fta
[23:22]  * KaptenRodSkagg_ is away: Jag är upptagen