[00:15] <jcastro> fta: big gwibber merge happening rsn, shouldn't break dailies but just to let you know
[00:21] <fta> jcastro, let's hope so, i don't have much time to fix it if it does
[00:21] <jcastro> ok
[00:21] <fta> is the one with the ui and the daemon?
[00:22] <jcastro> yeah
[00:23] <fta> cool
[00:29] <[reed]> mozilla bug 512575
[11:43] <plasticmillion> does anyone know what the situation is with branded Firefox 3.5 on Ubuntu?
[11:43] <plasticmillion> if I pull 1.9.1 and set the config flag for official branding, will I get a branded Firefox?
[11:43] <plasticmillion> and when will the official Firefox be 3.5?
[11:43] <gnomefreak> plasticmillion: it will have official branding in Karmic but Jaunty will not change
[11:44] <plasticmillion> gnomefreak: and can I simply build my own?
[11:44] <plasticmillion> someone told me that there are changes in the sources so that 1.9.1 doesn't build as Firefox even if the build is set to use official branding
[11:44] <gnomefreak> plasticmillion: if you wish but "simply" is not the same for everyone
[11:44] <plasticmillion> but I haven't confirmed that myself
[11:45] <plasticmillion> gnomefreak: well building Firefox is not a problem
[11:45] <plasticmillion> is there something different on Ubuntu from other platforms?
[11:45] <gnomefreak> plasticmillion: feel free to build it but we can not support it officially
[11:45] <plasticmillion> ok fair enough
[11:45] <plasticmillion> just out of curiosity, why is 3.5 not being supported on Jaunty?
[11:45] <gnomefreak> plasticmillion: i dont know what other platforms you mean/
[11:45] <plasticmillion> well I have more experience building on OS X and Windows
[11:46] <gnomefreak> plasticmillion: it is supported in Jaunty but the branding is staying as is
[11:46] <gnomefreak> plasticmillion: than yes it is different
[11:46] <plasticmillion> gnomefreak: what differences specifically?
[11:46] <plasticmillion> I mean I build Firefox on Ubuntu all the time but I haven't tried it with official branding
[11:46] <plasticmillion> I just build Minefield or Shiretoko
[11:46]  * plasticmillion hopes he got that right
[11:47] <gnomefreak> plasticmillion: you need to change braning in the /debian/ dir. off hand i dont remember what is in rules and *links
[11:47] <plasticmillion> gnomefreak: is there any documentation?
[11:49] <gnomefreak> plasticmillion: as i recall you need to add the build option in rules. you should be able to get the build option from 3.0 that you need to add
[11:49] <plasticmillion> --enable-official-branding probably
[11:49] <plasticmillion> okay well let me try it then... maybe I was misinformed
[11:49] <gnomefreak> - debian/rules: Added build option --enable-official-branding to build with official branding
[11:49] <gnomefreak> that is my sunbird change
[11:49] <plasticmillion> okay, and that will give me Firefox then
[11:49] <plasticmillion> (not IceWeasel or whatever)
[11:50] <gnomefreak> we dont package ice*
[11:50] <plasticmillion> ok
[11:51] <gnomefreak> plasticmillion: you may also what to change the icon it uses either in rules and links files (i cant recall if FF uses a rule to change icon in rules file
[11:51] <gnomefreak> )*
[11:52] <plasticmillion> cool... thanks
[11:53] <gnomefreak> np
[13:07] <gnomefreak> bug 326897
[13:07] <gnomefreak> !info firefox-3.5 intrepid
[13:22] <gnomefreak> bug 419177
[13:23] <gnomefreak> damn bot
[15:01] <jdstrand> fta: hi! I was wondering on the status of https://code.launchpad.net/~jdstrand/firefox/firefox-3.5-apparmor/+merge/10109?
[15:02] <bucket529> I need a bit of help with a Brainstorm idea: http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/21163/ (Popup help to install a Flash player). Is this reasonable? Already implemented? Considered and rejected?
[16:08] <fta> jdstrand, i'll have a look later today (after work), sorry, it passed below my radar
[16:09] <fta> bucket529, it's already in ubufox
[16:14] <jdstrand> fta: thanks :)
[16:47] <bucket529> fta: OK, already implemented, thanks.
[17:10] <ejat> fta : http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=20045 <-- no updates at all :(
[17:11] <fta> ejat, are you sure you have the same problem?
[17:26] <fta> ejat, does it crash for you? i mean, not the whole browser, jsut the plugin process. you should have a fresh /var/crash/_usr_lib_chromium-browser_chromium-browser.*.crash
[19:47] <DanaG> Hmm, how do I get Firefox not to try to do the profile migration?  I want to have both the firefox dir and the firefox-3.5 dir point at the same actual profile, for when I boot Jaunty... but each time I start it, it insists on bringing up the migrator.
[19:48] <micahg> DanaG: that is not a good idea
[19:48] <micahg> what 3.5 does to a profile is not guaranteed to work with 3.0
[20:31] <DanaG> What i mean is, firefox 3.5 in jaunty uses the firefox-3.5 dir, not the "firefox" dir.
[20:32] <DanaG> Unless there's now a backport.
[20:35] <micahg> no, that's correct
[20:35] <micahg> it's also not advisable to go between Ubuntu versions
[20:35] <micahg> as plugins and libraries will be different
[20:36] <DanaG> It's worked fine in the past.  I just want to get rid of that migrator.
[20:36] <DanaG> I'll deal with any other brokenness myself -- and not file bugs on it, as of course it'll be my fault.
[20:37] <DanaG> Oh yeah, and when I had the firefox-3.5 dir be a symlink to the firefox dir, it moved it, so I had a symlink pointing at itself.
[20:54] <micahg> so, it prompts you for the migrator every time?
[20:54] <DanaG> Yeah, because anything but "ask me later" moves files around.
[20:55] <DanaG> It'll either make a firefox-3.0-replaced, or a firefox-3.5-abandoned.
[20:56] <micahg> DanaG: please file a bug in firefox-3.5, I believe this should only happen once, but our main developer is on vacation
[20:56] <micahg> we'll take a look next week
[20:56] <DanaG> hmm, I'll file it this evening, when I get a chance.
[20:56] <micahg> great, thanks
[20:58] <DanaG> Hmm, what should it be about?  The lack of a "don't touch my files" option?
[20:59] <DanaG> The specific wording is:
[20:59] <DanaG> summary, rather:  "Do you want to import [firefox 3.0], replacing [firefox 3.5 alpha/beta]?"
[20:59] <DanaG> buttons:  keep 3.5, decide later, import settings.
[21:05] <micahg> DanaG: I would think the fact that it runs more than once is the actual bug
[21:05] <micahg> per user that is
[21:06] <DanaG> I'd tried moving the firefox-3.5-abandoned back to firefox-3.5, and it reran the migrator.
[21:07] <micahg> right
[21:07] <micahg> so, I think that's the bug, that it runs multiple times
[21:58] <BUGabundo> ola
[22:09] <binarymutant> hiya, I'm running Songbird-1.2.0 and was wondering what all the talk about xulrunner needing to be patched is about, as I haven't seen anything too buggy :/
[22:11] <micahg> binarymutant: songbird uses a custom version of xulrunner
[22:11] <micahg> that's why we can't include it in ubuntu
[22:12] <binarymutant> ah okay, thanks for clearing that up for me :)
[22:40] <binarymutant> does anyone know which songbird bug I should follow on their bts?
[22:43] <fta> binarymutant, what for?
[22:43] <binarymutant> the "songbird uses a custom version of xulrunner"
[22:44] <fta> the ubuntu bug is linked to the upstream bug
[22:44] <binarymutant> ah ty :D <-- blind
[22:45] <fta> hm, not the right one
[22:46] <fta> I'm not sure their is one then..
[22:46] <fta> stevel, Mook_sb, ^^
[22:47] <binarymutant> "Please package Songbird into a .deb file and get it included in the official Ubuntu repository." that's not really a bug... :/
[22:47] <binarymutant> ah
[22:54] <bdrung> binarymutant: but ubuntu handles that as bugs, too.
[22:55] <binarymutant> bdrung, I'm not sure I understand :D
[22:56] <bdrung> binarymutant: it's a "need-packaging" bug :)
[22:56] <bdrung> binarymutant: in debian is it a itp (intend to package) bug
[22:56] <binarymutant> bdrung, upstream shouldn't handle that bug I wouldn't think the "please package songbird" bug. But what about the xulrunner bug? I'm guessing because songbird uses a lower version than the one in karmic
[22:57] <bdrung> binarymutant: yes, that shouldn't be forwarded to upstream
[22:57] <binarymutant> ah it was :/
[22:59] <binarymutant> I'm just wondering where the bug that keeps songbird out of the repos is
[23:01] <micahg1> binarymutant: it's discussed in the debian and ubuntu bugs
[23:02] <micahg> getdeb.net has packages
[23:03] <Mook_sb> hmm, I'm unaware of the upstream bug to suck less on the XR front
[23:04] <binarymutant> Mook_sb, I couldn't find one
[23:08] <stevel> i don't think we have one :(
[23:08]  * stevel goes to file one
[23:10] <stevel> http://bugzilla.songbirdnest.com/show_bug.cgi?id=17708
[23:11] <binarymutant> stevel, ty :D
[23:13] <micahg> [reed]: do you have any idea where the code for mozilla bug 488605 is?
[23:14] <mconnor> micahg: see Smaug's comments
[23:15] <micahg> yes, but I don't know how to find it in the code base based on that comment
[23:16] <micahg> can I do a code search on mozilla-0central?
[23:16] <Mitch> micahg: http://mxr.mozilla.org/
[23:16] <mconnor> sure can
[23:16] <micahg> mconnor: Nice :)
[23:19] <micahg> thanks Mitch
[23:19] <micahg> I think I found it
[23:19] <micahg> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/toolkit/mozapps/update/src/nsUpdateService.js.in#2243
[23:19] <mconnor> um
[23:19] <micahg> no?
[23:20] <mconnor> that's code specific to the update service
[23:20] <micahg> oh
[23:20] <micahg> oops
[23:20] <micahg> guess I should look in which file I'm in...
[23:20] <mconnor> yes...
[23:21] <micahg> this seems better: http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/content/base/src/nsXMLHttpRequest.cpp#1226