[00:00] asac: you there _ [00:01] no [00:01] cool i will be back later [00:01] hey [00:01] hehe [00:01] just write what you want instead of summoning me... thats what i was trying to say ;) [00:01] im buddy o BUGabundo can u give me some help [00:01] ah ok [00:01] shoot [00:01] asac: I'm fine with that, thanks [00:02] good plan ;) [00:02] jdstrand: i am about to have a break through in my brain ;) [00:02] asac: well, I guess it is time for a break then ;) [00:02] i unistall my network manager -gnome [00:02] i try to get the road unblocked to push a standalone firefox so we can do major version upgrades [00:02] and now i dont have network to install it again [00:03] any way for fix it from live cd _ [00:03] jdstrand: last drop on this was firefox getting major sqlite update on a stable branch [00:03] jdstrand: e.g. 3.5 [00:03] we had luck ... but when i asked if we can unpatch the configure.in bumpage they said that would be trademark review [00:04] i am tired of explaining everything ;) [00:04] like that we can build in security with lower sqlite [00:04] and make a sru for sqlite if there is really a bad crasher [00:04] ;) [00:04] dcosta: what network? wired? [00:04] dcosta: wired is easiest [00:05] any [00:05] if you can plug in somewhere ... [00:05] wireless or wired [00:05] dcosta: killa NetworkManager ... sudo killall NetworkManager [00:05] dcosta: then sudo ifconfig eth0 up [00:05] (if eth0 is your wired) [00:05] nice plan, bummer on the trademark review [00:05] and run dhclinet eth0 [00:05] sudo dhclient eth0 [00:06] jdstrand: so basically we would not use any system libraries (nor xulrunner) and ship exactly what mozilla does [00:06] only sys libs are maybe nss/nspr [00:06] but even for that i am not sure [00:06] only blocker is that we have yelp on the CD [00:06] ok i dont do dhclient but i set my router in interfaces and resov.conf manualy and dont work [00:06] which requires xulrunner ... have to do something about that [00:07] i will try [00:07] brb [00:07] you will figure [00:07] configure eth0 in interfaces and run ifup eth0 [00:07] sudo ifup eth0 [00:07] eth0 is up [00:07] but i will do dhclient [00:08] reboot [00:08] dcosta: you dont need to reboot [00:08] sudo killall NetworkManager ... then the commands i suggested [00:12] asac, do you own the itp for v8 now? [00:33] asac, arm will need work... http://paste.ubuntu.com/268261/ [00:36] why do you think? [00:37] those flags look like its something we might actually be targetting [00:37] but i am not sure what kind of arm thing is the main target [00:37] its not necessarily the same as i have learnt in the past [00:38] i mean, by default, it will not work if you build with target_arch=arm, because it's protected by chromeos==1, which we should not pass [01:11] fta: doesnt that mean that those flags will only be used if its chromeos? [01:11] otherwise it will just build as normal? [01:13] indeed [01:14] i think those are performance optimization tweaks for their target platform [01:15] yep, but they are more tests like that scattered everywhere [01:16] should not be a problem if porters send their patches upstream (like freebsd is currently doing) and if we release often [01:19] can we get rid of the testsuite packages somehow? [01:19] or are they gone i am too old ;)? [01:19] point is that one needs to push all the binaries + the sources ;) [01:19] to debian [01:20] maybe when passing something like: UPLOAD_TARGET=debian debuild [01:21] but at best still running the testsuite during build ... though i think we dont hard fail, right? [01:22] i have USE_TESTS ?= 1 already [01:23] use tests does not prevent package creation i guess [01:23] it tweaks control :P [01:23] really [01:23] does it cleanup in clean at least? [01:23] then its good [01:23] though UPLOAD_TARGET=debian-release ;) [01:23] it doesn't, but it's possible [01:23] would be more high level api [01:24] do we need control stuff for all packages? [01:24] cant we convince debhelper to do that for us with snippets? [01:25] guess not [01:25] so you think the packages are really worth to have? [01:25] i thought that might be great [01:25] i wanted to drop the testsuite at some point, then reconsidered, now i'm unsure [01:25] but i think given the space consumed it would be better [01:25] to just say: we run make check [01:26] and if there is something that breaks you have to reproduce by building locally [01:26] i can build chromium in less than 20 min with USE_TESTS=0 [01:26] yes [01:26] well [01:26] i would like to keep using TESTS [01:26] so they are run [01:26] .... just not the packages [01:27] http://paste.ubuntu.com/268286/ [01:28] that's why i'm unsure [01:30] i am sure thats wrong math [01:30] maybe its even me and you reinstalling all the time every daily ;) [01:30] who would run a testsuite? [01:38] no idea [01:56] GPLv1+/AristicLicense ... ouch [01:56] what is that? [01:56] ok [02:07] fta: can we autoparse somehow what subtrees depend on what other subtrees? [02:07] like from gyp files ? [02:07] what do you mean? [02:08] e.g. if chrome requires "skia" we would want that relationship somehow parsed [02:08] like chrome/browser => skia, net/http, etc. [02:08] => == depends on [02:08] aka makes use of [02:08] aka links again [02:08] ;) [02:08] aka (in most cases) includes headers of [02:08] but i think checking for headers would be too hard [02:09] so i hoped that they had something like in Mozilla.in: [02:09] REQUIRES = xpcom strings ... [02:10] in chrome/chrome.gyp, you have those deps [02:10] in each target [02:10] * asac checks [02:11] ok so basically all "dependencies"="path/to/some/other.gyp [02:11] implies that that directory makes use of path/to/some/other [02:12] err some/ [02:12] ;) [02:12] so leaving system lib gyps alone [02:12] they probably have that gyp in the same subtree at least [02:12] ? [02:13] no always, but then, it's a relative path [02:13] s/no/not/ [02:13] http://paste.ubuntu.com/268300/ [02:16] yes, thats what i mean [02:16] didnt differentiate between paths [02:16] what i meant is ... is a .gyp file always in the top most directory of the component it descrbes? [02:16] ../third_party/bzip2/bzip2.gyp -> yes. [02:16] ../third_party/bzip2/build/bzip2.gyp -> no. [02:17] what does 'chrome_resources', [02:17] mean? [02:17] is that a placeholder for more .gyp files defined elsewhere? [02:17] or a subdir? [02:17] oh thats a .gyp target [02:17] of the same file [02:17] or something [02:17] ok [02:19] asac: ff3.5.3 never made it to jaunty in the security ppa [02:19] xul1.9.1.3 did though [02:20] woot [02:20] ok [02:20] i failed then ;) [02:20] thx [02:20] * micahg probably should have mentioned it earlier :) [02:20] Mozilla made the official release announcement [02:21] i know i shouldnt have slept in the middle of those uploads ;) [02:21] ok that means i will fix it [02:21] and if things will not go through -security we will use the same bits and put into -proposed ... and then -updates + -security [02:22] guess will make "Shiretoko" folks a bit more unpleased ;) [02:23] oh ... those fixes are xulrunner ;) [02:23] well ok [02:23] can you close the fixed-3.5.3 bugs in the upload? [02:24] fta: there probably is no way to dump those dependencies from .gyp ;) [02:24] Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090902 Ubuntu/9.04 (jaunty) Shiretoko/3.5.2 [02:24] like gyp --gimme-depends path/to/file.gyp:* [02:24] ;) [02:24] now i am in doubt [02:24] what to do [02:24] (ffox 3.5) [02:25] why? [02:26] omg [02:26] i386 15571 builds waiting in queue [02:27] ok uploaded [02:28] asac: should I be subscribing ubuntu@bugs.distro to upstream mozilla bugs? [02:28] micahg: if we file them we should use linux@distribution.bugs [02:29] also if they are linux specific [02:29] ok, what if it's found? [02:29] found? [02:29] you mean linked? [02:29] i.e. already there? [02:29] I was looking at this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Bugs/TriagersHandbook [02:29] i dont know :) [02:29] yes [02:29] that was the plan [02:29] since comeone linked it from the hugday page [02:29] *someone [02:29] now they created linux@distribution.bugs [02:30] i am not so sure what other distros say if we link all the bugs that get filed to it [02:30] hmm [02:30] one second [02:30] you can ask in the bug that created that [02:30] i think i was cced [02:31] 1 hr to build the jaunty amd64 ff3.5.3 [02:31] mozilla bug 444906 [02:32] Mozilla bug 444906 in Bugzilla: Other b.m.o Issues "Please setup a watcher account for linux related bugs" [Normal,Resolved: fixed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=444906 [02:32] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=444906#c5 [02:33] * micahg should probably be watching that account [02:34] well. thats a suggestion [02:34] * micahg signed up [02:34] i think we should ask about what is ok and what is not [02:34] or rather added it [02:34] should I ask in the bug? [02:34] or in the developers channel? [02:34] and if using that to link down to bugs we have in ubuntu is the right thing. [02:34] or if we should create ubuntu@distribution.bugs [02:34] rather [02:34] i think ask in the bug [02:35] let me check if the relevant folks i know are CCed [02:35] [reed]: ^^ [02:36] good day ;) [02:36] he's on there [02:36] yes [02:36] good day? [02:36] i want him to tell us what to do ;) [02:36] ah [02:38] [reed]: so basically: does it still make sense to work on improving the "old" bug forwarding workflow ... or can we start interfacing with bmo from launchpad already? [02:38] if the latter is unlikely from your side we really would prefer to have a watcher account so our bugsquad can better ensure that we follow up on upstreamed bugs [02:39] i assume using linux@distribution.bugs would be misuse [02:39] ;) [02:40] as the selection of bugs would probably not really be linux specific in general, but rather ubuntu [02:47] asac: only 32 bugs in b.m.o for that linux@ alias [03:26] <[reed]> asac: well, once bmo gets upgraded to Bugzilla 3.4, launchpad can easily integrate [03:27] <[reed]> no idea when that will be, though [03:28] <[reed]> until then, if you want a watcher account, that's easy to do [03:58] asac: I'm confused, you committed a patch to xul 1.9.3 that should already be in trunk [03:59] asac: neverming, I see you had a patch there temporarily that you removed now [03:59] *neverminf [03:59] *nevermind [08:03] asac: [reed] broke it :) mozilla Bug 294375 [08:03] Mozilla bug 294375 in File Handling "libgnomevfs-WARNING **: Deprecated function. User modifications to the MIME database are no longer supported." [Minor,Resolved: fixed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=294375 [08:03] I fixed the patch and as soon as LP is fixed, I will try to build it [08:03] <[reed]> I broke what? [08:04] the ubuntu build :) [08:04] not really [08:05] you commited the patch to mozilla-central that broke the build, one of our patches still had gnomevfs code [08:05] <[reed]> ah [08:05] <[reed]> is there a LP bug on it? [08:05] no [08:05] not that I know of [08:06] oh maybe [08:06] the patch was for bug 185622 [08:06] Error: Could not parse data returned by Launchpad: HTTP Error 503: Service Unavailable (https://launchpad.net/bugs/185622/+text) [08:06] ugh [08:06] maybe not [08:06] oh right [08:06] LP is broke right now :) [08:09] [reed]: about that bug watcher thing asac was talking about last night, we should have an ubuntu specific watcher and not abuse the linux.distro, right? [08:09] <[reed]> depends on what you want to do [08:09] <[reed]> but probably/possibly [08:09] ah, lp looks better [08:09] bug 185622 [08:09] Error: Could not parse data returned by Launchpad: HTTP Error 503: Service Unavailable (https://launchpad.net/bugs/185622/+text) [08:10] well, at least ppa uploads are working [08:46] <[reed]> bug 185622 [08:46] Launchpad bug 185622 in firefox-3.0 "Firefox 3 doesn't act as the default browser" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/185622 [08:46] <[reed]> micahg1: not that bug... [08:46] no, well the patch I had to fix was that bug [08:47] <[reed]> what did mozilla bug 294375 break? === micahg1 is now known as micahg [08:47] Mozilla bug 294375 in File Handling "libgnomevfs-WARNING **: Deprecated function. User modifications to the MIME database are no longer supported." [Minor,Resolved: fixed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=294375 [08:47] <[reed]> ah [08:47] <[reed]> I see [08:47] the patch was for a file that you removed code from upstream :) [08:47] and apparently I didn't do a good job fixing it :( [08:48] nah, you didn't mess anything up, I was joking about that [08:58] asac: ok, I have to go to sleep, I'm trying the build in my mozilla test ppa, I pushed the code change up to lp:~micahg/firefox/firefox-3.7.head, if it doesn't work, I might be able to try one more time in the morning [08:58] I'm leaving my computer on so the uploads finish [09:46] asac: hi... how to get extra functions into ubufox? ie. is there any due process , to get a new function in? i'm trying to make firefox notify extension fit to ubuntu [09:53] morning guys [10:34] eagles0513875, hi [10:34] eagles0513875, I fixed the wiki page you made [10:34] hey andv thanks m8 [10:35] and added some new contents [10:35] got alot on my plate before my lectures start [10:35] doing my lpi 101 exam tomorrow [10:35] working on getting linux level 1 certified :) [10:35] eagles0513875, I gonna work on firebug, is assigned to you, can I take it? [10:35] go for it [10:35] ty [10:35] dont have time atm and would probably take longer for me to fix then it would for u [10:35] *you [10:37] yeah, ok [10:38] hows things going in the ff realm [10:40] asac, should I have misc:depends removed as well? [10:40] asac, in the depends field [10:40] andv: dont think hes around or hes afk [10:40] asac, or should I remove everything apart that ( in firebug) [10:40] eagles0513875, he will read backlog :) [10:41] andv: question the first link that the bot will provide for packaging do i need to go through that and install all those packages? [10:41] which link? [10:41] !packaging [10:41] The packaging guide is at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide - See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/NewPackages for information on getting a package integrated into Ubuntu - Other developer resources are at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment - See also !backports [10:41] the packaging guide [10:41] do i need to install all that stuff to be able to help yall with packaging [10:42] eagles0513875, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/GettingStarted under 'Packaging Tools' [10:42] andv: i normally follow the complete packaging guide and install all that is on that wiki [10:43] same thing lol [10:43] yes [10:43] so install from there on out [10:47] viva la netsplit [10:58] andv: misc:depends is ok to have [11:03] [reed]: ok thanks. how are things going? are you preparing for final exams or why are you on "leave from project"? [11:03] asac: speaking of exams im outa commission at least till saturday afternoon [11:03] then ill get to packaging [11:04] asac, k, great [11:04] currently installing the necessary packaing packages :) hope to start packaging soon for yall [11:04] asac, firebug don't have mozilla-devscripts depends so don't have to bump its version, so I'm fixing the depends / recommends and should be fine [11:06] andv: xpi:depends depends on mozilla-devscripts [11:06] asac, comments not very helpful.. http://paste.ubuntu.com/268491/ [11:06] fta: well [11:06] asac, thanks for the info [11:06] asac, was forgetting it [11:06] fta: not if you look at one line ;) [11:07] i will try to make more useful first lines in future ;) [11:07] firebug should use mozilla-devscripts [11:07] thats one of the columns in the checklist [11:08] anyone else cannot search in firefox-3.5? [11:08] using the quicksearch box? [11:09] asac, ok B-D-I added [11:10] you need to do it right [11:10] just file a bug [11:11] asac, the bug was filed already [11:11] bug 425681 [11:11] Launchpad bug 425681 in firebug "firebug using the wrong version of mozilla-devscripts" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/425681 [11:11] thats not closed nor nothing [11:12] asac, I'm fixing it up [11:12] asac, mmm...wait [11:12] asac: hi, could you give me an update of the status of the FF3.5 translations? Is there anything in which the translations team can help? [11:12] asac, actually there were no B-D on mozilla-devscripts [11:12] asac, so that bug is not right [11:13] andv: well. use that bug or do something. you will figure [11:13] dpm: still need someone to write the export tool [11:13] besides from that the only bug existing is that zh-XXX locales are not properly merged [11:13] asac, yeah, I'm fixing the package, gonna provide you a debdiff in two minutes [11:14] no clue why arne holds back the complete translations because of that [11:14] i dont want debdiffs [11:14] just branches [11:14] if you are unsure do a merge request [11:14] asac: I'm not talking of the export, I was asking about the imports, but I'll ask arne, then [11:14] and i will review [11:15] asac, I never user branches to get latest uploads [11:15] * used [11:15] dpm: from what i understand its because country code specific locales are not properly produced (in devmode). the rest works. [11:15] i hoped that he would roll them [11:15] asac, sometimes they are wrong or tainted (like ubuntu-it-menu was for istance) [11:15] asac: ok, thanks, I've asked arne now [11:16] asac, plus this package is merged from Debian [11:16] asac, it's not ubuntu-specific [11:17] asac, so of course the branch would diverge when debian pushes a new revision [11:17] <[reed]> asac: eh, ok... just need a break from Mozilla and need to concentrate more on school... I'm around somewhat, just not as much. [11:17] [reed]: understood ... enjoy and good luck with your school. final year? [11:17] <[reed]> yeah, final year [11:18] <[reed]> definitely not enjoying [11:18] lucky [11:18] i have this yr which is supposed to be hell for me then 1 more [11:18] [reed]: enjoy the "break" ;) [11:18] not the school ;) [11:18] IT major is fun and all but not easy [11:19] <[reed]> break? school is not a break [11:19] <[reed]> yeah [11:19] <[reed]> anyway [11:19] <[reed]> sigh [11:19] <[reed]> 5:19am [11:19] <[reed]> hmmz [11:20] good night ;) === zbraniecki is now known as gandi [11:32] hey guys what package has replaced linda cuz im trying to install it and its not finding it [11:32] asac, http://paste.debian.net/46209/ [11:32] eagles0513875: ignore it [11:32] ok wiki seems to need an update lol [11:33] eagles0513875, linda no more exists [11:33] if I remember it right [11:33] eagles0513875: finish reading [11:33] it got merged into lintian [11:33] gotcha andv [11:33] im reading and installing atm lol [11:33] eagles0513875: the wiki is right [11:33] why is there a mention of linda in it though [11:34] dunno [11:34] eagles0513875: remember to read carefully [11:34] ya gotcha [11:34] dont stop after the first 3 words [11:34] asac, did you read? [11:34] "lintian and linda dissect Debian packages and report bugs and Policy violations. They contain automated checks for many aspects of Debian Policy as well as for common errors. linda is not available from the hardy heron repositories, but is still available in previous releases repositories. " [11:34] asac, tested on ffox3.5, works fine [11:34] asac, no extra licenses [11:34] andv: file a bug if you dont now how to use mozilla-devscripts ;) [11:34] i will get to it. [11:35] cant explain right now [11:35] include xpi.mk ... etc. [11:35] its not as simple as that [11:35] I gonna look at some other examples [11:35] yeah [11:35] it should be easy [11:35] bdrung or jazzva can also help ... i have to do something right now ;) [11:36] yep [11:36] ? [11:36] bdrung, is the MOZ_EXTENSION_PKG needed? [11:37] no [11:37] bdrung, adding mozilla-devscripts support on a package [11:37] bdrung, I've added the B-D-I, then added the include in rules [11:37] is that all? [11:37] if not set, the first binary package is used [11:38] mozilla-devscripts needs to be in b-d [11:38] it can be on b-d-i too [11:38] i guess [11:38] then the include will fail [11:39] ok [11:39] includes should be at the end of debian/rules [11:39] but this package set them at the beginning [11:40] let me have a look [11:40] bdrung, just a second, making a debdiff for you [11:43] bdrung, http://paste.debian.net/46210/ [11:45] asac: hi... how to get extra functions into ubufox? ie. is there any due process , to get a new function in? i'm trying to make firefox notify extension fit to ubuntu notify-osd specs and get it included into ubufox rather than as a separate extension [11:45] no [11:46] mac_v: too late for this cycle. features need carefully be selected and after UDS discussion we also need to talk to mozilla etc. [11:46] bdrung, anyway adding mozilla-devscripts as B-D-I works [11:46] :( [11:46] notify-osd in particular was explicitly kept broken upstream because they see our way as a regression [11:46] bdrung, tested yesterday [11:46] so thats not going to fly [11:46] ;) [11:47] bdrung, includes should go to the low part of the rules file [11:47] asac: ok , no probs , thanks ;p [11:47] bdrung, tested that with the MOZ_XPI_DOCUMENTED_LICENSE_FILES feature [11:47] mac_v: if it was a different idea i would have thought. but notify-osd isnt going to get approved. they want to fallback to their own notifications if system notifications dont support actions [11:48] andv: you can move the includes to the top of the rules file [11:48] bdrung, had some issues with putting them to the top [11:48] andv: mozilla-devscripts as B-D-I works, but it is not correct [11:49] bdrung, yeah, set it to B-D now [11:49] bdrung, is the debdiff fine for the mozilla-devscripts support? [11:49] asac: yeah , i feel notify-osd is a *still* bit of a mess , needs more refinement... [11:50] bdrung, asac suggested me to put includes at the low part [11:50]