[09:20] !ping fta [10:55] boas [11:01] hola [11:01] [reed]: some folks wonder how they can deploy firefox with additional root certs (e.g. for their own organization) [11:01] is there a way to do that in a global way? [11:02] hey asac long time no see [11:02] :p [11:04] yep [11:04] ;) [11:04] busy [11:04] busy [11:05] yeah right :) [11:05] any ideas whats gonna be default browser in lucid? [11:05] are we even considering double browser ? [11:06] and break the ONE app per function in default install? [11:08] BUGabundo_work: what do you mean? [11:08] BUGabundo_work: I dont see the main desktop image to move away from firefox [11:08] however, optimized images might move to something else [11:09] like for arm UNE (mobile team) we are looking into chromium etc. [11:20] oh cool [11:44] asac, did you copy the codecs? [11:44] asac, also, if you can push to a more stable/neutral location, it would be nice [11:44] fta: ack [11:44] i can drag in some testers from upstream [11:45] i will check for a different location [11:46] fta: dont hesitate to get them test from that location. if they need help on getting lucid images on their arm hardware, they can come to #ubuntu-arm [11:46] asac, can't you create a generic arm team and ask for a new native ppa in there? [11:46] no [11:46] well yes. [11:46] but atm policy does not allow any native ppa for teams where non-canonical folks are there. dont ask me why [11:46] i will try to work for a different approach [11:46] i won't be able to use it, i got that already [11:47] well. i can pocket copy whatever you want ;) [11:47] just not dailies. we have not enough builders for that [11:47] it's just that asking upstream to try something in a moz recycled ppa is weird [11:47] let me copy the codecs [11:47] ack [11:48] fta: we separate those codecs because of licensing/patent issues, right? [11:49] ok copied [11:49] lets check if that fails to build [11:49] fta: that packages does not try to build on armel [11:49] maybe architecture: i386 amd64 ? [11:50] oh, maybe [11:52] hmm, yasm on arm? is there such thing? [11:55] fta: hmm. armel? [11:55] maybe? [11:55] asac, could you get the metacity patch in? each visual alert made by chromium makes metacity assert [11:55] which one= [11:55] ? [11:55] bug 467972 [11:55] Launchpad bug 467972 in metacity "metacity assert failure: metacity:ERROR:core/bell.c:211:bell_flash_window_frame: assertion failed: (window->frame != NULL)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/467972 [11:55] gnome 598231 [11:55] Gnome bug 598231 in general "When Chromium rings the bell, metacity quits" [Normal,Unconfirmed] http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=598231 [11:55] ehh [11:55] i'vent seen that [11:56] when there's no (more) match while doing a search, metacity restarts, really annoying [12:05] fta: so ... shall i just upload with armel added to architectireu? [12:07] i just committed the arch any [12:07] just wondering about yasm [12:08] apparently not [12:09] fta: yasm exists on armel [12:10] http://packages.ubuntu.com/karmic/yasm ? [12:10] just i386/amd64 [12:21] fta: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+files/yasm_0.8.0-1_armel.deb [12:21] ? [12:21] fta: packages.ubuntu.com does not track stuff on ports [12:21] so you dont see it there [12:21] oh, damn [12:23] damn, metacity crashed.. again [12:26] i bet all desktop devs use compiz :( [12:26] so they don't care [12:27] yes. even i am on copmiz everywhere now [12:27] until last cycle my main desktop couldnt do it [13:06] i'm on compiz [13:06] been for several releases [13:06] after several ones where i would not like it [13:06] yesterday tried xedgers PPA with X 1.5 [13:07] heck that thing is huber broken [13:10] pushed the metacity fix to my own ppa, i'm sick of it [13:12] asac, around? [13:13] av`: no ;) [13:14] asac, I'm a DD :) [13:14] CONGRATS! [13:14] thanks :) [13:23] congrats av` [13:23] BUGabundo_work, thanks :) [13:23] BUGabundo_work, if you need any sponsorship just ask :) [13:23] humm [13:23] let me give it a good think [13:23] theres fuse [13:24] that needs to be looked at [13:24] in unstable and pushed to lucid [13:24] is it a NEW package? [13:24] so i can nag bjsnider to build lessfs [13:24] not sure [13:24] least time i looked at it , it was going to unstable [13:24] then i lost track [13:25] after debian has it, will need to get it synced to lucid [13:25] other then that, its all fine [13:25] small bug with smplayer [13:25] but its filed upstream [13:25] debian has an higher version then upstream LOL [13:27] lol [13:27] how can it be possible? [13:29] ehe [13:29] debian repackaged it [13:29] and upped it [13:29] no idea why [13:29] took bjsnider a bit to find how the heck that happend [13:35] wtf? Rejected: PPA exceeded its size limit (17204.00 of 10240.00 MiB). Ask a question in https://answers.launchpad.net/soyuz/ if you need more space. [13:53] seems my gwibber is broken, it spins forever since i tried to post something [13:54] hm, last message is 6h old [13:54] anything in .xsession-errors? [13:54] i guess there was a dbus timeout or something [13:56] difficult to say, it's a mess in there [13:57] apparently, nothing relevant [14:14] yuhuuu 8.7 MiB (0.08%) of 10.0 GiB, better [14:20] new PPA ? [14:20] fta: how many do u manage? [14:20] how much CPU power do all your bots use? [14:20] no, my own ppa (~fta) [14:20] ahhh u cleared it [14:20] aheh [14:21] just removed 90+ packages [14:21] my bot or the builders? [14:22] my bot can do the just in 20min depending on how fast the remote vcs are [14:22] +job [14:22] but often, it takes 45min [14:22] as the builders, it's another matter [14:23] could be all done in 2~3h hours or more than 24h depending on how machines are preempted to do something else, or the ppa queue [14:29] BUGabundo_work, ^^, but there's always someone to complain about my stuff, http://identi.ca/notice/16085460 http://identi.ca/notice/16096444 [14:29] i know [14:30] i've read both in realtiem [14:33] me too, but i didn't see any reply [14:34] so maybe he's the only one to care enough to fire a complaint [14:34] -t [14:46] i think i replied to one [14:46] but was over OMB [14:46] so might not have gotten threaded correctly [14:57] i386 6 179 jobs (11 hours) [14:57] ok, so no metacity today :( i'll build it locally [14:59] we went from 14 i386 builders 2h ago, to 6 [15:14] <[reed]> asac: hmm, I think it's possible, but it's a royal pain. [15:15] <[reed]> [05:08:56] however, optimized images might move to something else [15:15] <[reed]> [05:09:13] like for arm UNE (mobile team) we are looking into chromium etc. [15:15] <[reed]> why chromium over Firefox for mobile? [15:16] eeheh [15:16] [reed]: dont like lossing quota? [15:16] because ff is a slow pig? [15:16] ahhaahaaahahahahahaaha [15:17] <[reed]> if you have specific complaints, it would be useful for Mozilla to know... you know, talk to us [15:17] <[reed]> we're building a mobile edition, too, you know [15:17] no really [15:17] want to really take it? [15:17] 1st: startup time [15:17] chromium < 1sec [15:17] FF ~3-5 secs [15:18] memory usage: Ch 2 wind 5 tabs each: 40-60 mb each, shared and stuff, total 300-400 MBs [15:18] FF: 1 win, 1 tab: >300MBs [15:19] addos: FF wins :) [15:19] page load: chromium wins [15:19] comparing FF 3.7 vs Ch 4-dev [15:19] UI space: Ch wins again [15:19] drag and drop tabs anywhere: lovely [15:20] <[reed]> last I checked, we still had everybody beat in long-term memory use [15:20] <[reed]> by a bunch [15:21] want a 3 days comparation? [15:22] 8782 mainroad 20 0 1209m 301m 39m S 8 3.8 173:32.88 firefox-3.7 [15:22] 2787 mainroad 20 0 1105m 84m 22m S 2 1.1 35:51.41 chromium-browse 3135 mainroad 20 0 868m 62m 9.8m S 0 0.8 1:02.43 chromium-browse [15:22] again: ff 3 tabs 1 win [15:22] ch 4 win, several tabs [15:24] <[reed]> I think you're missing the point, but I don't know when the last time the memory tests were done. I can check on that later. [15:25] [reed]: eheh i'll let u know more in the end of the week then [15:25] lol [15:28] <[reed]> http://dotnetperls.com/chrome-memory [15:29] <[reed]> that's based on ch 3 [15:29] <[reed]> and ff 3.5 [15:29] <[reed]> looking at top is not a valid test [15:34] BUGabundo_work, about:memory in ch [15:35] Chromium 69,684k 72,502k Note: If other browsers (e.g. IE, Firefox, Safari) are running, I'll show their memory details here. [15:35] 2787 Browser 69,424k 72,037k 2788 Sandbox helper 260k 465k [15:39] [reed]: its not really decided. first step is to ensure that its in the archive and working on arm. then we do benchmarks, feature comparisions etc. before deciding. https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-lucid-arm-lightweightbrowser [15:52] * fta smells fear floating around here.. [16:20] hehe [16:20] [reed]: ok now i have a bit time ;). so what we plan to do is to get chromium in a shape that we can actually compare it [16:20] atm its not even in the archive etc. [16:21] [reed]: as you can see in the spec its not only horse we have in the race [16:21] the idea is to tune firefox performance as much as possible [16:21] and since we move to all-in-one packaging approach we should be delivering pretty much what you test [16:22] so if there are still issues with performance etc. we can hopefully work better with mozilla addressing them [16:22] asac, "Resolve Chromium armv7 build issues: " TODO -> DONE [16:22] yep ;) [16:22] fta: is there a separat work item for verifying that it actually works? [16:22] make FF faster and ill swich to it again [16:22] right now , i cant even open gmail in it [16:22] thats also a task of this. we want to check out PGO [16:23] asac, upstream devs say it works for them as it's used in chrome-os [16:23] mozilla / [reed] said they never were able to get that to work, but every bit of performance we can get out of it is worth efforts i guess [16:23] fta: yes. but lucid might be different. who knows how our libc and toolchain behave etc. [16:23] fta: they probably built it in hardy? ;) [16:24] or is that karmic or what do they base their stuff on? [16:24] i've got reports that it should work just fine for arm v5-6-7 [16:24] fta: hmm. so the build failure we got on karmic is fixed? [16:25] but they all cross build, noone is doing it natively [16:25] fixed i don't know, but fixable, sure [16:25] yeah. but cross building feels even more error prone imo [16:25] unless they tweaked their X chain to workaround issues in chromium [16:26] we will know soon. [16:26] fta: can we install chromium and force depends? [16:26] if you could retry a build on karmic, i can work with them to fix the remaining issues [16:26] e.g. will it not work if we dont have the codecs? [16:26] if so i can ask someone to firef it up now [16:26] fta: so there were fixes since we last tried? [16:26] it will work without codecs, it's just a lazy dlopen [16:27] yes [16:27] atm the buildd's are really busted as it seems with huge backlog because they were down over the weekend [16:27] so i will wait with a new spin a bit [16:27] tomorrow morning i will check again [16:27] libdap built broke all armel builders over weekend ;) [16:27] armel 6 143 jobs (3 hours 20 minutes), 3h! lol, looks like a joke [16:28] yeah [16:28] not sure why it thinks 3 hours is the target ;) [16:29] more like 3 days [16:30] asac: PM? [16:32] micahg: jumping from call to call atm ;) ... when will you be back= [16:32] ? [16:32] or how long will you be still here? [16:32] asac: I'm going to work in about 30-40 minutes, tomorrow works for me [16:32] ok let me check [16:33] hmm. would be available in 30minutes tomorrow :/ [16:33] doesnt help i guess [16:33] 1700 UTC? [16:33] that works [16:34] asac: tomorrow? [16:34] yes [16:34] ok [16:34] ttyt [16:34] thanks [19:01] Hello. I installed firefox 3.5 from mozilla-daily ppa on my hardy machine, and it does not use hinting as specified in /etc/fonts/conf.d. What do I need to do instead? === micahg1 is now known as micahg === asac_ is now known as asac [20:03] asac, do you think i can somehow accept contributions for translated strings for chromium using lp? some users desperately want to contribute, and i'm willing to provide the hooks [20:37] fta: I'll have to fix TB daily tonight [20:37] :) [21:53] removing myself from bug 254413, i have no plan to work on this anymore [21:53] Error: Could not parse data returned by Launchpad: The read operation timed out (https://launchpad.net/bugs/254413) [21:53] and from bug 183492 [21:54] Error: Could not parse data returned by Launchpad: The read operation timed out (https://launchpad.net/bugs/183492) [22:12] * micahg is not up for another project right now [22:18] micahg, i'm not asking you to ;) they are all moz related, so i announce it here [22:18] I know, I'm just announcing that I can't do it :) [22:18] the 1st is piece of cake, the 2nd is worse than songbird [22:19] after songbird, I want to try to bring sunbird up to speed === debfx_ is now known as debfx [22:40] asac: fta: why does my clean install have a /etc/firefox-3.0 ? [22:41] lucid should not have anything to do with it [22:41] what do you have inside ? [22:42] should give you a clue [22:42] i guess it's ubufox/apturl [22:43] BUGabundo, ^^ [22:44] fta $ ls -lR /etc/firefox-3.0/ | pastebinit http://paste.ubuntu.com/336867/ [22:45] see? :) [22:45] BUGabundo: it's ubufox, please file a bug against it [22:45] ok [22:49] micahg: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubufox/+bug/493805 [22:50] Error: Could not parse data returned by Ubuntu: The read operation timed out (https://launchpad.net/bugs/493805) [22:50] BUGabundo: triaged (problem on karmic as well) [23:08] *sigh* https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-lucid-multiarch-support [23:08] fortunately, chromium moved away from ia32-libs [23:11] fta Registered by Robbie Williamson on 2009-04-21 [23:11] lolol [23:11] just stay put [23:12] this topic has been discussed at many UDS, always postponed [23:14] duh [23:14] go figure [23:14] we would need a batalion of devs on it [23:14] and upstream support [23:30] i don't think so, it's mostly apt/dpkg [23:32] the plan was already in place in may (or was it in nov last year?) [23:42] baahhh [23:42] why can't google make their own sites work with chromium ? [23:43] picasaweb full screen is buggy [23:58] different teams