[03:58] <Paddy_NI> Hello is there a ppa with the current stable release of thunderbird 3?
[03:58] <Paddy_NI> All I can find are testing and unstable
[03:58] <micahg> Paddy_NI: not yet, my test ppa has the build which is the release, but labeled as shreddder
[03:58]  * micahg hopes to finish it soon
[03:58] <Paddy_NI> micahg, thank you.. do you have a link?
[03:59] <Paddy_NI> micahg, It is looking really nice
[03:59] <micahg> https://edge.launchpad.net/~micahg/+archive/mozilla-beta
[04:00] <Paddy_NI> micahg, adding this ppa wont automatically want to update my firefox will it?
[04:00] <micahg> Paddy_NI: I suggest pinning all ppa's to 450
[04:00] <Paddy_NI> Excuse my ignorance but what does that mean?
[04:01] <micahg> Paddy_NI: so that you have to explicitely choose a PPA package over one in the ubuntu archive
[04:01] <micahg> http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/352682/
[04:02] <micahg> if you add that to /etc/apt/preferences, you will need to choose a PPA version over an archive version
[04:02] <[reed]> micahg: can you see about getting mozilla bug 538028 filed with libnotify upstream?
[04:02] <[reed]> or tell me where I can do it
[04:02] <micahg> [reed]: let me check
[04:05] <micahg> [reed]: http://trac.galago-project.org/report
[04:05] <[reed]> (thx
[04:05] <[reed]> thx
[04:05] <Paddy_NI> micahg, do you mean create a file in the '/etc/apt/preferences.d/' directory with that content?
[04:05] <Paddy_NI> micahg, also what should the file extension be if any?
[04:05] <micahg> hmm
[04:06]  * micahg didn't know they added a preferences.d
[04:06] <Paddy_NI> there is no /etc/apt/preferences
[04:06] <micahg> Paddy_NI: you can add it
[04:06] <Paddy_NI> ok thanks
[04:06] <micahg> Paddy_NI: depends if you want this for all PPAs or just mine
[04:06] <micahg> I can tell you what to puteither way
[04:08] <Paddy_NI> What should the name of the file be?
[04:08] <micahg> Paddy_NI: it can be anything in the dir, or preferences if in /etc/apt
[04:09] <Paddy_NI> so I can call it 'ppa-prefs'?
[04:09] <micahg> Paddy_NI: yes, after you do that, do an apt-get update, and then apt-cache policy
[04:10] <micahg> you should see the ppa.launchpad.net at 450
[04:10] <micahg> if you've added a PPA
[04:12] <Paddy_NI> micahg, thanks you have been most helpful :)
[04:12] <micahg> Paddy_NI: np, the release version should be in Lucid before next week for alpha-2
[04:13] <Paddy_NI> would be nice if someone could make firefox and thunderbird compatible with the gnome-globalmenu-applet
[04:13] <micahg> Paddy_NI: idk what that is, but you can file a bug request in LP
[04:14] <Paddy_NI> micahg, yeah I guess so..
[09:25] <BUGabundo_work> morning
[09:53] <drclue> Howdy all. This channel could be just what I'm looking for. I'm running Firefox 3.5.6 on Ubuntu and unlike my other Firefox and unlike my Opera , when I click links in http://207.154.83.202/main.php , the browser goes through the motions of loading , but does not render anything. Any clues on this weird behavior?
[09:56] <drclue> What's weird is my other Firefox , running on a Debian box is actually an older Firefox.  I've only seen this behavior replicated in a single windows box running Firefox 3.5.6
[09:58] <drclue> Other folks running 3.5.6 in other instances have had no issues at all.
[10:01] <drclue> I've gone round and round with this one for over a month and just can't seem to find a way to make the problem go away.  I do use a lot of XSL  XHTML to XHTML transforms
[10:03] <drclue> I do know that if I either click the links a bunch of times or hit the reload button the rendering eventually kicks in and works as expected , but it would be nice if it would render each time instead of just putting the new clicked address in the location line , transferring all the files and forgetting to render
[11:47] <fta> lol, "The TLS support is being done via an extension point, to avoid depending directly on the TLS library, and there may end up being two implementations of the TLS extension point; one using GNU TLS (which is nice and small and doesn’t have a zillion dependencies) and one using NSS (which is more complicated and vaguely annoying to use outside the context of mozilla, but is FIPS 140 certified, which is important to Fedora)."
[12:08] <[reed]> woo FIPS
[14:42] <bdrung> asac: m-d 0.19 is ready for release. any objections?
[18:32] <fta> asac, http://paste.ubuntu.com/353052/
[18:34] <asac> fta: tlslite has no license info :(
[18:35] <asac> fta: yes. thats ld_libpath
[18:35] <asac> chromium should load that by GRE path i guess
[18:35] <asac> or provide their own mozjs
[18:37] <asac> ok all public domain according to readme
[18:40] <fta> they removed milestone-5 for the license bug :(
[18:40] <fta> milestone-X now :(
[18:44] <fta> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/37532689/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-i386.mozilla-devscripts_0.19~umd4_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[18:44] <asac> bdrung: ^^
[18:45] <micahg> asac: mozilla upgraded trunk to sqlite 3.6.22 and it built fine
[18:49] <bdrung> fta: lsb_release problem, let me check it
[18:50] <asac> micahg: cool
[18:51] <fta> asac, the channels ppa are stuck, upstream doesn't upgrade http://src.chromium.org/svn/releases/LATEST.txt
[18:51] <fta> (channel PPAs)
[18:52] <asac> fta: do we need build-tree/src/third_party/ocmock
[18:52] <asac> ?
[18:52] <asac> fta: is that a problem?
[18:52] <asac> ocmock is incompatible with GPL
[18:53] <fta> never heard of that
[18:53] <fta> let me check
[18:54] <asac> same for the files that have BSD (4 clause)
[18:54] <asac> all that is practically illegal if they interface in anyway with the GPL stuff
[18:55] <fta> hm, please update the bug then
[18:57] <fta> asac, ^^
[18:57] <fta> asac, ocmock is for mac only, i will drop it
[18:57] <asac> i can do that if you dont mind
[18:57] <asac> i committed the gles_example_book removal already
[18:58] <asac> so update if you commit it ;)
[19:02] <fta> oops, too late
[19:02] <fta> i pulled it first so it's fine
[19:05] <asac_> fta: what is th elicenseing bug?
[19:05] <asac_> do we need third_party/scons?
[19:06] <asac_> lets strip that too
[19:06] <fta> asac, http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=28291
[19:08] <bdrung> asac, fta: pushed m-d fix
[19:08] <fta> asac, http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=22140
[19:10] <asac_> commented ;)
[19:10] <asac_> bdrung: thanks. test your stuff ;) ... hehe
[19:11] <asac_> but thanks for quick fix
[19:11] <bdrung> asac: that fix was simple (other solution would be build depend on lsb_release) :)
[19:12] <asac_> i havent checked what you did now
[19:12] <asac_> i trust you to do  sane things ;)
[19:13] <fta> asac_, i said somewhere that i knew nothing about issues with compatible licenses incompatible between each others :P
[19:15] <asac_> thats why i commented  ;) ... fta: http://pastebin.com/f1bd4a626
[19:15] <asac_> i will remove BSD 4-clause fromthe whitelist
[19:15] <asac_> so we are down to just a few
[19:16] <asac_> i would like to strip scons
[19:16] <fta> it's probably possible but i need to test build 1st, it may be deeply rooted
[19:16] <asac_> ok
[19:17] <asac_> otherwise what license is scons?
[19:17] <asac> i can overwrite it
[19:17] <asac> just have pain from all this ;) and hoped for killing the rest ;)
[19:17] <asac> after that all third_party is done
[19:17] <asac> and i can move to the rest
[19:17] <fta> most probably the same as our system scons :P
[19:17] <fta> there are several third_party dirs, at least 3
[19:17] <asac> fta: gyp license issue didnt move, right?
[19:18] <fta> right
[19:18] <asac> can you poke someone?
[19:18] <fta> sure
[19:18] <asac> thats rather important ... without that we cant get it in
[19:18] <asac> tell them that chromium is close to archive entering ;)
[19:18] <fta> poking is easy, getting the fix is not ;)
[19:18] <asac> and gyp is blocking us ;)
[19:18] <asac> what was the gyp bug?
[19:19] <asac> gyp had no license at all, right?
[19:19] <fta> it's in the block list of the main license bug
[19:19] <fta> it has one, global
[19:19] <fta> bsd iirc
[19:19] <fta> asac, ^^ http://code.google.com/p/gyp/ (on the right)
[19:20] <asac> ij
[19:20] <asac> ok
[19:20] <asac> fta: is current gyp in ppa the one we want in lucid?
[19:20] <asac> give me .dsc file i will tell stevenk to poke it
[19:21] <fta> take the one in the daily ppa
[19:21] <fta> the one in the beta is 1 or 2 releases older
[19:22] <asac> fta: can we strip breakpad?
[19:22] <asac> thats bsd 4 clause
[19:22] <asac> ok
[19:22] <fta> hmm, not sure, it probably possibe if we just keep the gyp file
[19:23] <fta> yes, we must keep the gyp file
[19:24] <fta> i have hooks for that
[19:24] <asac> fta: ok. can you take care that that is out?
[19:25] <fta> damn, my hooks are for system libs
[19:26] <fta> it was STRIPPED_SYSTEM_LIB_DIRS
[19:26] <asac> ok committed the licensecheck.pl as a checkpoint
[19:26] <asac> more coming
[19:33] <asac> fta: i think we need one more bump for gyp: proper bug closing:
[19:33] <asac> bug 504425
[19:35] <fta> asac, you're whitelisting files without copyrights?
[19:35] <asac> fta: same for gyp
[19:35] <asac> strip?
[19:35] <asac> fta: if they have a license. then yes.
[19:36] <asac> well. it will still show up with no copyright if it has no copyright
[19:36] <asac> but a bunch had no license, but copyright
[19:36] <asac> so i inject just the license
[19:36] <asac> and its complete
[19:36] <asac> maybe we should look up a good default copyright owner ... but that would be a bit far taken
[19:36] <asac> because license is probably guessable from top level dir
[19:37] <asac> while the copyright owner could be anyone
[19:37] <asac> also i eleveated files where authors didnt put license in each file, but still mixed BSD/MIT/GPL/LGPL
[19:37] <asac> and make that GPL (v2 or later) compatible
[19:38] <asac> e.g. basically saying that all the other shit is also distributed as GPL for us
[19:38] <asac> (thats ok if they are compatible)
[19:39] <asac> works quite good. third party problem file is only 250 lines long
[19:39] <asac> all together its currently 1000 ;)
[19:39] <asac> taking a break now and then finishing all the other stuff
[19:39] <asac> third party is finishable too i guess
[19:39] <asac> its just two or three subtrees with problems
[19:40] <asac> http://pastebin.com/f4f0eee23
[19:40] <fta> asac, why isn't the generated copyright file in the branch?
[19:40] <asac> thats the current third_party problems
[19:40] <asac> fta: i will create it when i am done
[19:40] <asac> first want to finish the cleanup
[19:40] <asac> also will put a .problems only file in there
[19:40] <asac> like the one i pasted
[19:41] <asac> the biggest part left is to find full copyright text for all the whitelisted licenses
[19:41] <asac> want to help?
[19:41] <asac> ;)
[19:41] <asac> we need to append them to the file
[19:41] <asac> like what i started inthe .override file
[19:49] <asac> fta: can you commit the gyp changes so i can upload it?
[19:49] <asac> or just upload on your own ;)
[19:49] <asac> you have the powers
[19:49] <asac> will get stevenk review it
[19:50] <fta> asac, http://paste.ubuntu.com/353084/ ?
[19:51] <asac> just LP: #....
[19:51] <asac> not the CLoses
[19:51] <asac> and a colon
[19:51] <asac> after LP
[19:51] <fta> do you need something else? i mean, besides the gyp license bug
[19:51] <asac> so: LP: #504425
[19:51] <asac> i hope its fine
[19:51] <asac> i am not really familiar with python packaging
[19:51] <asac> might be that it gets rejected because its not policy compliance
[19:51] <asac> but we will see
[19:51] <asac> want to upload it to debian right afterwards too
[19:52] <fta> Closes: #XXX was added by dch when i 1st created the file
[19:52] <asac> yeah.
[19:52] <asac> thats debian syntax
[19:52] <asac> will add that for the debian upload
[19:52] <asac> have to file an ITP first
[19:52] <asac> fta: oh in copyirght
[19:52] <asac> you should mention what license the debian/ dir has
[19:52] <asac> e.g. what license you want to put that under
[19:53] <asac> you can use everything for that. but norm is to use either "upstream" license ... or GPL-3 (or later)
[19:53] <asac> easiest would probably to just say that "debian/ packaging is licensed under same license as the upstream code"
[19:58] <bdrung> asac: did you test m-d?
[19:58] <asac> no
[19:58] <asac> i wont have time for anything this week :( ... alpha-2 is pressing hard
[19:59] <bdrung> asac: am i allowed to release it or do you insist on checking it?
[20:00] <asac> in a perfect world you would test all packages that build depend on mozilla-devsript
[20:00] <asac> and if there are no issues release
[20:01] <asac> i can help you with that next week if you can wait
[20:01] <bdrung> asac: k, will write a testscript :)
[20:01] <asac> cooooool
[20:01] <asac> its just kind of a big rewrite so checking carefully feels right
[20:02] <bdrung> asac: i already pulled all package (for running grep on them)
[20:04] <asac> fta: the big question mark i am having atm is where to replace the default startpage for chromium ;)
[20:05] <asac> but first -> food
[20:05] <fta> asac, hmm, i don't think so, not without patching :P
[20:11] <fta> asac, you want me to upload gyp but we know we still have the license bug open.. :S
[20:18] <[reed]> anybody know Matthias Clasen's IRC nick?
[20:18] <micahg> [reed]: mclasen
[20:19] <[reed]> thanks
[20:22] <asac> in -desktop
[20:22] <asac> [reed]: ^
[20:22] <[reed]> asac: I msg'd him
[20:22] <asac> kk
[20:22] <[reed]> hasn't responded yet
[20:31] <asac> ok continuing ;)
[20:32] <[reed]> he responded, but he's busy now, so I'll have to wait
[20:32] <[reed]> really just need his gpg key
[20:32] <[reed]> so I can send him encrypted mail
[20:32] <asac> heh
[20:32] <asac> and you use irc to get that ;)
[20:32] <asac> search the key servers
[20:33] <asac> probably similar secure
[20:33] <gavin> not on launchpad?
[20:33] <asac> he is redhat
[20:33] <asac> afaik
[20:33] <[reed]> he is
[20:34]  * asac runs gpg --search-keys "Matthias Clasen"
[20:34] <asac> there it is
[20:34] <asac> asac@tinya:/tmp/pp/gyp-0.1~svn770$ gpg --search-keys "Matthias Clasen"
[20:34] <asac> gpg: searching for "Matthias Clasen" from hkp server subkeys.pgp.net
[20:34] <asac> (1)	Matthias Clasen <mclasen@redhat.com> 1024 bit DSA key 4E92C235, created: 2007-01-12
[20:34] <asac> (2)	Matthias Clasen <mclasen@redhat.com> 1024 bit DSA key 3D5AC636, created: 2005-10-18
[20:34] <asac> so gpg --recv-keys ...
[20:34] <asac> ;)
[20:35] <asac> [reed]: ^
[20:35]  * sebner is wondering if asac is playing stalker :P
[20:35] <[reed]> he says he doesn't have gpg set up locally
[20:36] <[reed]> so, I'll just get him to create an account on bmo
[20:36] <[reed]> and CC him ;)
[20:39] <bdrung> asac: there are many FTBFS, i have to improve my testscript
[20:44] <bdrung> asac: we have renamed med-xpi-*pack to xpi-*pack. a few packages uses these scripts. i will correct these package.
[20:44] <asac> great
[20:45] <asac> [reed]: bmo mails are still send in plain text to all CCed
[20:45] <asac> i dont see why you want gpg ;)
[20:45] <asac> or arent mails sent out anymore?
[20:45] <asac> i think at some point it was discussed to just send notificaoitn that there was an update
[20:59] <bdrung> asac: i found bugs, that come from m-d 0.16 and one "failed to build twice". :)
[21:18] <bdrung> asac: do you have a better name for install-xpi?
[21:21] <bdrung> asac: should i call this tool dh_installxpi?
[21:34] <bdrung> asac: would you support my ubuntu core dev application?
[21:45] <micahg> bdrung: you want to clean up prism?
[22:01] <fta> asac, about to try a build without scons/breakpad in the tarball. want me to drop anything else?
[22:02] <asac> gyp?
[22:03] <fta> ok
[22:06] <asac> fta: build-tree/src/tools/wine_valgrind/
[22:06] <asac> build-tree/src/v8/test/cctest/
[22:07] <asac> build-tree/src/sdch/open-vcdiff/
[22:07] <asac> ?
[22:07] <asac> whats that?
[22:07] <asac> do we need build-tree/src/native_client/ ?
[22:08] <asac> what license is that?
[22:08] <asac> http://pastebin.com/fa474aee
[22:08] <asac> thats the list of current issues
[22:08] <asac> the more subtrees get removed, the less we have ;)
[22:08] <bdrung> micahg: at least add a clean target
[22:09] <micahg> bdrung: I probably won't get to it till later in teh cycle
[22:09] <asac> build-tree/src/tools/symsrc
[22:09] <micahg> bdrung: do I just list the dirs to remove?
[22:09] <micahg> dirs/files
[22:11] <asac> fta: ill go to the shop and buy some stuff ... then 1h more of whitelisting and we should have a really small set of probs
[22:11] <bdrung> micahg: it builds then at least. let me check the diff file
[22:11] <asac> so maybe wait a bit so we can remove more if i dont find license info for that
[22:11] <asac> but go ahead and test without scons etc.
[22:12] <asac> bbib
[22:19] <bdrung> micahg: where is the prism branch?
[22:20] <micahg> bdrung: lp:prism
[22:20] <micahg> bdrung: feel free to take that bug
[22:21] <bdrung> micahg: i will
[22:21] <micahg> bdrung: thanks
[22:24] <bdrung> micahg: the lp:prism branch differs from the package in lucid. what should i do?
[22:24] <micahg> bdrung: shouldn't differ...
[22:25] <micahg> oh, yeah
[22:25] <micahg> I guess it does
[22:25] <bdrung> micahg: btw, here is the fix: http://paste2.org/p/598971
[22:26] <micahg> bdrung: idk if we should make a release or not
[22:26] <micahg> there seem to be some issues
[22:26] <micahg> the prism.karmic branch has the same stuff as lucid
[22:26] <micahg> at the moment
[22:26] <bdrung> micahg: it's your decision.
[22:27] <bdrung> micahg: should i pull the karmic branch and push it as lucid branch?
[22:27] <micahg> bdrung: I think we usually use .head for the devel branch
[22:27] <micahg> but idk
[22:27] <micahg> fta or asac?
[22:28] <fta> .head
[22:28] <bdrung> fta: there is no prism.head
[22:29] <micahg> bdrung: it's lp:prism
[22:29] <fta> yeah, it's a very old branch: ~mozillateam/prism/prism/
[22:29] <micahg> fta, sorry I meant for the devel release
[22:29] <fta> i have it a .head locally
[22:30] <micahg> fta, should I rename?
[22:30] <fta> not now, i would need to update the bot and i don't have time, busy with chromium
[22:30] <micahg> fta, k
[22:31] <micahg> fta, what should he do about updating lucid, branch at r119, release and merge the changes into head?
[22:32] <fta> for lucid, no need to branch
[22:32] <micahg> fta, it won't work since I've made changes for the daily
[22:32] <micahg> so he'd have to release a new version, not just an update
[22:33] <micahg> and there are some issues, so I don't want to break lucid version without more testing
[22:33] <fta> unfortunate. branch then
[22:33] <micahg> bdrung: branch at r119, release and merge the changes into head?
[22:34] <bdrung> k
[22:34] <micahg> fta, that should work, right?
[22:34] <micahg> will the tag import as well?
[22:34] <fta> it should
[22:34] <micahg> ok
[22:35] <micahg> if it doesn't I guess we can start prism.lucid early...
[22:35] <asac> micahg: you made changes to .daily branch?
[22:36] <asac> thats bad ;)
[22:36] <asac> cherry pick thos commits to .head and hope that the daily merge succeeds i would say
[22:37] <bdrung> asac: he made changes to .head (not .daily)
[22:37] <asac> then whats the problem?
[22:37] <micahg> asac: not .daily, head
[22:37] <micahg> asac: the problem is we've had some bugs with the PPA version
[22:38] <micahg> so I don't want to release to Lucid until I fix them
[22:38] <micahg> or confirm they're not bugs
[22:38] <asac> yeah
[22:38] <asac> so you want to do a release from a previous version?
[22:38] <asac> revision
[22:38] <micahg> so, I suggested branching .head at 119 which was the version that was released, make the changes, release, and merge back into .head
[22:39] <asac> thats done by branching previous version locally ... doing release commit locally ... merging that branch back into .head
[22:39] <micahg> asac: will that work?
[22:39] <asac> and then releasing the tag
[22:39] <asac> right
[22:39] <asac> but no need to make a online .lucid branch
[22:39] <micahg> asac: that's what I told him to do
[22:39] <asac> that can all be done locally
[22:39] <asac> oh cool
[22:39] <asac> yeah
[22:39] <micahg> asac: I was going on our conversations while you were showing me how to do releases the other day
[22:39] <asac> yeah. but dont create a .lucid branch
[22:40] <asac> ;)
[22:40] <micahg> asac: I saw that as a last resort if the other stuff didn't work
[22:40] <asac> right
[22:42] <bdrung> micahg or asac: how do i create the tag afterwards?
[22:43] <asac> bdrung: just do the release commit locally (that creates the tag) ... when you merge in the tag is still there
[22:43] <bdrung> k
[22:43] <asac> debcommit -r
[22:43] <asac> -> release commit with tag
[22:43] <bdrung> asac: debcommit -r will do it? yes
[22:43] <asac> yeah.
[22:44] <bdrung> you answered before i finished typing :)
[22:44] <asac> hehe
[22:45]  * asac dives back into chromium license mess
[22:45] <asac> for 1h
[22:46] <bdrung> asac: bzr tags shows "1.0~b2+svn20090813r49078-0ubuntu2 ?"
[22:47] <bdrung> asac: so the tag merge failed
[22:47] <micahg> bdrung: what's wrong with that?
[22:47] <bdrung> micahg: the ? instead of the number
[22:48] <micahg> oh...
[22:48] <micahg> hmm
[22:48] <micahg> let me see
[22:49] <fta> asac, hm third_party/apple
[22:50] <micahg> bdrung: wfm
[22:50] <micahg> bdrung: check the changelog entry
[22:54] <micahg> bdrung: make sure to delete the tag if it's wrong
[22:55] <micahg>  bzr tag --delete TAG
[22:55] <asac> fta: thats just one line, right?
[22:55] <asac> bdrung: that means you uncommitted something that had the tag
[22:56] <bdrung> asac: yeah, you are right. i played with the debuild parameter...
[22:57]  * micahg just learned something new...
[22:58] <asac> BSD Protection License
[22:58] <asac> -> evil
[22:58] <asac> build-tree/src/courgette/third_party/
[22:58] <asac> fta: do we need that?
[22:58] <asac> its GPL incompatible afaict
[22:58] <asac> even unfree
[22:58] <asac> it prevents use with GPL
[22:58] <asac> explicitly
[22:59] <bdrung> micahg, asac: it's pushed now with an correct tag
[22:59] <asac> great. if you tested, push
[23:04] <bdrung> pushed
[23:11] <asac> fta: /sandbox definitly should have an explicit license
[23:12] <asac> i assume its BSD (3-clause) ... but its nowhere
[23:13] <fta> asac, courgette no. it would be nice to have an equiv though. maybe apt delta something
[23:14] <asac> fta: build-tree/src/tools/site_compare/
[23:14] <asac> do we need that
[23:14] <asac> it has only all rights reserved
[23:14] <fta> hm, i'm not sure. doesn't ring a bell
[23:14] <asac> at best we could wipe that whole thing
[23:14] <asac> looks like crap ;)
[23:14] <asac> lots of win32
[23:15] <asac> and stuff
[23:15] <fta> you should list those somewhere, i'm having a hard time keeping track
[23:15] <asac> hehe
[23:15] <asac> yes.
[23:15] <asac> not sure where
[23:15] <asac> i will keep them
[23:15] <asac> the probs outputted are reasonable short now
[23:15] <fta> initially, my *_DROP_* were to just remove huge dirs
[23:16] <fta> a wiki page, maybe
[23:16] <asac> we have backlog here for now
[23:16] <asac> build-tree/src/tools/stats_viewer/ -> drop (thats C sharp)
[23:17] <fta> ok, build is fine without gyp/scons/breakpad
[23:17] <asac> yeah
[23:17] <asac> very good
[23:17] <asac> now with all the other stuff i mentioned ;)
[23:17] <asac> 23:06 < asac> fta: build-tree/src/tools/wine_valgrind/
[23:17] <asac> 23:06 < asac> build-tree/src/v8/test/cctest/
[23:17] <asac> 23:07 < asac> build-tree/src/sdch/open-vcdiff/
[23:17] <asac> build-tree/src/tools/symsrc
[23:18] <asac> build-tree/src/courgette/third_party/
[23:18] <asac> build-tree/src/tools/site_compare/
[23:18] <fta> oh my
[23:18] <asac> build-tree/src/tools/stats_viewer/
[23:18] <asac> also build-tree/src/tools/valgrind
[23:18] <asac> but i am almost through ;)
[23:19] <asac> so there is light!
[23:20] <asac> ok rerunning
[23:26] <jdstrand> asac: so there are no mfsa's for 3.0.17 and 3.5.7-- the website says this was not a security update
[23:28] <jdstrand> asac: did it fix regressions introduced in the last update?
[23:30] <asac> [reed]: ^^
[23:32] <asac> fta: could you verify that my last checking extends licensecheck in the right way?
[23:32] <asac> the idea was to only add license/copyright info if its UNKNOWN
[23:32] <fta> sdch/open-vcdiff is needed, we build it
[23:32] <asac> but not overwrite in case the stuff has licensing
[23:32] <asac> i might have missed something
[23:32] <asac> ok
[23:33] <asac> let me look more carefully for a license there then
[23:33] <micahg> bdrung: wouldn't {misc:depends} be pulled in with prism?
[23:33] <jdstrand> I guess https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=535193 could be the reason-- the other two listed in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL%20status1.9.1%3A.7-fixed don't seem to affect us
[23:33] <bdrung> micahg: only one package had it. now all have it
[23:34] <micahg> bdrung: yes, but all the other packages depends on the one that had it
[23:35] <bdrung> micahg: lintian complained about it. the new policy is, that all should have it.
[23:35] <asac> jdstrand: let me check
[23:35] <micahg> bdrung: hmmm
[23:35] <bdrung> micahg: there are many other lintian warnings. e.g. missing README.source, no patch header, ...
[23:35] <micahg> that seems like a bug...
[23:35] <bdrung> micahg: i read something on the debian mailing list
[23:35] <jdstrand> there was an NTLM update in the last update (CVE-2009-3983)
[23:36] <micahg> bdrung: is that in case the individual packages need something else?
[23:36] <bdrung> micahg: yes
[23:37] <micahg> k
[23:37] <asac> [reed]: you stopped using fixed1.9.1.x keyword?
[23:37] <asac> what is the right one now?
[23:38] <micahg> asac: there's a status1.9.1 with a .x for values
[23:38] <micahg> or.x-fixed
[23:39] <asac> how do i query that?
[23:39] <micahg> it was posted above: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL%20status1.9.1%3A.7-fixed
[23:40] <micahg> only 3 fixes
[23:40] <asac> There's also a fix for a NTLM regression introduced by a
[23:40] <asac> security fix in the current versions.
[23:40] <asac> Firefox 3.5.7 also contains a stability fix for a common crash.
[23:40] <micahg> asac: on windows
[23:40] <asac> micahg: thats quicksearch
[23:40] <asac> how is that searched for real?
[23:40] <asac> jdstrand: so yeah NTLM and stability common crash
[23:40] <jdstrand> easy enough
[23:40] <jdstrand> thanks
[23:41] <fta> asac, redoing a tarball, then a build. i'm concerned by courgette, many gyp deps
[23:43] <micahg> this is the link they posted on their site for all changes: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL%20status1.9.1%3A.7-fixed
[23:44] <micahg> asac: most of the fixes got pushed off to .8