/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/01/21/#ubuntu-mozillateam.txt

asacfta: i think we will get issues with firefox-3.5 branch tomorrow00:14
asaci committed take-over for 3.600:14
ftaif you renamed the src package, the bot will sure have troubles00:14
asacyeah00:14
asacits now "firefox"00:14
asac;)00:14
asacbloody mess i tell you00:14
asachmm00:15
asacso firefox-3.6.head is now firefox00:15
micahgasac: ff3.5 branch broke in dailies today00:15
asaccan you fix that at least?00:15
asacmicahg: i saw00:15
asacor wait00:15
ftathe conf needs to be updated00:15
asacthe mozclient should be ok in the 3.6.head branch00:15
asacmicahg: i think starting tomorrow it doesnt really matter  ;)00:16
micahgasac: why?00:16
micahgoh, right00:16
asacwe could move the 3.5.head branch either to be a firefox-old source00:16
asacor drop it00:16
micahgasac: drop from daily?00:17
asacas its now, the upload of binaries will fail because the 3.6 provides higher versioned transitional packages :)00:17
asacif we dont want to rework the branch in the same way as i did with 3.6 now00:18
asacjust with name firefox-old00:18
asacbut lets wait00:18
ftawant a respin now?00:18
asaconly thing i am sure about is that there will be a firefox stable release channel ;)00:18
asachmm00:18
asacfta: can you just try the 3.6 branch?00:18
ftayes00:18
asacfta: maybe just for lucid/karmic?00:18
asac;)00:18
ftanm00:18
ftahm00:18
asacif thats difficult, just push it.00:19
ftano more xul?00:19
asacit worke dhere00:19
asacyes00:19
asacxul is universe now00:19
asaci tried to keep the packaging still working00:19
asacnot sure if that can be maintained though00:19
asac;)00:19
fta      'vpattern'   => '^3\.6(\~|\.)',00:19
ftauseless then?00:19
asacunless we make a second ppa where we build it00:20
asacfta: what does that do?00:20
asacfta: xulrunner is quite important ;)00:20
micahgasac: I think we should keep building it for devs testing stuff, but maybe a new ppa00:20
asacotherwise every rdepend we cannot remove would have to build against firefox00:20
asacwhich is what we really dont want00:20
asacmicahg: 3.5?00:20
ftaasac, it's a test to make sure the tarball is not x-3.7 when x is supposed to be 3.600:21
micahgasac: at least 3.6 and 3.700:21
micahgI think we should keep doing 3.5 until we migrate all releases to 3.600:21
asacfta: hmm. maybe something similar based on the previous version ;)00:21
asace.g. dont bump from 3.5 to e.600:21
asac3.600:21
asacmicahg: well, our dailies have .head00:21
asacmicahg: we are preparing the transition there00:21
asacfor lucid ... and later everywhere else00:21
micahgright00:22
asacbasically already everywhere elkse00:22
asacso next step is also to add -3.0 transitional packages to 3.6. head00:22
asacits a tough topic ;)00:22
ftarunning00:23
asacwhat i would love to do is to have firefox-previous -next -dev00:23
asacso we could make firefox-previous out of that00:23
ftanice, i can control my new radio from my webbrowser and from anywhere00:23
asacheh00:23
asacbetter than a not controllable laptop ;)00:24
micahgasac: indeed, sounds good, problem with firefox-previous is what to do when branch is EOL?00:24
micahgor we just keep it rolling so -previous is never EOL00:24
asacyes. thats my main concern.00:25
asacwe dont know if there will be -previous in future00:25
micahgk00:25
asacthere are two approaches in general i think:00:25
asac1. if -previous is dead, it means that -previous is the same branch as firefox00:26
asacupstream branch i mean00:26
asac;)00:26
asacstill with the different profile etc.00:26
micahgBTW, we can't have firefox-dev branch since that would conflict with package names, firefox-trunk is probably better00:26
asacmicahg: somewhat true. so back to what we had initially ;)00:26
asacthough i will drop firefox-dev before the first archive upload00:27
micahgah, right00:27
asacthe idea is that noone can build depend against it ;)00:27
asacbut right. would be funny if someone previously having the -dev package installed suddenly tracks the -dev branch00:27
micahgok, so I guess we can do firefox-dev, but firefox-trunk seems to make more sense since firefox-next is also -dev00:27
asaci want to wait for a upstream decision00:28
micahgk00:28
asacif they give their release channels a real name we can use that00:28
asaclike if they start doing -beta channel etc.00:28
asacmicahg: ok. so 3.5 only failed in lucid00:29
asaci think its really the same issue we have for thunderbird00:29
asacbash or dash or something00:29
asachmm. only amd6400:29
micahgnm it was 3.600:29
asacwe have a patch for that00:29
asacyes, 3.6 was half baked last night00:29
micahgwe have a patch for the shell issue?00:29
asacyes00:29
micahgit seems random00:30
micahgwhere is it?00:30
asackees submitted it with his new xulrunner hardening branch. i found it by accident. he didnt understand why00:30
micahgah, ok, I'll look there00:30
asaclet me check00:30
asache has a bug about that00:30
asacbug 50774400:30
ubottuLaunchpad bug 507744 in xulrunner-1.9.1 "build with PIE to gain remaining ASLR support" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/50774400:31
micahgyep, I saw, I was waiting for you on it00:31
asacfeel free to merge it. cleanup changelog documentation a bit maybe00:31
asace.g. document the xulrunner patch explicitly00:31
asacthen put the same patch in firefox-3.5 and tbird and firefox-3.6 and xurlunner-19.2 ;)00:31
micahgasac: k00:31
asacactually the changes he submitted need to go in all branches ;)00:32
asac+ the patch from xulrunner also needs to go to all firefox .head branches00:32
micahgk, I need to add dh_xulrunner to 1.9.2 and 1.9.3 still also00:32
micahgso I can both at the same time00:32
asaclet me commit the patch to 3.600:32
asacotherwise it will fail00:32
asacfta: already pushed?00:33
asac;)00:33
asacmaybe hold back :(00:33
ftaFAILED00:33
fta*ERROR* firefox != firefox-3.600:33
asacgood ;)00:33
ftathat's vpattern00:33
asaci have to pick a patch and test that it applies00:33
ftano, not vpattern, i have to rename the package in my conf file00:34
ftamy keys are source package names00:34
asachmm00:36
asacyeah its branch name now00:36
asacand source package name is in theory indpendent00:36
asacok applied that patch to 3.6.head for now00:38
asacfta: i think we are ready from this side ;)00:38
ftarespining00:40
micahgasac: when should I clean up the changelog in ff3.6.head?00:41
asacmicahg: already tried to clean it up a bit ... needs more love00:42
micahgasac: k, when are you uploading to lucid?00:42
BUGabundoasac: is there a bug for NM "For All Users" nor working in lucid with WiFi?00:44
BUGabundoworks for karmic, but I never manage to get it workign in +100:44
asacmicahg: wanted to see a green daily build00:45
asacthen doing the official branhding and uploading it00:45
asacwhen upstream releases00:45
asacassuming that its ok now00:45
micahgasac: k, can I fix the changelog tonight00:45
asacsure. just clean it up and remove redundant stuff00:46
micahgasac: k, I'll also add a changelog entry for all the bugs fixed00:46
asacyes, adding a 3.6 released header to the changelog sounds good00:46
asacmicahg: ensure that the bugs closed are also filed against firefox source package00:47
micahgasac: ?00:47
asacotherwise they dont get closed00:47
micahgah, k00:47
asacmicahg: like what we do for security updates on top00:47
asac* firefox 3.6 release00:47
asac - fix LP: #....00:47
asac  - fix LP: #... - this bug00:47
asacetc.00:47
micahgasac: oh, ok, I didn't remember that's how it's done00:48
asacfirefox 3.6 release (FIREFOX_3_6_RELEASE)00:48
micahgI mean about the busg00:48
asacmicahg: check the stable branches00:48
asacyeah. i like that way00:48
asacyou can also use + instead of - ;)00:48
micahgk, I messed up TB then ;)00:48
asacheh00:48
asaci think a typical structure of a changelog is:00:49
asac* UPSTREAM RELEASE x.y.z (UPSTREAM_TAG)00:49
asac  - fix LP: #1 - microsft has majority of market share00:49
asac.00:49
asac.00:49
asac[ Master Luke <mmm@,,,>]00:49
asac* packaging change 100:49
asac* packaging change 200:49
asacetc.00:49
micahgasac: good to know00:49
ftaasac, done00:50
asacfta: how is the new "consistency" check?00:50
ftaunchanged00:50
asace.g. ensuring that no bad version gets uploaded?00:50
asachmm00:50
asacok00:50
asacso that still works?00:51
* asac happy00:51
micahgasac: if the patch works in older versions, should I upstream it?00:51
asacfirefox is building in daily ;)00:51
ftahttp://paste.ubuntu.com/359835/00:51
asacmicahg: do we see the issue in xulrunner trunk builds?00:52
micahgasac: yes00:52
asacif so, yes. remember to give credits to kees like in changelog00:52
asacand CC asac@jwsdot.com ;)00:52
micahgasac: where do I put that in an upstream patch?00:52
* asac might be able to read bug mail soon again ;)00:52
asacyou just submit the patch ... and say in the submit comment that you forward that patch; credits go to Kees...00:53
asacmaybe remember them when you ask for the commit00:53
micahgasac: k00:53
asacfta: can you disable 3.5 daily for now?00:57
asacor want to keep it failing ... i dont mind if noone complains about ppa usage00:57
asac?00:57
ftaas you want, i don't mind either way00:58
asacok. lets keep it running for a few days and see if we get to fixing it00:58
micahgasac: ff3.5 worked last night01:08
asacgood01:09
asaci think it failed on lucid01:10
* micahg hopes to have more time next week,,,01:10
micahgasac: do we need all the packages updated by Feature freeze?01:19
micahgTB, SM, Lightning, Sunbird01:20
asacfta: oh. can you also push karmic?01:21
asac;)01:22
asaci wanted to test the upgrade path more or less extensively01:22
asacif not i can push that to my sandbox01:22
asacmicahg: good question. in general yes.01:22
asacFF and TB need to happen this week ;)01:22
micahgheh, ok01:22
asachehe01:22
asacTB will be kind of half baked at first01:22
asacwithout -dev package etc.01:23
asacbut debian icedove folks seem to make progress on that01:23
micahgasac: I wanted to suggest branching tb.head before my changes and overwritting01:23
micahgthe final result is ok for most things, but the commits aren't so good01:24
asacyes01:24
asaci wanted to redo that with merges etc.01:25
asacand copying your files01:25
asacdid the build work?01:25
micahgno01:25
micahgI missed a few things in the rules file when I merged them01:25
=== asac_ is now known as asac
=== micahg1 is now known as micahg
BUGabundo_remotemorning08:46
LLStarksmorning08:49
LLStarksyou guys need squad members at that upcoming meeting?08:49
RAOFHas anyone thought about making a dh_xulrunnerdeps to emit substvars for packages that link against xulrunner libs?08:51
LLStarksin english?08:54
RAOFA debhelper tool to generate ${xulrunner:Depends} variables with appropriate versioning.08:59
LLStarksah09:10
LLStarksno clue.09:10
asacRAOF: thought we did that now10:26
asacin lucid10:26
RAOFasac: Really?10:29
RAOFI'd find that quite useful - where is it! :)10:29
RAOFapt-file search dh_ doesn't find anything xul-ish.10:34
RAOFI guess I could write one.  It can't be that hard, right? :)10:38
asaclet me check10:40
RAOFAha!  I had an out-of-date apt-file cache.10:43
RAOFSweet.  An idea so good, someone had it first!10:45
BUGabundo_remoteasac: http://blog.mozilla.com/tglek/2010/01/19/chromium-vs-minefield-cold-startup-performance-comparison/10:54
BUGabundo_remoteFirefox commandline: firefox -profile /mnt/startup/profile/firefox  -no-remote file://`pwd`/startup.html#`python -c ‘import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);’`10:54
BUGabundo_remoteChromium commandline: chromium-browser –user-data-dir=/mnt/startup/profile/chrome  file://`pwd`/startup.html#`python -c ‘import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);’`10:54
BUGabundo_remoteI can't run FF10:54
BUGabundo_remoteand Ch doesn't work much better either10:55
BUGabundo_remotebut at least it opens10:55
asacheh10:56
asacBUGabundo_remote: i will be here in a minute10:56
asacBUGabundo_remote: did you upgrade to latest daily firefox-3.6 yet?10:56
asacthat should give you startup speed etc.10:56
asacBUGabundo_remote: use this url:http://people.canonical.com/~asac/tmp/startup.html10:56
asacfor that test10:56
RAOFDarn.  dh_xulrunner doesn't pick up libmozjs dependencies.  Ah!  Because it's taken from Debian.10:59
RAOFI guess I'll re-add the handcrafting and write a patch for dh_xulrunner.11:02
BUGabundo_remoteasac: I'm using 3.711:03
BUGabundo_remoteasac: in Ch I get urls like http://xn--user-data-dir%3D-bg6i/tmp/chrome :(11:05
BUGabundo_remoteand file:///home/bugabundohttp://people.canonical.com/~asac/tmp/startup.html#126407191243711:05
BUGabundo_remote$ chromium-browser –user-data-dir=/tmp/chrome  file://`pwd`http://people.canonical.com/~asac/tmp/startup.html#`python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'`11:06
BUGabundo_remotefirefox-3.7 -profile /tmp/firefox  -no-remote file://`pwd`http://people.canonical.com/~asac/tmp/startup.html#`python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'`11:08
BUGabundo_remotebugabundo@BluBUG:~$ psx fox11:08
BUGabundo_remote1000     25618  0.0  0.0   7404   744 pts/7    D+   11:08   0:00 grep --color=auto fox11:08
asacBUGabundo_remote: did you have firefox-3.6 installed?11:10
asacwonder if your daily update today went well11:10
asacBUGabundo_remote: remove the file://`pwd`11:11
asacfrom the url11:11
asacjust the http:/....11:11
asacBUGabundo_remote:  would appreciate if you can check that firefox 3.6 still works nicely ;) ... we shuffled the packaging quite a lot ;)11:29
asacso if you had issues during upgrade i would want to know11:29
Tallkenhallo, anyone aware of a PPA problem?11:44
asacTallken: let me know what probably you see11:45
Tallkenasac, I was gonna paste a pastebin URL11:45
asacwe did some package shuffeling, so some issues might come from that11:45
asacright11:45
asacplease post what your issue is11:45
Tallkenis firefox-3.5 supposed to bring firefox-3.6 ?11:45
asacyes11:46
Tallkenthen who has both firefox-3.5 installed and firefox-3.6 will run into troubles?11:46
asacwe made the firefox 3.6 by default transition the last few days11:46
asacTallken: yes, you need to remove firefox-3.611:46
asacwe didnt add a transition for those packages, because they never entered the archive11:47
asacand putting more packages in is overkill11:47
Tallkenok, makes sense11:47
asaci might upload a special package to the daily ppa to ensure a good transition11:47
asacwith just that transition11:47
Tallkenbut that way you have to hear ppl like me complaining :p11:47
asacalready thought about that11:47
asacwill probably do that11:47
asacTallken: thats ok.11:47
asac;)11:47
Tallken:p11:47
asacTallken: let me know if you have issues after removeing firefox-3.611:47
asacpackages11:47
asacyo should end up with firefox and firefox-3.5 (empty/transitional) packages11:48
asacand your default browser should be 3.6 then11:48
Tallkenapt-get is sooooooo annoying when this happen11:49
TallkenI want to remove a package and he wants to install first the ones that failed11:49
Tallkenusing aptitude11:49
Tallken......downgrading to previous version of firefox......11:50
Tallken......removing firefox-3.611:50
Tallkenand finally, using apt-get to dist-upgrade, yay :D11:52
Tallkenasac, thank you for your help11:52
Tallkenif anyone else comes here, mention aptitude will do a better job11:52
Tallkenremoving firefox 3.611:52
Tallkenjust refuse the first solution it presents11:52
Tallkenand then it will offer to downgrade the packages back to the old firefox-3.5 (really 3.5)11:53
Tallkenand then the system is in consistent state and you can remove firefox-3.611:53
asacTallken: ok. i think we should make that special package for 3.6 users11:56
Tallkenhum11:57
Tallkenor, i'm thinking about this now11:57
Tallkenjust tell ppl to install firefox-3.6 first now11:57
TallkenI assume it's empty now?11:57
Tallkenthen, when installing firefox-3.5 there won't be any file collision11:58
Tallkenthe problem here was that apt-get would kill the install because it wanted to replace a file which belonged to another package11:58
Tallkenso, I assume if firefox-3.6 gets installed first, no files will be assigned to firefox-3.6 (assuming the firefox-3.6 package has now no files) and firefox-3.5 will complete with no issues11:58
asacTallken: no. thats not it12:00
asacfirefox-3.6 package is still in that ppa, from the previous version12:00
asacwe dont ship an empty package in the new package12:00
asacbecause that would mean we would have to push that to real archive ... and we never had that package there12:00
Tallkenthen you'll run into troubles :p12:00
Tallkendpkg: erro ao processar /var/cache/apt/archives/firefox_3.6~hg20100120r33527+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd2~karmic_i386.deb (--unpack):12:00
Tallken a tentar reescrever '/usr/lib/firefox-3.6pre/components/libnkgnomevfs.so', que também existe no pacote firefox-3.6-gnome-support 0:3.6~hg20100117r33523+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd1~karmic12:00
asacyes12:00
Tallkenit says: error processing12:00
asacsure12:00
Tallken...trying to rewrite ... which also exists in package12:00
asacright12:00
asacits half a bug, half a missing transitional package for the ppa-only12:01
gnomefreakDO NOT remove the idicater-applet (the one with your name) than try to add it back. You will lose your gnome-panels12:01
asacTallken: please dpkg -r firefox-3.6-gnome-support12:02
asacand try again12:02
asacTallken: do you get more cnflicts?12:02
* asac currently fixes packaging12:02
gnomefreakforce it will fix it12:02
Tallkenasac, no, no, no, I'm good now :)12:02
Tallkenasac, what I was saying was just discussing the thing12:02
gnomefreak^^^ ugly way12:02
Tallkenas I said, I used aptitude to handle it "automatically", it downgraded to the previous version (in which firefox-3.5 was firefox-3.5) and then I was able to remove12:03
TallkenI was just wondering any other possible solutions, but personally I've everything correct now12:03
asacTallken: ok committed. so that error shouldnt happen anymore12:03
Tallken:)12:04
asacthe gnome-support one12:04
Tallkenthen if that error won't happen, ppl will just have two Firefox 3.6 instaled at the same time without noticing it :p12:05
BUGabundo_remotebugabundo@BluBUG:~$ python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'12:06
BUGabundo_remote126407533175312:06
BUGabundo_remotebugabundo@BluBUG:~$ python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'12:06
BUGabundo_remote126407533273212:06
BUGabundo_remotebugabundo@BluBUG:~$ python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'12:06
BUGabundo_remote126407533317612:06
BUGabundo_remotebugabundo@BluBUG:~$ python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'12:06
BUGabundo_remote126407533353312:06
BUGabundo_remotebugabundo@BluBUG:~$ python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'12:06
BUGabundo_remote126407533388312:06
BUGabundo_remotebugabundo@BluBUG:~$ python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'12:06
BUGabundo_remote126407533431012:06
Tallkenhum... er?12:06
BUGabundo_remoteasac: how can that simple test have so much diff results?=12:07
asacBUGabundo_remote: you just print the time12:07
BUGabundo_remotewho will the browser test be coeheren ?12:07
asacsince current time moves on - as we all know12:07
BUGabundo_remoteasac: yeah, I still haven't manage to get any browser to open with it :(12:07
asacyou dont run the browser test with that command line12:07
asacyou just run python to print hte time12:07
asacBUGabundo_remote: then dont do it ;)12:07
asaci told you how ;)12:08
Tallkenanyway, thank you! idleing12:08
BUGabundo_remote$ firefox-3.7 -profile /tmp/firefox -no-remote http://people.canonical.com/~asac/tmp/startup.html# python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'12:08
BUGabundo_remoteprints nothing12:08
asacchromium-browser –user-data-dir=/tmp/chrome "http://people.canonical.com/~asac/tmp/startup.html#"`python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'`12:08
BUGabundo_remoteELAPSED 70412:09
BUGabundo_remoteYAY12:09
asacfirefox "http://people.canonical.com/~asac/tmp/startup.html#"`python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'`12:09
asacyes12:09
gnomefreakasac: do you know what app to file a bug against for update-apt-xapi12:09
asacthat works12:09
asacgnomefreak: no. dont know what that is12:09
asacdpkg -S update-apt-xapi12:10
asacgives you the package the file is shipped in12:10
gnomefreakthanks checking12:10
asacso its apt-xapian-index12:10
BUGabundo_remoteaahhh -profile /tmp/firefox  is causing probs12:11
* Tallken wonders why firefox-3.6 now that it is in the place of firefox-3.5 has the antialiasing or something different12:11
asacTallken: font issues?12:11
Tallkenno, it's prettier :p12:11
asacreally?12:11
gnomefreakmine isnt comming up yet but thanks i will file bug against that12:11
asaccool12:11
BUGabundo_remoteasac: 3.7 in safemode ELAPSED 482212:12
TallkenI had already noticed Firefox-3.5 had prettier fonts than Firefox-3.612:12
BUGabundo_remoteway worse the Chromium12:12
TallkenI'd assumed it was some flag which was only enabled in final builds or something12:12
asacBUGabundo_remote: be sure chromium is closed before running it ;)12:12
asacalso dont use -profile12:12
TallkenBUGabundo_remote, ppl want the speed while browsing, not the startup time, unless the difference is huge12:12
asacfirefox has probably system extensions so it takes ages longer12:12
asace.g. run with existing profiles12:13
asacor ensure that no extension whatsoever is on your system12:13
asacalso no plugin12:13
asacif you want to do a "fresh-profile" test12:13
gnomefreakok be righnt back i have to fix this.12:13
BUGabundo_remoteasac: new profile : ELAPSED 88512:14
BUGabundo_remoteTallken: I *do* want speed at start12:14
BUGabundo_remoteI keep opening new windows, and closing browsers, on remote machines12:14
TallkenBUGabundo_remote, okidoki12:14
BUGabundo_remoteso Ch 774 and FF 3.7 88512:15
BUGabundo_remotelet me test 3.5 and 3.612:15
BUGabundo_remote$ apt-cache policy firefox  Installed: 3.6~hg20100120r33527+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd212:16
BUGabundo_remotewell.... can't test 3.5 anymore :\12:16
BUGabundo_remotebugabundo@BluBUG:~$ firefox "http://people.canonical.com/~asac/tmp/startup.html#"`python -c 'import time; print int(time.time() * 1000);'`12:17
BUGabundo_remoteELAPSED 86212:17
BUGabundo_remote3.6 faster then 3.712:17
asacBUGabundo_remote: right. firefox 3.6 is now all-static12:20
asacwhich should boost startup considerably12:20
asacthanks for confirming12:20
asacTallken: so you say that fonts got better in latest 3.6?12:21
Tallkenwell, yes12:21
Tallkencan't explain it though12:21
Tallkenthey're the same a firefox-3.5 was12:21
Tallkenalso notice it is probably dependent of the person you ask, some people complained about firefox-3.5 fonts12:22
asacTallken: have a screen?12:37
asacmaybe a screen with before too12:37
asac?12:37
Tallkenyes, wait12:44
Tallkenasac, may I DCC you? [P.S.: the differences in the screenshots are fairly small]12:46
* Tallken awaying for half an hour12:49
gnomefreakthere i reached my file 3 bugs today ;)12:50
gnomefreakwho wants to try to confirm a bug or 2?13:00
coastGNUThere is a problem with the apparmor profile of firefox*13:01
asacTallken: please post somewhere ;) ... DCC is not good for me ;)13:01
asacimageshack.us or something13:02
asaccoastGNU: which versino are you running?13:02
Tallkenasac, most services I register use a real-world username13:02
coastGNU3.6~hg20100120r33527+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd2~karmic13:02
Tallkeni suppose i can create another account at imageshack13:02
asaccoastGNU: COLUMNS=200 dpkg -l firefox\* please13:03
asacin a pastebin13:03
coastGNUI added an entry for dirname and pwd to the apparmor prifile and firefox* starts again13:04
asaccoastGNU: pleast post ;)13:04
asaccoastGNU: we shuffled things a bit, so want to see what your status is13:05
coastGNUhttp://www.pastebin.org/7969513:06
coastGNUin /etc/apparmor.d/usr.bin.firefox add the lines:13:07
coastGNU  /usr/bin/dirname ixr,13:07
coastGNU  /usr/bin/pwd ixr,13:07
coastGNUjust after the line which has basename13:08
Tallkenah, imageshack doesn't require registering :)13:10
Tallkenasac, http://img696.yfrog.com/i/firefox36pos.png/ && http://img714.yfrog.com/i/firefox36pre.png/ . They're going to look VERY similar, but note the "//" in http:// in the address bar to see there is a small difference in the anti-aliasing13:11
* asac breaks for lunch13:14
jdstrandcoastGNU: can you file a bug following https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingApparmor13:15
coastGNUsee the changes I made to the apparmor profiles:  http://www.pastebin.org/7970113:15
coastGNUJepp, thanks for this tip. I wasn't shure if this needs an apparmor or firefox bugreport13:16
* gnomefreak confused :(13:39
Tallkenyay youtube HTML5; uses H264 :( [no support in FF3.6]15:40
LLStarksasac, i really want to put this autocomplete/screensaver bug to bed. is there any way to gdb it?15:52
LLStarksit pisses me off so much.15:53
LLStarksscreensaver = 5 minutes of no autocomplete15:53
LLStarksmicahg?16:00
micahgLLStarks: did you already make an strace?16:00
LLStarksno.16:01
LLStarksdon't know how.16:01
micahgwe can try this one first16:01
micahgstrace -f -eopen /usr/lib/firefox-3.5.7/firefox 2>&1 | tee ~/ff_strace.log16:02
micahgthat'll create an strace log in your home directory16:03
LLStarkscan't replicate16:16
LLStarksgrrr16:16
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
BUGabundo_remoteasac: with the release of FF 3.6 does that mean a new branch for 4.0 ?16:24
* BUGabundo_remote wants less cluthered browser16:25
technovikingWill there be a offical ppa for Firefox 3.6 in Karmic other than -daily16:47
technovikingTry to stop forums folks from installing 20,000 crack-filled homemade Firefox 3.6 debs of unknown quality and try to stay with something somewhat offical?16:48
BUGabundo_remotetechnoviking: secrutity ppa I guess16:54
micahgwhat's the question?16:55
technovikingWill there be a offical ppa for Firefox 3.6 in Karmic other than -daily16:55
technovikingTry to stop forums folks from installing 20,000 crack-filled homemade Firefox 3.6 debs of unknown quality and try to stay with something somewhat offical?16:55
micahgtechnoviking: yes, there is a plan to upgrade all stable versions to firefox 3.616:55
micahgyou probably won't need a PPA16:55
technovikingsweet, I will spread the word in the forums. I assume a week or so of testing for 3.616:56
micahgtechnoviking: not that fast unfortunately16:56
micahgtechnoviking: hopefully before Lucid is released16:56
technovikingwill it be in Karmic?16:57
micahgthere might be a PPA sooner, but that depends on if we can make a policy for it16:57
micahgtechnoviking: not right awway16:57
gnomefreakmicahg: there is a bug in sb and tb that should be addressed in tb3.0 maybe 2.0 as well and sb1.0but i dont recall the bug number but i will find it in the next 30 or so minutes16:58
gnomefreakim just testing something atm16:59
micahggnomefreak: k, you remember what it's about?16:59
micahgk16:59
gnomefreakmicahg: yeah sort of. when you get the open with dialog (image or what not) it lists tb and sb to open it with and it shouldnt do that17:00
micahgtechnoviking: we can't release it into the current stable releases without a language pack update17:00
gnomefreakshould be as simple as removing a line or 3 but i would have to look at where it is17:00
micahggnomefreak: oh, the image thing?17:00
micahgbug 458148?17:01
gnomefreakthe open with dialog should not list tb or sb to open with17:01
ubottuLaunchpad bug 458148 in lightning-sunbird "Thunderbird and Sunbird claim to be able to open PNG and JPEG files" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/45814817:01
gnomefreakmicahg: thats it17:02
micahggnomefreak: yeah, I was going to update TB3 once it was released into Lucid17:02
gnomefreakmicahg: oh ok i was thinking to do it on the initial upload17:02
micahgwell, I didn't to add more complexity to the merge17:03
micahgbut idk17:03
gnomefreakmicahg: it really doesnt matter if we push the fix after as long as it gets fixed (per users) but can we even push that to 2.0.x in <=karmic17:04
gnomefreakit looks like i have to reboot as normal this damn bug needs to be set to high :( ill be back17:06
Salva1Hello.17:06
Salva1Does anyone one know if Ubuntu will include Firefox 3.6 in its stable repositories?17:07
Salva1At least for Karmic.17:07
BUGabundo_remoteyes17:07
BUGabundo_remotebut not yet17:07
BUGabundo_remoteit needs a lang pack17:07
Salva1OK.17:08
BUGabundo_remoteif you really really want it NOW, there's a daily ppa for it17:08
Salva1If I add that, Firefox 3.6 and 3.5 will update it daily?17:09
Salva1Is it more for bug testers, right?17:09
BUGabundo_remote3.6 replaces 3.517:09
Salva1I see the final one in the Firefox page. Are those binaries not packaged?17:11
Salva1Could I not update Firefox with that?17:12
gnomefreakmicahg: we are planning on backporting 3.6?17:30
BUGabundo_remoteyes17:30
gnomefreakwhy?17:34
BUGabundo_remoteshouldn't we ?17:34
gnomefreaknot really17:40
BUGabundo_remoteoh?17:40
gnomefreakintroducing a major release to our stable releases can cause problems if 3.6 ends up not being as stable as they/we think and backporting is a big deal that we try not to do (at least in the past) example dapper-firefox-3.017:41
gnomefreakwe didnt backport it (would introduce too many problems)17:42
gnomefreakthe bug listed releases that we didnt even get 3.5 in but i would have to look again17:43
gnomefreakbut i will talk to them about it17:43
gnomefreakwe should also hold the meeting before backporting major release packages17:44
gnomefreakbe back17:44
BUGabundo_remotewell, users (specally 9.X) will demand 3.617:45
BUGabundo_remoteif we don't give it to them in backport repos17:45
BUGabundo_remotethey will go strange ways , untrusted sources17:45
BUGabundo_remoteplus, those who just want stable releases, won't enable backports17:45
BUGabundo_remotebut I do agree with you, we shouldn't put it in -updates17:46
gnomefreakim sorry for using the word "backporting" he is talking more like releasing it to -updates repo17:49
gnomefreakif we push 3.6 to <lucid than people will want/expect us to release tb3.0 sb1.0 ect...17:50
gnomefreakif i find bug i can see exactly what he wants to do17:50
gnomefreakmicahg: you really think adding ff3.6 in the updates repo for >=hardy? << IMHO it is a very bad idea18:05
micahggnomefreak: we're going to add for all eventually18:06
micahggnomefreak: ff36 is all in one18:06
gnomefreakcant find bug that you said it in but title had [hardy][....18:06
gnomefreakmicahg: if we do throw it into updates repo we are going to see problems arise not to mention users will than want tb3.0 and every new releases we make. I would suggest just putting them into a PPA so people can decide if they want it. forcing it maybe a bad idea (this is why we never did it before18:07
gnomefreak)18:07
micahggnomefreak: that's the plan18:08
micahgTB3 will also need to be backported due to security concerns I think after TB2 is EOL18:08
gnomefreakmicahg: from the bug report sounded like you plan on pushing it into the -updates repo18:08
micahggnomefreak: yes18:08
micahgI think so18:08
gnomefreakso you are planning on pushing it to -update repos?18:09
micahgthat's how I understood it at least18:09
micahggnomefreak: after QA testing18:09
gnomefreakmicahg: IMHO its a bad idea to release major releases into our stable releases of ubuntu18:09
gnomefreakits going to cause alot of problems and more bugs18:10
micahggnomefreak: can;t help it...https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-lucid-new-firefox-support-model18:10
gnomefreakeither throw it into backports repo or in PPA not in supported repos. ok looking at it in a minute18:10
gnomefreakMozilla needs to make up thier mind. they are merging 3.7 into 3.6 now 3.6 into 3.518:11
micahggnomefreak: no, that's not what's happening18:12
micahgwe don't know about 3.5 yet18:12
micahgthey're talking about adding OOPP to 3.618:12
* gnomefreak not sure what you mean but i thought they were making 3.7 a release of 3.618:13
micahggnomefreak: no18:13
gnomefreakno? didnt i read something about that? or something like that?18:13
micahgFUD18:15
micahgonly OOPP18:15
micahgafaik18:15
micahggnomefreak: http://beltzner.ca/mike/2010/01/15/of-rumours-and-broken-telephones/18:15
* gnomefreak reading18:17
gnomefreakit sounds like they will take stuff from 3.7 and 4.0 (new features ect..) and put them into earlier releases. that makes me think that they will use them as updates to stable browser (at least 3.6) they state "earlier" and that makes me thing of an update to stable 3.618:21
micahggnomefreak: small updates that won't affect other things, yes18:21
micahgbut they still want a rapid release pace, so we're adapting our release policy to match18:22
gnomefreakif we take enough out of the unstable releases than they will keep updating and making versioning even more of a cunfusing mess of crap18:22
micahggnomefreak: that's why we're moving to follow their releases in our stable releases and moving to an all-in-one ff18:23
micahgso when they update, we can update18:23
gnomefreakwell rapid release pace would be as i understand it monthly( like 3.0.5 wou;ld be 5th month after release) its not really a change18:23
micahggnomefreak: no, they want to decrease time between minor revisions18:24
gnomefreaknot sure what "all in one" means 4.0 should be a major update like 3.0 was from 2.018:24
micahglike 3.6 is 7 months after 3.518:24
micahgit was supposed to be out 2 months ago18:24
micahggnomefreak: no external depends like xulrunner18:25
gnomefreakmicahg: ah i remember seeing that on the blueprint. is this our change or mozillas change?18:26
micahgour change so that we can keep up with mozilla18:26
micahgxulrunner is going to be in universe in Lucid18:26
gnomefreakfor other apps but since firefox is in main it would be all in one but provide xulrunner for other browsers?18:27
micahggnomefreak: no, it will not provide anything for other apps18:27
micahgexcept x-www-browser :)18:28
gnomefreakhmmmm18:28
micahgeverything's moving to webkit anyways18:29
micahgor so it seems18:29
gnomefreakok so with 4.0 we will provide it for all releases of Ubuntu?  yeah they are moving to webkit shotly after they moved to xulrunner :)18:29
micahggnomefreak: yep, we will provide steady updates in stable releases18:30
micahggnomefreak: and the source package is changing18:30
micahgfirefox for current18:30
micahgnext and trunk are TBD18:30
gnomefreakepiphany used both 2 different packages but now its one package that uses both (that confused the hell out of me how to decide what one you want18:30
micahggnomefreak: we're going to try to backport karmic webkit for previous releases to drop epiphany-gecko18:31
gnomefreakthat defeats the whole stable release updates per Ubuntu policy18:31
micahggnomefreak: firefox already has an exception18:31
gnomefreakoh ok18:31
micahgbut because of security concerns for xulrunner, we have to do some extensive backporting18:32
gnomefreakso really Mozilla will not release liek they did for 2.0->3.0 it will continue to be updates with security and new features it just seems weird18:33
gnomefreakthat is why we have never packported Mozilla apps as it becomes a bitch for depends/rdepends18:34
gnomefreaks/packported/backported18:34
gnomefreakwell if you need help with the backporting let me know i can spin 1 or more a day depending on how long a package builds (depending on package)18:35
micahggnomefreak: right, that's why xulrunner is moving to universe so we don't have to do this again18:35
gnomefreakmicahg: ah18:35
gnomefreakok be back i need to eat18:36
micahgepiphany moving to webkit made things easier I think18:36
ccheneygrr pulling in the other macro boilerplate appears to be wanting to pull all of the rest of glib in with it18:39
asacccheney: what are you trying to pull?18:44
asacwhat macro?18:44
asacmicahg: hi. you think you can get the PIE branches merged today?18:45
asacgnomefreak76: yes, so18:55
asacupstream aims for a more continous update process18:55
asace.g. similar to chromium, without long lasting old-stable branches18:55
asacwe dont know how that will look like, but we know it will happen18:56
asacalso they go for more frequent updates ... like every 6 weeks or so18:56
asacwhich they already do for a while ... but both combined makes it overly hard to backport stuff for ages18:56
ccheneythe G_G_DEFINE_TYPE (GInetSocketAddress, g_inet_socket_address, G_TYPE_SOCKET_ADDRESS);18:57
ccheneyer G_DEFINE_TYPE (GInetSocketAddress, g_inet_socket_address, G_TYPE_SOCKET_ADDRESS);18:57
* ccheney is cleaning up the files a bit more so its more easy to see where parts came from18:58
jcastro[reed]: mconnor: congrats!18:59
jcastrostevel: belated congrats. :)18:59
asacalso gavin__, gandi ... congrats!19:03
gandiasac: !19:03
gandi:)19:03
gandiasac: I wanted to ask you sth19:03
asacgandi: shoot19:03
asaci am here for a bit ;)19:04
gandiasac: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-lucid-new-firefox-support-model19:04
gandido you work with Kev on this?19:04
asacyes19:04
gandido you have support from MoCo team?19:04
asacgandi: in what way?19:04
asacits about mainly two things:19:04
asac1. moving to firefox all-static ... and rolling that out to all releases (once the ohter branches go EOL)19:05
gandiin discussing the approach, and how can we make it easier for your model to release stuff, and about the concept of replacing all embedded gecko with webkit to minimize the regression risk19:05
asac2. fighting with xulrunner reverse dependencies and extensions etc.19:05
gandiwe recently started a big discussion about how to support you better19:05
asachmm19:05
gandiand I gave this link as an example of a big shift that we're not supporting you with19:06
gandibeltzner asked if you're working with Kev on this19:06
gandiI said I don't know19:06
asacso what i often did, was trying to evangelize the importance of the embedding api19:06
asacstability19:06
asacand keeping that maintained with a long security support cycle19:06
asaci talked to almost everyone about that ...19:06
gandibasically, fwik pascal and several other guys suggest that we should consider starting our ppa19:06
gandior another channel with .devs19:06
gandi.debs19:06
asacand i never got any positive feedback on that except some security team members ;)19:06
gandiyea, so it boils down to the question19:07
asacthe main line is: "firefox is our product"19:07
gandisec, otp19:07
asaceverything else: someone needs to step up to do that19:07
asacgandi: please dont start shipping debs ;)19:07
asacthats really a mess19:07
asaccome to us and work with us on the packages you want to see shipped :)19:08
gandimhm19:08
asacif you ship packages it will become messy for sure.19:08
asacthe problem is that there should be one package for all .deb based distros imo. however, mozilla doesnt run a distro so they are not aware of all the details and hence, their package will never be such a "one package"19:09
gandiwe'd like to ship nightliy debs19:09
asachowever, if mozilla works with us directly on such a package, all will be different19:09
gandiok19:09
asacgandi: we ship nightly debs for ages19:09
asacwe even talked about putting the packaging in mozilla-central somehow19:09
gandimhm19:09
gandiotp19:09
asachowever, its a bit tricky and needs some up-front discussion19:10
micahgasac: sure, by when?19:10
asacmicahg: now ;)19:10
asachehe19:10
asacwell, whenever you can19:10
jcastroyeah, let's do it now. :)19:10
asaci want to get the final roughest edges flashed out and just release 3.6 final to lucid ;)19:11
asacat best today ;)19:11
asacjcastro: do what now?19:11
micahgasac: which branch needs it immediately?19:11
asac3.6.head19:11
jcastroasac: get the discussion started19:11
asacyes. we can try that again. but imo it would be simpler to get mozilla folks involved with our package branches to start with19:12
jcastroindeed19:12
gandiasac: the deal is. we'd like to ship 64bit, we'd like to ship nightly builds, beta builds and stable builds similarly separately to how we distribute channels. I think that for now you ship only nightlies, right?19:12
gandiyou don't ship betas separately?19:12
ftaasac, did you fix 3.6?19:12
asacgandi: we can ship everything.19:12
gandiok19:12
asacgandi: actually even you can ship everything.19:12
asacjust use a ppa and use our packaging branches19:13
asacrather than doing your own stuff that isnt used19:13
yofelhi, is there a chance firefox 3.6 will get backported to karmic?19:13
gandiwe'd like also to remove the restriction that you set in the doc about having to reduce the dependency on xulrunner in order to improve the shipping policy for firefox19:13
micahgyofel: yes, eventually19:14
yofelmicahg: ok thx :)19:14
asacgandi: not sure what you mean. we dont put a restriction on the dependencies of xulrunner because we want to improve firefox. we do that because xulrunner is not maintainable security wise over the timespan of a support cycle19:14
gandiah, ok19:14
gandiwebkit is?19:14
asacand once you have dependency on something, you cannot throw in major upgrades19:14
asacso we move to all-static firefox, that can then go with major upgrades19:14
asacgandi: webkit is also kind of a mess, but xulrunner is officially mess and for xulrunner there is someone explicitly saying that they wont do security support ;)19:16
asacthe main reason why to take webkit rather than xulrunner is that the gecko api was neglected for long time19:17
asacso most upstreams already moved to webkit19:17
asace.g. gnome19:17
asacand others19:17
asacso the rational is that we can only support one engine: and since webkit is the market leader, we go for that19:17
asacand try to get everything also move there19:18
asac;)19:18
asacmarket leader - in the small embedding market for linux ;)19:18
and`asac: do you link pinging me 20 times a day, don't you? :)19:18
asacand`: you must change your nick ;)19:18
and`asac: never! :)19:18
asacthat nick is really the worst you had so far ;)19:18
and`don't worry, irssi doesnt pop up everytime so no problem really19:19
micahgasac: do I have to merge PIE into xul191 first?19:19
asaci think andv was the best19:19
and`andv the best?19:19
and`mmm...19:19
and`didnt like it so much, I liked av or averi19:19
and`but and is nice as well :)19:19
asacmicahg: there are two branches submitted. merge the firefox one in 3.5, the xulrunner one in 1.9.1, then the firefox one in 3.6 and xulrunner in 1.9.219:19
and`it must be the same of my DD account :)19:19
asacthen in 3.7 and 1.9.3 ;)19:19
micahgasac: I won't have time to do all that till later tonight19:20
asacits recognizable19:20
micahgI could probably do one now19:20
asacspeaking about someone with nick "and" is kind of like odysseus naming himself "nobody" at the cyklop19:20
asacgandi: so to summarize: dont do two different set of packages, but work on one standard packaging everywhere; i am happy to talk to you guys about ways of governance of such a cross-project effort19:22
asacand figure what would make you feel comfortable19:22
asacif you can setup such a discussion i would be really grateful19:22
gandiasac: thanks a lot19:24
gandiit is very very helpful and informative to me19:24
gandiI'll carry it upstream and let you updated19:24
gandiI basically believe that Mozilla screwed with helping Ubuntu ship xulrunner/firefox and we have to do extra work to fix that. I'm glad I asked you so that we wont spend cycles on doing useless stuff :)19:25
dauerbaustellehi there, I think the 3.6 ppa dependencies are broken, at least for the firefox-3.5 and firefox-3.6-dbg packages19:25
asacgandi: right. so mozilla screwed somewhat, but i am quite sure that that was intentional. i am happy to hear that there is thinking ongoing and i am happy to discuss this all in depth with anyone who wants to improve the situation19:26
dauerbaustellethe firefox 3.5 package depends on the firefox metapackage, which depends on firefox 3.619:28
dauerbaustelleis that indented?19:28
micahgdauerbaustelle: no19:29
micahgactually, isk19:29
micahgidk19:29
micahgwell, the way it's set up now, if you just try to install firefox-3.5 from the PPA, you'll get firefox 3.619:30
dauerbaustelleand firefox-3.6-dbg depends on firefox-dbg, which depends on a wrong hg revsison... I'll find out which one those are, one minute19:31
and`asac: lol, luckily I'm on irssi, so I don't have xchat blinking every minute :)19:32
motedGents, congrats on the code push today.  I'm using the daily 3.6 build with the Java(TM) Plug-in 1.6.0_15 successfully detected, but it's won't load any applets.  Just wondering if anyone had seen anything like this?19:33
dauerbaustellefirefox-dbg depends on 3.6~hg20100120r33527+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd2~karmic, whereas the current firefox version in the ppa is (...)~umd1~(...)19:33
gandiasac: I wrote a summary of what you said. I'll make sure we get back to you. Thanks again!19:33
gandiand btw. "and" nickname is definitely high on my list of the worst nicknames to pick. Congrats!19:34
asacgandi: thanks a lot!19:34
asac"and" is like odysseus calling himself "nobody" on the cyclops island ;)19:34
asacmoted: which java version ?19:35
dauerbaustellecan I support you fixing the dependency problems? ;-)19:35
gandi"and" is like saying "i don't want to work, I want to spend my life being disturbed by highlights"19:36
vishasac: hi.. when adhoc or gsm icons need signal strengths  , could you ping me regarding the names , I'll need add them to Humanity19:36
motedjava version "1.6.0_15"19:37
motedJava(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_15-b03)19:37
motedJava HotSpot(TM) Server VM (build 14.1-b02, mixed mode)19:37
and`gandi: thanks for the kind comment19:38
gandi:)19:38
asaci like if someone openly criticizes ... helps to address that19:38
and`asac: I can't have a nickname which is different from my DD account19:39
asacwhy not?19:39
and`Freenode rules ;)19:39
asacmaybe you should hav choosen your dd account more wisely19:39
asacor change that19:39
asacyou even changed your launchpad name ;)19:39
and`yes, but av can't be used as DD account name19:39
and`too short19:39
and`there is a motivation for everything and criticing without knowing things is not the best really :)19:40
=== gnomefreak76 is now known as gnomefreak
and`asac: looks like you started not "loving" me so much these days, I hope that is not for the discussion we had the other day, and if it is for that, then I can't do anything to "fix" such situation, that's simply what I think :)19:44
dauerbaustellewould someone mind having a look on the depency problems? I'd like to have my browser back :-)19:44
asacand`: huh? nothing changed ;)19:44
asacall is fine19:44
micahgdauerbaustelle: manually install the firefox-3.5 versions of the packages19:45
asacdauerbaustelle: are you running dailiesß19:45
asacworkaroud is to uninstall firefox-3.619:45
asacand just upgrade19:45
asacyou will get to firefox-3.619:45
* asac should ship a simple transition package in daily ppa19:45
dauerbaustelleI have completely removed all firefox packages and then reinstalled 3.619:45
dauerbaustellebut I still can't install the debugging symbol packages19:46
and`asac: anyway I love my nick and I will tolerate any ping, so it's ok really! :)19:46
dauerbaustellenor the gnome support packages19:46
asacand`: heh. then dont complain ;)... thats the only thing that triggered any comment on that nick19:47
and`asac: nope, my phrase before was just a joke, not a complain :)19:48
vishasac: ... are adhoc or gsm icons signal strengths likely to land in time for Lucid?19:49
dauerbaustellethat's the error trying to install the gnome support packages throws:19:50
dauerbaustelletrying to overwrite '/usr/lib/firefox-3.6pre/components/libnkgnomevfs.so', which is also in package firefox 0:3.6~hg20100120r33527+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd2~karmic19:50
dauerbaustelleI'll paste the full traceback19:50
dauerbaustellehttp://paste.pocoo.org/show/168115/ here it is19:50
dauerbaustelleand still it's a problem that you can't install 3.5, because that's installing 3.6, which is removing 3.519:52
micahgdauerbaustelle: you don't need the gnome-support package anymore19:52
and`gandi: I just read the other comment you gave me, lol19:52
dauerbaustellewhy is it shipped, then?19:52
and`gandi: damn you :)19:52
gandiand what can I say?19:53
gandi;)19:53
asacdauerbaustelle: yes, thats fixed in tomorrows dailies19:53
asactry to install it twice19:53
asacit should continue19:53
asacon second attempt19:53
dauerbaustellewhat, the gnome-support thing?19:53
asacits for gnome support. previously we had .so in there19:54
asacnow they are in default package and that one only has the proper dependencies19:54
asacto ensure tha the gnome support works19:54
asacso keep it19:54
=== gavin__ is now known as gavin
micahgthat's what I meant...19:54
dauerbaustelleasac, what do you mean by "install it twice"?19:55
asacdauerbaustelle: run apt-get dist-upgrade twice20:00
asacdoesnt that help?20:00
asacor run apt-get install firefox-gnome-support20:00
asac;)20:00
asacmanually20:00
asacor run dpkg -i /path/to/firefox-gnome*.deb20:01
dauerbaustelleI still can't install it, because apt complains about that libngnomevfs.so which it doesn't want to overwrite20:03
dauerbaustelledist-upgrade did exactly *nothing*20:03
asacok20:05
asacthen remove firefox-3.6-gnome-support ;)20:05
asacupgrade20:05
asacand install firefox-gnome-support afterwards20:05
dauerbaustelleI did20:06
dauerbaustelledist-upgrade did nothing20:06
micahgit should just want firefox-gnome-support now20:06
dauerbaustelledoesn't20:06
asacdauerbaustelle: paste dpkg -l firefox\*20:06
asacactually20:06
asacCOLUMNS=200 dpkg -l firefox\*20:06
asac-> paste.ubuntu.com20:06
dauerbaustellehttp://paste.ubuntu.com/360231/20:07
asacdauerbaustelle: yeah ... so install firefox-gnome-support and you should be set20:09
asacalso wait a bit20:09
dauerbaustelleyeah this works20:09
asaci am trying to get the transitional package somewhere20:09
dauerbaustellebut why not firefox-3.6-gnome-support? wtf20:09
asacdauerbaustelle: thats too much detail to explain atm ... tomorrow all will be good for those that havent upgraded yet.20:10
micahgdauerbaustelle: firefox-3.6 won't be versioned anymore20:10
dauerbaustellehm, well then, next problem: firefox debugging mode doesn't work, "not in executable format"20:10
dauerbaustellemaany problems :D20:10
dauerbaustelleshall I wait until tomorrow?20:11
asacdauerbaustelle: that never worked the way you think it works ;)20:11
asacat least i think20:11
asacdauerbaustelle: what are you running?20:11
dauerbaustellefirefox -g or gdb /usr/lib/firefox.../firefox20:12
gnomefreakits only going to be "firefox"? :(20:14
* asac checks20:14
asacdauerbaustelle: http://pastebin.com/f45650d1f20:17
asacdauerbaustelle: replace your /usr/bin/firefox with that20:17
dauerbaustelleI'll try. Is this only a problem of mine because I upgrade today (when the packages where broken), or did that never worked the way it should?20:19
dauerbaustelles/worked/work/20:19
asacdauerbaustelle: firefox -g? thats a bug in the new package for firefox 3.6 we landed yesterday20:20
dauerbaustellenow I'm getting Reading symbols from /usr/lib/firefox-3.6pre/firefox-bin...(no debugging symbols found)...done.20:21
dauerbaustelle(the debugging symbol packages are installed)20:22
gnomefreakmicahg: if you let me know when SM2 is fixed (grabs 2.0 not 2.1 and versioning fixed) ill spin it and test it, i can also upload to a PPA if needed20:22
asacdauerbaustelle: firefox-dbg is installed?20:22
gnomefreakflash bug or extension bug?20:22
dauerbaustelleasac, I can't..wtf.20:22
asacseems now20:22
asacnot20:22
dauerbaustellefirefox-dbg: Depends: firefox-3.6 (= 3.6~hg20100120r33527+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd2~karmic) but 3.6~hg20100117r33523+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd1~karmic is to be installed20:23
asacremove the -3.6 package first20:23
dauerbaustelleah20:23
asacthats the same as the gnome-support basically20:23
asacis fixed20:23
asactomorrow20:23
dauerbaustellesame error after removing firefox-3.6-dbg20:23
* gnomefreak wonders why it wants to install a lower version than what is installed20:24
asacdauerbaustelle: for me firefox-dbg is:20:24
asacReplaces: firefox-3.5-dbg, firefox-3.6-dbg20:24
asacDepends: firefox-3.6 (= 3.6~hg20100120r33527+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd2~karmic)20:24
asacConflicts: firefox-3.5-dbg (<< 3.6~hg20100117r33523), firefox-3.6-dbg (<< 3.6~hg20100117r33523+nobinonly)20:24
gnomefreak-dbg updated for 3.6 yet?20:24
asacoh wait20:25
asacdauerbaustelle: fixed now ;)20:26
asacthanks20:26
asacso for now you have to force ignoredependes or wait till tomorrow for the -dbg package20:26
asac4am UTC20:26
asacdauerbaustelle: do you have instant need for dbg symbols? then get the .deb and run dpkg -i --force-depends PACKAGEFILENAME20:27
dauerbaustelleyes, I'll do20:30
dauerbaustellegna20:30
dauerbaustellestill no debugging symbols20:30
dauerbaustelleoh wait20:30
dauerbaustelleasac, you mean this deb? ...pool/main/f/firefox/firefox-dbg_3.6~hg20100120r33527+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd2~jaunty_i386.deb20:41
asacis yes20:42
asacyes20:42
dauerbaustelleook20:42
asachttps://edge.launchpad.net/~asac/+archive/sandbox/+packages20:44
asacthe special transition packages for karmic should be there too soon ;)20:44
gnomefreakmicahg: i got mail from Joe. I made my comments about SM2.0 and added you to CC since i mentioned you ;)20:51
gnomefreakthose issues need to be worked out before i can build it for any reason since its grabbing 2.1 not sure how he built 2.0 if he did (made a script)? but he should stick with -devscripts since it adds nobinonly script in it but you will get email :)20:52
gnomefreakthat is before we can push into any Ubuntu release20:53
gnomefreakas i see it20:53
* gnomefreak gone need to get work done here before people get here20:54
technovikingThis sound ok? http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=870258820:54
* ccheney thinks he is making some progress on the patch, it keeps getting larger more and more functions :-\22:08
asacccheney: for what are you pulling in new functions?22:20
ccheneyyea i think i got one of the get_types to stop complaining! :)22:20
ccheneyasac: having to pull lots more stuff to get the macros to work properly to get the get_type errors to go away22:20
asacthe G_DEFINE_TYPE macros should be in hardy glib22:21
asacccheney: which macros?22:21
asacmore than the DEFINE_TYPE?22:21
ccheneythose type macros the stuff that it pulls in is more for the particular classes that the get_type was showing up as missing22:21
asaci think you dont need the rest if the code doesnt use them22:21
ccheneyeg gsocketaddress, etc22:21
ccheneyit won't build without the other functions once i add the macros in22:21
asacso you say only the G_DEFINE_TYPE macro does that?22:22
ccheneyfor gsocketaddress it was this:22:22
ccheneyG_DEFINE_ABSTRACT_TYPE_WITH_CODE (GSocketAddress, g_socket_address, G_TYPE_OBJECT,22:22
ccheney                                  G_IMPLEMENT_INTERFACE (G_TYPE_SOCKET_CONNECTABLE,22:22
ccheney                                                         g_socket_address_connectable_iface_init))22:22
ccheneywhich caused a lot of more functions to become needed22:22
asacok. so the iface_init22:25
asacyeah22:26
asacthe macros themselve shouldnt need anything new though22:26
asacG_TYPE_SOCKET_CONNECTABLE -> needs to be pulled in too22:26
asacright22:26
asacccheney: can you publish an checkpoint patch EOD?22:26
ccheneyok22:27
ccheneyi didn't completely finish reorganizing the c file but the header should be much more easy to read now22:27
asacgreat22:33
asacanyone here who hasnt upgraded to latest dailies, but has firefox-3.6 ?22:34
micahgasac: yes :)22:40
asacmicahg: really ... cool.22:41
asacso the sandbox ppa (~asac)22:41
micahgasac: I have rc2 that I spun22:41
asachas the fake transition packages i wanted to in ject22:41
asacmicahg: but before the renaming?22:41
micahgasac: yes22:41
asachmm. wonder if that would upgrade to our ~rc222:41
asacerr22:41
asac~hg22:41
=== gandi_ is now known as gandi
asacmicahg: can you add https://edge.launchpad.net/~asac/+archive/sandbox22:42
asacand post what apt-get dist-upgrade suggests (dont run it)22:42
micahgnothing22:43
* micahg thinks it's because of ~rc222:43
asacmicahg: do you have the dailies too?22:43
asace.g. the ppa?22:43
micahgyep22:43
asacdpkg -l firefox\* ;)22:43
asacCOLUMNS=200 dpkg -l firefox\*22:44
asac;)22:44
micahgI can install the old daily package22:44
asackarmic?22:44
micahgyep22:44
asacso the fake transition packages should be higher ... its 3.6+karmic22:44
asacapt-cache show firefox-3.6 please22:45
asacdoes that show the 3.6+karmic fake package?22:45
asac(should list more than one)22:45
asacoh ... do you have any pins etc.?22:45
asaci had some i didnt even know ... and those caused something similar22:46
micahgyep, shows 3.6+karmic22:46
micahgyes22:46
micahgI do :)22:46
asacok... so maybe downgrade all firefox-3.6* packages to the versions before the transition22:46
asacremove the -gnome-support one (thats buggy atm)22:46
asacand then see if dist-upgrade is better ;)22:46
asacmicahg: whats your local package version exactly? 3.6~rc2... ?22:47
micahg 3.6~rc2~micahg+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~karmic~ppa122:47
asacyeah22:47
asacso if you could downgrade like mentioned up and then remove the pins and show what dist-upgrade suggests i would be happy ;)22:48
micahgdowngrading right now22:48
micahgpins won't matter since daily and your ppa are the same22:48
micahgproblem is my moz-beta is higher than daily22:48
micahgThe following packages will be upgraded:22:48
micahg  firefox-3.6 firefox-3.6-branding22:48
asacright. but the firefox-3.6 package from the fake thing should still go up ... it doesnt have tight dependencies on versions or something22:49
micahgfake thing?22:49
asaccheck https://edge.launchpad.net/~asac/+archive/sandbox/+packages22:49
asacthe binaries produced by  ffox36-daily-transition-special - 3.6+karmic22:49
micahgmy web browser is broke ;P22:49
asaci didnt add transitional packages for 3.6 because i dont want them in the archive22:50
asacso i want to inject that package for our daily users to properly transition22:50
* micahg fires up arora22:50
asacso i put empty firefox-3.6 etc. in there22:50
asacthat depend on firefox etc.22:50
asaconly22:50
asacheh. finally a reason for that ;)22:51
micahgk, but the transition isn't trying to upgrade firefox or anything els22:51
asacso lets see what happens after downgrade ;)22:51
asacso you downgraded?22:52
micahgyeah22:52
asacand dist-upgrade still shows nothing?22:52
asacmaybe you kept some ~rc2 package ... like -dbg etc. ?22:52
micahghttp://pastebin.com/f515f46dd22:52
micahgThe following packages will be upgraded:22:52
micahg  firefox-3.6 firefox-3.6-branding22:52
asacyes, thats the pin i would think22:52
asachmm22:53
asaci really think thats the pin22:53
asacfirefox-3.6 only came from ppa22:53
micahgk, I'll remove22:53
asacfirefox from archive22:53
asacso if you prefer archive over ppa nothing would happen22:53
micahghttp://paste.ubuntu.com/360321/22:54
* micahg had a lot of PPAs :)22:54
asacmicahg: ok. so remove firefox-3.6-gnome-support if you have that (seems you dont)22:54
micahgI removed it22:54
asacthen check that you have the current firefox launcher in the gnome-panel22:55
asace.g. for firefox 3.522:55
asacafter upgrade it should still be there22:55
asac(just with the blue globe)22:55
micahgk22:55
asacmicahg: what would upgrade do?22:55
asace.g. without dist-upgrade?22:55
micahginstall all those package I don't want22:55
asacpaste please ;)22:56
micahghttp://paste.ubuntu.com/360322/22:56
asachmm.22:56
asaccan you paste your dpkg -l firefox\* please ?22:57
asacwant to check why its kept back22:57
micahgsorry22:57
asacsorry?22:57
micahghttp://pastebin.com/f44f3ffdb22:57
micahgdidn't doo it earlier ;)22:57
asacmicahg: heh. np. do you see any package there that isnt installed, that is mentioned in the dist-upgrade?22:59
asaci mean ... for the firefox ones22:59
asacdoes dist-upgrade also suggest to remove something? or just the part you pasted?22:59
micahgno, just what I pasted23:00
micahglooks like it covers everything23:00
asacmicahg: if you fire up update-manager ... it doesnt want to upgrade firefox etc?23:01
micahgno, it does23:02
asacreally?23:03
asachmm. strange23:03
asacand sudo aptitude upgrade ?23:03
asacdoes that complain?23:03
asacor keep back the firefox?23:03
micahghttp://paste.ubuntu.com/360328/23:05
asacplease also run sudo apt-get -oDebug::pkgProblemResolver=true  upgrade23:05
asacand post whats going on ;)23:05
asachmm.23:05
asacfirefox-3.5-branding removed23:06
* asac checks firefox-branding23:06
micahghttp://paste.ubuntu.com/360330/23:06
asachmm23:07
asacmicahg: ok i committed a provides: for all the packages now. lets hope that resolves it. maybe stick to that state till next daily has finished and see if just upgrade also works smoothly23:14
asacotherwise ... if update-manager (without -d) works, thats probably fine ... not 100% sure though if it would work in stable release update-manager23:15
asacoh wait ... you are running karmic. so yeah. if update-manager works its probably fine, but we should check if tomorrows builds are perfect23:15
* asac copies the fake transition packages to daily and hopes its all good :)23:15
asacdamage done ;)23:16
asaclets hope23:16
micahgasac: can I restore my browser now?23:17
asacwhy is it broken?23:17
asaci hoped you can try tomorrow ;)23:17
micahgI can put it back like this tomorrow23:17
asacok23:17
asacwhatever feels good to you23:18
asaci hope its fine23:18
asac;)23:18
* micahg needs browser for work :)23:18
asacheh23:19
asaceah23:19
micahgwhat do you think of a firefox-stable PPA?23:19
micahgasac: ^^23:20
asacccheney: do you know gcc-uno?23:20
asac;)23:20
asacmicahg: yes, i want to make one ppa for each channel23:21
asacnow that we dont want to care about version transitions that should work nicely23:21
micahgasac: can we start with stable?23:21
asace.g. we can have one ppa for each channel23:21
micahgand do it after it's in lucid?23:21
asacno23:22
asacwe can set it up now23:22
asacotherwise it will never happen i presume ;)23:22
asacfta: are you there?23:22
micahgasac: I'm not talking about a bot based one23:23
asacright23:23
asacstill want to check with him23:23
micahgk23:23
asacwe talked about this a few times ;)23:23
rippsmeh, youtube html 5 still doesn't work with chromium23:29
micahgripps: if they weren't using h.264, they could make it work with everything23:31
rippsmicahg: so, the chromium-ffmpeg package doesn't include h.264 support?23:32
micahgidk23:32
* micahg just knows that's why it won't work with ff23:32
Fernandoshi23:33
RAOFI thought the chromium nonfree ffmpeg package did include h.264 support.23:34
FernandosI've Thunderbird 3 and have 2 email accounts one having "junk" as the spam folder and the other having "Spam" as the spam folder. How can I make them display under the >Junk tree?23:35
rippsRAOF: I already have chromium-codecs-nonfree installed, but youtube still says my browser doesn't support the video23:36
micahgripps: maybe it's the user agent?23:36
mahfouzI just got this after firefox from ppa is now 3.6:23:36
mahfouz> firefox23:36
mahfouz/usr/lib/firefox-3.6pre/firefox: 59: dirname: Permission denied23:36
mahfouz/usr/lib/firefox-3.6pre/firefox: 88: /bin/pwd: Permission denied23:36
mahfouz/usr/lib/firefox-3.6pre/run-mozilla.sh: 39: dirname: Permission denied23:36
mahfouz/usr/lib/firefox-3.6pre/firefox-bin: error while loading shared libraries: libxul.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory23:36
RAOFripps: Yeah, I've just checked.  -nonfree says it should support h.264, but youtube doesn't detect support.23:36
micahgmahfouz: try pastebin next time :)23:37
mahfouzok23:37
mahfouzcan you read it?23:37
rippsHow do I change chromium's user-agent so it thinks I'm using google-chrome?23:37
mahfouzthere is a problem with the transition to 3.6 in ppa23:37
asacmahfouz: at best wait till 5am UTC ;)23:37
mahfouzok23:37
mahfouzthx23:37
mahfouzjust wanted to report it23:37
asacmahfouz: so if it doesnt help in 12 hours come here ;)23:38
asaci hope we fixed all cases now ;)23:38
rippsHmm.... even using the chromeleon extension in chromium to spoof my useragent doesn't work.23:43
ftaasac, ?23:43
ftaRAOF, ripps: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=13416#c36 and c3723:45
rippsfta: ah thanks, will the patch see the -dev ppa?23:47
ftaripps, it's not about user agent either23:47
ftaripps, if it works, most probably23:47
micahgfta: asac and I were talking about a PPAs for firefox channels23:48
ftaand?23:49
micahgasac: said he was discussing with you23:49
* micahg wanted to make a firefox-stable PPA after ff36 gets into lucid23:50
ftai have nothing against it, if that's the question23:54
* micahg doesn't know what the question is...pokes asac23:55
asacfta: hi23:55
asacfta: so ... two choices: either we put that in ~mozillateam ... or ~ubuntu-mozilla-daily/+archive/stable23:55
asacor webtech ;)23:55
asacthree23:55
* micahg votes for ~mozillateam23:55
ftawho/what will populate this ppa?23:56
* micahg figured he could after a release from mozilla23:56
micahgshould be easy now that it's all in one23:57
asacfta: for now manual. later: undefined23:58
mahfouzwhat's the diff between firefox-stable and regular lucid-updates?23:58
asacmahfouz: lucid-updates?23:58
asacwe are still developing ;)23:58
micahgmahfouz: PPA might be bleeding edge release23:58
mahfouzasac: I mean the regular firefox updates coming thru regular ubuntu repos23:59
asacyes23:59
micahgtiming23:59
asacfirefox-stable will have the latest stable packages backported23:59
mahfouzyou mean because ubuntu repos will not update 3.6 --> 3723:59
asaceven if the archive is still stuck to the previous one23:59
mahfouzyes23:59
asacmahfouz: we might. but we will probably update later there23:59
asacbasically when the other version is EOL upstream23:59
asacin the end it might not be that different23:59

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!