[04:27] <LLStarks> hmm. why isn't a thunderbird-gnome-support a dependency of thunderbird?
[04:27] <ddecator> in case KDE users don't want it =)
[04:32] <LLStarks> but ubuntu default comes with firefox-gnome-support
[04:32] <LLStarks> are packages DE-agnostic?
[09:06] <BUGabundo_remote> m@rnlng cowboys&girls
[09:06] <ddecator> morning BUGabundo_remote, gonna join the bugsquad meeting?
[09:08] <BUGabundo_remote> nope
[09:08] <ddecator> aw
[09:08] <BUGabundo_remote> I must force my self
[09:08] <BUGabundo_remote> to put work in day
[09:09] <BUGabundo_remote> still have work sheets to complete from one week ago :S
[09:09] <ddecator> haha, fair enough
[09:11] <micahg> fta: PM?
[15:16] <lfaraone> Just so I understand this correctly, is sugar-hulahop's use case entirely unsupported on 10.04 LTS, or is there something that could be done to get it working? from looking at bug 573772 and https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xulrunner-1.9.1/+bug/567819/comments/4 it seems like the package is important to a signif. number of people.
[15:21] <lfaraone> asac: ^^
[15:24] <micahg> lfaraone: well, we were hoping to backport it
[15:24] <lfaraone> micahg: okay, I guess that's what may have me confused.
[15:24] <micahg> lfaraone: we ran out of time for Lucid
[15:25] <lfaraone> micahg: ah, okay. what needs to be done to get it working, so to speak? I'm very unfamiliar with xulrunner and the mozilla team, sadly.
[15:26] <micahg> lfaraone: I think we need to evaluate either getting pyxpcom in archive or porting sugar-hulalop to use python-gtkmozembed
[15:26] <lfaraone> micahg: okay. is the former feasable?
[15:26] <micahg> lfaraone: idk, I have to find out what upstream's plans are
[15:27] <lfaraone> micahg: well, Sugar is persuing switching to WebKit, but that won't be finished till the end of GSoC or so.
[15:28] <micahg> lfaraone: k, well, then that could be backported to Lucid instead
[15:28] <lfaraone> micahg: yes. but the concern is that there are (apparently) other people who use sugar-hulahop.
[15:31] <lfaraone> micahg: (such as pyjamas)
[15:32] <micahg> lfaraone: I don't see that in archive
[15:36] <lfaraone> micahg: it was in the archive, removed in Lucid.
[15:37] <micahg> lfaraone: ah, it was only in Lucid
[15:37] <lfaraone> micahg: http://changelogs.debian.net/pyjamas
[15:38] <micahg> lfaraone: yeah, so I think that was the right decision
[15:38] <micahg> one of the binaries depended on python-hulahop which was dropped
[15:43] <lfaraone> micahg: okay. do all the binaries depend on pyton-hulahop, or just one?
[15:44] <micahg> lfaraone: just one, but the source would FTBFS in the LTS so it was decided to dorp
[15:44] <micahg> *drop
[15:54] <chrisccoulson> lfaraone, i don't know who that commenter is, but he needs a prompt attitude change before i consider doing anything to help him
[15:54] <chrisccoulson> i have zero interest in working with such idiots
[15:56] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I was tempted to post a CoC comment
[15:56] <chrisccoulson> he should just be removed from launchpad
[15:56] <BUGabundo_remote> ?
[15:56] <ddecator> yah, that's excessive
[15:56] <chrisccoulson> (that's probably a bit extreme though)
[15:56] <chrisccoulson> i'm not going to respond though, i wouldn't be able to be polite
[15:57] <BUGabundo_remote> what's going on ?
[15:57] <ddecator> BUGabundo_remote: the comment that was linked to above
[15:57] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, I assume we removed the package because it was new to Lucid and it would be an FTBFS
[15:58] <chrisccoulson> i think we removed it because it was part of the stack that required python-xpcom
[15:58] <micahg> chrisccoulson: yeah, pyjamas-desktop had a depends on python-hulahop
[15:58] <micahg> which would mean an FTBFS if we had to rebuild it
[16:01] <lfaraone> chrisccoulson: upstream developer of pyjamas, from what I can tell.
[16:02] <chrisccoulson> i was going to try and get that fixed this cycle, but you can tell him someone else can do it now
[16:03] <lfaraone> chrisccoulson:
[16:03] <chrisccoulson> i've got more important things to do than please people who are just going to be rude to me
[16:04] <lfaraone> chrisccoulson: don't let him get you down. there are other users of hulahop (including me, via Sugar) who greatly value the work you're doing.
[18:24] <micahg> fta: ping for PM?
[19:20] <gnomefreak> im guessing mvo is at UDS
[19:57] <gnomefreak> bug 52667
[20:02] <gnomefreak> !info alsa-firmware-loaders karmic
[20:03] <gnomefreak> !info alsa-firmware-loaders
[20:13] <gnomefreak> !info usplash maverick
[20:16]  * gnomefreak thought we removed that
[20:27] <gnomefreak> @btlogin
[20:28] <gnomefreak> @whoami
[20:29] <gnomefreak> ubottu: thanks
[20:29] <micahg> gnomefreak: identity crisis?
[20:30] <gnomefreak> micahg: yep i thought i was logged into ban tracker already
[20:30] <micahg> gnomefreak: yes, mvo is at UDS
[20:30] <gnomefreak> reviewing my bans
[20:30] <gnomefreak> micahg: thank would explain why hes not on IRC
[20:31] <gnomefreak> i can always ask in #smart when i get a minute or 6
[20:32] <gnomefreak> micahg: if i patch tb3 myself i would have to submit the patch for daily builds?
[20:32] <micahg> gnomefreak: patch for what?
[20:32] <gnomefreak> micahg: the link clicking bug
[20:32] <micahg> gnomefreak: what bug?
[20:32] <gnomefreak> dont recall bug number buts it is set to fixed since stable has the patch
[20:33] <gnomefreak> give me a few ill see if i can find it
[20:33] <micahg> gnomefreak: what stable?/
[20:33] <micahg> I'm lost
[20:33] <micahg> daily builds should be the same as Lucid
[20:33] <micahg> ATM
[20:33] <gnomefreak> micahg: tb3 in Lucid and Maverick has the patch but dailies do not
[20:34] <gnomefreak> its something with gnome suppport crap IIRC
[20:34] <micahg> I'll check now
[20:35] <gnomefreak> chris fixed it AFAIK
[20:35] <micahg> gnomefreak: nope, they're the same
[20:36] <gnomefreak> micahg: its not working here
[20:36] <micahg> gnomefreak: it might be a karmic issue then
[20:36] <gnomefreak> micahg: im on Lucid and Maveric
[20:37] <micahg> gnomefreak: hmmm
[20:37] <gnomefreak> both dont work
[20:37] <micahg> gnomefreak: but archive version does?
[20:37] <gnomefreak> micahg: AFAICT but im still looking for bug #
[20:37] <gnomefreak> well i have to run outside for a minute someone is in driveway
[20:43] <micahg> bug 526290
[20:43] <gnomefreak> micahg: trying to open links brings up the choose application dialog box.
[20:44] <micahg> gnomefreak: what happens when you do xdg-open http://www.mozilla.com from the command line?
[20:44] <gnomefreak> it opens
[20:45] <gnomefreak> micahg: thats the same bug but that is not the bug i commented on
[20:45] <micahg> gnomefreak: does archive version work
[20:46] <gnomefreak> yes as of yesterday it did. but im back on daily
[20:48] <micahg> gnomefreak: let me install daily quick
[20:48] <gnomefreak> micahg: the bug im refering to was fixed by chris not ales
[20:48] <gnomefreak> alex
[20:48] <micahg> gnomefreak: right, I remember, just not the number :-/
[20:48] <micahg> but the branches are the same ATM
[20:48] <gnomefreak> micahg: im still looking. do i need to remove *-gnome-support?
[20:48] <micahg> gnomefreak: won't make a difference, it's only the deps
[20:49] <gnomefreak> ok
[20:52] <micahg> gnomefreak: gnome?
[20:52] <gnomefreak> micahg: yes
[20:52]  * micahg needs to package 3.0.5
[20:53] <micahg> gnomefreak: wfm
[20:53] <micahg> but I'm using xubuntu also
[20:53] <micahg> gnomefreak: did you look at your gconf settings?
[20:54] <gnomefreak> micahg: ok Lucid?
[20:54] <micahg> yep
[20:54] <gnomefreak> micahg: no not yet. what am i lloking for?
[20:54] <gnomefreak> looking
[20:55] <gnomefreak> micahg: my browser is set to open the links if that is what you mean
[20:56] <micahg> gnomefreak: I forgot what the gconf thing you are looking for is
[20:57] <gnomefreak> micahg: i hope it doesnt have anything to do with the heading thunderbird
[20:57] <micahg> gnomefreak: in gconf, what's desktop/gnome/applications/browser
[20:58] <gnomefreak> exec = firefox  needs_term == unchecked nremote -- checked
[21:00] <micahg> gnomefreak: maybe check the settings in TB to see if the http handler is set for something else
[21:01] <gnomefreak> micahg: do you know where that is? under first look i couldnt find anything close to that in prefferences
[21:02] <micahg> network.protocol-handler.expose.https;true
[21:02] <gnomefreak> micahg: its true
[21:03] <gnomefreak> this started the same time as it did for everyone else but never got fixed here. same with all my other tb3 bugs that noone can reproduce but safemode doesnt help either
[21:05] <micahg> gnomefreak: new profile?
[21:05] <gnomefreak> i guess we will find out.
[21:06] <micahg> brb
[21:06] <gnomefreak> me too
[21:09] <fta> micahg, hi
[21:10] <gnomefreak> fuck. ill be back this isnt working at all
[21:16]  * gnomefreak wondering if its java messing it up
[21:19] <gnomefreak> micahg: new profile didnt change anything the 2 biggest bugs i have are not changed in safe-mode nor new profile
[21:21] <micahg> gnomefreak: so it has to be a system setting
[21:21] <micahg> maybe I can find it later
[21:21] <gnomefreak> micahg: thanks. im changing java settings atm
[21:22] <micahg> gnomefreak: k, I'm heading out
[21:22] <gnomefreak> micahg: have fun
[21:22] <micahg> thanks
[21:24] <gnomefreak> well got rid of the java errors but still broken. looks for more info
[21:25] <fta> micahg, pm
[22:12] <gnomefreak> !info lightning-extension hardy-backports