[00:04] <fta> asac, well, let me know if i should revert, or file a bug ;)
[00:07] <asac> fta: the gzipping is a lintian error ... i thinkwe should backout that part
[00:07] <fta> i already have lintian errors
[00:08] <fta> lzma is one of them
[00:09] <asac> true. but we shouldnt add more ;)
[00:09] <asac> for mostly nothing
[00:09] <asac> in the end your call ... but noone does that ;)
[00:18] <fta> but noone's that big: http://paste.ubuntu.com/450326/
[00:19] <fta> anyway, enough for today, i'm off
[00:20] <ddecator> cya fta
[01:18] <ddecator> wow, it takes an hour for me to pull the sb source and package it into a tar.gz...
[03:39] <ddecator> dang it, still failing in the same place..
[09:08] <ddecator> ok, so they changed the directory on the svn server for xr, got that updated so it pulls from the new location, updated the patches that wouldn't apply, but now it doesn't find libnotify. it's past 4am though so that's for tomorrow...night
[10:12] <fta2> asac, http://paste.ubuntu.com/450509/
[10:15] <asac> fta2: yep. we could check if PKG_DIR is hard depending on DEBIAN_NAME and dont do the replacement if its not
[10:15] <asac> not sure if everything in chromium is hard depend though
[10:15] <asac> e.g. ensure that the link is always resolvable if a package is installed
[10:16] <fta2> asac, re-read the code :)
[10:16] <fta2> hint: $(filter-out)
[10:19] <fta2> oh, i see what you meant. it's always a hard depend in that way
[10:21] <asac> fta2: i would think its worthwhile to improve the snippet so that it either a) does not create a link if the package does not hard depend ... or b) create a hard depend for a package that receives that link
[10:21] <asac> as a safety net
[10:21] <asac> who knows if you will remember if you introduce a package that does not hard depend ;)
[10:22] <asac> and also that code might be useful to be integrated higher up
[10:22] <asac> like what we do for changelogs
[10:22] <asac> etc.
[10:22]  * asac still ponders on that he saw exactly this in some generic place at some point
[10:23] <fta2> asac, i only link duplicates created by this source package, and they all depend on the main deb (-dbg, -l10 and -inspector need the main path)
[10:23] <fta2> so if you want to uncouple -l10n, it can have its own copyright file, it will not be a copy
[10:23] <fta2> -copy+dupe
[10:24] <asac> right. but do we know that all packages will in future depend on the main deb?
[10:26] <fta2> i can add an exception variable but it's not needed atm
[10:26] <asac> fta2: so you said you found the place where we do the current magic with link etc.?
[10:26] <fta2> yes
[10:26] <asac> fta2: just saying would be worthwhile to extend that snippet to maybe move that to some generic helper or something at some point
[10:26] <asac> but its definitly good as it is for chromium
[12:14]  * gnomefreak thinks i wore sound-juicer out
[12:16] <gnomefreak> that is disc #4 and it still not reading disks
[12:17] <gnomefreak> now it works
[12:28] <chrisccoulson> we need to drop more mozilla extensions from the archive, we still have too many ;)
[12:29] <gnomefreak> isnt there ~12 extensions
[12:30] <chrisccoulson> yeah, still too many ;)
[12:31] <chrisccoulson> that's not too bad actually, but updating all the extensions in hardy, jaunty and karmic is just crazy
[12:31] <gnomefreak> true
[12:33]  * gnomefreak not real sure why you would backport the extensions without any security risk
[12:34] <gnomefreak> it just adds more work
[12:34] <gnomefreak> i say set up a bot and make a PPA for them
[12:35] <gnomefreak> be back in a min. smoke
[12:39] <chrisccoulson> gnomefreak, we have to backport them to support the firefox 3.6 rollout
[12:40] <gnomefreak> ah that makes sense
[12:40] <chrisccoulson> but this is why we dropped a lot of them during the last cycle
[12:42]  * gnomefreak thinking
[15:22] <asac> chrisccoulson: we should keep native extensions and those ranking really high in popcon ;)
[15:22] <asac> oh ... think i already mentioned that ;)
[15:24] <gnomefreak> i was thinking make a poll or something like that
[15:26] <gnomefreak> example without knowing other opinions we can drop xul-ext-webfav
[15:26] <gnomefreak> shouldnt go by popcon alone since it is not enabled by default
[15:29] <gnomefreak> reason i say drop that is because it has to do with something that we already can do
[15:31] <gnomefreak> firefox-ubuntu-it-menu  << isnt this already the case when using IT locale?
[15:32] <gnomefreak> ok nevermind i just read about it
[15:35] <gnomefreak> i guess this would be a bad time to say "i have an extension that we should package"?
[15:35] <gnomefreak> :)
[16:01] <gnomefreak> all this work and its only for the paid accounts
[16:03] <gnomefreak> bug 103791
[16:03] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 103791 in debian (and 1 other project) "[needs-packaging] pcsx2 (affects: 5) (dups: 1) (heat: 55)" [Unknown,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/103791
[16:21] <fta> crimsun_, hi, are you still working on pulseaudio/alsa-plugins?
[16:22] <gnomefreak> asac: or chrisccoulson when we push 3.6.* where are we pushing to, proposed or security repos?
[16:22] <chrisccoulson> gnomefreak, to security
[16:23] <gnomefreak> chrisccoulson: thanks
[16:23] <chrisccoulson> they're are bing tested in ubuntu-mozilla-security, so please help testing if you have time :)
[16:23] <chrisccoulson> s/bing/being/
[16:23] <gnomefreak> i dont hae anything under Lucid that i can get to at least for a month or 2
[16:24] <chrisccoulson> kvm ftw :)
[16:26] <gnomefreak> i am going to ask people to test it :)
[16:26] <chrisccoulson> coo, thanks
[16:26] <chrisccoulson> there was an announcement for hardy testers a couple of weeks back. jaunty and karmic aren't quite ready yet, although most of the bits for karmic are in the PPA already
[16:26] <gnomefreak> did we have to update apturl ?
[16:27] <chrisccoulson> yeah, there's an updated apturl in the PPA (to move the conffile location)
[16:28] <gnomefreak> chrisccoulson: cool that should fix this bug :)
[16:37] <gnomefreak> chrisccoulson: it seems you knew about that bug. i posted to it from email than changed the source package on bug and than saw you reported it
[16:37] <gnomefreak> chrisccoulson: bug 594864
[16:37] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 594864 in apturl "apturl installs preferences in the wrong location for firefox 3.6.x (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/594864
[16:37]  * gnomefreak heading for a smoke
[16:38] <chrisccoulson> gnomefreak - that bug was specifically for the version in hardy-backports ;)
[16:38] <chrisccoulson> the version in hardy is being handled through -security
[16:39] <chrisccoulson> but the version in -backports needs a bug report to fix it
[16:39] <gnomefreak> why are we backporting it if it is going to be update in firefox uploads?
[16:39] <chrisccoulson> gnomefreak - there is already a version of apturl in hardy-backports, which needs fixing also
[16:39] <gnomefreak> oh
[16:40] <chrisccoulson> but the official version in hardy will be handled through security, so no bug report
[16:40] <gnomefreak> !info apturl hardy-backports
[16:40] <ubot4> gnomefreak: 'hardy-backports' is not a valid distribution: hardy, jaunty, karmic, lucid, maverick
[16:40] <gnomefreak> !info apturl hardy backports
[16:40] <ubot4> gnomefreak: apturl (source: apturl): Install package with the apt protocol. In component main, is optional. Version 0.2.2ubuntu1 (hardy), package size 11 kB, installed size 180 kB
[16:40] <gnomefreak> damn
[16:40] <gnomefreak> chrisccoulson: you adjusting it or should i?
[16:41] <chrisccoulson> gnomefreak - feel free to do that :)
[16:41] <gnomefreak> k changin it back
[16:41] <chrisccoulson> thanks
[16:41] <gnomefreak> np
[16:41] <gnomefreak> i think firefox has a leak
[16:50] <gnomefreak> fuck
[16:52] <gnomefreak> it seems its LP thaat is causing the major lag
[19:56] <micahg> fta: if you're dropping the testsuite anyways, why do we need the transitional package?
[19:57] <micahg> jdstrand: I'm switching gears to finish midbrowse tonight, kazehakase is not going well, but it's in universe, so I can update later
[19:57] <micahg> chrisccoulson: did you see planned release is tomorrow for 3.6.4?
[19:59] <chrisccoulson> micahg - no, i didn't know that yet
[20:00] <micahg> chrisccoulson: barring any problems w/build7
[20:01] <chrisccoulson> cool. right, i gotta go and make a phone call, then i will be back to do some more work
[20:01] <micahg> chrisccoulson: although still looks like they haven't fully committed
[20:01] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k
[20:02] <jdstrand> micahg: k
[20:16] <jlebar> I was wondering what it would take to update the build-dep list for Firefox.  As you can see at https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Developer_Guide/Build_Instructions/Linux_Prerequisites , the current list is a little out of date.
[20:17] <micahg> jlebar: I think that list is when you use the upstream source as is
[20:47] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - karmic is updated in the PPA now btw
[20:47] <chrisccoulson> (although not tested very much)
[20:47] <chrisccoulson> i'm going to do an upgrade tonight and test everything before we send out the call for testing to everyone
[20:48] <chrisccoulson> just to make sure most things are still working properly
[20:49] <chrisccoulson> micahg - those release meetings are on IRC are they?
[21:01] <micahg> chrisccoulson: no, but you can dial in
[21:04] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: k, thanks. I'll test it in a bit
[21:32] <micahg> bdrung_: do you need any more info about my uploader application?
[21:35] <jlebar> micahg, Ah, you mean that the dependencies are what you need to build the version of FF that Ubuntu ships?
[21:35]  * jlebar isn't even sure where to look to list the packages which build-dep firefox pulls.
[21:35] <micahg> jlebar: the deps on the Ubuntu package are because of the packaging
[21:36] <micahg> jlebar: I'm guessing the deps on Mozilla's site are for their source tarball to build with their instructions
[21:37] <micahg> chrisccoulson: BTW, I'm going to reorganize the priorities on our blueprint since we're busy w/the ff3.6.4 transition and move most things between alpha3 and beta1
[21:38] <chrisccoulson> micahg - cool, thanks. i've already postponed most of my other desktop work items to a3
[21:39] <micahg> I hope I can still get 2 rounds of Debian merges in this cycle
[21:40] <chrisccoulson> hopefully the 3.5.4 update work will wind down at the end of the week (although there will still be some xulrunner rdepends to port, all of the urgent work will be done by then)
[21:40] <chrisccoulson> oops, 3.6.4 ;)
[21:40] <micahg> chrisccoulson: well, we stil have to do rdepends for jaunty and karmic
[21:40] <micahg> jaunty with more priority
[21:40] <chrisccoulson> karmic is not urgent yet, as 1.9.1 is still supported
[21:41] <micahg> chrisccoulson: right, but we have to make sure that they don't break w/xulrunner-1.9.2 on the syste,m
[21:41] <chrisccoulson> the urgent work really is getting firefox and extensions updated, and making sure all the plugins still work, or are updated
[21:41] <chrisccoulson> yeah, we can hold off distributing 1.9.2 for karmic for now though, as there's currently nothing using it
[21:42] <chrisccoulson> it's in the PPA already, but there's nothing built against it yet
[21:42] <micahg> chrisccoulson: that won't work since the plugins need to build-dep off of it
[21:42] <micahg> at least the ones that won't work OOTB with xul192
[21:42] <micahg> s/xul192/ff364/
[21:42] <jlebar> micahg, What do you mean that the build deps are because of the packaging?
[21:42] <bdrung_> micahg: no, i just need time
[21:43] <micahg> bdrung_: k, no problem, thank you
[21:43] <bdrung_> micahg: didn't i sponsor more than the two bugs?
[21:43] <micahg> jlebar: because of the way we package it, we have certain dependencies that upstream might not
[21:43] <micahg> bdrung_: that's all I could find, possibly more that were superceded
[21:43] <chrisccoulson> hopefully those should be minimal in karmic, as most of the plugins are just NPAPI plugins rather than using any xpcom
[21:43] <micahg> bdrung_: I can look a little more
[21:43] <bdrung_> thx
[21:43] <chrisccoulson> eg, totem and rhythmbox don't need xulrunner in karmic
[21:43] <jlebar> micahg, Ah.  That's fine.  What I'm concerned about is the other way around -- dependencies which Ubuntu doesn't have which upstream does.
[21:44] <bdrung_> micahg: there should be some mozilla releated packages
[21:44] <micahg> bdrung_: ok, I'll have to find a way to check that then
[21:44] <micahg> jlebar: there shouldn't be any
[21:44] <bdrung_> micahg: maybe searching your email archive?
[21:44] <micahg> jlebar: if you find one, let me know
[21:45] <jlebar> micahg, https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Developer_Guide/Build_Instructions/Linux_Prerequisites says we need to get a bunch of packages in addition to build-dep firefox.
[21:46] <micahg> jlebar: like I said, we should have those, if you find one we need that's not on there, let me know
[21:46] <jlebar> I see.  I'm pretty sure it's missing some.  Let me pull up the lists and see.
[21:51] <micahg> bdrung_: bug 536877
[21:51] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 536877 in xiphos (Ubuntu) "Rebuild xiphos against xulrunner-1.9.2 (affects: 1) (heat: 34)" [Low,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/536877
[21:52] <bdrung_> micahg: you tend to have one liners
[21:53] <micahg> bdrung_: no, I have have some very substantial ones, but asac and chrisccoulson did most of them :)
[21:53] <bdrung_> micahg: small one are easier to review ;)
[21:53] <bdrung_> s/one/ones/
[21:54] <chrisccoulson> heh, i should probably allocate some time to comment on your developer app tomorrow morning
[21:54] <chrisccoulson> when is the next DMB meeting?
[21:54] <chrisccoulson> i can probably comment when i run a hardy -> lucid upgrade test after the 3.6.4 updates
[21:55] <chrisccoulson> my laptop won't cope with much else ;)
[21:55] <micahg> chrisccoulson: Tuesday, so no rush
[21:55] <micahg> bdrung_: right :)
[21:55] <chrisccoulson> ah, tuesday is quite close. i should really do it tomorrow so they have time to review it
[21:56] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I sent the email to the list, but it hasn't been approved yet
[21:56] <chrisccoulson> i keep delaying my core-dev application too, but i just haven't got time to work on it atm
[21:59] <micahg> chrisccoulson: well, you'll get Firefox upload rights from the Mozilla uploaders ;)
[21:59] <chrisccoulson> i've already got firefox upload rights ;)
[21:59] <chrisccoulson> i think the only thing i can't upload right now is xulrunner
[21:59] <micahg> chrisccoulson: ah, well, you should get that then
[22:00] <chrisccoulson> yeah, that would be useful
[22:01] <micahg> I left out any rdepends in main to make the set less controversial
[22:01] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - firefox-showcase is giving me a headache. for some reason, that slipped through the net in lucid when we dropped lots of extensions from the archive
[22:01] <chrisccoulson> but, it hasn't been updated at all since jaunty
[22:01] <chrisccoulson> and doesn't work in karmic and lucid
[22:01] <chrisccoulson> but does work in jaunty
[22:02] <chrisccoulson> so, i need to still make it work in jaunty, which means i also need to update it in karmic (even though it doesn't work there), and then do a SRU for lucid to not break the upgrade path
[22:02] <chrisccoulson> unless you can think of another way around that ;)
[22:02] <chrisccoulson> unless we just update it in lucid as part of the security update too
[22:03] <jdstrand> man, that is a bit of a mess
[22:03] <jdstrand> so jaunty needs it in its update for sure
[22:04] <chrisccoulson> yeah, it is. whatever i do in jaunty will give it a version number newer than karmic ;)
[22:04] <jdstrand> karmic and lucid are currently broken, so I say fix it in SRU
[22:04] <chrisccoulson> ok, i can probably do that then
[22:05] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: just make the version number in karmic and lucid higher than jaunty, target -proposed and all should be fine
[22:05] <jdstrand> obviously, there will be a few days where it is not fine, but the week wait can probably be bypassed for something that is totally broken
[22:06] <chrisccoulson> i should have spotted that when i updated it for hardy really. the update in the PPA currently has a higher version than lucid
[22:06] <chrisccoulson> we should just provide disabled packages in karmic and lucid really?
[22:06] <chrisccoulson> s/disabled/empty
[22:06] <jdstrand> firefox-showcase is also not listed in the qa tracker, so I missed testing it
[22:06] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I don't see it in Lucid
[22:07] <jdstrand> (I also didn't do hardy - lucid upgrade testing, as others seemed to be handling it, and that can really be fixed after the fact if something went wrong)
[22:07] <micahg> nm
[22:07] <chrisccoulson> micahg - https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-showcase
[22:07] <chrisccoulson> perhaps it failed a rebuild test and the binaries dropped from the archive
[22:08] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: was that disabled packages question for me? I'm saying fix it in SRU and we can maybe hurry up the process there since they are totally unusable now anyway
[22:08] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - i'm going to do an upgrade test tomorrow morning, to hopefully catch any more of these issues that might be lurking
[22:10] <micahg> chrisccoulson: weird, I don't the binaries are in Lucid
[22:21] <jlebar> micahg, I think the firefox build deps are missing libcurl4-openssl-dev, mesa-common-dev, and yasm.
[22:21] <micahg> jlebar: I know mesa's in there
[22:23] <jlebar> micahg, You're right.  It was hiding.
[22:23] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - bug 595276 fyi
[22:23] <jlebar> Let's see if these others are also hiding somewhere deep in the dependency tree.
[22:23] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 595276 in firefox-showcase (Ubuntu Karmic) (and 2 other projects) "firefox-showcase needs a SRU for karmic and lucid to not break the ugprade path from Jaunty (affects: 1) (heat: 10)" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/595276
[22:24] <jdstrand> thanks
[22:24] <jdstrand> oh, look at that, I am already subscribed. too easy
[22:26] <jlebar> libcurl4 is also in there.  But I don't see yasm when I do apt-rdepends -b firefox | grep yasm
[22:26] <jlebar> ^ micahg
[22:26] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - LP must be magic ;)
[22:26] <micahg> jlebar: I don't think we need it for building
[22:26] <jlebar> Once I have a working build, I can try uninstalling it and see.
[22:27] <jdstrand> :)
[22:34] <micahg> chrisccoulson: please, no SRU with new binary in Lucid
[23:19] <nonZero> Hi!  will the  thunderbird-3.1 pkg be updated soon?
[23:19] <micahg> nonZero: early next month probably
[23:19] <micahg> nonZero: maybe end of this month
[23:19] <nonZero> :-( ok
[23:20] <micahg> nonZero: if you have time to fix it, I'll be happy to review :)
[23:20] <nonZero> :-)
[23:21] <micahg> nonZero: I need to help with the FF364/Xulrunner 1,9.2 backports, so everything else is on hold
[23:21] <nonZero> how different are those pacakges from the original mozilla distributoin
[23:21] <nonZero> ?
[23:21] <micahg> nonZero: well, our packaging has a .desktop file, so it's in the menu and the files are under apt control
[23:22] <nonZero> that's all?
[23:22] <micahg> nonZero: we also use some system libraries
[23:22] <nonZero> micahg: i.e., remove files from the original dist?
[23:23] <micahg> nonZero: no, we build from source and install what we need
[23:25] <nonZero> micahg: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Simple_Thunderbird_build ?
[23:26] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: fyi, you probably noticed this, but mozilla-stumbleupon ftbfs on karmic
[23:27] <micahg> nonZero: I'm not sure what you're asking
[23:27] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - thanks, i'll fix that shortly
[23:27] <nonZero> micahg: nevermind.  thank you!
[23:28] <micahg> nonZero: k
[23:28] <micahg> chrisccoulson: can we just not upload a new binary to Lucid for firefox-showcase
[23:28] <chrisccoulson> micahg - i suppose that's possible
[23:29] <micahg> chrisccoulson: since there's no binary now and we're not planning on updating, it seems to make the most sense so that the package is EOL in Apr 2011 vs Apr 2013
[23:31] <chrisccoulson> yeah, that probably makes more sense
[23:32] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - stumbleupon, venkman and useragentswitcher all have the same issue as firefox-showcase (but only in karmic)
[23:32] <micahg> chrisccoulson: also, do you want to file a removal request for Maverick or should I?
[23:33] <chrisccoulson> micahg - already done :)
[23:33] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: k. we should treat them the same then
[23:33] <chrisccoulson> i opened one last night
[23:33] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k
[23:33] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - yeah, i added some extra tasks to the bug
[23:35]  * micahg just found a malone bug :(