[06:17] <nikolam> micahg, I have trouble using SM on 64bit lucid (bug with dying): It dies too often actually.
[06:18] <micahg> nikolam: yes, I'm not sure what to do as I don't have a quick fix, I need to get a patch upstream and have it approved
[06:19]  * micahg is trying to get openjdk to build before going to sleep, but that doesn't look promising
[08:14] <micahg> asac: friendly reminder for a Endorsement :)
[16:09] <chrisccoulson> hi jdstrand - i got all the extensions updated in jaunty on friday, so feel free to do some testing on jaunty if you like :)
[16:09] <chrisccoulson> i know that mozgest, stumbleupon and imagezoom currently don't work, but i'm fixing those now
[16:11] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: cool, so now with the exception of those 3 are hardy - lucid ready? what about karmic/openjdk?
[16:11] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: and hi! :)
[16:12] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - i don't know if micahg made any progress with openjdk yet - i'll ask him when he's online
[16:14] <[reed]> do I want adobe-flashplugin or flashplayer-installer?
[16:14] <[reed]> they seem to be the same thing yet separate packages?
[16:15] <jdstrand> ultimately they are the same
[16:15] <[reed]> which one would you pick?
[16:15] <[reed]> :)
[16:15] <jdstrand> adobe-flashplugin is in the partner archive and the canonical partner guy works with adobe on it
[16:16] <jdstrand> flashplugin-installer's packaging is different, but is updated to pull down adobe's installer that is in the partner archive
[16:16] <jdstrand> I use adobe-flashplugin on i386 and flashplayer-installer on amd64
[16:17] <jdstrand> the former is only available on i386, and the latter uses nspluginwrapper, which is required to use the i386 plugin on amd64
[16:17]  * jdstrand wishes adobe would finish their amd64 version...
[16:24] <asac> jdstrand: afaik they said they will not finish amd64
[16:24]  * asac spreading rumours
[16:24] <asac> jdstrand: with OOPs we might just get nspluginwrapper for free in firefox anyway
[16:26] <jdstrand> I am not up on it, but I thought the last adobe said is that they were committed to it. though, how long have we heard that?
[16:28] <[reed]> asac: there's a mail to security-group@ from dveditz addressed to you
[16:28] <[reed]> has "Ubuntu" in the subject
[16:29] <asac> [reed]: i saw
[16:29] <asac> will answer next
[16:29] <asac> i am even CCed ;)
[16:30] <asac> [reed]: in short: we didnt apply the patch because the other part needed backporting
[16:30] <gnomefreak> last i heard it will be atleast 1 year before flash 64 will be even close to release, asac it snot a rumor :) or if it is you didnt start it
[16:30] <[reed]> ok, cool
[16:30] <asac> gnomefreak: hehe ... my rumour is: they will never finish it ;)
[16:31] <asac> they just try to calm the mob by having it in beta state
[16:31] <gnomefreak> ah you may still be right :) im looking to see if i have an email address for them
[16:32]  * gnomefreak was hoping to get an email back from the rock station already
[16:34] <gnomefreak> chromium doesnt like to ask or to even save passwords
[16:42] <micahg> chrisccoulson: hi, I have openjdk for karmic, should I copy to transition PPA or do you want to pull from my personal PPA?
[16:42] <chrisccoulson> micahg - awesome. i can just take that from your personal PPA
[16:43] <micahg> chrisccoulson: the only thing not adjusted is the maintainer, it set for me ATM, since I didn't know if we should keep the openjdkteam or not: https://launchpad.net/~micahg/+archive/mozilla-test/+packages
[16:45] <micahg> chrisccoulson: the other thing is that control.in and control aren't in sync, but I figured that might not matter in a backport
[16:46] <micahg> chrisccoulson: actually that last statement wasn't true, but for some reason, in my chroot, it wouldn't set the karmic build deps right when I regenerated the control file
[16:46] <micahg> chrisccoulson: so I manually dropped llvm to 2.6 and dropped oprofile from the build deps
[16:57] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I'm thinking more and more that maybe I need more checks on that symlink for the profile dir for Thunderbird 3
[17:03] <micahg> asac: thank you for the endorsement :)
[17:11] <jdstrand> micahg: did you run the verification test suite on your openjdk packages? I don't have the details, but doko has a testing procedure you could ask about if you haven't already (it's in main, so we need to follow whatever procedures he uses)
[17:11] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: has upstream reviewed the hardy font configuration patches yet?
[17:11] <micahg> jdstrand: ah, good point, I should do that
[17:12] <jdstrand> micahg: cool, thanks
[17:12]  * micahg wonders if it'll run in a chroot
[17:12]  * jdstrand has no idea -- ask doko
[17:12] <chrisccoulson> micahg - i will take a look at those issues with debian/control shortly if you like
[17:12] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, not yet. karl said he was going to look at it when he gets some time
[17:12] <chrisccoulson> i will ask him again later
[17:13] <micahg> chrisccoulson: well, the only issue is the maintainer I think, everything else is generated anyways
[17:13] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: hmmm. I'm not sure what that means. is this going to hold up our publication?
[17:13] <jdstrand> at least 3.6.4 hasn't been released yet...
[17:19] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - i'm not sure if it should hold up publication (if it comes to that). the fonts aren't that bad with the fixed cairo patch - they just can't be configured in the same way as before
[17:21] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: ok. sounds good to me. we'll yank it if that is all that is left and it can be added as an SRU or in the next security update if desired
[17:42] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - ok, no worries. one thing we still need to do is test the old epiphany with xulrunner 1.9.2 installed on the system
[17:42] <chrisccoulson> seeing as we don't have an immediate solution for that just yet
[17:42] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: I thought 1.9.2 was a new package? won't epiphany-gecko continue to use 1.9.1?
[17:42] <jdstrand> or rather 1.9
[17:44] <micahg> jdstrand: there's a transitional package for epiphany-gecko
[17:45] <jdstrand> right, but we aren't uploading the new epiphany until it is ready
[17:45] <micahg> jdstrand: ah
[17:45] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - it's not quite as simple as that unfortunately. epiphany will load the newest runtime where the version is between the range passed to GRE_GetGREPathWithProperties
[17:45] <jdstrand> so, the old epiphany should continue to use 1.9, unless 1.9.2 replaces it, which I didn't think it did
[17:46] <chrisccoulson> and i just checked the epiphany source, and it will load 1.9.2
[17:46] <micahg> chrisccoulson: is there a patch in the old epiphany where we can tweak the GRE?
[17:46] <jdstrand> ok. we can test that
[17:46] <chrisccoulson> this is the same issue that broke yelp with 1.9.2 installed on the system ;)
[17:46] <chrisccoulson> micahg - yeah, we will have to do that if it breaks
[17:46] <chrisccoulson> that's what i did with yelp already
[17:47] <jdstrand> sounds like we should expect some breakage. we should be able to do an update for epiphany to not pull in 1.9.2 and then work on epiphany webkit. we'll see
[17:47] <jdstrand> if there is no breakage, that would certainly be nice :)
[17:47] <jdstrand> we could continue to update 1.9.2 until hardy is EOL
[17:47] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - yeah, we could do that. i'm not sure how we handle the versioning though, as we already have 2.28 in the PPA
[17:48] <jdstrand> (that is probably wishful thinking though)
[17:48] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: just delete it from the ppa
[17:48] <jdstrand> I think that should work fine
[17:48] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - it would probably just be safer to patch it only load 1.9 for now, rather than having it spring up some surprises on us later on ;)
[17:48] <jdstrand> we are going to need to seriously clean out that ppa after this anyway
[17:48] <chrisccoulson> yeah, it's got a lot of packages now
[17:49] <jdstrand> (and deleting doesn't really delete it...)
[17:49] <chrisccoulson> yeah, i noticed that when we ran out of space
[17:49] <chrisccoulson> but, there's no chance of that happening again now we have a 1TB limit in the PPA ;)
[17:53] <chrisccoulson> right, i have to disappear for 30 minutes or so to run some errands
[17:53] <chrisccoulson> bbiab
[17:53] <jdstrand> haha
[17:56] <micahg> Repository size:     21.7 GiB        (2.17%)         of 1000.0 GiB
[18:12] <fta> micahg, at some point, ucd was using ~40G with a single package ;)
[18:13] <micahg> fta: that's wild
[18:30] <chrisccoulson> back
[18:30] <chrisccoulson> urgh, i feel absolutely rotten today
[19:10] <ejat> ouch .. 1TB
[19:24] <ddecator> adobe stopped offering their alpha version of 64-bit flash, but they said they would release it in a future version (i saw you guys were talking about that earlier :p)
[19:24] <ddecator> chrisccoulson: hope you feel better soon
[19:34] <chrisccoulson> ddecator, thanks, so do i :)
[19:47] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: hey, where did beagle 0.3.3-2ubuntu1.8.04.1 go?
[19:51] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: and ctxextensions 4.3.2010020101-0ubuntu0.8.04.1
[19:52] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: did we decide to not update ctxextensions?
[20:00] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: err... are you sure you want to use an epoch for ctxextensions?
[20:02] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: only a small handful of people should be affected... imho we should just delete the newer one and have the few people who tested it downgrade manually
[20:02] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: otherwise karmic-lucid upgrade won't work
[20:53] <gnomefreak> i dont think its Firefox causing the very slow run. I think its Tbird
[20:54] <gnomefreak> it doesnt have to be doing anything, just sitting there online or offline it causes a great lag
[20:56]  * gnomefreak testing
[20:56] <gnomefreak> ok found the problem
[20:57] <fta> jdstrand, is chromium ready to land in updates & security now?
[20:58] <jdstrand> fta: yes, as of a little while ago
[20:58] <jdstrand> fta: let me copy it
[21:03] <fta> thanks
[21:08] <micahg> chrisccoulson: can I send a mail on behalf of the Ubuntu Mozilla Team asking how long support for TB3.0 will be?
[21:22] <gnomefreak> micahg: go for it
[21:23] <gnomefreak> micahg: can you CC me or the mailing list as well.
[21:40] <micahg> chrisccoulson: can I send a mail on behalf of the Ubuntu Mozilla Team asking how long support for TB3.0 will be?
[21:40] <chrisccoulson> micahg - yeah, can do. could you please copy me on that too?
[21:40] <micahg> chrisccoulson: yes
[21:42] <micahg> chrisccoulson: gnomefreak: done with you 2 copied
[21:42] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I'm still trying to figure out how to run the TCK for OpenJDK
[21:43] <gnomefreak> micahg: thanks
[21:43]  * micahg has to get some other work done right now though
[21:44] <gnomefreak> micahg: how long (are we going to bother) pushing updates for FF in Hardy?
[21:44] <micahg> gnomefreak: until EOL we hope
[21:44] <gnomefreak> EOL of desktop?
[21:45] <micahg> gnomefreak: yep, so next April
[21:45] <gnomefreak> thanks i told him to upgrade to Lucid (suggested but i will get this right. :)
[21:45] <nxvl> chrisccoulson: any ETA on FF?
[21:46] <chrisccoulson> nxvl - not yet ;)
[21:46] <chrisccoulson> soon ;)
[21:46] <chrisccoulson> that's all i know really
[21:47] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: fyi, epiphany absolutely requires an update. 'EphyBrowser initialization failed for...'
[21:47] <nxvl> chrisccoulson: ok, thnx
[21:47] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: did you see my other questions?
[21:47] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - interesting. thanks
[21:47] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, yeah, i think i answered your earlier questions
[21:48] <micahg> chrisccoulson: according to upstream wiki, they should have a better idea later today about when to ship 3.6.4
[21:48] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: no, I think you missed them. here they are:
[21:48] <jdstrand> 13:47 < jdstrand> chrisccoulson: hey, where did beagle 0.3.3-2ubuntu1.8.04.1 go?
[21:48] <jdstrand> 13:51 < jdstrand> chrisccoulson: and ctxextensions  4.3.2010020101-0ubuntu0.8.04.1
[21:48] <jdstrand> 13:52 < jdstrand> chrisccoulson: did we decide to not update ctxextensions?
[21:48] <jdstrand> 14:00 < jdstrand> chrisccoulson: err... are you sure you want to use an epoch  for ctxextensions?
[21:48] <jdstrand> 14:02 < jdstrand> chrisccoulson: only a small handful of people should be  affected... imho we should just delete the newer one and have  the few people who tested it downgrade manually
[21:48] <gnomefreak> Debian is keeping xul191
[21:48] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - yeah, i answered those ;)
[21:49] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: they didn't hit the channel afaict
[21:49] <micahg> gnomefreak: Debian has their own issues to deal with ;)
[21:49] <chrisccoulson> ah
[21:49] <gnomefreak> yep seems so ;)
[21:49] <chrisccoulson> that might have occurred when i undocked, and i switched from wireless to wired
[21:49] <micahg> gnomefreak: we're jumping to xul193 for maverick +1
[21:49] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: you had a ping timeout and came back on
[21:49] <gnomefreak> micahg: dropping xul192 at that time?
 jdstrand - beagle and ctxextensions for hardy aren't needed as the current versions aren't needed
[21:49] <chrisccoulson>  and ctxextensions doesn't exist in lucid, which is why i fixed the other problem with an epoch in karmic
[21:49] <chrisccoulson>  i wasn't sure if i could just delete packages from the PPA, after the call for testing has gone out
[21:50] <micahg> gnomefreak: yep, we only plan on supporting one xul release per release
[21:50] <chrisccoulson> i meant to say that the current versions don't work
[21:50] <chrisccoulson> (for beagle and ctxextensions)
[21:50] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: ok, I'll update the wiki
[21:51] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: I still encourage removing the epoch. maybe a followup email can go out to those that tested it... I doubt anyone did since I had already commented on it in the tracker
[21:51] <gnomefreak> that sounds like a great idea assuming everything is on same version. ff37 is xul193 tb  is xul192 and ff3.6 is 192 as well, tb im not sure about, i could never keep that straight
[21:51] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - ok, i can do that
[21:51] <jdstrand> if we ever bring it back, it'll be a problem...
[21:51] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: thanks
[21:51] <micahg> gnomefreak: by then, we might be at TB32 :)
[21:53]  * gnomefreak not holding breath 
[21:58] <micahg> gnomefreak: BTW, xul191 might be EOL before squeeze is released :)
[21:59] <gnomefreak> they still havent released squeeze? i thought they were going to shorten the devel cycles to be shorter
[22:00]  * gnomefreak trying to find the right words for this email, other than bad bad things ;)
[22:00] <micahg> gnomefreak: squeeze isn't even frozen yet, they have a few major transitions in progress, they have to be completed before they can freeze
[22:00] <gnomefreak> so much for the trying to be like us :)\
[22:01] <micahg> gnomefreak: well, one of the transitions is python 2.6 :)
[22:01] <gnomefreak> if we can do it so can they since alot of our core devs are/were Debian devs
[22:02] <micahg> gnomefreak: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=debian-python@lists.debian.org;tag=python2.6
[22:02] <gnomefreak> looking thanks
[22:03] <gnomefreak> thats all the blockers?
[22:04] <micahg> gnomefreak: for that transition :)
[22:04] <gnomefreak> damn
[22:05] <gnomefreak> listening to radio and ali morgan is on from 9-2 what do you call that? a segment or a show?
[22:05] <gnomefreak> im at a loss for words
[22:12]  * gnomefreak found words let hope she doesnt take it the wrong or RIGHT way
[22:14] <gnomefreak> be back smoke
[22:21] <micahg> chrisccoulson: we don't intend to continue supporting hardy after Desktop EOL, right?
[22:26] <chrisccoulson> micahg - i don't think there's anything we need to maintain for the server
[22:27] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, just wanted to verify before responding on the ML, user was asking about FF updates after desktop EOL
[22:28] <gnomefreak> micahg: yep i CCed the list
[22:28] <chrisccoulson> yeah, we wouldn't update FF after the desktop has gone EOL, but i'm not sure if anything on the server uses xulrunner
[22:28] <gnomefreak> i think i sent it
[22:28] <micahg> gnomefreak: yes, you did
[22:28] <gnomefreak> micahg: thanks
[22:29] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - i've dropped epiphany from the PPA as well for now. i will upload a version that makes it carry on working after the upgrade later
[22:30] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: k
[22:31] <micahg> gnomefreak: answered
[22:34] <gnomefreak> micahg: thanks
[22:40] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: fyi, I gave firegub/karmic a pass after retesting. I think it might have been one of the other extensions that I had installed that was broken and messing it up
[22:40] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: I don't know that, but that is what I going with :)
[22:40] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: at any rate, one less bug in the qa tracker
[23:12] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: fyi, mozilla-noscript is fine now too
[23:12] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: and ctxextensions is good
[23:12] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: (those are karmic)
[23:12] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: and apparmor is fixed
[23:12] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - cool, that's good
[23:12] <chrisccoulson> thanks for testing
[23:12] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: so that should leave only openjdk on karmic
[23:13] <micahg> jdstrand: is it worth trying to keep noscript up to date in the security PPA before release, or just SRU the latest after release?
[23:14] <jdstrand> micahg: well, what is in the ppa is working ok. I don't know what you want to SRU, but if it is bugfix only, the SRU later
[23:15] <micahg> jdstrand: well, usually every release or every other release of noscript has security fixes
[23:16] <jdstrand> micahg: if it is security relevant, then it can go in
[23:16] <micahg> jdstrand: well, my question is how much to worry about keeping up to date in the PPA?
[23:17] <jdstrand> micahg: I'm not worried at all. to me, sru is fine
[23:17] <micahg> jdstrand: k, it's in universe also, so I guess it's a little lower in priority
[23:17]  * jdstrand nods
[23:17] <micahg> jdstrand: I'll plan for an SRU next month then
[23:18] <jdstrand> cool, thanks :)