[00:29] <gnomefreak> micahg: what was the reason for not shipping ff4 in Maverick?
[00:29] <gnomefreak> people were asking today
[00:38] <micahg> gnomefreak: not ready yet
[00:39] <gnomefreak> ok so 11.04 than
[00:39] <gnomefreak> thanks
[00:39] <micahg> gnomefreak: yeah, but it'll be in firefox-stable
[00:39] <gnomefreak> ok so i can send people there?
[00:40] <micahg> gnomefreak: yeah, well it won't be updated until 4.0 is released since 3.6.x is in all releases at the moment
[00:40] <micahg> gnomefreak: I'll have a beta up soon, just don't know when yet
[00:41] <gnomefreak> k
[00:41] <micahg> gnomefreak: I'll update /topic when I know more
[00:41] <micahg> I've been trying to keep it up to date with the latest stuff
[00:41] <gnomefreak> micahg: thanks. i may update #ubuntu+1 topic if more people ask
[00:42] <gnomefreak> i get updates every day or 2
[00:42] <micahg> gnomefreak: they were spoiled with hardy and joaunty
[00:42] <micahg> *jaunty
[00:43] <gnomefreak> yeha but they are both close to EOL. should we really bother with them
[00:43] <micahg> gnomefreak: not what I meant
[00:44] <micahg> gnomefreak: hardy had 3.0 before release and jaunty had 3.5
[00:44] <gnomefreak> oh yeah
[00:44] <micahg> gnomefreak: we won't be doing that anymore :)
[00:44] <gnomefreak> sorry forgot about that
[00:45] <micahg> we'll use the PPAs to give people early looks and save the archive maintainence
[00:45] <gnomefreak> we 3.6 is intended to run its course than EOL. only 4.0 will will continue the update cycle
[00:46] <micahg> gnomefreak: we're hoping to get to april 2011 so we don't need to update hardy and karmic
[00:46] <micahg> then jump lucid to the newest 4.x release
[00:46] <micahg> and maverick
[00:46] <gnomefreak> do we really want to reomve 3.6
[00:46] <gnomefreak> remove
[00:47] <micahg> gnomefreak: what do you mean?
[00:47] <gnomefreak> jump lucid to  4.x  is that with 3.6 still there
[00:47] <micahg> gnomefreak: no, that's why we move to unversioned source packages
[00:47] <micahg> xulrunner-1.9.2 will remain though for the apps w/out insecure coontent
[00:48] <gnomefreak> right so we are not going to wait for 3.6.x to reach EOL
[00:48] <micahg> gnomefreak: no, we will
[00:48] <gnomefreak> oh
[00:48] <micahg> we're hoping that won't happen until april 2011 though
[00:48] <gnomefreak> i thought 3.6 EOL was closer to this time next year
[00:49]  * gnomefreak checks to see what version i have
[00:49] <micahg> gnomefreak: probably not, should be 6 months after 4.0 release
[00:49] <gnomefreak> 3.6.10~hg20100828r34553
[00:49] <gnomefreak> i cant believe we are on 3.6.9 already
[00:50] <micahg> gnomefreak: well, it's been out for 7 months, 3.6.5 was skipped and 3.6.6/3.6.8 were chemspil releases
[00:50] <gnomefreak> yeah i remember 3.6.5 was skipped
[00:53] <gnomefreak> ok i cant view my bookmarks in chromium unless i go to bookmark manager
[00:54] <gnomefreak> not having fun with chromium today
[00:55] <gnomefreak> ok using the incognito window shows them as it should but normal window does not have a way to view them
[00:56] <gnomefreak> even safe mode doesnt show them. is there a setting im missing?
[00:57] <gnomefreak> found it
[01:00] <gnomefreak> ok here we go. crosses fingers and upgrades again
[01:00] <Dimmuxx> http://www.thewildernessdowntown.com/ pretty cool chrome demo site
[01:02] <gnomefreak> that is cool
[01:04] <gnomefreak> i stand by my word when i say update-manager sucks its way too slow
[03:34] <[reed]> where's asac when I need him
[03:34] <micahg> [reed]: idk, can I help with something?
[03:35] <[reed]> I need his mobile broadband skills
[03:35] <micahg> oh
[03:35] <[reed]> can't get my verizon mobile broadband working on my new work laptop
[03:36] <[reed]> works in windows, sadly :(
[03:39] <micahg> [reed]: is this relavent? http://www.linux.com/archive/articles/52729
[03:42] <cherricerra> is it necessary to download latest thunderbird to upgrade from old one?
[03:43] <micahg> cherricerra: please be more specific?
[03:43] <cherricerra> i downloaded 3.1 and am trying to run it and cant seem to get it
[03:43] <micahg> cherricerra: from where?
[03:44] <micahg> cherricerra: what is your old version?
[03:44] <micahg> what version of Ubuntu?
[03:44] <cherricerra> 9.01
[03:45] <micahg> cherricerra: we don't have an upgrade path yet from TB2 to 3.1, that's why it's not in the thunderbird-stable PPA yet, I hope to get to it soon
[03:46] <cherricerra> ok thanks so im out of luck
[03:46] <cherricerra> i guess i could still get the calendar add on though?
[03:46] <micahg> cherricerra: you can upgrade to 3.0.6 in the thunderbird-stable PPA, then you'll get the 3.1 upgrade when we push it
[03:47] <micahg> cherricerra: you have to download the calendar extension from mozilla at the moment, I can point you to the 64 bit build if you need
[03:47] <cherricerra> that would be great
[03:47] <micahg> cherricerra: sure, which build, 3.0 or 3.1?
[03:48] <cherricerra> does it have to match the version of tb i have now?
[03:48] <micahg> cherricerra: yes, unfortunately
[03:49] <cherricerra> no lie i'm a newb im not even sure which i have
[03:49] <micahg> cherricerra: go to about thunderbird
[03:49] <[reed]> micahg: well, I was hoping I could get network-manager to just work
[03:49] <[reed]> sigh
[03:49] <micahg> [reed]: you might be able to, I'm no n-m expert
[03:50] <cherricerra> 2.0.0.24
[03:50] <micahg> cherricerra: you should just install from the repo then
[03:50] <micahg> cherricerra: it's called lightning-extension
[03:51] <cherricerra> ok thanks
[03:52] <cherricerra> i run into all kinds of problems not being able to upgrade to 10.04 is what i keep getting told
[03:52] <cherricerra> appreciate the help
[03:55] <micahg> cherricerra: np, come back anytime
[13:17] <gnomefreak> micahg: any chance you can post the FF4.0 info <not making it into 10.10 before next cycle> i would like to have a link to refer people to. i added it to topic in #ubuntu+1
[13:21] <gnomefreak> its not real important. atm i cant do it, not until i read guide on Mutt
[13:46] <chrisccoulson> gnomefreak, there isn't really anything written down anywhere for you to quote
[13:46] <chrisccoulson> it won't be in maverick because it isn't released in time ;)
[13:47] <gnomefreak> i know that i just cant fit that in /topic for +1
[13:47] <chrisccoulson> why does it need to go in to the topic there? do people keep asking about it?
[13:48] <chrisccoulson> realistically, it never was really going to make it in to maverick
[13:48] <gnomefreak> yes and they are getting annoying with the questions
[13:48] <chrisccoulson> just ignore them ;)
[13:48] <chrisccoulson> lol
[13:48] <gnomefreak> lol
[13:49] <chrisccoulson> but, certainly don't send them in here ;)
[13:49] <gnomefreak> hell no
[13:49] <chrisccoulson> i would have thought it would have been obvious to most users why maverick ships with 3.6
[13:49] <gnomefreak> its stable?
[13:50] <chrisccoulson> it's stable now, but still changing a lot ;)
[13:51] <gnomefreak> libgirepository1.0-0 is still an issue it seems
[13:51] <gnomefreak> oh
[13:51] <gnomefreak> i thought they pushed most if not all to 4.0
[13:52] <chrisccoulson> well, there's certainly been quite a lot of under-the-hood changes in the last couple of weeks or so (because they completely broke our packaging)
[13:52] <chrisccoulson> IMO, it's too much of a moving target to consider even having it in universe
[13:52] <gnomefreak> oh nice of them to do that for us
[13:52] <chrisccoulson> (which some people have been asking for)
[13:53] <gnomefreak> we did that a while ago with 3.5 IIRC
[13:53] <gnomefreak> its was unstable version in universe and stable in main
[13:53] <chrisccoulson> yeah, that was before PPA's were a viable alternative though
[13:53] <gnomefreak> yep
[13:54] <chrisccoulson> PPA's just suit the current workflow much better (we don't have to bother with freezes and other distro milestones)
[13:54] <gnomefreak> yep
[13:55] <gnomefreak> ill brb i need a damn smoke again
[14:18] <gnomefreak> !rtfm
[14:18] <ubot2> Acronyms or statements like noob, jfgi, stfu, or rtfm are not welcome in this channel. Period.
[14:19] <gnomefreak> !no rtfm is <reply> Acronyms or statements like noob, jfgi, stfu, rtfm, or rtm are not welcome in this channel Period.
[14:20] <gnomefreak> !rtfm
[14:20] <ubot2> Acronyms or statements like noob, jfgi, stfu, or rtfm are not welcome in this channel. Period.
[14:30] <gnomefreak> is there a reason why chromium keeps asking me if i want to set it to default when it already is? everytime i open chromium it asks
[19:38] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I just poked the release approver for mozilla again about the NSPR bug
[19:38] <chrisccoulson> micahg - thanks. yeah, we need to resolve this soon
[19:39] <chrisccoulson> so, has in-tree nss/nspr been upgraded to 3.12.7/4.8.6 in 1.9.2?
[19:39] <micahg> chrisccoulson: yes, but it isn't actually required technically
[19:39] <micahg> chrisccoulson: so if I don't get an answer, I'll patch it to work with NSPR 4.8
[19:40] <micahg> and we can push in the morning to security PPA
[19:41] <chrisccoulson> yeah, sounds ok. although i'm wondering if it would be safer to use the new version (to avoid having version skew between the different copies of nspr on the system)
[19:41] <chrisccoulson> i'm not sure if there are any plugins running in firefox that link against nspr
[19:42] <chrisccoulson> might be worth checking that and make sure you don't end up with 2 copies in memory
[19:42] <micahg> chrisccoulson: enigmail links against nspr (thunderbird 3.1 also affected)
[19:42] <chrisccoulson> it would be worth checking that then
[19:43] <chrisccoulson> ah
[19:43] <micahg> chrisccoulson: actually, that doesn't matter, your case does though since Firefox builds its own nspr
[19:43] <chrisccoulson> actually, thunderbird uses system nspr
[19:43] <micahg> chrisccoulson: right :)
[19:43] <micahg> typing faster than brain...
[19:43] <chrisccoulson> yeah, i'm thinking of cases where firefox pulls in it's own nspr, and then a plugin linking with nspr also pulls in the (different) system copy
[19:44] <chrisccoulson> although, LD_LIBRARY_PATH should stop that from happening
[19:44] <chrisccoulson> bbiab
[20:24] <chrisccoulson> heh, i just pushed the breakpad patch for our daily builds, and it's been pushed to mozilla-central now
[20:24]  * chrisccoulson backs it out again
[20:24] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, BTW, weave/sync is built against system nspr
[20:25] <micahg> chrisccoulson: BTW, crashreporter failed on 3.6.x
[20:25] <micahg> dailies
[20:26] <chrisccoulson> oh, i will take a look at that then
[20:29] <micahg> chrisccoulson: and I have the gnome-shell wrapper installing now, I just need to test it (not sure how until after I upgrade)
[20:29] <chrisccoulson> micahg - i suppose we can just add a version check and disable the crashreporter on the old releases
[20:29] <chrisccoulson> i'm not even submitting the symbols for the 3.6 dailies anyway
[20:29] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, but you are for the point releases
[20:29] <chrisccoulson> i'm only submitting 4.0 dailies for maverick, and 3.6 maverick release and lucid security
[20:30] <chrisccoulson> i'll ask ted if he's interested in 3.6 dailies
[20:30] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, can I make a beta 5 PPA then for Firefox 4.0 and you can push the symbols for that?
[20:30] <chrisccoulson> yeah, can do
[20:31] <micahg> chrisccoulson: beta 5 is scheduled for next monday, so I figure I'll push them all up that day, do you know if upstream uses official branding on the betas?
[20:32] <chrisccoulson> yeah, i think they do
[20:32] <chrisccoulson> (they do on the windows build i tested anyway)
[20:32] <micahg> chrisccoulson: oh, if I have time I'll rename to firefox-next, otherwise, I'll branch 4.0 to firefox-next.head so we have a PPA release branch
[20:33] <chrisccoulson> i'm not sure about the rename yet, as we need to work out how to do the profile migration
[20:33] <micahg> chrisccoulson: why not the same way as before?
[20:33] <chrisccoulson> i think it gets more complicated when we don't use version numbers, so we need to figure that out
[20:33] <micahg> oh, we'd have to do firefox-trunk at the same time
[20:34] <micahg> chrisccoulson: ah, the issue I can see if beta participation
[20:34] <chrisccoulson> yeah, i think it gets more complicated to migrate users then
[20:35] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I was thinking, maybe the profile and the binary link can be auto generated based on the first point version number (i,e 3.6, 4.0, 4.1) from debian/changelog
[20:36] <chrisccoulson> yeah, possibly. i'll have a think about that
[20:36] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, if you decide by the weekend, I'll prepare beta 5 :)