micahgfta: that's fine, I'd prefer to keep changes like that only to major version bumps00:49
ftamicahg, it's the idea, it will be 10->1100:49
ftaunless there's another 10 in between with security fixes00:50
micahgfta: right, well, last bump was only about 3 weeks ago, so I figure at least one more 10.x00:51
micahgfta: there's a new ioquake which might solve your issue, can I push to a test PPA for you or would you rather I push packages up to my p.u.c page?01:31
[reed]jcastro: well, I wore a Mozilla t-shirt today04:46
[reed]that's about it04:46
[reed]I had actual work to do :004:47
kbrosnan[reed]: aww in sv?05:03
[reed]by "sv", do you mean "silicon valley" or "sunnyvale"... note that my current employer is in palo alto :)05:04
[reed]kbrosnan: ^05:05
kbrosnanthe former05:05
kbrosnanin MV05:06
kbrosnani'm in mv.05:07
[reed]ah, cool05:08
[reed]for how long?05:08
kbrosnantill August05:08
[reed]ah, awesome05:08
kbrosnanworking with aakash and tony05:08
kbrosnanon mobile firefox05:08
[reed]I may come over Thursday for lunch05:08
[reed]I need to meet with some people05:09
kbrosnani'm at @ 3rd floor near warp core most of the time05:09
[reed]you're more than welcome to come check out my work and eat lunch/dinner05:11
[reed]or come visit me in the city :)05:11
linuxtechCan we install firefox4 from the ppa and keep the old firefox with our profiles for 3.6.15 separate?06:29
Dimmuxxmicahg: ah I didn't know that, thanks!06:48
chrisccoulsonlinuxtech, no, you can't do that07:11
bdrungchrisccoulson: porting eclipse to use webkit would be cool11:53
chrisccoulsonbdrung, the latest version can already use webkit11:53
chrisccoulsoni was questioning the dependency on swt though, as i thought that eclipse had its own copy11:53
ftamicahg, jdstrand_: fyi, security update of ch10 planed for tomorrow11:55
ftaplaned? planned?11:56
ftawell, expected tomorrow11:56
mdeslaurchrisccoulson: are language packs available for FF4 in the PPA?12:27
chrisccoulsonmdeslaur, they're not unfortunately. it's pretty difficult for me to do that because the 3.6 translations are bundled with our language packs12:28
chrisccoulsoni'm not sure how else to support that12:28
mdeslaurchrisccoulson: oh, hrm12:28
chrisccoulsonideas welcome ;)12:28
mdeslaurchrisccoulson: are there plans to update to 4.0 in maverick?12:28
mdeslaurchrisccoulson: yes, split them all out again :)12:28
chrisccoulsonmdeslaur, yeah, i want to split them, so i can support translated builds in PPAs ;)12:29
chrisccoulsonmaverick probably won't get 4.0, but will get another version12:29
mdeslaurchrisccoulson: cool, thanks12:29
mdeslaurchrisccoulson: another version? seriously? I though we were doing rolling releases now?12:34
chrisccoulsonmdeslaur, maverick will likely get 5.0 ;)12:34
mdeslauroh, so they will still do some security fixes for 3.6?12:36
chrisccoulsonmdeslaur, yeah, not sure for how long though12:42
mdeslaurI see12:43
=== m_conley_away is now known as m_conley
=== jdstrand_ is now known as jdstrand
micahgfta: ACK13:32
gnomefreaki guess we skipped tb32. do we have a build for enigmail for tb33?13:49
micahggnomefreak: upstream skipped 3.214:00
BUGabundohttp://slides.html5rocks.com/#speech-input nie14:05
gnomefreakmicahg: thanks14:07
gnomefreakthis is odd. using minefield i get the following message "Your browser either doesn't support or you have disabled JavaScript."14:09
gnomefreaki have IcedTea-Web Plugin (using IcedTea-Web 1.1pre (1.1~20110320-0ubuntu1))14:12
gnomefreaksupporting LiveConnect/JavaScript.14:14
gnomefreakso either minefield or icedtea is screwed up14:14
gnomefreakor incompatible14:14
gnomefreakit is the same for official ff package in repos 4.0rc214:17
gnomefreakand chrome :(14:18
ftamicahg, ch is now complaining our system flash is out dated :(14:21
micahgmdeslaur: ^^14:23
mdeslaurfta: I'm currently working on flashplugin-nonfree updates...they should come out either this afternoon or tomorrow14:23
mdeslaurfta: our adobe-flashplugin packages are already released14:24
ftamdeslaur, what's the difference between those two?14:24
mdeslaurfta: adobe-flashplugin is in the partner repo...flashplugin-nonfree is in multiverse14:25
ftawhy maintain two?14:25
mdeslaurfta: adobe-flashplugin don't install on amd64, flashplugin-nonfree integrated with nspluginwrapper on amd6414:25
mdeslaurfta: adobe won't let us ship the official packages (adobe-flashplugin) on amd6414:25
gnomefreakcan someone please test this link. let me know if it says you have javascript disabled or not installed enigmail.mozdev.org/download/download-static.php.html14:26
gnomefreakwait adobe wont let us package and distribute falsh for 64bit?14:27
gnomefreakflash even14:27
mdeslaurgnomefreak: I don't know the details...all I know is the "adobe-flashplugin" package in the partner repo doesn't install on amd6414:28
mdeslaurgnomefreak: I _assume_ they prefer it not be used on amd64 with the nspluginwrapper hack14:28
mdeslaurgnomefreak: I don't actually know anything about that, so don't take anything I say seriously on that subject :)14:29
gnomefreakwait are you trying to use the 64bit package or the 32bit+nsplugin...14:29
gnomefreakiirc they still havent finished 64bit but they atleast have one14:29
mdeslaurgnomefreak: thay have a preview version of the 64 bit one that doesn't get updated for security issues. We don't ship that.14:30
gnomefreaki didnt relize it was a prefiew i thought it was normal package. alot of people want the 64bit package included but i guess that is a bad idea atm14:31
mdeslaurgnomefreak: yes14:32
mdeslaurgnomefreak: it's available in my PPA is anybody wants to install it at their risk14:32
chrisccoulsoni wish they'd just release that, so we can bury nspluginwrapper in a very deep grave14:33
BUGabundo youtube html5 WIN! inf FF4 any video > right click "save as" > rick roll!15:29
ftadoh! nice changelogs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-2d/+bug/724717/comments/1120:24
ubot2Launchpad bug 724717 in unity-2d "Indicators fail to load" [Critical,Fix released]20:24
=== m_conley is now known as m_conley_away
LLStarkschrisccoulson, are you annoyed as i am with all of the ubuntuzilla, ppa, tarball madness. the entire ubuntu userbase comes down with a collective case of the derpes whenever a new fx comes out.20:55
chrisccoulsonwhat do you mean?20:55
LLStarksit's not readily apparent to people that the stable ppa is the best solution20:58
LLStarksthey dload the tarball: "wah, my fonts are ****ed"20:58
LLStarksthey use ubuntuzilla: "what the hell is the /opt folder? where's the binary?"20:58
chrisccoulsonwell, ubuntuzilla is dead anyway20:59
chrisccoulsonso that's 1 less option21:00
chrisccoulsonand nothing annoys me (well, not much anyway) ;)21:00
LLStarkslinux needs an instant-gratification way to install firefox with proper folder structure and linking21:00
LLStarkspackagekit underdelivers21:00
chrisccoulsonwell, that's what PPA's and deb packages provide, no?21:01
LLStarkswell, i don't see mozilla doing a deb/rpm repo21:01
LLStarksand the sru  process for firefox takes too long21:01
chrisccoulsonwell, we don't follow the sru process for firefox21:02
LLStarksis there a fancy name or initialism i can use?21:03
chrisccoulsonand we release security updates within a day of mozilla normally (hardly, "long")21:03
chrisccoulsonand in future, we'll be pushing major updates out to all releases at the same time too21:03
LLStarkswho is getting 4.0 btw? karmic, lucid, maverick, hardy?21:04
chrisccoulsonkarmic and lucid definitely aren't21:04
chrisccoulsoni meant karmic ;)21:04
chrisccoulsonlucid and maverick most likely won't, but they will most likely get 521:04
chrisccoulsonbut i have absolutely no idea of what mozilla's plans are for supporting 3.6, so i'm basing my prediction on the results of my crystal ball right now21:05
LLStarksisn't that a bit risky? i don't trust the new mozilla roadmap.21:05
chrisccoulsonanything i tell you now is just a complete guess tbh21:06
chrisccoulsoni don't know if 3.6 will be supported for 1 week, 1 month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 10 years21:06
LLStarkswould it be possible to issue a security update for all supported releases that changes the greyed out 'upgrade firefox' menu item into an add-apt-repository command that adds the stable ppa?21:08
LLStarksyou'd avoid the issue of directly packaging for a release with the main archive21:09
chrisccoulsonabsolutely not. that wouldn't be a security update for a start21:10
chrisccoulsonand where is that string visible?21:10
chrisccoulsonwe disable the updater, so there should be no menu item at all21:10
chrisccoulson(there isn't one here)21:10
LLStarksah, it's gone. you used to be able to gksu firefox &21:11
chrisccoulsonyeah, it's been gone for a long time ;)21:11
LLStarksbut looking forward, is that a viable option21:11
LLStarksmake the user assume all risk21:12
chrisccoulsonnot really, especially seeing as this won't be a problem in future (where we're pushing out major updates to all supported releases at the same time)21:12
chrisccoulsonit will be just like chromium then ;)21:13
LLStarksah, nice21:13
LLStarksthis still the latest spec? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/Specs/Lucid/FirefoxNewSupportModel21:14
ftachrisccoulson, chromium still suffers from n days in the security queue21:15
fta+ delay21:15
chrisccoulsonfta - hmm, waiting on armel and other arches by any chance?21:15
ftaonly partially, it's also waiting for human resources and testers21:16
chrisccoulsonLLStarks, yeah, sort of. that's a bit out of date now, and we used that spec to drive 3.6 to all supported releases21:16
ftafrom what i can see21:16
chrisccoulsonbut we will be going 1 step further now21:16
chrisccoulsonfta - hmmm, that's a pain. do you run the test-suite in chromium? (i think i've asked you this already)21:18
chrisccoulsoni'd like the test-suite in firefox to reduce some of the human effort required to test :)21:18
ftai used to, for a long time, but i had to disable so many tests because of the build env restrictions that it didn't make sense anymore21:19
chrisccoulsonfta - which sorts of restrictions? just network access or other restrictions?21:19
ftanot to mention that it tooks hours to build, and even more hours to run21:20
ftayep, no network, no display, no input21:20
ftanowadays, it's also no GPU21:20
chrisccoulsonfta - did you try xvfb for the display?21:20
chrisccoulsonthe network access is a pain21:21
chrisccoulsonand do automated tests require input? i don't have an issue with that particularly21:21
ftasure, i had a long pipe with xvfb, timeout, gdb21:21
ftachrisccoulson, http://paste.ubuntu.com/584498/21:23
micahgfta: the biggest delay on chromium ATM is the build time :)21:27
ftamicahg, why do we even have to wait for arm? it's different in all matters, why not split the uploads21:31
micahgfta: not going to have 2 source packages for the same thing, the only reason we do it for openjdk is that the newer openjdk doesn't work with arm yet21:34
ftano, not 2 src packages, but upload once the 32/64 builds are tested21:35
ftathat's what most of the users need21:35
micahgfta: I don't think we can split the publishing like that, jdstrand ^^21:36
ftamicahg, when we find something wrong with arm, we postpone the fix until the next upgrade anyway21:37
micahgfta: that depends on how badly the update is needed as well21:38
ftahot security fixes for the masses prevail over arm fixes21:38
ftawell, until now at least21:38
jdstrandLP does not allow pocket copying of a build after the fact21:39
jdstrandeg, we publish i386 and amd64 then publish when arm is not done21:40
jdstrandarm is left out in the cold and needs a new source upload21:40
jdstrandwe have skipped arm in the past for chromium with important fixes, fwiw21:40
ftatomorrow's update will also have a long list of hot fixes21:41
fta..along with arm fixes from the previous upload :P21:48
micahgfta: heh, we'll play it by ear, but the earlier tomorrow the better as we generally don't like pushing out fixes on Friday21:49
micahgs/don't like/try to avoid/ :)21:49
ftanot my call, i'm waiting for the upstream tag21:50
micahgfta: I understand, not trying to pressure you :)21:50
ftai have an idea of what it will be but i won't be sure until it's out21:50
ftamicahg, libvpx 0.9.6 in natty is a security update, why isn't it in maverick and lucid?22:25
micahgfta: we generally patch stable releases vs full updates22:25
ftamakes stuff hard to follow..22:26
micahgfta: there's more than the one that was backported to 0.9.5?22:26
ftanot sure22:26
micahgI don't see any open CVEs22:26
ftait seems it fixed at least cve-2010-448922:27
ubot2fta: libvpx, as used in Google Chrome before 8.0.552.215 and possibly other products, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds read) via a crafted WebM video.  NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of a regression. (http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2010-4489)22:27
micahgfta: right, that was backported to 0.9.5-222:27
micahgand that was pushed to stable releases when chromium upped the build-dep22:28
LLStarksgfd firefox. it won't let me click certain  links.23:42
micahgLLStarks: I'm using forecastfox w/out issue in firefox 423:46
LLStarksyeah, that's not it23:46
LLStarksi can't click on page links after the page loads23:46
LLStarksjust the tabs and interface23:46
LLStarksi think shifting window focus unlocks it or something23:47
LLStarksokay, this sucks23:48
LLStarkscan't click or highlight anything23:49
LLStarksno right-click23:49

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