[11:59] is there a lightning package for any of the Thunderbird PPA builds? [12:05] bhearsum, not at the moment [12:05] there will be one for the beta PPA, but i wasn't planning to do a lightning build for the other PPA's just yet [12:16] ahhh [12:16] cool, i'm looking forward to have a working lightning again ;) [12:18] bhearsum, which PPA are you using? [12:19] i'm on the Aurora one right now [12:19] ah, ok [12:19] using the upstream comm-central Lightning [12:19] (which doesn't work at all) [12:19] i'm wondering whether i should just build lightning from the thunderbird source tarball for our aurora and nightly builds [12:20] we use a separate source package for release builds, but we probably don't need to do that for nightly builds [12:20] yeah, it probably doesn't matter much here [12:21] i'm not sure we've figured out what's happening with Lightning upstream, though. f.e., there's no Aurora lightning yet [12:21] the only reason we use different source tarballs for release builds is because the releases are never in sync [12:21] ah [12:23] about:memory is looking really cool now [12:26] i wonder how i could get apport to add some of that information to bug reports [12:26] that might be useful for people who report bugs with single-sentence descriptions saying "Firefox uses too much memory" [12:26] and no other details ;) [12:28] yeah, it's going to tremendous for narrowing things down [12:28] i'm so glad we've got a couple people focused on it, finally [12:40] bhearsum, are the dates on https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease/Calendar fixed, or is there the possibility that they will slip at all? [12:41] i'm just comparing them to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/OneiricReleaseSchedule [12:41] (in particular, our final freeze date - 29th september) [12:41] they're fixed, except that some of us doubt we're going to ship anything on dec 20 ;) [12:42] seems like those dates are compatible, aren't they? [12:42] i think so, but those are merge dates rather than release dates aren't they? [12:42] ah [12:42] yes and no [12:43] for beta/aurora they are merge days, and the release happens N days after that [12:43] i'm just wondering whether to track the firefox 7 beta, or stick with the firefox 6 release after 16th august [12:43] for release, it's the release day, and we work backwards from it [12:43] confusing, yes [12:43] ah, ok [12:43] thanks [12:43] np [12:44] so, it's probably relatively safe for me to carry on tracking the beta after 6.0 is released [12:47] yeah, i think so [12:48] we are being _very_ strict about this, we really believe in the fixed dates [12:48] (...we also made a lot of noise about it and don't want to embarass ourselves by slipping ;) [12:49] heh :-) [12:51] * bhearsum updates that wiki page to try and clear up confusion [12:52] thanks === m_conley_away is now known as m_conley [13:57] hmmm, scons seems like magic to me [13:57] give me autoconf! [13:59] hmmm, perhaps i should actually try installing this: http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/new-product/google-android/3289857/ubuntu-one-files-for-android-lets-you-access-photos-anywhere/ [15:14] Hi all Where is the folder to start ->./thunderbird -ProfileManager [15:15] or is thewre a direct way to start the Thunderbird Profilemanager %u %P === JanC_ is now known as JanC [16:01] g'ah, no internet [16:01] yay for 3g [16:03] hji [16:09] is there a way to share ligthning 1.04b xp /ubuntu [16:10] hi ikonia [16:10] hello [16:13] glda19: what do you mean by share? [16:13] micahg, i have a dualboot xp /linux [16:13] and whant to read my mail in both [16:13] glda19: no, it's a binary extension [16:13] ? [16:15] micahg, what did you mean [16:15] lightning needs to be compiled on each platform so it cannot be shared [16:15] but why can i do it with 1.02b [16:16] orly? I wonder why that works [16:16] glda19: do you have 1.02b installed as a system extension in UBuntu? [16:16] ik works fine [16:17] now make my one [16:17] err, 1/0b2 [16:17] 1.0b2 [16:17] yes [16:18] so, why not install 1.0b4 as a system extension? [16:42] bhearsum, is the plan still to do a beta update today? [16:42] i'm just wondering whether to upload the current build before i finish for the day [16:43] i _think_ we're pushing it out today [16:44] it's all built already, but we had a problem with one locale, not sure if we're going to hold on it [16:44] ah, ok. thanks [16:48] i'll let you know when i hear more [16:51] bhearsum, awesome, thanks! [17:13] hi [17:17] micahg, [17:19] is here a posibility to share ligthning [17:20] I answered you above [17:21] micahg, you answer not [17:21] glenn__, and your 2 threads on dev-apps-calendar were also answered with pretty much the same response [17:21] (assuming that you're the same glenn) [17:21] [11:18] so, why not install 1.0b4 as a system extension? [17:22] micahg, i thnik that you nothing new about ligthing [17:24] chrisccoulson, why did, it work by 1.02b [17:24] chrisccoulson, why did, it work by 1.b02 [17:24] glenn__, i've got no idea what you did, but i can assure you that you cannot share binary components between different platforms [17:25] chrisccoulson, i make a new xpi [17:25] it's a compiled extension, running the linux version of lightning on windows is never going to work [17:25] it works [17:25] so, what's the problem then? [17:25] if it's installed as a system extension, it should mask the one in the profile I think since the windows one in the profile isn't valid [17:26] it doesn't work quite like that [17:27] oh, actually, it might do, because the install.rdf has a em:targetPlatform [17:27] https://wiki.mozilla.org/index.php?title=User:Ssitter/UnifiedLightning&oldid=255845 [17:28] i did it so becouse the only to different ffiles are dll and so files [17:29] is that right ore not [17:30] so quited now [17:31] chrisccoulson, [17:32] where are you [17:33] sorry, i have work to do as well [17:33] micahg, [17:34] but why can't i do that by 1.b04 [17:34] glenn__, did you update the chrome.manifest with the new components locations? [17:35] in the 1.04b [17:35] or in 1.0b2 [17:36] glenn__, https://developer.mozilla.org/en/XPCOM/XPCOM_changes_in_Gecko_2.0#Platform-specific_directories [17:36] you should probably read that [17:38] chrisccoulson, you think when i may a change in the manifest file it will work [17:38] i've no idea, why don't you try it ;) [17:39] if you haven't changed the binary-component stanza's though, then it definitely won't work [17:43] where can i find the maifest fille [17:47] chrisccoulson, thanx that the first person tha that give a bit of information [17:56] chrisccoulson: we're shipping 6.0b1 tomorrow, as it turns out [17:58] bhearsum, cool, thanks! [17:58] bhearsum, 6.0b1 of what [17:58] Firefox [17:58] ok [17:58] bhearsum, have you some time for me [17:58] bhearsum, will that still be the current build1 ? [17:59] chrisccoulson: so far that's the plan, yeah [17:59] glenn__: really busy right now, actually [17:59] excellent, thanks [17:59] bhearsum, [17:59] * bhearsum just found out that we're chemspilling 3.6.19/5.0.1 for a bloody Mac 10.7 problem [18:00] bhearsum, is that just for a mac problem, or is there anything interesting for us there? [18:00] chrisccoulson, whe can i find the chrome.manifest [18:00] chrisccoulson: we're only shipping Mac builds, so nothing you need to worry about [18:00] glenn__, i'm pretty busy too ;) [18:01] bhearsum, ok, that's a relief :) [18:01] ok [18:01] glenn__: try #introduction on irc.mozilla.org [18:02] bhearsum, what is that [18:05] what is introduction channel on mozilla [18:06] #introduction [18:06] ehhe [18:06] place to ask devish questions [18:06] !ping asac [18:06] Factoid 'ping asac' not found [18:11] devish ? [19:19] lol @ comments 2 and 3 on bug 801059 [19:19] Launchpad bug 801059 in firefox "package firefox 5.0+build1+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.11.04.2 failed to install/upgrade: subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 2" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/801059 [20:01] w00t, new aurora builds are published now [20:29] evening === m_conley is now known as m_conley_away [22:43] where's fta? [22:43] http://paste.ubuntu.com/639783/ [22:58] cool, http://mzl.la/pHmTgQ, memory usage in Firefox 7 down 30% [22:58] and hopefully we can ship with that version :)