| === asac_ is now known as asac | |
| [13:02] <asac> Ubulette: profile migration pushed | |
| === \sh_away is now known as \sh | |
| [13:18] <asac> Ubulette: how did you take care that the time you use in DEBIAN_DATE is PST? | |
| [13:19] <asac> i don't see any PST or something in the date expression used during checkout+ | |
| [13:43] <asac> lunch | |
| [13:57] <asac> back | |
| === jimmy_ is now known as jimmy | |
| === ]reed[ is now known as [reed] | |
| [16:07] <asac> Ubulette: you are a perl expert, right? j2se1.4-amd64 fails to build because of some illegal perl in rules (apparently) | |
| [16:08] <asac> most likely it became illegal in recent perls, because the package built in feisty :) | |
| [16:08] <asac> Ubulette: http://paste.ubuntu.com/4207/ | |
| [16:09] <asac> http://paste.ubuntu.com/4208/ | |
| [16:09] <asac> thants the complete expression | |
| === \sh is now known as \sh_away | |
| [18:24] <Ubulette> hi | |
| [18:25] <Ubulette> indeed, i'm good in perl (how did you know???) | |
| [18:25] <Ubulette> I'll have a look in a short while | |
| === ]reed[ is now known as [reed] | |
| [18:32] <asac> Ubulette: you told me long ago :) | |
| [18:32] <Ubulette> really ? oh, ok | |
| [18:35] <asac> (somehow my brain is still intact) | |
| [18:37] <Ubulette> the code is weird but correct. Which perl is that ? | |
| [18:37] <asac> ... it fails like in the past | |
| [18:37] <asac> Ubulette: try to build j2se1.4-amd64 | |
| [18:37] <asac> (i assume you have amd64) | |
| [18:38] <Ubulette> i have but it's now running i386 :P | |
| [18:38] <asac> oh damn ;) | |
| [19:19] <Ubulette> asac, so ff3 b3 will replace ff2 ? | |
| [19:28] <Ubulette> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=688435 | |
| [20:24] <armin76> Ubulette: guess you know that's not new? :P | |
| [20:46] <Ubulette> what ? the corruption ? for me it's gone | |
| [21:04] <Ubulette> [reed], what was wrong with b3_rc1 ? | |
| [21:05] <Ubulette> woow, and 200012rc4 | |
| [21:06] <[reed]> build&release forgot to change some settings on their end | |
| [21:06] <[reed]> to match what had been changed on dev-end | |
| [21:06] <[reed]> so, makes those builds not match what nightlies had been using | |
| [21:06] <[reed]> so, they fixed it | |
| [21:06] <[reed]> :) | |
| [21:07] <Ubulette> what's the eta for final b3 if everything goes according to plan ? | |
| [21:08] <[reed]> next Tuesday | |
| [21:08] <Ubulette> 1 week !!! | |
| [21:08] <[reed]> is that an exclamation of joy or despair? | |
| [21:08] <Ubulette> I have time to do a rc3 preview than :) | |
| [21:08] <Ubulette> rc2 | |
| [21:08] <armin76> ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/ <- 2030? :D | |
| [21:09] <[reed]> heh | |
| [21:09] <[reed]> lol | |
| [21:09] <Ubulette> ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/3.0b3-candidates/ | |
| [21:10] <armin76> ah, that means it will be released in 2030 :P | |
| [21:10] <[reed]> haha | |
| [21:10] <Ubulette> rotfl | |
| [21:14] <Ubulette> asac, is your "profile migrator" ready ? i'm about to push a preview to my ppa... :S | |
| [21:14] <[reed]> [03:11:46PM] <nthomas|afk> rhelmer|afk: linux slave thinks it's 2030 | |
| [21:14] <[reed]> [03:12:01PM] <rhelmer|afk> er | |
| [21:14] <[reed]> [03:12:03PM] <rhelmer|afk> really? | |
| [21:14] <[reed]> [03:12:20PM] <nthomas|afk> http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/2030/02/2030-02-05-11-firefox3.0b3/ | |
| [21:14] <[reed]> [03:12:22PM] <rhelmer|afk> awesome | |
| [21:14] <[reed]> [03:12:29PM] <rhelmer|afk> stupid clock, i'll kick it over | |
| [21:14] <[reed]> [03:12:36PM] <nthomas|afk> probably screws the buildid | |
| [21:14] <[reed]> [03:12:40PM] <rhelmer|afk> yeah | |
| [21:14] <[reed]> [03:12:41PM] <rhelmer|afk> nthomas|afk: tx | |
| [21:15] <Ubulette> lol | |
| [21:15] <dejv_ntb> hello | |
| [21:16] <Ubulette> [reed], cvs is much faster today | |
| [21:17] <[reed]> I don't think cvs-mirror has changed. | |
| [21:17] <[reed]> weird | |
| [21:17] <dejv_ntb> please can you look at bug #106316 if the upstream fix landed in ubuntu? | |
| [21:17] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 106316 in ghdl "sync request" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/106316 | |
| [21:17] <dejv_ntb> bug #106314 | |
| [21:17] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 106314 in firefox "[edgy] Firefox doesn't support X11/Gnome/KDE session managment" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/106314 | |
| [21:19] <Ubulette> mozilla bug 93789 | |
| [21:19] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 93789 in OS Integration "Mozilla should support X11 session management" [Enhancement,Resolved: fixed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93789 | |
| [21:19] <Ubulette> taggued as fixed | |
| [21:19] <[reed]> mozilla bug 262258 | |
| [21:19] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 262258 in XRE Startup "GNOME session support broken ("save current setup")" [Normal,Assigned] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=262258 | |
| [21:19] <[reed]> has patch, waiting for review | |
| [21:19] <[reed]> if that's what you're talking about | |
| [21:20] <dejv_ntb> not sure | |
| [21:21] <dejv_ntb> I'm cleaning up my bugs and see "resolved fixed" upstream at this one | |
| [21:21] <dejv_ntb> and just "in progress" in LP | |
| [21:22] <Ubulette> the moz bug linked in lp is fixed, apparently since 3.0 alpha 7 | |
| [21:23] <Ubulette> not ff 2.0.* | |
| [21:25] <dejv_ntb> but it isn't in "in progress" state for 2.0 either, is it? | |
| [21:27] <Ubulette> i don't think so. [reed], you're the bugzilla expert here :) do you confirm ? | |
| [21:29] <dejv_ntb> if upstream won't fix, "invalid" would be suited better | |
| [21:29] <Ubulette> yes | |
| [21:30] <dejv_ntb> unless you [mozilla team] will hack the fix to 2.0 also :) | |
| [21:30] <Ubulette> I wont for sure. i'll let asac decide. | |
| [21:35] <dejv_ntb> It's waste of time IMO | |
| [21:35] <Ubulette> indeed | |
| [21:36] <dejv_ntb> FF3 is way ahead of 2 and it has "remember tabs" feature | |
| [21:36] <dejv_ntb> so this is now just nuisance at logging off | |
| [21:38] <dejv_ntb> ok, thanks for your time | |
| [21:55] <Ubulette> asac, you're profile script won(t work | |
| [22:11] <asac> Ubulette: which cases? | |
| [22:11] <Ubulette> several bugs | |
| [22:11] <Ubulette> i've fixed them | |
| [22:11] <Ubulette> 1 | |
| [22:11] <Ubulette> it was granparadiso, not ff-granparadiso | |
| [22:12] <asac> Ubulette: ok thanks | |
| [22:12] <Ubulette> 2/ if you have like me the 3 old profiles, you'll end up with the oldest one after 3 runs | |
| [22:12] <Ubulette> i've added a stamp file | |
| [22:12] <asac> I cannot rule out typo ... I tested the most important use cases though | |
| [22:13] <asac> Ubulette: really? ... oh right :) ... well you could have checked for *replaced as well | |
| [22:13] <asac> e.g. if such a directory exists you never want to migrate | |
| [22:13] <Ubulette> ok, doable too. | |
| [22:14] <Ubulette> hm, no, it's either *replaced, or *abandoned, or ... | |
| [22:16] <Ubulette> why a * in ${LIBDIR}*/ffox-3-beta-profile-migration-dialog ? | |
| [22:16] <asac> Ubulette: now that i think about it: all should be renamed | |
| [22:16] <Ubulette> it's not needed | |
| [22:16] <asac> what is not needed? | |
| [22:17] <asac> LIBDIR* ? | |
| [22:17] <Ubulette> yes | |
| [22:17] <asac> yeah ... i should have switched that back | |
| [22:18] <Ubulette> what good does it do to rename all old profiles ? | |
| [22:19] <asac> what good does it do to keep them? | |
| [22:19] <Ubulette> right :) | |
| [22:19] <asac> i though it would make sense to wipe them completely ... | |
| [22:19] <Ubulette> we just rename anyway so there're still there | |
| [22:19] <Ubulette> oh | |
| [22:20] <asac> then i thought that some people might consider this: loss of data ... so i thought renaming them to something officially obsolete would be the right intermediate solution | |
| [22:20] <Ubulette> ok, doing that rename with an explicit name | |
| [22:21] <asac> explicit? | |
| [22:22] <Ubulette> like you did for the others | |
| [22:22] <asac> yes fine | |
| [22:22] <Ubulette> i see you like unnecessary ${} in shell | |
| [22:22] <asac> sometimes yes | |
| [22:22] <Ubulette> makefile habit ? | |
| [22:27] <asac> well i have never looked into the details how shell parses variables (e.g. how does it detect the end) ... so if i squash things together i use ${} to be safe ... and then i change the rest to the same approach to keep things more easily readable | |
| [22:29] <Ubulette> it looks artificial to me. I've written zillions of lines of shell over the years. | |
| [22:31] <Ubulette> I only use ${} when it's needed like ${FOO}bar or ${FOO}_bar or ${FOO}123 | |
| [22:31] <Ubulette> but I keep $FOO.bar, etc.. | |
| [22:31] <Ubulette> $FOO-bar | |
| [22:32] <Ubulette> for ex, ${MOZDIR}/${FOUND} is totally useless | |
| [22:40] <Ubulette> asac, http://paste.ubuntu.com/4222/ | |
| [22:44] <asac> mozilla bug 344818 | |
| [22:44] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 344818 in Build Config "Linking - missing library deps" [Major,New] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=344818 | |
| [22:47] <asac> Ubulette: granparadiso and trunk most likely should be alpha.abandoned :-P | |
| [22:47] <asac> anyway ... now ${} and $XX are completely mixed up | |
| [22:47] <asac> :) | |
| [22:48] <Ubulette> it was already mixed up, i've tried to keep yours as much as possible, even if I don't really like it. What do you propose ? | |
| [22:49] <Ubulette> I can either drop all non needed or add everywhere | |
| [22:51] <Ubulette> i vote just for ".abandoned" | |
| [23:00] <Ubulette> ok, committed | |
| [23:04] <Ubulette> damn, ppa buildds are stuck by a kernel (1h+), openoffice (6h+), kde, ... | |
| [23:06] <asac> mozilla bug 130336 | |
| [23:06] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 130336 in Plug-ins "can load plugin from new $HOME tree" [Normal,Verified: fixed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=130336 | |
| [23:06] <asac> Ubulette: yes, i think there are plans to add a bunch more machines soon ... but those packages even block the real buildd's usually :) | |
| [23:07] <Ubulette> yep, the kernel will take 4 or 5h, oo, i don't know, it's painful | |
| [23:08] <Ubulette> new h/w is definitely good | |
| [23:09] <Ubulette> oh, another guy pushed a kernel | |
| [23:09] <Ubulette> seems everyone is pushing the same packages | |
| [23:12] <Ubulette> my bot failed on ff3 today because xul is now b4pre but ff3.head has >= b3 << b4 | |
| [23:28] <Ubulette> [reed], do I need to ask for superreview for 292254 ? | |
| [23:29] <[reed]> what's 292254? | |
| [23:30] <Ubulette> oops, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=344818 | |
| [23:30] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 344818 in Build Config "Linking - missing library deps" [Major,New] | |
| [23:30] <[reed]> no | |
| [23:30] <[reed]> vlad is enough | |
| [23:30] <Ubulette> so it's enough like that ? | |
| [23:31] <[reed]> yes | |
| [23:31] <[reed]> it's a blocker, so it doesn't need approval | |
| [23:31] <[reed]> and I added the checkin-needed keyword already | |
| [23:31] <[reed]> I'll get to it sometime | |
| [23:31] <[reed]> tree is still closed right now | |
| [23:33] <Ubulette> really ? i thought it was open since b4pre landed | |
| [23:34] <[reed]> it's been closed since last night for stuart landing jemalloc | |
| [23:34] <[reed]> http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/Firefox/ | |
| [23:34] <[reed]> see that | |
| [23:34] <Ubulette> ok | |
| [23:34] <Ubulette> i was on it already | |
| [23:35] <Ubulette> http://www.osnews.com/story/19278 | |
| [23:37] <[reed]> nice | |