On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 03:31 PM, jaromil wrote:
> (to not mention the recent openSSL security desaster and such
> solipsistic decisions taken by package mantainers).
I don't know how this can affect our discussion but anyway...
> in fact javascript spidermonkey 1.8 *does not exists* and i cannot
> understand why the mantainer renamed the package to "xulrunner" and
> raised the upstream version number, this makes no sense under any
> circumstances.
From
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/XULRunner :
XULRunner is a Mozilla runtime package that can be used to bootstrap
XUL+XPCOM applications that are as rich as Firefox and Thunderbird. It
will provide mechanisms for installing, upgrading, and uninstalling these
applications. XULRunner will also provide libxul, a solution which allows
the embedding of Mozilla technologies in other projects and products.
Maybe xulrunner packager just provided a js library based on xulrunner
sources but not strictly dependant from them because he thought it was
reusable (and I think it is).
> my final decision on the issue regarding freej is to keep javascript
> linked statically inside freej. sorry, but we are writing code and we
> cannot rely on misleading bug-reports due to wrong packaging and
> such. After running a few tests my conclusion is: if you like to run a
> working binary of FreeJ then i do NOT recommend linking dynamically
> javascript and DISCOURAGE all dynamic linking in debian and other
> distros.
Ok, but if this is you decision please arrange your javascript directory
to be cleanly compilable on various architectures and with modern
compilers/linkers.
> i'll leave the dynamic linking flag in configure, but please use it on
> your own risk. feel free to experiment but PLEASE: *** do not include
> a freej package in debian that links dynamically to xulrunner unless
> you fully tested it under all circumstances ***
Ok, please can you provide me some automatic testing stuff I can run to be
sure I have a "fully tested" freej?
> that's all for what i'm concerned about this debian packaging issue,
> please forward it on the debian bugtracker if necessary.
AFAIK there was no issue, the guy how had problems with javascript in
freej and debian/ubuntu was trying to compile a standard freej tarball.
I simply jumped into the discussion to say "Hi, we're doing this, please
tell me what do you think about.."
Cheers,
Luca
--
Beware of programmers who carry screwdrivers.
-- Leonard Brandwein
http://shammash.homelinux.org/ -
http://www.artha.org/ -
http://www.yue.it/
_______________________________________________
Freej mailing list
Freej@???
http://lists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freej
