DJ Lucas wrote:
> Okay...done.  Checks OK.
> 
> NSPR-4.7.3:
> 
> NSS-3.12.0:

Once again as I must have missed the original proposal to separate
the packages, why are we doing it?

Here's the questions I have.

1. What is wrong with leaving them together? Hopefully it isn't
because we have to use a 5 month old tarball. I say this because
it will probably be a year or more after the book is updated
before it is updated again. So whatever versions we put in the
book will be just as obsolete 6 months from now.

It looks to me that the NSS devs put out a new release about
every 6 months (for the last few years this has been the pattern).
So, going on this, and because an NSS-3.12.1-RC2 is available in
CVS, a new release of NSS is right around the corner.

2. Are there no test suites in the individual packages to somewhat
confirm a working installation (as we have now).

3. Current Firefox uses NSPR 4.7.1 and the NSS-3.12.1 RC. This is
different than both of the versions DJ used. Seems the combined
tarball is much closer to what the Firefox devs are using, than
what is being developed for BLFS.

I'm not trying to rock the boat, I just want to get a good handle
on our reasoning to separate these two packages. I realize that
*right now* there is some lag in NSS, but in a week or two that
is likely to be resolved.

I could be wrong here, as I've not tested anything or built
Firefox-3.0.4 yet. I may later in the day. Got other things going
on right now though.

Additional conversation about this is welcomed.

-- 
Randy
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to