On 01/09/2011 09:16 AM, Randy McMurchy wrote: > Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 01/09/11 08:58 CST: > > Is it worth it? Perhaps we should just not even mention NSPR/NSS can be >> built from the Xulrunner/Firefox/Thunderbird trees, and simply keep the >> optional (with the parenthetical note about using them in other moz apps) >> dependency. > > The more I think about this (I'm updating T-Bird right now so it is on my > mind), I think we should abandon the installation of NSPR/NSS from the > Xulrunner/Firefox/Thunderbird trees. It is a hassle keeping up with the > patches, best I can tell it is currently broken, and I don't like the fact > that we (as editors) are jumping through hoops to provide NSPR/NSS libs > from packages that are not designed for this.
I agree. The reasons for the decision to do so escape me ATM. Something to do with libcrmf.a and rebuilds IIRC, but it stands to reason that if a system NSPR and NSS is not installed, the user has no additional need for them. An update of Firefox or Xulrunner will include the new static libraries. Additionally, regarding Thunderbird alone, nothing else on the system needs to find it. Even building custom Thunderbird add-ons requires a full Mozilla build tree to be available. Also, I think the system xulrunner configuration option can go now as the mozab and ldap additions will never happen outside of Thunderbird/Seamonkey tree. -- DJ Lucas -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content, and is believed to be clean. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
