On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 11:26:34AM +0100, Rene Engelhard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [ also Cc'ing iceweasels bug ] > > Am Donnerstag, 7. Dezember 2006 08:12 schrieben Sie: > > block 401969 by 324637 > > thanks > [...] > > > MySpell is obsolete. > > > Please build against Hunspell, which is an improved version of MySpell > > > retaining full backwards compatibility. That also would make the usage > > > of hunspell-de-* in iceweasel possible. > > (...) > > > > I won't do that until hunspell comes with a shared library. > > And I won't add a shared library myself and invent a SONAME. (Like Fedora > does).
Why is that ? Not for binary compatibility, obviously (which is generally the reason to not *change* a soname) > (BTW, I'll probably remove MySpell after etch so then this is RC; > I consider building against system-hunspell (and telling that) still better > than building with an internal copy of MySpell) > > Especially since Mozilla now doesn't support hunspell dicts but hunspell-* and > myspell-* have the same file. I guess I need to make hunspell-* conflict with > any > Mozilla out there *sigh*) > > There's no big difference in using hunspell and myspell, except that hunspell > dictionaries > then will also work. And you show that hunspell is used so the security team > knows > that mozilla needs to be rebuilt (which probably won't happen, no one ever > found a security bug > in either hunspell or myspell). And in any case, there's already enchant and > openoffice.org building > with static hunspell (openoffice.org does build far longer than ice*) It's not because it's done elsewhere that it's not a bad thing. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
