On 8/22/13, Adam Williamson <awill...@redhat.com> wrote: > Looked into this a bit further this afternoon. Both swfupload and > plupload are open source projects, but Wordpress ships compiled binaries > in its 'source tarball', there is no build system in there for them at > all. Wordpress posts the sources for them on its site, though: > http://wordpress.org/download/source/ > > The Debian package includes the sources for them in its source tarball > in a 'missing sources' directory - you can grab > http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/w/wordpress/wordpress_3.5.2 > +dfsg-1.debian.tar.xz and see the 'missing-sources' directory with a > README explaining the situation. The package documentation indicates > that they possibly actually rebuild the .swfs from this source during > package build, but I'm not expert enough at the Debian package format to > be able to see where and how exactly this is done. But we should > probably harmonize with them on this.
That Debian package doesn't build anything. :-( Plupload's flash directory taunts you with a .sh script, but it needs this thing to build: https://flex.apache.org/ And of course that allegedly "open source" framework is chock full of binary goop from Adobe. Shame on you, Apache. > Not sure if Debian's done anything about the Silverlight bits, yet. That's bundled too. Can *we* do anything about Silverlight? Last time I checked Moonlight was no bueno for Fedora (and now I guess it's dead upstream anyway). What were the people who made this thing thinking, anyway? What sort of crazy person has Silverlight installed but not Flash?? There's someone that uses Netflix but not YouTube??? -T.C. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
