Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: esc and esc-xulrunner-devel


           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEEDINFO
               Flag|                            |needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED])

------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-07-14 10:23 EST -------
So the esc-xulrunner-devel package is sort of weird.

First, we don't normally put -devel in the name of srpms.  -devel is usually
reserved for subpackages.

Also, you install all header files, images, config files, stylesheets, binaries,
etc into %{_libdir}.  Normally we put header files in %{_includedir}, images in
%{_datadir}, binaries in %{_bindir}, etc.

On the other hand, esc-xulrunner-devel is only needed for building esc, yea? not
for running esc?  Why are we installing it as a separate package at all then?
Can we just put the xulrunner tarball as an extra Source: line in the spec file
and get rid of esc-xulrunner-devel entirely?

Also, I tried to build the two packages and ran into problems.  esc looks for
something called nsinstall in wrong place. I had to create a symlink for the
build to finish.

After I got it built, it didn't work with our cert server.  It gave me an error
code 44 or something.  This actually brings up another point.

This tool only works with a closed source certificate server that most in the
fedora community don't have access to.  Maybe it would be better if we put this
in extras instead of core?  What do you think?

Configure bugmail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

Fedora-package-review mailing list

Reply via email to