On 17:59 Tue 18 Nov , Duncan wrote: > Michael Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted > [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue, 18 Nov > 2008 22:30:56 +0530: > > > Indeed it doesn't. What i wanted to know was that can the bin package > > provide the files needed for the softwares to compile against? If not, > > then i guess i may have to stick with firefox lying around my sys. > > The -bin package will be 32-bit. 64-bit packages don't like 32-bit > libraries. However, I'm not sure whether xulrunner is separately > executable or works as a library. If it's executable, the 32-bit may be > just fine. If it works as a library, no-go since that would be mixing 32- > bit libs in 64-bit apps and that won't work. (FWIW xulrunner-1.9, for > mozilla-firefox-3.x, has both binaries and shared-object libraries > (.so*), but I'm not sure if the libraries are only used internally or > not.) The wiki entry on xulrunner says:-
"XULRunner is a runtime environment developed by the Mozilla Foundation for providing a common back-end for XUL applications. It replaced the Gecko Runtime Environment, a stalled project with a similar purpose." ... "Benefits of having a separate shared run-time environment are the same as those with shared libraries. Benefits to developers and source-based systems – that is, systems on which programs are compiled from source as opposed to downloaded in binary form – are decreased compilation time, less bandwidth needs and less storage space needed. Benefits for use on binary-based systems are similarly less bandwidth and storage use." So, if i understand correctly, then, the -bin version can let the software run but can't allow me to build it. So, acroread can work on top of xulrunner-bin but can't be built (if Adobe someday open-sources it :-) ). > FWIW, firefox-2 and the related gecko version is fast coming to the end > of its mozilla support period. Any products depending on them that > aren't already moving to newer gecko dependencies have a relatively short > life expectancy at this point. Both thunderbird and seamonkey depend on > them at present but have upgrades in the pipeline, altho there'll be a > bit of a gap before full release. For thunderbird, there's arrangements > already in place to cover the gap, but seamonkey and others are up in the > air at this point. > > See the headlining feature article from the front page of the November 6, > 2008 LWN weekly edition, here: > > November 6 LWN Weekly Edition front page: > http://lwn.net/Articles/305169/ > > Article direct link: > The end of the Road for Firefox 2 > http://lwn.net/Articles/306015/ > > -- > Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. > "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- > and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman > Interesting article, i had thought Mozilla would support the 2.x series for a lot longer. -- Regards, Michael Moore <mikem.unet(at)gmail.com> About *NIX: If its not fun, why do it?
