On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:29:20 -0700
"Paweł Hajdan, Jr." <phajdan...@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Gentoo uses /usr/$(get_libdir)/nsbrowser/plugins for browser plugins.
> However, Debian uses /usr/$(get_libdir)/mozilla/plugins, and that's
> what many software projects (including Chromium) target.

Could you name them? Opera looks into tons of directories.

> Why are we using nsbrowser/plugins instead of mozilla/plugins, and how
> relalistic would it be to switch to mozilla/plugins?

Index: nsplugins.eclass
RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/eclass/nsplugins.eclass,v
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -B -r1.24 nsplugins.eclass
--- nsplugins.eclass    1 May 2009 23:03:00 -0000       1.24
+++ nsplugins.eclass    10 Aug 2010 23:21:19 -0000
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
 DESCRIPTION="Based on the ${ECLASS} eclass"
 # This function move the plugin dir in src_install() to
 # ${D}/usr/$(get_libdir)/${PLUGIN_DIR}.  First argument should be

You would then need to re-emerge all users of this eclass.

All I want to ask is why? In fact *most browsers* have no trouble
finding plugins, and provide options through which you can inform them
where the plugins might be.

What's bugging Chromium? Why does it insist on using a competing
browser vendor's name instead of the much more neutral "nsbrowser",
which generally denotes browsers with a Netscape style plugin interface?


Reply via email to