Christophe Jarry wrote:
I tried to solve xulrunner freedom bug, but have some problems.
First, I used iceweasel 3.5.8 from Lenny Backports
(http://packages.debian.org/lenny-backports/xulrunner-1.9.1) and
applied:
-the changes Robert Millan made in our current version of Xulrunner,
-the bug fix.
I discovered there was no rule to build xulrunner from this version of
iceweasel under the "debian" directory and I am not able to do all that
work by myself.
I was wrong before: our xulrunner-1.9.1 is not built from iceweasel, but
has its own source package. Same in lenny-backports.
So I looked for the latest version of Lenny Backport's Xulrunner
prepared by the maintainers at
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=glandium%40debian.org: this is
xulrunner-1.9.1.11-1~bpo50+1 (see
http://backports.debian.org/debian-backports/pool/main/x/xulrunner/).
I applied the changes made by Robert and the bug fix.
When I `dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -us -uc', I have a lot of
dependancy problems. I think those can only be solved by basing metad
entirely upon current version of Lenny Backport, which sounds unlikely.
I tried "aptitude build-dep xulrunner-1.9.1" on my Yeeloong and that
didn't complain about missing packages. I'd find it weird if a lot of
dependencies changed between the current lenny-backports version and
ours. What packages do you have problems with?
So where should I go from here? Is it better to:
-try packaging Lenny's version of xulrunner with bug fix?
-apply the fix to the metad's version of xulrunner? (Seems the best
option to me.)
-wait for Parkes release then fix the bug in it?
I suggest we focus on the current lenny-backports version because I
imagine that will have some security fixes over ours. If the changelog
doesn't show any important fixes from our version or it can't be built
after all, then stick with the current version in metad.
_______________________________________________
gNewSense-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-dev
