On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 07:51:30PM +0000, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678977#c46 > > mike hi, it looks like this has been solved, and i leave it in your > capable hands to sort out xulrunner - the question remaining is: what > to do now about hulahop? i've been asked to help get hulahop into a > working state, but xulrunner 10 is so badly borked that that's > impossible.
Without specifics, there's not much I can do. > that would be fine, if it wasn't for the fact that > xulrunner-dev has now overwritten and replaced xulrunner-9-dev, making > it impossible to now compile up python-hulahop. We can't indefinitely keep multiple versions of xulrunner in the archive. We don't scale that much. The good news for you is that xulrunner 10 will stay there for a while and /might/ be what is released in wheezy. Anyways, as a general rule of thumb, if you're not following upstream closely and in advance, hulahop is doomed to die. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
