On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 07:28:26 (EDT), Darren Salt wrote: > I demand that Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton may or may not have written... > > [snip] >> basically, an interpretation of the decision from the mozilla foundation is >> that all languages but javascript can get lost. i do not understand why, >> after years of support thanks to xpcom, _just_ when there's a project which >> actually _uses_ alternative language bindings 100% and i meaaan 100%, the >> mozilla foundation slams the door in its face and in the face of every >> other project using xpcom. > > I'm wondering whether I should start investigating alternative Javascript > libraries, given Mozilla's (apparent) reluctance to install libmozjs as > anything other than a private library for use by xulrunner-using apps. > > That said, if anybody is prepared to take the Ubuntu workaround for this in > their gxine package and make that suitable for upstream, I'll take that > instead. I did try to push for something which is acceptable for upstream, > but no, distribution-specific workaround...
Ubuntu is currently using this wrapper to get gxine started: ,---- | #!/bin/sh | # | # wrapper for finding libmozjs.so. See https://launchpad.net/bugs/542506 | # Copyright (C) 2010, Reinhard Tartler <[email protected]> | # | # This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify | # it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by | # the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or | # (at your option) any later version. | | | LD_LIBRARY_PATH="/usr/lib/xulrunner-`xulrunner-1.9.2 --gre-version`:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH" | export LD_LIBRARY_PATH | | exec `which gxine.real` "$@" `---- Would this be acceptable to you for inclusion into gxine upstream? I suppose not, that's why I've didn't forward it (yet). If you are interested in the full patch, see http://patches.ubuntu.com/g/gxine/gxine_0.5.904-2ubuntu3.1.patch I *guess* something more appropriate would be to use an RPATH on the gxine binary here, but I didn't look into this more closely. > (I suppose that I could create a Ubuntu-based chroot, but I'd rather avoid > that.) no need for that, you can use debian's dpkg-source utility to extract ubuntu source packages, too. -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
