Re: upcoming issues with python-hulahop, python-xpcom, xulrunner-1.9.2
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 <siretart@ubuntu.com>
| #
| # 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
Reply to: