Hi,
I recently posted an email about Firefox/xulrunner extensions and dependencies
to fedora-devel, but I got no answers, so I'll try this list as well. Here's
what I wrote:
As we just saw with nspluginwrapper, packaging things dependening on
xulrunner/Firefox is a bit problematic. My Mozvoikko package was recently
approved by Ville Skyttä
(
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448215) but he had a good
question about the dependencies:
"If I understand correctly, using xulrunner-unstable makes this prone to
breakage on updates - is there some versioned dependency towards some
package that could be used so that it would be easier to notice such
cases?"
I think the answer here is no. Or is there? We just saw what happens if you
hardcode a xulrunner version as a dependency, there will be breakage as
soon as xulrunner is updated. I had the Mozvoikko package from that review
installed as well and it worked fine after the update of Firefox and
xulrunner. So I think I should just leave the xulrunner dependency
unversioned and rebuild the mozvoikko package if I notice the extension
being broken after a xulrunner update.
I also noticed something interesting about xulrunner-devel and
xulrunner-devel-unstable. Mozvoikko can't be built just with the stable
headers which apparently are in /usr/include/xulrunner-sdk-1.9/stable/. For
example it needs mozISpellCheckingEngine.h. This file can be found from two
locations, however. The xulrunner-devel package puts it
in /usr/include/xulrunner-sdk-1.9/spellchecker/mozISpellCheckingEngine.h
and the xulrunner-devel-unstable package puts it
in /usr/include/xulrunner-sdk-1.9/unstable/mozISpellCheckingEngine.h. Why
are there two copies and is it considered stable or unstable? I'm thinking
it's "classified" as unstable, but why is it in the "stable devel
package"
then as well?
If anyone has any answers or ideas on packaging the extension, I would really
appreciate the feedback.
--
Ville-Pekka Vainio