On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 13:35 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On 07/21/2009 12:06 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 20:11 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >> Orphan: pcmanx-gtk2
> >> gnash-plugin requires /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
> >> gnome-chemistry-utils-mozplugin requires /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
> >> java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin requires /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
> >> mozilla-opensc-signer requires /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
> >> swfdec-mozilla requires /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
> >
> > Umm.... What???
> >
> > Sigh. pcmanx-gtk2.spec includes:
> >
> > # We need to own this dir, because we don't want to Requires: firefox
> > %{_libdir}/mozilla/plugins/
> >
> > I think not.
> >
> > The package already "Requires: xulrunner"; which requires
> > mozilla-filesystem, which is what owns %{_libdir}/mozilla/plugins.
>
> Yeah, that predates mozilla-filesystem. pcmanx-gtk2 is safe to die if no
> one wants it (although, having a telnet client plugin for firefox is
> somewhat cool).
I have no interest in taking ownership of this package; but I would be
happy to fix this problem so that the package can be properly culled.
Why aren't orphans given open ACLs?
--
Braden McDaniel <braden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
