Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 18:44:42 -0500, Warren Togami wrote:
Warren Togami wrote:
Gilboa Davara wrote:
I'm pretty annoyed by this as well. So I am soon submitting an
alternative short-term solution to Extras.
The real solution is to make browser plugins run out-of-process.
This would have tremendous benefits to us in the long-term. I am
skeptical however that it will happen in a timely manner.
You thinking about submitting nspluginwrapper?
- Gilboa
No. It is broken and requires lots of work. You will see my submission
soon.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215256
Yes, this really sucks.
Ugly indeed. Are you serious about building this as x86_64, ppc64 and
s390x, but with a non-32-bit-specific dependency on "firefox"? You end up
with an x86_64 package to be used for an i386 firefox, a ppc64 package for
a ppc firefox, and so on. It's also possible to uninstall 32-bit firefox
and keep this package including the trigger and the menu entry.
We don't build Extras packages for ppc64 and s390x, but for completeness
this package would be buildable there too if anybody cared.
Can you think of a way to make a firefox.i386 dependency specifically if
this is a x86_64 arch package? I can't.
With regard to the bottom half of the %description, there is one big
question: *Why* isn't it done?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214100
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
