[Bug 1048493] Review Request: icecat - GNU version of Firefox browser

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1048493



--- Comment #10 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Denis Fateyev from comment #9)
> (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #8)
> >  
> > > 2) "Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception" - have no
> > > idea whether it's actual here, could you check them, or clear the issue
> > > providing more details?
> > 
> > I've tried to remove some of them. However it seems to me that some sources
> > from third cannot be cancelled without break the compilation (for example,
> > there is not any build config option to use libvorbis system libraries; this
> > happens for xulrunner currently built in Fedora as well). 
> 
> I've just looked through the spec and recent changes. Anyway, I think you
> should try something with CFLAGS/LDFLAGS to minimize bundled libs as much as
> possible. These libraries mentioned in spec..
> 
> > ## --with-system-png won't work because the system's libpng doesn't have APNG support
> > ## libpng in source tree are necessary
> > #rm -f media/libpng/png.h
> > #rm -f media/libpng/pngconf.h

I already annotated in the comment the reason why system libpng can't be
linked. :)

> 
> > ##It doesn't seems possible to remove these library sources
> > ##without break the compilation
> > #rm -rf media/libtheora
> > #rm -rf media/libvorbis
> > #rm -f media/libogg/include/ogg/*.h
> > #rm -f media/libopus/include/*.h

In particular for these libraries doesn't exist any option to link against the
same ones in the system and I think there is a reason. Also, in their
sub-directories in /media, some mozilla-specific patches are included and used
for the compilation. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=517422

Probably this is valid even for other libraries linked against the system ones;
for example see media/libvpx. I hope this not compromise Icecat
functionalities.

> 
> .. are not explicitly allowed to be bundled in packages. I've also noticed
> "libffi" references which is already packaged in Fedora. 

That's right, I'm fixing.

> For bundled
> libraries policy, you may refer this document for details:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries
> This is a stopper here. I doubt we can omit this requirement.

I agree. Also guidelines
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Needing_unreleased_features)
say: 

"When an application needs unreleased features of a library and that library
has committed to those features (usually, the changes are checked into the
trunk branch of the upstream's revision control system) but the library has not
yet made a release that has that code an exception may be granted to bundle
that library until the Fedora packages contain the necessary extra features"

and there are security reasons to do that in Icecat.

> 
> > > 3) Multiple issues with "%{mozappdir}" should be sorted;
> 
> Can you reduce the amount of warnings related to that? Seems there was also
> a 'rpmlint' complain.

If you refer to 'binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath' errors, rpaths exist for same
reasons because some libraries are patched/compiled in Icecat. They are also
located in a private lib directory, so allowed.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Rpath_for_Internal_Libraries

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]