On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:03:17AM +0200, أحمد المحمودي wrote:
Hello,
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 11:51:33AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
I'm planning on a push to unstable of iceweasel/xulrunner 5.0 on the
15th of July. Please update your packages by then.
---end quoted text---
If upstream
Package: icedtea-gcjwebplugin
Severity: important
(disclaimer: this is a semi automatic message)
Hi,
Iceape 2.0 has been uploaded to unstable, and it is deprecating iceape-dev.
For now, the iceape-dev package still exists and depends on xulrunner-dev,
which may provide a smooth upgrade path,
tag 480803 + patch
thanks
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 09:07:23AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
Package: classpath
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: xulrunner-transition
With the upcoming xulrunner transition, libxul-dev is going to disappear.
I already sent instructions
Package: eclipse
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: xulrunner-transition
With the upcoming xulrunner transition, libxul-dev is going to disappear.
I already sent instructions on what you should be doing in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2008/05/msg9.html
This bug
Package: classpath
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: xulrunner-transition
With the upcoming xulrunner transition, libxul-dev is going to disappear.
I already sent instructions on what you should be doing in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2008/05/msg9.html
This bug
Hi everyone[1],
Here is a status update for xulrunner 1.9, and what remains to be done
to be ready for what we would like to be in Lenny.
In the past few weeks, I've uploaded several beta releases of xulrunner
to experimental, with the latest one, 1.9~b5-4 (in NEW) being more-or-less
in its
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 10:18:59PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 09:51:59PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
Hi,
You are receiving this email because you happen to be listed as maintainer
or co-maintainer of a reverse dependency of libxul0d.
As you may already know
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 09:51:59PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
Hi,
You are receiving this email because you happen to be listed as maintainer
or co-maintainer of a reverse dependency of libxul0d.
As you may already know, the plan for lenny concerning Mozilla/libxul would
be to ship
Hi,
You are receiving this email because you happen to be listed as maintainer
or co-maintainer of a reverse dependency of libxul0d.
As you may already know, the plan for lenny concerning Mozilla/libxul would
be to ship with version 1.9. Now, while it would be nice to *only* ship 1.9,
it would
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 08:24:51AM +0200, Michael Ablassmeier [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike: can you give us a short pointer wether this is the packages,
pkg-config, or libxul-dev's fault?
See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=413964;msg=10
Mike
Package: ecj-bootstrap
Version: 3.2-1
Severity: important
As stated in the subject, it shouldn't be possible to install
ecj-bootstrap 3.2 with ecj-bootstrap-gcj 3.1.2, which is the reason why
xulrunner failed to build on arm, ecj-bootstrap still not being built on
it.
BTW, I'm curious to know
retitle 338277 plugin doesn't work with IBM JRE 1.4
thanks
(and supposedly 1.3 or any other from IBM)
The problem is deeper than I thought initially. After finding itself as
libjavaplugin_oji.so, the plugin follows the link _once_, gets the
directory of the file it got, gets its parent, and run
Package: java-package
Version: 0.26
Severity: important
The plugin has been renamed libjavaplugin.so at some time (the link in
/usr/lib/mozilla(|-firefox)/plugins), and it doesn't work with ibm's jre
(tried 1.4.2), which tries to find itself called libjavaplugin_oji.so.
-- System Information:
13 matches
Mail list logo
