DJ Lucas wrote: > On 05/13/2012 01:49 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> Author: bdubbs >> Date: 2012-05-13 12:49:25 -0600 (Sun, 13 May 2012) >> New Revision: 10201 >> >> Modified: >> trunk/BOOK/general.ent >> trunk/BOOK/introduction/welcome/changelog.xml >> trunk/BOOK/x/lib/lib.xml >> trunk/BOOK/x/lib/xulrunner.xml >> Log: >> Restore xulrunner >> > Actually, I've been thinking a bit more on this one. As a compromise, we > could probably still get rid of the XUL Runner page and use only the > Firefox page to first build XUL Runner, and then Firefox in a separate > build directory from only the Firefox source tarball. This is the way > Firefox should actually be built anyway for our purposes. Without the > dev libs, a user cannot build browser extensions from source (still > ignoring the fact that the build tree needs to kept around). The FF > portion of the build should take < 0.1 SBU. The reason it is not done > that way by default is that the Mozilla devs choose not to cater to > developers, but rather end users...understandable give the huge Windows > target, but a minor PITA for us and a source of mild disagreement. > Anybody think this is a bad compromise?
Not a problem for me, but we need to make sure that /usr/lib/pkgconfig/mozilla-plugin.pc is installed as that is required for idedtea-web. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
