On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:53:00PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:12:38PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: > >On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:34:25PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > >> I suggest you use my proposed hack for now (so that I can get > >> sugar-hulahop and sugar-browse-activity past NEW queue and into > >> experimental) and reassign this bug to Python. > > > >Do they depend on python-xpcom from experimental only? Note that I > >hadn't tried the python xpcom glue before today, and it has several > >problems compared to the older version: python program must be run from > >the MOZILLA_HOME, and LD_LIBRARY_PATH set... Obviously that will need > >to be fixed. > > > >The packages in unstable should be fine, though. > > Yes, they need the unstable branch of 1.9. > > I'd be _very_ happy if you could make the 1.9 branch available in > unstable. But even in experimental it will get compiled for the popular > architectures so is of some use for testing out this core Sugar > activity.
This won't happen before all rdeps of the current xulrunner in unstable are ready for the transition. I hope this can happen before the end of May. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
