Ben Bucksch wrote:
>
> *Does anybody know about the Redhat and Debian policies for crypto? All
> of Mozilla going into non-US wouldn't be good at all.
Can't speak for Red Hat (haven't used it in years) but I do know that
Debian requires all crypto code to be in the non-US section. On the
other hand, they are generally good at splitting large programs into
multiple packages, so they would certainly create a mozilla-psm package
that would just be equivalent of the psm xpi.
On the third hand[1], the Debian Mozilla maintainer has said (it's even
in the FAQ) that the way PSM is currently designed makes this horribly
hard - something to do with trying to alter component.reg at every
startup? (component.reg is, of course, in a global non-writable
directory in any sane linux installation). He does provide blizzard's
jedimindtrick code, so that end-users can work around this, but he has
apparently been unsuccessful so far in wrapping this up into a
package[2].
I would strongly suggest that, if the PSM authors have any desire to get
Mozilla working well and accepted on Unix / Linux / Debian, they try to
work with the Debian maintainer (his email is [EMAIL PROTECTED] according
to the changelog.Debian file) to resolve this issue. It won't just be
Debian that is suffering, just that Debian seems to be the first
distribution to have tried to package Moz "right" (rather than in a
world-writable directory or with separate installs for each user).
Stuart.
[1]What species I must be to have 3 hands is left as an exercise for the
reader.
[2]He also seems to have been unable, thus far, to build separate
-mailnews, -editor, -xmlterm etc packages... but these issues may have
already been addressed by the existence of regxpcom and regchrome. The
PSM issue is the most dangerous, though, because this is a *missing*
component rather than just extra bloat that has to be installed.
