Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Fedora Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/)
-   -   How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ? (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/317411-how-about-firefox-3-6-fedora-12-a.html)

M A Young 01-30-2010 09:23 AM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
On Sat, 30 Jan 2010, Wes Shull wrote:


On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 1:42 AM, Liu Yu Fei Eric <hoveringnowings@gmail.com>
wrote:
So it doesn't have an official one?


I've been running the f13 build out of rawhide for a week now, and it's
worked fine for me...* not sure about Java though.

yum --enablerepo=rawhide update firefox


It looks like some upstream support in OpenJDK + IcedTea
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/2010-January/008120.html
went live 3 days ago, but it doesn't look like there have been any Fedora
builds based on it yet.


I would suggest a slight word of caution about mixing Fedora 12 and
rawhide packages. At the moment they still seem fairly compatible, but if
something major changes you might find yourself having to update most of
your OS to rawhide to satisfy all the dependencies.


Michael Young--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Braden McDaniel 01-30-2010 04:05 PM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 14:48 +0800, Liu Yu Fei Eric wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed firefox was stuck on 3.5.6 for a rather long time.
> What about 3.5.7 and the recently 3.6? They are even not in koji.

xulrunner-1.9.2 breaks API compatibility with 1.9.1, so downstream
packages would need patching for this to happen.

I don't think it's worth it.

--
Braden McDaniel <braden@endoframe.com>

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Rex Dieter 01-30-2010 04:36 PM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
Braden McDaniel wrote:

> On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 14:48 +0800, Liu Yu Fei Eric wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I noticed firefox was stuck on 3.5.6 for a rather long time.
>> What about 3.5.7 and the recently 3.6? They are even not in koji.
>
> xulrunner-1.9.2 breaks API compatibility with 1.9.1, so downstream
> packages would need patching for this to happen.

Even minor releases generally/often break ABI, requiring lots of dependent
package rebuilds... or is this case even worse?

-- Rex

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Braden McDaniel 01-30-2010 05:53 PM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 11:36 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Braden McDaniel wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 14:48 +0800, Liu Yu Fei Eric wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I noticed firefox was stuck on 3.5.6 for a rather long time.
> >> What about 3.5.7 and the recently 3.6? They are even not in koji.
> >
> > xulrunner-1.9.2 breaks API compatibility with 1.9.1, so downstream
> > packages would need patching for this to happen.
>
> Even minor releases generally/often break ABI, requiring lots of dependent
> package rebuilds... or is this case even worse?

I said "API", and that's what I meant.

At the very least, there have been subtle changes to the plug-in API
that can cause compile failures.

--
Braden McDaniel <braden@endoframe.com>

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Mail Lists 01-30-2010 06:00 PM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
On 01/30/2010 01:53 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 11:36 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
>> Braden McDaniel wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 14:48 +0800, Liu Yu Fei Eric wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I noticed firefox was stuck on 3.5.6 for a rather long time.
>>>> What about 3.5.7 and the recently 3.6? They are even not in koji.
>>>
>>> xulrunner-1.9.2 breaks API compatibility with 1.9.1, so downstream
>>> packages would need patching for this to happen.
>>
>> Even minor releases generally/often break ABI, requiring lots of dependent
>> package rebuilds... or is this case even worse?
>
> I said "API", and that's what I meant.
>
> At the very least, there have been subtle changes to the plug-in API
> that can cause compile failures.
>

And how many plugins are packaged by fedora ? Any?

I'd guess all the plugin dev's at the moz website state clearly which
vers of filrefox is supported - and most want their plugins to work with
current release - 3.6.

So that seems like a bad reason not to update.

So what are the couplings then that need source changes other than
plugins?

Can someone be specific rather than hand waving API around please.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Christopher Brown 01-30-2010 06:04 PM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
On 30 January 2010 06:48, Liu Yu Fei Eric <hoveringnowings@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed firefox was stuck on 3.5.6 for a rather long time.
> What about 3.5.7 and the recently 3.6? They are even not in koji.

This is because 3.5.7 doesn't affect us. Stability issue is for
Windows people and update notification is patched out for obvious
reasons.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL%20status1.9.1%3A.7-fixed

Regards

--
Christopher Brown
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Frank Murphy 01-30-2010 06:06 PM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
On 30/01/10 08:42, Liu Yu Fei Eric wrote:
> So it doesn't have an official one?
>

Not in F12,
but as has been said.
You can update to 3.6
from Rawhide,
then disable rawhide again.

Which is what I have done,
no problems yet.


--
Regards,

Frank Murphy
UTF_8 Encoded
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Mat Booth 01-30-2010 06:54 PM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
On 30 January 2010 19:00, Mail Lists <lists@sapience.com> wrote:
> On 01/30/2010 01:53 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
>> On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 11:36 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
>>> Braden McDaniel wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 14:48 +0800, Liu Yu Fei Eric wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed firefox was stuck on 3.5.6 for a rather long time.
>>>>> What about 3.5.7 and the recently 3.6? They are even not in koji.
>>>>
>>>> xulrunner-1.9.2 breaks API compatibility with 1.9.1, so downstream
>>>> packages would need patching for this to happen.
>>>
>>> Even minor releases generally/often break ABI, requiring lots of dependent
>>> package rebuilds... or is this case even worse?
>>
>> I said "API", and that's what I meant.
>>
>> At the very least, there have been subtle changes to the plug-in API
>> that can cause compile failures.
>>
>
> *And how many plugins are packaged by fedora ? Any?
>
> *I'd guess all the plugin dev's at the moz website state clearly which
> vers of filrefox is supported - and most want their plugins to work with
> current release - 3.6.
>
> *So that seems like a bad reason not to update.
>

Well there's the Java and Totem plugins at least, but there's a whole
slew of apps in Fedora that build against xulrunner:

repoquery --whatrequires --alldeps xulrunner*

--
Mat Booth
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Mail Lists 01-30-2010 07:04 PM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
On 01/30/2010 02:54 PM, Mat Booth wrote:

> Well there's the Java and Totem plugins at least, but there's a whole
> slew of apps in Fedora that build against xulrunner:

I think we need to use sun java as green tea is not yet on new api
anyway is it?

>
> repoquery --whatrequires --alldeps xulrunner*
>

Cant both xulrunners be there?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Mat Booth 01-30-2010 09:37 PM

How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?
 
On 30 January 2010 20:04, Mail Lists <lists@sapience.com> wrote:
> On 01/30/2010 02:54 PM, Mat Booth wrote:
>
>> Well there's the Java and Totem plugins at least, but there's a whole
>> slew of apps in Fedora that build against xulrunner:
>
> *I think we need to use sun java as green tea is not yet on new api
> anyway is it?
>
>>
>> repoquery --whatrequires --alldeps xulrunner*
>>
>
> Cant both xulrunners be there?


Maybe but I agree with Braden: I don't think it's worth it. Seems like
a lot of extra work for not a lot of gain.

--
Mat Booth
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:06 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.