[PATCH] www/firefox: main merge from debian

[Jeremy Messenger]

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:08:00 +0100, Jose M Rodriguez  
<josemi at freebsd.jazztel.es> wrote:

> Jeremy Messenger wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:29:06 +0100 (CET), Jose M Rodriguez   
>> <josemi at freebsd.jazztel.es> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> Submitter-Id:    current-users
>>>> Originator:    Jose M Rodriguez (freebsd)
>>>> Organization:    Redes JM
>>>> Confidential:    no
>>>> Synopsis:    [PATCH] www/firefox: main merge from debian
>>>> Severity:    non-critical
>>>> Priority:    low
>>>> Category:    ports
>>>> Class:        update
>>>> Release:    FreeBSD 5.3-STABLE i386
>>>> Environment:
>>>
>>> System: FreeBSD orion.redesjm.local 5.3-STABLE FreeBSD 5.3-STABLE #0:   
>>> Mon Dec 27 17:00:42 CET 2004
>>>
>>>> Description:
>>>
>>> n this patchset:
>>
>>
>> Why don't you (Jose) submit those patches to mozilla's bugzilla instead  
>> to  us? Almost all of patches in our current mozilla ports have been  
>> merged in  Mozilla CVS.
>
> Well, most of this is Unix specific.

Mozilla's goal is platforms, so they should accept those patches or the  
reports of your, then they will tweak their own patch in CVS.

> To go in Mozilla CVS, this need more work. Also, I'm not so profident
> with mozilla/gnome.  I post this mostly for test, not for main merge.

You are making it sounds like it shouldn't go in FreeBSD ports either,  
because those need the more work. I am still expecting for either Debian  
team or you to report Mozilla bugzilla with those patches. Doesn't matter  
if those patches need the more work, the developers will know what they  
are doing.

>>> files/patch-uriloader_exthandler_unix_nsGNOMERegistry.cpp
>>>   - reprocopy fixes from mozilla (same code and use).
>>>
>>> files/patch-browser_app_mozilla.in
>>>   - fix for non posix expr (RELENG_4_9?)

This one has been committed by ahze.

>>>   - protect against missleave as test options
>>>
>>> files/patch-browser_app_Makefile.in
>>>   - small fix from debian
>>>
>>> files/patch-browser_app_profile_extensions_classic_install.rdf.in
>>>   - small fix from debian

Few of like this could use some more details of what's small fix.

>>> files/patch-browser_app_profile_firefox.js
>>>   - disable default browser check
>>>   - disable app update, from debian
>>>   - disable autoUpdate, from debian
>>
>>
>> Why disable? If those are enable by default then we _should_ leave  
>> that  way. But, ahze has covered about that we have been approved for  
>> official  build of firefox.
>
> App autoUpdate or update only works on windows (or if you have rights on  
> ${PREFIX}/lib/firefox).

Ok, it's better to fix than disable it.

> As I can see, local extensions/themes can be [auto]updated.  I also have
> plans to disable plugins dialogs (ej., fedora).  You need ports/packages
> for this on Unix.

I think it is better idea to leave plugins dialogs alone, because what if  
someone create a FreeBSD plugins and our Firefox will not working because  
it was disabled? When I used Mozilla on RedHat and it will redirecting me  
to the right place to download the linux version of flash plugins. It's  
why I don't think it's good idea to disable it.

Cheers,
Mezz

>> BTW: ahze, I disagree about create a firefox slave. ;-)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Mezz
>>
> <snip/>
>
> --
>   josemi


-- 
mezz7 at cox.net  -  mezz at FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/  -  gnome at FreeBSD.org