RFC: What to do with Mozilla

Arjan van Leeuwen avleeuwen at piwebs.com
Thu Oct 16 11:40:18 PDT 2003


On Thursday 16 October 2003 17:10, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 11:05, Arjan van Leeuwen wrote:
> > On Thursday 16 October 2003 12:26, Philip Paeps wrote:
> > > On 2003-10-15 14:12:44 (-0400), Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus at FreeBSD.org>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > As some of you may be aware, Mozilla 1.5 was released today (along
> > > > with Firebird and Thunderbird updates which will be handled soon). 
> > > > The question is, what do we do with Mozilla 1.4.x?  Do you resurrect
> > > > mozilla-vendor to hold 1.4.x for a while, or do we just update
> > > > www/mozilla to 1.5, and say "to hell" with 1.4.x?  Note, 1.6a is due
> > > > out shortly as well, and mozilla-devel will be updated to that.
> > >
> > > Perhaps we should look at Mozilla more as a 'collection of things',
> > > much like GNOME than as simply several different unrelated things?
> > >
> > > We could make 'www/mozilla' build the browser-bits, with knobs for the
> > > user to say what browser they want:
> > >
> > >   WITH_MOZILLA_FB --> Mozilla Firebird
> > >   WITH_MOZILLA_14 --> Latest on the 1.4 branch
> > >   WITH_MOZILLA_15 --> Latest on the 1.5 branch
> > >   WITH_MOZILLA_16 --> Latest on the 1.6 branch
> > >
> > > Default would be 'the most stable', which currently would probably have
> > > to be the 1.4 branch.  So if a user were to compile www/mozilla or
> > > pkg_add it, he would get a stable browser, as expected.
> > >
> > > A nice way to sort out dependencies would be a USE_MOZILLA variable,
> > > much like the USE_GNOME variable for ports to say what bits or what
> > > version of Mozilla they want.  We could use pkgnamesuffixes to deal
> > > with different versions of Mozilla being installed (each in different
> > > places, of course) and a 'mozilla' symlink pointing to the binary the
> > > user expects to be his browser.
> >
> > I don't really like this idea. Mozilla and Mozilla Firebird are clearly
> > different programs, so they should have different ports.
> >
> > Furthermore, the versioning is inconsistent with other ports, and it
> > would be far more difficult for people to search for the newest version
> > of Mozilla (go to Freshports, search for Mozilla - you'll find Mozilla
> > 1.4, because that's the default. Where is 1.5? Where is Firebird? Same
> > with searching using make search).
>
> I'm able to find all Mozilla browsers (including Firebird and even
> Thunderbird) when I search Freshports with "mozilla".  Plus, 1.5 is not
> in the tree yet, hence this whole thread.  I'm not sure I follow what
> you're trying to say here.

You can in the current situation, and I like that. I wasn't talking about 
that.

This was a response to Philip Paeps' suggestion of creating one big mozilla 
port (www/mozilla) where you have to set knobs to get the different mozilla 
versions - and no seperate ports for Firebird and the other versions of 
Mozilla. Or is that not what you (Philip) meant?

Arjan

>
> Joe
>
> > Arjan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-gnome at freebsd.org mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-gnome
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-gnome-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"



More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list