RFC: What to do with Mozilla
philip+freebsd at paeps.cx
Thu Oct 16 12:24:29 PDT 2003
On 2003-10-16 17:05:19 (+0200), Arjan van Leeuwen <avleeuwen at piwebs.com> 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.
I think it was more of a braindump than an idea ;-)
> Mozilla and Mozilla Firebird are clearly different programs, so they should
> have different ports.
Well, Mozilla and Mozilla Firebird are really just different interfaces to the
same application. Mozilla is the SeaMonkey thing in native code, Firebird is
a nice XUL interface. If you run them simultaneously, they'll complain about
each other (unless you do some ugly fiddling about).
> Furthermore, the versioning is inconsistent with other ports
Yes, that's true. Expanding on the original braindump would be to use ports
like www/mozilla14, www/mozilla15, www/mozilla16 and www/mozilla-firebird
which refer to www/mozilla and set de correct pkgnamesuffix and build with the
> 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).
Indeed. I think this issue would also be solved with different ports all
building the same port with different knobs and suffixes?
It would be nice if we could split out Mozilla as a program and Mozilla as a
dependency. Some things which cite Mozilla as a dependency probably only need
Gecko or bits of Gecko, in which case they would specify USE_MOZILLA=gecko and
potentially WANT_MOZILLA_GECKO_VER=15 or something to that effect, and they'd
magically get something like www[devel?]/mozilla-gecko[15?] as a dependency.
Currently, people (users and maintainers) need to keep track of heaps of
versions and ports and are probably spending a lot of time compiling things
they'll never use and are never even used internally by the programs depending
Philip Paeps Please don't CC me, I am
subscribed to the list.
BOFH Excuse #244:
Your cat tried to eat the mouse.
More information about the freebsd-ports