Some thoughts about the handling of xulrunner-1.9.1 et al.

Axel Beckert abe at
Wed Jul 8 19:30:47 UTC 2009


two things:

I just heard on the backports-users list from KiBi that there's
ongoing work on xulrunner 1.9.1 and iceweasel 3.5 since quite a while

I'm quite disappointed that there weren't any hints about this or the
corresponding blog posts on this list. Because that's the main reason
why I subscribed to it: To get an idea of what's going on in Debian's
xulrunner package and its relatives. Just a few days longer and I
would have asked about the xulrunner 1.9.1 status quo on _this_ list
(and not on backports-users as someone else did).

The second thing is a question and a wish depending on the answer to
the question. :-)

For how long will xulrunner-1.9 be around? In case it's not only a
short overlapping period with xulrunner-1.9.1, I suggest adding
something like /etc/alternatives/xulrunner, because currently
xulrunner applications have to decide themself between two binaries
with the version in the file name even if they would work fine with

Currently there's no possibility for the local admin to choose which
of them should be used by default, e.g. conkeror currently only uses
xulrunner-1.9 although it would work with xulrunner-1.9.1, too. (The
git version of the conkeror package uses xulrunner-1.9 if present,
else xulrunner-1.9.1.)

		Regards, Axel
Axel Beckert - abe at, abe at -

More information about the pkg-mozilla-maintainers mailing list