Hi, arches. For Gnome 2.18, we are supporting xulrunner as a XUL provider. To this end, every gnome package that used to depend on firefox now optionally depends on xulrunner. Your arch doesn't have xulrunner keyworded, and doesn't have the xulrunner USE flag masked. Please either keyword xulrunner or mask the xulrunner USE flag. (I suppose, if you really want, you can drop keywords from gnome 2.18 packages...) Below are the packages with the xulrunner dep, and the arches that have problems with them. dev-python/gnome-python-extras-2.14.2-r1: alpha hppa ia64 gnome-extra/yelp-2.18.0: alpha arm hppa ia64 sh media-video/totem-2.18.0: alpha arm hppa ia64 www-client/epiphany-2.18.0: alpha hppa ia64 www-client/epiphany-extensions-2.18.0: hppa
net-libs/xulrunner-1.8.0.4 marked ~hppa.
~ia64 done.
~alpha done
This is a really poor decision as xulrunner is no where near ready for production use. Upstream for xulrunner will not support it until final is released some months away.
(In reply to comment #4) > This is a really poor decision as xulrunner is no where near ready for > production use. Upstream for xulrunner will not support it until final is > released some months away. > care to elaborate ? xulrunner is running fine for me for the last 6 months or so also I don't have exotic arches to test on. Supporting xulrunner doesn't mean we don't support firefox nor seamonkey as a XUL provider as well.
Never mind that upstream gnome has mandated xulrunner, and nevermind that this it is optional on Gentoo, and not even default... We won't remove firefox support until we have to. This does not imply that firefox support is going away soon. However, seamonkey support is already dropped from some packages.
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > This is a really poor decision as xulrunner is no where near ready for > > production use. Upstream for xulrunner will not support it until final is > > released some months away. > > > > care to elaborate ? xulrunner is running fine for me for the last 6 months or > so also I don't have exotic arches to test on. Supporting xulrunner doesn't > mean we don't support firefox nor seamonkey as a XUL provider as well. > The fact is the there is noone in the mozilla herd knowledgable enough to fix any bugs that will show up from moving xulrunner to production. The only person who could have done that would have been Anarchy. Not to mention this stuff where gnome herd decideds what they are gonna support not what the users wants, I guess it is time to move on from gentoo the choice to use whatever a user wants has been thrown out the window with drobbins.
(In reply to comment #7) > The fact is the there is noone in the mozilla herd knowledgable enough to fix > any bugs that will show up from moving xulrunner to production. The only person > who could have done that would have been Anarchy. Not to mention this stuff > where gnome herd decideds what they are gonna support not what the users wants, > I guess it is time to move on from gentoo the choice to use whatever a user > wants has been thrown out the window with drobbins. > hum, let me see, we have xulrunner, firefox and seamonkey use flags. Don't you see the choice here ? I don't know about the expertise of the mozilla herd but my little finger told me xulrunner was to be the gecko engine of firefox 3. So if we ever encounter a bug with xulrunner, I think upstream will want to hear about it and it'll be fixed (hopefully) in no time. Moreover, I heard that gnome (upstream) validated the use of xulrunner as the default gecko provider for 2.18 too (but if I'm wrong please correct me).
(In reply to comment #7) > The only person who could have done that would have been Anarchy. Soliloquy is a first sign of madness. :P
