[oi-dev] Would OI be interested in Pale Moon?

[Adam Števko]

Hello Andrew,

thanks for all your efforts. Regarding packaging requirements and our standards not lining up, I would say don’t worry about all those requirements from their side.

The easiest way for you to get started would be to write a Makefiel that will build and install everything. The build system will help you generate p5m file. You might be required to change something in p5m file in multiple iterations, but people will comment/help with that.

The biggest problem with Pale Moon in OI I see is the complicated process of building it. You seem to have figured that out. The rest should be OK (packaging and shipping), but to set expectations straight we also expect that you will actively maintain the package.

Cheers,
Adam

> On 11 Dec 2019, at 07:39, Jeremy Andrews <athenian200 at outlook.com> wrote:
> 
> I ported UXP to illumos and Solaris recently, and I got them to take the 
> code upstream. I'm pretty anxious about the process now honestly, and 
> really want everything to work out. There are a few things I'm worried 
> about, though.
> 
> 1. I'm not very familiar with how packages are actually packaged for OI, 
> and the p5m file for Firefox in particular is... so complicated that 
> I've been holding off creating a Pale Moon system package for OI until 
> now, when they're pushing me to try. I was hoping that the subject 
> wouldn't come up and they'd just want to distribute a binary .tar.xz 
> file like they do for other operating systems (that kind of package is 
> very easy to create with a single command). I'm so mixed up because the 
> .p5m file for Firefox 52 looks so different from the one for Firefox 60, 
> and includes all these header files, is for 32-bit, etc. And I'm trying 
> to figure out which differences are due to a change in package design, 
> and which are due to actual differences in Firefox.
> 
> 2. Pale Moon has some unusual requirements. For one thing, it can't use 
> the system NSS because Mozilla has changed the API somewhat since they 
> forked. In general, they're leery of using system libraries over the 
> ones in their own tree because sometimes those libraries have to be 
> modified in specific ways for the browser. On top of that, they seem to 
> have a problem with distributing the langpacks with the browser. They 
> have a site where you can download a langpack of your choice, but you 
> can't ship it with the browser for some reason.
> 
> I'm kind of afraid now that I've done all this for nothing. I'm worried 
> that their packaging requirements and our packaging requirements may not 
> line up, and I'll wind up only being able to distribute a tarball on my 
> own web space that no one will ever download. It's a very good browser, 
> and the people behind it are actually decent people, but... I'm 
> overwhelmed with the sense that I've gotten in over my head.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> oi-dev mailing list
> oi-dev at openindiana.org
> https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev