mozilla-xpcom.pc - Slackware

This is a discussion on mozilla-xpcom.pc - Slackware ; Hi Guys, And sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this question; I've been literally trying for months to get mozilla::mechanize installed, searched perl-monks, google, google-groups and the mozilla site for hours but seem to be too daft ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: mozilla-xpcom.pc

  1. mozilla-xpcom.pc

    Hi Guys,

    And sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this question; I've
    been literally trying for months to get mozilla::mechanize
    installed, searched perl-monks, google, google-groups
    and the mozilla site for hours but seem to be too daft to
    find any information that would tell me how I get the tools/libs
    that comprise xpcom (and of course the file in the subject line!)
    installed on my slackware machine.

    Could someone point me at the starting point for this, or give
    me a quick run-down of how to install this?

    Cheers,
    Tink

  2. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    On 2008-01-31, tink wrote:
    > Hi Guys,
    >
    > And sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this question; I've
    > been literally trying for months to get mozilla::mechanize
    > installed, searched perl-monks, google, google-groups
    > and the mozilla site for hours but seem to be too daft to
    > find any information that would tell me how I get the tools/libs
    > that comprise xpcom (and of course the file in the subject line!)
    > installed on my slackware machine.
    >
    > Could someone point me at the starting point for this, or give
    > me a quick run-down of how to install this?



    I have no experience with mozilla::mechanize, but I can tell you that
    Slackware doesn't contain a 'mozilla-xpcom.pc' file. The seamonkey
    package, however, does contain this:
    /usr/lib/pkgconfig/seamonkey-xpcom.pc
    Since Seamonkey *is* what used to be Mozilla, that's almost certainly
    part of what you're trying to find.

    If you need development libraries/headers for Mozilla, then Seamonkey
    is definitely what you want. The Firefox and Thunderbird packages
    that are shipped in Slackware are the official binary tarballs that
    Mozilla.org releases (but the tarball contents are modified to live
    in /usr as opposed to /usr/local, and a few *minor* patches for plugin
    paths and such are applied) -- anyway, the point of noting that they
    are the official binaries is that they do not contain the development
    files (things that many distributions would package as "package-dev"
    or some such.

    -RW

  3. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    Robby Workman wrote:
    > On 2008-01-31, tink wrote:
    >> Hi Guys,
    >>
    >> And sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this question; I've
    >> been literally trying for months to get mozilla::mechanize
    >> installed, searched perl-monks, google, google-groups
    >> and the mozilla site for hours but seem to be too daft to
    >> find any information that would tell me how I get the tools/libs
    >> that comprise xpcom (and of course the file in the subject line!)
    >> installed on my slackware machine.
    >>
    >> Could someone point me at the starting point for this, or give
    >> me a quick run-down of how to install this?

    >
    >
    > I have no experience with mozilla::mechanize, but I can tell you that
    > Slackware doesn't contain a 'mozilla-xpcom.pc' file. The seamonkey
    > package, however, does contain this:
    > /usr/lib/pkgconfig/seamonkey-xpcom.pc
    > Since Seamonkey *is* what used to be Mozilla, that's almost certainly
    > part of what you're trying to find.
    >
    > If you need development libraries/headers for Mozilla, then Seamonkey
    > is definitely what you want.


    But this is not exactly the same version as firefox; although they are a
    great chance that this is compatible. I think the solution is to compile
    firefox from source. This is actually quite easy and I do not understand
    why Slackware does not do it.

    Olive

  4. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    In article <47a191c7$0$4836$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl>,
    Olive wrote:

    > [...] I think the solution is to compile
    > firefox from source. This is actually quite easy and I do not understand
    > why Slackware does not do it.


    Because if they do, Slackware isn't allowed to call it Firefox or use
    the Firefox icon.

    - Martijn

  5. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    In article
    <987b653e-04fd-4e8a-bfaa-137b7609238d@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
    tink wrote:

    > Could someone point me at the starting point for this, or give
    > me a quick run-down of how to install this?


    Mozilla is now called SeaMonkey. Install the seamonkey package, then
    edit or patch your source to look for seamonkey-xpcom.pc instead of
    mozilla-xpcom.pc. That should be all you need to change.

    This command tells you where in the source to edit it:
    grep -Rn 'seamonkey-xpcom\.pc' YOUR_SOURCE_DIRECTORY

    - Martijn

  6. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 14:33:50 +0100, Martijn Dekker wrote:

    > In article <47a191c7$0$4836$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl>,
    > Olive wrote:
    >
    >> [...] I think the solution is to compile firefox from source. This is
    >> actually quite easy and I do not understand why Slackware does not do
    >> it.

    >
    > Because if they do, Slackware isn't allowed to call it Firefox or use
    > the Firefox icon.


    Does that apply to any build from source, or only if Slackware patches
    the source with non-Mozilla patches?

    In the case of Debian, the specific issue was that they patched the
    source to disable auto-updates (which would have bypassed apt).

  7. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    Hallo, Mark,

    Du meintest am 01.02.08:

    >>> [...] I think the solution is to compile firefox from source. This
    >>> is actually quite easy and I do not understand why Slackware does
    >>> not do it.


    >> Because if they do, Slackware isn't allowed to call it Firefox or
    >> use the Firefox icon.


    [..]

    > In the case of Debian, the specific issue was that they patched the
    > source to disable auto-updates (which would have bypassed apt).


    The major work of Debian was changing the name. Looks like product
    piracy.

    Viele Gruesse
    Helmut

    "Ubuntu" - an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".


  8. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 15:29:00 +0100, Helmut Hullen wrote:

    >>> Because if they do, Slackware isn't allowed to call it Firefox or use
    >>> the Firefox icon.

    >
    > [..]
    >
    >> In the case of Debian, the specific issue was that they patched the
    >> source to disable auto-updates (which would have bypassed apt).

    >
    > The major work of Debian was changing the name. Looks like product
    > piracy.


    It's called a fork. Debian and Mozilla were unable to agree on a way
    that Debian could distribute the software with the Firefox name and
    artwork once it had been patched to work with the rest of Debian.

    But your wording is much more emotively judgmental, I have to grant you
    that :-)

  9. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    In article <47a32114$1_3@news.bluewin.ch>,
    Mark South wrote:

    > Does that apply to any build from source, or only if Slackware patches
    > the source with non-Mozilla patches?


    I seem to recall that this applies to any non-official binaries. I'm too
    lazy at the moment to verify that myself, so I'll just give you the link
    to Mozilla's complete trademark policy:
    http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/tr...ks/policy.html

    - M.

  10. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    In article <60glmqF1pimsjU2@mid.individual.net>,
    Martijn Dekker wrote:

    > Mozilla is now called SeaMonkey. Install the seamonkey package, then
    > edit or patch your source to look for seamonkey-xpcom.pc instead of
    > mozilla-xpcom.pc. That should be all you need to change.
    >
    > This command tells you where in the source to edit it:
    > grep -Rn 'seamonkey-xpcom\.pc' YOUR_SOURCE_DIRECTORY


    Um, that should of course be:
    grep -Rn 'mozilla-xpcom\.pc' YOUR_SOURCE_DIRECTORY

    Sorry about that.

    - M.

  11. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 01:55:36 +0100, Martijn Dekker wrote:

    > In article <47a32114$1_3@news.bluewin.ch>,
    > Mark South wrote:
    >
    >> Does that apply to any build from source, or only if Slackware patches
    >> the source with non-Mozilla patches?

    >
    > I seem to recall that this applies to any non-official binaries. I'm too
    > lazy at the moment to verify that myself, so I'll just give you the link
    > to Mozilla's complete trademark policy:
    > http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/tr...ks/policy.html


    Clearly my recollections are inadequate :-)

    Now, from that page, I follwoed the link to:

    http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/tr...0n-policy.html

    which contains the following among the Q&A:


    What if I and the other people on my L10n team don't want to bother with
    all this. We don't want to be an "official localization team". Now which
    rules apply? Do I have to stop using all of the Mozilla trademarks?
    We haven't figured that out just yet. But the set of rules that apply
    will probably be at least somewhat more restrictive. If you're not
    interested in being recognized as an official localization team, you'll
    have to be willing to live with some uncertainty for just a little bit
    longer.

    I create a custom build of Firefox or Thunderbird. Can I just play by the
    rules in this localization policy?
    We haven't created a complete, general trademark policy that applies
    to everyone just yet. Hang in there just a little longer. But it is quite
    likely that we will try to use the localization trademark policy as the
    model for a more universal trademark policy.


    So I guess even the Mozilla Foundation don't have a general answer :-)

  12. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    Martijn Dekker wrote:
    > In article <47a32114$1_3@news.bluewin.ch>,
    > Mark South wrote:
    >
    >> Does that apply to any build from source, or only if Slackware patches
    >> the source with non-Mozilla patches?

    >
    > I seem to recall that this applies to any non-official binaries. I'm too
    > lazy at the moment to verify that myself, so I'll just give you the link
    > to Mozilla's complete trademark policy:
    > http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/tr...ks/policy.html
    >
    > - M.


    On this page I see

    [...]
    Those taking full advantage of the open-source nature of Mozilla's
    products and making significant functional changes may not redistribute
    the fruits of their labor under any Mozilla trademark
    [...]

    So I think that you can distribute a self compiled binary of firefox if
    you do not do significant modification. By the way exactly the same
    rules apply for Seamonkey for which Slackware do not use the official
    binaries.

    Now I have heard that Debian was not pleased because the firefox logo
    itself was not free. I have never understand that point of view that put
    on a logo the same license requirement as for a software. Moreover this
    viewpoint is not shared by the FSF (in GPLv3 in even authorize to put
    such logo in GPL softwares).

    Olive

  13. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 11:11:36 +0100, Olive wrote:

    > Now I have heard that Debian was not pleased because the firefox logo
    > itself was not free.


    It was exactly the other way round. Mozilla Foundation said that Debian
    could not use the logo or branding because they patched the source used
    to make Debian packages for release.

  14. Re: mozilla-xpcom.pc

    On Feb 2, 2:38 am, Martijn Dekker wrote:
    Hi Martijn,

    And sorry forthe very late response.

    > Mozilla is now called SeaMonkey. Install the seamonkey package, then
    > edit or patch your source to look for seamonkey-xpcom.pc instead of
    > mozilla-xpcom.pc. That should be all you need to change.
    >
    > This command tells you where in the source to edit it:
    > grep -Rn 'mozilla-xpcom\.pc' YOUR_SOURCE_DIRECTORY

    I'm not sure I want to go an try that. mechanize is a perl module
    from CPAN, and I'm a tad concerned I may screw things up ... :}

    > - Martijn

    Cheers,
    Andrej

+ Reply to Thread