Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
On 2006-05-05 at 08:41:15 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote (shortened):
Correct. And this is expected since we don't have a x86-64 Java/Flash/Adobe Reader plugin. Wouldn't it be preferrable to ship/install a 32bit executable of the browser for archs that support running 32 and 64 bit binaries? I mean: Who needs 64 bit in a browser? Or some intermediate 64-bit stub that does an exec to a 32 bit program (Actually I don't know whow the plugin mechanism works)
Note that from Sun JDK/JRE 1.5.0 on, there are real 64bit builds. I assume the plugin in that JRE is 64bit as well. $ rpm -q java-1_5_0-sun --qf "%{ARCH}\n" x86_64 Any reason there isn't any java-1_5_0-sun-plugin package ? That way we could have a 64bit Java plugin for 64bit firefox ;) (ok, still doesn't help for Flash, which is probably a much higher priority than the Java plugin)
The plugin mechanism doesn't allow such a workaround at the moment unfortunately.
The 32bit workaround is already done for Firefox but wasn't possible easily in the past for mozilla since many applications used libraries from the mozilla installation.
It would have been possible with SeaMonkey though since it isn't an integral part anymore for other applications.
If you think that's useful (I agree at the moment) to ship SeaMonkey in 32bit version on x86-64 please file a bugreport as enhancement. (But the three examples from above should really be solved from their vendors!)
What about packages that require gtkmozembed ? (liferea [1] being one example) [1] feedreader: http://liferea.sourceforge.net/ http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/rpm-navigation.php?cat=Network/liferea/ Since mozilla has been withdrawn from 10.1 and "replaced" by seamonkey, there is no gtkmozembed available any more. From what I've seen, Seamonkey doesn't provide a 1:1 compatible form of gtkmozembed - at least I haven't been able to build liferea with it. The MozillaFirefox packages don't ship a -devel, so I cannot use those to build gecko support in liferea (although liferea supports doing so). What about shipping a MozillaFirefox-devel and a MozillaFirefox with gtkmozembed ? Note that "too much work" would be a valid reason not to do it, I mean, I just throw that question out in the wild, but I'm very much aware that MozillaFirefox & friends are very tedious pieces of software to package. I'm just naively assuming that the headers, .so symlinks and pkgconfig files are being installed anyway and just being discarded by the spec file at the moment, which means it would not be too much work to include them in a -devel subpackage. Remember, I said "naively" ;) cheers -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser@skynet.be> <guru@unixtech.be> _\_v FOSDEM 2006 -- 25+26 February 2006 in Brussels