how to properly link against libxul and libxpcom?

[Matthias Klose]

Binary package hint: xulrunner-1.9.2

openjdk-6 and eclipse do link against libxul and libxpcom. How should these applications be linked/built such that xulrunner upgrades don't break these builds?

the xulrunner-dev package was recently demoted, now you have an explicit dependency on xulrunner-dev-1.9.2. Are the reverse build-depending packages required to manually uploaded, if a xulrunner-dev-1.9.3 package is uploaded to lucid-proposed?

for icedtea6-plugin, the dependency on xulrunner-1.9.2 can be hard coded. is this really necessary? calling

  dh_shlibdeps -s -L openjdk-6-jre-headless \
                -l[...]:/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.2

results in:

dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: Can't extract name and version from library name `libxpcom.so'
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: Can't extract name and version from library name `libxul.so'

and no dependency added. xulrunner-1.9.* not having any shlibs files?

even determining the xulrunner libdir seems to be overly complicated (if the same solution should work on debian and ubuntu):
echo /usr/lib/xulrunner-$($(basename $(pkg-config --libs-only-L libxul | sed 's/^-L//;s/-devel//;s,/lib *$,,' )) --gre-version | sed 's/^\(.....\).*/\1/')

desktop guys, xulrunner is not just a private dependency for firefox, other components rely on it as well. please treat it with the same priority.

[Micah Gersten (micahg)]

This was an accidental demotion of xulrunner-dev in xulrunner-1.9.2 instead of just the xulrunner-dev in xulrunner-1.9.1. The issue has been corrected.