firefox-dev is missing the static libraries

[Daniel Stodden]

Binary package hint: firefox

$ dpkg -l firefox-dev
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-===========================================-===========================================-======================================================================================================
ii firefox-dev 2.0.0.3+1-0ubuntu2 Development files for Mozilla Firefox

$ dpkg -L firefox-dev | grep '\.a$'

$

why, oh why?

kind regards,
dns

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 03:21:33PM -0000, Daniel Stodden wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> Binary package hint: firefox
>
>
> $ dpkg -l firefox-dev
> Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
> | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
> |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
> ||/ Name Version Description
> +++-===========================================-===========================================-======================================================================================================
> ii firefox-dev 2.0.0.3+1-0ubuntu2 Development files for Mozilla Firefox
>
> $ dpkg -L firefox-dev | grep '\.a$'
>
> $
>
> why, oh why?
>
> kind regards,
> dns
>

What do you want to do?

 - Alexander

[Daniel Stodden (dns-somacoma)]

well,

in may specific case, linking against libmozjs

after all, the whole point of putting header files into a packet is building things on top of that, right?

regards,
daniel

[Daniel Stodden (dns-somacoma)]

well,

let me elaborate a litte. not sure about whether ubuntu/debian currently sport any policies regarding that matter,
but i suppose most developers expect to get the static libraries together with the the -dev packages.
after all, it's the dev-.deb, one of those cases completeness is far more worthwile than disk footprint.

- at least for the standalone libraries, i'd strongly suggest to put them in. standalone means libmozjs and probably libjsj.
- personally, i do not presently care much about the embedding stuff. other may differ.
- static xpcom is probably useless, i suppose, since it's pointless without sharing, and probably even dangerous to link in.

regards,
daniel

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

for xulrunner-1.9 we will ship the complete sdk.

[jfm3 (jfm3-nectarine-city)]

the xulrunner package, too, is missing libmozjs.a

I'm having trouble finding that bug report, assuming it exists.

[Chris Coulson (chrisccoulson)]

Closing this, as we dropped the firefox-dev package entirely in maverick