On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 05:50:44PM -0000, Morgan Collett wrote:
> sevenseeker, I have cleaned my PPA
> (https://launchpad.net/~morgan/+archive) which I was using to test the
> building of Sugar packages including (in this case) sugar-hulahop.
>
> Alexander Sack pointed out that xulrunner-1.9 included the python
> bindings (which for xulrunner-1.8 were in a separate package) so all I
> had to do was change my build-deps from debian's "python-xpcom,
> xulrunner-dev" (IIRC) to "xulrunner-1.9-dev".
>
OK. How many packages do depend on the old python-xpcom? Is this one
of the rare examples or do we need a proper transition somehow?
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 05:50:44PM -0000, Morgan Collett wrote: /launchpad. net/~morgan/ +archive) which I was using to test the 1.9-dev" .
> sevenseeker, I have cleaned my PPA
> (https:/
> building of Sugar packages including (in this case) sugar-hulahop.
>
> Alexander Sack pointed out that xulrunner-1.9 included the python
> bindings (which for xulrunner-1.8 were in a separate package) so all I
> had to do was change my build-deps from debian's "python-xpcom,
> xulrunner-dev" (IIRC) to "xulrunner-
>
OK. How many packages do depend on the old python-xpcom? Is this one
of the rare examples or do we need a proper transition somehow?
- Alexander