xulrunner in AUR and extra?

[Phillip Smith-7]

I'm going through the orphans list in the AUR at the moment looking for
packages to adopt, and came across xulrunner. Given then xulrunner is now in
extra, shouldn't it be removed from the AUR?

[Eric Bélanger-2]

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Phillip Smith <arch-general@...> wrote:
> I'm going through the orphans list in the AUR at the moment looking for
> packages to adopt, and came across xulrunner. Given then xulrunner is now in
> extra, shouldn't it be removed from the AUR?
>

The package in AUR is xulrunner-1.8, not xulrunner.  I guess it's
there because it is  (was?) required for apps that didn't worked with
the latest xulrunner.

[Phillip Smith-7]

>
> The package in AUR is xulrunner-1.8, not xulrunner.  I guess it's
> there because it is  (was?) required for apps that didn't worked with
> the latest xulrunner.
>

Ah, I didn't notice that... Crisis averted! ;)

[Smartboy]

I know it used to be required for Aptana, which is why it was uploaded (I
think). Now it isn't required by it anymore, though.

Smartboy

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool@...>wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Phillip Smith <arch-general@...>
> wrote:
> > I'm going through the orphans list in the AUR at the moment looking for
> > packages to adopt, and came across xulrunner. Given then xulrunner is now
> in
> > extra, shouldn't it be removed from the AUR?
> >
>
> The package in AUR is xulrunner-1.8, not xulrunner.  I guess it's
> there because it is  (was?) required for apps that didn't worked with
> the latest xulrunner.
>

[Stefan Husmann]

Smartboy schrieb:

> I know it used to be required for Aptana, which is why it was uploaded (I
> think). Now it isn't required by it anymore, though.
>
> Smartboy
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool@...>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Phillip Smith <arch-general@...>
>> wrote:
>>> I'm going through the orphans list in the AUR at the moment looking for
>>> packages to adopt, and came across xulrunner. Given then xulrunner is now
>> in
>>> extra, shouldn't it be removed from the AUR?
>>>
>> The package in AUR is xulrunner-1.8, not xulrunner.  I guess it's
>> there because it is  (was?) required for apps that didn't worked with
>> the latest xulrunner.
>>
>

Hello,

zattoo still needs it. It is flagged out of date, though.

Regards Stefan.

[vlad-16]

Hi,

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 06:29:34PM +0100, Stefan Husmann wrote:
> Hello,
>
> zattoo still needs it. It is flagged out of date, though.
I submitted xulrunner-1.8 some time ago to AUR.
Now there is no need for this package as zattoo has no client for
Linux anymore. It is only available as a browser-app.
Xulrunner-1.8 can now be safely deleted imo.

Vlad

--

[Stefan Husmann]

vlad schrieb:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 06:29:34PM +0100, Stefan Husmann wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> zattoo still needs it. It is flagged out of date, though.
> I submitted xulrunner-1.8 some time ago to AUR.
> Now there is no need for this package as zattoo has no client for
> Linux anymore. It is only available as a browser-app.
> Xulrunner-1.8 can now be safely deleted imo.
>
> Vlad
>

Hello,

the tarball of zattoo might not be supported anymore, but it is still downloadable.
So the PKGBUILDs of zattoo and zattoo-ch might still work. I did not test them, though.

Regards Stefan