[desktop-discuss] Firefox build names are too long

[Jerry Sutton]

First, as others have mentioned, please leave 'i386' alone, at least 
until SMC is prepared to completely respin the uname command and 
*everything* which might conceivably depend upon its output.  And you 
might infuriate a bunch of customers who have created their own 
dependencies on $(uname -p).

Second, this is mozilla.org code and perhaps the most sane thing would 
be to grit your teeth and conform to the Mozilla project conventions. 
If you look at what the Sun Beijing team delivers to mozilla.org, your 
folks flatten the tree to encode both OS and ISA in addition to lang and 
that's where the OpenSolaris pkg naming seems to come from (and that 
makes sense).  If you wanted to go back to
ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/.../contrib/
and put solaris_pkgadd/ as well as solaris_tarball there and then 
replicate the hierarchy you see for the linux builds, that is 
defensible.  The down side to it is that if you do so and then pull a 
linux, sparc, and i386 version, you need to preserve that directory 
hierarchy when you download (or name the files as done now or some 
similar dodge).  It's a bit messier than the linux case since there is 
no kernel or OS major number allowed for there.

I recommend you leave it alone.  Whatever you do, I suggest you use the 
same conventions for OpenSolaris and mozilla.org contributed builds.  As 
long as Solaris 8, 9, and 10 are supported I hope those contributed 
builds are maintained [I use the Solaris 8 build, firefox and 
thunderbird, on this Solaris 9 i386 box].

Robert G. Sohigian wrote:
> Dave--
> 
> Why are these names so darn long?
> 
>  firefox-3.0a3.en-US.solaris11-i386.tar.bz2
>  firefox-3.0a3.en-US.solaris11-sparc.tar.bz2
> 
> Here are some thoughts:
> 
>    solaris11: afaik, there is no such thing as "solaris11", and it 
> shouldn't be used
>    i386: 386 went away awhile ago... why not x86?
>    en-US: are there other English versions which will be used?
> 
> Actually, why have "en-US" at all? I mean, if all we're delivering is 
> this version, I
> don't understand why we have to spell it out.
> 
> So, something like:
> 
>  firefox-3.0a3-snv-x86.tar.bz2
>  firefox-3.0a3-snv-sparc.tar.bz2 
> would work just fine, right?
> 
> --Robs
> 
> 
> Dave Lin wrote:
>>
>> Please do NOT reply to this address. If you have any problems, feel free
>> to send email to desktop dash discuss at opensolaris dot org
>>
>>
>> Firefox 3.0 Alpha3 contrib. builds on Nevada are now available on
>> www.mozilla.com
>>
>>
>> Download Page
>> ==============
>> External:
>> http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/granparadiso/alpha3/contrib/ 
>>
>>
>> Internal:
>> http://moz.prc/wiki/index.php/Download:Community_Firefox
>>
>> Regards,
>> Desktop Beijing Team
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-discuss mailing list
> desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org
> 
> 

-- 
Jerry Sutton	jerrys at airmail.net