Re: updated mozsupport package

On 02/28/16 11:48 AM, Steve Wendt wrote:
> On 02/28/2016 09:21 AM, Doug Bissett wrote:
>
>> YUM. It is definitely a terrible way to do things
>
> I've said it before, and I'll say it again:  until/unless you can run
> "yum install firefox seamonkey thunderbird" the current process they are
> using is broken.  Even once that works, it would still be nice to have a
> ZIP/WPI version that is statically linked.

Well their plan does involve building RPM packages of FF, SM and TB, not 
sure if using my binaries or building them themselves. They also plan on 
removing MOZILLA_HOME and replacing it with %HOME% as that is how Redhat 
does it and they seem to have forgotten that this is _not_ Linux.
Really they should have a virtual Mozilla package that installs all the 
prerequisites but since Redhat doesn't do that...
I wouldn't mind building static linked packages, but it is not as simple 
as it should be and there should also be some discussion on which 
libraries should be static and which dynamic.
Dave