[Pkg-mozext-maintainers] #573250 -- conflict between policy and mozilla-devscripts about file placement

[Mike Hommey]

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 03:56:02AM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 13.03.2010, 23:28 -0500 schrieb Daniel Kahn Gillmor:
> > On 03/10/2010 05:52 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > > Am Mittwoch, den 10.03.2010, 17:43 -0500 schrieb Daniel Kahn Gillmor:
> > >> On 03/10/2010 04:46 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > >>> I think we shouldn't clutter /usr/share and /usr/lib with one directory
> > >>> per extension.
> > >> That seems like a reasonable concern to me.  What if we used
> > >> /usr/share/xul-ext/foo (or /usr/lib/xul-ext/foo for arch-dependent
> > >> packages)?  it certainly seems tidier.
> > > 
> > > Great idea. I like it. Patches are welcome. ;)
> > 
> > The attached patch to install-xpi works for me (i don't know if any of
> > the cdbs stuff needs patching -- i just use straight debhelper).
> 
> Applied. The cdbs stuff needs no modification, because it calls only
> xpi-install and dh_xul-ext. All logic is in these two tools.
> 
> > What's the timeline like for getting a new version of mozilla-devscripts
> > with this and with some automated configfile handling?
> 
> I was busy with eclipse [1]. I am away this weekend. Release next week
> after including configfile handling?
> 
> Latest idea:
> 
> Create a (nearly) empty file
> in /etc/xul-ext/<packagename-without-xul-ext>.js that contains a
> commented header describing where to find the config file.
> Create a link
> in /usr/{share,lib}/xul-ext/<packagename-without-xul-ext>/defaults/preferences/000system.js pointing to /etc/xul-ext/<packagename-without-xul-ext>.js
> 
> An updated patch is welcome.
> 
> Any objection against this approach?

I'm not entirely sure the preferences files are read by filename order.
If that's the case, the system preferences should be read after the
others.
But I think they are read in readdir() order...

Mike