We need a new subject- bug fixes

Rahul Sundaram sundaram at fedoraproject.org
Sun Mar 4 20:38:48 UTC 2007


Les Mikesell wrote:
> Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>
>>> This is partially my fault. What I am reporting is not an upstream
>>> problem. Mozilla is perfectly capable of doing what I want it to do if I
>>> change the config option indicated. It is a problem with how firefox is
>>> distributed by the rpm created I assume by fedora. I am asking that
>>> fedora repackage a existing rpm. I am completely updated. A new firefox
>>> came last week (1.5.0.10) but I can't tell if this correction was made.
>>
>> Fedora generally doesnt deviate from upstream defaults. So what 
>> configuration upstream ships with indeed does matter here.
> 
> Errr... except where it suits their fancy - like omitting java bindings, 
>  multimedia plugins, and configuring sendmail not to receive mail.

It is not a question of fancy. Nobody patches for "fancy".

1) Not sure which java bindings you are referring to but anyone is free 
to maintain additional packages in Fedora.

2) You are probably talking about proprietary multimedia codecs which 
are omitted due to licensing reasons. Usually doesnt require changing 
any configuration upstream since they are modular components in 
gstreamer cleanly split out into -good -bad and -ugly.

3) Security. Daemons connecting to external ports by default is a bad 
idea. Well documented reasons. Configuration changes are easier to 
manage compared to other kind of patches too.

Rahul




More information about the fedora-list mailing list