173602 - Release Notes (1.0 ~ 1.4) need to state needed solaris dependencies (libgtk)

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(www.mozilla.org :: General, defect)

Description

[Wolf]

The solaris download is missing libgtk, which does not exist on every system.  I
had to use a Netscape 6.1 installation's copy.

Comment 1

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

Is this actually installer?  I thought the installer was not even built on
Solaris... isn't the solaris build just a tarball (and contributed by someone
volunteering his machine at that?)

Comment 2

[Wolf]

All I know is that if I download the Solaris Sparc Mozilla 1.1 or previous pre-
compiled package and run it, it dies with the message:

ld.so.1: ./mozilla-bin: fatal: libgtk-1.2.so.0: open failed: No such file or 
directory

and I need to go find a libgtk and add it to LD_LIBRARY_PATH to get mozilla to 
run.  As the mozilla download includes a number of other libraries, I assumed 
that this one has/had just been missed.  

If not, it needs instructions on where to get it, how to compile it, etc.

Comment 3

[Henrik Gemal]

not installer

Comment 4

[hacker formerly known as [e-mail]]

Gtk is an external dependency.  The README contained in the tarball should
contain instructions on where to get the libraries as should the Release Notes.

Comment 5

[Wolf]

The README in the 1.1 download (the most recent Solaris download) does NOT 
contain any messages of that sort.  It lists dependancies, but all those files 
are included in the tarball.  It does not contain information on where to 
obtain libgtk, or that it is an external dependency.

The Release Notes contain no such information for Solaris.

Comment 6

[hacker formerly known as [e-mail]]

.

Comment 7

[Henry Jia]

The instructions are in the README file since mozilla 1.2a (I'm not sure the
details of the binaries before 1.2a).

By the way, we've discussed this issue with a lot of experts in mozilla
community and we are not suggested to bundle the gtk library with the solaris
binary. It should be also the same for other platform releases.

Taking.

Comment 8

[Wolf]

While I think not bundling a major library makes the download a lot less 
attractive, that's a decision you'll make without me, I'm sure.

In any case, if you don't include the library, please make sure it's very clear 
how to obtain it, and please have the install/run scripts check for it and 
generate a nice message about it being missing, as I'm sure it will be the 
first time many people (i.e. non-developers) try to run it.

Comment 9

[Henry Jia]

This decision is not made by me. Indeed, I suggest to bundle it. :-) Because a
lot of people ask me the same questions.

Thx for the suggestion about the message.

Comment 10

[Ed Grimm]

The release notes contains a section on requirements, which does list solaris,
and mentions nothing about the need for Gtk.  For example,

http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla1.2.1/#require

This is true in every version of the release notes that I have seen.  The
Release Notes file is the first thing anyone I consider competent would look at
when downloading new software; it should contain the system requirements for all
ports.  By system requirements, I mean the things not included in the download
which must be there for the program to work.

The Linux requirements do list it, even though it's much more commonly found on
Linux systems.  It also lists Glib, which ISTR is a requirement of Gtk.  I would
be surprised if the libstdc++ requirement was strictly for Linux.

Admittedly, the README.txt file is notably lacking comments regarding Solaris;
the README file is notably lacking existance for those of us who do not have CVS
(I thought that's why we downloaded the tarball.)

Comment 11

[Henry Jia]

Thx for the catch, Ed.

=> Pete for the continuous handling. Pete is now incharge of this.

Comment 12

[Roland Mainz]

We should list that Mozilla on Solaris needs the Recommended&Security patch
cluster applied - at least the libCrun (to make Sun Workshop/Forte builds and
the JAVA plugin happy) and the Xsun patches for the matching OS version.

Comment 13

[Daniel Wang]

.

Comment 14

[Roland Mainz]

Taking myself... actually I updated the release notes a while ago and added the
minimum patch list and a comment about the library issue...

Comment 15

[Reed Loden [:reed]]

Really out of date.