mozilla on the s390 tracking bug

RESOLVED FIXED

Status

SeaMonkey
Build Config
RESOLVED FIXED
17 years ago
13 years ago

People

(Reporter: blizzard, Assigned: blizzard)

Tracking

({meta})

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment, 4 obsolete attachments)

(Assignee)

Description

17 years ago
No, I'm not kidding.
(Assignee)

Comment 1

17 years ago
Created attachment 41659 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
(Assignee)

Comment 2

17 years ago
Red Hat project, Red Hat owner.
Assignee: asa → blizzard

Updated

17 years ago
Component: Browser-General → Build Config
Keywords: meta, patch, review
QA Contact: doronr → granrose

Comment 3

15 years ago
Created attachment 105060 [details] [diff] [review]
Attached is a complete patch for s390 and s390x tested on Debian.

The patch has been used for several months now in Debian for S/390 without any
problems.
(Assignee)

Comment 4

15 years ago
Created attachment 112287 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

This is from the debian 1.2.1 packages.  It's probably a bit newer.  It differs
only slightly.
Attachment #105060 - Attachment is obsolete: true
(Assignee)

Comment 5

15 years ago
Comment on attachment 112287 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

Looking for review and super-review.
Attachment #112287 - Flags: superreview?(shaver)
Attachment #112287 - Flags: review?(wtc)
Comment on attachment 112287 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

rs=shaver on the new xptcall port and the build glue.  Please wait for wtc's
review of the NSPR changes.
Attachment #112287 - Flags: superreview?(shaver) → superreview+

Comment 7

15 years ago
Comment on attachment 112287 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

The new files have the NPL (not MPL).  I believe they
should have the MPL/GPL/LGPL tri-license, right?
Attachment #112287 - Flags: review?(wtc) → review-
(Assignee)

Comment 8

15 years ago
Good eye, wtc.  Let me do some digging.
(Assignee)

Comment 9

15 years ago
Oh, OK, the guy who submitted it to debian is the same person who posted the
original patch.

Gerhard, can we fix these licenses so they are consistent with the rest of Mozilla?

You're the original person who did this patch, right?

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=168339

Comment 10

15 years ago
Yes, no problem. Let me know what I should change regarding the license. 

BTW., the Debian patch should be the same as the one I posted here. What is the
difference?

Regards,
Gerhard
(Assignee)

Comment 11

15 years ago
I don't think there's a huge difference.  It's just a question of the
surrounding code.
(Assignee)

Comment 12

15 years ago
As for the licensing, if it's OK with you I would like to just change the
licenese of those particular files to use our standard tri-license template with
you as the original contributor of the code.  Does that sound OK?

Comment 13

15 years ago
Yes, change them to the standard tri-license template. That's fine with me. I am
glad to get it accepted upstream finally.

The s390x code need some more testing, since Debian doesn't support s390x yet
and I haven't been able to test it elsewhere. Let me know if there are any
problems.


Thanks,
Gerhard
(Assignee)

Comment 14

15 years ago
Great, I'll whip up a new patch.

My initial testing on the Red Hat boxes that we have (both s390 and s390x) look
pretty promising.
(Assignee)

Comment 15

15 years ago
Created attachment 112330 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

Patch with the right licenses.
Attachment #41659 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #112287 - Attachment is obsolete: true
(Assignee)

Updated

15 years ago
Attachment #112330 - Flags: superreview?(shaver)
Attachment #112330 - Flags: review?(wtc)
Comment on attachment 112330 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

Dayquil says it looks great!
Attachment #112330 - Flags: superreview?(shaver) → superreview+

Comment 17

15 years ago
Comment on attachment 112330 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

r=wtc.

There is a missing "is" in
"The Original Code mozilla.org code".
Other than that, this patch is good.

Whoever adds the new files should
remember to add the "is" to the
tri-license headers.
Attachment #112330 - Flags: review?(wtc) → review+

Comment 18

15 years ago
Comment on attachment 112330 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

I just found that there is an extraneous 'endif' in the
patch for mozilla/security/coreconf/Linux.mk.  I've
checked in the nsprpub and (corrected) security patches
on the NSPR and NSS trunk, which will eventually make it
into the branches used by the Mozilla client.
(Assignee)

Comment 19

15 years ago
Yeah, I noticed that last night myself.  I'll upload a new patch in a bit.
(Assignee)

Comment 20

15 years ago
Created attachment 112778 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

All comments addressed here.
Attachment #112330 - Attachment is obsolete: true

Comment 21

15 years ago
Comment on attachment 112778 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

All the NSPR and NSS changes in this patch, including
the parisc64 change to mozilla/security/coreconf/Linux.mk,
have been checked into the tip of NSPR and NSS.  These
changes will eventually make it into the branches used
by the Mozilla client.
(Assignee)

Comment 22

15 years ago
The parisc change was actually an accident, but I guess it doesn't hurt anything.

Is there any chance that you can push the branch bits forward, assuming there's
nothing wrong with them, to the Mozilla static tag?  Or do we know that there's
going to be an update before 1.3b?

Comment 23

15 years ago
Don't you need to get drivers' approval for this patch
to be checked into Mozilla 1.3b?
(Assignee)

Comment 24

15 years ago
It's just a ports change so dbaron and I think it's fine to check it in.
(Assignee)

Comment 25

15 years ago
These were checked in a while ago and the nspr and nss changes have been
migrated to the mozilla trunk since then.  Marking fixed.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Product: Browser → Seamonkey
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.