--z+pzSjdB7cqptWpS
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 11:52:19AM -0800, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:

> > We could of course just duplicate the package and make the necessary
> > adjustment, or we could adapt the existing package to take an option to
> > allow building moz-flash or firefox-flash.
>=20
> I think we should have only one package per mozilla/netscape compatible
> plugin. Then have some framework to create symlinks as needed.
>=20
> Symlinks have worked great for me for various modules.

wouldn't this prevent both from being installed and working without
futzing about with symlinks? I don't see what the gain is, and there's
certainly a loss.

unless there is a conflict of some sort, my preference is always to be
able to have multiple packages like this installed and working
simultaneously. the prior art is that we have the acroread plugin
packages for both Firefox and Mozilla.

grant.


--z+pzSjdB7cqptWpS
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFCAoicluYOb9yiFXoRAuWeAJ9hgm0mPBhuMTWu40mxh9Y0+1xL6QCcCB4h
yj974+g0bANrfKe6NhZBj34=
=jdgo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--z+pzSjdB7cqptWpS--