17:38 <beerman> farkuhar: whats the problem with apng and firefox? openmamba rebased the patch, I wasn't aware its needed anymore (so I didn't look for it)

17:38 <beerman> https://src.openmamba.org/rpms/libpng/src/branch/main/libpng-1.6.45-apng.patch

18:33 <farkuhar> beerman: the firefox build looks at png.h, fails to find the necessary APNG functions, and errors out. Somehow libpng 1.6.45 is not getting built with the same APNG support as 1.6.44.

18:49 <farkuhar> The difference between the header files installed by libpng 1.6.44 and 1.6.45 is essentially the reverse of the openmamba patch: https://0x0.st/s/FAkw70VbZDqgVrI3PA0X2A/8-dO.h.diff

18:54 <farkuhar> Not unexpected, considering that commit 4bb7457616d6e912829a90901451edaa93a1b131 removed the libpng-apng patch.

18:59 <beerman> iirc it didn't apply anymore, thats why I considered it not needed anymore ;) Nothing else seems to have a problem with it, but I can surely add it back if you'd like me to

19:03 <farkuhar> If nothing else needs it, and firefox compiles successfully by changing that one line in mozconfig, then you don't need to add back the patch. Heh, VoidLinux has been building firefox without system png for 3 years already.

19:05 <beerman> at least over here I didn't notice anything

19:11 <beerman> https://bugs.gentoo.org/824018 this is a good ressource on the topic it seems. To me, this makes it sound like a good deal to drop the apng patch

19:15 <farkuhar> The Gentoo discussion confirms that firefox is the only consumer of the apng patch, and that's only if it tries to use the system png. In case anyone's curious, here's the error I got when building against libpng 1.6.45: https://0x0.st/s/mtzIlWrq-_edRPTc-z2eGg/8-dn.log

19:21 <beerman> btw, I'd be fine with changing names for the mm stuff in contrib, it's indeed a mess