Re: gnome-spidermonkey?



On Sat, 2010-12-11 at 08:33 +0100, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> 2010/12/11 Maciej Piechotka <uzytkownik2 gmail com>:
> > On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 13:16 -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> >> Basically, I want us to be decoupled from this; there are conceptually
> >> actually 4 layers.
> >>
> >> NSPR <- spidermonkey <- xulrunner <- firefox
> >>
> >> Where "<-" is depends on.  Right now at least Fedora ships like:
> >>
> >> NSPR <- (spidermonkey xulrunner firefox)
> >>
> >> Where () is "tightly coupled", meaning that gjs and gnome-shell are
> >> tightly coupled to firefox.
> >>
> >> Having a separate xulrunner as a project hasn't really worked - it's a
> >> *huge*, enormous codebase.  Spidermonkey on the other hand has always
> >> nominally supported being built seprately; it has its own configure
> >> script, etc.
> >
> > Probably better way would be to work on parallel installation of
> > xulrunner and/or spidermonkey then forking. I.e. if needed there should
> > be possible to install, for example, xulrunner 2.0 and xulrunner 2.1 at
> > the same time.
> 
> This is already possible for xulrunner in most distributions.
> 

Then probably the problem is Fedora itself then coupling. Since
otherwise the gnome-shell/gjs are coupled to particular branch of
xulrunner if I understand correctly. 

I guess update xulrunner 1.9.x -> xulrunner 1.9.(x+1) does not require
code changes so the problem can be derefered to distributions (updates,
updating fx/gjs/gnome-shell when ABI changes for example due to inlining
etc.).

Regards

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]