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