Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On 11/01/12 10:44, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Hi,

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:25:12AM +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
On 10/01/12 23:53, Matúš Kukan wrote:
On 10 January 2012 22:41, Michael Stahl <mstahl@redhat.com> wrote:
argh, there is a SYSTEM_MOZILLA_HEADERS?  completely forgot about that,
but i guess in that case changing the header isn't such a good idea
after all :(

Hmm, but does anybody use --with-system-mozilla-headers ?

Yes. And actually I think *any* distro should.

I can't see any advantage over internal headers. (But I can't see many things.)

The advantage is that you use from system what belongs to the system. Not
LibreOffice itself.

I'd say, let's just remove SYSTEM_MOZILLA_HEADERS and change the internal ones.

hmmm.... that is also an option... actually it looks like there are both
headers and source files in np_sdk, and if SYSTEM_MOZILLA_HEADERS is

and the headers were always and still are a bug imho.

so how would you build the plugin on windows?

set, source files are still compiled, but not against the headers in
np_sdk, but against the system headers.

This is *exactly the point* of the option.
You say you want SYSTEM_MOZILLA_HEADERS, so they get used.

well, almost all SYSTEM_FOO options enable taking both the headers and
the actual code from the system, so this one is weird.

What exactly is your problem?

hmmm... thinking about it a bit more, it now looks like
SYSTEM_MOZILLA_HEADERS isn't a problem after all, because it is not used
on Windows, where the missing __declspec(dllexport) bites us; at least
on Linux GCC does not complain about the inconsistency (and on ELF based
platforms there is no equivalent of __declspec(dllimport) anyway).

so let's do the following:
- add SAL_DLLPUBLIC_EXPORT to the internal np_sdk headers
- add a check to configure.in to disable SYSTEM_MOZILLA_HEADERS if the
host platform is windows (just to be safe)

any objections?

this doesn't seem to make all that much sense to me, so i'll change my
opinion again: let's remove SYSTEM_MOZILLA_HEADERS option.

NO. Why on earth do people always want to remove options to make the build
sane and instead rely on copies headers from system stuff? (Which the npapi
headers are, no matter what you argue)

Stop this nonsense, please.

[ But yes, I needed 
http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-openoffice/libreoffice.git;a=blob;f=patches/getMIMEDescription-mismatch.diff;h=9924877e8501d0f0e2175f6c521c0bf88a1301ba;hb=refs/heads/debian-experimental-3.5
 with recent headers ]

hmm... i've got a /usr/include/xulrunner-sdk-2/npapi.h here that also
looks like it would need this change.  can you commit it on master (and
adapt np_sdk/inc/npapi.h to match)?

Yes, I use --with-system-mozilla-headers. Like I use *any* system-lib
or -header possible (also for sane, x11, etc.)

Regards,

Rene


Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.