On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 14:00 -0500, Mail Lists wrote: > On 01/30/2010 01:53 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote: > > On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 11:36 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > >> Braden McDaniel wrote: > >> > >>> On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 14:48 +0800, Liu Yu Fei Eric wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> I noticed firefox was stuck on 3.5.6 for a rather long time. > >>>> What about 3.5.7 and the recently 3.6? They are even not in koji. > >>> > >>> xulrunner-1.9.2 breaks API compatibility with 1.9.1, so downstream > >>> packages would need patching for this to happen. > >> > >> Even minor releases generally/often break ABI, requiring lots of dependent > >> package rebuilds... or is this case even worse? > > > > I said "API", and that's what I meant. > > > > At the very least, there have been subtle changes to the plug-in API > > that can cause compile failures. > > > > And how many plugins are packaged by fedora ? Any? Yes. Somewhere between a few and several. > I'd guess all the plugin dev's at the moz website state clearly which > vers of filrefox is supported - and most want their plugins to work with > current release - 3.6. Given that doing so can mean breaking compatibility with the previous XULRunner release, it's probably not a good assumption that all plug-in developers will be consistently aggressive about supporting the new release. Also keep in mind that I have no reason to believe that the plug-in *ABI* has changed. Fielded binaries should be safe. > So that seems like a bad reason not to update. > > So what are the couplings then that need source changes other than > plugins? I don't know. I don't even know if mozilla.org tracks this meticulously. > Can someone be specific rather than hand waving API around please. It's easy enough to diff the NPAPI headers from 1.9.1 to 1.9.2 to see the changes. Some highlights: * Some JNI types in function signatures have been changed to void *, presumably to avoid pulling in JNI headers. * C99 sized types are now used instead of XULRunner- (or NSPR-?) specific typedefs. In some cases, this means that the new underlying type is distinct from the old one as far as the compiler is concerned. I really have no idea about the extent of XULRunner API changes outside NPAPI. But simply assuming the NPAPI changes are all there is seems foolhardy. -- Braden McDaniel <braden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel