Guys,
What is the status for this 64-bit thing ?
We need to move faster ,)
Did you just randomly choose different compile options that made the distribution 2 meg
different ?
What is the known differences between .3 and .4 ?
Should we just live with the small version difference ?
I can't answer these since I don't know the details of xulrunner - you guys do.
-max
Sergey said something about tests being included.
Not sure
Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
> I was looking at these today and noticed there is about 2 meg difference between .3
and .4 - why ?
>
> /max
>
>
>> Hi all:
>>
>> I've up-loaded a down-graded version of xulrunner over at
>>
http://repository.jboss.org/xulrunner/
>>
>> The reason for this is so that we may (if it's not impossible) use a
>> matching xulrunner release across all jbds and jbosstools releases.
>> Previously, the x64 release was 1.8.1.4 rather than the standard 1.8.1.3
>> used in windows, linux, and osx.
>>
>> Whether this can be worked into the build for 2.1.0 GA, or the update
>> site, or not, remains to be seen. But I just wanted to make sure this is
>> a possibility for GA. Personally, *I* hope it makes it in... but with
>> the xulrunner version being technically lower than the old, anyone
>> already using the product would have to manually downgrade the file in
>> the plugins folder. Not exactly a great situation.
>>
>> Parity? Or ease of use? Which will win?
>>
>> - Rob Stryker
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbosstools-dev mailing list
>> jbosstools-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
>>
>>
>
>
>
>