Sergey Vasilyev wrote:
Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
I was looking at these today and noticed there is about 2 meg difference between .3 and .4 - why ?

/max

Because this two version were build with different arguments:

        Configure arguments:
        --enable-application=xulrunner --enable-extensions=default,-universalcharser
        Configure arguments:
       --enable-application=xulrunner --disable-freetype2 --disable-svg --disable-canvas --disable-auto-deps --disable-tests
       --enable-javaxpcom --enable-default-toolkit=gtk2
 
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@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev

   



_______________________________________________
jbosstools-dev mailing list
jbosstools-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev
 
Which version of xulrunner did you compare? Where did you get it?

/sergey
_______________________________________________
jbosstools-dev mailing list
jbosstools-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev