On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 09:02:19AM +0200, Michael Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have checked my mails again and I never got it. Damn GMX.
Damn RBLs :( > > Here is what I wrote about the headers issue: > > > > Looking at the source code for xulrunner, it's intentional. The problem > > is headers are not necessarily in sync with the fact that symbols are > > hidden... > > I think the symbol definition in the header should be removed then. It should, but since it's not the only symbol for which it may be the case, I prefer to do nothing before actually taking the time to check everything. > > And about the alternative: > > You should patch the eclipse source to use NS_InitXPCOM3 or > > NS_InitXPCOM2 instead, and that means you also have to add code for > > components auto registration. Another option would be to look around if > > a patch for eclipse exists to make it use javaxpcom instead of its own > > xpcom stub. As of xulrunner 1.8.0.4-1, javaxpcom is not yet packaged, > > but it is planned for 1.8.0.4-2. > > If you opt for the first option and need help with embedding code, I > > can give a hand. I'd personally prefer the second option. > > I think I opt for the first solution. It seems to be the less invasive > for me. Upstream still builds against Mozilla 1.4 and this is no chance > yet to make them support xulrunner. I'd really go with the second option, especially considering [1]. At least, I'd give the proposed patch a try. Mike 1. https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=79213 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
