User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050211 Build Identifier: N/A (FIREFOX_1_0_1_RELEASE tag) There is an extraneous leading space (presumably a typo) in the perl regexp used to identify the OS under which the installer is being built in the following script file: mozilla/toolkit/mozapps/installer/build_static.pl Quite simply, this line: $win32 = ($^O =~ / ((MS)?win32)|cygwin|os2/i) ? 1 : 0; should read: $win32 = ($^O =~ /((MS)?win32)|cygwin|os2/i) ? 1 : 0; Although it may seem like a bit of an overkill, I nonetheless created a patch file in the format preferred by Mozilla.org, as specified in the guildelines for patch file submission. I had never used CVS before, so it was worth the learning experience. :-) Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: N/A 'MSWin32' !~ / MSWin32/
Created attachment 176306 [details] [diff] [review] patch to mozilla/toolkit/mozapps/installer/build_static.pl
Oops! I failed to explicitly state that the result of incorrectly detecting the platform in $(MOZ_SRC)/toolkit/mozapps/installer/build_static.pl is that the installer _WILL NOT_ build under Windows (i.e., this is not merely a cosmetic issue). CVS tag: FIREFOX_1_0_1_RELEASE
you have to ask for review on patches so that they have a chance to get checked in.
Assignee: chase → nobody
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Component: Build Config → Build Config
Ever confirmed: true
Product: Firefox → Toolkit
QA Contact: bryner → build-config
Comment on attachment 176306 [details] [diff] [review] patch to mozilla/toolkit/mozapps/installer/build_static.pl Since the reporter never responding, I'm taking the liberty to request first-review from bsmedberg since this code is still unchanged in trunk.
Attachment #176306 - Flags: first-review?(benjamin)
Comment on attachment 176306 [details] [diff] [review] patch to mozilla/toolkit/mozapps/installer/build_static.pl But obviously the installer *does* build, so I'm not sure what the issue is.
Attachment #176306 - Flags: first-review?(benjamin) → first-review+
(In reply to comment #5) > (From update of attachment 176306 [details] [diff] [review]) > But obviously the installer *does* build, so I'm not sure what the issue is. > My dated response is that it did not build on Windows when I reported this. I don't know whether this has been fixed as I'm no longer using Windows. By installer, I meant the self-extracting installer.
since the installer builds marking wfm
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.