Closed
Bug 288690
Opened 20 years ago
Closed 20 years ago
make version_win.pl able to use the app name from configure vars
Categories
(Firefox Build System :: General, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla1.8beta2
People
(Reporter: kairo, Assigned: kairo)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
|
5.70 KB,
patch
|
benjamin
:
review+
chase
:
superreview+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
While working on rebranding our suite application (bug 285696), I discovered we are currently hardcoding our application name in module.ver as well as splash.rc, which are both process by version_win.pl to create a module.res file. To make branding work for different products easier, I figured that perl script could use the MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME var from configure to more or less preprocess that data while creating module.res, and we get better and easier branded binary files as a result. A patch follows, though I'm no Windows guy, I'm currently building on WinXP with my suite rebranding patch, which contains those changes, and it seems to work...
| Assignee | ||
Comment 1•20 years ago
|
||
Here's the patch. What it does is adding a -DISPNAME option to version_win.pl and use it where it makes sense, so that we can stuff @MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME@ strings into module.ver and splash.rc - this may be no complete solution for getting a generic module.ver, but it goes a nice part of the way. We can now do e.g. those: splash.rc: ID_DDE_APPLICATION_NAME, "@MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME@" IDS_STARTMENU_APPNAME, "@MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME@" module.ver: WIN32_MODULE_DESCRIPTION=@MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME@ WIN32_MODULE_PRODUCTNAME=@MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME@ WIN32_MODULE_NAME=@MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME@ Additionally, the displayname gets the default productname, if set. I think this might help in doing some aviary builds without trademark stuff as well...
Attachment #179316 -
Flags: review?(benjamin)
Comment 2•20 years ago
|
||
We may want to use a different approach on this file. version_win.pl sets the information displayed in the Windows dll files' properities view. Properly speaking the product name here should be "Gecko" not the application that happens to be using Gecko as it's rendering engine. Simply changing the line: my $productname = "Mozilla"; to my $productname = "Gecko"; Would be more accurate and work with all applications using Gecko.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 3•20 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #2) > my $productname = "Gecko"; > > Would be more accurate and work with all applications using Gecko. I certainly don't want mozilla.exe or firefox.exe call itself "Gecko". If we want the DLLs be called "Gecko" (I'd think there should be a "Mozilla" in though, as "Mozilla" is the trademarked name of the platform actually), then we may think of replacing the default productname, but I'd prefer to call them "Mozilla". The most important part for me is that I can use @MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME@ in splash.rc and module.ver, and that ASAP (meaning Gecko-1.8b2 level), so please don't stop that patch by such hypothetical views.
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.8beta2
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #179316 -
Flags: review?(benjamin) → review+
| Assignee | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #179316 -
Flags: superreview?(chase)
Comment 4•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 179316 [details] [diff] [review] patch: add a -DISPNAME option and use it sr=chase
Attachment #179316 -
Flags: superreview?(chase) → superreview+
| Assignee | ||
Comment 5•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 179316 [details] [diff] [review] patch: add a -DISPNAME option and use it requesting approval. This patch alone shouldn't change anything in our applications, but it gives us the possibility of rebranding them more easily (module.ver and splsh.rc recognize @MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME@ strings and replace them by the display name as set by configure)
Attachment #179316 -
Flags: approval1.8b2?
Comment 6•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 179316 [details] [diff] [review] patch: add a -DISPNAME option and use it a=asa
Attachment #179316 -
Flags: approval1.8b2? → approval1.8b2+
| Assignee | ||
Comment 7•20 years ago
|
||
checked in. We may want to replace the version number in module.ver as well, I realized in the last days. I'll probably have to look into how to do it best in another bug one time...
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 20 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
| Assignee | ||
Comment 8•19 years ago
|
||
> We may want to replace the version number in module.ver as well, I realized in > the last days. I'll probably have to look into how to do it best in another bug > one time... I filed bug 316387 for that.
Updated•7 years ago
|
Product: Core → Firefox Build System
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•