295023 - XULRunner example app doesn't handle flat chrome

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Toolkit Graveyard :: XULRunner, defect)

Description

[Alex Vincent [:WeirdAl]]

I compiled XULRunner with my standard .mozconfig, which includes
--enable-chrome-format=flat.  I was mightily unimpressed by the results.

Basically, nothing renders in the window.

The first time through, I got a lot of messages from nsChromeProtocolHandler:
printf("Chrome file doesn't exist: %s\n", path.get());

path.get() included make-jars.pl...

The second time through (after rebuilding with jars and then switching back to
flat chrome building), I had warnings everywhere.  It looked like nothing in the
chrome:// protocol was working, including the string bundle for XML
well-formedness errors.

Steps to reproduce:
(1) Edit your .mozconfig for a fresh objdir and to add:
ac_add_options --enable-chrome-format=flat

(2) make -f client.mk build

(3) From the objdir:
./xulrunner ../xpi-stage/simple/application.ini

Expected Results:
Simple App renders.

Actual Results:
Unusable window.

Comment 1

[Alex Vincent [:WeirdAl]]

Bug is still present, and I figured out why.

The chrome.manifest files are written for jarred chrome.  When I change:
http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/xulrunner/examples/simple/chrome.manifest

to contain:

content simple simple/content/simple/
locale simple en-US en-US/locale/en-US/simple/

Then the widget works.

This is a general problem with all the chrome.manifest files, I'm sure.

In JavaScript, if str were the contents of the file,
str.replace(/jar:(.*)\.jar!/g, "$1");

Comment 2

[Alex Vincent [:WeirdAl]]

Oops.  I realized just now this applied only to the sample application.  The
generated files in dist/bin/chrome follow the right pattern.

Comment 3

[Alex Vincent [:WeirdAl]]

Attachment: patch, v1

A one-line change to Makefile.in ensures the chrome is always jarred, and that
chrome.manifest will work.

Comment 4

[Benjamin Smedberg]

Comment on attachment 195105 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v1

Why don't we just support flat chrome? The only reason that we are
hand-generating the chrome.manifest right now is because we didn't have the
better jar.mn system.

Comment 5

[Alex Vincent [:WeirdAl]]

If you wish.  :)  I personally don't care one way or the other; I don't know
what XULRunner does support.

Comment 6

[Benjamin Smedberg]

Comment on attachment 195105 [details] [diff] [review]
patch, v1

If the chrome is registered from within jar.mn this problem goes away.

Comment 7

[Nickolay_Ponomarev]

Attachment: use jar.mn to create manifests

Is this it? I'm not experienced with mozilla's build machinery.

I also dropped the last parts of "en-US(.jar)/locale/en-US/simple/" and "simple(.jar)/content/simple/" paths, since it is unnecessary for a simple example, which only has a single chrome provider of each type.

Comment 8

[:Gavin Sharp [email: [e-mail]]]

mozilla/xulrunner/examples/simple/Makefile.in; new revision: 1.9;
mozilla/xulrunner/examples/simple/chrome.manifest; new revision: delete;
mozilla/xulrunner/examples/simple/jar.mn; new revision: 1.3;