Closed Bug 513709 (CcConfCleanup) Opened 11 years ago Closed 7 years ago

configure.in: Remove some useless vars, mozilla-* ones are enough

Categories

(MailNews Core :: Build Config, defect)

defect
Not set
trivial

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: sgautherie, Assigned: sgautherie)

References

(Depends on 1 open bug, )

Details

Attachments

(20 files, 3 obsolete files)

2.02 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.82 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
3.66 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
2.67 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
3.37 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
4.88 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
4.19 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
3.43 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
12.56 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
17.32 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
standard8
: superreview+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
8.72 KB, patch
standard8
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
3.27 KB, patch
Callek
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
2.40 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.67 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
15.35 KB, patch
Callek
: review+
kairo
: review+
standard8
: superreview-
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
2.90 KB, patch
Callek
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.98 KB, patch
Callek
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
6.98 KB, patch
Callek
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
2.08 KB, patch
Callek
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
4.22 KB, patch
kairo
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
This is spun off from my failing bug 496236 patch Ov2.
This var stays in mozilla-*.
Flags: in-testsuite-
I verified that only the mozilla-* var is used.
Attachment #397648 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Summary: configure.in: Remove useless WIN32_FONT_FEATURE → configure.in: Remove some useless vars, mozilla-* ones are enough
Attachment #397648 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Attachment #397654 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Attachment #397657 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Attachment #397786 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Succeeded on ThunderbirdTry.
Attachment #397847 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Attachment #397847 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Comment on attachment 397648 [details] [diff] [review]
(Av1) Just remove it (WIN32_FONT_FEATURE)
[Checkin: Comment 6]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/ea9ee8b64f5c
Attachment #397648 - Attachment description: (Av1) Just remove it → (Av1) Just remove it (WIN32_FONT_FEATURE) [Checkin: Comment 6]
Comment on attachment 397654 [details] [diff] [review]
(Bv1) Remove FC_FONT_FEATURE
[Checkin: Comment 7]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/2597fa4c0b78
Attachment #397654 - Attachment description: (Bv1) Remove FC_FONT_FEATURE → (Bv1) Remove FC_FONT_FEATURE [Checkin: Comment 7]
Comment on attachment 397657 [details] [diff] [review]
(Cv1) Remove FT_FONT_FEATURE
[Checkin: Comment 8]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/44f9a9bf6315
Attachment #397657 - Attachment description: (Cv1) Remove FT_FONT_FEATURE → (Cv1) Remove FT_FONT_FEATURE [Checkin: Comment 8]
Comment on attachment 397786 [details] [diff] [review]
(Dv1) Remove HAVE_FT_*, _HAVE_FREETYPE2 and related
[Checkin: Comment 9]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/74e8dd33f86e
Attachment #397786 - Attachment description: (Dv1) Remove HAVE_FT_*, _HAVE_FREETYPE2 and related → (Dv1) Remove HAVE_FT_*, _HAVE_FREETYPE2 and related [Checkin: Comment 9]
Attachment #397847 - Attachment description: (Ev1) Remove MOZ_ENABLE_CAIRO_FT → (Ev1) Remove MOZ_ENABLE_CAIRO_FT [Checkin: Comment 10]
Depends on: 514198
Depends on: 514215
Attachment #398233 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [c-n: Fv1 after SM 2.0b2 freeze]
Comment on attachment 398233 [details] [diff] [review]
(Fv1) Remove MOZ_CAIRO_CFLAGS and related, SANITY_CHECKING_FEATURE, QUARTZ_FONT_FEATURE, PNG_FUNCTIONS_FEATURE, *_SURFACE_FEATURE
[Checkin: Comment 12]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/0bb2a0ee37c1
Attachment #398233 - Attachment description: (Fv1) Remove MOZ_CAIRO_CFLAGS and related, SANITY_CHECKING_FEATURE, QUARTZ_FONT_FEATURE, PNG_FUNCTIONS_FEATURE, *_SURFACE_FEATURE → (Fv1) Remove MOZ_CAIRO_CFLAGS and related, SANITY_CHECKING_FEATURE, QUARTZ_FONT_FEATURE, PNG_FUNCTIONS_FEATURE, *_SURFACE_FEATURE [Checkin: Comment 12]
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [c-n: Fv1 after SM 2.0b2 freeze]
Eventually looked at and understood what these calls are actually doing :->
Attachment #398860 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Attachment #398860 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Comment on attachment 398860 [details] [diff] [review]
(Gv1) Restore still useful AC_CHECK_FT2(), CAIRO_VERSION and PKG_CHECK_MODULES()s, remove CAIRO_FT_CFLAGS
[Checkin: Comment 14]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/e70576f1ac8d
Attachment #398860 - Attachment description: (Gv1) Restore still useful AC_CHECK_FT2(), CAIRO_VERSION and PKG_CHECK_MODULES()s, remove CAIRO_FT_CFLAGS → (Gv1) Restore still useful AC_CHECK_FT2(), CAIRO_VERSION and PKG_CHECK_MODULES()s, remove CAIRO_FT_CFLAGS [Checkin: Comment 14]
Succeeded on ThunderbirdTry.
Attachment #399059 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Attachment #399059 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Comment on attachment 399059 [details] [diff] [review]
(Hv1) Remove FT2* and some of MOZ_TREE_FREETYPE
[Checkin: Comment 17]

didn't we just re-add some of this in the last patch? or are things too similar here for me to remember specifics? ;-)
Comment on attachment 399059 [details] [diff] [review]
(Hv1) Remove FT2* and some of MOZ_TREE_FREETYPE
[Checkin: Comment 17]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/16357b9e1e67


(In reply to comment #16)
> didn't we just re-add some of this in the last patch?

Yes, the AC_CHECK_FT2(): I wanted to get back to a working state first.
Attachment #399059 - Attachment description: (Hv1) Remove FT2* and some of MOZ_TREE_FREETYPE → (Hv1) Remove FT2* and some of MOZ_TREE_FREETYPE [Checkin: Comment 17]
Succeeded on ThunderbirdTry.
Attachment #399266 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Comment on attachment 399266 [details] [diff] [review]
(Iv1) Remove various vars (1/n)
[Checkin: Comment 29]

>-MOZ_ENABLE_XREMOTE	= @MOZ_ENABLE_XREMOTE@

Are you sure that xremote does still work on Linux builds with this change? I'm a bit nervous as mozilla/toolkit/xre/nsAppRunner.cpp is being included via |LOCAL_INCLUDES += -I$(MOZILLA_SRCDIR)/toolkit/xre| in suite/app et al.

>-MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_DEFAULT = @MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_DEFAULT@
>-MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_BASIC = @MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_BASIC@
>-MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_MINIMAL = @MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_MINIMAL@

And we surely don't need those when we want to create an embedded Thunderbird version or something similar?
(In reply to comment #19)
> (From update of attachment 399266 [details] [diff] [review])
> >-MOZ_ENABLE_XREMOTE	= @MOZ_ENABLE_XREMOTE@
> 
> Are you sure that xremote does still work on Linux builds with this change? I'm

I have no idea: all I check is that the vars are not (directly) used in comm-central...

> a bit nervous as mozilla/toolkit/xre/nsAppRunner.cpp is being included via
> |LOCAL_INCLUDES += -I$(MOZILLA_SRCDIR)/toolkit/xre| in suite/app et al.

Is tgere any way I can automatically check that from ThunderbirdTry?
Otherwise, I guess someone with Linux would need to download and try
http://s3.mozillamessaging.com/build/try-server/2009-09-08_08:33-sgautherie.bz@free.fr-513709-Iv1_various-1_1729/sgautherie.bz@free.fr-513709-Iv1_various-1_1729-mail-try-linux.tar.bz2

> >-MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_DEFAULT = @MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_DEFAULT@
> >-MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_BASIC = @MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_BASIC@
> >-MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_MINIMAL = @MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_MINIMAL@
> 
> And we surely don't need those when we want to create an embedded Thunderbird
> version or something similar?

Fwiw, the only actual (non-)user in c-c/m-* is
{
/toolkit/library/libxul-config.mk
    * line 100 -- #ifndef MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_DEFAULT
}

How can one check if it's needed or not in c-c?
(In reply to comment #20)
> > a bit nervous as mozilla/toolkit/xre/nsAppRunner.cpp is being included via
> > |LOCAL_INCLUDES += -I$(MOZILLA_SRCDIR)/toolkit/xre| in suite/app et al.
> 
> Is tgere any way I can automatically check that from ThunderbirdTry?

Not that I know of, I'm pretty sure someone needs to test a tryserver build to be sure.

> Fwiw, the only actual (non-)user in c-c/m-* is
> {
> /toolkit/library/libxul-config.mk
>     * line 100 -- #ifndef MOZ_EMBEDDING_LEVEL_DEFAULT
> }
> 
> How can one check if it's needed or not in c-c?

Ah, right, I guess we're pretty safe with this then.
(In reply to comment #19)
> (From update of attachment 399266 [details] [diff] [review])
> >-MOZ_ENABLE_XREMOTE	= @MOZ_ENABLE_XREMOTE@
> 
> Are you sure that xremote does still work on Linux builds with this change? I'm
> a bit nervous as mozilla/toolkit/xre/nsAppRunner.cpp is being included via
> |LOCAL_INCLUDES += -I$(MOZILLA_SRCDIR)/toolkit/xre| in suite/app et al.

I tried to learn a little more about these and I'm not sure I understand your comment:
*Ftr, LOCAL_INCLUDES in c-c seem to refer to 2 MOZILLA_SRCDIR dirs only:
 toolkit/xre and xpcom/tests.
http://mxr.mozilla.org/comm-central/search?string=toolkit%2Fxre&case=on&find=%2Fapp%2FMakefile%5C.in%24
*nsAppRunner.cpp doesn't seem to be included anywhere.
 (And I wouldn't expect (such) a cpp file to be included.)
*MOZ_ENABLE_XREMOTE is not used in any .h file:
http://mxr.mozilla.org/comm-central/search?string=MOZ_ENABLE_XREMOTE&case=on&find=%5C.h

What do you think would be wrong exactly?
I at least know that nsSuiteApp.cpp directly calls functions from nsAppRunner.cpp so I assumed it actually is being included in some way. Unfortunately, I don't really understand C/C++ enough to know how the mechanics work.
(In reply to comment #23)

> I at least know that nsSuiteApp.cpp directly calls functions from
> nsAppRunner.cpp so I assumed it actually is being included in some way.

*.h provides the function declarations (to c-c compiler),
xulapp_s.$(LIB_SUFFIX) is built (in m-*) first then provides the called functions (to c-c linker).

> Unfortunately, I don't really understand C/C++ enough to know how the mechanics
> work.

Then, removing MOZ_ENABLE_XREMOTE from c-c seems safe, afaict.
Attachment #399266 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Comment on attachment 399266 [details] [diff] [review]
(Iv1) Remove various vars (1/n)
[Checkin: Comment 29]

OK, then let's at least look closely for eventual bug reports if we're wrong ;-)
Comment on attachment 399266 [details] [diff] [review]
(Iv1) Remove various vars (1/n)
[Checkin: Comment 29]

"approval-thunderbird3=?":
Not needed for TBv3.0b4, but should be no risk.
Attachment #399266 - Flags: approval-thunderbird3?
Attachment #399266 - Flags: approval-thunderbird3? → approval-thunderbird3-
Comment on attachment 399266 [details] [diff] [review]
(Iv1) Remove various vars (1/n)
[Checkin: Comment 29]

Given this is just tidy up and doesn't add any value to b4, I'd prefer just to wait a few days.
Comment on attachment 399266 [details] [diff] [review]
(Iv1) Remove various vars (1/n)
[Checkin: Comment 29]

"approval-thunderbird3=?":
Re-asking, this time for TBv3.0.
Attachment #399266 - Flags: approval-thunderbird3- → approval-thunderbird3?
Attachment #399266 - Flags: approval-thunderbird3? → approval-thunderbird3+
Comment on attachment 399266 [details] [diff] [review]
(Iv1) Remove various vars (1/n)
[Checkin: Comment 29]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/322f46abfa44
Attachment #399266 - Attachment description: (Iv1) Remove various vars (1/n) → (Iv1) Remove various vars (1/n) [Checkin: Comment 29]
Succeeded on ThunderbirdTry.
Attachment #401190 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Attachment #401190 - Flags: approval-thunderbird3?
Attachment #401190 - Flags: superreview?(bugzilla)
Attachment #401190 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Attachment #401190 - Flags: review+
Comment on attachment 401190 [details] [diff] [review]
(Jv1) Remove various vars (2/n)
[Checkin: Comment 33]

Looks good to me, but I wonder that we can remove the libIDL stuff, I'd like Mark to give his OK on those parts.
Comment on attachment 401190 [details] [diff] [review]
(Jv1) Remove various vars (2/n)
[Checkin: Comment 33]

From what I can see the libIDL parts are just affecting/required in the mozilla-central build system, so we don't need them. sr+a=Standard8.
Attachment #401190 - Flags: superreview?(bugzilla)
Attachment #401190 - Flags: superreview+
Attachment #401190 - Flags: approval-thunderbird3?
Attachment #401190 - Flags: approval-thunderbird3+
Comment on attachment 401190 [details] [diff] [review]
(Jv1) Remove various vars (2/n)
[Checkin: Comment 33]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/6df1d7e9b63c
Attachment #401190 - Attachment description: (Jv1) Remove various vars (2/n) → (Jv1) Remove various vars (2/n) [Checkin: Comment 33]
Depends on: 521624
Attachment #405188 - Flags: approval-thunderbird3?
Comment on attachment 405188 [details] [diff] [review]
(Kv1) Remove various vars (3/n)
[Checkin: Comment 44]

> dnl Set various checks
> dnl ========================================================
>-MISSING_X=
> AC_PROG_AWK
...
>-	AC_CHECK_LIB(X11, XDrawLines, [X11_LIBS="-lX11"],
>-		[MISSING_X="$MISSING_X -lX11"], $XLIBS)
>-	AC_CHECK_LIB(Xext, XextAddDisplay, [XEXT_LIBS="-lXext"],
>-		[MISSING_X="$MISSING_X -lXext"], $XLIBS)
>+	AC_CHECK_LIB(X11, XDrawLines, [X11_LIBS="-lX11"],, $XLIBS)
>+	AC_CHECK_LIB(Xext, XextAddDisplay, [XEXT_LIBS="-lXext"],, $XLIBS)
...
>-        AC_CHECK_LIB(Xt, XtFree, [ XT_LIBS="-lXt $XT_LIBS"],
>-		    [MISSING_X="$MISSING_X -lXt"], $X_PRE_LIBS $XT_LIBS $XLIBS)
>+        AC_CHECK_LIB(Xt, XtFree, [ XT_LIBS="-lXt $XT_LIBS"],, $X_PRE_LIBS $XT_LIBS $XLIBS)
...
>-    if test ! -z "$MISSING_X"; then
>-        AC_MSG_ERROR([ Could not find the following X libraries: $MISSING_X ]);
>-    fi
>-

I can't see any reason why it is useful or wanted to remove the MISSING_X checks here. The rest looks ok though.

Looks like mozilla-central could remove some of the other stuff as well.
Attachment #405188 - Flags: review?(bugzilla) → review-
(In reply to comment #35)

> I can't see any reason why it is useful or wanted to remove the MISSING_X
> checks here.

Well, just the point of this bug: what good does it do to keep/maintain MISSING_X when it's already in m-c?

> Looks like mozilla-central could remove some of the other stuff as well.

Sure, and I've filed 1+ bugs about things like this ... but I can't take care of m-c :-/
Attachment #405188 - Flags: review?(bugzilla)
Depends on: 543271
Attachment #424415 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review+
Comment on attachment 424415 [details] [diff] [review]
(Lv1) Remove NS_PRINTING and NS_PRINT_PREVIEW
[Checkin: Comment 38]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/7486acf567e0
Attachment #424415 - Attachment description: (Lv1) Remove NS_PRINTING and NS_PRINT_PREVIEW → (Lv1) Remove NS_PRINTING and NS_PRINT_PREVIEW [Checkin: Comment 38]
(In reply to comment #36)
> Well, just the point of this bug: what good does it do to keep/maintain
> MISSING_X when it's already in m-c?

I wonder, would that mean that configure for us runs without problems and then only fails when running the m-c one? Should we expect other things to come along and use this variable?
(In reply to comment #37)
> (Lv1) Remove NS_PRINTING and NS_PRINT_PREVIEW

As a side note, luckily I noticed that it's gone as I had NS_PRINTING in use in my first version of the bug 521523 patch, along with a few other vars that are gone. If it's only in packaging, I guess it doesn't matter if we print a warning that the file doesn't exist when something like that is disabled.

Unfortunately, we now can't get a Qt port of comm-central apps working any more, as that port doesn't implement NS_PRINTING and our Qt compile failures in mailnews are exactly because of that.
(In reply to comment #39)

> > MISSING_X when it's already in m-c?
> 
> would that mean that configure for us runs without problems and then
> only fails when running the m-c one?

Exactly: the assumption in this bug is that c-c doesn't want to care (anymore) for things it doesn't use itself (even if that means (gracefully) failing to build a little later).

> Should we expect other things to come along and use this variable?

Well, I have no way to know, but if this happens in the future we'll restore the needed part at that time.

(In reply to comment #40)
> As a side note, luckily I noticed that it's gone as I had NS_PRINTING in use in
> my first version of the bug 521523 patch, along with a few other vars that are
> gone. If it's only in packaging, I guess it doesn't matter if we print a
> warning that the file doesn't exist when something like that is disabled.

Note that I don't like warnings and I'm all in favor of keeping variables that are useful in packaging only:
in this case, I removed it because it was used nowhere in c-c (currently) :-|
Then, I'm ready to restore+use (in separate bugs) all variables you would list !
(In reply to comment #40)
> Unfortunately, we now can't get a Qt port of comm-central apps working any
> more, as that port doesn't implement NS_PRINTING and our Qt compile failures in
> mailnews are exactly because of that.

I think I saw a bug related to this...
If its fixing needs NS_PRINTING, then it seems a good reason to restore(+use) at least this variable!
(In reply to comment #42)
> (In reply to comment #40)
> > Unfortunately, we now can't get a Qt port of comm-central apps working any
> > more, as that port doesn't implement NS_PRINTING and our Qt compile failures in
> > mailnews are exactly because of that.
> 
> I think I saw a bug related to this...
> If its fixing needs NS_PRINTING, then it seems a good reason to restore(+use)
> at least this variable!

This is bug 482312, and I pointed to NS_PRINTING there, but it seems to me that currently nobody really cares about mailnews on the Qt port.
Attachment #405188 - Flags: review?(bugzilla)
Attachment #405188 - Flags: review-
Attachment #405188 - Flags: review+
Comment on attachment 405188 [details] [diff] [review]
(Kv1) Remove various vars (3/n)
[Checkin: Comment 44]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/40193c79a97d
Attachment #405188 - Attachment description: (Kv1) Remove various vars (3/n) → (Kv1) Remove various vars (3/n) [Checkin: Comment 44]
Depends on: 544913
(In reply to comment #43)

I filed bug 544913.
Alias: CcConfCleanup
Depends on: 545133
Attached patch (Mv1) Remove various vars (4/n) (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #426909 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #426909 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review?(kairo)
Comment on attachment 426909 [details] [diff] [review]
(Mv1) Remove various vars (4/n)

>Various =
>*EAZEL*, PROFILER_*,
>MOZ_PROFILE_MODULES,

What are those? Might we need those in the end?

>MOZ_PERF_METRICS,
>MOZ_REFLOW_PERF*.

Those look good to me.
Mv1, with comment 47 suggestion(s).

(In reply to comment #47)

> >*EAZEL*, PROFILER_*,
> >MOZ_PROFILE_MODULES,

I'll move these to bug 513924.

> >MOZ_PERF_METRICS,

Moved to bug 457949.

> >MOZ_REFLOW_PERF*.

Only these remain for this patch.
Attachment #426909 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #426930 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Attachment #426909 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Depends on: 485405
Attachment #426930 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Comment on attachment 426930 [details] [diff] [review]
(Mv2) Remove MOZ_REFLOW_PERF*
[Checkin: Comment 49]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/2b5f3bd9e71a
Attachment #426930 - Attachment description: (Mv2) Remove MOZ_REFLOW_PERF* → (Mv2) Remove MOZ_REFLOW_PERF* [Checkin: Comment 49]
Attachment #427365 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Comment on attachment 427365 [details] [diff] [review]
(Ov1) Remove "MOZ_BUILD_APP = xulrunner" support
[Checkin: Comment 51]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/6528d2f62780
Attachment #427365 - Attachment description: (Ov1) Remove "MOZ_BUILD_APP = xulrunner" support → (Ov1) Remove "MOZ_BUILD_APP = xulrunner" support [Checkin: Comment 51]
Attachment #427604 - Flags: superreview?(bugzilla)
Attachment #427604 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Attachment #427604 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #427604 - Flags: review+
Comment on attachment 427604 [details] [diff] [review]
(Nv1) Remove some NSPR+NSS related vars

The NATIVE_[NSS|NSPR] change is good, as is the MDCPUCFG stuff.

I'm skeptical the PTHREADS defines of _REENTRANT or _THREAD_SAFE are worth doing.

And I'm not confident one way or the other with the Win CRT Dir changes.

(the sr is more for Mark's viewing of the pthread changes, but happy to have him review whole patch)
Comment on attachment 427604 [details] [diff] [review]
(Nv1) Remove some NSPR+NSS related vars

Looks basically good to me, but let's have Mark sign off the _REENTRANT/_THREAD_SAFE stuff.
Attachment #427604 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
We support QT but don't intend to compile any specific file.
Attachment #427673 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Depends on: 545320
Attachment #427716 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review+
Comment on attachment 427716 [details] [diff] [review]
(Qv1) Remove MOZ_DISABLE_PARENTAL_CONTROLS
[Checkin: Comment 57]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/4b9fd9862902
Attachment #427716 - Attachment description: (Qv1) Remove MOZ_DISABLE_PARENTAL_CONTROLS → (Qv1) Remove MOZ_DISABLE_PARENTAL_CONTROLS [Checkin: Comment 57]
I know nothing about WinCE, but I assume c-c doesn't need to rebuild the tools.
Attachment #427985 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Rv1, WINCE_SDK_DIR part only.

I realized this is configure, not Makefile, so c-c runs before m-c... :->
Attachment #427985 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #427985 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #427988 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Attachment #427988 - Attachment description: (Rv2) Remove WINCE_SDK_DIR → (Rv2) Remove AC_SUBST(WINCE_SDK_DIR)
Comment on attachment 427673 [details] [diff] [review]
(Pv1) Remove some QT related vars

I'm not sure that we can remove those and still build the Qt port, I'll need to test it.
Depends on: 444022
Attachment #427988 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review+
Comment on attachment 427988 [details] [diff] [review]
(Rv2) Remove AC_SUBST(WINCE_SDK_DIR)
[Checkin: Comment 62]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/944473ba03cf
Attachment #427988 - Attachment description: (Rv2) Remove AC_SUBST(WINCE_SDK_DIR) → (Rv2) Remove AC_SUBST(WINCE_SDK_DIR) [Checkin: Comment 62]
Depends on: 509179
Depends on: 548600
Attachment #428004 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review+
Comment on attachment 428004 [details] [diff] [review]
(Sv1) Remove MOZ_ACTIVEX_SCRIPTING_SUPPORT, MOZ_LEAKY, MOZ_XPCTOOLS, XPC_IDISPATCH_SUPPORT
[Checkin: Comment 64]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/97196906ae5d
Attachment #428004 - Attachment description: (Sv1) Remove MOZ_ACTIVEX_SCRIPTING_SUPPORT, MOZ_LEAKY, MOZ_XPCTOOLS, XPC_IDISPATCH_SUPPORT → (Sv1) Remove MOZ_ACTIVEX_SCRIPTING_SUPPORT, MOZ_LEAKY, MOZ_XPCTOOLS, XPC_IDISPATCH_SUPPORT [Checkin: Comment 64]
Attachment #428932 - Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review+
Comment on attachment 428932 [details] [diff] [review]
(Tv1) Remove MOZ_GNOMEVFS_*
[Checkin: Comment 65]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/c1aa17c4abf5
Attachment #428932 - Attachment description: (Tv1) Remove MOZ_GNOMEVFS_* → (Tv1) Remove MOZ_GNOMEVFS_* [Checkin: Comment 65]
Comment on attachment 427673 [details] [diff] [review]
(Pv1) Remove some QT related vars

r- right now, the patch has bitrotted so I can't test it. At least the Qt port compiles again here so I can test once the patch has been unbitrotted.
Attachment #427673 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review-
Same patch, just rebased .
Attachment #427673 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #435070 - Flags: review?(kairo)
Attachment #427673 - Flags: review-
Comment on attachment 435070 [details] [diff] [review]
(Pv1) Remove some QT related vars
[Checkin: See comment 69+70]

OK, a Qt-based build compiles and runs with that, so it seems to be fine.
Attachment #435070 - Flags: review?(kairo) → review+
Comment on attachment 435070 [details] [diff] [review]
(Pv1) Remove some QT related vars
[Checkin: See comment 69+70]


http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/b90af1833692
Attachment #435070 - Attachment description: (Pv1) Remove some QT related vars → (Pv1) Remove some QT related vars [Checkin: Comment 69]
Comment on attachment 435070 [details] [diff] [review]
(Pv1) Remove some QT related vars
[Checkin: See comment 69+70]


+
http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/7266e3e0fe87
(Uv1) Pv1 removed the "wrong" AC_SUBST(MOZ_QT_*).
Attachment #435070 - Attachment description: (Pv1) Remove some QT related vars [Checkin: Comment 69] → (Pv1) Remove some QT related vars [Checkin: See comment 69+70]
Comment on attachment 427604 [details] [diff] [review]
(Nv1) Remove some NSPR+NSS related vars

Searching around the internet I see various references to _REENTRANT and _THREAD_SAFE being required for libraries to work right in various situations although in others they indicate they are maybe not necessary.

I'd therefore much rather consider those flags on a standalone bug where we can get input from m-c build guys and any other appropriate people.
Attachment #427604 - Flags: superreview?(bugzilla) → superreview-
Depends on: C192ConfSync
No longer depends on: 514198
Depends on: 803854
Depends on: 873834
I'm marking this as fixed - the bug itself is no longer necessary, since the recent landing of bug 856540 which removed the duplication of mozilla-central, and moved only what we require out to app dependent configure.in files. Hence there's no more simplification to do to configure.in.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.