556256 - Explicitly set MOZ_MORKREADER and MOZ_MORK for Thunderbird and SeaMonkey, and sync enable places changes from bug 516758

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(MailNews Core :: Build Config, defect)

Description

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

Attachment: The fix

Following on from bug 516758 and before bug 556253 happens, I want to:

- explicitly set MOZ_MORK and MOZ_MORKREADER in confvars.sh for Thunderbird & SeaMonkey.
-- Bug 556253 will be setting the default to MOZ_MORKREADER=1 and MOZ_MORK=
-- Note that both apps will have MOZ_MORK set to 1 as we both build mailnews.
-- Thunderbird will clear MOZ_MORKREADER as it doesn't currently need that. SeaMonkey doesn't need to add it, as it builds places and therefore needs the mork reader.
-- SeaMonkey can have the MOZ_PLACES=1 removed as bug 516758 has set it by default.

- remove the --enable-places option as bug 516758 has done.

This won't affect 1.9.2 as:

- SeaMonkey doesn't build there.
- Thunderbird will just be explicit about what it is/isn't building.
- I don't care about --enable-places on 1.9.2, but in any case this removing the option from comm-central configure.in wouldn't have a bearing on that.

Comment 1

[Justin Wood (:Callek)]

Comment on attachment 436174 [details] [diff] [review]
The fix

note: m-c has applied a bustage fix for their landing that assists us here, might be good to get that backed out while your at it :-)

http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/aea2b08ae4a3

Comment 2

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

(In reply to comment #1)
> (From update of attachment 436174 [details] [diff] [review])
> note: m-c has applied a bustage fix for their landing that assists us here,
> might be good to get that backed out while your at it :-)
> 
> http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/aea2b08ae4a3

Yes, that's why we're doing this bug and bug 556253

Comment 3

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

Checked in: http://hg.mozilla.org/comm-central/rev/3179601351f1

Comment 4

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Could you put AC_SUBST(MOZ_PLACES) back were it stayed in m-c?

Were these changes actually meant for *-1.9.2, whereas bug 556253 was pushed to m-c only?

Comment 5

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

(In reply to comment #4)
> Were these changes actually meant for *-1.9.2, whereas bug 556253 was pushed to
> m-c only?

Try reading comment 0.