Respond to implications of storage of packed extensions (bug 533038) for Gecko 2

NEW
Unassigned

Status

Other Applications
DOM Inspector
8 years ago
7 years ago

People

(Reporter: crussell, Unassigned)

Tracking

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(URL)

By mwu's blog post, we should do one of two things:
* use <em:unpack>true</em:unpack>
  This means we're responsible for the user experiencing slower cold startup.
* Stop packing the chrome into a jar
  Compressed jars result in higher memory overhead.  I don't think there's any
  reason to continue using jars if they're uncompressed.  If we're not using
  <em:unpack>true</em:unpack>, though, apparently we lose the window icon.
(In reply to comment #0)
> * Stop packing the chrome into a jar
>   Compressed jars result in higher memory overhead.  I don't think there's any
>   reason to continue using jars if they're uncompressed.  If we're not using
>   <em:unpack>true</em:unpack>, though, apparently we lose the window icon.
I don't think we use compressed jars (at least the build system doesn't to my knowledge).  Non-compressed jars still can give you a win, but maybe not once add-ons are left in their xpi form.

Comment 2

7 years ago
Since bug 646519 attachment 582609 [details] [diff] [review] landed, the extension is installed unpacked.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.