737975 - [Tracking] write setup/configs needed for generating metrofx builds on mozilla-central

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 747347

(Core :: General, defect)

Comment 1

[John O'Duinn [:joduinn] (please use "needinfo?" flag)]

per email w/jimm:

morphing subject to match reality and avoid confusion with bug#737994

Comment 2

[Armen [:armenzg]]

Does anybody know if we can make a build for win8 that can be run on 64-bit, 32-bit and arm? or do we have to generate one build for each one of these architectures?
and can they run on win7 or previous?

Comment 3

[Jim Mathies [:jimm]]

(In reply to Armen Zambrano G. [:armenzg] - Release Engineer from comment #2)
> Does anybody know if we can make a build for win8 that can be run on 64-bit,
> 32-bit and arm? or do we have to generate one build for each one of these
> architectures?
> and can they run on win7 or previous?

32-bit builds run on both 32-bit and 64-bit os, just like our current builds. AFAIK we've never supported an windows arm port. As for win8 arm, currently Microsoft is restricting those devices to pure winrt based metro apps available through the app store which would exclude firefox. So we really don't need to be concerned about arm for now.

Dependent bug 737994 relates to using our existing win2008 build servers to do builds that use vc11, include the win8 code bits, and run on all supported os. Currently we only have one hard blocker on universal builds which is blocker bug 744942 (issues with the new vc11 crt libs on XP).

Comment 4

[Armen [:armenzg]]

bug 744942 has a lot of info.
What is the overall status/timeline?

I would prefer to have that working so we can generate only one Windows build that could work on all OSes rather that one for XP and another for all the other ones.

Assuming IIUC.

Comment 5

[Jim Mathies [:jimm]]

(In reply to Armen Zambrano G. [:armenzg] - Release Engineer from comment #4)
> bug 744942 has a lot of info.
> What is the overall status/timeline?
> 
> I would prefer to have that working so we can generate only one Windows
> build that could work on all OSes rather that one for XP and another for all
> the other ones.
> 
> Assuming IIUC.

Armen, how does the inability to run on xp affect your work? If the issue is tests we should disable any xp test runs. As far as fixing bug 744942 it's a priority but but I can't say exactly when something will land on elm/mc to address it. Within the next two months?

Comment 6

[Armen [:armenzg]]

Perhaps I worded it incorrectly.
I am trying to figure out release logistics.
Would we have to release two different Windows installers? The current w32 one plus the win8 builds? or would the win8 produced builds be able to run on every Windows up to XP?

Comment 7

[Jim Mathies [:jimm]]

(In reply to Armen Zambrano G. [:armenzg] - Release Engineer from comment #6)
> Perhaps I worded it incorrectly.
> I am trying to figure out release logistics.
> Would we have to release two different Windows installers?

Not at this point. 

> The current w32
> one plus the win8 builds? or would the win8 produced builds be able to run
> on every Windows up to XP?

We have some ideas on how to get vc11 builds running on xp. Bug 744942 tracks that work.