<formletter>It has been decreed (or requested at any rate) that our release
(read non-debug) builds must not print anything to the console when the app is
running. See bug 76720 for details. I have done a preliminary tree scouring
and created mini-patches for each module that has bare printfs. These patches
are not all inclusive as I didn't even think about xul/js output until post
scour so module owners & peers will still need to scour their modules themselves
as well as make sure the preliminary patches do not break anything.</formletter>
Created attachment 33039 [details] [diff] [review]
Sorry about the additional spammage but I should clear up a couple of things
before everyone starts replying.
1) I'm just the messenger. Discussions outside of the specific module/patches
should be discussed in the parent bug ( bug 76720).
2) I have no intention of checking in the patches as is; that's why the bugs are
assigned to someone else ;).
3) The patches are the result of a far & wide-reaching grep across the entire
tree. They may affect some cases that are not even used and they are far from
4) Some platforms/ports will not need the printfs shutoff as they use other
mechanisms to stop the printfs. That's fine. Note it in the bug and close it
as invalid(?). Depending upon the platform/port some people may still be
interested in removing the overhead from the printfs.
76720 is targetted for 0.9.1, setting same.
kandrot, are you looking at this?
I guess this needs a sr=, then I can check it in.
dribble this in as you can get to it. not critical for
the 0.9.1 betas that I know of.
moving the target milestone to reduce the size of the list.
check it in in the next week if its ready.
I think seawood can super review.
Sorry, I'm just a build geek not a strong hacker. :) I believe scc is the sr
for xpcom issues (even though this is a trivial change)
wish there was something helpful I could say about this patch but it's fairly
straightforward (if long). The only part approaching taxing is verifying the
|CHECK_COUNT| macro. What is the case that would make the |PR_FALSE| side of
this happen? Is there a way to test this? Other than that minor concern, sr=scc
lets keep dribbling these [console] bugs into the tree as quick as we
can, but they shouldn't hold up or block 0.9.1 so moving the target milestone
reassign all kandrot xpcom bug.
cls, save us. do you have another patch so that I can pull this in?
Sorry, I do not.