Last Comment Bug 78667 - [console] xpcom must not print to console in opt builds
: [console] xpcom must not print to console in opt builds
: helpwanted
Product: Core
Classification: Components
Component: XPCOM (show other bugs)
: Trunk
: All All
P2 trivial (vote)
: Future
Assigned To: Nobody; OK to take it and work on it
: Nathan Froyd [:froydnj]
Depends on:
Blocks: 76720
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2001-05-02 23:28 PDT by cls
Modified: 2012-01-24 15:05 PST (History)
1 user (show)
See Also:
Crash Signature:
QA Whiteboard:
Iteration: ---
Points: ---
Has Regression Range: ---
Has STR: ---

prelim patch (17.88 KB, patch)
2001-05-02 23:28 PDT, cls
no flags Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Description User image cls 2001-05-02 23:28:12 PDT
<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>
Comment 1 User image cls 2001-05-02 23:28:55 PDT
Created attachment 33039 [details] [diff] [review]
prelim patch
Comment 2 User image cls 2001-05-02 23:55:55 PDT
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.
Comment 3 User image Jon Granrose 2001-05-08 17:11:10 PDT
76720 is targetted for 0.9.1, setting same.
Comment 4 User image chris hofmann 2001-05-08 22:11:38 PDT
kandrot,  are you looking at this?
Comment 5 User image Edward Kandrot 2001-05-14 17:07:11 PDT
I guess this needs a sr=, then I can check it in.
Comment 6 User image chris hofmann 2001-05-14 17:20:58 PDT
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.
Comment 7 User image cls 2001-05-14 20:33:43 PDT
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)
Comment 8 User image Scott Collins 2001-05-15 12:59:30 PDT
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
Comment 9 User image chris hofmann 2001-05-15 21:55:47 PDT
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
to 0.9.2.
Comment 10 User image Doug Turner (:dougt) 2001-08-28 09:19:17 PDT
reassign all kandrot xpcom bug.
Comment 11 User image Doug Turner (:dougt) 2001-10-01 14:11:14 PDT
cls, save us.  do you have another patch so that I can pull this in?
Comment 12 User image hacker formerly known as 2001-10-02 14:49:43 PDT
Sorry, I do not.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.