If file structure on Linux is anywhere like Windows than the shared library (chrome.dll on Windows) would be versioned (the dll is kept inside a version directory on Windows) but the executable itself (chrome.exe) will always live at the same place. On Linux are we going to allow Chrome updates to happen while Chrome is running? In this is what we are aiming for forking sounds great since we will end up using the same exe version and this should work as long as we know which shared library we are using with it.
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Dan Kegel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Firefox behaves terribly upon update on Linux because > they didn't bother even trying to make distro updates > work well, and everybody uses distro packages for Firefox. > Let's avoid this same problem on Chrome for Linux. > Does that sound like a reasonable goal? We're > early enough in the port that it might not be too > hard to bake that feature in. > > What would it take to survive all our files changing > out from under us? I imagine it would suffice to: > > 1) open all the files we're going to need early, > and keep the handles around for when we need them > > 2) for our own executables, don't exec, only fork. > That would mean using a zygote, i.e. at startup time, > fork before creating any threads, and have the initial > instance just be a factory for anybody who needs another > instance of that executable. > > Is that practical, and did I miss anything? > - Dan > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
