On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]> wrote:

> Wow... we definitely have re-entrancy bugs with --in-process-plugins that
> are not worth fixing.
> Command line options like this are, however, kind of nice since it allows
> you to tell
> a user to try the flag to see if it fixes a particular problem.  Maybe we
> could allow the
> option but show a MessageBox at startup warning them about the fact that
> the option
> is unsupported and potentially hazardous to the stability of Chrome.
>

But then we still have the same side-effects (less security, crash reports).
 I think this is a small enough use-case, that pointing users towards
Chromium or Debug Chrome builds is almost just as good, while avoiding the
overhead with having official Chrome builds used in untested and buggy
configurations.


>
> -Darin
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:16 PM, John Abd-El-Malek <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> I was looking at the second top crasher in 2.0.166.1, and it turned out
>> that these users are running with --in-process-plugins.  This turns off the
>> sandbox and runs plugins in the renderer process.
>> So far we've exposed all the internal command line switches to all users,
>> but I'm wondering if that has outlived its usefulness. We don't test
>> either mode on chromebot, while in-process-plugins doesn't even have any
>> tests. I don't think spending much development time on these modes is worth
>> the opportunity cost.
>>
>> The flip side is in the past they have been useful to have around, i.e.
>> when someone complains about a bug, we sometimes ask them to try these
>> modes.
>>
>> So I propose that we disable these flags in release builds, and if we want
>> to test on users, we can point them towards debug builds off the build
>> server. Obviously this is more work for them, but I think this avoids
>> distracting us with looking at modes that are only used by a minority of
>> users, and which we know are already broken. The bigger issue is why these
>> users used those modes. I think in the past we might have suggested it to
>> people if they had performance problems etc, but hopefully these are taken
>> care of by now, and if not, better to know it anyways by having these users
>> use the standard multi-process mode.
>>
>> Any strong opposition to this?
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to