It's quite confusing but "worker processes" [used for Web workers] & "utility processes" represent 2 different process types.
So: * Worker processes are enabled and Sandboxed on OS X. * Utiliity processes are disabled on OS X & Linux but the plumbing is now in place to Sandbox them when they're re-enabled. Best regards, Jeremy On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Antony Sargent <asarg...@chromium.org>wrote: > > http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/chrome/browser/utility_process_host.cc?r1=31090&r2=31091&pathrev=31091 > > I notice the following code is still in there: > > bool UtilityProcessHost::StartProcess(const FilePath& exposed_dir) { > #if defined(OS_POSIX) > // TODO(port): We should not reach here on Linux (crbug.com/22703). > // (crbug.com/23837) covers enabling this on Linux/OS X. > NOTREACHED(); > return false; > #endif > .... > > > If MacOS still defines OS_POSIX, doesn't this mean your changes further > down are not actually running? > > Also, by "worker process" did you mean "utility process"? (Do we have > something called a "worker process" for html5 worker threads?) > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Jeremy Moskovich <jer...@chromium.org>wrote: > >> r31091 <http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=31091>adds >> sandboxing for worker processes on Mac and infrastructure to do the >> same for the utility process which is currently disabled on Mac/Linux ( >> http://crbug.com/23837). >> >> All unit tests currently pass according to the buildbots but if you >> experience any issues with worker processes on Mac please try running Chrome >> with --no-sandbox . If that solves the issue please file a bug and assign it >> to me. >> >> Best regards, >> Jeremy >> >> >> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
