Hi,
we're trying to build the mozilla 1.4 xpconnect standalone variant here. We've done this for 1.1, but gotten to the point where we're seriously questioning whether xpconnect standalone is still in a usable state. This worked for 1.1:
export CVSROOT=":pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvsroot" cvs -z 3 co mozilla/client.mk cd mozilla make -f client.mk pull_all BUILD_MODULES=xpconnect \ MOZ_CO_TAG=MOZILLA_1_1_RELEASE
./configure --enable-modules=xpconnect make BUILD_MODULES=xpconnect
We changed MOZ_CO_TAG to MOZILLA_1_4_RELEASE and tried. The pull_all resulted in a checkout of lots of stuff that we think should not be needed for xpconnect standalone and which wasn't in the 1.1 xpconnect build (all of mozilla/accessible/ or mozilla/netwerk/protocol/gopher, for instance). The configure complained about lots of missing makefiles:
creating xpfe/bootstrap/Makefile can't read ./xpfe/bootstrap/Makefile.in: No such file or directory
We assumed this is as intended. configure ended with:
configuring in directory/c-sdk configure: warning: no configuration information is in directory/c-sdk
Calling make anyway resulted in:
[...] gmake[2]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/mozilla' /usr/bin/gmake -C directory/c-sdk gmake[3]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/mozilla/directory/c-sdk' gmake[3]: *** No targets specified and no makefile found. Stop. [...]
Then we found a mail that told us to use ./configure --enable-standalone-modules instead. The following make resulted in:
[...] gmake[2]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/mozilla' gmake[2]: *** No rule to make target `js/jsd/classes/Makefile.in', needed by `js/jsd/classes/Makefile'. Stop. [...]
All of this is on a Linux box with gcc 3.3.
Basically, all we want is to use xpcom and javascript as component model
and scripting language for our own application. With mozilla 1.1, we used xpcshell to script our components. Are we on the right
track at all? Is the xpconnect standalone build what we need? Would the Gecko SDK help?
Most important: is xpcom currently usable outside of mozilla or should we search for a different component architecture?
Regards,
Uli
xpcom can be used standalone. Transformiix does that, for example. You might see http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=183321, too.
I wonder if anybody is going to fix up xpconnect standalone, that would probably need that same hand-woven love that we need for transformiix inside build/unix/modules.mk
Axel
