Re: Fission Engineering Newsletter #1
On 2019-02-13 9:02 p.m., Tom Ritter wrote: On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM Matthew N. wrote: What about doing better sandboxing of the content process (e.g. ensuring a compromised process can't request information from the parent that isn't relevant to it)? This is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1505832 Its major sub-bug that pertains specifically to IPC is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=fission-ipc For now, the focus on Fission is just getting it working, these efforts (stronger sandboxing) will come after that. I quoted the part about the milestone flag as I was wondering whether we are supposed to nominate such bugs now or we should only be nominating functional bugs? (Same goes for memory usage ones.) ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Fission Engineering Newsletter #1
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM Matthew N. wrote: > What about doing better sandboxing of the content > process (e.g. ensuring a compromised process can't request information > from the parent that isn't relevant to it)? This is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1505832 Its major sub-bug that pertains specifically to IPC is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=fission-ipc For now, the focus on Fission is just getting it working, these efforts (stronger sandboxing) will come after that. -tom ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Fission Engineering Newsletter #1
On 2019-02-04 6:02 a.m., Nika Layzell wrote: If have a bug which may be relevant to fission,*please* let us know by setting the “Fission Milestone” project flag to ‘?’. We’ll swing by and triage it into the correct milestone. It seems to me like there are a few overlapping areas in progress that are related but I'm not sure if they are now being tracked under one Fission umbrella… What types of bugs are considered part of the Fission project? Are you including bugs that are about reducing our memory usage with more processes? What about doing better sandboxing of the content process (e.g. ensuring a compromised process can't request information from the parent that isn't relevant to it)? Thanks, Matthew N. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: try pushes: use a base revision from 2019-02-06 or newer
On 2/12/19 9:15 PM, Randell Jesup wrote: >> if you push to the Try server, use base revisions (= the shared revision on >> top of which you add your changes) from 2019-02-06 or newer, else there >> will be many test failures due to expired certificates. The newer base >> revisions have the fixes from >> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1525191 > > What if you need to push a Try involving an older rev (i.e. to verify a > problem or fix)? Is there a patch you can add on top of an older rev to > avoid failures? > > Has the ESR branch been updated so it can be used as a base as well? ESR was fixed with https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr60/rev/2a0b77c6fa9b Unfortunately there isn't a preexisting single patch you can use to update the certificates in mozilla-central, but depending on the tests you're running, using some or all of the "original commit"s mentioned in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1525191#c26 should work. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Moving reviews to Phabricator
For what it's worth, arcanist works fine for me in WSL, with a considerably less-horrifying installation process than on real Windows. With an alias you can call it from MozillaBuild as if it were native: alias arc="cmd //c ubuntu1804 run arc" On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 3:49 PM Jörg Knobloch wrote: > > On 06/02/2019 21:42, Kim Moir wrote: > > On February 28 Bugzilla review flags will be disabled for Firefox and other > > mozilla-central products and components. From this point forward, all > > reviews of code changes to mozilla-central should be conducted in > > Phabricator. Tasks that have been identified as crucial to this transition > > have been set as blocker bugs tohttps://bugzil.la/1514775. > > Any simplification in sight to get this set up more easily for Windows > users? > > Last I looked you needed 12 steps to get there: > https://moz-conduit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/arcanist-windows.html > > I have three Windows development machines to set up :-( > > Jörg. > > > ___ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
