Re: Requiring secure contexts for new features

> One potential resolution to that sort of problem is to ship in secure contexts anyway and ask other browsers to do the same. It would be really great from a HTTPS adoption standpoint if we can hold back as many features from being shipped to insecure contexts. Perhaps Firefox could ship new

Re: Intent to unship: remote jar: protocol pref

On 17/01/2018 00:01, Daniel Veditz wrote: On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:12 PM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: the most likely group of people to have enabled this (given 0 public reports on breakage so far, as far as I'm aware) are people on ESR or otherwise in enterprise

Re: Intent to unship: remote jar: protocol pref

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:12 PM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: > the most likely group of people to have enabled this (given 0 public > reports on breakage so far, as far as I'm aware) are people on ESR or > otherwise in enterprise environments > ​Or those trying to run

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018, at 10:51 AM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote: > > Sorry for resuming an old thread. > > > > But I would be interested in knowing how long that same Lenovo P710 > > takes to compile *today*….> In the past

Re: Requiring secure contexts for new features

Great news. Thanks to all those involved for getting to this point. Anne, your posting suggests an exception is likely if: * other browsers already ship the feature insecurely * it can be demonstrated that requiring secure contexts results in undue implementation complexity. Either of these

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On 01/16/2018 11:41 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:02:12AM -0800, Ralph Giles wrote: On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 7:51 AM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote: But I would be interested in knowing how long that same Lenovo P710 takes to compile *today*…. On my

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018, at 10:51 AM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote: > Sorry for resuming an old thread. > > But I would be interested in knowing how long that same Lenovo P710 > takes to compile *today*….> In the past 6 months, compilation times have > certainly increased > massively.> > Anyhow, I’ve

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:02:12AM -0800, Ralph Giles wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 7:51 AM, Jean-Yves Avenard > wrote: > > But I would be interested in knowing how long that same Lenovo P710 takes > > to compile *today*…. > > > > On my Lenovo P710 (2x2x6 core Xeon

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

> On 16 Jan 2018, at 8:19 pm, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote: > > > >> On 16 Jan 2018, at 7:02 pm, Ralph Giles > > wrote: >> >> On my Lenovo P710 (2x2x6 core Xeon E5-2643 v4), Fedora 27 Linux >> >> debug -Og build with gcc:

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

Yes, most of the build time regressions in 2017 came from Rust. Leaning more heavily on C++ features that require more processing or haven't been optimized as much as C++ features that have been around for years is likely also contributing. Enabling sccache allows Rust compilations to be cached,

Re: Requiring secure contexts for new features

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 1:11 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > * Modules might want to look into ways of enforcing this > programmatically, to ease ongoing maintenance and guide everyone to do > the right thing without having to ask/review/etc. E.g., >

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote: 12 minutes sounds rather long, it’s about what the macpro is currently > doing. I typically get compilation times similar to mac... > Yes, I'd like to see 7 minute build times again too! The E5-2643 has a higher

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

> On 16 Jan 2018, at 7:02 pm, Ralph Giles wrote: > > On my Lenovo P710 (2x2x6 core Xeon E5-2643 v4), Fedora 27 Linux > > debug -Og build with gcc: 12:34 > debug -Og build with clang: 12:55 > opt build with clang: 11:51 I didn’t succeed in booting linux unfortunately. so I

Requiring secure contexts for new features

Yesterday Mozilla announced Firefox will be restricting new features to secure contexts (i.e., HTTPS): https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2018/01/15/secure-contexts-everywhere/ I'm glad to report that thus far this has been very well received. I'm posting this here per suggestion from Ben

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 7:51 AM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote: But I would be interested in knowing how long that same Lenovo P710 takes > to compile *today*…. > On my Lenovo P710 (2x2x6 core Xeon E5-2643 v4), Fedora 27 Linux debug -Og build with gcc: 12:34 debug -Og build

Re: Faster gecko builds with IceCC on Mac and Linux

Sorry for resuming an old thread. But I would be interested in knowing how long that same Lenovo P710 takes to compile *today*…. In the past 6 months, compilation times have certainly increased massively. Anyhow, I’ve received yesterday the iMac Pro I ordered early December. It’s a 10 cores

Re: PSA: Avoid invoking Debug formatters in release-mode Rust

On 2018-01-12 9:07 PM, Bobby Holley wrote: The most common way this seems to happen is in panic!() messages, where it can be tempting to include a stringified value to make the message more informative. Just a friendly reminder: panic messages that are parameterized to include debug data