Subj : Re: latest stable SpiderMonkey source version
To   : netscape.public.mozilla.jseng
From : user
Date : Wed Apr 06 2005 02:38 pm

Shanti Rao wrote:

> I've done this before. The standard tarball works, with a few 
> modifications. Check my notes on 
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59195 -- for some reason 
> (like I was the only person compiling SM with BCC), we never bothered to 
> check these back into the main code.

I just found out, I've been reading the newsgroup from the wrong server 
(secnews.netscape.com instead of news.mozilla.org) so the last post 
("static SpiderMonkey lib") might be redundant.

Anyways, I've just read all there was about bug #59195. I noticed that 
the last entry there is from 2004-04-13. The RC6 tarball I started with 
is dated later in 2004 yet it doesn't include any #ifdefs. My guess is 
the changes never were comitted.

Also I noticed that much of the changes you had to make, I didn't. The 
JSLL_INIT macro for example works just fine, as long as you make sure 
that WIN32 is defined when jslong.h is compiled (else the wrong macro 
definition is selected).

Meanwhile I've completed a conditionally static build of js and a build 
of fdlibm both using borland's C++ Builder5 IDE. bcc32 for BCB5 has 
version 5.5, the free compiler available from Borland has version 5.5.1 
so there should not be too much difference.

What I'd like to ask is what I should do with the changes I've made. Are 
they still of any use? It would sure be nice to get those #ifdefs into 
the mozilla source tree so I won't have to do this over and over. It's 
only about a day of coding and testing but still I think there's a 
number of people that could use that time otherwise.

regards,
klaus

.