inactive builders

For contributed third party builds not necessarily configured like the main product.
e.g. AVX builds, SSE builds, Pandora builds.

Moderator: satrow

ikar-us
Fanatic
Fanatic
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu, 21 May 2015, 23:21
Location: Baden

inactive builders

Unread postby ikar-us » Tue, 16 Jun 2015, 11:07

On http://www.palemoon.org/contributed-builds.shtml ,
the AVX build is marked as inactive and outdated.
The SSE build should be marked as such as well.

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 22269
Joined: Sun, 28 Aug 2011, 17:27
Location: 58.5°N 15.5°E
Contact:

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby Moonchild » Mon, 22 Jun 2015, 21:15

I don't really get it.. people start on a third-party build, ask about redistribution, then just stop maintaining without a word.
I guess I'll just make a more generic note about the builds listed.
Improving Mozilla code: You know you're on the right track with code changes when you spend the majority of your time deleting code.

"If you want to build a better world for yourself, you have to be willing to build one for everybody." -- Coyote Osborne

ikar-us
Fanatic
Fanatic
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu, 21 May 2015, 23:21
Location: Baden

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby ikar-us » Mon, 22 Jun 2015, 22:14

Just now building for SSE was resumed!
After five releases skipped.

Alt+F4
Apollo supporter
Apollo supporter
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat, 14 Feb 2015, 15:17
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby Alt+F4 » Sat, 03 Oct 2015, 08:30

Could someone PLEASE provide regular Pale Moon SSE builds? It would be greatly appreciated!

Roman's releases are great but they are so sporadic and irregular...

Thanks!

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Knows the dark side
Knows the dark side
Posts: 4667
Joined: Tue, 09 Oct 2012, 19:37

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby New Tobin Paradigm » Sat, 03 Oct 2015, 08:47

Alt+F4 wrote:Could someone PLEASE provide regular Pale Moon SSE builds? It would be greatly appreciated!

Roman's releases are great but they are so sporadic and irregular...

Thanks!


Don't look at me I had my fill with PM4XP.. Never again.. RelEng seriously sucks. Also, you should be bothering the guy who committed to the 3rd party build.. Not us.

Alt+F4
Apollo supporter
Apollo supporter
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat, 14 Feb 2015, 15:17
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby Alt+F4 » Sat, 03 Oct 2015, 10:40

Hey Matt, it's gotta be you and nobody else! :D

Jeez, man, take it easy FFS... I asked for this from no one in particular... not you, not Moonchild... but somebody who perhaps is willing to do it... no strings attached whatsoever.

Seriously, the whole problem is that the guy who committed himself to the 3rd party build is not committed. There is not much I (or anybody else for that matter) can do about it.

Until the solution is found (if ever), the SSE build should be marked outdated. Just my 2 ¢.

And please Matt, don't feel bothered. There's no need. Thank you.

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Knows the dark side
Knows the dark side
Posts: 4667
Joined: Tue, 09 Oct 2012, 19:37

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby New Tobin Paradigm » Sat, 03 Oct 2015, 11:06

Alt+F4 wrote:Hey Matt, it's gotta be you and nobody else! :D

Jeez, man, take it easy FFS... I asked for this from no one in particular... not you, not Moonchild... but somebody who perhaps is willing to do it... no strings attached whatsoever.

Seriously, the whole problem is that the guy who committed himself to the 3rd party build is not committed. There is not much I (or anybody else for that matter) can do about it.

Until the solution is found (if ever), the SSE build should be marked outdated. Just my 2 ¢.

And please Matt, don't feel bothered. There's no need. Thank you.


Don't worry I am good... :thumbup:

Though you could go to his site and contact him to get a move on or just to tell us he isn't doing them anymore.. This situation is kinda unacceptable and kind of puts users at risk by skipping important updates to the code that should be pushed out.

While doing PM4XP.. I did give my self an out to quit at any time and I did consider it a few times.. But I stuck with it until the intended end date. I did learn a lot about release engineering, automatic update servicing and some previously unknown tidbits about the codebase and the "NT subsystem divide" which helped all of us to produce better builds when v25 came about.

I accomplished a lot and helped ~500 people (that time I bothered counting) and wouldn't trade the accomplishment for anything.. But wouldn't do it again unless absolutely necessary :P

Alt+F4
Apollo supporter
Apollo supporter
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat, 14 Feb 2015, 15:17
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby Alt+F4 » Sat, 03 Oct 2015, 12:00

Matt A Tobin wrote:Don't worry I am good... :thumbup:

Though you could go to his site and contact him to get a move on or just to tell us he isn't doing them anymore.. This situation is kinda unacceptable and kind of puts users at risk by skipping important updates to the code that should be pushed out.


I (and a couple of other guys) did contact him but to no avail. And you are absolutely right, this situation is unacceptable and puts users at risk, depreciating your efforts to keep this great browser safe and up to date.

While doing PM4XP.. I did give my self an out to quit at any time and I did consider it a few times.. But I stuck with it until the intended end date. I did learn a lot about release engineering, automatic update servicing and some previously unknown tidbits about the codebase and the "NT subsystem divide" which helped all of us to produce better builds when v25 came about.

I accomplished a lot and helped ~500 people (that time I bothered counting) and wouldn't trade the accomplishment for anything.. But wouldn't do it again unless absolutely necessary :P


Thanks, Matt, I really do appreciate your work. Keep it up!

Mercury
Fanatic
Fanatic
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri, 01 Nov 2013, 23:26
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby Mercury » Sat, 17 Oct 2015, 21:43

Hm. What's actually involved in making builds for public distribution?

I've been building my own SSE versions of PM for my own use for over a year, and I'm pretty sure I'll continue for a while yet. I'd be happy to share them, but I have no clue how to do so appropriately.

For starters, I have no online space to put them. I also don't even know how to build the .exe installer; just the .zip. Nor do I know how to deal with the internal updater so it can pull a compatible binary, or at least be prevented from pulling an incompatible one.

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Knows the dark side
Knows the dark side
Posts: 4667
Joined: Tue, 09 Oct 2012, 19:37

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby New Tobin Paradigm » Sun, 18 Oct 2015, 09:25

Mercury wrote:Hm. What's actually involved in making builds for public distribution?

I've been building my own SSE versions of PM for my own use for over a year, and I'm pretty sure I'll continue for a while yet. I'd be happy to share them, but I have no clue how to do so appropriately.

For starters, I have no online space to put them. I also don't even know how to build the .exe installer; just the .zip. Nor do I know how to deal with the internal updater so it can pull a compatible binary, or at least be prevented from pulling an incompatible one.


You should at the very least run

Code: Select all

mach package


after building at the very least so that the binaries are properly stripped and everything is packaged. That is the minimal level of what to do because JUST compiling isn't the only thing you need to do.

Also building for your self and building and publishing a release are VERY different things. You need to consider that the update you push out actually isn't broken.

Alt+F4
Apollo supporter
Apollo supporter
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat, 14 Feb 2015, 15:17
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby Alt+F4 » Sun, 18 Oct 2015, 14:05

Mercury wrote:Hm. What's actually involved in making builds for public distribution?

I've been building my own SSE versions of PM for my own use for over a year, and I'm pretty sure I'll continue for a while yet. I'd be happy to share them, but I have no clue how to do so appropriately.

For starters, I have no online space to put them. I also don't even know how to build the .exe installer; just the .zip. Nor do I know how to deal with the internal updater so it can pull a compatible binary, or at least be prevented from pulling an incompatible one.


That's great news!

Maybe you could ask Roman for help too, he used to provide PM SSE builds, he's probably willing to help...

Here, via the comment section...

http://www.romanstefko.com/pale-moon-sse/

... or here, via his Twitter account...

https://twitter.com/rstefko

Good luck and thank you.

Eagerly waiting for your magic... ;)

Mercury
Fanatic
Fanatic
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri, 01 Nov 2013, 23:26
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby Mercury » Sun, 18 Oct 2015, 15:22

Matt A Tobin wrote:You should at the very least run

Code: Select all

mach package

Yeah, I got that part. That's what I meant when I said I can make the .zip.
Also building for your self and building and publishing a release are VERY different things. You need to consider that the update you push out actually isn't broken.

You're not telling me anything I don't already know!
I'm asking what else I need to do, after making the .zip, which I can already do reliably.
I'm sure the builds I make aren't broken, since I use them myself on a real Athlon XP system.

Mercury
Fanatic
Fanatic
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri, 01 Nov 2013, 23:26
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby Mercury » Sun, 18 Oct 2015, 15:40

Okay, let's run this down again. I want to help, and it seems like I have something to offer because:
- I've already invested time (a lot of time, in fact) into learning how to do builds that work with SSE processors.
- I have a build environment set up and can do builds (up to the "mach package" stage) reliably.
- I have a genuine SSE CPU test system to verify my builds.

Issues I need resolved are:
1) What do I do about PM's internal updater. As it is, attempting an update from within PM will install an SSE2-requiring executable.
—1a) I just leave that as-is, and people running this version should just be smart enough not to use the updater. Fine by me, but would Moonchild approve?
—1b) Disable the internal updater, or have it display a message or open a webpage instead. How to do this?
—1c) Somehow get the updater working as intended, downloading new builds as I publish them. No clue about how this process works. It may be too hard for me.
2) What about the executable installer?
—2a) Not necessary. People will use the .zip that that's that. Would Moonchild approve?
—2b) The .exe is necessary. How do I make it?
3) Online space. Someone else needs to provide it; I can't. I'm fine with just a public FTP site I could upload to, honestly.

squarefractal

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby squarefractal » Sun, 18 Oct 2015, 15:52

Mercury wrote:What do I do about PM's internal updater. As it is, attempting an update from within PM will install an SSE2-requiring executable.

You could simply set ac_add_options --disable-updater in the .mozconfig file to disable the internal updater. You could also generate incremental updates via the updater, but you'll have to ask someone else regarding the details.

Mercury wrote: What about the executable installer?

I'd guess that this isn't a strict requirement for being approved as an official third-party build, but you could use cd $OBJDIR && make installer for this.

Mercury wrote:Online space.

There are many websites which provide hosting for open source projects.

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Knows the dark side
Knows the dark side
Posts: 4667
Joined: Tue, 09 Oct 2012, 19:37

Re: inactive builders

Unread postby New Tobin Paradigm » Sun, 18 Oct 2015, 18:27

One) Don't listen to squarefractal he is occasionally mistaken on proper procedure and advancements I specifically put in to make releng easier or other options that can be provided.. If you are serious about this.. Then I CAN help you.

Two) For binary releases which are not going to be signed.. I added a few extra mach commands to speed things along..

Code: Select all

mach installer
for instance will easily generate the installer package

Code: Select all

mach mar
likewise will also generate the mar files needed for AUS (automatic update service)

And C) you need to change app.update.url to serve automatic updates from your specific location.. Now, I have been down this road.. this can get tricky to juggle around but I also have solutions as well.

Finally, NaN) Also, you should consider exactly which mozconfig options you run for production builds.

Perhaps it might be easier for real-time communication.. Hit me up on our IRC channel and I can expand on what you can do..


Return to “Contributed 3rd Party Builds”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest