Building applications on top of UXP
Moderators: trava90, athenian200
Building applications on top of UXP
I've been reading on what UXP will bring upon release, especially how it's supposed to be a universal platform to develop applications with.
However, there's one thing I didn't fully understand: if I were to build my application, would I need to take the whole codebase, change and add the necessary files, release the application and then keep the platform updated on my own, or does it work in the same spirit of (but not equally to) a system library, where my application's users will receive platform updates directly from UXP developers, and application updates from me?
Looking at the architecture structure I would think it's the first, but since I don't know anything about either the Mozilla or the UXP codebase, I wanted to ask this.
However, there's one thing I didn't fully understand: if I were to build my application, would I need to take the whole codebase, change and add the necessary files, release the application and then keep the platform updated on my own, or does it work in the same spirit of (but not equally to) a system library, where my application's users will receive platform updates directly from UXP developers, and application updates from me?
Looking at the architecture structure I would think it's the first, but since I don't know anything about either the Mozilla or the UXP codebase, I wanted to ask this.
Re: Building applications on top of UXP
There are a few options, actually.
- Full application development.
This means you clone the UXP source tree and add your own application in /application/Yourname. You will update the UXP source and build your application as a fully standalone executable. You have full control over what modules and features are included. - Using the XUL runner stub.
This is using a minimal application stub that doesn't have any XUL application code itself and is only there to load your XUL application. Usually you build this stub yourself from source with your desired options, but if there is enough demand for this stub then we may release a generic platform build in the future as ready binaries, but building it yourself with your preferred options and optimizations should be trivial. You don't have to integrate the UXP source with your own and can build the stub from a pristine release version of a UXP application, separate from your application development. - Using an existing application with your own application.ini and XUL code.
This means you can run your own XUL application code "on top of" an existing UXP application like Basilisk or the future Pale Moon. Your application will depend on what modules and features are included in the "parent" application, so usually you use this for a similar type of application as the parent. You don't have to build UXP yourself and can use ready-made binaries.
"Sometimes, the best way to get what you want is to be a good person." -- Louis Rossmann
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite
Re: Building applications on top of UXP
I see, now I understand how it works.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Re: Building applications on top of UXP
Current status of xulrunner is the application.ini loader works but has only had casual testing. But any currently existing application on UXP can do that too. Everything else like generating a custom stub is busted.
A few of us WILL fix or rewrite custom stub generation but it is low on the priority list for all of us.
Frankly, it is easier to just structure your own full application if going beyond generic application.ini anyway. Since this is basically what you are doing anyway in addition to the xulrunner stuff.
A few of us WILL fix or rewrite custom stub generation but it is low on the priority list for all of us.
Frankly, it is easier to just structure your own full application if going beyond generic application.ini anyway. Since this is basically what you are doing anyway in addition to the xulrunner stuff.
- SpockFan02
- Astronaut
- Posts: 535
- Joined: 2017-09-24, 16:35
- Location: Mak pupulusšum, California
Re: Building applications on top of UXP
Out of curiosity, since the official Mozilla XULRunner hasn't been updated in about a decade, what about UXP broke it?
Also, vannilla, I can tell you that https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/doc ... /XULRunner is a good place to start looking for XULRunner information and tutorials. I did some fiddling with it a few months back, and if you look, there are some informative docs/tutorials/blog posts.
Also, vannilla, I can tell you that https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/doc ... /XULRunner is a good place to start looking for XULRunner information and tutorials. I did some fiddling with it a few months back, and if you look, there are some informative docs/tutorials/blog posts.
Re: Building applications on top of UXP
Mozilla busted it in the 30s and it was removed at some point in the 40s.. UXP didn't bust it.. UXP didn't have it.
- SpockFan02
- Astronaut
- Posts: 535
- Joined: 2017-09-24, 16:35
- Location: Mak pupulusšum, California
Re: Building applications on top of UXP
That explains it. I suppose the XULRunner binaries from the last release work because they're on an older version of the Mozilla platform, yeah?
Re: Building applications on top of UXP
Diversity is key.
Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.
Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.
Re: Building applications on top of UXP
xulrunner is going to come back properly not a hack made by someone.. it is just low priority until other things are accomplished like Pale Moon 28.