Update plan for embedded Mozilla browser? [message #757927] |
Wed, 16 November 2011 04:45  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
the SWT.Browser currently uses xulrunner up to version 1.9.2. I'm wondering
what's the plan to update to newer versions, e.g. in order to gain 64 bit
support for Windows and Mac.
Thanks,
Carsten
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Update plan for embedded Mozilla browser? [message #789930 is a reply to message #757928] |
Fri, 03 February 2012 10:38   |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hello Grant,
when moving up to a "modern" version of firefox/xulrunner, are you considering to include JavaXPCOM interfaces as well? My understanding is that JavaXPCOM has been abandoned by the Mozilla folks, and is no longer part of xulrunner as such.
Whe have an app that depends quite strongly on JavaXPCOM, and are considering to step in for the maintenance of that component. However, for that to make sense, we obviously also need some perspective of how we would be able to use it from within eclipse. If we cannot get an SWT browser instance started on top of the newer xulrunner, then we wouldn't be able to use the updated JavaXPCOM, either.
thanks,
Christian
|
|
|
Re: Update plan for embedded Mozilla browser? [message #792052 is a reply to message #789930] |
Mon, 06 February 2012 09:56  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
For anyone interested in this the discussion continued in
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=327696 .
Grant
On 2/3/2012 10:38 AM, Christian Sell wrote:
> Hello Grant,
>
> when moving up to a "modern" version of firefox/xulrunner, are you
> considering to include JavaXPCOM interfaces as well? My understanding is
> that JavaXPCOM has been abandoned by the Mozilla folks, and is no longer
> part of xulrunner as such.
>
> Whe have an app that depends quite strongly on JavaXPCOM, and are
> considering to step in for the maintenance of that component. However,
> for that to make sense, we obviously also need some perspective of how
> we would be able to use it from within eclipse. If we cannot get an SWT
> browser instance started on top of the newer xulrunner, then we wouldn't
> be able to use the updated JavaXPCOM, either.
>
> thanks,
> Christian
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.08785 seconds