Ari Heitner wrote:
>
> John,
>
> Ok. So there are a couple of things (conceivably; i'm expecting you to tell me
> which ones are wrong/dumb) that we could do to hack xptiIIM and friends to
> support multiple locations for typelibs
>
> 1) Do the path thing you talked about; there will be a search path of
> directories where typelibs may live. Requires significant restructuring :). But
> is the obviously right solution
This is not huge, but means touching a number of places in xpti.
It would inevitably consume a week to get this done, reviewed,
and into the tree. I consider it the right thing to do in the
long run. It is not currently a requirement for anything I (or my
employers) need.
>
> 2) Move the component directory. What if an embedding application could just
> say "Use *my* component directory instead of mozilla's". The mozilla type files
> could be copied (or symlink'd; i'm ignoring possible evil versioning goofups. i
> just want to know if it would work). Rather than just looking in components/,
> xptiIIM (or whatever) would allow you to set a different directory to look for
> typelibs. Should be easy to implement, right?
This is what I'd do if I were you. I showed how in a previous
post:
news://news.mozilla.org/3A5233A7.9D8F66D0%40netscape.com
>
> 3) Add support ti xptiIIM for storing complete paths of files. Then new files
> could be added in different locations. Probably slightly harder than 2).
I'd be against this going into the tree. It is wasteful of space
and not reproducible on subsequent rebuilding of the type
repository.
>
> what i'm getting at here (a bit unsubtly) is that i'd *love* it if there was a
> way to get what i need with a simple change to mozilla (i.e. simple enough that
> *i* could write it) since i know that your to-do list is backed up with much
> more important stuff (i would consider rewriting the DOM to use XPConnect *far*
> more important than this stuff).
>
> this is perhaps a bit unfair: it moves ugliness from Sash (my side) to mozilla
> (where i don't have to look at it).
>
> If you say "1), because it's something i've been meaning to do anyhow" then
> i'll just let the whole thing drop, hack Sash for the time being, and eagerly
> await this eventually being done.
>
> I could even enter a feature-request bug to make myself feel better :).
Feel free.
John.
>
> cheers,
>
> ari
