I would be willing to assist with cleaning up the JAR files. The major
bloat issue with the JAR files is the XUL files, which generate interface
elements for functionality where we have not created an interface. In
theory, we could replace all of the XUL interfaces with our own. But
someone would have to code them and keep them up-to-date as the Mozilla
code changed. Even if we don't replace all of the XUL interfaces, I've
been planning on editing some of them because currently, they call
components, like Help, which we will never be importing from Mozilla.
This leads to errors and in some cases, the browser locking up completely.
As far as extraneous DLLs, I think we generally just use the base
components from the Mozilla embedded build with a few known extras added,
like Typeaheadfind. Off hand, I don't know of any we could just zap.
On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, po wrote:
> :: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:59:32 -0800 (PST) :: jlf001@... ::
> > I have been taking a look in embed.jar, and it appears a lot of it is
> > 'garbage'. I was planning on doing some cleaning, but I can no longer
> > archive the file and have it work correctly. I need to figure that out
> > first. :(
> I had started to play around with this a little on my own, but i haven't
> been able to get around to it much lately... plus, my methods were very
> primitive trial-and-error, since i don't have a deep understanding of
> the purpose of all of the files... i would be willing to test
> stripped-down versions of embed.jar for functionality, probably,
> though... you could just post a list of files that you've found to be
> dispensable, and i (and anyone else) could make my own archive and see
> if any problems come up, perhaps?
> just a thought. :)
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:
> With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility
> Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel
> Kmeleon-dev mailing list