Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update quickjs to revision 2788d71e823b522b178db3b3660ce93689534e6d #14863

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 2, 2022

Conversation

calixteman
Copy link
Contributor

  • The date parser in quickjs is not optimal so use the navigator one.

- The date parser in quickjs is not optimal so use the navigator one.
@calixteman
Copy link
Contributor Author

I noticed some errors with date parsing so I patched our quickjs built to use the navigator date parser:
mozilla/pdf.js.quickjs@de3bf95

@calixteman
Copy link
Contributor Author

/botio unittest
/botio integrationtest

@pdfjsbot
Copy link

pdfjsbot commented May 1, 2022

From: Bot.io (Linux m4)


Received

Command cmd_unittest from @calixteman received. Current queue size: 0

Live output at: http://54.241.84.105:8877/9669980863161a2/output.txt

@pdfjsbot
Copy link

pdfjsbot commented May 1, 2022

From: Bot.io (Windows)


Received

Command cmd_unittest from @calixteman received. Current queue size: 0

Live output at: http://54.193.163.58:8877/2917d944f2e8224/output.txt

@pdfjsbot
Copy link

pdfjsbot commented May 1, 2022

From: Bot.io (Linux m4)


Success

Full output at http://54.241.84.105:8877/9669980863161a2/output.txt

Total script time: 3.52 mins

  • Unit Tests: Passed

@pdfjsbot
Copy link

pdfjsbot commented May 1, 2022

From: Bot.io (Windows)


Success

Full output at http://54.193.163.58:8877/2917d944f2e8224/output.txt

Total script time: 6.61 mins

  • Unit Tests: Passed

@calixteman
Copy link
Contributor Author

/botio integrationtest

@pdfjsbot
Copy link

pdfjsbot commented May 1, 2022

From: Bot.io (Linux m4)


Received

Command cmd_integrationtest from @calixteman received. Current queue size: 0

Live output at: http://54.241.84.105:8877/9b1fb76e50e1057/output.txt

@pdfjsbot
Copy link

pdfjsbot commented May 1, 2022

From: Bot.io (Windows)


Received

Command cmd_integrationtest from @calixteman received. Current queue size: 0

Live output at: http://54.193.163.58:8877/735a9ebf9152ddd/output.txt

@pdfjsbot
Copy link

pdfjsbot commented May 1, 2022

From: Bot.io (Linux m4)


Success

Full output at http://54.241.84.105:8877/9b1fb76e50e1057/output.txt

Total script time: 4.32 mins

  • Integration Tests: Passed

@pdfjsbot
Copy link

pdfjsbot commented May 1, 2022

From: Bot.io (Windows)


Success

Full output at http://54.193.163.58:8877/735a9ebf9152ddd/output.txt

Total script time: 7.66 mins

  • Integration Tests: Passed

@calixteman calixteman requested a review from Snuffleupagus May 1, 2022 20:07
Copy link
Collaborator

@Snuffleupagus Snuffleupagus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

r=me (essentially rubber-stamping the changes).

However, there's a couple of alerts here: https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js/pull/14863/checks?check_run_id=6247493331
Are some of those possible to fix, perhaps by patching/updating the build-process in https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js.quickjs, or should we simply just ignore them?

@calixteman
Copy link
Contributor Author

calixteman commented May 2, 2022

I don't know what to do to remove these warnings.
The compilation command is:
https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js.quickjs/blob/main/compile.sh

If you've any ideas, then I take, else I think we should ignore them.
If you're interested to hack on this file, if I remember correctly I didn't manage to run that stuff in a windows shell.
But in installing docker on Windows and an Ubuntu in using WSL, then it works nice (just run node build.js --compile --output /tmp/foo in an Ubuntu shell).

@Snuffleupagus Snuffleupagus merged commit 85b7e60 into mozilla:master May 2, 2022
@Snuffleupagus Snuffleupagus removed the request for review from timvandermeij May 2, 2022 09:46
@Snuffleupagus
Copy link
Collaborator

Given that the alerts don't suggest any security problems, but rather just mention unused code and missing semicolons, it's likely not meaningful to spend a lot of time/effort on "fixing" this (especially when none of this code is being used in Firefox).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants