-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
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
CEF3: Upgrade to latest CEF3 version (Chromium 31) #237
Comments
@perlun I would like to give this one a try. So far I'm able to build the pristine Win32 version of libcef_dll_wrapper.lib from your link above with /MD and /MDd when I disable the 4275 warning with VS2010 + SP1. I think I have understood from your post and the wiki build info combined with a bit of digging around in git history what changes are needed in the /CEF folder of the CefSharp3 branch. Any suggestions on how to test it apart from the obvious of trying to run the WPF and WinForms example apps? edit: ... and running Test code of course ;-) https://github.com/cefsharp/CefSharp/tree/CefSharp3/CefSharp.Test |
Yeah, the tests are quite lame at the moment... 😄 Like you say, it's roughly that:
I'll be very happy to cooperate with you on this one. Just let me know if you need any help/feedback and we can take a look at it. I'll also happily accept pull requests in this direction. |
Thank you for the warm welcome & the detailed recipe! Yes, I noticed the potential explosion in configurations. I will start by focusing on doing it manually starting with a few combinations. Then focus on testing with them. Currently I have VS 2010 SP1 and VS 2013 installed locally. Longer term I'm wondering if something like coapp on top of NuGet native support and maybe a .NET/open source friendly cloud based build service like myget.org would be a way to go. But let's not get too sidetracked by that now. As you noted in the Google groups post that I mentioned above new official CEF builds are not that frequent. So a few well documented manual steps are OK for now. I'd better stop ranting here now and get building and learning about CefSharp. I'll probably need a few days for that ... |
Progressing slowly (but steadily - i hope!) on this. So far I have managed to build and run only the Win32/Debug/VS2010 variant of both the WinForms and WPF example apps with Chromium 31. I'm new to actually contributing code with this whole GitHub thing. So @perlun how would you like the commits on my fork; small commits folder by folder within the /CEF folder or as few as possible? |
@jornh Very nice to see you're doing some great progress! 😃 Regarding the commits and such, here are some general principles:
Feel free to ask if you're wondering about anything else. |
[removed long comment on a now resolved GitHub problem that wasn't related to this issue] -- jornh |
... continuation of discussion regarding a missing libcef.lib at https://groups.google.com/d/msg/cefsharp/CC1O66JPM4E/Rwn0WJ0f6XUJ And I do have problems with my current copy of the CefSharp3 branch. ;-) I have a few areas I suspect - but so far haven't been able to nail it down:
My plan is to backtrack a bit towards CefSharp 3.29 over the weekend and see if I can get to a point where I have something worth committing. As long as what I have isn't able to run without crashing I guess it's worse than the current 3.29 based CefSharp3 branch. Ideas are more than welcome :-) |
Status update: Have been thinking - and learning about As a followup to the cefsharp/cef-binary#1 PR what I plan to do is this:
I know this is progressing a bit slower compared to just copying over into
Any thoughts, ideas, showstoppers on this? |
Cool ideas, really! And as you say, the new packages can be of use elsewhere (both for our "competitors" 😉 at Xilium.CefGlue, and perhaps also for other C++ projects that just wants a stable version of CEF). I do think that the include files should be in the native package though. It's part of the "contract" in a way. Yes, it does mean that it will not be as easily searchable on GitHub in the One question though. How will you handle the different VS versions? One NuGet package for VS2010, one for VS2012 and another for VS2013? That's just an idea, but I don't think that will work; I think we will have to package them all (VS2010, VS2012 and VS2013) in one single NuGet package, but in separate subfolders. All of that VS2010/VS2012/VS2013-specificity (what a wonderful word indeed) is really quite awful, but it's impossible to come around with C++/CLR unfortunately... so we need to maintain separate (When I joined the project, it only supported VS2008...) |
OK, lets try to aim for the "all in on NuGet" approach then. I think the packages should be split into:
|
i think the idea of building a nuget for the upstream cef build is a great one. i just dont see why we should add the content of the package to the cefsharp repo at all. http://docs.nuget.org/docs/workflows/using-nuget-without-committing-packages that way we dont bloat the source control with binary files that can be obtained elsewere |
@JanEggers, absolutely, that's what we were thinking about. 😄 |
I'm inching forward with this in branch 3.31-and-native-nugets-wip on my fork It doesn't look very impressive - but for 3.31 alone it should mean that we don't need to pollute the repo with
Also it only works for the VS2010, (and since #288 VS2013 😄) Win32,
|
With #288 in Chromium 31 is there - closing |
This link has it. The CEF3 1650-version, i.e. Chromium 31, will give us some more "latest & greatest" functionality. We should definitely upgrade to it; it's a few hours worth of work, but it should be worthwhile.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: