Before you rip it out, let’s see if Darrell or Gordon can answer. I thought there were still digests for unsigned RSLs and the signing that the cache depends on was a separate non-compiler thing
-Alex On 10/31/14, 7:36 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: >Well I stumbled over code that looks to me as if it must be dead code. >I think the only libraries with signed digests must be those swz files >distributed by Adobe (Hope I'm correct with that assumption). Was just >thinking that in this case it would be a good idea to remove code that >cant be used anyway and which makes the compiler more complicated than it >has to be. > >Chris > >________________________________________ >Von: Kessler CTR Mark J <mark.kessler....@usmc.mil> >Gesendet: Freitag, 31. Oktober 2014 11:02 >An: dev@flex.apache.org >Betreff: RE: [FALCON] Procedure of writing SWFs (removing code for >handling signed swfs) > >>Now my question: >>As we don't have signed RSLs and never will again ... how about removing >>code related with this from Falcon? > > >Does that mean keeping RSLs and removing the calculated digest comparison >from Falcon? Since we don't have Adobe signed RSLs anymore (meaning >stored in the flash asset cache vs the browser cache) then I think it >would be fine. > > >-Mark > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Christofer Dutz [mailto:christofer.d...@c-ware.de] >Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 5:35 AM >To: dev@flex.apache.org >Subject: [FALCON] Procedure of writing SWFs (removing code for handling >signed swfs) > >Hi, > > >So I read the code and now it's a little clearer why the SWC part >references a lot of the SWF stuff. A SWC is nothing more than a Zip file >containing the library content in form of an SWF as well as the static >resources (CSS Files, Assets etc.). > > >While writing the output for the SWF a digest is created (unless the >library is signed, which shouldn't be possible at all as we don't have >signed libraries anymore). > > >As last step the catalog.xml is created, which is sort of an index of the >content of the SWF (probably so the compiler knows where to get type >definitions from when compiling). This catalog also contains the digest >for the SWF so the compiler can quit with an error, if the saved digest >doesn't match the calculated digest of the SWF and therefore the index >values can't match the real positions int the file. > > >Now my question: > >As we don't have signed RSLs and never will again ... how about removing >code related with this from Falcon? > > >Chris
