[FALCON] Procedure of writing SWFs (removing code for handling signed swfs)

[Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>]

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

AW: [FALCON] Procedure of writing SWFs (removing code for handling signed swfs)

[Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>]

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 <ma...@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.dutz@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

RE: [FALCON] Procedure of writing SWFs (removing code for handling signed swfs)

[Kessler CTR Mark J <ma...@usmc.mil>]

>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.dutz@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