I have CKEDITOR inline embedded in my portal but I am unable to find the version of CKEDITOR.
CKEDITOR.version returns %VERSION%
The changes.md file doesn't exist either.
If CKEDITOR.version is set to %VERSION% it means that you're using a development version of CKEditor, not a release (or that it was built incorrectly). Lack of changelog means that someone removed it... Not a very fortunate move as well. So if you don't know its source and its not a clone of CKEditor repository it will be very hard to guess what version it is. You can try to check CKEDITOR.revision and compare it with http://github.com/ckeditor/ckeditor-dev. But if that fails too, then the only solution will be to compare code manually.
Related
My company has strict rules about which versions we can use of open source software like CKEditor. Right now we are on 4.4.7.
I want to start using the online CKBuilder to bundle everything in a single ckeditor.js file. But it seems like the online builder at http://ckeditor.com/builder only deals with the latest version.
Is there a way to run the online CKBuilder against a prior release of CKEditor?
I don't think that you can change the way the online CKBuilder works, but you can run it locally with whatever version you want: http://docs.ckeditor.com/#!/guide/dev_build
I have an old version of dompdf, and need to upgrade to support my headers properly. How would I go about doing this? I tried just copying the new files in my directory, but no go...
From/to which versions? dompdf 0.5.x and 0.6.x are drop-in compatible, though you may need to reset your font directory, namely by removing the dompdf_font_family_cache file. The file may or may not have a .php extension depending on which version you're starting from. Do not delete the file that includes .dist in its name.
You will, of course, need to reload any fonts.
0.7.0 requires a bit more work on the implementation side. Easiest path is to completely replace the dompdf directory. Usage is mostly the same, though some method names have changed and you'll need to reference the dompdf namespace.
There's a work-in-progress migration guide that may help and the usage documentation might also be useful.
In anticipation of making some modifications to ckeditor, I'm trying to build it from source, as described in the documentation here. I want to build a version that is, as nearly as possible, identical to the version I already have installed on my production web server, so there won't be any surprises when I deploy my modified version later. Here are the steps I've followed:
Clone the git repository
git checkout 4.3.3 (this is the version on the production server)
copy the build-config.js from the production server to ckeditor-dev/dev/builder/ (my production version came from the online builder; the config is at http://ckeditor.com/builder/059ce76c63ea2ff01636265c46f713c5)
cd dev/builder ; ./build.sh
there were complaints about missing plugins (scayt and wsc) so I downloaded them as zip files (scayt_4.3.3.zip and wsc_4.3.3.zip) and unzipped them in ckeditor-dev/plugins
tried ./build.sh again
It apparently completed successfully, but the result in release/ckeditor is not a match for the production version as I had hoped. It contains a lot of plugins that I didn't ask for, and I know they're not dependencies of plugins I did ask for because the production version works fine without them. For example, I have release/ckeditor/plugins/adobeair which is not mentioned in my build-config.js.
The main ckeditor.js file is not a match for the production version either. i can see that part of the reason is that there is a different timestamp and version string ("4.3.3 DEV"), but there are lots of other changes too, which I can't easily examine because it's minified. And I can't really trust that this file was built correctly, since the plugin list wasn't built correctly. Also I can't break the build process down into smaller steps find out what it's doing because there's no source.
In a desperate move to try to understand what's going on, I reduced the plugin list in build-config.js to just the about plugin and ran ./build.sh again. This caused release/ckeditor/plugins to get even bigger!
Can anyone explain why the build.sh can't give me anything close to the version I downloaded from the online builder?
(By the way, this question is here instead of on the CKEditor support forum because they wouldn't let me post it there. Called me a spammer!)
CKBuilder which is used by the build script in https://github.com/ckeditor/ckeditor-dev is exactly the one which is used by http://ckeditor.com/builder. The difference is caused by different arguments passed to it.
By default CKBuilder adds all plugins, even those omitted in build-config.js, to the package, although it doesn't merge them into the ckeditor.js. They are available to be enabled on demand. So ckeditor.js is not bigger than that downloaded from http://ckeditor.com/builder.
To build a package with only those plugins which you specified in build-config.js pass -s option to the build script:
> ./dev/builder/build.sh -s
You can also check other options:
> ./dev/builder/build.sh --help
As you'll find there it is possible to change the version, leave JS and CSS unminified etc.
PS. Sorry for the spam filter on forum.
We are working on a .NET application and recently started using Git for version control.
Our latest release was tagged in Git, and now i am trying to debug some issue.
Here's what i did:
Installed the app (from the release) on my Pc.
Checked out the tagged release version.
Started VS and attached to the process.
Placed breakpoints over some part of the code.
I am getting the message: "Source code is different from original version", however this is the actual code that was compiled to release this installed version.
What am i doing wrong here?
using VS2008 if that matters.
BTW: What is the mechanism that is used to compare if the binaries are different from source code?
When cloning the repo from Git, for example, it will change all files/folders date to the current date. Is this value (datetime) used to determine source code vs. binary?
The problem was i didnt use (or store) the original symbols for this release.
I previously thought symbols only contained source code line information and were not needed to actually debug the program under VS. apparently i was wrong.
A good resource on symbols for anyone who's looking into problems with them: http://www.wintellect.com/CS/blogs/jrobbins/archive/2009/05/11/pdb-files-what-every-developer-must-know.aspx
This post also contains a few other links to MSDN Magazine with more valuable information.
We are using that exact version and I believe I've hit a bug that I might need to fix, however the 2.1RC doesn't fix it, and I don't want to break all dependencies to other frameworks (Windsor for instance) for an upgrade.
They have however removed the SVN repository that contained all tags, and the new git repository doesn't contain any tags at all so I have no idea which revision I should check out.
Does anyone know where I can find the source code? I have an old version for 1.0.3 on my drive but that is of little use now...
To answer my own question, they seem to have put it in a readonly git repository and branched it for 2.0.0 here:
https://github.com/castleproject/Castle.MonoRail-READONLY/tree/2-0-stable