* [gentoo-user] Firefox
@ 2006-02-04 13:09 Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 13:26 ` Beau E. Cox
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Daniel D Jones @ 2006-02-04 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
I'd like to run Firefox 1.5. The latest stable build appears to be 1.07. I
added ww-client/mozilla-firefox ~x86 to my package.keywords file, which
resulted in Deer Park being installed. I don't want Deer Park, just the 1.5
release version. I've considered downloading the source and manually
installing but I'd prefer not to do something which may confuse portage at
some point. Thanks for any suggestions.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2006-02-04 13:09 Daniel D Jones
@ 2006-02-04 13:26 ` Beau E. Cox
2006-02-04 14:09 ` Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 13:30 ` Andrew Gaydenko
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Beau E. Cox @ 2006-02-04 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user; +Cc: Daniel D Jones
On Saturday 04 February 2006 03:09 am, Daniel D Jones wrote:
> I'd like to run Firefox 1.5. The latest stable build appears to be 1.07.
> I added ww-client/mozilla-firefox ~x86 to my package.keywords file, which
> resulted in Deer Park being installed. I don't want Deer Park, just the
> 1.5 release version. I've considered downloading the source and manually
> installing but I'd prefer not to do something which may confuse portage at
> some point. Thanks for any suggestions.
I think I read that Deer Park is the name for Firefox that is used
to get an GPL-type liscense - but is really Firefox.
I have several packages that I maintain 'manually' (outside of portage)
and I have experienced no portage 'confusion', i.e. Apache 2.2, mod_perl,
mysql-5.1.5-alpha, etc. I install them to /usr/local and portage
doesn't care.
--
Aloha => Beau;
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2006-02-04 13:09 Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 13:26 ` Beau E. Cox
@ 2006-02-04 13:30 ` Andrew Gaydenko
2006-02-04 13:32 ` Holly Bostick
2006-02-04 13:36 ` Scott Stoddard
3 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Gaydenko @ 2006-02-04 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
"Deer Park" is Firefox-1.5's name :-)
======= On Saturday 04 February 2006 16:09, Daniel D Jones wrote: =======
I'd like to run Firefox 1.5. The latest stable build appears to be 1.07. I
added ww-client/mozilla-firefox ~x86 to my package.keywords file, which
resulted in Deer Park being installed. I don't want Deer Park, just the 1.5
release version. I've considered downloading the source and manually
installing but I'd prefer not to do something which may confuse portage at
some point. Thanks for any suggestions.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2006-02-04 13:09 Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 13:26 ` Beau E. Cox
2006-02-04 13:30 ` Andrew Gaydenko
@ 2006-02-04 13:32 ` Holly Bostick
2006-02-04 13:36 ` Scott Stoddard
3 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Holly Bostick @ 2006-02-04 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
Daniel D Jones schreef:
> I'd like to run Firefox 1.5. The latest stable build appears to be
> 1.07. I added ww-client/mozilla-firefox ~x86 to my package.keywords
> file, which resulted in Deer Park being installed. I don't want
> Deer Park, just the 1.5 release version.
The version labelled as Deer Park under Gentoo *is* the 1.5 release
version, to the best of my knowledge.
As I understand it, there is a licensing requirement from the Mozilla
group that specifies that compiled versions provided by anyone other
than Mozilla.org cannot use the 'official' branding. Therefore, the
release displays "Deer Park" but is otherwise identical (built from the
same source release tarball as the Mozilla.org compiled release, just
not built by Mozila.org, but by you or the Gentoo devs).
Apparently you can 'fix' this (if it must be fixed) by activating the
./configure switch --enable-official-branding. You can of course do this
by copying the current ebuild to your PORTDIR_OVERLAY, making the
adjustment, and compiling that instead, or by --as you said-- installing
or compiling the official Mozilla binary or source from the Mozilla.org
site.
Check the forums, I believe that that's where I discovered what
information I know about this issue.
> I've considered downloading the source and manually installing but
> I'd prefer not to do something which may confuse portage at some
> point. Thanks for any suggestions.
That's what Portage overlay directories are for; to do something like
this without confusing Portage. Self-regulating, of course-- if the
issue is not important enough to the user to make it worth their while
to learn how to set up an overlay, and how to populate it with the
relevant ebuilds (especially if the relevant ebuild must be created from
scratch rather than just adjusted), then the issue is not necessarily
important enough to warrant "solving", offering the user an opportunity
to re-evaluate the severity of the issue. As with all things Gentoo,
it's your choice as to how you want to handle it.
Holly
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2006-02-04 13:09 Daniel D Jones
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2006-02-04 13:32 ` Holly Bostick
@ 2006-02-04 13:36 ` Scott Stoddard
3 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Scott Stoddard @ 2006-02-04 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
Daniel D Jones wrote:
> I'd like to run Firefox 1.5. The latest stable build appears to be 1.07. I
> added ww-client/mozilla-firefox ~x86 to my package.keywords file, which
> resulted in Deer Park being installed. I don't want Deer Park, just the 1.5
> release version. I've considered downloading the source and manually
> installing but I'd prefer not to do something which may confuse portage at
> some point. Thanks for any suggestions.
>
No fear, you have firefox 1.5. Anarchy (dev responsible for the ebuilds
for most mozilla stuff) has been running into problems re-titling it,
but it is definitely 1.5
(Incidentally, the ebuild gives you this information when you emerge it.)
Scott.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2006-02-04 13:26 ` Beau E. Cox
@ 2006-02-04 14:09 ` Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 16:37 ` Holly Bostick
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Daniel D Jones @ 2006-02-04 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On Saturday 04 February 2006 08:26, Beau E. Cox wrote:
> On Saturday 04 February 2006 03:09 am, Daniel D Jones wrote:
> > I'd like to run Firefox 1.5. The latest stable build appears to be 1.07.
> > I added ww-client/mozilla-firefox ~x86 to my package.keywords file, which
> > resulted in Deer Park being installed. I don't want Deer Park, just the
> > 1.5 release version. I've considered downloading the source and manually
> > installing but I'd prefer not to do something which may confuse portage
> > at some point. Thanks for any suggestions.
>
> I think I read that Deer Park is the name for Firefox that is used
> to get an GPL-type liscense - but is really Firefox.
I'm aware that Deer Park IS Firefox but my understanding was that Deer Park
was a nightly release build and not the official 1.5 release. I thought it
was the equivalent of grabbing the most recent source (at the time the
package was created) from CVS rather than getting the official release
source. Am I confused?
Part of the issue is that several of my extensions complained that they were
only compatible with Firefox 0.? - 1.5 when I restarted Firefox.
> I have several packages that I maintain 'manually' (outside of portage)
> and I have experienced no portage 'confusion', i.e. Apache 2.2, mod_perl,
> mysql-5.1.5-alpha, etc. I install them to /usr/local and portage
> doesn't care.
Cool! I'll look into that.
And thanks to everyone who replied.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2006-02-04 14:09 ` Daniel D Jones
@ 2006-02-04 16:37 ` Holly Bostick
2006-02-04 17:02 ` Daniel D Jones
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Holly Bostick @ 2006-02-04 16:37 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
Daniel D Jones schreef:
> On Saturday 04 February 2006 08:26, Beau E. Cox wrote:
>> On Saturday 04 February 2006 03:09 am, Daniel D Jones wrote:
>>> I'd like to run Firefox 1.5. The latest stable build appears to be 1.07.
>>> I added ww-client/mozilla-firefox ~x86 to my package.keywords file, which
>>> resulted in Deer Park being installed. I don't want Deer Park, just the
>>> 1.5 release version. I've considered downloading the source and manually
>>> installing but I'd prefer not to do something which may confuse portage
>>> at some point. Thanks for any suggestions.
>> I think I read that Deer Park is the name for Firefox that is used
>> to get an GPL-type liscense - but is really Firefox.
>
> I'm aware that Deer Park IS Firefox but my understanding was that Deer Park
> was a nightly release build and not the official 1.5 release. I thought it
> was the equivalent of grabbing the most recent source (at the time the
> package was created) from CVS rather than getting the official release
> source. Am I confused?
Yes, you are. Have a look at the ebuild:
# $Header:
/var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/www-client/mozilla-firefox/mozilla-firefox-1.5-r11.ebuild,v
1.1 2006/02/01 22:13:20 anarchy Exp $
unset ALLOWED_FLAGS # stupid extra-functions.sh ... bug 49179
MOZ_FREETYPE2="no" # Need to disable for newer .. remove here and in
mozconfig
# when older is removed from tree.
MOZ_PANGO="yes" # Need to enable for newer .. remove here and in
mozconfig
# when older is removed from tree.
inherit flag-o-matic toolchain-funcs eutils mozconfig-2 mozilla-launcher
makeedit multilib fdo-mime mozextension autotools
LANGS="ar ca cs da de el en-GB es-AR es-ES fi fr ga-IE he hu it ja ko mk
nb-NO nl pl pt-BR ro ru sk sl sv-SE tr zh-CN zh-TW"
SHORTLANGS="es-ES ga-IE nb-NO sv-SE"
PVER="1.4"
DESCRIPTION="Firefox Web Browser"
HOMEPAGE="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/"
==>
SRC_URI="ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/${PV}/source/firefox-${PV}-source.tar.bz2
As you see, the source tarball is being downloaded from the releases
folder of Mozilla.org's ftp, not any CVS or nightly build folder.
Ebuilds from development trees such as CVS or "nightlies" are clearly so
marked in their title, if they exist.
For example, I use an ebuild for Krusader (provided by on the Homepage)
which builds from the project's CVS tree, and it is rightfully called
"krusader-cvs" rather than the normal "krusader" ebuild provided by
Portage.
If an ebuild doesn't say it's compiling from CVS, it isn't. And of
course, you can always just open it in a text editor and /look/...
Holly
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2006-02-04 16:37 ` Holly Bostick
@ 2006-02-04 17:02 ` Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 18:20 ` Chan Min Wai
2006-02-04 19:01 ` Holly Bostick
0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Daniel D Jones @ 2006-02-04 17:02 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On Saturday 04 February 2006 11:37, Holly Bostick wrote:
> Daniel D Jones schreef:
> > I'm aware that Deer Park IS Firefox but my understanding was that Deer
> > Park was a nightly release build and not the official 1.5 release. I
> > thought it was the equivalent of grabbing the most recent source (at the
> > time the package was created) from CVS rather than getting the official
> > release source. Am I confused?
>
> Yes, you are. Have a look at the ebuild:
> # $Header:
> /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/www-client/mozilla-firefox/mozilla-firefox-1.5-r11.
>ebuild,v 1.1 2006/02/01 22:13:20 anarchy Exp $
...
> As you see, the source tarball is being downloaded from the releases
> folder of Mozilla.org's ftp, not any CVS or nightly build folder.
>
> Ebuilds from development trees such as CVS or "nightlies" are clearly so
> marked in their title, if they exist.
>
> For example, I use an ebuild for Krusader (provided by on the Homepage)
> which builds from the project's CVS tree, and it is rightfully called
> "krusader-cvs" rather than the normal "krusader" ebuild provided by
> Portage.
Thanks for the info and for clearing up my confusion.
> If an ebuild doesn't say it's compiling from CVS, it isn't. And of
> course, you can always just open it in a text editor and /look/...
I'm still learning how Portage works. I wasn't aware that ebuilds were that
straightforward.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2006-02-04 17:02 ` Daniel D Jones
@ 2006-02-04 18:20 ` Chan Min Wai
2006-02-04 19:01 ` Holly Bostick
1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Chan Min Wai @ 2006-02-04 18:20 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
Daniel D Jones wrote:
> On Saturday 04 February 2006 11:37, Holly Bostick wrote:
>
>> Daniel D Jones schreef:
>>
>>> I'm aware that Deer Park IS Firefox but my understanding was that Deer
>>> Park was a nightly release build and not the official 1.5 release. I
>>> thought it was the equivalent of grabbing the most recent source (at the
>>> time the package was created) from CVS rather than getting the official
>>> release source. Am I confused?
>>>
>> Yes, you are. Have a look at the ebuild:
>> # $Header:
>> /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/www-client/mozilla-firefox/mozilla-firefox-1.5-r11.
>> ebuild,v 1.1 2006/02/01 22:13:20 anarchy Exp $
>>
> ...
>
>> As you see, the source tarball is being downloaded from the releases
>> folder of Mozilla.org's ftp, not any CVS or nightly build folder.
>>
>> Ebuilds from development trees such as CVS or "nightlies" are clearly so
>> marked in their title, if they exist.
>>
>> For example, I use an ebuild for Krusader (provided by on the Homepage)
>> which builds from the project's CVS tree, and it is rightfully called
>> "krusader-cvs" rather than the normal "krusader" ebuild provided by
>> Portage.
>>
>
> Thanks for the info and for clearing up my confusion.
>
>
>> If an ebuild doesn't say it's compiling from CVS, it isn't. And of
>> course, you can always just open it in a text editor and /look/...
>>
>
> I'm still learning how Portage works. I wasn't aware that ebuilds were that
> straightforward.
>
>
After reading all the thread I only confused on one thing.
Why The [Account Setting] And [Preference] is Under the [Edit] Menu
Where on the windows build it is under the [Tools] Menu.
Any Idea?
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2006-02-04 17:02 ` Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 18:20 ` Chan Min Wai
@ 2006-02-04 19:01 ` Holly Bostick
1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Holly Bostick @ 2006-02-04 19:01 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
Daniel D Jones schreef:
> On Saturday 04 February 2006 11:37, Holly Bostick wrote:
>
>> If an ebuild doesn't say it's compiling from CVS, it isn't. And of
>> course, you can always just open it in a text editor and /look/...
>>
>
> I'm still learning how Portage works. I wasn't aware that ebuilds
> were that straightforward.
Well, in some respects they aren't, insofar as you kinda need to be
familiar with the compilation process of the program under
consideration, on the one hand (for example, the specific dependencies,
and the configuration options for it, which obviously vary from
application to application), and Gentoo conventions on the other hand
(such as the variables used to specify things like version number and
install directory and the like).
But in the sense that they are ultimately just scripts, and scripts are
ultimately just text, which are quite understandable if you know the
"language" they're written in, yes, ebuilds are very much "that
straightforward". Certainly straightforward enough even for the
completely untutored to be able to see things like where the source
is being downloaded from (the project site, or a gentoo mirror or
someplace else), and what options the application is being configured
with (or not), and how the USE flags available relate to the configure
options available to the application.
That's what makes Gentoo so cool-- or at least one of the big things-- *I*
can write an ebuild, at need, and I can't code my way out of a paper
bag. A *wet* paper bag. Admittedly, my skills only really reach (at this
time) to modifying existing ebuilds in relatively simple ways (version
bumps and "switching" annoying dependencies to separate-but-equal ones),
but I can learn more via the docs when I want to try something more
complex. I can even submit modified or new ebuilds on b.g.o for
submission into Portage (and have done, actually).
It's just me (same old me), but I can provide development services even
now, as I am (which is way more than anyone ever 'asked' of me under
previous distros, or under Windows, and certainly more than I ever knew
I was capable of), and I can fairly easily learn enough to do more, if I so
choose, by reading the Development docs on the main site, which will
tell you all you need to know about getting started with ebuilds.
Everybody can really help, in a truly functional way, and that's because
ebuilds *are* in that sense simple enough that they give you a "way in",
if you see what I mean.
Holly
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-user] Firefox
@ 2011-06-27 23:52 Daniel D Jones
2011-06-28 0:44 ` Albert Hopkins
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Daniel D Jones @ 2011-06-27 23:52 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
Can anyone explain why it takes so long for Firefox-bin to be unmasked?
That's not intended to be a rant or finger-pointing, but a serious question. I
can certainly understand the issues involved with ensuring that a complex
package compiles on various systems with all sorts of different drivers and
set-ups. But the -bin package is a precompiled binary that's merely
installed. It seems like it should be pretty simple and straightforward to
ensure that it works and unmask it.
Firefox just released 5.0 and announced that all development, including bug
fixes and security updates, had halted on 4.0. They plan to hold to similar
short-release cycles in the future. It's been four months since 4.0 was
released and it's still masked. If future releases see similar delays in
unmasking, Gentoo users will soon be two or three versions behind. We'll be
forced to either manually install, unmask the masked package, or run a
potentially buggy, insecure version. Any insight into the delay of unmasking
the binary verion that would help me understand the issue greatly appreciated.
--
"It seems to me that it is madder never to abandon one's self than often to be
infatuated; better to be wounded, a captive and a slave, than always to walk
in armor." - Margaret Fuller
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox
2011-06-27 23:52 [gentoo-user] Firefox Daniel D Jones
@ 2011-06-28 0:44 ` Albert Hopkins
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Albert Hopkins @ 2011-06-28 0:44 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On Monday, June 27 at 19:52 (-0400), Daniel D Jones said:
> Can anyone explain why it takes so long for Firefox-bin to be unmasked?
[etc.]
Have you gone to bugs.gentoo.org and submitted a stabilization request?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-06-28 0:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-06-27 23:52 [gentoo-user] Firefox Daniel D Jones
2011-06-28 0:44 ` Albert Hopkins
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-02-04 13:09 Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 13:26 ` Beau E. Cox
2006-02-04 14:09 ` Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 16:37 ` Holly Bostick
2006-02-04 17:02 ` Daniel D Jones
2006-02-04 18:20 ` Chan Min Wai
2006-02-04 19:01 ` Holly Bostick
2006-02-04 13:30 ` Andrew Gaydenko
2006-02-04 13:32 ` Holly Bostick
2006-02-04 13:36 ` Scott Stoddard
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox