From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 946121382C5 for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 07:37:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 48CA0E0CB8; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 07:37:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 951EDE0CB1 for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 07:37:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([79.223.100.124]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LtlG5-1eLYKe3Rll-011Dqe for ; Mon, 02 Apr 2018 09:37:09 +0200 Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 09:37:08 +0200 From: tuxic@posteo.de To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Firefox and addons no longer supported question Message-ID: <20180402073708.qzphgiws5chviwc2@solfire> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <20180331173626.nmq7jbqi2r2sxuwc@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> <20180401143550.ia5mmamo5f44aysn@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> <20180401222629.lrhfnu5juhxcocda@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> <20180402002807.iyf6zepv3fvaa3fb@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180323 Sender: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:diddZztI0iyVYCaPI6OH9+xBlaZrpFRf3rkJCFGQHBU/R0a+UEO FB1nDAfZ2potdRlyhhSxaXDit3xYpOZTAMEcAnWXenxYOcy0UdjPXtc99WAxiQjsWitKeBm MLOk3/RCZPHSasYnQz7EkpJ7BoNyqjDCSzcc82hBdcJxxqBjt7nlyGL61JsTJ9vW/+FT1q5 zmEVOdHikJQUX75T+Rcrw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:+PB4HgBt50w=:w03mR81UOxiQYstwDqSmNr ZMDErNWl4OdkC8xygBi8TKRiyGnuSz4lPPCKLhSN8EvgyXL+Wm3Ep/0tLKCPpj9DKXejk5WFX BM/KAsRRlYRU2X2RYlDrIFw/oRG0UMzXNQP2WKreQ2o9i85SlyO4av7ahAfQUv9HNXkCK7k86 3L7ctPLUmXLZVdjG+gp0plTaulEOT79outsmgHXaFzy9GjMZGb3cM9R3pYo6kVSE+ZzRxC5Mg /cHZ3PS+PXdy58Jkjn6OA99xVDtAV6q4+o3yLhqZMFIOwJMKDM+ggIOQQt0xwKAkKeAI6IvfQ 0arEWreUn2r0iAlGNZbofEhNFSXfBsZPwSu6rW3FB66VrwLSboDqjtpV1oRob/s4Y2ksbDKt2 I19JcZwqQxw7AGLLYPhdNOGeARTcm08qQPreqmS/PIR0bPi3dUYL9u11bkPuz/kV/9YL3ij/W K0GXyJlrtU7K5bkzmvdPzWNtC7RQhnutOq7z+xH9TIfbCt4eNTWWNtg1gmlkxbd0m4bexXj4k 1tc2mcE3vu0tUXrZY5+jgZ6k3/XoNLj1rryANTnK+bARx/u/ygSCS1EKYZOH94gv0QaFtdr4s Xi4YB5v+axFQCFw2JmQtsi9SLefIMyMtuPUqVFN9oUaAysSrWM4byHt3LI6fSEowr1Nm9m/72 chWj6cFcK+d11NbJsBcCF12MzFtiO1AXMTTFd/lTKi3B7+diz8XjKsned2LIj1UdsuCu2t3S5 sHI4TfMS3a5b2EzFJ0FW1uaiyhwHYq7EITI0bhxxVbTyczPJbSEH/QOy+52Ve6FExAURoljm2 ezANMTlfYctmsQ6ocTXE39SjGyH9A== X-Archives-Salt: 17b24eff-aac4-4d38-b799-0acdb91bd003 X-Archives-Hash: feb5ceb0d936fbab45e7a12fd2b0249d On 04/02 05:41, Martin Vaeth wrote: > Bill Kenworthy wrote: > > I use the palemoon overlay. > > There is also the octopus overlay. > Anyway, both can only react to upstream. > > > builds fine with gcc-6.4 > > Yes, but it has random crashes which do not occur with gcc-5, > and as somebody familiar with the code posted somewhere, > the reasons are quite some assumptions in assembler code > which should not have been made. (I simply repeated these > claims without checking them.) > > Upstream knows about it and therefore officially does not > support building with gcc-6. Since firefox upstream has fixed > all these things ages ago, and palemoon is not able to identify > or pull the corresponding patches this shows IMHO that it > has already diverged to a degree that it cannot be reasonably > maintained with the resources they have, and I doubt that > security issues are closed (or worse: recognized) timely: > In contrast to crashes (even Heisenbug crashes), security > issues cannot be "detected" if there is no expert regularly > checking the code very carfully. > > The decision to stick with legacy extension api completely > excludes that there is some convergence of the fork in the > future. > > Also the refusal to implement webextension apis (which is > consequent, since it is hardly possible to maintain 2 > more and more diverging apis) has the side effect that > only obsolete versions of the actively maintained extensions > like noscript and ublock-origin can be used. In the moment, > the legacy version of noscript is still maintained, but only > because of the tor browser. I suppose eventually this will change. > > I also do not know much about waterfox, but if one goal ist > to keep legacy extensions, I am afraid it will go the palemoon > way, too: > It seems currently that mozilla, google, and apple are the only > oranganizations with enough resources to maintain full browsers, > and any forks of their browsers which diverge more than a patchset > of essentially fixed size are doomed to fail for this very reason. > > ...and if after all that (at least) firefox gets so bulky and has such a hugh memory footprint that (on a multitasking OS) no other reasonable "powerful" application will multitask with it (or your machine goes swapping) and if mozilla itsself walks down an at least questionable way...then... What? In the moment I cannot use firefox - regardless how advanced/secure/modern/or what it is. It does not fit into my working environment - it is to huge. Cheers Meino