[gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Ryan Sims]

I just upgraded to mozilla-thunderbird-bin-1.0.6-r1 and
mozilla-firefox-bin-1.0.6-r1, and they seem to be conflicting with
each other, i.e. when I install firefox, running thunderbird gives me
a "/usr/libexec/mozilla-launcher: can't find the browser :-(" error,
so I remerge thunderbird and it runs, but I find that then firefox
gives me the same error. I've done this a couple of times, and
resynced.

Well, I looked at the ebuilds, because I noticed that the thunderbird
merge was installing a lot of stuff in "/opt/firefox" which seemed
wrong, and sure enough I found this in the thunderbird-bin-1.0.6-r1:

(line 36) src_install () {
     declare MOZILLA_FIVE_HOME=/opt/firefox

The thunderbird-bin-1.0.5-r1 ebuild seems to use /opt/thunderbird as its home...

Changelog doesn't seem to mention anything....was thinking about
opening a bug report?

-=-
Ryan W Sims

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Patrick Rutkowski]

On Friday 22 July 2005 23:31, Ryan Sims wrote:
> I just upgraded to mozilla-thunderbird-bin-1.0.6-r1 and
> mozilla-firefox-bin-1.0.6-r1, and they seem to be conflicting with
> each other, i.e. when I install firefox, running thunderbird gives me
> a "/usr/libexec/mozilla-launcher: can't find the browser :-(" error,
> so I remerge thunderbird and it runs, but I find that then firefox
> gives me the same error. I've done this a couple of times, and
> resynced.
>
> Well, I looked at the ebuilds, because I noticed that the thunderbird
> merge was installing a lot of stuff in "/opt/firefox" which seemed
> wrong, and sure enough I found this in the thunderbird-bin-1.0.6-r1:
>
> (line 36) src_install () {
>      declare MOZILLA_FIVE_HOME=/opt/firefox
>
> The thunderbird-bin-1.0.5-r1 ebuild seems to use /opt/thunderbird as its
> home...
>
> Changelog doesn't seem to mention anything....was thinking about
> opening a bug report?
>
> -=-
> Ryan W Sims

I recently had various problems with firefox-bin too; then I let the source 
compile rip while I was away at work.

I find that things are just better if you stay away from bins.

Sorry I can't offer any real advice,
Patrick Rutkowski
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Zac Medico]

Patrick Rutkowski wrote:
> On Friday 22 July 2005 23:31, Ryan Sims wrote:
> 
>>I just upgraded to mozilla-thunderbird-bin-1.0.6-r1 and
>>mozilla-firefox-bin-1.0.6-r1, and they seem to be conflicting with
>>each other, i.e. when I install firefox, running thunderbird gives me
>>a "/usr/libexec/mozilla-launcher: can't find the browser :-(" error,
>>so I remerge thunderbird and it runs, but I find that then firefox
>>gives me the same error. I've done this a couple of times, and
>>resynced.
>>
>>Well, I looked at the ebuilds, because I noticed that the thunderbird
>>merge was installing a lot of stuff in "/opt/firefox" which seemed
>>wrong, and sure enough I found this in the thunderbird-bin-1.0.6-r1:
>>
>>(line 36) src_install () {
>>     declare MOZILLA_FIVE_HOME=/opt/firefox
>>
>>The thunderbird-bin-1.0.5-r1 ebuild seems to use /opt/thunderbird as its
>>home...
>>
>>Changelog doesn't seem to mention anything....was thinking about
>>opening a bug report?
>>

I give you permission to file a bug ;-).  Something's not right about that.

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Holly Bostick]

Zac Medico schreef:
> Patrick Rutkowski wrote:
> 
>> On Friday 22 July 2005 23:31, Ryan Sims wrote:
>>
>>> I just upgraded to mozilla-thunderbird-bin-1.0.6-r1 and
>>> mozilla-firefox-bin-1.0.6-r1, and they seem to be conflicting with
>>> each other, i.e. when I install firefox, running thunderbird gives me
>>> a "/usr/libexec/mozilla-launcher: can't find the browser :-(" error,
>>> so I remerge thunderbird and it runs, but I find that then firefox
>>> gives me the same error. I've done this a couple of times, and
>>> resynced.
>>>
>>> Well, I looked at the ebuilds, because I noticed that the thunderbird
>>> merge was installing a lot of stuff in "/opt/firefox" which seemed
>>> wrong, and sure enough I found this in the thunderbird-bin-1.0.6-r1:
>>>
>>> (line 36) src_install () {
>>>     declare MOZILLA_FIVE_HOME=/opt/firefox
>>>
>>> The thunderbird-bin-1.0.5-r1 ebuild seems to use /opt/thunderbird as its
>>> home...
>>>
>>> Changelog doesn't seem to mention anything....was thinking about
>>> opening a bug report?
>>>
> 
> I give you permission to file a bug ;-).  Something's not right about that.
> 
May already be solved; both firefox and tbird went to 1.0.6-r2 very
early today.

I've gotta say, I'm getting tired of upgrading them (I saw the upgrade
to 1.0.6 two days ago, but waited; there was an upgrade to 1.0.6-r1,
which I took yesterday afternoon, and today I have to upgrade to 1.0.6-r2).

There was also an upgrade to the version of mozilla launcher in the past
day and a half; in my original emerge -uaDtv world, 1.39 was proposed, a
few hours later, when I finally got around to actually upgrading (after
another, "extra" sync), the version had been bumped to 1.45.

In any case, I'm not having any problems with firefox or tbird 1.0.6-r1
atm-- but then again, I'm not using the bins. But, amazingly, Enigmail
works out of the box on upgrade (which is a first; I usually have to
reinstall it), and I was clever enough to backup my search plugins
before upgrading (and order them in user.js, which should be
unaffected), so as soon as I upgrade (again), I should be able to put
them back and move on with my life.

I was going to post a question as to whether anybody knew how many more
revisions we're going to see to the Mozilla programs in the next couple
days; I understand heavy development, but three upgrades in three days
is a bit much even for me (since it takes an hour and a half or so to
compile each program, and further means I have to use Konq for that time
if I don't want to mess up ff by having it loaded while it's upgrading.

So I'd love to know if this is likely to settle down soon, if anybody
happens to follow the relevant development.

Holly
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Tero Grundström]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Holly Bostick wrote:

> I've gotta say, I'm getting tired of upgrading them (I saw the upgrade
> to 1.0.6 two days ago, but waited; there was an upgrade to 1.0.6-r1,
> which I took yesterday afternoon, and today I have to upgrade to 1.0.6-r2).

I'm getting tired of it too. I would understand this upgrade cycle with 
some smaller packages, but ff and tb are huge programs to compile this 
often.

And as if bumping the revisions were not enough they keep deleting the 
previous versions from the tree making it hard to mask the new ones:
If the old one is gone, you just cannot add the new one to your 
package.mask file - you also have to put a "fake" ebuild to your local 
portage tree. Otherwise portage will want to *downgrade* with emerge -u 
world. Or worse, complain about missing packages if the current one is 
the only one in the tree, as it was with firefox-1.0.5-r1.


> In any case, I'm not having any problems with firefox or tbird 1.0.6-r1

That's the real paradox here. I don't remember when was the last time I 
had a problem with ff (actually I use only Galeon these days, compiled 
against ff) so it feels so stupid to compile it just because of these 
revision bumps (yeah, I know - you don't *have to* upgrade, they'll 
say - but then again, read what I said above).


> I was going to post a question as to whether anybody knew how many more
> revisions we're going to see to the Mozilla programs in the next couple
> days; I understand heavy development, but three upgrades in three days
> is a bit much even for me (since it takes an hour and a half or so to
> compile each program, and further means I have to use Konq for that time
> if I don't want to mess up ff by having it loaded while it's upgrading.

Hmmm... I don't see how it could mess ff this way.

> So I'd love to know if this is likely to settle down soon, if anybody
> happens to follow the relevant development.

Relevant? But is it really...? ;-)

--
T.G.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Holly Bostick]

Tero Grundström schreef:
> 
>> In any case, I'm not having any problems with firefox or tbird 1.0.6-r1
> 
> 
> That's the real paradox here. I don't remember when was the last time I
> had a problem with ff (actually I use only Galeon these days, compiled
> against ff) so it feels so stupid to compile it just because of these
> revision bumps 

No, you actually *did* have to upgrade to 1.0.6-- there was a GLSA for
1.0.5, for which 1.0.6 was the fix.

But what happened (or seems to have happened) is that some aspect of
this enterprise (either on the mozilla side or the gentoo side) was a
bit borked, requiring a revision, and then the revision had to be fixed.

Or the "error" was on both sides--from the changelog, it looks like
there was an error in the original 1.0.6 ebuild, requiring a revision to
1.0.6-r1, and then there was an upgrade to the source ("10MozillaFirefox
lib dir"), which required another revision to the ebuild.

The whole thing seems to have been a bit of a mess, but everybody seems
to have been a part of it.

Oh, well. Hope everything is straightened out now, except for the issue
raised in my post "Double Firefox folders in /usr/lib?".

So if that's a real issue, there could be another revision in all of our
futures. Sorry.

Holly
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Benno Schulenberg]

Holly Bostick wrote:
> I understand heavy development, but three
> upgrades in three days is a bit much even for me

Come on, Holly, when you're running unstable (~x86), you've got to 
be ready to take frequent updates.  Or, to circumvent this, you 
could sync less often: once a week works fine here.

> (since it takes 
> an hour and a half or so to compile each program, and further
> means I have to use Konq for that time if I don't want to mess up
> ff by having it loaded while it's upgrading.

There's no problem with using Firefox while it is being compiled.  
Only as soon as it has actually been merged, it may be wise to 
restart it.

Benno
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Tero Grundström]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 718 bytes --]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Holly Bostick wrote:

> Tero Grundström schreef:
>>
>>> In any case, I'm not having any problems with firefox or tbird 1.0.6-r1
>>
>>
>> That's the real paradox here. I don't remember when was the last time I
>> had a problem with ff (actually I use only Galeon these days, compiled
>> against ff) so it feels so stupid to compile it just because of these
>> revision bumps
>
> No, you actually *did* have to upgrade to 1.0.6-- there was a GLSA for
> 1.0.5, for which 1.0.6 was the fix.

Actually, I was talking about revision bumps, not version bumps.

But no, I don't *have to* to upgrade anything, GLSA or not. Unless you 
come here and put a gun on my head ;)



--
T.G.

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Holly Bostick]

Benno Schulenberg schreef:
> Holly Bostick wrote:
> 
>>I understand heavy development, but three
>>upgrades in three days is a bit much even for me
> 
> 
> Come on, Holly, when you're running unstable (~x86), you've got to 
> be ready to take frequent updates.  Or, to circumvent this, you 
> could sync less often: once a week works fine here.

In this case, syncing less often wasn't an issue-- the reason I had to
upgrade to 1.0.6 was due to a GLSA. Having to upgrade once due to
instability of the GLSA upgrade is fine, but twice is a bit annoying,
especially when that means *6* compiles (firefox and thunderbird each
three times).

And the fact that we're revising on-the-fly, as it were, would suggest
that there's 'no end in sight'-- at least I as a user can't see any such
end, since being neither a Mozilla nor a Gentoo developer, I don't know
if everything that needed to be fixed is finished being fixed or not, or
if there remain any 'loose ends' to be tied.

I understand completely that 'these things happen', and I'm not
complaining about that *per se*, I'd just like to know if there is in
fact an end in sight, and whether we've perhaps reached it (or it is at
least close).

> 
> 
>>(since it takes 
>>an hour and a half or so to compile each program, and further
>>means I have to use Konq for that time if I don't want to mess up
>>ff by having it loaded while it's upgrading.
> 
> 
> There's no problem with using Firefox while it is being compiled.  
> Only as soon as it has actually been merged, it may be wise to 
> restart it.


Not completely true. You can use an already-opened instance of
Firefox--- as long as you stay within the same window.

Open another window for any reason, and the whole thing will close down
(because you can't open a new instance of Firefox while Firefox is
compiling). So forums or database sites that open new windows to create
posts, or display information about an item in the database are
unuseable during this time.

Rather than control my surfing, I prefer to use another browser until
Firefox is finished compiling.

Holly
> 
> Benno

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Tero Grundström]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Holly Bostick wrote:

> Benno Schulenberg schreef:
>> Holly Bostick wrote:
>>
>>> I understand heavy development, but three
>>> upgrades in three days is a bit much even for me
>>
>>
>> Come on, Holly, when you're running unstable (~x86), you've got to
>> be ready to take frequent updates.  Or, to circumvent this, you
>> could sync less often: once a week works fine here.
>
> In this case, syncing less often wasn't an issue-- the reason I had to
> upgrade to 1.0.6 was due to a GLSA.

I don't find any GLSA on firefox-1.0.6. Even the official firefox release
notes doesn't list any security fixes.

>>
>>
>>> (since it takes
>>> an hour and a half or so to compile each program, and further
>>> means I have to use Konq for that time if I don't want to mess up
>>> ff by having it loaded while it's upgrading.
>>
>>
>> There's no problem with using Firefox while it is being compiled.
>> Only as soon as it has actually been merged, it may be wise to
>> restart it.
>
>
> Not completely true. You can use an already-opened instance of
> Firefox--- as long as you stay within the same window.
>
> Open another window for any reason, and the whole thing will close down
> (because you can't open a new instance of Firefox while Firefox is
> compiling). So forums or database sites that open new windows to create
> posts, or display information about an item in the database are
> unuseable during this time.
>
> Rather than control my surfing, I prefer to use another browser until
> Firefox is finished compiling.

Erhm.. I don't know how in the world you could be seeing this kind of 
behavior while compiling firefox...

Anyways, you're just so wrong here, Holly (and Benno is right). Don't you
understand the concept of compiling? When something is being compiled
*nothing* gets installed during that time, and so it couldn't interfere
with your current installation. The program gets installed only after
compiling has finished.

make && make install, you know... or do you?

--
T.G.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Tero Grundström]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 403 bytes --]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Tero Grundström wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Holly Bostick wrote:
>
>> In this case, syncing less often wasn't an issue-- the reason I had to
>> upgrade to 1.0.6 was due to a GLSA.
>
> I don't find any GLSA on firefox-1.0.6. Even the official firefox release
> notes doesn't list any security fixes.

I mean on firefox (or thunderbird) >=1.0.5, ofcourse...


--
T.G.

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Holly Bostick]

Tero Grundström schreef:
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Holly Bostick wrote:
> 
>>
>> In this case, syncing less often wasn't an issue-- the reason I had to
>> upgrade to 1.0.6 was due to a GLSA.
>
>
> 
> 
> I don't find any GLSA on firefox-1.0.6. Even the official firefox release
> notes doesn't list any security fixes.
> 

On the 20th, my system was listed as affected by this GLSA

        GLSA 200507-14:
Mozilla Firefox: Multiple vulnerabilities
============================================================================
Synopsis:          Several vulnerabilities in Mozilla Firefox allow
		   attacks ranging from execution of script code with
                   elevated privileges to information leak.
Announced on:      July 15, 2005
Last revised on:   July 15, 2005: 01

Affected package:  www-client/mozilla-firefox-bin
Affected archs:    All
Vulnerable:        <1.0.5
Unaffected:        >=1.0.5

However, at the time I was using 1.0.5-r1 (installed on the 19th).

I didn't look at the GLSA that clearly at the time (just saw Firefox),
so I didn't realize that I was in fact not supposed to be affected, but
glsa-check mailed me that I was.

So that explains that, if it explains it at all. glsa-check is not
perfect, apparently; perhaps it made a mistake.

>>>
>>> There's no problem with using Firefox while it is being compiled.
>>> Only as soon as it has actually been merged, it may be wise to
>>> restart it.
>>
>> Not completely true. You can use an already-opened instance of
>> Firefox--- as long as you stay within the same window.
>>
>> Open another window for any reason, and the whole thing will close down
>> (because you can't open a new instance of Firefox while Firefox is
>> compiling). So forums or database sites that open new windows to create
>> posts, or display information about an item in the database are
>> unuseable during this time.
>>
>> Rather than control my surfing, I prefer to use another browser until
>> Firefox is finished compiling.
> 
> 
> Erhm.. I don't know how in the world you could be seeing this kind of
> behavior while compiling firefox...
> 
> Anyways, you're just so wrong here, Holly (and Benno is right). Don't you
> understand the concept of compiling? When something is being compiled
> *nothing* gets installed during that time, and so it couldn't interfere
> with your current installation. The program gets installed only after
> compiling has finished.
> 
> make && make install, you know... or do you?

Y'know, Tero-- bite me. Maybe I've got a (currently unknown) system
problem that causes this behaviour only on my system, maybe I *used* see
this behaviour, created a workaround, and haven't noticed that I don't
need it anymore, maybe I'm using a different version of Portage than you
which isn't quite as neat as the one you're using.

You don't have to insult me with a strong implication that I'm stupid or
something-- certainly over an issue that neither of us control
(Portage), and certainly not over behaviour that I have clearly
documented my experience of.

Geez.

Holly
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Tero Grundström]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Holly Bostick wrote:

> You don't have to insult me with a strong implication that I'm stupid or
> something-- certainly over an issue that neither of us control
> (Portage), and certainly not over behaviour that I have clearly
> documented my experience of.
>
> Geez.
>
> Holly

I should say nothing more than that I'm really sorry if I've implied 
something like that.

Lets end this tero/holly conflict right here :)



--
T.G.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Ryan Sims]

Seems that someone filed the bug report this morning while I was at work:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100048

To "fix" it for now, I'm switching to the source-based version, which
is still compiling, but I assume it will be fine.

Sorry to have touched off a conflict, but thanks for the responses.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] thunderbird/firefox conflict

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 789 bytes --]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:11:09 +0200, Holly Bostick wrote:

> I was going to post a question as to whether anybody knew how many more
> revisions we're going to see to the Mozilla programs in the next couple
> days; I understand heavy development, but three upgrades in three days
> is a bit much even for me (since it takes an hour and a half or so to
> compile each program, and further means I have to use Konq for that time
> if I don't want to mess up ff by having it loaded while it's upgrading.

Use emerge -B pkg to build a binary. Then install it in a few seconds
with emerge -k pkg.

Or you could just use Konqueror, which doesn't seem to be plagued with
hourly security fixes ;-)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Found my .sig, it was in behind the cushion on the settee.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]