FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-30-2010, 09:49 PM
Mail Lists
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

On 01/30/2010 05:37 PM, Mat Booth wrote:

> Maybe but I agree with Braden: I don't think it's worth it. Seems like
> a lot of extra work for not a lot of gain.
>

I much prefer chrome and use it preferentially now anyway ... I'd
prefer we put any broswer related energy into chromium - it is already
far superior to firefox and I'd be shocked if its not the dominant
browser across all platforms in time.

Assuming some cross polination of resources ....
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-30-2010, 09:57 PM
Mike Chambers
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 22:37 +0000, Mat Booth wrote:

> Maybe but I agree with Braden: I don't think it's worth it. Seems like
> a lot of extra work for not a lot of gain.

Running a fully updated system, I upgraded to firefox-3.6 in rawhide
today, and it only updated 3 (firefox, xulrunner, and some other that I
don't recall) and everything working just fine.

--
Mike Chambers
Madisonville, KY

"Best lil town on Earth!"

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-31-2010, 12:09 AM
Braden McDaniel
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 14:00 -0500, Mail Lists wrote:
> On 01/30/2010 01:53 PM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 11:36 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> >> Braden McDaniel wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 14:48 +0800, Liu Yu Fei Eric wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I noticed firefox was stuck on 3.5.6 for a rather long time.
> >>>> What about 3.5.7 and the recently 3.6? They are even not in koji.
> >>>
> >>> xulrunner-1.9.2 breaks API compatibility with 1.9.1, so downstream
> >>> packages would need patching for this to happen.
> >>
> >> Even minor releases generally/often break ABI, requiring lots of dependent
> >> package rebuilds... or is this case even worse?
> >
> > I said "API", and that's what I meant.
> >
> > At the very least, there have been subtle changes to the plug-in API
> > that can cause compile failures.
> >
>
> And how many plugins are packaged by fedora ? Any?

Yes. Somewhere between a few and several.

> I'd guess all the plugin dev's at the moz website state clearly which
> vers of filrefox is supported - and most want their plugins to work with
> current release - 3.6.

Given that doing so can mean breaking compatibility with the previous
XULRunner release, it's probably not a good assumption that all plug-in
developers will be consistently aggressive about supporting the new
release.

Also keep in mind that I have no reason to believe that the plug-in
*ABI* has changed. Fielded binaries should be safe.

> So that seems like a bad reason not to update.
>
> So what are the couplings then that need source changes other than
> plugins?

I don't know. I don't even know if mozilla.org tracks this
meticulously.

> Can someone be specific rather than hand waving API around please.

It's easy enough to diff the NPAPI headers from 1.9.1 to 1.9.2 to see
the changes. Some highlights:

* Some JNI types in function signatures have been changed to void
*, presumably to avoid pulling in JNI headers.
* C99 sized types are now used instead of XULRunner- (or NSPR-?)
specific typedefs. In some cases, this means that the new
underlying type is distinct from the old one as far as the
compiler is concerned.

I really have no idea about the extent of XULRunner API changes outside
NPAPI. But simply assuming the NPAPI changes are all there is seems
foolhardy.

--
Braden McDaniel <braden@endoframe.com>

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-31-2010, 07:05 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

Wes Shull wrote:
> yum --enablerepo=rawhide update firefox

NEVER do that!!!

You probably have way more Rawhide packages than just Firefox now. At least
xulrunner and all the stuff using its "unstable API", probably also sqlite
and a lot more stuff. Each time your package depends on a newer library with
a new ABI, you end up dragging in the new library, which in turn drags in
rebuilt versions of ALL programs using that library! And of course this
continues in a transitive chain! That quickly sums up to half of the distro
leaving you with an unsupportable mix of F12 and Rawhide.

And even if it worked for you, it is a big mistake to recommend this to
other users who do not understand the implications. Please NEVER recommend
this to another user again!!! (And I'd also STRONGLY recommend against doing
that again yourself.)

The ONLY safe use of --enablerepo=rawhide is a full
"yum --enablerepo=rawhide update", at which point you're running Rawhide
with all its warts, something I'd NOT recommend to an average user.
Selective upgrades from Rawhide are NOT SUPPORTED and will in many cases NOT
work as expected due to dependencies and reverse dependencies.

(IMHO, it might make sense for yum to reject --enablerepo=rawhide for
anything other than a full upgrade.)

This is what repositories like Remi's are for!

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-31-2010, 07:05 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

Frank Murphy wrote:
> You can update to 3.6
> from Rawhide,
> then disable rawhide again.
>
> Which is what I have done,
> no problems yet.

NEVER do that!!!

You probably have way more Rawhide packages than just Firefox now. At least
xulrunner and all the stuff using its "unstable API", probably also sqlite
and a lot more stuff. Each time your package depends on a newer library with
a new ABI, you end up dragging in the new library, which in turn drags in
rebuilt versions of ALL programs using that library! And of course this
continues in a transitive chain! That quickly sums up to half of the distro
leaving you with an unsupportable mix of F12 and Rawhide.

And even if it worked for you, it is a big mistake to recommend this to
other users who do not understand the implications. Please NEVER recommend
this to another user again!!! (And I'd also STRONGLY recommend against doing
that again yourself.)

The ONLY safe use of --enablerepo=rawhide is a full
"yum --enablerepo=rawhide update", at which point you're running Rawhide
with all its warts, something I'd NOT recommend to an average user.
Selective upgrades from Rawhide are NOT SUPPORTED and will in many cases NOT
work as expected due to dependencies and reverse dependencies.

(IMHO, it might make sense for yum to reject --enablerepo=rawhide for
anything other than a full upgrade.)

This is what repositories like Remi's are for!

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-31-2010, 07:09 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

Mail Lists wrote:
> I think we need to use sun java as green tea is not yet on new api
> anyway is it?

The IcedTea plugin is in Fedora (as java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin). Fedora does
not and will not ship proprietary software such as the Sun Java plugin (from
the non-open JDK or JRE).

A new version of IcedTea with a new plugin which supports Firefox 3.6 is
being imported into Rawhide. This would have to be backported if Firefox 3.6
were to be pushed to F12.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-31-2010, 07:14 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

Christopher Brown wrote:
> This is because 3.5.7 doesn't affect us. Stability issue is for
> Windows people and update notification is patched out for obvious
> reasons.
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL%20status1.9.1%3A.7-fixed

What about the NTLM issue? That looks like it could affect Fedora users if they
are behind a Window$ Vi$ta or 7 proxy.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-31-2010, 09:34 AM
Wes Shull
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> wrote:

Wes Shull wrote:

> yum --enablerepo=rawhide update firefox



NEVER do that!!!

If you'd taken half a minute to check, you would have seen that it sucks in a grand total of sqlite and xulrunner.* Yeehaw.

If anything, you should be chastising me for making such an obvious suggestion.* This is the -devel list, after all.* I probably should have assumed that in addition to being able to make a decision about what to install on their system and from where, members of this list would know they could potentially use rawhide builds on a non-rawhide install.


I will grant you that back (f11? f10?) before 3.5 hit, grabbing it from rawhide would drag in a giant quagmire.* But it's pretty easy to hit 'n' when yum asks if you want to update half your system.


I'm sure Remi's a helpful and trustworthy guy, but I trust a build out of the fedora buildsystem proper more.

--wes

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-31-2010, 09:53 AM
Christopher Brown
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

On 31 January 2010 08:14, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> wrote:
> Christopher Brown wrote:
>> This is because 3.5.7 doesn't affect us. Stability issue is for
>> Windows people and update notification is patched out for obvious
>> reasons.
>>
>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=ALL%20status1.9.1%3A.7-fixed
>
> What about the NTLM issue? That looks like it could affect Fedora users if they
> are behind a Window$ Vi$ta or 7 proxy.

That looks pretty corner-case to me.

--
Christopher Brown
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-31-2010, 11:59 AM
M A Young
 
Default How about firefox 3.6 in Fedora 12 ?

On Sun, 31 Jan 2010, Wes Shull wrote:


On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at>
wrote:
Wes Shull wrote:
> yum --enablerepo=rawhide update firefox

NEVER do that!!!


If you'd taken half a minute to check, you would have seen that it sucks in
a grand total of sqlite and xulrunner.* Yeehaw.


At the moment it does for you, though more updates may be required
depending on what you have installed, but you also have to think longer
term, because the latest Fedora release and rawhide will tend to move
apart as time goes on, so when the first Fedora 3.6 security update comes
along you may find yourself having to download most of rawhide to update
it.


I wouldn't go as far as saying that you should never install rawhide
packages on a Fedora system, but you have to be prepared to cope with the
difficulties that might result as time goes on, so I wouldn't recommend it
unless you have the skill to cope with such difficulties.


Personally I have a couple of Fedora 12 installs that I put the rawhide
Firefox 3.6 on, but those are installs that I will probably switch to
rawhide at some point anyway.


Michael Young--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:34 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org