Firefox for #!

corenominal · 2012-06-14 20:31:12

Update: the information in this post is now defunct and the experimental Firefox packages have been removed from the Waldorf repository.

Following the recent WWW browser discussion (thank you again to everyone who took the time provide constructive comments) I have been looking at options for providing an up-to-date version of Firefox/Iceweasel for the Waldorf release. To this end, I have been playing around with the Linux Mint solution of packaging the official Mozilla binaries. I am not too sure how I feel about this method, but it works for Mint, so I figure there is no reason why it should not work for CrunchBang.

Anyhow, if anyone would like to try these packages, I uploaded Firefox 13 to the Waldorf repository today. Enter the command below to install, taking care to select the correct langauge for your system:

sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install firefox firefox-l10n-en-us

Last edited by corenominal (2012-07-27 10:07:31)

wuxmedia · 2012-06-14 20:46:57

cool, thanks - like a kid (at least my kids) with a new toy - trying to break it right now.
for (my) reference, thats not -en-uk but -en-gb - and it runs from terminal, or does it 'replace' iceweasel?

Edit;
used 'change default browser in network -> WWW browsers to change to default - duh.

mais, whats the diff between auto and manual. auto browsing sounds kinda magical mystery tour...

i think the scrolling is nicer. handles multiple tabs well.

Last edited by wuxmedia (2012-06-14 20:57:25)

Stanie · 2012-06-14 20:55:46

Great! All is working without probs.
I installed it through synaptic and had to check language pack for installation before firefox, because otherwise it wanted to automatically pull bg instead of en-us.

FYI I use two locales, but none of them is bg.

pvsage · 2012-06-14 21:46:57

I have the Debian Mozilla repo in my /etc/sources.list, and I currently have Iceweasel 13.0 in Statler.

deb http://mozilla.debian.net/ squeeze-backports iceweasel-release

Surely this version (or newer) is in their wheezy-backports repo.
(EDIT: Make that just "wheezy"; obviously, there is no backports repo for testing. (Is there?))

Not sure if this is a better solution, but perhaps easier for you, Papanom?

Last edited by pvsage (2012-06-14 22:14:59)

corenominal · 2012-06-14 22:02:58

pvsage wrote:

Not sure if this is a better solution, but perhaps easier for you, Papanom?

I'm not sure either hmm

I guess the main advantage with the Mint solution is that the binaries do not depend on any other libraries/packages -- I seem to remember this being an issue for Squeeze at some point(?)

vicshrike · 2012-06-15 07:23:48

Installed and running, sweet as Iceweasel. wink

corenominal · 2012-06-15 07:48:29

vicshrike wrote:

Installed and running, sweet as Iceweasel.

Good stuff. For what it is worth, I have been running the Mozilla binaries for a long time and I cannot recall ever having any real issues with them. I think I just have a slight personal issue with how Clem packages them for Mint, which is something I think I should try and get over -- I mean, I could be wrong, but I cannot recall Clem being lambasted for not strictly adhering to Debian packaging policies.

rizzo · 2012-06-15 07:54:21

^ It's never done Clem any harm. He probably has more supporters than detractors regarding the way he does things smile

corenominal · 2012-06-15 08:04:21

^ true, and besides, I could be wrong, but I do not think the majority of users would even know the difference. Still, I don't think it will become a habit to build packages in this fashion, but I am willing to make an exception for Firefox. smile

vicshrike · 2012-06-15 08:31:39

^I think it is ok to do that, Firefox is an icon, and everybody knows it. How many times has not the question about Icewaesl/Firefox come up around Linux forums? So if it works well, why not!

CBizgreat! · 2012-06-15 08:50:54

Awesomeish ...

Think it's a good move and glad for Core and the #! crowd. I kinda get why somebody might feel a bit bad about adding something branded, rather than Debian's IW. I mean if it's an opensource only or FOSS loyalty deal. Same time thought has crossed my mind more than a few times recently. Kinda sucks all this great software floating around AND a tiny minority has ever heard about it. Buntu's claim to fame, as far as I know ... rolling proprietary everything into Debian ?

Though think basic math says ALOT. Debian ( for most people) ans: What the heel is Debian ? Sounds like a space game or summin.

Buntu = Supposedly around 20million users.

Think same kinda goes for IW vs FF too. Haven't checked a credible source in awhile, so rough stats on browser market share. Sure it hasn't changed all that much.

IW = 3% or so ...
FF = 20-25%

Last edited by CBizgreat! (2012-06-15 08:53:07)

corenominal · 2012-06-15 09:07:44

My issues do not really have anything to do with the Debian standpoint on the Firefox branding, but concern how the packages contain pre-built binaries. Normally, a Debian source package is used to compile an application's binary files in a cleanroom environment via pbuilder. The Mint Firefox packages skip this step and use the binary files as supplied by Mozilla. Some people (the Debian purists amongst us) consider this bad form. That said, I guess the purists would be using Debian over #!, so there really isn't a problem.

CBizgreat! · 2012-06-15 09:33:02

^ Thanks ...

Of course had no idea about that. My next totally random guess centered around Sec issues. Never had a problem w FF Sec or otherwise to date. Still have zero clue if there's any real diff between them. But guessing most long time FF users want FF. Been using that sucker since about the time there's been a FF. So figure it's safe to assume others would feel the same way. Babbling way of saying, think it'll be more good feelin inspiring and appealing to people when they see #! has FF.

So glad you're giving people what they want. Can't see how it'll hurt anyone. Good for the users, good for the distro, good for the guy who's kept the crunch express rolling. So sounds like a win/win/win situation to me. Ok ... will stop babbling about this. Giving myself (and probably others) a headache. tongue

vl#!! wink

Last edited by CBizgreat! (2012-06-15 09:34:55)

corenominal · 2012-06-15 09:37:18

smile

vicshrike · 2012-06-15 11:38:54

corenominal wrote:

That said, I guess the purists would be using Debian over #!, so there really isn't a problem.

Since we not are pure here, smile , Firefox would certainly make #! more #!

snowpine · 2012-06-15 13:59:30

Impure and proud of it. smile

johnraff · 2012-06-15 15:39:06

From the users' point of view, what's the advantage of getting a packaged Firefox binary over the Iceweasel from the mozilla.debian repos? A Firefox icon? Is it worth all the extra work?

wuxmedia · 2012-06-15 19:56:35

i did kinda like having to explain to people what iceweasel was "ohh you use all the weird stuff - you" was one reply.. (a buntu user smile )
"it's the debian version of firefox" kinda like saying you drive a Golf Gti - Wolfsberg edition... big_smile

vicshrike · 2012-06-15 20:08:12

Edit, sorry were just confusing myself! big_smile

Last edited by vicshrike (2012-06-15 20:11:48)

pidsley · 2012-06-15 20:09:38

wuxmedia wrote:

i did kinda like having to explain to people what iceweasel was "ohh you use all the weird stuff - you" was one reply.. (a buntu user )
"it's the debian version of firefox" kinda like saying you drive a Golf Gti - Wolfsberg edition...

A badge of honor. I think #! should "rebrand" it as fireweasel...

Last edited by pidsley (2012-06-15 20:09:52)

vicshrike · 2012-06-15 20:13:25

^Fireweasel...the dirty version.Or should it be impure? big_smile

Last edited by vicshrike (2012-06-15 20:17:35)

pvsage · 2012-06-15 21:21:14

^ Nah, that would be F@rtweasel. lol How about Iceweasel Denali?

pidsley · 2012-06-15 21:28:38

I vote for Flamingweasel. I bet damo could come with a great icon for it...

Kind of sounds like a drink.. I'll have a flaming weasel, please...

Anyway, to bring this back on topic a little, I appreciate the effort to provide the latest version of Firefox for those that want/need that. However, I am perfectly happy with whatever version of iceweasel is currently available in Debian, and it seems that those who want/need the latest Firefox/Aurora/whatever can get it fairly easily, so I'm not sure I see the point of providing it in #!, especially if it takes any of corenominal's time or energy from almost anything else.

(and after writing all that, I see that wasn't the point of this thread at all... so I'll just go find seabiscuit and we'll babble in the corner)

Last edited by pidsley (2012-06-15 21:36:24)

pvsage · 2012-06-15 22:19:51

^ Reminds me of the grasshopper named Irving joke...

pidsley · 2012-06-15 22:21:47

A flaming weasel walks into a bar... ?

CrunchBang Linux

SEARCH

#1 2012-06-14 20:31:12

Firefox for #!

#2 2012-06-14 20:46:57

Re: Firefox for #!

#3 2012-06-14 20:55:46

Re: Firefox for #!

#4 2012-06-14 21:46:57

Re: Firefox for #!

#5 2012-06-14 22:02:58

Re: Firefox for #!

#6 2012-06-15 07:23:48

Re: Firefox for #!

#7 2012-06-15 07:48:29

Re: Firefox for #!

#8 2012-06-15 07:54:21

Re: Firefox for #!

#9 2012-06-15 08:04:21

Re: Firefox for #!

#10 2012-06-15 08:31:39

Re: Firefox for #!

#11 2012-06-15 08:50:54

Re: Firefox for #!

#12 2012-06-15 09:07:44

Re: Firefox for #!

#13 2012-06-15 09:33:02

Re: Firefox for #!

#14 2012-06-15 09:37:18

Re: Firefox for #!

#15 2012-06-15 11:38:54

Re: Firefox for #!

#16 2012-06-15 13:59:30

Re: Firefox for #!

#17 2012-06-15 15:39:06

Re: Firefox for #!

#18 2012-06-15 19:56:35

Re: Firefox for #!

#19 2012-06-15 20:08:12

Re: Firefox for #!

#20 2012-06-15 20:09:38

Re: Firefox for #!

#21 2012-06-15 20:13:25

Re: Firefox for #!

#22 2012-06-15 21:21:14

Re: Firefox for #!

#23 2012-06-15 21:28:38

Re: Firefox for #!

#24 2012-06-15 22:19:51

Re: Firefox for #!

#25 2012-06-15 22:21:47

Re: Firefox for #!

Board footer