On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:56 AM, David G. Miller wrote:
> SIGH. The choice is always bleeding edge (and take your lumps) or stability
> but
> missing the most recent versions. I'm looking at a career change (or mid-life
> crisis) with the network security classes. I'm not finding that I enjoy
David G. Miller wrote:
> Ron Blizzard writes:
>
>> I hadn't logged into Fedora for about ten days -- which was the last
>> time I updated it. I updated it again today and it already had 315
>> Megs of updates. I think Fedora is a good distribution, but I don't
>> think I would want that kind of u
Ron Blizzard writes:
> I hadn't logged into Fedora for about ten days -- which was the last
> time I updated it. I updated it again today and it already had 315
> Megs of updates. I think Fedora is a good distribution, but I don't
> think I would want that kind of upkeep traffic. (Which is one of
Mike A. Harris wrote:
> http://mharris.ca/pub/el/5/SRPMS/xulrunner-1.9.1.2-0.mh.1.src.rpm
> http://mharris.ca/pub/el/5/SRPMS/firefox-3.5.2-0.mh.2.src.rpm
> http://mharris.ca/pub/el/5/SRPMS/mozilla-filesystem-1.9-4.src.rpm
Mike, thanks! They all built and seem to run well for me.
I did have to in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Thomas wrote:
> Ron Blizzard wrote:
>> Firefox 3.5 and *some* CentOS 5.3 computers (an Xorg graphics card
>> incompatibility issue?) -- it goes beyond the RPM package released by
>>
> For the record, I have been using Michael Harris' 3.5 Firefox w
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 13:06, David G. Miller wrote:
> I just checked the links with FF 3.5.2 under Fedora Core 11 and they open just
> fine. This would seem to narrow the problem down to FF 3.5 on CentOS 5.3.
> Perhaps someone with a CentOS 4.X could give it a try (assuming FF 3.5 will
> in
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 12:06 PM, David G. Miller wrote:
> I just checked the links with FF 3.5.2 under Fedora Core 11 and they open just
> fine. This would seem to narrow the problem down to FF 3.5 on CentOS 5.3.
> Perhaps someone with a CentOS 4.X could give it a try (assuming FF 3.5 will
> ins
Ron Blizzard writes:
>
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
> > I have Firefox 3.5 (the mozilla.com version) on CentOS 5.3 using an
> > Intel card and it has caused X to restart on a couple of occasions.
> >
> > I am shifting back to the 3.0 version in the repo.
>
> A grea
On 8/10/09, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> Ron Blizzard wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 5:20 PM, John
>> Thomas wrote:
>>> Ron Blizzard wrote:
Firefox 3.5 and *some* CentOS 5.3 computers (an Xorg graphics card
incompatibility issue?) -- it goes beyond the RPM package released by
>>> For t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ron Blizzard wrote:
> I set up a CentOS desktop computer for my brother and his kids. When
> Firefox 3.5 came out he decided to download and install it like he
> would Windows (he doesn't yet understand the repository system). He's
> been telling me th
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> I have Firefox 3.5 (the mozilla.com version) on CentOS 5.3 using an
> Intel card and it has caused X to restart on a couple of occasions.
>
> I am shifting back to the 3.0 version in the repo.
A great test page for the bug it is right on Cen
Ron Blizzard wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 5:20 PM, John
> Thomas wrote:
>> Ron Blizzard wrote:
>>> Firefox 3.5 and *some* CentOS 5.3 computers (an Xorg graphics card
>>> incompatibility issue?) -- it goes beyond the RPM package released by
>>>
>> For the record, I have been using Michael Harris
Lanny Marcus wrote:
> On 8/10/09, Ron Blizzard wrote:
>
>> I set up a CentOS desktop computer for my brother and his kids. When
>> Firefox 3.5 came out he decided to download and install it like he
>> would Windows (he doesn't yet understand the repository system). He's
>> been telling me that
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Lanny Marcus wrote:
> Ron: My Desktop is dual boot. M$ WinXP Home and CentOS 5.3 (32 bit). I
> rarely use M$ Windows, but yesterday I needed to use it, and I was
> offered an Update for Mozilla Firefox. What was offered was not 3.5.
> It was 3.0.13 as I recall. I u
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 5:20 PM, John
Thomas wrote:
> Ron Blizzard wrote:
>> Firefox 3.5 and *some* CentOS 5.3 computers (an Xorg graphics card
>> incompatibility issue?) -- it goes beyond the RPM package released by
>>
> For the record, I have been using Michael Harris' 3.5 Firefox without
> any i
On 8/10/09, Ron Blizzard wrote:
> I set up a CentOS desktop computer for my brother and his kids. When
> Firefox 3.5 came out he decided to download and install it like he
> would Windows (he doesn't yet understand the repository system). He's
> been telling me that it works fine, even though I wa
Ron Blizzard wrote:
> Firefox 3.5 and *some* CentOS 5.3 computers (an Xorg graphics card
> incompatibility issue?) -- it goes beyond the RPM package released by
>
For the record, I have been using Michael Harris' 3.5 Firefox without
any issues at all and with some speed benefits. I hope Mr. Harr
17 matches
Mail list logo
