On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 09:28:40PM +0200, Beat G?tzi wrote:
> On Oct 22, 2011, at 2:54 AM, Joe Altman wrote:
> > Greetings...
> >
> > I was running portupgrade on libxul and noticed it depends on Firefox
> > 3.x. I cancelled the upgrade, because I thought FF3.x was
On Oct 22, 2011, at 2:54 AM, Joe Altman wrote:
> Greetings...
>
> I was running portupgrade on libxul and noticed it depends on Firefox
> 3.x. I cancelled the upgrade, because I thought FF3.x was insecure and
> therefore deprecated while FF7 was recommended and secure.
>
>
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 12:45:11 +0200
Polytropon articulated:
> I'm not sure if it still applies, but in earlier Firefox
> version transitions (and the consideration of dependencies)
> some programs depending on libxul would install an outdated
> Firefox version. The solution has been WITH_GECKO=libx
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 09:32:47 +0200, Eduardo Morras wrote:
> As far as i know, the libxul port is inside ff3. Installing libxul
> doesn't install ff3, only libxul. Perhaps it's an old libxul and the
> newr one is inside ff7, so libxul port should point there, don't know that.
I'm not sure if it s
At 02:54 22/10/2011, Joe Altman wrote:
Greetings...
I was running portupgrade on libxul and noticed it depends on Firefox
3.x. I cancelled the upgrade, because I thought FF3.x was insecure and
therefore deprecated while FF7 was recommended and secure.
My questions:
1) is the dependency libxul
Greetings...
I was running portupgrade on libxul and noticed it depends on Firefox
3.x. I cancelled the upgrade, because I thought FF3.x was insecure and
therefore deprecated while FF7 was recommended and secure.
My questions:
1) is the dependency libxul has for FF3 a security problem?
2) is
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Andrea Venturoli
> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 1:08 PM
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Firefox 3 and 4 with NFS home director
On 06/20/11 21:55, Devin Teske wrote:
I'm wondering if anyone has been able to test Firefox 4 on NFS $HOME.
I had problems in the past with Firefox 3, but they are gone.
Firefox 4 also works.
Right now I'm using 8.1, but I don't remember if this was what solved.
In any cas
s.cs.umbc.edu/willm1/2009/04/15/firefox-3-over-nfs-still-sucks/
NOTE: The above dissection of the NFS issues was posted April 15, 2009 in
relation to Firefox-3.0.x, however remains relevant to Firefox-3.5.x.
I'm wondering if anyone has been able to test Firefox 4 on NFS $HOME.
The types o
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Warren Block wrote:
One other note: FF3 wanted to check my extensions for compatibility almost
every time it started. A process for disabling that check is described here:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Updating_extensions
It's just adding these two settings to about:config:
> I did experience this, and I had to tweak the following settings in
> about:config before the experience became usable:
>
> network.http.pipelining: true
> network.http.pipelining.maxrequests: 10
> network.http.pipelining.ssl: true
>
> The image loading and display code seems to hav
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Jason W. Morgan wrote:
I also get the annoying black boxes. I haven't tested it thoroughly
yet, but it seems to happen most often with resized png images. That
could just be a result of the pages I visit though; they seem to use
pngs quite extensively.
That's a known bug:
> I did experience this, and I had to tweak the following settings in
> about:config before the experience became usable:
>
>network.http.pipelining: true
>network.http.pipelining.maxrequests: 10
>network.http.pipelining.ssl: true
>
> The image loading and display code seems to have cha
On 2008.07.14 14:08:03, Jonathan Chen wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 06:24:50PM -0600, Keith Seyffarth wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone else had problems with Firefox 3 installed from the ports
> > being massively slow?
> >
> > Unlike on Windows, where the load
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 06:24:50PM -0600, Keith Seyffarth wrote:
>
> Has anyone else had problems with Firefox 3 installed from the ports
> being massively slow?
>
> Unlike on Windows, where the load time for the application is much
> slower (takes roughly twice as long as FF2
On Sun 2008-07-13 18:24:50 UTC-0600, Keith Seyffarth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Has anyone else had problems with Firefox 3 installed from the ports
> being massively slow?
No. I installed it from Ports on a FreeBSD 7.0 and it seemed to run
with no major dramas. Certainly no long
Has anyone else had problems with Firefox 3 installed from the ports
being massively slow?
Unlike on Windows, where the load time for the application is much
slower (takes roughly twice as long as FF2 did), but once the
application is loaded, it seems to be about the same, on my BSD box,
the
y 2008 17:56:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 04:40:35PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 02:27:42PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>> wrote:
> &g
2008 at 04:40:35PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 02:27:42PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I downloaded the firefox*gz file from devel but it doesn't mak
downloaded the firefox*gz file from devel but it doesn't make for
64-bit. Is Firefox 3 available for 64-bit AMD FreeBSD 7.0?
It builds fine from ports on amd64 7-STABLE. Use the port www/firefox3.
Roland
I'm running 7.0-release. I ran portsnap and then porsnap extra
downloaded the firefox*gz file from devel but it doesn't make for
64-bit. Is Firefox 3 available for 64-bit AMD FreeBSD 7.0?
It builds fine from ports on amd64 7-STABLE. Use the port www/firefox3.
Roland
I'm running 7.0-release. I ran portsnap and then porsnap extract.
Then I cd'd
oaded the firefox*gz file from devel but it doesn't make for
> > > > 64-bit. Is Firefox 3 available for 64-bit AMD FreeBSD 7.0?
> > >
> > > It builds fine from ports on amd64 7-STABLE. Use the port www/firefox3.
> > >
> > > Roland
> >
>
On Saturday 05 July 2008 17:56:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 04:40:35PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 02:27:42PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > I downloaded the firefox*gz file from devel but it doesn't make for
>
On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 04:40:35PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 02:27:42PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I downloaded the firefox*gz file from devel but it doesn't make for
> > 64-bit. Is Firefox 3 available for 64-bit AMD FreeBSD 7.0?
>
>
On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 02:27:42PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I downloaded the firefox*gz file from devel but it doesn't make for
> 64-bit. Is Firefox 3 available for 64-bit AMD FreeBSD 7.0?
It builds fine from ports on amd64 7-STABLE. Use the port www/firefox3.
Roland
--
I downloaded the firefox*gz file from devel but it doesn't make for
64-bit. Is Firefox 3 available for 64-bit AMD FreeBSD 7.0?
Thanks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questio
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:06:45 -0400
"Tsu-Fan Cheng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the gui looks just like v2, right?
>
> TFC
>
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 08:34:01AM +0200, herbs wrote:
> >> Yes, you invoke #firefox (the V
the gui looks just like v2, right?
TFC
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 08:34:01AM +0200, herbs wrote:
>> Yes, you invoke #firefox (the V2.x) or #firefox-devel (for the new one).
>> Dont remember with the bookmarks and plugins thoug
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 08:34:01AM +0200, herbs wrote:
> Yes, you invoke #firefox (the V2.x) or #firefox-devel (for the new one).
> Dont remember with the bookmarks and plugins though, you maybe have to
> import/reinstall these.
Thanks for confirmation.
--
Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: htt
Yes, you invoke #firefox (the V2.x) or #firefox-devel (for the new one).
Dont remember with the bookmarks and plugins though, you maybe have to
import/reinstall these.
Cheers
herbs
> > I took firefox-devel. Some days ago it was version 3.0a2. Works quite well
> > if you really dont want to wait
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 03:35:46PM +0200, herbert langhans wrote:
> I took firefox-devel. Some days ago it was version 3.0a2. Works quite well if
> you really dont want to wait..
Does it coexist happily with Firefox 2.x?
--
Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ]
I was ess
On Fri 2008-06-27 14:01:46 UTC+0200, Leslie Jensen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Now that there's been quite some focus on the release of Firefox 3, I'm
> wondering if anyone on the list knows when one can expect it to appear
> in the ports tree?
3.0.a2 is currently in t
I took firefox-devel. Some days ago it was version 3.0a2. Works quite well if
you really dont want to wait..
Cheers
herbs
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 14:01:46 +0200
Leslie Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Now that there's been quite some focus on the release of Firefox 3, I&
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 02:01:46PM +0200, Leslie Jensen wrote:
>
> Now that there's been quite some focus on the release of Firefox 3, I'm
> wondering if anyone on the list knows when one can expect it to appear in
> the ports tree?
> Thanks
> Leslie
Also, will the
Now that there's been quite some focus on the release of Firefox 3, I'm
wondering if anyone on the list knows when one can expect it to appear
in the ports tree?
Thanks
Leslie
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.f
35 matches
Mail list logo
