Re: Removing firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1 from system

2009-08-26 Thread Lowell Gilbert
by these programs. > > /var/db/pkg $ pkg_info -R firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1 > Information for firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1: > > Required by: > gegl-0.0.22_6 > gimp-2.6.6,2 > gimp-app-2.6.6_3,1 > gimp-gutenprint-5.1.7_2 > gimp-help-2.4.2_1 > librsvg2-2.26.0_1 > > I am not su

Re: Removing firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1 from system

2009-08-26 Thread George Liaskos
be required by these programs. > > /var/db/pkg $ pkg_info -R firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1 > Information for firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1: > > Required by: > gegl-0.0.22_6 > gimp-2.6.6,2 > gimp-app-2.6.6_3,1 > gimp-gutenprint-5.1.7_2 > gimp-help-2.4.2_1 > librsvg2-2.26.0_1 > > I am

Removing firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1 from system

2009-08-26 Thread Jerry
firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1 Information for firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1: Required by: gegl-0.0.22_6 gimp-2.6.6,2 gimp-app-2.6.6_3,1 gimp-gutenprint-5.1.7_2 gimp-help-2.4.2_1 librsvg2-2.26.0_1 I am not sure why these programs require Firefox-2 since Firefox-3.5 was installed prior to their installation. Is

Re: firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1

2009-08-21 Thread Lowell Gilbert
Lowell Gilbert writes: > Howard Goldstein writes: > >> It's like the cat dragged in firefox2 despite use of 3.5 for actual >> browsing :( Is there a good way to resolve these dependencies through >> firefox3 or 3.5 short of ditching gnome? > > Yeah, it's really from the gecko handling. Accordi

Re: firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1

2009-08-20 Thread Lowell Gilbert
Howard Goldstein writes: > It's like the cat dragged in firefox2 despite use of 3.5 for actual > browsing :( Is there a good way to resolve these dependencies through > firefox3 or 3.5 short of ditching gnome? Yeah, it's really from the gecko handling. According to Mk/bsd.gecko.mk, I think you

Re: firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1

2009-08-20 Thread Howard Goldstein
ajtiM wrote: > firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1 > Paul Schmehl pschmehl_lists at tx.rr.com > Thu Aug 13 02:16:24 UTC 2009 > Previous message: firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1 > Next message: firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1 > Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] > --On August 12,

Re: firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1

2009-08-12 Thread Paul Schmehl
--On August 12, 2009 9:48:04 PM -0500 Mel Flynn wrote: Given the above, it should be affected. Reading the original documents it doesn't show. And I can't find anywhere that firefox 2 is End of Life. Firefox was EOL in December 2008. No security updates or fixes will be released for it.

Re: firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1

2009-08-12 Thread Mel Flynn
On Wednesday 12 August 2009 18:16:20 Paul Schmehl wrote: > --On August 12, 2009 8:18:55 PM -0500 ajtiM wrote: > > Hi! > > When I run > > > > > > ; > > portaudit -a > > Affected package: firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1 > > Type of problem: mozilla --

Re: firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1

2009-08-12 Thread Paul Schmehl
--On August 12, 2009 8:18:55 PM -0500 ajtiM wrote: Hi! When I run ; portaudit -a Affected package: firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1 Type of problem: mozilla -- multiple vulnerabilities. Reference: <http://portaudit.FreeBSD.org/49e8f2ee-8147-11de-a994-0030843d3802.html> but when I check above

firefox 2.0.0.20_9,1

2009-08-12 Thread ajtiM
Hi! When I run ; portaudit -a Affected package: firefox-2.0.0.20_9,1 Type of problem: mozilla -- multiple vulnerabilities. Reference: <http://portaudit.FreeBSD.org/49e8f2ee-8147-11de-a994-0030843d3802.html> but when I check above site I found: Affects: firefox <3.*,1 firefox >3.*