1:13 a.m.
So, what was the conclusion regarding Mozilla in FC6 (i.e. as a set of
libs for things like Epiphany)? Is it being dropped in favour of FF or
is it staying?
Don't want to start a flame war, just being curious...
--
Bojan
2:05 a.m.
Replacing "mozilla" is highly overdue, as it still relies on the Gecko 1.7
backend which is completely outdated. One negative effect of this is a much
lower printing quality. Newer Gecko versions e.g. allow to print Truetype
fonts whereas Gecko 1.7 falls back to using plain PS fonts. See also my
earlier bug report:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=130697
So, what was the conclusion regarding Mozilla in FC6 (i.e. as a set
of
libs for things like Epiphany)? Is it being dropped in favour of FF or
is it staying?
3:05 a.m.
On 4/24/06, Joachim Frieben <jfrieben(a)freesurf.fr> wrote:
Replacing "mozilla" is highly overdue, as it still relies
on the Gecko 1.7
backend which is completely outdated. One negative effect of this is a much
lower printing quality. Newer Gecko versions e.g. allow to print Truetype
fonts whereas Gecko 1.7 falls back to using plain PS fonts. See also my
earlier bug report:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=130697
> So, what was the conclusion regarding Mozilla in FC6 (i.e. as a set of
> libs for things like Epiphany)? Is it being dropped in favour of FF or
> is it staying?
It would be nice to see a complete move away from mozilla and to
Seamonkey, Mozilla Suite (which is my preference) has numerous
rendering issues. And I am just not a fan of Firefox for my majority
browsing.
--
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
3:09 a.m.
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 03:05 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On 4/24/06, Joachim Frieben <jfrieben(a)freesurf.fr> wrote:
> Replacing "mozilla" is highly overdue, as it still relies on the Gecko
1.7
> backend which is completely outdated. One negative effect of this is a much
> lower printing quality. Newer Gecko versions e.g. allow to print Truetype
> fonts whereas Gecko 1.7 falls back to using plain PS fonts. See also my
> earlier bug report:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=130697
>
> > So, what was the conclusion regarding Mozilla in FC6 (i.e. as a set of
> > libs for things like Epiphany)? Is it being dropped in favour of FF or
> > is it staying?
>
It would be nice to see a complete move away from mozilla and to
Seamonkey, Mozilla Suite (which is my preference) has numerous
rendering issues. And I am just not a fan of Firefox for my majority
browsing.
There's also xulrunner which is actually designed to solve this problem.
4:56 a.m.
In principle, it could be dropped as distros like Ubuntu already build
"epiphany" against "firefox". In this case, "epiphany"
benefits from the
improved Gecko backend (> 1.8) which e.g. solves the Truetype printing
problem reported earlier.
So, what was the conclusion regarding Mozilla in FC6 (i.e. as a
set of libs for things like Epiphany)? Is it being dropped in
favour of FF or is it staying?
10:56 a.m.
Maybe, however,
"rpm -q --requires epiphany" yields quite a couple of dependencies,
including:
"mozilla = 37:1.7.12".
This is intelligible as (current FC5) "epiphany" e.g. requires
"libxpcom.so"
which is provided by two packages, "firefox-1.5.0.2-1.2.fc5" and
"mozilla-1.7.12-5", but which seems to have nothing to do with the
"nspr"
package mentioned by you. This confirms, that the dependency on "mozilla"
might be replaced by that on "firefox".
FC already uses the browser-independant (ie, not mozilla-specific) nspr
and nss packages.
-- Rex
11:17 a.m.
Joachim Frieben wrote:
Maybe, however,
"rpm -q --requires epiphany" yields quite a couple of dependencies,
including:
"mozilla = 37:1.7.12".
This is intelligible as (current FC5) "epiphany" e.g. requires
"libxpcom.so"
which is provided by two packages, "firefox-1.5.0.2-1.2.fc5" and
"mozilla-1.7.12-5", but which seems to have nothing to do with the
"nspr"
package mentioned by you. This confirms, that the dependency on "mozilla"
might be replaced by that on "firefox".
OK, this is yet another dependancy, provided by a theoretical xulrunner
package.
-- Rex
>FC already uses the browser-independant (ie, not mozilla-specific)
nspr
> and nss packages.
>
>-- Rex
7:14 a.m.
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 11:56 +0200, Joachim Frieben wrote:
In principle, it could be dropped as distros like Ubuntu already
build
"epiphany" against "firefox". In this case, "epiphany"
benefits from the
improved Gecko backend (> 1.8) which e.g. solves the Truetype printing
problem reported earlier.
It's cleaner to build both epiphany and firefox against xulrunner.
Forcing epiphany users to have firefox installed doesn't make any sense
when it's possible to use a neutral backend for both.
7:17 p.m.
Mark Rosenstand wrote:
It's cleaner to build both epiphany and firefox against
xulrunner.
Forcing epiphany users to have firefox installed doesn't make any sense
when it's possible to use a neutral backend for both.
Agreed. I'm a big fan of Epiphany, and I think it'd be great if we could
get this into Fedora in time for Core 6 testing.
--
Peter Gordon (codergeek42)
GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint:
DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479
6624
days inactive
6625
days old
10 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Arthur Pemberton -
Bojan Smojver -
Joachim Frieben -
Mark Rosenstand -
Peter Gordon -
Rex Dieter