Re: firefox extensions

On Wed, 06 Oct 2021, Jan Palus wrote: > On 05.10.2021 23:50, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > On Tue, 05 Oct 2021, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > > > I can't figure out what the trigger was, but since recently (92+?, > > > September?) firefox extensions started misbehavin

Re: firefox extensions

On 05.10.2021 23:50, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > On Tue, 05 Oct 2021, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > I can't figure out what the trigger was, but since recently (92+?, > > September?) firefox extensions started misbehaving. ex. ublock is > > not really blocking adds, and if I try

Re: firefox extensions

Dnia 2021-10-05, o godz. 23:50:36 Jan Rękorajski napisał(a): > On Tue, 05 Oct 2021, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > I can't figure out what the trigger was, but since recently (92+?, > > September?) firefox extensions started misbehaving. ex. ublock is > > not really blo

Re: firefox extensions

On Tue, 05 Oct 2021, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > I can't figure out what the trigger was, but since recently (92+?, > September?) firefox extensions started misbehaving. ex. ublock is > not really blocking adds, and if I try to click its icon all I get > is a single vertical line instead

firefox extensions

I can't figure out what the trigger was, but since recently (92+?, September?) firefox extensions started misbehaving. ex. ublock is not really blocking adds, and if I try to click its icon all I get is a single vertical line instead of the menu. So, does firefox extensions work for you? Any

Re: problem with firefox 88

Try to figure what's missing to make it work and webrender most likely will be fine in firefox. Anyway if you still have issues the discussion should be moved to pld-users-* The solution was uninstalling of xorg-driver-video-intel. Now modesetting works OK. Than

Re: problem with firefox 88

with fresh profile (firefox -ProfileManager), mozilla's binary (package mozilla-firefox-bin) and in case it still doesn't work stracing it? I tried with fresh profile - the same effect. It seems like FF is reacting for clicking, but doesn't "re-paint" the interface accordingly. When I, let's

Re: problem with firefox 88

Dnia środa, 5 maja 2021 13:44:48 CEST Krzysztof Mrozowicz via pld-devel-en pisze: [...] > Regarding the modesetting, I don't remember if I was tweaking any X > config about that. My hardware is: > CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2640M CPU @ 2.80GHz > GPU: VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation

Re: problem with firefox 88

W dniu 05.05.2021 o 12:08, Jan Palus pisze: On 05.05.2021 12:50, Krzysztof Mrozowicz via pld-devel-en wrote: W dniu 05.05.2021 o 11:35, Jan Palus pisze: Downgraded to version 87 and happy days. Works for me. Did you try with fresh profile (firefox -ProfileManager), mozilla's binary (package

Re: problem with firefox 88

On 05.05.2021 12:50, Krzysztof Mrozowicz via pld-devel-en wrote: W dniu 05.05.2021 o 11:35, Jan Palus pisze: Downgraded to version 87 and happy days. Works for me. Did you try with fresh profile (firefox -ProfileManager), mozilla's binary (package mozilla-firefox-bin) and in case it still

Re: problem with firefox 88

say click "+" to open a new tab, then minimize the window and restore it, the new tab is there. Double-clicking on the window title (maximize/un-maximize) also refreshes the interface. Firefox 88 from mozilla-firefox-bin behaves the exact same way. What graphics environment do

Re: problem with firefox 88

open a new tab, then minimize the window > and restore it, the new tab is there. Double-clicking on the window > title (maximize/un-maximize) also refreshes the interface. Firefox 88 > from mozilla-firefox-bin behaves the exact same way. What graphics en

Re: problem with firefox 88

W dniu 05.05.2021 o 11:35, Jan Palus pisze: Downgraded to version 87 and happy days. Works for me. Did you try with fresh profile (firefox -ProfileManager), mozilla's binary (package mozilla-firefox-bin) and in case it still doesn't work stracing it? I tried with fresh profile - the same

Re: problem with firefox 88

On 04.05.2021 21:10, Krzysztof Mrozowicz via pld-devel-en wrote: W dniu 03.05.2021 o 22:22, Krzysztof Mrozowicz pisze: W dniu 03.05.2021 o 22:11, Krzysztof Mrozowicz pisze: Hi, I just upgraded firefox to version 88 and discovered its interface doesn't respond to clicking and in the terminal I

Re: problem with firefox 88

W dniu 03.05.2021 o 22:22, Krzysztof Mrozowicz pisze: W dniu 03.05.2021 o 22:11, Krzysztof Mrozowicz pisze: Hi, I just upgraded firefox to version 88 and discovered its interface doesn't respond to clicking and in the terminal I can see the following: JavaScript error: resource://gre/modules

Re: problem with firefox 88

W dniu 03.05.2021 o 22:11, Krzysztof Mrozowicz pisze: Hi, I just upgraded firefox to version 88 and discovered its interface doesn't respond to clicking and in the terminal I can see the following: JavaScript error: resource://gre/modules/ExtensionCommon.jsm, line 2304: Error: primed

problem with firefox 88

Hi, I just upgraded firefox to version 88 and discovered its interface doesn't respond to clicking and in the terminal I can see the following: JavaScript error: resource://gre/modules/ExtensionCommon.jsm, line 2304: Error: primed listener not re-registered JavaScript error: resource://gre

Re: [packages/firefox] - bump libicu-devel to 63.1; builds fine with nodejs 10 even with no read access to resolv.conf

libicu-devel >= 59.1} >> +%{?with_system_icu:BuildRequires: libicu-devel >= 63.1} >> # requires libjpeg-turbo implementing at least libjpeg 6b API >> BuildRequires: libjpeg-devel >= 6b >> BuildRequires: libjpeg-turbo-devel >> =

Re: [packages/firefox] - bump libicu-devel to 63.1; builds fine with nodejs 10 even with no read access to resolv.conf

menting at least libjpeg 6b API > BuildRequires: libjpeg-devel >= 6b > BuildRequires: libjpeg-turbo-devel > ==== No, it does not: http://buildlogs.pld-linux.org//index.php?dist=th=x86_64=0=firefox=05da2df8-250

Re: firefox and builders...

build doesn't seem a right way to do it. ALT is building its repos without network access, maybe some patches or approaches will be reuseful to you too. In particular, fx67 has just landed: https://packages.altlinux.org/en/sisyphus/srpms/firefox I'm not into nodejs but it's sort of there too: https:/

Re: firefox and builders...

That nodejs in firefox is not downloading anything AFAIK, it's just convoluted build process that needs nodejs started and it cannot start without dns :/ I don't remember how we run builds, but maybe if we point resolv.conf at 127.0.0.1 it will be enough for it. On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:19 AM

Re: firefox and builders...

On 03/06/2019 07.25, Jan Rękorajski wrote> > I don't believe it's nodejs problem, I think it's builder > security/networking problem. But the security/networking restrictions are there for a reason. If we allow build process to download anything it wants, then we could skip shipping source

Re: firefox and builders...

On Sun, 02 Jun 2019, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > On 02/06/2019 23:13, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > After long trial and error process I managed to get firefox to build, > > unfortunately our automation is overprotective and the build doesn't > > work on builders - I can run

Re: firefox and builders...

On 02/06/2019 23:13, Jan Rękorajski wrote: After long trial and error process I managed to get firefox to build, unfortunately our automation is overprotective and the build doesn't work on builders - I can run it manually on builders, but not in automatated way. Until someone finds out why

firefox and builders...

After long trial and error process I managed to get firefox to build, unfortunately our automation is overprotective and the build doesn't work on builders - I can run it manually on builders, but not in automatated way. Until someone finds out why nodejs doesn't start during firefox build

Re: [packages/firefox] - move lang to main package

On Sat, 09 Sep 2017, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > On 02.09.2017 18:01, baggins wrote: > > - move lang to main package > > why do you still create commits not explain intentions? > > > so question: "why?" Isn't it obvious? a) the split itself was artificial, due to rpm deficiencies at that

Re: [packages/firefox] - move lang to main package

On 02.09.2017 18:01, baggins wrote: - move lang to main package why do you still create commits not explain intentions? so question: "why?" -- glen ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org

Re: [packages/firefox] filterout -Werror=format-security to fix build with gcc7

error: -Wformat-security ignored without -Wformat [-Werror=format-security] cc1: some warnings being treated as errors $ rpm -q gcc gcc-7.2.0-1.x86_64 Apparently firefox is quite selective about passing -Wno-format as most files are compiled without it. I prefer to wait until either gcc or firefox st

Re: [packages/firefox] filterout -Werror=format-security to fix build with gcc7

On Saturday 26 of August 2017, atler wrote: > commit a132acc2832bf9003b9693a696c0cb6d96e44a5e > Author: Jan Palus > Date: Sat Aug 26 22:25:55 2017 +0200 > > filterout -Werror=format-security to fix build with gcc7 Why not fix these errors instead? -- Arkadiusz

Re: SPECS: bmpx.spec - changed name of mozilla-firefox-plugin-bmpx package to i...

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 11:16:10PM +0200, megabajt wrote: Author: megabajt Date: Fri Jul 25 21:16:10 2008 GMT Module: SPECS Tag: HEAD Log message: - changed name of mozilla-firefox-plugin-bmpx package to iceweasel-extension-bmpx -%package -n

Re: SPECS: bmpx.spec - changed name of mozilla-firefox-plugin-bmpx package to i...

Jakub Bogusz wrote: [...] What is this? Why not browser-plugins? mozilla-firefox has been replaced by iceweasel in Th, that is why I changed name of this package. I know that browser-plugins would be the best solution, but I'm not sure whether it supports this kind of extensions. -- Marcin

Re: Unclear Firefox situation

Dnia 19-09-2007, Śr o godzinie 22:22 +0200, Rafał Cygnarowski napisał(a): quotation If an individual or organization is creating a Community Edition of Mozilla Firefox or Thunderbird, it must use the names Firefox Community Edition or Thunderbird Community Edition to identify this software

Re: Unclear Firefox situation

I think Debian does allow it, but I don't even remember those package names. BTW: iceweasel.spec contains obsolete version of package, with well known security bugs. Those Debian patches seems to simply replace logos and some texts in source. After removing debian specific chunks from patches

Re: Unclear Firefox situation

Dnia czwartek, 20 września 2007, Cezary Krzyzanowski napisał: Dnia 19-09-2007, Śr o godzinie 22:22 +0200, Rafał Cygnarowski napisał(a): quotation If an individual or organization is creating a Community Edition of Mozilla Firefox or Thunderbird, it must use the names Firefox Community

Unclear Firefox situation

Older versions of Firefox used Bon Echo branding which is permitted to all parties. Now it seems official branding is back. Any particular reason? Are we allowed to do that? We can use community edition instead of Bon Echo but I doubt we are allowed to ship it as Firefox. -- Patryk Zawadzki

Re: Unclear Firefox situation

On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 09:42:06PM +0200, Marcin Król wrote: Older versions of Firefox used Bon Echo branding which is permitted to all parties. Now it seems official branding is back. Any particular reason? Are we allowed to do that? We can use community edition instead of Bon Echo but I

Re: Unclear Firefox situation

Dnia środa, 19 września 2007, Jakub Bogusz napisał: Mozilla Community Edition Policy doesn't say anything about files or filenames, just: You may not prefix the name product with Mozilla (e.g. Mozilla Firefox Community Edition is not allowed.) nor use the official Firefox or Thunderbird

Re: firefox 2 for ac

there problems descibred below ceased to exist after using release = 1 and removing /usr/lib/mozilla-firefox/chrome/chrome/app-chrome.manifest, which i don't know exactly how it appeared to my system. if somebody wishes to dig into it then the file is available at http://glen.alkohol.ee/pld

firefox 2 for ac

has anybody tried building it for ac? does it work properly too? i have noticed two problems - bookmarks menu is empty unless new bookmark is added or it's opened at sidebar - the statusbar is 80px high. - throbber keeps spinning if the tab has content downloaded - searchbox doesn't activate on

mozilla-firefox upgrade vs. mktemp...

Retrieving th-test::mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.7-1.x86_64.rpm... .. 100.0% [7.4M (166.0K/s)] Retrieving th-test::mozilla-firefox-lang-en-1.5.0.7-1.x86_64.rpm... .. 100.0% [107.6K (5.7K/s)] Retrieving th-test::mozilla-firefox-devel-1.5.0.7-1.x86_64

Re: mozilla-firefox upgrade vs. mktemp...

On Tuesday 26 September 2006 22:37, Paweł Sikora wrote: Retrieving th-test::mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.7-1.x86_64.rpm... .. 100.0% [7.4M (166.0K/s)] Retrieving th-test::mozilla-firefox-lang-en-1.5.0.7-1.x86_64.rpm... .. 100.0% [107.6K (5.7K/s

gtkmozembed (mozilla-firefox) i czcionki

Chyba jest jakas nielogicznosc w wybieraniu czcionek przez embed firefoxa. X11-fonts-100dpi-6.9.0-1 X11-fonts-100dpi-ISO8859-1-6.9.0-1 X11-fonts-100dpi-ISO8859-2-6.9.0-1 X11-fonts-75dpi-6.9.0-1 X11-fonts-75dpi-ISO8859-1-6.9.0-1 X11-fonts-75dpi-ISO8859-2-6.9.0-1 X11-fonts-ISO8859-1-6.9.0-1

Re: gtkmozembed (mozilla-firefox) i czcionki

On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 05:42:38AM +0200, havner wrote: Sorry, this was supposed to go to -pl list. -- RegardsHavner {jid,mail}:havner(at)pld-linux.org PLD developerhttp://www.pld-linux.org PLD LiveCD author

Re: SPECS: epiphany.spec - build with firefox by default - rel. 2

On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 06:07:53PM +0200, wrobell wrote: Author: wrobell Date: Mon Apr 17 16:07:53 2006 GMT Module: SPECS Tag: HEAD Log message: - build with firefox by default - rel. 2 the reasons for above change: - mozilla suite

Re: Firefox

) is toolkit-independent. I don't talk about GUI or canvas, but only about font rendering. Enable/disable xft/freetype2 has no impact on the rest of Fx GUI. Breaking mozilla-firefox build is a big impact. according to your ex-TODO: # ac_add_options --enable-xft # Enables XFT advanced

SPECS: mozilla-firefox-lang-pl.spec - PATCH

Hi, I try to remove a mozilla-firefox and mozilla-firefox-lang-pl package, but I get an error. The mozilla-firefox-lang-pl was build from SPEC - revision 1.20. === error log === [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ sudo rpm -e mozilla-firefox-lang-pl mozilla-firefox-1.0.7 cat: /usr/lib/mozilla-firefox

Re: Firefox

I played with mozilla-firefox.spec today and managed to get more or less working firefox. I disabled freetype2 and enabled xft because firefox starts then and after all offical realeses seem to be built this way. The issues with faq.fedora.pl (see pld-users) and search engines crashing firefox

Re: SPECS: mozilla-firefox-lang-pl.spec - PATCH

On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 03:58:54PM +0200, Maciej Witaszek wrote: Hi, I try to remove a mozilla-firefox and mozilla-firefox-lang-pl package, but I get an error. The mozilla-firefox-lang-pl was build from SPEC - revision 1.20. === error log === [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ sudo rpm -e

Re: SPECS: mozilla-firefox-lang-pl.spec - PATCH

is using find: === patch === --- mozilla-firefox-lang-pl.spec.orig 2005-10-18 15:28:04.0 +0200 +++ mozilla-firefox-lang-pl.spec2005-10-18 18:48:40.0 +0200 @@ -53,7 +53,10 @@ %postun umask 022 -cat %{_firefoxdir}/chrome/*-installed-chrome.txt %{_firefoxdir}/chrome

Re: SPECS: mozilla-firefox-lang-pl.spec - PATCH

On wtorek 18 października 2005 19:36, Maciej Witaszek wrote: Jakub Bogusz wrote: That's because rpm STILL ignores Requires(postun) :/ This is a weakness of PLD's rpm or rpm in general? That's something Jeff will hapilly accept patches for. And we'd really need a patch for it. -- In the

Re: Firefox

Hi, I attach a SPEC file that build firefox rpm package from binary version from firefox.pl. It builds polish version, but it's easy to change language in source url. Package provides mozilla-firefox for firefox plugins. It should conflicts with mozilla-firefox, but unfortunately it's unable

Re: Firefox

On Monday 17 of October 2005 20:04, Patrys :: Patryk Zawadzki wrote: Dnia 17-10-2005, pon o godzinie 01:21 +0200, Maciej Witaszek napisał(a): Hi, I attach a SPEC file that build firefox rpm package from binary version from firefox.pl. I [...] I'd like to avoid repackaging binary i386

Re: Firefox

Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: On Monday 17 of October 2005 20:04, Patrys :: Patryk Zawadzki wrote: [...] Such binary package has no chances to get into PLD. No worries. Why? The compiled PLD version of firefox doesn't work correctly for me. -- Maciej Witaszek [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Firefox

On Monday 17 of October 2005 21:08, Maciej Witaszek wrote: Such binary package has no chances to get into PLD. No worries. Why? The compiled PLD version of firefox doesn't work correctly for me. Then fix PLD version. There is no room for external binaries when we can make own one. Maciej

Re: Firefox

--- Patrys :: Patryk Zawadzki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it's because you added --disable-xft. it should be always enabled since pango/gtk+ uses xft for font rendering. Actually not. It uses it internally. Mozilla developer docs explicitly say to always use --disable-xft when using

Re: Firefox

Dnia 17-10-2005, pon o godzinie 23:33 +0200, Fryderyk Dziarmagowski napisał(a): --- Patrys :: Patryk Zawadzki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it's because you added --disable-xft. it should be always enabled since pango/gtk+ uses xft for font rendering. Actually not. It uses it internally.

Re: Firefox

--- Patrys :: Patryk Zawadzki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could someone test if after my changes Firefox still suffers from memory corruption It's currently being built to i386 ac-test. Go ahead and check if it works better in your test case (you're using ix86, right?). Yes, i686

Re: Firefox

On 16.10.2005 17:52, Patrys :: Patryk Zawadzki wrote: Could you do the same with the --enable-optimization line removed? I think this might be the problem and having this removes is still better than using Mozilla-provided binary packages (and they happen to have this option removed when

Firefox

Could someone test if after my changes Firefox still suffers from memory corruption (displaying random memory parts as page content under some circumstances) and if it does, does removing optimization parameter help to fix it (if you don't pass it, firefox will build using default optimization

Re: Firefox

Dnia 15-10-2005, sob o godzinie 21:25 +0200, Paweł Sakowski napisał(a): On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 18:04 +0200, Patrys :: Patryk Zawadzki wrote: Could someone test if after my changes Firefox still suffers from memory corruption It's currently being built to i386 ac-test. Go ahead and check