Moz Firefox 0.9 (all versions) general discussion thread.

neenee · Veteran Joined: 20 Jul 2003 Posts: 1786

thanks for updating the title of the thread :wink:

viperlin · Veteran Joined: 15 Apr 2003 Posts: 1319 Location: UK

firephoto · Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 8:24 pm Post subject:

Since his problem is that the new "release" is masked, I have to ask the question why is it masked and not just released to ~x86 users? If it was an rc release or an alpha I would understand.

Add

belgo · n00b Joined: 16 Jun 2004 Posts: 4

AthlonRob · n00b Joined: 19 Jan 2003 Posts: 37

Well, after glancing through this thread I unmasked the ebuild and tried to emerge it:

Mben · Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 9:10 pm Post subject:

the ebuild in portage for the source version worked for me a couple hours ago. it didnt seem to update the gnome menus though.

plbe · l33t Joined: 01 May 2004 Posts: 661

0.9 seems quicker

NME · Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 9:50 pm Post subject:

download this:

Bague · Apprentice Joined: 09 Feb 2004 Posts: 292

Grrr... I hate Hardmasked ebuilds, I've got the source downloading now, but then I will have to su and manually copy it into distfiles :evil:

Thank god they are fixing themes and extensions, I had some annoying bugs where my extensions wouldnt install in .8

34% of source now. I can't wait.

If you are wondering why more people haven't switched, the MAIN reason, is that most people either

A) Are too lazy to change and don't see reason.
B) They haven't heard of Firefox

Those are by FAR the two main reasons. I suggest if we won't to convert more average joers, you do like I did, hijack your parents computer, install firefox, give it an IE icon, name the shortcut internet explorer, and change the theme :twisted:

70%

100% I started the emerge and guess what, 23 dependancies.

Is everyone getting this insane amount of dependancies or is my portage broken (last few things I have installed it has been re-emerging things like gcc and everything is having these asinine dependancies...)

lizardloop · Apprentice Joined: 16 Mar 2003 Posts: 278

Bague · Apprentice Joined: 09 Feb 2004 Posts: 292

Hrm, I installed it on my moms box (she had .

, and basically restored everything, except when I reinstalled googlebar, TWO googlebars are there! It's really ate up..

AthlonRob · n00b Joined: 19 Jan 2003 Posts: 37

placeholder · Advocate Joined: 07 Feb 2004 Posts: 2500

I hate those extra toolbars and crap that get installed (only in Windows with IE usually which is one of the million reasons I don't use Windows/IE) and have all that crap on them. To me, they just add bulk and take up space.

KiTaSuMbA · Guru Joined: 28 Jun 2002 Posts: 430 Location: Naples Italy

placeholder · Advocate Joined: 07 Feb 2004 Posts: 2500

msingle1 · n00b Joined: 18 Dec 2003 Posts: 10

Yeah, so why is this thing hard masked?

viperlin · Veteran Joined: 15 Apr 2003 Posts: 1319 Location: UK

maybe because it's new?, i dunno

Bague · Apprentice Joined: 09 Feb 2004 Posts: 292

To me it seems that a lot more things are hard masked lately for some reason, and simply put, it's kind of annoying. I also have found out that my portage must be FOOBAR since it was installing XFREE as a dependancy to firefox (i already have a working xfree dammit!), plus gcc, jeezus, I now have like 100 etc files in need of update :evil:

RIght now I am having to fix portage before trying firefox again.

Wi1d · Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2004 12:08 am Post subject:

Wow. Nice speed improvement on my machine. One thing I've notice that I don't like though is that I use to could middle click on a page and what ever link that was stored in the copy buffer would load. Now it doesn't seem to work anymore.

OOps

Forgot to turn off 'middle button scroll' in 'All-in-one gesture' extension. Guess I like everything

allucid · Veteran Joined: 02 Nov 2002 Posts: 1314 Location: atlanta

It's probably hard masked because none of the devs have had a chance to look at it in detail. The ebuild could have just been pulled from bugs.gentoo.org and put in portage so users could get to easily if they wanted. It's not that big of a deal to unmask a package.

firephoto · Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2004 12:13 am Post subject:

Check about:config and look for "middlemouse.contentLoadURL", the default seems to still be true but maybe it got changed somehow on yours?

I have mine set to false since I middle click a lot to open things in new tabs, or paste text.

*edit* I see your edit beat my idea.

Also as another note, I did some checking on the firefox scripts and it seems that .9 does use the new script or atleast parts of it so maybe the "no running window" error and no startup was just due to the need to run it as root once.

Mirrorball · Apprentice Joined: 25 Apr 2003 Posts: 235 Location: Brazil

I just installed Firefox 0.9 from the ebuild that is already on Portage. I'm a bit disappointed because the "back" button doesn't always work. Does anyone else have this problem?

duff · Guru Joined: 19 Jun 2002 Posts: 466 Location: Clemson, SC

Count me in for the "No running windows found", but worked at root, and suddenly work as normal user crowd. Bookmarks came in just fine, but I am not diggin' this new theme at all.

Definately snappier though...so I can't complain too much, I just need to install a new theme.

Bague · Apprentice Joined: 09 Feb 2004 Posts: 292

Hmmm, I have had no problems once it got installed. It indeed feels snappier. The new theme is kind of good/bad in my opinion. I don't mind though, because I already loaded up some themes, this charamel one looks nice and simple. I need to find the site that had The noia theme, because I really liked the full theming that had.

Thank god they fixed extensions and they split extensions and themes from cloggin up the download manager, which is very nice.

And of those extensions, the sessionsaver one (aka, close firefox, reopen and all your tabs are intact) is perfect!

Given M. Sur · Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2004 4:53 am Post subject:

OMG! The default theme is worse than I imagined!
_________________
What is the best [insert-type-of-program-here]?