Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 15:04:43 -0500 From: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> To: Jose M Rodriguez <josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> Cc: re@freebsd.org Subject: Re: use of firefox as 5.4 default web browser Message-ID: <1108929883.36569.12.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> In-Reply-To: <200502202048.44571.josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> References: <200502201041.22259.josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> <1108921909.36569.2.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <200502202048.44571.josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-du+vvviFk+R/3i8lMU5M Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 2005-02-20 at 20:48 +0100, Jose M Rodriguez wrote: > El Domingo, 20 de Febrero de 2005 18:51, Joe Marcus Clarke escribi=F3: > > On Sun, 2005-02-20 at 10:41 +0100, Jose M Rodriguez wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm very glad of firefox use over FreeBSD, and think that, after > > > firefox-1.0.1 and merge of urihelper patches from mozilla, is a > > > good candidate for a 'FreeBSD default graphics web browser'. > > > > > > So, I open this trying to get epiphany moved from gnome2-lite to > > > gnome2, and firefox, al last, in FreeBSD-5.4 disc1. I'll be also > > > glad to get some note on release notes about that. > > > > Firefox will never be made part of the GNOME desktop unless Epiphany > > starts to use Firefox as its default Gecko browser (or GNOME chooses > > to make Firefox its default browser). > > >=20 > I'm not talking about make firefox part of gnome desktop. I think that=20 > the web browser of a gnome desktop must be epiphany, as konqueror must=20 > do the same role for kde. >=20 > I only talking about features/size advantage of firefox againts the=20 > mozilla+epiphany duo now in disc1 There may be advantages of Firefox over Epiphany. Certainly, I think Firefox is the more popular browser. However, we try to to follow the GNOME Desktop guidelines as set by gnome.org. If we had the space, gnome2-lite wouldn't exist at all, and we would put the full GNOME Desktop on disc 1. >=20 > I see most of our gnome/kde user do network installs. Most, but not all. We have to accommodate those in areas where CD installs are all they have. I know of some FreeBSD users in India that don't have the luxury of broadband at home. >=20 > Also, we may include firefox for amd64. We aren't doing the same for=20 > epipahny. Sure we are. We include epiphany for amd64 provided OSVERSION > 500035. This should be all users or supported versions of FreeBSD for amd64. >=20 > If mozilla+epiphany+firefox will fit on disc1, great. But if not, my=20 > chance is for firefox. That's not the way it works. The gnome2-lite meta-port decides what GNOME components are on disc 1. It is just a bare-bones list of GNOME desktop components. Nothing gets added to it unless it is deemed vital, _and_ it is part of the official GNOME desktop. If Firefox is added to disc 1, it will be in addition to Epiphany and Mozilla. Joe --=20 PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc --=-du+vvviFk+R/3i8lMU5M Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBCGO1bb2iPiv4Uz4cRAnWnAJkBu9hHnQo+EIFxzWKxJ1nS7eugcwCfRrrs rUokp5cTi6Zw2/WnkV1/gXA= =LF5t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-du+vvviFk+R/3i8lMU5M--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1108929883.36569.12.camel>