Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Hideki Yamane schrieb: > Hi, > > On Fri, 18 May 2018 10:29:03 +0200 > Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: >> > Does it fail like in bug #858153 (which has a patch) or in a different way? >> >> That bug is a year old and for 0.19, not sure if it's still any relevant >> for current releases, when trying to run a bootstrap build with 0.25 it's >> still trying to execute cargo, but I haven't dug deeper so far: > > Let me clarify current status, cargo package backport for stretch > is the blocker to bring firefox-esr 60 to stable, right? Correct, backports of rustc 1.24 and LLVM 4.0 have landed in Stretch 9.5 and cargo is the last missing bit. It's also worth pointing out that rustc is currently only available on amd64, so if anyone is interested in having i386 or some arm supported one needs to sort out a cross-compiled build. Cheers, Moritz
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Hi, On Fri, 18 May 2018 10:29:03 +0200 Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > > Does it fail like in bug #858153 (which has a patch) or in a different way? > > That bug is a year old and for 0.19, not sure if it's still any relevant > for current releases, when trying to run a bootstrap build with 0.25 it's > still trying to execute cargo, but I haven't dug deeper so far: Let me clarify current status, cargo package backport for stretch is the blocker to bring firefox-esr 60 to stable, right? -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.org/iijmio-mail.jp
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort schrieb: > On 16/05/18 19:12, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: >> I've started to look into this; I have created a llvm-4.0 build >> for stretch and build a bootstrap build of rustc 1.24 against it. >> Those two went fine. >> >> However cargo's bootstrap is broken ATM which will need fixing (and >> it also requires a more recent libgit than we have in stretch). > > Does it fail like in bug #858153 (which has a patch) or in a different way? That bug is a year old and for 0.19, not sure if it's still any relevant for current releases, when trying to run a bootstrap build with 0.25 it's still trying to execute cargo, but I haven't dug deeper so far: -- make[1]: Entering directory '/home/jmm/cargo/cargo-0.25.0' # cp -a /home/jmm/cargo/cargo-0.25.0/Cargo.lock /home/jmm/cargo/cargo-0.25.0/.Cargo.lock.orig ln -sf `which cargo` /home/jmm/cargo/cargo-0.25.0/cargo-stage0 debian/scripts/prune-checksums vendor/backtrace-sys-*/ debian/scripts/prune-checksums vendor/libgit2-sys-*/ make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/jmm/cargo/cargo-0.25.0' debian/rules override_dh_auto_build-arch make[1]: Entering directory '/home/jmm/cargo/cargo-0.25.0' RUST_BACKTRACE=1 cargo build --release --target=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu --verbose /bin/sh: 1: cargo: not found debian/rules:75: recipe for target 'override_dh_auto_build-arch' failed make[1]: *** [override_dh_auto_build-arch] Error 127 make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/jmm/cargo/cargo-0.25.0' debian/rules:46: recipe for target 'build-arch' failed make: *** [build-arch] Error 2 dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build-arch gave error exit status 2 -- If anyone wants to give this a shot, my llvm 4.0 and rustc 1.24 packages for stretch are available at https://people.debian.org/~jmm/esr60/ Cheers, Moritz
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 16/05/18 19:12, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > I've started to look into this; I have created a llvm-4.0 build > for stretch and build a bootstrap build of rustc 1.24 against it. > Those two went fine. > > However cargo's bootstrap is broken ATM which will need fixing (and > it also requires a more recent libgit than we have in stretch). Does it fail like in bug #858153 (which has a patch) or in a different way? Cheers, Emilio
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Hi, On 05/16/2018 07:12 PM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > However cargo's bootstrap is broken ATM which will need fixing (and > it also requires a more recent libgit than we have in stretch). I'm backporting firefox to stretch since a while. rustc built fine with llvm-3.9 so far. https://sources.progress-linux.org/distributions/dschinn-backports/packages/firefox/ https://sources.progress-linux.org/distributions/dschinn-backports/packages/rustc/ https://sources.progress-linux.org/distributions/dschinn-backports/packages/cargo/ https://sources.progress-linux.org/distributions/dschinn-backports/packages/libgit2/ I've decided to go with newer nspr/nss/sqlite3 (I prefer using "proper" system libraries from backported packages rather than "embedded copies" in packages): https://sources.progress-linux.org/distributions/dschinn-backports/packages/nspr/ https://sources.progress-linux.org/distributions/dschinn-backports/packages/nss/ https://sources.progress-linux.org/distributions/dschinn-backports/packages/sqlite3/ However, both firefox 60 and firefox-esr 60 do currently ftbfs for me on stretch with above backports (not sure why, didn't look into it yet). Regards, Daniel
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 05/16/2018 07:12 PM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > Hideki Yamane schrieb: >> Firefox60 needs rustc (>= 1.24) to be built but rustc in stretch is 1.14. >> rustc (>= 1.24) needs llvm-4.0 and cargo but it is not in stretch... >> >> - add llvm-4.0 and cargo to stretch >> - backport rustc >> - rebuild build-depends: rustc packages? >> - firefox-esr 60 to stretch > > I've started to look into this; I have created a llvm-4.0 build > for stretch and build a bootstrap build of rustc 1.24 against it. > Those two went fine. > > However cargo's bootstrap is broken ATM which will need fixing (and > it also requires a more recent libgit than we have in stretch). > > Cheers, > Moritz Thanks for your work, Moritz. Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Hideki Yamane schrieb: > Firefox60 needs rustc (>= 1.24) to be built but rustc in stretch is 1.14. > rustc (>= 1.24) needs llvm-4.0 and cargo but it is not in stretch... > > - add llvm-4.0 and cargo to stretch > - backport rustc > - rebuild build-depends: rustc packages? > - firefox-esr 60 to stretch I've started to look into this; I have created a llvm-4.0 build for stretch and build a bootstrap build of rustc 1.24 against it. Those two went fine. However cargo's bootstrap is broken ATM which will need fixing (and it also requires a more recent libgit than we have in stretch). Cheers, Moritz
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Hi, On Thu, 3 May 2018 21:31:35 +0900 Mike Hommey wrote: > > I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move > > to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. > > ... as long as we get the required compilers in stretch in time... Firefox60 needs rustc (>= 1.24) to be built but rustc in stretch is 1.14. rustc (>= 1.24) needs llvm-4.0 and cargo but it is not in stretch... - add llvm-4.0 and cargo to stretch - backport rustc - rebuild build-depends: rustc packages? - firefox-esr 60 to stretch ... and how about jessie? -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.org/iijmio-mail.jp
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Thu, 10 May 2018, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:27:32PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > It would be nice to move away from using RC bugs as testing blockers, > > but instead declare a source package as not suitable for stable (e.g. > > in some meta data on ftp-master or in whatever tooling involved) and > > then have a mechanism to yank all those packages out of testing once > > we've entered a freeze. > > Interesting idea. Do we then not consider testing to be the proving > ground for the next stable release, until freeze time? While I can understand that dropping packages can have some effect on other (remaining) packages, the packages we are speaking of are usually leaf-packages or part of a relatively self-contained dependency tree. So the consequences of dropping them are low. > Do you think this would result in longer freezes, or not? I don't think so. Removal of packages doesn't tend to uncover many bugs. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Support Debian LTS: https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html Learn to master Debian: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
* Thomas Goirand [2018-05-10 17:36:19 +0200]: > On 05/08/2018 03:01 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 8:29 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > >> I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move > >> to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. > > > > Does anyone know when firefox-esr in unstable will switch to 60? > > It's currently in the NEW queue. For experimental, not unstable. -- Nicolas Dandrimont "All language designers are arrogant. Goes with the territory..." (By Larry Wall)
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 05/08/2018 03:01 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 8:29 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: > >> I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move >> to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. > > Does anyone know when firefox-esr in unstable will switch to 60? It's currently in the NEW queue. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:27:32PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: It would be nice to move away from using RC bugs as testing blockers, but instead declare a source package as not suitable for stable (e.g. in some meta data on ftp-master or in whatever tooling involved) and then have a mechanism to yank all those packages out of testing once we've entered a freeze. Interesting idea. Do we then not consider testing to be the proving ground for the next stable release, until freeze time? Do you think this would result in longer freezes, or not? -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net ⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 11:10:23AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > While I understand the need to keep them out of stable, keeping them out > of testing would annoy testing users and all users of "rolling" derivatives > based on testing (where the packages are not a problem since new upstream > versions can be imported at any time to fix compatibility problems). Agreed, that's a deficiency in our current process/tooling. It would be nice to move away from using RC bugs as testing blockers, but instead declare a source package as not suitable for stable (e.g. in some meta data on ftp-master or in whatever tooling involved) and then have a mechanism to yank all those packages out of testing once we've entered a freeze. Cheers, Moritz
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Fri, 04 May 2018, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > We should make it easy for administrators of bigger desktop > deployments to easily create debs for local deployments, but > keeping all those extensions in a stable release is just > broken and we should block them from testing migration. While I understand the need to keep them out of stable, keeping them out of testing would annoy testing users and all users of "rolling" derivatives based on testing (where the packages are not a problem since new upstream versions can be imported at any time to fix compatibility problems). Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Support Debian LTS: https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html Learn to master Debian: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 09:01:20AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 8:29 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move > > to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. > > Does anyone know when firefox-esr in unstable will switch to 60? Like previous cycles, when 52 goes EOL. esr60 will go to experimental in the meanwhile. Mike
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 8:29 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: > I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move > to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. Does anyone know when firefox-esr in unstable will switch to 60? Personally I would prefer it stay with 52 until it is EOL. If not, I hope mozilla.d.n will have 52 until it is EOL. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 2018-05-04 21:04, Holger Levsen wrote: > because this is what the modern web has become in 2018. go gopher go! Modern web? I don't use Mosaic anymore! :~)
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 2018-05-04 23:22, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > W. Martin Borgert schrieb: > > If a software is not in Debian, I just don't use it. > > Your call. Don't use the extensions, then. Alternatively: Do what is possible for me, to keep the software I like to use in Debian. (It's the same with Python modules: I don't use pip, but package them.) Using browser extensions from some untrusted third party without any idea whether they comply with the rules of my OS (e.g. DFSG) is not a tempting idea for me. > > Why? We have now a huge breakage for all XUL extensions, but > > were there problems of a similar scale before? Do we have to > > expect similar breakages in the future with the new API? > > Sure, plenty of addons needed updates to remain compatible > with later Firefox (ESR) releases in the past. This model > is broken for many years already, totally independant of > the switch to web extensions. There is no (huge) problem, if an extension needs an update. We can update it then. The switch from XUL to WebExtension is an exception, because some extensions break completely (= for ever). I don't think, this will happen again soon.
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
❦ 4 mai 2018 23:22 +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff : >> Why? We have now a huge breakage for all XUL extensions, but >> were there problems of a similar scale before? Do we have to >> expect similar breakages in the future with the new API? > > Sure, plenty of addons needed updates to remain compatible > with later Firefox (ESR) releases in the past. This model > is broken for many years already, totally independant of > the switch to web extensions. WebExtensions are backed by a standard draft: https://browserext.github.io/browserext/. So, situation is expected to improve in the future. -- Say what you mean, simply and directly. - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Fr, Mai 04, 2018 at 09:12:39 +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: Same as all previous extension breakages incurred by ESR transitions; not at all. Apart from enigmail those are all not updated along in stable, this doesn't scale at all. If you want your extensions to be kept compatible, get them from the Mozilla addons page like every other Firefox/Thunderbird user. Then drop firefox/thunderbird from debian as well. If you don’t want to do it right (meaning with all the extensions), then don’t do it. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/keys.html | smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
W. Martin Borgert schrieb: > On 2018-05-04 21:12, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: >> Same as all previous extension breakages incurred by ESR transitions; >> not at all. Apart from enigmail those are all not updated along >> in stable, this doesn't scale at all. If you want your extensions >> to be kept compatible, get them from the Mozilla addons page >> like every other Firefox/Thunderbird user. > > This is not something I would consider. > If a software is not in Debian, I just don't use it. Your call. Don't use the extensions, then. > Why? We have now a huge breakage for all XUL extensions, but > were there problems of a similar scale before? Do we have to > expect similar breakages in the future with the new API? Sure, plenty of addons needed updates to remain compatible with later Firefox (ESR) releases in the past. This model is broken for many years already, totally independant of the switch to web extensions. Cheers, Moritz
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 10:52:26PM +0200, W. Martin Borgert wrote: > On 2018-05-04 21:12, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > > Same as all previous extension breakages incurred by ESR transitions; > Why? because this is what the modern web has become in 2018. go gopher go! -- cheers, Holger, SCNR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 2018-05-04 21:12, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > Same as all previous extension breakages incurred by ESR transitions; > not at all. Apart from enigmail those are all not updated along > in stable, this doesn't scale at all. If you want your extensions > to be kept compatible, get them from the Mozilla addons page > like every other Firefox/Thunderbird user. This is not something I would consider. If a software is not in Debian, I just don't use it. (Or only with the objective to bring it into Debian.) > We should make it easy for administrators of bigger desktop > deployments to easily create debs for local deployments, but > keeping all those extensions in a stable release is just > broken and we should block them from testing migration. Why? We have now a huge breakage for all XUL extensions, but were there problems of a similar scale before? Do we have to expect similar breakages in the future with the new API?
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
W. Martin Borgert schrieb: > Quoting Moritz Mühlenhoff : >> Julien Cristau schrieb: >>> I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will >>> move to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. >> >> Exactly. > > How will we deal with breaking extensions? Same as all previous extension breakages incurred by ESR transitions; not at all. Apart from enigmail those are all not updated along in stable, this doesn't scale at all. If you want your extensions to be kept compatible, get them from the Mozilla addons page like every other Firefox/Thunderbird user. We should make it easy for administrators of bigger desktop deployments to easily create debs for local deployments, but keeping all those extensions in a stable release is just broken and we should block them from testing migration. Cheers, Moritz
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Hi, Am 04.05.18 um 18:38 schrieb The Wanderer: ... >> I guess so, yes. There's not much we can do if there is no support >> for newer versions. > > Though please do take note of other applications which may still work > with them. > > Even leaving other Mozilla-based browsers aside, ISTR there being (or > having been?) some extensions which would work just fine in both Firefox > and Thunderbird, and since Thunderbird is retaining XUL support - at > least for now - there may be some value in retaining such "overlap" > extensions for people who use them there. well, there is some support for legacy extensions in Thunderbird > 57.0 <= 60.x. But, the authors of such plugins need to make some adjustments within their AddOns to get them work with the upcoming TB ESR 60.x https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/Add-ons_Guide_57 My experience right now is this is simply not happen for a significant amount of Thunderbird AddOns, all my extensions I normally want to use do not work with TB 60. So it will be a long road to walk. For Thunderbird there are probably more problems to fix. The old way of packaging XUL based extensions into /u/s/xul-ext/$extension isn't working out of the box anymore and I've no idea why nor had I time to take a deeper look at this issue. I can't speak for Firefox but I expect a similar situation here. The last FF version in Debian right now is 59.0.2. Maybe Mike can say something on this. We will also need to fix some build issues before any version uploaded to unstable can enter testing. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1434589 -- Regards Carsten
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 2018-05-04 at 12:22, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 04/05/18 17:42, W. Martin Borgert wrote: >> How will we deal with breaking extensions? >> >> E.g. I'm using xul-ext-scrapbook a lot. AFAIK, upstream does not >> provide a post-XUL version. Probably other extensions will face the >> same compatibility issue. >> >> Should we just remove them from stable? > > I guess so, yes. There's not much we can do if there is no support > for newer versions. Though please do take note of other applications which may still work with them. Even leaving other Mozilla-based browsers aside, ISTR there being (or having been?) some extensions which would work just fine in both Firefox and Thunderbird, and since Thunderbird is retaining XUL support - at least for now - there may be some value in retaining such "overlap" extensions for people who use them there. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 04/05/18 17:42, W. Martin Borgert wrote: > Quoting Moritz Mühlenhoff : >> Julien Cristau schrieb: >>> I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will >>> move to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. >> >> Exactly. > > How will we deal with breaking extensions? > > E.g. I'm using xul-ext-scrapbook a lot. AFAIK, upstream does > not provide a post-XUL version. Probably other extensions will > face the same compatibility issue. > > Should we just remove them from stable? I guess so, yes. There's not much we can do if there is no support for newer versions. Emilio
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Quoting Moritz Mühlenhoff : Julien Cristau schrieb: I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. Exactly. How will we deal with breaking extensions? E.g. I'm using xul-ext-scrapbook a lot. AFAIK, upstream does not provide a post-XUL version. Probably other extensions will face the same compatibility issue. Should we just remove them from stable?
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Julien Cristau schrieb: > I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will > move to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. Exactly. Cheers, Moritz
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
在 2018年5月4日星期五 CST 上午3:56:30，Jeremy Bicha 写道：
> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:29:59PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> >> I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will
> >> move
> >> to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September.
> >
> > That's really, really out of what would be reasonable for a stable update.
>
> Updating to the latest Firefox ESR is specifically promised (or
> "planned" at least) in the release notes for Jessie and Stretch. [1]
>
> > At this point, it'd be probably better to look into one of forks that
> > claim
> > security support, of those the only candidate is Waterfox: version >= that
> > of Firefox in stable, the project has been going for awhile.
> >
> > Any of possible options, though, make me really sorry for anyone who
> > maintains a browser... :(
>
> It sounds like you're requesting that somebody other than you maintain
> yet another web browser.
>
> [1]
> https://www.debian.org/releases/stretch/amd64/release-notes/ch-information.
> html#browser-security
>
> Jeremy Bicha
(Sidenote: I found that pkg-mozilla-maintainers Alioth maillist got archived
and is inavailable now; that might have driven this discussion onto debian-
devel).
Firefox 60 ESR would indeed be largely different from 52 ESR; as Adam Borowski
said, "We'd need backports to stretch of multiple compilers (I would
specifically point out the compiler of Rust, 'rustc'), plenty of libraries. It
would also break the entire XUL ecosystem."
However as a user, I found myself largely expecting 60 ESR into Stretch
(regardless of what technology Debian might use). Switching to another Firefox
fork would certainly break Debian's reputation or even drive more people onto
Chromium ("yes, Chromium in Debian (stable) is following upstream version
closely and why couldn't Debian follow Firefox or even follow Firefox ESR?"),
which would be unacceptable.
My personal suggestion is some sort of joint efforts and a exception to push
all reverse depdendencies back to Stretch before 52 ESR got EOL. If that
breaks the whole XUL system, just remove 'em all in next point release. The
time window is limited (Augest 21, 2018, according to [2]).
Besides, it would be great if current firefox maintainers (and Rust
maintainers) could step up and speak out their thoughts.
--
Regards,
Boyuan Yang
[2] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:29:59PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: >> I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move >> to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. > > That's really, really out of what would be reasonable for a stable update. Updating to the latest Firefox ESR is specifically promised (or "planned" at least) in the release notes for Jessie and Stretch. [1] > At this point, it'd be probably better to look into one of forks that claim > security support, of those the only candidate is Waterfox: version >= that > of Firefox in stable, the project has been going for awhile. > > Any of possible options, though, make me really sorry for anyone who > maintains a browser... :( It sounds like you're requesting that somebody other than you maintain yet another web browser. [1] https://www.debian.org/releases/stretch/amd64/release-notes/ch-information.html#browser-security Jeremy Bicha
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:29:59PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > On 05/03/2018 02:09 PM, Julien Aubin wrote: > > Firefox 60esr is due for next week. > > > > As of now Debian Stretch is bound to Firefox ESR 52 which reaches EOL > > soon. The problem is that it becomes less and less usable as more and > > more extensions are becoming incompatible with it. > > > > So what's the future of Firefox in stable ? Can we expect to have the > > 60esr release and if so, when, or will we stick w/ 52esr ? If needed I > > can test it alongside upgraded xul-ext packages if you put it in > > proposed-updates or on mozilla.debian.net. > > I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move > to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. That's really, really out of what would be reasonable for a stable update. We'd need backports to stretch of multiple compilers, plenty of libraries. It would also break the entire XUL ecosystem. At this point, it'd be probably better to look into one of forks that claim security support, of those the only candidate is Waterfox: version >= that of Firefox in stable, the project has been going for awhile. Any of possible options, though, make me really sorry for anyone who maintains a browser... :( Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Certified airhead; got the CT scan to prove that! ⠈⠳⣄
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 2018-05-03 14:09:51 +0200 (+0200), Julien Aubin wrote: > As of now Debian Stretch is bound to Firefox ESR 52 which reaches > EOL soon. The problem is that it becomes less and less usable as > more and more extensions are becoming incompatible with it. > > On the other hand team mozilla.debian.net clearly states that > Firefox > 52 is not available on Stretch and all the xul-ext-* > packages will have to be upgraded. > > So what's the future of Firefox in stable ? Can we expect to have > the 60esr release and if so, when, or will we stick w/ 52esr ? If > needed I can test it alongside upgraded xul-ext packages if you > put it in proposed-updates or on mozilla.debian.net. There's also an inverse problem: a number of extensions haven't gotten around to porting (or can't be ported) from XUL to WebExtensions. Since support for "legacy" XUL-based extensions was entirely dropped between 52 and 60, users who were relying on any of them will cease to be able to do so and the corresponding packaged versions of them likely need to be dropped from the archive. https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2017/10/03/legacy-add-on-support-on-firefox-esr/ -- Jeremy Stanley signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
El jue., 3 de may. de 2018 a la(s) 11:06, Julien Aubin < julien.au...@gmail.com> escribió: > > > Le jeu. 3 mai 2018 à 14:41, eamanu15 a écrit : > >> Hello Julien, >> >> Maybe this question need to be made on debian-metors or >> pkg-mozilla-maintainer list. >> >> I think will be good wait until EOL before change to 60. I think that >> the first months of 60ers will be a little unstable. >> >> Regards! >> > > I tried but mozilla maintainers ML looks dead. :'( > > Anyway I'm available for testing ! > Great. Let me know if you need help never test mozilla, and I want to learn about it. Thanks > > > >> >> El jue., 3 de may. de 2018 a la(s) 10:30, Julien Cristau < >> jcris...@debian.org> escribió: >> >>> On 05/03/2018 02:09 PM, Julien Aubin wrote: >>> > Hi >>> > >>> > Firefox 60esr is due for next week. >>> > >>> > As of now Debian Stretch is bound to Firefox ESR 52 which reaches EOL >>> > soon. The problem is that it becomes less and less usable as more and >>> > more extensions are becoming incompatible with it. >>> > >>> > On the other hand team mozilla.debian.net clearly states that Firefox >>> >> 52 is not available on Stretch and all the xul-ext-* packages will >>> > have to be upgraded. >>> > >>> > So what's the future of Firefox in stable ? Can we expect to have the >>> > 60esr release and if so, when, or will we stick w/ 52esr ? If needed I >>> > can test it alongside upgraded xul-ext packages if you put it in >>> > proposed-updates or on mozilla.debian.net. >>> > >>> debian-devel is the wrong place for your questions. >>> >>> I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will >>> move to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Julien >>> >>> -- >> Arias Emmanuel >> https://www.linkedin.com/in/emmanuel-arias-437a6a8a >> http://eamanu.com >> > -- Arias Emmanuel https://www.linkedin.com/in/emmanuel-arias-437a6a8a http://eamanu.com
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:29:59PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > On 05/03/2018 02:09 PM, Julien Aubin wrote: > > Hi > > > > Firefox 60esr is due for next week. > > > > As of now Debian Stretch is bound to Firefox ESR 52 which reaches EOL > > soon. The problem is that it becomes less and less usable as more and > > more extensions are becoming incompatible with it. > > > > On the other hand team mozilla.debian.net clearly states that Firefox > > > 52 is not available on Stretch and all the xul-ext-* packages will > > have to be upgraded. > > > > So what's the future of Firefox in stable ? Can we expect to have the > > 60esr release and if so, when, or will we stick w/ 52esr ? If needed I > > can test it alongside upgraded xul-ext packages if you put it in > > proposed-updates or on mozilla.debian.net. > > > debian-devel is the wrong place for your questions. > > I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move > to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. ... as long as we get the required compilers in stretch in time... Mike
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
Hello Julien, Maybe this question need to be made on debian-metors or pkg-mozilla-maintainer list. I think will be good wait until EOL before change to 60. I think that the first months of 60ers will be a little unstable. Regards! El jue., 3 de may. de 2018 a la(s) 10:30, Julien Cristau < jcris...@debian.org> escribió: > On 05/03/2018 02:09 PM, Julien Aubin wrote: > > Hi > > > > Firefox 60esr is due for next week. > > > > As of now Debian Stretch is bound to Firefox ESR 52 which reaches EOL > > soon. The problem is that it becomes less and less usable as more and > > more extensions are becoming incompatible with it. > > > > On the other hand team mozilla.debian.net clearly states that Firefox > >> 52 is not available on Stretch and all the xul-ext-* packages will > > have to be upgraded. > > > > So what's the future of Firefox in stable ? Can we expect to have the > > 60esr release and if so, when, or will we stick w/ 52esr ? If needed I > > can test it alongside upgraded xul-ext packages if you put it in > > proposed-updates or on mozilla.debian.net. > > > debian-devel is the wrong place for your questions. > > I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will > move to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. > > Cheers, > Julien > > -- Arias Emmanuel https://www.linkedin.com/in/emmanuel-arias-437a6a8a http://eamanu.com
Re: Firefox 60esr on Stretch ?
On 05/03/2018 02:09 PM, Julien Aubin wrote: Hi Firefox 60esr is due for next week. As of now Debian Stretch is bound to Firefox ESR 52 which reaches EOL soon. The problem is that it becomes less and less usable as more and more extensions are becoming incompatible with it. On the other hand team mozilla.debian.net clearly states that Firefox 52 is not available on Stretch and all the xul-ext-* packages will have to be upgraded. So what's the future of Firefox in stable ? Can we expect to have the 60esr release and if so, when, or will we stick w/ 52esr ? If needed I can test it alongside upgraded xul-ext packages if you put it in proposed-updates or on mozilla.debian.net. debian-devel is the wrong place for your questions. I expect nothing much different from previous ESR cycles: stretch will move to 60 after 52 goes EOL in September. Cheers, Julien
