Re: [ilugd] Firefox 3.0 static build
gajendra khanna wrote: >> I did have rpms for a firefox-3beta3 set for el4/i386 and x86_64. Given >> a lazy sunday afternoon I might be tempted to pull them out and see if >> an update can be done for something newer than that. ok, so here is why I didnt bother with the ff-3 released packages, because they are already a part of RHEL4/CentOS-4. Make sure your machine is updated... > So it may not be that simple. Like he says 2 more are needed. I disagree. FF-3 builds fine with the included libs. -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
Re: [ilugd] Firefox 3.0 static build
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tanveer Singh wrote: >> Its such a royal mess that I don't even want to go there again(did it >> once and ended up screwing everything up, was luckily building in a >> separate dir, so rm did the work > > I did have rpms for a firefox-3beta3 set for el4/i386 and x86_64. Given > a lazy sunday afternoon I might be tempted to pull them out and see if > an update can be done for something newer than that. > > The other option is to just download the tar.gz from mozilla.org and > drop them into a dir under ~/ - use that. Should work. I had also tried using it on an old machine with an OS of similar vintage. It couldn't be used due to various libraries being older including gtk amont others. So it may not be that simple. Like he says 2 more are needed. Personally I find firefox2 is sufficient for all needs and most greeds. Whats that special thing in firefox 3 which you are looking for? > > - KB > > ___ > ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org > http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd > Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi > http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/ > Regards Gajendra ___ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
Re: [ilugd] Firefox 3.0 static build
Tanveer Singh wrote: > Its such a royal mess that I don't even want to go there again(did it > once and ended up screwing everything up, was luckily building in a > separate dir, so rm did the work I did have rpms for a firefox-3beta3 set for el4/i386 and x86_64. Given a lazy sunday afternoon I might be tempted to pull them out and see if an update can be done for something newer than that. The other option is to just download the tar.gz from mozilla.org and drop them into a dir under ~/ - use that. Should work. - KB ___ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
Re: [ilugd] Firefox 3.0 static build
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tanveer Singh writes: > Hi, > I am stuck with a RH Enterprise 4.0 desktop at work. Due to very > obvious reasons, upgrading to 5 is not possible. > This leads to a big problem > Frefox 3 won't run because it wants newer pango. > Of course I can build a new pango, but that requires 500 billion other > packages rebuilt and 5 billion errors and crashes. > Its such a royal mess that I don't even want to go there again(did it > once and ended up screwing everything up, was luckily building in a > separate dir, so rm did the work > Now this poses a problem. I am stuck with firefox 2 > The only way out? > Somehow get a ff3 static build for linux. Is it possible to get one? I > remember long time back when firefox was firebird, there used to be > some kind gentlemen who used to build static binaries for firebird for > all platforms. How about you *statically* building your own Firefox 3.0 on a box which has all dependencies installed, hmm...? OR or, You can install recent libs in a chroot on your box, and also bind your $HOME in the appropriate location in that chroot, hmm...? Maybe '--installroot' option of yum(8) or '--root' option of rpm(8) might help. HTH - -- ·-- ·- ·--- ·- ···- ·- ·--·-· --· -- ·- ·· ·-·· ·-·-·- -·-· --- -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against HTML e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjKb8YACgkQHy+EEHYuXnSVIQCgzMw8hqkfOV5xvP30X8WNAr7f jQwAmgMpaT60UFuVDNTFdFexpaNzicXe =efqL -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
Re: [ilugd] Firefox 3.0 static build
same message from my side also , i too want,, But,,, currently FF2.0.0.16 is working fine on my system ___ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
[ilugd] Firefox 3.0 static build
Hi, I am stuck with a RH Enterprise 4.0 desktop at work. Due to very obvious reasons, upgrading to 5 is not possible. This leads to a big problem Frefox 3 won't run because it wants newer pango. Of course I can build a new pango, but that requires 500 billion other packages rebuilt and 5 billion errors and crashes. Its such a royal mess that I don't even want to go there again(did it once and ended up screwing everything up, was luckily building in a separate dir, so rm did the work Now this poses a problem. I am stuck with firefox 2 The only way out? Somehow get a ff3 static build for linux. Is it possible to get one? I remember long time back when firefox was firebird, there used to be some kind gentlemen who used to build static binaries for firebird for all platforms. For firefox 3.0 I am not able to find any static binary. I understand that with static binary its going to be huge, but space is not really a big issue. any help please Tanveer Singh ___ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
