On: Fri, 22 May 2009 16:26:45 +0200, Lorenzo Quatrini
wrote:
http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/PluginsFor64BitFirefox
Thank you.
--
*** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel ***
James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca
Harte & Lyne Limited http://www
JohnS ha scritto:
> On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 16:40 -0400, James B. Byrne wrote:
>> SOMEbody on this list must have this combination working by now.
>>
>> How does one enable the firefox jre plugin for Sun's x86_64
>> distribution? Every site that I can find refers to making a link to
>> a now non-exi
On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 16:40 -0400, James B. Byrne wrote:
> SOMEbody on this list must have this combination working by now.
>
> How does one enable the firefox jre plugin for Sun's x86_64
> distribution? Every site that I can find refers to making a link to
> a now non-existent plugins directory
SOMEbody on this list must have this combination working by now.
How does one enable the firefox jre plugin for Sun's x86_64
distribution? Every site that I can find refers to making a link to
a now non-existent plugins directory under the jre installation
directory. The official firefox plugin
Filipe Brandenburger wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to make Firefox 3 work in CentOS 4.
So far I was able to do it by installing the evolution28-* rpms, which
have a more recent GTK, Cairo, Pango, etc. With those libs installed
and configured, Firefox 3 from mozilla.org works fine.
The only thing is th
Hi,
I'm trying to make Firefox 3 work in CentOS 4.
So far I was able to do it by installing the evolution28-* rpms, which
have a more recent GTK, Cairo, Pango, etc. With those libs installed
and configured, Firefox 3 from mozilla.org works fine.
The only thing is that it doesn't use the "Bluecur
Karanbir Singh wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote:
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 11:31 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
P.S. It's the xulrunner @ 57MB that looks like the killer. FF is only
11MB. Looks like things have sped up. 10MB done already in 11 minutes.
I'll keep an eye on it.
There is an early
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 18:09 +, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> William L. Maltby wrote:
> > On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 11:31 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
> >>
> >
> > P.S. It's the xulrunner @ 57MB that looks like the killer. FF is only
> > 11MB. Looks like things have sped up. 10MB done already in 11
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 17:07 +0100, Niki Kovacs wrote:
> William L. Maltby a écrit :
>
> >
> > It looks like it will take about 13 hours to download. I'm afraid I
> > would soak up your outgoing bandwidth. If I don't hear from you in an
> > hour or so, I'll kill it.
> >
> I'm hosting this on a pu
William L. Maltby wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 11:31 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
>>
>
> P.S. It's the xulrunner @ 57MB that looks like the killer. FF is only
> 11MB. Looks like things have sped up. 10MB done already in 11 minutes.
>
> I'll keep an eye on it.
>
There is an early build for
William L. Maltby a écrit :
It looks like it will take about 13 hours to download. I'm afraid I
would soak up your outgoing bandwidth. If I don't hear from you in an
hour or so, I'll kill it.
I'm hosting this on a publicly available server, and sometimes, download
speeds are throttled. But 13
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 11:31 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
>
P.S. It's the xulrunner @ 57MB that looks like the killer. FF is only
11MB. Looks like things have sped up. 10MB done already in 11 minutes.
I'll keep an eye on it.
--
Bill
___
CentOS mai
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 11:31 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 11:22 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
> > On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 08:06 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:16 AM, William L. Maltby
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 2008-0
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 11:22 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 08:06 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:16 AM, William L. Maltby
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 12:10 +0100, Niki Kovacs wrote:
> > > > William L. Maltby a écr
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 08:06 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:16 AM, William L. Maltby
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 12:10 +0100, Niki Kovacs wrote:
> > > William L. Maltby a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > # cat /etc/yum.repos.d/kikinovak
>
> Try adding
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:16 AM, William L. Maltby
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 12:10 +0100, Niki Kovacs wrote:
> > William L. Maltby a écrit :
> > >
> > > # cat /etc/yum.repos.d/kikinovak
Try adding a ".repo" to the file name.
___
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 12:10 +0100, Niki Kovacs wrote:
> William L. Maltby a écrit :
>
> >
> > I tried to get and test this for you, and me. Can't access the repo.
> >
> > # uname -a
> > Linux centos501.homegroannetworking 2.6.18-53.1.14.el5 #1 SMP Wed Mar 5
> > 11:36:49 EST 2008 i686 athlon i386
William L. Maltby a écrit :
I tried to get and test this for you, and me. Can't access the repo.
# uname -a
Linux centos501.homegroannetworking 2.6.18-53.1.14.el5 #1 SMP Wed Mar 5
11:36:49 EST 2008 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
# cat /etc/yum.repos.d/kikinovak
[kikinovak]
enabled=0
priority=99
n
On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 11:11 +0100, Niki Kovacs wrote:
> Niki Kovacs a écrit :
> >>
> > I gave it a go anyway, and the result is very convincing.
>
> I forgot: if anyone wants to try out Firefox 3.0beta without the hassle
> of building/adapting it for CentOS, feel free to use the RPM from my
> r
Niki Kovacs a écrit :
I gave it a go anyway, and the result is very convincing.
I forgot: if anyone wants to try out Firefox 3.0beta without the hassle
of building/adapting it for CentOS, feel free to use the RPM from my
repo. To add it, create and edit /etc/yum.repos.d/kikinovak.repo:
--
Johnny Hughes a écrit :
This implementation changes the way pango, cario, and a new thing called
xul-runner interact with several gnome things ... it is also tied to a
newer version of nss ... which requires other system components to be
rebuilt.
I gave it a go anyway, and the result is ver
Niki Kovacs wrote:
I see that the folks from Red Hat decided to completely ignore Firefox
2.0: an eloquent detail.
2.0 didnt bring anything new enough to rebase to. The issue was well
thrashed out about a year back I believe.
Now it's more than once that I've read good things about Firefox 3
Niki Kovacs wrote:
Hi,
I just read the release announcement for RHEL 5.2beta:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv5-announce/2008-March/msg0.html
And something caught my eye:
--8<-
* Laptop and Desktop Enhancement
+ Suspend and Hibernate improvem
Hi,
I just read the release announcement for RHEL 5.2beta:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv5-announce/2008-March/msg0.html
And something caught my eye:
--8<-
* Laptop and Desktop Enhancement
+ Suspend and Hibernate improvements
+ Re-base of
24 matches
Mail list logo
