Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-12 Thread Todd And Margo Chester
On 06/11/2011 10:54 PM, John H. Outlan CPA wrote: LeighLinux123 is a Fedora Forum Admin, and he was active with us for a whilebut those packages have worked fine for me. Any chance of talking him into doing a Thunderbird package?

Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-11 Thread John H. Outlan CPA
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Todd And Margo Chester < toddandma...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 06/02/2011 03:30 PM, John H. Outlan CPA wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Alexander Hunt < > alexander.d.h...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> On 06/02/2011 04:44 AM, Hugo Berus wrote: >> >> Hi,

Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-11 Thread Todd And Margo Chester
On 06/02/2011 03:30 PM, John H. Outlan CPA wrote: On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Alexander Hunt wrote: On 06/02/2011 04:44 AM, Hugo Berus wrote:

Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-03 Thread Dr Andrew C Aitchison
6. This suggests to me that it is time to explore Firefox 4. -- Dr. Andrew C. Aitchison Computer Officer, DPMMS, Cambridge a.c.aitchi...@dpmms.cam.ac.uk http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~werdna

Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-03 Thread Oleg Sadov
02/06/2011 12:44 +0200, Hugo Berus wrote: > Hi, > > On 2 June 2011 11:37, Dr Andrew C Aitchison > wrote: > > My feeling is that Red Hat Firefox is too far > > behind the curve for bugs to get fixed. > > That, and Google will stop support for firefox 3.6 eventually, 3.5, not 3.6 > according to

Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-02 Thread John H. Outlan CPA
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Alexander Hunt < alexander.d.h...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 06/02/2011 04:44 AM, Hugo Berus wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2 June 2011 11:37, Dr Andrew C Aitchison > wrote: > > My feeling is that Red Hat Firefox is too far > behind the curve for bugs to get fixed. > >

Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-02 Thread Alexander Hunt
On 06/02/2011 04:44 AM, Hugo Berus wrote: Hi, On 2 June 2011 11:37, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote: My feeling is that Red Hat Firefox is too far behind the curve for bugs to get fixed. That, and Google will stop support for firefox 3.6 eventually, according to this blogpost http://gmailblog.bl

Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-02 Thread Hugo Berus
Hi, On 2 June 2011 11:37, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote: > My feeling is that Red Hat Firefox is too far > behind the curve for bugs to get fixed. That, and Google will stop support for firefox 3.6 eventually, according to this blogpost http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/our-plans-to-support-mo

Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-02 Thread Dr Andrew C Aitchison
On Wed, 1 Jun 2011, Todd And Margo Chester wrote: Hi All, Under SL6, are we stuck with Firefox 3.6? Is there some plan to support Firefox 4 in our future? (I have just been using the binary under CentOS 5.6.) Red Hat switched from Firefox 1.5 to Firefox 3.0 with RHEL 5.2 http

Re: Firefox 4?

2011-06-01 Thread Stephen John Smoogen
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 14:39, Todd And Margo Chester wrote: > Hi All, > > Under SL6, are we stuck with Firefox 3.6?  Is there some plan > to support Firefox 4 in our future?  (I have just been using the > binary under CentOS 5.6.) I think this was asked earlier with 5.x. Scie

Firefox 4?

2011-06-01 Thread Todd And Margo Chester
Hi All, Under SL6, are we stuck with Firefox 3.6? Is there some plan to support Firefox 4 in our future? (I have just been using the binary under CentOS 5.6.) Many thanks, -T

Re: SL5, Firefox 4 and libstdc++

2011-03-28 Thread Vaclav Mocek
On 03/26/2011 08:42 AM, Keith Lofstrom wrote: The firefox developers, in their reciprocally infinite wisdom, are pushing Firefox 4, which requires libstdc++.so.6 with GLIBCXX_3.4.9 . The available libstdc++.i386 0:4.1.2-50.el5 RPM contains only GLIBCXX_3.4.8 . You can read more about it here

Re: Firefox 4 - apology

2011-03-28 Thread Vaclav Mocek
On 03/26/2011 04:48 PM, Keith Lofstrom wrote: On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 01:42:20AM -0700, Keith Lofstrom wrote: The firefox developers, in their reciprocally infinite wisdom, ... Or perhaps the firefox developers should be encouraged (with red hot encouragement irons) to support the older librar

Re: Firefox 4 - apology

2011-03-28 Thread Chris Tooley
Perhaps I need another piece of code which automatically holds any email sent after midnight until I've confirmed it 8 hours later. That would help with sleep-deprived oropedal insertion, and might be helpful for security, too. Keith I think gmail has something like that :D -Chris

RE: SL5, Firefox 4 and libstdc++

2011-03-28 Thread James M Pulver
-Original Message- From: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov [mailto:owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov] On Behalf Of Vaclav Mocek Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2011 12:54 PM To: SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV Subject: Re: SL5, Firefox 4 and libstdc++ On 03

RE: Firefox 4 - apology

2011-03-26 Thread Lukas Press
Keith Lofstrom Sent: 26 March 2011 16:48 To: kei...@keithl.com Cc: Mailling list for Scientific Linux users worldwide Subject: Firefox 4 - apology On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 01:42:20AM -0700, Keith Lofstrom wrote: > The firefox developers, in their reciprocally infinite wisdom, ... > Or perhaps

Re: SL5, Firefox 4 and libstdc++

2011-03-26 Thread Vaclav Mocek
On 03/26/2011 08:42 AM, Keith Lofstrom wrote: The firefox developers, in their reciprocally infinite wisdom, are pushing Firefox 4, which requires libstdc++.so.6 with GLIBCXX_3.4.9 . The available libstdc++.i386 0:4.1.2-50.el5 RPM contains only GLIBCXX_3.4.8 . You can read more about it here

Firefox 4 - apology

2011-03-26 Thread Keith Lofstrom
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 01:42:20AM -0700, Keith Lofstrom wrote: > The firefox developers, in their reciprocally infinite wisdom, ... > Or perhaps the firefox developers should be encouraged (with > red hot encouragement irons) to support the older library, > and proper upgrades. Abandoning million

SL5, Firefox 4 and libstdc++

2011-03-26 Thread Keith Lofstrom
The firefox developers, in their reciprocally infinite wisdom, are pushing Firefox 4, which requires libstdc++.so.6 with GLIBCXX_3.4.9 . The available libstdc++.i386 0:4.1.2-50.el5 RPM contains only GLIBCXX_3.4.8 . You can read more about it here: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=23