Firefox 4 beta for maemo - Page 3 - maemo.org

Active Topics

Is there a section to talk about Java ME? Apps, etc. (6)
to General by Kalatti - 2 days, 12 hrs ago
Full linux distros on Sailfish OS (253)
to SailfishOS by qoh - 5 days, 6 hrs ago
more...

Page 3 of 5

< Prev

Next >

Thread Tools

	hordeman	2010-10-11 , 05:12
	Posts: 698 \| Thanked: 129 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ CA	#21

Originally Posted by qwazix

Ok I know I a a little bit off topic but I had the 1.1, added the repo for ff4 and an update appeared immediately. But the software is now unusable. After 10 minutes I have managed to visit only one website and then nothing. Loading for ever.

Are you saying that you got FF4 to work on OS2008?

Quote & Reply |

lma	2010-10-11 , 09:42
Posts: 2,802 \| Thanked: 4,491 times \| Joined on Nov 2007	#22

Originally Posted by cstryon

Is anyone else a little annoyed that the new Firefox 4 beta for maemo, is only for fremantle. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am frustrated. Our Fennec is a joke. And don't tell me it's because of the legacy devices, Opera runs just fine on maemo 4.

Well, at the end of the day xulrunner is a dog and you won't see great performance from any app that's based on it, especially on Diablo-era hardware.

Originally Posted by hordeman

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.o.../binary-armel/

The URL is misleading, mozilla.org always called their maemo repository "chinook" for some strange reason. That's a Fremantle package and won't run on Chinook or Diablo (just look at the dependencies).

Quote & Reply |

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to lma For This Useful Post:
cstryon, giladmttw

	qwazix	2010-10-11 , 11:35
	Moderator \| Posts: 2,622 \| Thanked: 5,447 times \| Joined on Jan 2010	#23

Originally Posted by hordeman

Are you saying that you got FF4 to work on OS2008?

no I am sorry for causing confusion or unfulfilled hope, I didn't mention that it was on fremantle. (that's why I said I am a little off topic)
________
Pattaya apartments for sale

Last edited by qwazix; 2011-08-21 at 10:42.

Quote & Reply |

	hordeman	2010-10-12 , 04:59
	Posts: 698 \| Thanked: 129 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ CA	#24

Originally Posted by qwazix

no I am sorry for causing confusion or unfulfilled hope, I didn't mention that it was on fremantle. (that's why I said I am a little off topic)

Ah. Please remember that this is an OS2008 forum and thread.

Quote & Reply |

	HellFlyer	2010-10-12 , 05:00
	Posts: 1,148 \| Thanked: 613 times \| Joined on Mar 2010 @ Toronto	#25

W00t beta 2 is out

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.o.../binary-armel/

__________________
The quieter you become the more you are able to hear

"I'm a N900 user, can I haz Flash 10 plz?!11!?"

Quote & Reply |

	hordeman	2010-10-12 , 08:07
	Posts: 698 \| Thanked: 129 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ CA	#26

Originally Posted by HellFlyer

W00t beta 2 is out

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.o.../binary-armel/

Clearly, people do not realize that they are posting in an OS2008 forum.

Originally Posted by lma

The URL is misleading, mozilla.org always called their maemo repository "chinook" for some strange reason. That's a Fremantle package and won't run on Chinook or Diablo (just look at the dependencies).

Well, I know for a fact that Firefox 2 Beta USED to work for OS2008 because I used to use it. It's just that when 1.1 came out, I decided to with that release. As someone mentioned prior, along the way, they stopped building the OS2008 deb and simply symlinked to fremantle.

C'mon guys, we gotta get FF back to OS2008!!

Quote & Reply |

The Following User Says Thank You to hordeman For This Useful Post:
cstryon

pavlov	2010-10-18 , 19:37
Posts: 6 \| Thanked: 11 times \| Joined on Oct 2008 @ California	#27

Hi,

The chinook build is actually pointing (via a softlink) to the fremantle ones. Not sure why this happened, but we're removing the softlink to avoid further confusion.

It is still possible to build Fennec with the chinook SDK, but we won't be providing builds more recent than 1.1 due to maintenance costs. General instability of the N810s makes it nearly impossible for us to keep our automated tests running on them, and we don't want to publish software that hasn't been tested.

Quote & Reply |

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to pavlov For This Useful Post:
cstryon, lma, steven676

	heavyt	2010-10-18 , 21:27
	Posts: 708 \| Thanked: 125 times \| Joined on Jan 2007 @ Too Close To D.C	#28

Originally Posted by pavlov

Hi,

The chinook build is actually pointing (via a softlink) to the fremantle ones. Not sure why this happened, but we're removing the softlink to avoid further confusion.

It is still possible to build Fennec with the chinook SDK, but we won't be providing builds more recent than 1.1 due to maintenance costs. General instability of the N810s makes it nearly impossible for us to keep our automated tests running on them, and we don't want to publish software that hasn't been tested.

Thanks for the explanation, sorry to hear N810 is not stable enough. But I have fingers cross that a build for it will show up.

__________________
N810-WiMAX

Quote & Reply |

The Following User Says Thank You to heavyt For This Useful Post:
hordeman

	hordeman	2010-10-19 , 06:46
	Posts: 698 \| Thanked: 129 times \| Joined on Oct 2007 @ CA	#29

Originally Posted by pavlov

Hi,

The chinook build is actually pointing (via a softlink) to the fremantle ones. Not sure why this happened, but we're removing the softlink to avoid further confusion.

It is still possible to build Fennec with the chinook SDK, but we won't be providing builds more recent than 1.1 due to maintenance costs. General instability of the N810s makes it nearly impossible for us to keep our automated tests running on them, and we don't want to publish software that hasn't been tested.

Thanks for chiming in, Pavlov. Where would someone be able to find the sources to do a Chinook build?

Quote & Reply |

linuxeventually	2010-10-19 , 07:52
Posts: 540 \| Thanked: 387 times \| Joined on May 2009	#30

I wish people would stop calling it "Firefox". It's not. It's "Fennec". It's purposely misleading branding tactics.

Also I don't like Fennec. I have Fennec 1.1b1 installed in Diablo. (I've also tried it in "Desktop"/x86 Linux and x86 Windows). Though I certainly like having the options, more browsers is a good thing.

What I'd like is this: http://nightly.mozilla.org the real Firefox beta.
webM support and what-not built-in.

But yeah I've read about the JS problems, they are no longer supporting PPC either.

Everytime I try to compile it in scratchbox, it utterly fails. I don't know what the "secret" is.

@pavlov
If you tell us which compile options you've used that would really help so someone else could maintain a build other than Mozilla. "Iceferret" or whatever if branding is a concern.

@Hordeman
Source (as far as I can tell):
http://moff.mozilla.com/latest/sourc...source.tar.bz2
tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/fennec1p1source

Code:

1.) wget http://moff.mozilla.com/latest/sourc...source.tar.bz2
2.) tar xjvf fennec-1.1rc1.source.tar.bz2
3.) cd fennec*
4.) ???
5.) magic?
6.) compile
7.) package
8.) profit

__________________
{ https://sites.google.com/site/maemo4repo/home }