New Firefox version
New Firefox version
New Firefox is a more stable version and is faster then Mozilla. Maybe time for puppy to revisit Firefox.
DeerPark (Firefox 1.1 Alpha) seems to be noticeably faster than Firefox 1.04 ... it uses the same base as Mozilla 1.8, i think
in fact, i'm using DeerPark now
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/deerpark/
there are a few bugs, nothing particularly serious, mostly the way a few of the options windows display
adblock and mouse guestures work ok
the switchproxy extension doesn't work properly ... it would be nice to have, because DeerPark can send dns requests through a proxy, so it can work directly with Tor, and doesn't need Privoxy to prevent dns leaks (usually, Firefox will ask your isp's dns servers for the ip address of the webpage you want to see, and send the ip address to Tor ... DeerPark can send the text url directly to Tor, which looks up the ip address and gets the webpages for you, so your isp won't know what web pages you are looking at) ... it's easy enough to enable / disable the proxy in options anyway
in fact, i'm using DeerPark now
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/deerpark/
there are a few bugs, nothing particularly serious, mostly the way a few of the options windows display
adblock and mouse guestures work ok
the switchproxy extension doesn't work properly ... it would be nice to have, because DeerPark can send dns requests through a proxy, so it can work directly with Tor, and doesn't need Privoxy to prevent dns leaks (usually, Firefox will ask your isp's dns servers for the ip address of the webpage you want to see, and send the ip address to Tor ... DeerPark can send the text url directly to Tor, which looks up the ip address and gets the webpages for you, so your isp won't know what web pages you are looking at) ... it's easy enough to enable / disable the proxy in options anyway
Re: New Firefox version
Firefox is rapidly gaining market share and becoming the preferred browser. Seamonkey will attempt to continue development of Mozilla, see http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonk ... 2005-07-02 .
Following are items we would like to see included in a preferred future Puppy release. If not possible in the standard Puppy, then an option with PupGet:
1. Firefox browser
2. Gimp image editor
3. CUPS printing system (might not be necessary if existing system is perfected).
4. RealPlayer video/audio player
5. MOTV or other program which will enable TV from TV card.
6. Open Office
7. K3B DVD/CD burner (probably would need to be on KDE version of Puppy)
8. Expanded hardware wizard or something similar to Suse's YaST.
9. Easy to use masquerade/forward option in PupGet for networked computers.
10. Puppy for 64-bit computers.
11. True open source VOIP for Linux, see http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/ ... 076,00.htm
Gizmo may be a possibility, see http://www.gizmoproject.com
(Note that while some of these may make Puppy chubbier, you can delete other unused programs with PupGet).
The following explains why Firefox is not in the standard 60MB version of Puppy and why it needs to be in a slightly more expanded version of Puppy:
Q: Why not use Firefox instead of Mozilla!
My "suggestion would be to replace the ugly/heavy Mozilla suite with Firefox & Thunderbird - leaner, meaner & prettier"
A: This question, or some variation of it, gets asked again and again on the Forum.
Yes, Firefox web browser, Thunderbird email and news client, Sunbird Calendar, and NVU HTML editor. The Mozilla suite, with all of this functionality, is about 11M compressed, whereas the separate applications are each about 8 - 11M compressed. So, the live-CD, instead of being 60M would be 85M and would be too big to run in RAM in a PC with 128M RAM.
In what way is Mozilla inferior to the separate applications? IT ISN'T! Firefox, Thunderbird, etc., are compiled from Mozilla source. It is the same source code. There are some issues still outstanding, getting the integrated suite to work harmoniously, but those are being worked on, and they are minor problems.
The only application that is currently being compiled from separate source is NVU, which forked off Composer (the HTML editor part of Mozilla) awhile back -- there is politics involved here, but presumably the improvements made to NVU will find their way back into the Composer source one day.
However, there is a qualification to the above paragraph. My comments apply to Mozilla version 1.8+, as prior to that there was significant divergence of the code base between the Mozilla suite and Firefox, etc. That is, the Firefox project split off from the suite, went its own way for awhile, then the Firefox source got merged back into the main suite at version 1.8. The Mozilla suite 1.8 has never been released, only a beta release. The official stable suite releases are currently 1.7.x.
Why are the separate applications so big compared with the Mozilla suite? Simply because the Mozilla suite has a lot of common code shared by each module, whereas the separate applications have to duplicate that code. This creates a gigantic size bloat, not in the spirit of Puppy.
You may have read in some news report that development on Mozilla has ceased. That is very misleading. The developers compile the separate applications from the Mozilla source, just configuring to compile the part that they want, such as the browser. The Mozilla suite used in Puppy is compiled from that same source, pre-compile-configured to compile the whole suite.
Due to perceived falling interest in the suite, the Mozilla developers decided not to officially release the full suite anymore. However, some developers were very annoyed at this decision and are continuing supporting the suite, for (probably) political reasons renamed as Seamonkey (which is a code name used for the suite many years ago).
However, if you really want to run Firefox etc., they can be downloaded and work fine in Puppy.
Following are items we would like to see included in a preferred future Puppy release. If not possible in the standard Puppy, then an option with PupGet:
1. Firefox browser
2. Gimp image editor
3. CUPS printing system (might not be necessary if existing system is perfected).
4. RealPlayer video/audio player
5. MOTV or other program which will enable TV from TV card.
6. Open Office
7. K3B DVD/CD burner (probably would need to be on KDE version of Puppy)
8. Expanded hardware wizard or something similar to Suse's YaST.
9. Easy to use masquerade/forward option in PupGet for networked computers.
10. Puppy for 64-bit computers.
11. True open source VOIP for Linux, see http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/ ... 076,00.htm
Gizmo may be a possibility, see http://www.gizmoproject.com
(Note that while some of these may make Puppy chubbier, you can delete other unused programs with PupGet).
The following explains why Firefox is not in the standard 60MB version of Puppy and why it needs to be in a slightly more expanded version of Puppy:
Q: Why not use Firefox instead of Mozilla!
My "suggestion would be to replace the ugly/heavy Mozilla suite with Firefox & Thunderbird - leaner, meaner & prettier"
A: This question, or some variation of it, gets asked again and again on the Forum.
Yes, Firefox web browser, Thunderbird email and news client, Sunbird Calendar, and NVU HTML editor. The Mozilla suite, with all of this functionality, is about 11M compressed, whereas the separate applications are each about 8 - 11M compressed. So, the live-CD, instead of being 60M would be 85M and would be too big to run in RAM in a PC with 128M RAM.
In what way is Mozilla inferior to the separate applications? IT ISN'T! Firefox, Thunderbird, etc., are compiled from Mozilla source. It is the same source code. There are some issues still outstanding, getting the integrated suite to work harmoniously, but those are being worked on, and they are minor problems.
The only application that is currently being compiled from separate source is NVU, which forked off Composer (the HTML editor part of Mozilla) awhile back -- there is politics involved here, but presumably the improvements made to NVU will find their way back into the Composer source one day.
However, there is a qualification to the above paragraph. My comments apply to Mozilla version 1.8+, as prior to that there was significant divergence of the code base between the Mozilla suite and Firefox, etc. That is, the Firefox project split off from the suite, went its own way for awhile, then the Firefox source got merged back into the main suite at version 1.8. The Mozilla suite 1.8 has never been released, only a beta release. The official stable suite releases are currently 1.7.x.
Why are the separate applications so big compared with the Mozilla suite? Simply because the Mozilla suite has a lot of common code shared by each module, whereas the separate applications have to duplicate that code. This creates a gigantic size bloat, not in the spirit of Puppy.
You may have read in some news report that development on Mozilla has ceased. That is very misleading. The developers compile the separate applications from the Mozilla source, just configuring to compile the part that they want, such as the browser. The Mozilla suite used in Puppy is compiled from that same source, pre-compile-configured to compile the whole suite.
Due to perceived falling interest in the suite, the Mozilla developers decided not to officially release the full suite anymore. However, some developers were very annoyed at this decision and are continuing supporting the suite, for (probably) political reasons renamed as Seamonkey (which is a code name used for the suite many years ago).
However, if you really want to run Firefox etc., they can be downloaded and work fine in Puppy.