Firefox gtk3

Message

Keisha · #21 Post by **Keisha** » Sun 01 May 2016, 21:55

Flash, please delete these three posts if you can

peebee · #22 Post by **peebee** » Mon 02 May 2016, 09:06

firefox46 from:
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/

runs on LxPupSc (Slackware 14.2RC2) with the addition of 3 dependencies (10MB):
gtk+3-3.18.9-i586-1.txz
at-spi2-atk-2.18.1-i586-1.txz
at-spi2-core-2.18.3-i586-1.txz

It runs BBC iPlayer using the HTML5 beta player in the UK (@Marv reports he needs flashplayer)
Youtube also runs AOK

sfs here

OscarTalks · #23 Post by **OscarTalks** » Mon 02 May 2016, 11:10

Sailor Enceladus wrote:The official firefox gave me an error "g_slice_set_config: assertion `sys_page_size == 0` failed" in all versions up to around 42 I think, the mozilla team kept the bug around that entire time in Linux, I've seen people mentioning it on Ubuntu and Debian and Gentoo forums too. I might try to compile an older one just to kill that annoying message. Any pointers or tips to watch out for?

I think that error message only appears in certain Puppies so I wonder which one you are using. I seem to recall seeing it in Raring when I tested that, but I don't get it in Wheezy or Slacko 5.7 which remain my most commonly used everyday versions. As for tips it is difficult because I am just experimenting and builds do take a while to complete. I haven't yet tried any source code patches or FLAGS changes. I just look at the configure help and try different options in my DOTmozconfig. I normally focus on the ESR versions and for me the serious problems have only crept in with the jump from 38 to 45 although 38 remains a current branch.

For anyone interested, here is a screenshot of the faulty long right-click list:-

peebee · #24 Post by **peebee** » Mon 02 May 2016, 18:04

Right click brings up what looks like the correct menu on the above version of ff46

The sfs also installs and run OK on LxPup-15.11 (Slackware 14.1 base)

Keisha · #25 Post by **Keisha** » Mon 02 May 2016, 18:47

Building it in TahrPup64-605CE now, should be ready in about 90 minutes. Where's a hassle-free fast place to upload two .sfs's about 19 and 30 MB each in size?

OscarTalks · #26 Post by **OscarTalks** » Mon 02 May 2016, 20:36

peebee wrote:Right click brings up what looks like the correct menu on the above version of ff46

Yes, the official build looks OK including right-click, but you are of course forced to install gtk-3 and I find the official builds rather heavy. Theme control may need to be addressed.

I just wanted to explore the possibilites of compiling from source to get a lighter build and now also to be able to still use gtk-2 if we want. I prefer not to have these things auto-updating or crash reporting. The list of DOTmozconfig options which works with ESR 38.8.0 produces the right-click problem with 45.* and 46.0 so I was hoping to pin down what I need to do differently with these.

OscarTalks · #27 Post by **OscarTalks** » Mon 02 May 2016, 20:47

Keisha wrote:Building it in TahrPup64-605CE now, should be ready in about 90 minutes. Where's a hassle-free fast place to upload two .sfs's about 19 and 30 MB each in size?

Hello Keisha,
Great that you have been spending some time on this and good that you have had some success. With so many variables I hope we can figure out the best way forward. Do you think we need newer libs, patches, python3, gcc upgrade or just the right build options? Regarding uploading you can use datafilehost for casual examples of builds. I use yandex disk for larger stuff or experimental packages as well but you have to sign up for that. Thanks for posting your findings.

Keisha · #28 Post by **Keisha** » Mon 02 May 2016, 21:18

OscarTalks wrote:Do you think we need newer libs, patches, python3, gcc upgrade or just the right build options?...

Well, strangely, it builds just fine in TahrPup64-605CE using TP64's libs, gcc, and python2.7. Fedora-23 needs python3 to build it.

Before I saw your message I had already started to upload it. Here's my first trial build for TahrPup64-605CE:
https://www.sendspace.com/file/3q5bqp

I'm posting this from it.

I'll start a new thread for discussion of it (http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=106744), and list the build procedure there. I placed a copy of the mozconfig in the firefox directory.

If there is interest I can try building it for other Puppies/Quirkies as I get time.

Moat · #29 Post by **Moat** » Wed 04 May 2016, 02:40

Hmmm... interesting. Yesterday, I could update my Precise 5.7.1 pup's Firefox 45.0.1 using it's own updater (Menu>Help>About Firefox) to version 46.0. Today... no go via the same FF menu updater (i.e. - 45.0.1 today displays "Your Firefox Is Up To Date"). From the Mozilla manual download link (a few posts above), today's version has been bumped up to 46.0.1.

My thinking is that it's probably best to go ahead and update to this new Gtk3-supporting version and try to get it working, as it seems the rest of the Linux world is moving full-bore ahead with Gtk3 (

) and it's likely just a matter of time 'til our "older" FF versions will become obsolete/troublesome/insecure/left behind/etc. Trouble is - when I was able to update and test v46.0 yesterday, it was not accepting and rendering Gtk3 themes properly (Firefox scrollbars and colors were wonky, in particular). Not to mention that it appears many of Puppies Gtk themes are only Gtk2, and thus could (likely) work poorly in this new Firefox.

I'm hopeful that this current menu-update glitch is Mozilla's response to a buggy first Gtk3-support release, and they are busy addressing the Gtk theming/rendering issues I experienced yesterday. Fingers crossed...

Bob

Sailor Enceladus · #30 Post by **Sailor Enceladus** » Wed 04 May 2016, 15:51

OscarTalks wrote:I think that error message only appears in certain Puppies so I wonder which one you are using. I seem to recall seeing it in Raring when I tested that, but I don't get it in Wheezy or Slacko 5.7 which remain my most commonly used everyday versions. As for tips it is difficult because I am just experimenting and builds do take a while to complete. I haven't yet tried any source code patches or FLAGS changes. I just look at the configure help and try different options in my DOTmozconfig. I normally focus on the ESR versions and for me the serious problems have only crept in with the jump from 38 to 45 although 38 remains a current branch.

Nice. I did find the exact changes in FF42 and backporting them to FF28 seems to have worked. Using Slacko 6.3.0.6 right now.

How long did it take your machines to compile Firefox? It took exactly 4.5 hours on my Pentium M running at a constant 1.86GHz, kind of ridiculous, but that didn't stop me from trying it 5 times. I ended up taking our biga** 6-foot-tall stand-up fan and placing it directly under the laptop at max settings the whole time to blow all the hot air away that would have probably otherwise melted the thing. 3 out of my 5 attempts made it to the end, the other 2 got about 4 hours and 20 minutes in before cycling through an endless loop. Watching htop during the 2nd successful attempt later, I noticed the ram usage go up to 400MB then 550MB and leveling off at 706/995MB during the massive mozz.a part near the end, so I suspect it locked up at this exact spot on the two unsuccessful attempts because I tried adding --enable-release which does a little extra work and probably pushed gcc to my ram limit and it wasn't able to steal any more. Nice to know that a 1GB ram laptop with no swap file can successfully compile an older Firefox though, but watching how tight it got there I don't think I'd want to try the same feat with Firefox 46.

Keisha · #31 Post by **Keisha** » Wed 04 May 2016, 16:46

Sailor Enceladus wrote:...How long did it take your machines to compile Firefox? It took exactly 4.5 hours on my Pentium M...

On Fedora-23 or TahrPup64-605CE it takes just over an hour on my i5-3570k, 3.7 GHz (hardinfo 0.5.2pre CPU Blowfish = 2.66 seconds), using 2 cores, no difference using 3 cores, not using swap. I have 8 GB of ram but during the firefox build even on 64-bit Fedora-23 I never see ram usage exceed 2.83 GB (at idle, firefox running, F23 uses 2.21GB).

For my "fedzilla" build, add 15 minutes for make clean, the preliminary patching, and configure, and then about half an hour afterward to uncompress the omni.ja's, make the .sfs, and then reboot to load the .sfs fresh and see that it loads and runs.

All in all, with coffee breaks and the time between when the build finishes and when I notice it's finished, plus other distractions, about two hours per trial build.

Of course, overnight I can run multiple trial builds simultaneously.

This is a homebuilt tower, temperature is not an issue.

Belham · #32 Post by **Belham** » Wed 04 May 2016, 17:42

Please forgive me if I ask an incredibly dumb question here, as I mean no offense. But I've read this thread through twice, I even read Keisha's thread about the latest FFv46 compiling for Tahr64-6.0.5 CE, and I guess I am really confused.

The reason is that why waste all this time compiling FF, when version 46 runs absolutely great in Tahr64 with no fuss (if you just add the the three dependencies mentioned earlier by peebee). I mean, one can even download Firefox and do the following:

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=106173

Everything installs correctly, and it takes maybe 2 minutes tops to do it if you are lazy.

I do not understand all this enrgy to re-compile FF, or make an SFS, or whatever, when FF loads so easily in Tahr64? Furthermore, from my end, it has handled everything I've thrown at it. And keeping FFv46 up-to-date is dead simple in Tahr64, as once you load firefox (via that link's method), FF's updater works flawlessly and updates Firefox within seconds and puts the updates in the correct folder.

Is there something I am not understanding in this discussion of "trying" to compile FF v46? Keisha? Oscar?? Anyone?? I have not come across one instance of FF45-46 (and updates through) not working in my Tahr64-6.0.5 CE when set up either the above link method, or actually using the Tahr64 package manager, and updating those packages by simply downloading the latest tar.bz2 firefox file, unarchive it, pull the relevant folders out, and use them to replace the exact same folders in my Tahr64 system. Voila', FF is updated to the latest. But not even this has been necessary since I installed FF using the link mentioned above. Everything works flawlessly, for every site I visit, and updates from Mozilla go straight into the FF folder in /usr/lib64/firefox. Maybe I've been wrong and am being fooled somehow in what I am doing??? I honestly don't know

Thanks for any explanation/feedback

Keisha · #33 Post by **Keisha** » Wed 04 May 2016, 18:28

Belham wrote:...why waste all this time compiling FF, when version 46 runs absolutely great in Tahr64...

In a nutshell, it's just an experiment to see if building Firefox 46 in Puppy the Fedora way produces a Firefox that's any better than when built the Mozilla way. So far nobody's been able to produce a stable Firefox 46 built in Puppy the Mozilla way.

As a Fedora-23 user I could not help but notice that the official Fedora build differs from the official Mozilla build (according to about:buildconfig called up in the browser) as night differs from day. And on Fedora-23 the Fedora build performs better than the Mozilla build.

Meanwhile, back at the Puppy ranch, OscarTalks reported difficulty in making a lighter build using gtk-2 without the auto-updater or crash reporting.

I wanted to develop a local build procedure in Fedora anyway because I too wanted a Firefox-46 for Fedora built the same way Oscar wanted it for Puppy, partly because even in Fedora I enjoy using Puppy contributor zigbert's beautiful gtk2 "Stardust" theme, and further because I prefer to use the beautiful "infinality" font rendering, and to get infinality you must (among other things) custom-build Firefox yourself to use the system cairo and freetype rather than Firefox's own. Both the release Mozilla build and the official Fedora build use firefox's own internal cairo and freetype, which are not patched to provide infinality font rendering.

The resulting build was unstable, and I spent two exasperating days trying without success to cure the instabilities before giving up on building it the Mozilla way. Then I tried building it to Oscar's specifications and system cairo+freetype the Fedora way, starting from the Fedora mozconfig and had success.

Curious, and not knowing whether Puppy users were having difficulty with Mozilla's release build, I built it in the first 64-bit Ubuntu-based Puppy which sprang to mind, TahrPup64-605CE, so as to invite Puppy users to compare it against the release Mozilla binary and see if this gtk2, non-crash-reporting, non-auto-updating build, using system cairo + freetype, built as close as I could come to the Fedora way, works better than, worse than, or the same as the release Mozilla build built by Mozilla the Mozilla way.

I chose a Ubuntu-based puppy because Ubuntu's font rendering is also excellent, 90% as good as infinality in my opinion, so besides wondering if building it the Fedora way has any advantages (other than the simple fact that it works and, by all accounts, the Mozilla way doesn't) I'm wondering if users see any improvement in the appearance of text in Firefox.

I'm rebuilding it now with the new firefox-46.0.1 source code, should have a new version 0.0.2 up tonight.

Moat wrote:Yesterday, I could update my Precise 5.7.1 pup's Firefox 45.0.1 using it's own updater...

I can try building a 32-bit version of my "fedzilla" firefox for Precise 5.7.1 provided you tell me where to download the kernel source (I need it to build a driver for my wifi dongle). Also are you using the regular or retro version of Precise 5.7.1?

Moat · #34 Post by **Moat** » Wed 04 May 2016, 21:40

Keisha wrote:I can try building a 32-bit version of my "fedzilla" firefox for Precise 5.7.1 provided you tell me where to download the kernel source (I need it to build a driver for my wifi dongle). Also are you using the regular or retro version of Precise 5.7.1?

Oh heavens, Keisha - don't bother for my sake (it's a highly modified Precise 5.7.1 Retro, so not a reliable, representative testing example - and the kernel sources look to be unavailable from the link on Barry's blog anyway; http://barryk.org/blog2/?viewDetailed=00317 ).

For the time being, I'm more than happy with v45.0.1's performance, and am just curious/hopeful as to Mozilla's devotion to addressing some of the apparent Gtk3 issues I experienced in v46. Although I know little of the nuts 'n bolts, it seems to me FF should simply recognize if a Gtk3-supporting desktop theme is in use or not, and revert/fallback to it's old, trusty Gtk2 rendering if not... instead of introducing these odd, incorrect graphical flaws.

Not really a deal-breaker, though, as FF46 otherwise seemed fast, stable and perfectly normal in function.

I'm also curious, too, as to what issues you may have experienced with the OEM v46, regarding font rendering or Ziggy's Stardust theme. Thinking back, fonts may have appeared a little "weaker" to me, testing 46 a few days ago. Hmm... time for some deeper testing...

Bob

Keisha · #35 Post by **Keisha** » Wed 04 May 2016, 23:06

Moat wrote:...the kernel sources look to be unavailable from the link on Barry's blog...

Urk. That's worrisome.

Moat wrote:...also curious, too, as to what issues you may have experienced with the OEM v46, regarding font rendering or Ziggy's Stardust theme...

See below, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 544#902544.

Here's a couple screencaps of font rendering in firefox-fedzilla on unmodified TahrPup64. Download the image and open it fullscreen in gpicview. I have a 24" monitor:

Standard DejaVu Sans and DejaVu Serif, zoomed out to 80%:
http://imgur.com/dbFvRUh

Proprietary Optima Nova Demi Old Style sans serif and Gelasio serif zoomed out to 90%:
http://imgur.com/UppHU1B

Fonting results will vary across different video hardware. Actually, on my rig, in TahrPup, I see little or no difference between firefox-fedzilla and the stock PaleMoon. Ubuntu's, and therefore TahrPup's, default fonting is pretty good. The difference is much more noticeable in Fedora-23 when equipped with infinality, between oem firefox (with firefox's own cairo+freetype) and firefox with system cairo+freetype (e.g. firefox-fedzilla).

Fonting in Fedora-23, firefox-46 built with --enable-system-cairo and USE_FC_FREETYPE=1 (i.e. my "firefox-fedzilla"), with libfreetype, fontconfig, and libcairo all built using the Infinality patch set (https://github.com/bohoomil/fontconfig-ultimate):

Moat · #36 Post by **Moat** » Thu 05 May 2016, 00:22

Keisha wrote:Here's a couple screencaps of font rendering in firefox-fedzilla on unmodified TahrPup64.

Your font rendering looks excellent, from here - as far as can be deciphered from a screenshot .jpeg, anyhow.

Overall, my old eyes have been happy with Precise 5.7.1's font rendering. Better than Windows XP/7, and seemingly just a hair shy of Mint/official Ubuntus (for some reason). But really good, as is. As good or better than any of many pups I've tried.

Thanks for the info, Keisha!

Bob

Keisha · #37 Post by **Keisha** » Thu 05 May 2016, 12:40

Moat wrote:...Overall, my old eyes have been happy with Precise 5.7.1's font rendering...

Well...I tried to boot Precise-5.7.1-retro, I found the kernel source...but after I create the savefile and shut down, it won't boot again on my machine. It errors out and freezes after the "loading modules" message. I guess my machine is too new.

Somewhere around here I have an old Thinkpad laptop, if I can get that running then I'll try building firefox-46 for you. Do you normally run the browser as root or as spot?

Keisha · #38 Post by **Keisha** » Thu 05 May 2016, 17:30

Moat wrote:Thanks for the info, Keisha!

Good news: I now have Precise-5.7.1-retro up and running, and tried to build firefox-46, but...

Bad news:
..,got...

Code: Select all

configure:3933: checking for ranlib
configure:3965: checking for as
configure:4019: checking for ar
configure:4054: checking for ld
configure:4089: checking for strip
configure:4124: checking for windres
configure:4159: checking for otool
configure: error: Only GCC 4.7 or newer supported
# gcc --version
gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.3-1ubuntu5) 4.6.3
Copyright (C) 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

#

...so it looks like firefox-45 is the end of the line for Precise, unless someone can tell me how to install gcc 4.7 or higher. (***EDITED there may be hope yet, see below...)

Keisha · #39 Post by **Keisha** » Thu 05 May 2016, 21:13

Moat wrote:...I'm also curious, too, as to what issues you may have experienced with the OEM v46, regarding...Ziggy's Stardust theme...

Of course, the most obvious issue is that a gtk3 firefox (e.g., the present official Mozilla binary release of firefox-46) does not render the vertical and horizontal sliders and the active-tab colorations of Stardust correctly.

Here are two comparison screencaps. Note: this is not actually Stardust, rather it is "Stardust-vector" (http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 834#769834) with the gtk3 subdirectory of Greybird added.

With gtk2 the sliders are much prettier and more readily visible, and it is immediately apparent which tab you are in.

Keisha · #40 Post by **Keisha** » Thu 05 May 2016, 21:19

BTW there is still hope on Precise-5.7.1-retro. I've succeeded in building firefox-46 (in Fedora) with a set of linker and configure switches which I think might work in Precise's gcc 4.6.3. But there is one video this build has a problem with. I'm doing a second trial build now, with just a single parameter changed, and if it turns out able to play the problematic video then I'll try again in Precise. (***EDITED yes this trial build succeeded. Now to build it in Precise...)

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Firefox gtk3

Build time of firefox-46

Can I ask a question? Why all the FF compilng fuss??

Why build Firefox-46 the Fedora way?

Re: Why build Firefox-46 the Fedora way?

Re: Why build Firefox-46 the Fedora way?

Re: Why build Firefox-46 the Fedora way?

Re: Why build Firefox-46 the Fedora way?

Re: Why build Firefox-46 the Fedora way?

Re: Why build Firefox-46 the Fedora way?