Abrowser is taking too long to launch
Hello fellow trisquelers.
I finished fresh install via net installer. I chose Trisquel console and then installed xfce4 and xfce4-goodies which I start by "startxfce4" command in my .bash_profile. Then in GUI I installed Abrowser. It works well but It takes around 10 seconds to launch. No other program behaves like this so far (emacs, thunar...)
btw today is my first day of using Trisquel and so far it is the best distro I've used (~6mths on debian, ~6mths on fedora). One more question, is there any place for users to report bugs? Or are there any community sites I should follow except of this one?
Welcome dpo!
On the right side panel, there is an "Issues" link to https://gitlab.trisquel.org
You might like to create an account there to submit issues.
About abrowser taking too much to launch, could it be that the machine has some limited resources to provide?
Does it presents more than the first time it launches?
Have you checked for an unusual memory or cpu usage?
So far I'm not aware of abrowser getting stuck or behaving abnormally feel free to open an issue if you find this repeating or have some data that could show some abnormal behavior.
Regards
When launching the Abrowser I have over 6GB of free memory. I opened htop on other monitor and since the moment I execute "Abrowser" command I get 7 new processes immediately but the window launches 10-20 sec later. It happens even for all consecutive launches, not only for first one. Nothing unusual happens to cpu or ram at least htop says so.
EDIT: I signed on Gitlab, to report issues. Maybe even this one.
Start the browser from CLI with verbosity enabled, see if there's any hint or warning that may point to the issue.
Bare in mind that Trisquel is a GNU+Linux-libre distribution unlike Debian and Fedora, and has no support at all for hardware that relies on nonfree firmware and drivers, so this could be a lack of hardware acceleration issue, that would explain the delayed start (and probably bad 3D rendering performance in general), see how's the CPU usage when you use the browser.
Good idea, this is what I got:
~$ abrowser
console.warn: services.settings: Ignoring preference override of remote settings server
console.warn: services.settings: Allow by setting MOZ_REMOTE_SETTINGS_DEVTOOLS=1 in the environment
ATTENTION: default value of option mesa_glthread overridden by environment.
ATTENTION: default value of option mesa_glthread overridden by environment.
console.error: ({})
console.error: (new TypeError("localeHandlers is undefined", "resource://gre/modules/ExtHandlerService.sys.mjs", 139))
console.error: (new TypeError("undefined has no properties", "resource://services-settings/RemoteSettingsClient.sys.mjs", 603))
console.error: (new TypeError("undefined has no properties", "resource://services-settings/RemoteSettingsClient.sys.mjs", 603))
console.error: (new TypeError("undefined has no properties", "resource://services-settings/RemoteSettingsClient.sys.mjs", 603))
console.error: (new TypeError("undefined has no properties", "resource://services-settings/RemoteSettingsClient.sys.mjs", 603))
console.error: (new TypeError("undefined has no properties", "resource://services-settings/RemoteSettingsClient.sys.mjs", 603))
console.error: (new TypeError("undefined has no properties", "resource://services-settings/RemoteSettingsClient.sys.mjs", 603))
console.error: (new TypeError("undefined has no properties", "resource://services-settings/RemoteSettingsClient.sys.mjs", 603))
JavaScript error: resource://gre/modules/XULStore.sys.mjs, line 60: Error: Can't find profile directory.
Do you know what it means or if it is related?
quick update, this long launch also happens with Icedove... So it seems that it is something related to firefox based programs...
I am a translator!
Which programs do not behave like that?
Can you measure the number of seconds it takes between the command and the window showing up? If it would be somehow constant and the same for several apps, it could be that they are waiting for something and after some waiting timer is expired something happens that makes them start.
Abrowser is a very large and heavy program. You're noticing it takes time to start while smaller programs don't. This should not be a surprise.
Well.. I don't think this is valid argument since my setup ran a live cd where Abrowser opened in 2 seconds, previous Debian installation opened Firefox in ~2 also and even GIMP starts much much quicker than Abrowser.
I think that there must be some packages missing in my installation, however I installed all recommended for Abrowser and Icedove too.
Both Icedove and Abrowser have a slow start on my system too, and this happens mostly at first launch after startup. I am not using Icedove as my daily email client, so I never noticed it before you mentioned it here, but it takes about the same time as Abrowser when first launched. Next launches are noticeably faster.
I got used to expect browsers to start slow, especially at first launch, and this clearly predates Trisquel 11. As mentioned by Avron, both Icedove and Abrowser may be waiting for some Mozilla related process to establish a connection, which will fail because such connections are prevented by default on Trisquel.
If it is true, I am happy to wait :) I was just wandering if I am not missing some other components to install.
>"my setup ran a live cd where Abrowser opened in 2 seconds"
I'm thinking that live CD is likely pre-loading Abrowser into ram.
On your current system, how long does it take Abrowser to load the 2nd time? For example, if you open Abrowser, then close it, then open it again - how long does that 2nd time take?
It takes the same time as the first time. No change on any consequent starts.
I also tried to open new window when Abrowser is running and that is instant as a new card. However, when I close all windows, new startup takes again very long. I tried to install other web browsers using flatpak and they start up instantly, so it is definitely something with abrowser (and icedove) firefox core. Am I only one having this problem??
I am a translator!
> Am I only one having this problem??
I have rarely seen comments about XFCE on this forum. It could be that it works perfectly well on Trisquel or that almost no one is using it on Trisquel.
I tried XFCE on top of the default installation, I can't remember this kind of issue. However, I stopped using XFCE (easier to get support on MATE).
Of course, your problem might not be related to your type of installation (installing xfce4 and xfce4-goodies on console install) but it could be useful to reproduce this on a virtual machine.