Google Chrome For Trisquel
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios
Is google chrome and it's derivatives a good browser for Trisquel? Because i favor it for it's power.
No
> Is google chrome and it's derivatives a good browser for Trisquel?
> Because i favor it for it's power.
Chrome is proprietary and therefore, at a minimum, is a security threat for you. Chromium isn't much better either: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines#chromium-browser
Ah well, i guess i only have 2 options, Keep using chrome or use a free-software browser that causes me inconvience. Which option? Huh?
how is Firefox AKA abrowser inconvenient?
if there is an inconvenience it could be fixed
The only inconvenience I've encountered so far is an impossibility to download a specific PDF file.
I tried disabling all my plugins, enabling all the js, and even turning my VPN off.
I know that I previously modified stuff in about:config, so that might be a likely cause.
So it's probably my fault.
I ended up downloading the PDF from another widowsed machine.
I think I'll get icecat, tweak it to my liking, and reinstall Abrowser with default settings for such administrative tasks.
Don't you mean "display" the PDF file? Any Web browser can download any file on the Web. The downloaded file will always be the same. And you can then open it with any PDF reader such as GNOME's document reader, Evince.
well, usually I have no problem with that.
Here I can't download the file at all, nor can I access it online.
I had a 302 error, but it only happened when I tried to download the document twice in a row (without success of course), so I don't think it's related at all since it's a redirection error, if I'm not mistaken.
What exactly happened is that when my PDF is processed (after completing a survey of some sort), I must clic on a button to get the PDF. The page switches to the "done" or "downloaded successfully" page, but no file is actually downloaded.
This sounds like some proprietary JavaScript nonsense, or even like some sort of malware. Could you link to the page you're talking about?
Not really, unfortunately.
You'd need my personal login to access it.
But it's a legit website (government related).
I'll try again right now, with IceCat as well, so I can compare.
EDIT:
Uh, it worked with IceCat (freshly downloaded, no modifications).
It still doesn't work with my heavily modified Abrowser (plugins and about:config).
I still suspect it's one of the tweaks in the about:config.
The government is perfectly capable of re-inventing the wheel with proprietary JavaScript code that breaks on some browsers. It seems to have become somewhat fashionable in the last few years to turn the Web browser into a shim for various JavaScript clients.
Perhaps you can record a video of what happens? You can do that with SimpleScreenRecorder:
http://www.maartenbaert.be/simplescreenrecorder/
And you could upload it here, for example:
Visually, nothing in articular happens (check my step by step written description above).
IceCat has LibreJS on by default, and it worked, so I doubt it's Javascript related.
Specially since enabling/disabling NoScript on Abrowser didn't change a thing.
Just to not let things hang, I'll save my bookmarks and make a fresh Abrowser install and try again.
I'm not looking for interesting visuals. I want to see what exactly happens. Abrowser doesn't have a "downloaded successfully" page, or anything like that. That's something the website is doing. Seeing this non-standard process is entirely relevant to understanding what's going on.
The way it's supposed to happen is when a download starts, it appears in your download history, and you can see the progress of the download. Then when it finishes or when the browser was unable to finish it, that is noted in that download's spot of the download history.
The "downloaded successfully" isn't Abrowser related. Yes, I see how it's clearer visually than with words,
but trust me, nothing special happens. If anything, nothing happens.
It's not even "downloaded successfully", it's just some sort of landing page, with a "return to previous page" kind of button.
The thing is, it doesn't appear in the download history, so I conclude that nothing starts.
EDIT:
Through synaptic, when going for a full uninstall of Abrowser (config files included), I still have all my settings back when I reinstall it.
How come? Aren't they supposed to be deleted?
EDIT 2:
It seems the plugins and bookmarks are kept, but the about:config was reset, and it still didn't work, so it can't be the reason.
I also tried to restart Abrowser with all plugins turned off (help > restart with all plugins turned off or something).
It says that a plugin is needed to display the content, and downloading acrobat reader is suggested.
The strange thing is it works in IceCat.
When I have the plugins re-enabled, I now have the same message (which I didn't have previously...).
Anyway, I don't know why I'm wasting my time since it works in IceCat.
Your personal configuration is in hidden files inside your home directory. In the case of Abrowser, it is in ~/.mozilla/abrowser. You can rename that folder to experiment a fresh start. APT's "purge" relates to system configurations (in /etc).
Awesome, thank you Sir!
EDIT:
Even with the default Abrowser, I can't access nor can I download that specific PDF file.
Javascript enabled or not doesn't change a thing.
Default plugins (I think there are 3) disabled (safe mode) or not doesn't have any effect either.
The about:config is the default version on both IceCat and Abrowser.
I just tried again with Icecat and a bunch of additional plugins (included NoScript fully on), and it works.
Go figure.
Abrowser's "System config" is indeed empty as I used "remove completely" in Synaptic.
Well I can still use both since I enjoy "Reader view".
News to me. I always purged things expecting my configurations to be lost (and
the hidden directories purged) and was then always surprised to find the
reinstalled programs exactly as I left them and the files still there. I
thought my purge wasn't working or something. Thanks for clearing that up :)
That's because you unistall it. You must use apt-get purge to unistall + remove preferences of the program.
But isn't that the same as "completely remove" in Synaptic? I thought it was.
Anyway, I'll try it, thanks.
EDIT:
There's still the abrowser folder in .mozilla though.
(but I renamed the older one as Magic Banana suggested).
So I'll remove this by hand, then retry an installation.
EDIT_2:
I removed that old folder, I disabled javascript and pop-up windows, I cleared the cache, the offline web content and the cookies and started again (in safe mode as well). Still doesn't work in super default Abrowser.
I cleared all the possible culprits I can think of.
The only thing I didn't try is the about:config mods for Icecat, but since I tried both with and without in Abrowser,
it's safe to assume it should work with IceCat. Or at least that it's not the problem with Abrowser.
Actually, I don't know. I don't use synaptic. But yes, you can change the names so is like there were nothing.
People on this forum will likely suggest freeing yourself. I certainly do. If you need to strengthen your resolve, do some reading https://gnu.org/philosophy/philosophy.html
You haven't told us what the inconvenience is, maybe we could help.
I am a member!
How about qupzilla http://www.qupzilla.com/, it is fast, it uses webkit, has an integrated adblock and it is libre.
What Abrowser can't do (in my opionion)
Using helpful extensions like Adblock, Duplicate a tab, so forth
Abrowser has Adblock, and it can duplicate tabs.
How do i do those tasks of installing adblocker for Abrowser and How to duplicate tabs for me? Any help would be much apperciated!
Here's a repository of free extensions https://trisquel.info/en/browser
Of course you can use 3rd party sources as well, just make you sure check the license before you do.
(One way to dupe a tab without any extensions is to select the location bar (by using alt+d or ctrl+l or by mouse) and then hitting alt+enter.)
to install a ad-blocker go here(ublock is free software gplv3):
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock/
and to duplicate tabs:
http://techlogon.com/2012/06/13/how-to-duplicate-tabs-in-firefox/
Prefer uBlock Origin ( https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases ) to uBlock, which is a fork (the original author works on uBlock Origin) that only aims to get donations that do not profit the actual contributors. Also, uBlock basically is unmaintained.
Err.....Chrome's extensions (and the browser itself) were predated by Firefox's extensions and were actually inspired by it.
I don't see hoe Chrome's got more power than Firefox, upon which IceCat and
Abrowser were copied almost (but not quite) verbatim, in terms of extensions.
Can i compile a free software version using chromium?
Why not opt for Abrowser instead? (Its parent had adblock before Chrome was conceived, and I'm thinking the same for the tab extension you want).
Ahem, anyway, there seems to exist parts of Chromium where the licensing is unclear, in effect making it not-fully free. Debian takes a different position on this so you can always grab the browser from their repo, but why?
Why not opt for Abrowser instead? (Its parent had adblock before Chrome was conceived, and I'm thinking the same for the tab extension you want).
Ahem, anyway, there seems to exist parts of Chromium where the licensing is unclear, in effect making it not-fully free. Debian takes a different position on this so you can always grab the browser from their repo, but why?
"(i refuse to say gnu/linux - it an mouthful)"
https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#long2
https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html#whycare
"i need my games so i choose to install steam so i can play with my friends and play my favorite games"
you don’t need them.
i am a kid from the 2000's and it was hard to give up non-free games but i did and i am still alive and addicted to 0AD XD
i did do it over time though not instantly
"it really slow and i cant even use abrowser for work even thoough it firefox "
i have not had any speed problems with abrowser or icecat
but any speed problem but if you are having problems with abrowser there are other free browsers such as midori, epiphany, Konqueror, Dillo etc etc
if you are having problems with running a free system this forum would be happy to help you so if you are having problems ask before you install chromium and we will most likely be able to help
Linux / GNU :p
Chrome has a reputation of being faster.
It seems it's not really true: http://internet-browser-review.toptenreviews.com/
Also you maybe might have too many plugins running.
You can't run a "close but open" linux distro.
It's not even open anymore, since parts are closed.
It's no different from running Windows or Ubuntu in that case.
If you still care about privacy and software freedom (and one of the consequence that is freedom of speech, a pillar of democracy), maybe there's a free version of Fedora (or not, I don't know).
As for games, I wouldn't support Steam, but if you have to have it, you can at least run it in a virtual machine, to have some degree of isolation. You could even run Chromium or Chrome from there (even though there's no proof it's faster). Sure it's not free software and it should be limited to specific activities, but since it's isolated by a libre VM, at least your privacy is safe, depending on what you do in the said VM.
But make it the exception, not the rule. That's a compromise I could reasonably make.
> maybe there's a free version of Fedora
Not exactly a free version of Fedora, but the Linux-libre project maintains a repo for Fedora called "Freed-ora". Installing a package from there will conflict with all of the proprietary software in Fedora's repo. This is possible because Fedora mostly has a robust policy against proprietary software and only makes a specific exception for firmware.
Digging a bit more, I see that BLAG (Fedora-based) uses that repo.
I'm not sure I understand what you say: I mean I understand that enabling that libre repo from standard Fedora is supposed to work. I don't understand the "will conflict" part, it seems to be saying the opposite, to me.
There's a package which is called something like "your-freedom", that conflicts with all proprietary software in Fedora's repo. This prevents those proprietary programs from being installed accidentally (and also helps you remove them in the first place).
Oh, I see why you say it's not exactly free, as it prevents the installation of non-free software.
In a way, Libreboot isn't fully free because it doesn't support running non-free OSs (useful to study them).
But I can live with that.
I didn't say it's "not exactly free", I said that it's not exactly a free version of Fedora; rather, it's a modification to Fedora that can make it free. The package conflicting with the proprietary software is a tool that keeps it that way; considering that you can remove it whenever you want, its presence doesn't obstruct freedom 0 any more than any other feature preventing you from accidentally doing something you don't want.
That CAN make it free?
I don't understand:
installing that package does what exactly?
I have a hard time deciphering what you wrote.
What I get is that additional package makes
(or can make? what's the difference?) Fedora free.
And that when installed, it prevents the accidental installation of non-free code.
Does that mean that voluntary installation of non-free code is possible?
The your-freedom package prevents the installation of non-free code, and due to deliberate conflict with non-free packages in Fedora's repos, deletes non-free packages on a Fedora system. If you want to install proprietary software after installing the your-freedom package, you have to remove your-freedom.
It makes Fedora free.
As in, you can use it to make Fedora free (by installing it).
> Does that mean that voluntary installation of non-free code is possible?
Voluntary installation of proprietary software is always possible. In the case of the Freed-ora package, you could (but shouldn't!) easily reverse its effects just by removing it, and that would make it possible to install the proprietary firmware in Fedora's repo, if nothing else.
I see, thank you both for the clarification.
I personally don't care about installing non-free software,
it's just that I was told (and might have misunderstood)
that a free system can't prevent you from installing non-free software. If it does, it's not free.
Sure you can reverse the effect by removing that package,
but to my understanding, on Trisquel both can cohabit,
that is, at the same time (which makes it a truly free system).
That's why I thought that Fedora with that package installed isn't completely free.
But no big deal either way.
You are free to study, modify and redistribute the list of dependencies the package "your-freedom" conflicts with. That package is free.
Trisquel does not have any non-free package in its repository. The "your-freedom" package of Freedora prevents the accidental installation of the non-free packages in Fedora's repository (warning you that you must remove "your-freedom" to install a non-free package). The effect is the same.
I think I got that mixed up with external installations, like from a PPA.
I mean if Fedora with that free package install
does prevent let's say a software from a PPA (that I've mistaken as fully free),
then it's not free, is that right?
It is free. The "your-freedom" package satisfies the definition of free software: https://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
It is not forced upon the user like a DRM would. The user can remove the package or not install it in the first place. Not that I would recommend it since it would only serve to install proprietary software that denies the user the control of her own computing (that she deserves).
Now if the question is whether the package conflicts with any proprietary software even outside the Fedora repository, the answer is "no". There is no automatic way to test whether a piece of software is free. The "your-freedom" package probably only conflicts with the non-free packages inside the Fedora repository. Whenever software is taken from third parties, the user has to to discover by herself whether it is free or proprietary. The same holds for PPAs you can add to Trisquel.
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios