Internet browser confusion
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
1.Abrowser - rebranded, normal version of Firefox, maintained by Trisquel
2.Icecat - rebranded, esr version of Firefox, maintained by FSF(?)
3.Iceweasel - abandoned(?), rebranded by Debian, esr version of Firefox
4.libre version of Seamonkey - is it usable?
Abrowser seems outdated - it's v81.2, while FF is on v82+. I am missing something? Is Abrowser's versioning scheme different than normal FF's?
Icecat doesn't seem to be updated. In FSF's official repo, the last update was last year. There's a different repo that is updated to v78.4, but it's not the official FSF repo, so I don't trust it.
Why does Trisquel maintain it's own rebrand of Firefox? Wouldn't it be much less work + less work duplication if all libre distros would use the main FSF's esr rebrand? Also, why isn't it updated? Am I missing something?
I wanted to use Trisquel on my spare laptop, but this - browsers not being updated - is a serious no-no.
Please don't think I'm criticizing your work, I have great respect for what you're trying to accomplish with 100% Libre distros.
I would be very grateful is someone could please explain this to me.
> Abrowser seems outdated - it's v81.2, while FF is on v82+. I am missing something? Is Abrowser's versioning scheme different than normal FF's?
No, the versioning scheme is the same. Sometimes Abrowser falls a littlbe bit behind when new changes need to be made to deal with new versions of Firefox.
> Icecat doesn't seem to be updated. In FSF's official repo, the last update was last year. There's a different repo that is updated to v78.4, but it's not the official FSF repo, so I don't trust it.
The official Icecat releases are very out of date. Guix maintains an unofficial build that is up-to-date, but otherwise stay away from Icecat.
> Why does Trisquel maintain it's own rebrand of Firefox? Wouldn't it be much less work + less work duplication if all libre distros would use the main FSF's esr rebrand?
Not really, because Icecat is also maintained by quidam, the maintainer of Trisquel/Abrowser.
> 3.Iceweasel - abandoned(?), rebranded by Debian, esr version of Firefox
It's not abandoned, it's just no longer rebranded. Normally modified versions of Firefox need to be rebranded, but Debian has gotten Mozilla's approval for the specific changes that they make, so they can call it Firefox now.
chaosmonk - Is there any freedom related reason not to use Debian's Firefox ESR at this point? I guess the fact that it still has the DRM checkbox available is problematic. Otherwise it seems to have been tamed.
I'm talking about freedom issues here, not security or privacy issues, which we've discussed at length elsewhere.
>No, the versioning scheme is the same. Sometimes Abrowser falls a littlbe bit behind when new changes need to be made to deal with new versions of Firefox.
I do find it a bit funny that version 81 is only about 7 weeks old and that is considered behind. Version 82 is only 3 weeks old.
Anything quicker than 6 months is more than enough for me considering the nature of the Trisquel project.
-------------
In addition to your comments in Icecat. Abrowser and Icecat have some minor but notable differences, particularly in terms of the default add-ons. Icecat most notably has LibreJS as standard.
> chaosmonk - Is there any freedom related reason not to use Debian's Firefox ESR at this point?
These are the freedom issues I am aware if in Debian's Firefox:
* Optional DRM, as you mention.
* Pocket is enabled by default. Some components of Pocket have been freed, and I have read that Mozilla is in the process of freeing the rest of the code one component at a time, but that for various reasons progress is slow on this. The client-side code that Debian actually ships has been freed, so whether or not this is a problem depends on your stance on non-free server-side dependencies.
* Non-free addons are recommended, though none are installed by default.
* Permission from Mozilla to use Firefox branding only extends to the modifications made by Debian. If you were to make additional modifications, you would not be allowed to share your modified version with the current branding, so the trademark limits freedom 3. Whether or not this is a problem depends on whether or not you consider the need to rebrand the software yourself an unreasonable burden.
So by the strict standards of the FSDG, Debian's Firefox is not acceptable, but by less strict standards like the DFSG it can be acceptable, depending on where you stand on various debatable issues.
> * Pocket is enabled by default.
Pocket is stripped out of Debian's Firefox ESR, at least the one I'm looking at right now.
I agree on the other points.
The one I am looking at right now does ship with pocket enabled by default, although the icon appears within the address bar (not sure where it should appear though, I have been using Abrowser or un-pocketed FF for a while).
This is happening on Devuan by the way.
EDIT: It says "Firefox Quantum ESR 68.8.0esr"
>It says "Firefox Quantum ESR 68.8.0esr"
Outdated, should've been on v78.x months ago. Why is this happening? Browsers are probably the single most used program on personal computers today and x distro not delivering the security updates on time is unacceptable. Don't just tell me - "how about *you* do something about it?", this is not some fringe program the developers would need to go out of their way to implement just for me, it's a browser, a program used by everyone all the time. I'd like to use Trisquel for all my personal computing but if even the basic stuff like this is not properly done, I most likely won't.
You seem to have missed this line:
> This is happening on Devuan
Trisquel 9 currently ships with Abrowser 81.x
A quick visit here [1] will tell you that the current stable Debian actually says 78.4.0esr. I am only experimenting with Devuan, so I might easily have missed some upgrade.
I didn't miss the line, I wrote "x" distro. If Devuan people also manage to not update their browser - well, just don't use it.
I thought your OP was more specifically about Trisquel, that's why I thought you might have missed the line about Devuan.
My point was about Debian's Firefox ESR, which seems to be 78.4. Is that outdated according to your standards?
No, v78.4 is the esr v. of ff with the latest updates; wanting the browser to be updated is not "my standard" - it's the standard on every system. I am not asking for feature-updates, only sec. ones.
Reading the posts in this thread you can
decide if you want to get the linux
firefox version from mozilla's
website.
There is the pale moon browser. Apart from the
name trademark matter, it is free software. To my
knowledge pale moon is privacy focused.
It gets updates.
http://www.palemoon.org/releasenotes.shtml
I add ublock and java script scriptblock.
Pale moon does not support real time communication.
Basilisk browser does.
http://www.basilisk-browser.org/
It gets updates.
I have found both pale moon and basilisk browsers
are stable in use.
@andyprough: by the way, Debian's Firefox ESR 78.4 still appears to have pocket enabled by default on my Devuan Beowulf install. So I am curious, what config are you using?
@lutes - > @andyprough: by the way, Debian's Firefox ESR 78.4 still appears to have pocket enabled by default on my Devuan Beowulf install. So I am curious, what config are you using?
Looks like you are right, my bad. I've hacked this version of Firefox ESR quite a bit, and didn't notice that it was me that removed the references to Pocket.
Looks like the changes I made in about:config were:
browser.newtabpage.activity-stream.section.highlights.includePocket - change to FALSE
and
extensions.pocket.enabled - change to FALSE
I am a translator!
You can also check out Hyperbola's libre browsers which support legacy add-ons (you'll need to compile them on Trisquel).
Iceweasel-UXP
https://git.hyperbola.info:50100/software/iceweasel-uxp.git/
Iceape-UXP
https://git.hyperbola.info:50100/software/iceape-uxp.git/
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires