Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #242796 > unrolled thread

Firefox ESR EOL

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 11:20 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-09 14:00 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 15:20 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-09 17:40 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Kenneth Parker <sea7kenp@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 17:50 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 17:50 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-09 18:00 +0100
              Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-09 18:50 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 19:30 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-09 20:00 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-12-09 21:50 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Jonathan Dowland <jon+debian-user@dow.land> - 2021-12-09 23:10 +0100
              Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 23:20 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-12-09 23:30 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-09 23:40 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL Michael Castellon <castellonmichael@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 00:00 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Jonathan Dowland <jon+debian-user@dow.land> - 2021-12-10 11:50 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Marco Möller <talby@debianlists.mobilxpress.net> - 2021-12-09 23:30 +0100
              Re: Firefox ESR EOL Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 11:00 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-18 21:50 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2021-12-18 23:30 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-12-19 00:10 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Rainer Dorsch <ml@bokomoko.de> - 2021-12-19 10:30 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2021-12-20 11:00 +0100
                      Re: Firefox ESR EOL Jeremy Ardley <jeremy@ardley.org> - 2021-12-20 11:10 +0100
                        Re: Firefox ESR EOL gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-12-20 12:50 +0100
                          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-12-20 15:50 +0100
                            Re: Firefox ESR EOL John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> - 2021-12-20 17:10 +0100
                            Re: Firefox ESR EOL gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-12-21 00:00 +0100
                          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-25 12:10 +0100
                            Re: Firefox ESR EOL gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-12-25 18:40 +0100
                        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-20 16:40 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL David Newman <dnewman@networktest.com> - 2021-12-18 23:30 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-19 09:20 +0100
                      Re: Risc-V [OT: Firefox ESR EOL] Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside <debian@polynamaude.com> - 2021-12-19 19:50 +0100
                        Re: Risc-V [OT: Firefox ESR EOL] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-12-20 10:00 +0100
                          Re: Risc-V [OT: Firefox ESR EOL] Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-25 12:10 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 00:10 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 00:10 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> - 2021-12-10 10:30 +0100
              Re: Firefox ESR EOL Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2021-12-10 11:30 +0100
                Re: Firefox ESR EOL Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-12-10 13:30 +0100
                  Re: Firefox ESR EOL Rainer Dorsch <ml@bokomoko.de> - 2021-12-18 12:40 +0100
                    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Georgi Naplatanov <gosho@oles.biz> - 2021-12-18 20:10 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2021-12-10 11:50 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2021-12-09 14:10 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL Kenneth Parker <sea7kenp@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 17:20 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 19:30 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-12-09 19:50 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2021-12-09 20:00 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2021-12-10 08:00 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2021-12-10 07:50 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 11:30 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-09 18:50 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL Michael Castellon <castellonmichael@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 22:30 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-09 22:50 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2021-12-10 01:50 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Michael Castellon <castellonmichael@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 18:30 +0100
    [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-10 15:10 +0100
      Re: [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution Michael Castellon <castellonmichael@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 15:50 +0100
      Re: [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-10 16:40 +0100
        Re: [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-10 17:00 +0100
          Re: [SOLVED] Firefox + Thunderbird upstream solution Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-10 17:00 +0100
    Re: Firefox ESR EOL Kushal Kumaran <kushal@locationd.net> - 2021-12-21 02:20 +0100
      Re: Firefox ESR EOL piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> - 2021-12-26 23:20 +0100
        Re: Firefox ESR EOL Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-27 09:20 +0100
          Re: Firefox ESR EOL "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-12-27 09:40 +0100
            Re: Firefox ESR EOL Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-12-27 15:30 +0100

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#242796 — Firefox ESR EOL

Hello,

I noticed that Debian Stable uses Firefox ESR 78.15.0, which is final
update of 78 series. All further updates go to Firefox ESR 91, as
Mozilla page says:
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/78.15.0/releasenotes

"Version 78.15.0, first offered to ESR channel users on October 5, 2021
This is the final planned ESR78 release. Eligible users will be
automatically updated to the ESR91 release on November 2."

Since 2 November, Firefox 78 is EOL and we all should upgrade. I use
Debian Bullseye on several of my computers, and they all are on ESR 78.

Firefox 91 should migrate to Stable as soon as possible, otherwise we
risk unpatched security vulnerabilities being present in Debian Stable,
there are several of them already.
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/firefox-esr

Is there any remedy for this?

--
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#242799

On 12/9/21 12:12, piorunz wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I noticed that Debian Stable uses Firefox ESR 78.15.0, which is final
> update of 78 series. All further updates go to Firefox ESR 91, as
> Mozilla page says:
> https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/78.15.0/releasenotes
> 
> "Version 78.15.0, first offered to ESR channel users on October 5, 2021
> This is the final planned ESR78 release. Eligible users will be
> automatically updated to the ESR91 release on November 2."
> 
> Since 2 November, Firefox 78 is EOL and we all should upgrade. I use
> Debian Bullseye on several of my computers, and they all are on ESR 78.
> 
> Firefox 91 should migrate to Stable as soon as possible, otherwise we
> risk unpatched security vulnerabilities being present in Debian Stable,
> there are several of them already.
> https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/firefox-esr
> 
> Is there any remedy for this?
> 

Hey Piotr,

a new release of Firefox ESR was uploaded to Sid two days ago and
probably will be uploaded to stable soon.

https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=firefox-esr&suite=sid

Kind regards
Georgi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242803

On 09/12/2021 12:47, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:

> Hey Piotr,
>
> a new release of Firefox ESR was uploaded to Sid two days ago and
> probably will be uploaded to stable soon.
>
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=firefox-esr&suite=sid

ESR 91 was first uploaded to sid in November. It didn't migrated to
Testing, or Stable, due to problems. Package tracker show some details:
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/firefox-esr

There is a bug here:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1001234

Rust compiler for Stable is not available? It means we have to continue
to use outdated, vulnerable Firefox ESR until this is resolved? When it
will be?

--
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242814

On Thu, 2021-12-09 at 14:18 +0000, piorunz wrote:
> On 09/12/2021 12:47, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
> 
> > Hey Piotr,
> > 
> > a new release of Firefox ESR was uploaded to Sid two days ago and
> > probably will be uploaded to stable soon.
> > 
> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=firefox-esr&suite=sid
> 
> ESR 91 was first uploaded to sid in November. It didn't migrated to
> Testing, or Stable, due to problems. Package tracker show some details:
> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/firefox-esr
> 
> There is a bug here:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1001234
> 
> Rust compiler for Stable is not available? It means we have to continue
> to use outdated, vulnerable Firefox ESR until this is resolved? When it
> will be?

Think it's more complicated than just a compiler [1]

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I've just installed ESR 91
direct from Firefox, as it seems Debian are likely to leave us with an
insecure browser for a long time. Considering this was known about
before the last release, you would have thought we would have been
warned about it in the release notes, or through some other means.

The only mention of Firefox in the release notes is...

    For general web browser use we recommend Firefox or Chromium.
    They will be kept up-to-date by rebuilding the current ESR
    releases for stable.

:-(

[1] https://www.google.com/url?q=http://techrights.org/2021/11/10/firefox-esr-91-issues/&sa=D&source=hangouts&ust=1639153687425000&usg=AOvVaw2wBZnDhgCrL9Id5BzyH5hE

-- 
Tixy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242815

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Dec 9, 2021, 11:37 AM Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> wrote:

> On Thu, 2021-12-09 at 14:18 +0000, piorunz wrote:
> > On 09/12/2021 12:47, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
> >
> > > Hey Piotr,
> > >
> > > a new release of Firefox ESR was uploaded to Sid two days ago and
> > > probably will be uploaded to stable soon.
> > >
> > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=firefox-esr&suite=sid
> >
> > ESR 91 was first uploaded to sid in November. It didn't migrated to
> > Testing, or Stable, due to problems. Package tracker show some details:
> > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/firefox-esr
> >
> > There is a bug here:
> > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1001234
> >
> > Rust compiler for Stable is not available? It means we have to continue
> > to use outdated, vulnerable Firefox ESR until this is resolved? When it
> > will be?
>
> Think it's more complicated than just a compiler [1]
>
> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I've just installed ESR 91
> direct from Firefox, as it seems Debian are likely to leave us with an
> insecure browser for a long time. Considering this was known about
> before the last release, you would have thought we would have been
> warned about it in the release notes, or through some other means.
>

Thanks, Tixy.  I will, also, install Firefox 91 directly from Firefox [into
my Bookworm test environments].

The only mention of Firefox in the release notes is...
>
>     For general web browser use we recommend Firefox or Chromium.
>     They will be kept up-to-date by rebuilding the current ESR
>     releases for stable.
>
> :-(
>
> [1]
> https://www.google.com/url?q=http://techrights.org/2021/11/10/firefox-esr-91-issues/&sa=D&source=hangouts&ust=1639153687425000&usg=AOvVaw2wBZnDhgCrL9Id5BzyH5hE
>
> --
> Tixy
>

Kenneth Parker

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242816

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 04:37:18PM +0000, Tixy wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-12-09 at 14:18 +0000, piorunz wrote:
> > On 09/12/2021 12:47, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
> > 
> > > Hey Piotr,
> > > 
> > > a new release of Firefox ESR was uploaded to Sid two days ago and
> > > probably will be uploaded to stable soon.
> > > 
> > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=firefox-esr&suite=sid
> > 
> > ESR 91 was first uploaded to sid in November. It didn't migrated to
> > Testing, or Stable, due to problems. Package tracker show some details:
> > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/firefox-esr
> > 
> > There is a bug here:
> > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1001234
> > 
> > Rust compiler for Stable is not available? It means we have to continue
> > to use outdated, vulnerable Firefox ESR until this is resolved? When it
> > will be?
> 
> Think it's more complicated than just a compiler [1]
> 
> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I've just installed ESR 91
> direct from Firefox, as it seems Debian are likely to leave us with an
> insecure browser for a long time. Considering this was known about
> before the last release, you would have thought we would have been
> warned about it in the release notes, or through some other means.
> 
> The only mention of Firefox in the release notes is...
> 
>     For general web browser use we recommend Firefox or Chromium.
>     They will be kept up-to-date by rebuilding the current ESR
>     releases for stable.
> 
Work on this is nearing completion.

Please note that Mozilla is constantly updating to newer rustc and LLVM
versions.  That means that preparing a new major ESR release for Debian
requires not just the packaging of the firefox-esr and thunderbird
updates, but also some very complex toolchain components.  Those
components are usually already in unstable/testing, but for stable,
oldstable, and LTS, the toolchain must be backported first.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242817

On 12/9/21 18:43, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 04:37:18PM +0000, Tixy wrote:
>> On Thu, 2021-12-09 at 14:18 +0000, piorunz wrote:
>>> On 09/12/2021 12:47, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey Piotr,
>>>>
>>>> a new release of Firefox ESR was uploaded to Sid two days ago and
>>>> probably will be uploaded to stable soon.
>>>>
>>>> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=firefox-esr&suite=sid
>>>
>>> ESR 91 was first uploaded to sid in November. It didn't migrated to
>>> Testing, or Stable, due to problems. Package tracker show some details:
>>> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/firefox-esr
>>>
>>> There is a bug here:
>>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1001234
>>>
>>> Rust compiler for Stable is not available? It means we have to continue
>>> to use outdated, vulnerable Firefox ESR until this is resolved? When it
>>> will be?
>>
>> Think it's more complicated than just a compiler [1]
>>
>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I've just installed ESR 91
>> direct from Firefox, as it seems Debian are likely to leave us with an
>> insecure browser for a long time. Considering this was known about
>> before the last release, you would have thought we would have been
>> warned about it in the release notes, or through some other means.
>>
>> The only mention of Firefox in the release notes is...
>>
>>     For general web browser use we recommend Firefox or Chromium.
>>     They will be kept up-to-date by rebuilding the current ESR
>>     releases for stable.
>>
> Work on this is nearing completion.
> 
> Please note that Mozilla is constantly updating to newer rustc and LLVM
> versions.  That means that preparing a new major ESR release for Debian
> requires not just the packaging of the firefox-esr and thunderbird
> updates, but also some very complex toolchain components.  Those
> components are usually already in unstable/testing, but for stable,
> oldstable, and LTS, the toolchain must be backported first.
> 

As far as I know Ubuntu has no such problem with Firefox.

Kind regards
Georgi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242823

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 06:59:07PM +0200, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
> On 12/9/21 18:43, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > 
> > Please note that Mozilla is constantly updating to newer rustc and LLVM
> > versions.  That means that preparing a new major ESR release for Debian
> > requires not just the packaging of the firefox-esr and thunderbird
> > updates, but also some very complex toolchain components.  Those
> > components are usually already in unstable/testing, but for stable,
> > oldstable, and LTS, the toolchain must be backported first.
> > 
> 
> As far as I know Ubuntu has no such problem with Firefox.
> 
Debian also supports additional hardware architectures and the toolchain
components sometimes require specific work in order to support those
additional architectures.  In fact, that was the case with this current
update that is underway.

However, the point is not about arguing which is better, Debian or
Ubuntu.  Naturally, Debian is better.

Rather, the point was simply to offer assurance that this work is
underway and that it is near completion.

It is lamentable that it has taken this long, but that is not an
indication of a lack of effort on the part of the people in Debian
working on this.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242827

On 12/9/21 19:09, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 06:59:07PM +0200, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
>> On 12/9/21 18:43, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>>>
>>> Please note that Mozilla is constantly updating to newer rustc and LLVM
>>> versions.  That means that preparing a new major ESR release for Debian
>>> requires not just the packaging of the firefox-esr and thunderbird
>>> updates, but also some very complex toolchain components.  Those
>>> components are usually already in unstable/testing, but for stable,
>>> oldstable, and LTS, the toolchain must be backported first.
>>>
>>
>> As far as I know Ubuntu has no such problem with Firefox.
>>
> Debian also supports additional hardware architectures and the toolchain
> components sometimes require specific work in order to support those
> additional architectures.  In fact, that was the case with this current
> update that is underway.
> 
> However, the point is not about arguing which is better, Debian or
> Ubuntu.  Naturally, Debian is better.
> 
> Rather, the point was simply to offer assurance that this work is
> underway and that it is near completion.
> 
> It is lamentable that it has taken this long, but that is not an
> indication of a lack of effort on the part of the people in Debian
> working on this.
> 

Hi Roberto


thanks for the explanation. I didn't want to offend anybody. I use both
- Debian and Kubuntu and like more Debian and I have been using it for
almost 2 decades. The idea was that somehow Ubuntu handles well with
this problem. This is all I meant.

Kind regards
Georgi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242830

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 07:49:01PM +0200, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
> On 12/9/21 19:09, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 06:59:07PM +0200, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
> >> On 12/9/21 18:43, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Please note that Mozilla is constantly updating to newer rustc and LLVM
> >>> versions.  That means that preparing a new major ESR release for Debian
> >>> requires not just the packaging of the firefox-esr and thunderbird
> >>> updates, but also some very complex toolchain components.  Those
> >>> components are usually already in unstable/testing, but for stable,
> >>> oldstable, and LTS, the toolchain must be backported first.
> >>>
> >>
> >> As far as I know Ubuntu has no such problem with Firefox.
> >>
> > Debian also supports additional hardware architectures and the toolchain
> > components sometimes require specific work in order to support those
> > additional architectures.  In fact, that was the case with this current
> > update that is underway.
> > 
> > However, the point is not about arguing which is better, Debian or
> > Ubuntu.  Naturally, Debian is better.
> > 
> > Rather, the point was simply to offer assurance that this work is
> > underway and that it is near completion.
> > 
> > It is lamentable that it has taken this long, but that is not an
> > indication of a lack of effort on the part of the people in Debian
> > working on this.
> > 
> 
> Hi Roberto
> 
> 
> thanks for the explanation. I didn't want to offend anybody. I use both
> - Debian and Kubuntu and like more Debian and I have been using it for
> almost 2 decades. The idea was that somehow Ubuntu handles well with
> this problem. This is all I meant.
> 
No offense was taken.

I think what is important is to understand is that a statement like "As
far as I know Ubuntu has no such problem with Firefox" implies an
inappopriate value judgment.  That is to say, the circumstances that
have led to Ubuntu being in a "better" position (by your estimation) are
necessarily different than those which have led to Debian being in a
"worse" position.

I was simply trying to shed light on the differences in circumstances,
because they are important and because I think it is unkind to devalue
the work of those in Debian just because we happen to strive to a
different set of criteria than perhaps what Ubuntu strives for.  The
discussion, both in this thread and in the Phoronix "article" and its
associated discussion seem to be overly negative without good cause.
I'm glad that the other sub-threads in this discussion seem to be
focusing on alternative solutions that allow users to achieve their
objectives until the firefox packaging situation in Debian improves.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242836

On 12/9/21 20:20, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 07:49:01PM +0200, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
>> On 12/9/21 19:09, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 06:59:07PM +0200, Georgi Naplatanov wrote:
>>>> On 12/9/21 18:43, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that Mozilla is constantly updating to newer rustc and LLVM
>>>>> versions.  That means that preparing a new major ESR release for Debian
>>>>> requires not just the packaging of the firefox-esr and thunderbird
>>>>> updates, but also some very complex toolchain components.  Those
>>>>> components are usually already in unstable/testing, but for stable,
>>>>> oldstable, and LTS, the toolchain must be backported first.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As far as I know Ubuntu has no such problem with Firefox.
>>>>
>>> Debian also supports additional hardware architectures and the toolchain
>>> components sometimes require specific work in order to support those
>>> additional architectures.  In fact, that was the case with this current
>>> update that is underway.
>>>
>>> However, the point is not about arguing which is better, Debian or
>>> Ubuntu.  Naturally, Debian is better.
>>>
>>> Rather, the point was simply to offer assurance that this work is
>>> underway and that it is near completion.
>>>
>>> It is lamentable that it has taken this long, but that is not an
>>> indication of a lack of effort on the part of the people in Debian
>>> working on this.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Roberto
>>
>>
>> thanks for the explanation. I didn't want to offend anybody. I use both
>> - Debian and Kubuntu and like more Debian and I have been using it for
>> almost 2 decades. The idea was that somehow Ubuntu handles well with
>> this problem. This is all I meant.
>>
> No offense was taken.
> 
> I think what is important is to understand is that a statement like "As
> far as I know Ubuntu has no such problem with Firefox" implies an
> inappopriate value judgment.  That is to say, the circumstances that
> have led to Ubuntu being in a "better" position (by your estimation) are
> necessarily different than those which have led to Debian being in a
> "worse" position.
> 
> I was simply trying to shed light on the differences in circumstances,
> because they are important and because I think it is unkind to devalue
> the work of those in Debian just because we happen to strive to a
> different set of criteria than perhaps what Ubuntu strives for.  

Hey Roberto,

here is no devalue by my side. It was "go see how Ubunto does the stuff
and backport to Debian if it's appropriate". It was the idea.


Kind regards
Georgi


The
> discussion, both in this thread and in the Phoronix "article" and its
> associated discussion seem to be overly negative without good cause.
> I'm glad that the other sub-threads in this discussion seem to be
> focusing on alternative solutions that allow users to achieve their
> objectives until the firefox packaging situation in Debian improves.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Roberto
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242819

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 05:11:05PM +0000, piorunz wrote:
> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Web-Browser-Packages-Debian
> 
> :(
> 
What utter trash.

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242820

On 09/12/2021 17:18, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 05:11:05PM +0000, piorunz wrote:
>> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Web-Browser-Packages-Debian
>>
>> :(
>>
> What utter trash.
> 
What is trash?

-- 
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242826

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Web-Browser-Packages-Debian

:(

-- 
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242842

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 05:11:05PM +0000, piorunz wrote:
> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Web-Browser-Packages-Debian
> 
> :(
> 
> -- 
> With kindest regards, Piotr.
> 
> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
> ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

Yes: not great but also not informed. We do package the latest versions as
we can - the latest dependency on Rust is a problem and the point about
needing to build toolchains is very valid.

Too many comments there are just Debian-bashing with no real understanding.

The one thing that would be good would be a backport of the mesa-utils to 
Bullseye as that would also solve problems with Debian and GUI apps under
WSL2 and Windows :)

All the very best, as ever,

Andy Cater

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242847

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 08:44:12PM +0000, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>The one thing that would be good would be a backport of the mesa-utils to
>Bullseye as that would also solve problems with Debian and GUI apps under
>WSL2 and Windows :)

I've seen that proposed a few times: backport Mesa to get EGL support to
solve this problem. Is it definitely the case that there is no hardware
for which GLX is supported and EGL is not?

-- 
Please do not CC me for listmail.

👱🏻	Jonathan Dowland
✎	 jmtd@debian.org
🔗	https://jmtd.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242848

On 09/12/2021 22:06, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 08:44:12PM +0000, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>> The one thing that would be good would be a backport of the mesa-utils to
>> Bullseye as that would also solve problems with Debian and GUI apps under
>> WSL2 and Windows :)
>
> I've seen that proposed a few times: backport Mesa to get EGL support to
> solve this problem. Is it definitely the case that there is no hardware
> for which GLX is supported and EGL is not?
>

Could firefox-esr and mesa be updated in backports? If that makes is any
easier? So main repository is not messed that much with?

--
With kindest regards, Piotr.

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242850

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 10:16:22PM +0000, piorunz wrote:
> On 09/12/2021 22:06, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 08:44:12PM +0000, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> > > The one thing that would be good would be a backport of the mesa-utils to
> > > Bullseye as that would also solve problems with Debian and GUI apps under
> > > WSL2 and Windows :)
> > 
> > I've seen that proposed a few times: backport Mesa to get EGL support to
> > solve this problem. Is it definitely the case that there is no hardware
> > for which GLX is supported and EGL is not?
> > 
> 
> Could firefox-esr and mesa be updated in backports? If that makes is any
> easier? So main repository is not messed that much with?
> 
> --
> With kindest regards, Piotr.
> 
> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
> ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
> 

It will be updated soon - there are problems getting some components to 
build but as soon as that's done, it'll move from unstable -> stable, I
think.

Andy C. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242851

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 10:26:33PM +0000, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> 
> It will be updated soon - there are problems getting some components to 
> build but as soon as that's done, it'll move from unstable -> stable, I
> think.
> 
Sort of.  There will be builds prepared specifically for stable,
oldstable, and LTS.  Each will be uploaded to the -security archive for
the respective distribution.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#242853

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

easier than this?

$su
#cd /opt
#wget -O firefox.tar
"https://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-esr-latest&os=linux64"
#tar xf firefox.tar
#ln -s /opt/firefox/firefox /usr/bin/
#exit
$firefox

*info*
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/latest-esr/README.txt

Firefox is a web browser developed by Mozilla.

Regards



On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM piorunz <piorunz@gmx.com> wrote:

> On 09/12/2021 22:06, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 08:44:12PM +0000, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> >> The one thing that would be good would be a backport of the mesa-utils
> to
> >> Bullseye as that would also solve problems with Debian and GUI apps
> under
> >> WSL2 and Windows :)
> >
> > I've seen that proposed a few times: backport Mesa to get EGL support to
> > solve this problem. Is it definitely the case that there is no hardware
> > for which GLX is supported and EGL is not?
> >
>
> Could firefox-esr and mesa be updated in backports? If that makes is any
> easier? So main repository is not messed that much with?
>
> --
> With kindest regards, Piotr.
>
> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
> ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web