Search Members Help

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Mini-ITX Boards Sale, Fanless BareBones Mini-ITX, Bootable 1G DSL USBs, 533MHz Fanless PC <-- SALE $200 each!
Get The Official Damn Small Linux Book. DSL Market , Great VPS hosting provided by Tektonic

Question: Firefox :: Total Votes:27
Poll choices Votes Statistics
Update to Firefox v2 gtk1. 7  [25.93%]
Leave Firefox as is. 3  [11.11%]
Remove Firefox from DSL. 17  [62.96%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted
Pages: (9) </ ... 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 >/

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

 new topic new poll
Topic: Firefox< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
imhennessy Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: April 2007
Posted: April 14 2008,22:29 QUOTE
lucky13,
thanks.  I tracked it down and exterminated it.  I'm not worried about security, my computer is really just a toy for me.
ivan
Back to top
Profile PM 
lucky13 Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 1478
Joined: Feb. 2007
Posted: April 14 2008,23:08 QUOTE
Quote
I too use and like Opera. However, Opera is not open source.

Neither are the binaries used in things like ndiswrapper or certain other drivers. Yet those things are either included or related tools are included to enable their use -- ndiswrapper by itself without any binary blob is totally useless, but DSL has it in the base anyway. Go a step further and look at how many distros include Flash and other closed source offerings, including Opera, in default configurations.

I've gone back and forth about where to draw lines when it comes to what should or shouldn't be included with an open source operating system. In a perfect world, we wouldn't need ndiswrapper or Flash or emulation layers like WINE. The world isn't perfect. Users ultimately want things to work with minimal (i.e., zero) fuss. They don't care for the religion of Stallman and his demented, frothing hyperbole about evil except with occasional lip service and petty rants against "winblows." I think most are really only interested in free as in beer; and Opera is free as in beer.

I see modularization as probably the most pragmatic solution because it leaves all the choice of larger, major apps to the user without moralizing about what choice is or isn't acceptable for whatever reason. Want open source Firefox? Fine, mydsl-load it. Want closed source Opera? Do the same thing. Everyone gets to choose without decisions being made for him. That's my definition of "free as in freedom."

I also want to address the 2.4/older machines remark but this is neither the thread nor the time for it.

--------------
"It felt kind of like having a pitbull terrier on my rear end."
-- meo (copyright(c)2008, all rights reserved)
Back to top
Profile PM WEB 
^thehatsrule^ Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 3275
Joined: July 2006
Posted: April 15 2008,00:16 QUOTE
Quote
Neither are the binaries used in things like ndiswrapper or certain other drivers. Yet those things are either included or related tools are included to enable their use -- ndiswrapper by itself without any binary blob is totally useless, but DSL has it in the base anyway. Go a step further and look at how many distros include Flash and other closed source offerings, including Opera, in default configurations.
ndiswrapper itself is open, and DSL only includes that - afaik it does not include any windows drivers.  This is different from Flash and Opera.  Correct me if I'm wrong though, as I don't really know much about ndiswrapper.

Quote
I've gone back and forth about where to draw lines when it comes to what should or shouldn't be included with an open source operating system. In a perfect world, we wouldn't need ndiswrapper or Flash or emulation layers like WINE.
Side note: I thought WINE stood for something... ;p

Quote
Users ultimately want things to work with minimal (i.e., zero) fuss. They don't care for the religion of Stallman and his demented, frothing hyperbole about evil except with occasional lip service and petty rants against "winblows." I think most are really only interested in free as in beer; and Opera is free as in beer.
On the other hand, it allows for users to have the ability to change things, even if it's just to a minimal degree.
Back to top
Profile PM 
lucky13 Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 1478
Joined: Feb. 2007
Posted: April 15 2008,00:53 QUOTE
Quote
ndiswrapper itself is open

Paradox -- what good is it on its own? It's a kludge that's only useful with a blob. No blob, no good.
Quote
Side note: I thought WINE stood for something... ;p

Its developers want to deny it's an emulator and their faq restates the argument on grounds that it isn't an x86 emulator. That's a red herring (not to mention it ignores the fact that Windows isn't limited to Intel x86 architecture, that's just the de facto standard -- one even Apple has had to migrate). It's a layer that enables emulation of the Windows API for both closed and open source applications right down to C:\ on a different operating system, irrespective of hardware. IOW, it's an emulator.

--------------
"It felt kind of like having a pitbull terrier on my rear end."
-- meo (copyright(c)2008, all rights reserved)
Back to top
Profile PM WEB 
^thehatsrule^ Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 3275
Joined: July 2006
Posted: April 15 2008,02:49 QUOTE
Quote (lucky13 @ April 14 2008,20:53)
Quote
ndiswrapper itself is open

Paradox -- what good is it on its own? It's a kludge that's only useful with a blob. No blob, no good.
I was just pointing out that you can't really use that to justify your argument about including flash/Opera.

Quote
Quote
Side note: I thought WINE stood for something... ;p

Its developers want to deny it's an emulator and their faq restates the argument on grounds that it isn't an x86 emulator. That's a red herring (not to mention it ignores the fact that Windows isn't limited to Intel x86 architecture, that's just the de facto standard -- one even Apple has had to migrate). It's a layer that enables emulation of the Windows API for both closed and open source applications right down to C:\ on a different operating system, irrespective of hardware. IOW, it's an emulator.
I think it would be because it's usually grouped with other software packages that emulate the x86 architecture cpu (hence your red herring remark too, I suppose)... whereas Wine itself is a framework layer, so I would say it depends on your interpretation of an emulator.  You could say Linux itself is an emulator and that Opera is one, etc. (everything emulates something older, but that's just getting silly [and kind of OT])
Back to top
Profile PM 
44 replies since April 06 2008,17:24 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Pages: (9) </ ... 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 >/ 		new topic new poll
Quick Reply: Firefox

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code