Package Details: palemoon 1:33.5.0-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/palemoon.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: palemoon
Description: Open source web browser based on Firefox focusing on efficiency.
Upstream URL: https://www.palemoon.org/
Keywords: browser goanna web
Licenses: MPL-2.0
Submitter: artiom
Maintainer: WorMzy
Last Packager: WorMzy
Votes: 141
Popularity: 0.064316
First Submitted: 2014-06-05 10:54 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-12-05 10:09 (UTC)

Pinned Comments

WorMzy commented on 2021-03-02 16:19 (UTC) (edited on 2022-08-03 21:12 (UTC) by WorMzy)

The following key is used to sign release commits:

40481E7B8FCF9CEC

Import it into your keyring however you want.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/GnuPG#Import_a_public_key

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 .. 38 Next › Last »

runical commented on 2016-11-29 11:51 (UTC)

I recently cleared out all sources like this and the download was dreadfully slow, so I thought I'd ask. I rather deal with slight inconvenience if I know why it happens :-) The thread I was talking about is the TU-application of Baptiste Jonglez. Levente had some comments on his PKGBUILDs, including the tagging thing. Link: https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2016-November/032972.html The one I'm referring to is the last comment made. Levente and Eli then discuss a bit further. The main one to read is https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2016-November/032974.html.

WorMzy commented on 2016-11-28 23:35 (UTC)

I switched away from the 7z downloads about two years ago after getting frustrated with the slowness of them (see https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/palemoon/?comments=all#comment-476004 ). I got (and still get, tbh) the feeling that the palemoon team resent having to provide source code for other people to compile their own copies, preferring that people just use their own precompiled copies; so they don't make source archives available promptly, and when they do, they throttle the download speeds. With a git source hosted on github, the source code is always available, the tags are usually made several days before the release announcement, and although the initial clone may take a while, subsequent updates will take much less time than downloading complete versioned source archives. The only negative, as far as I see it, is that the git repository is significantly larger than any number of source archives, but disk storage space is cheap. I must've missed the git tag tampering discussion, can you link me to it?

runical commented on 2016-11-28 21:57 (UTC)

WorMzy, is there a reason why you use a git checkout instead of the provided source archive (the 7-zipped one)? The archive would be a lot quicker to download and (as recently discussed on the ML) protect from tampering with the tags in the git repo.

Arvedui commented on 2016-08-08 11:23 (UTC)

That is exactly my point. Bundling your own libs has exactly the same downsides as static linking, arch got rid of the later for a reason.

prettyvanilla commented on 2016-08-07 21:31 (UTC)

It's not quite the same point in this case, as extra/firefox also still compiles against system libraries. (Besides, I don't believe the Arch Linux ideals of simplicity include *not* unbundling libraries if upstream's build system explicitly provides for building against system libs.) Anyway, it's not really a problem for me to just leave the respective options in on my local system if you decide to go with Matt's/Pale Moon's request.

WorMzy commented on 2016-08-07 15:51 (UTC)

It's the same point as using Arch's extra/firefox instead of downloading mozilla's precompiled firefox binaries from getfirefox.com. Of course, if you don't want to compile your own due to the perceived lack of benefit, you can always use palemoon-bin.

Arvedui commented on 2016-08-07 10:44 (UTC)

Where is the point in this package if it just replicates the binary distribution from upstream?

WorMzy commented on 2016-08-06 21:30 (UTC)

Hi Matt, that's not a problem. One of the main Arch Linux ideals is shipping software as close to what upstream recommends, so the more explicit recommendations on the dev wiki, the better! I was going to remove the system lib lines from my mozconfig for the next point release of PM, but I'll push it out shortly instead since you recommend against using them.

mattatobin commented on 2016-08-06 16:36 (UTC)

@wolf At this point we can say the current codebase SHOULD be good with GCC5 but GCC6 is simply not supported and won't be. Work on GCC6 support has shifted to the new milestone that will become Pale Moon 27. @WorMzy After some consideration, also not related to this GCC but general building.. We, Pale Moon, would prefer if you would go ahead and stop building with system libs period (beyond --with-phthreads). I want to start an initiative to standardize and sync package maintainers and our generic linux configuration. The intention is to keep packages maintained by .. package maintainers as close to our official generic linux package as possible to avoid any potential issues from different configuration and compiling quirks. Configuration and Compiling differences SHOULD be limited in scope to those absolutely required for a successful and operational build for the target platform and system but otherwise follow our official setup as closely as possible. Please see the (now being revised) Developer Wiki page for Building Pale Moon for Linux here: http://developer.palemoon.org/Developer_Guide:Build_Instructions/Pale_Moon/Linux Mainly, the .mozconfig shouldn't need to diverge from our official one much if at all.

wolf commented on 2016-07-31 20:51 (UTC)

Nope, couldn't make it work with gcc6, so I returned to gcc5 for the moment. Ok, got a workaround, apparently it doesn't like something in my .bashrc. Sry for wasting your time, issue was on my end :)

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 .. 38 Next › Last »