From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 19 17:28:23 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94ED3106566B for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 17:28:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from papowell@astart.com) Received: from astart2.astart.com (99-111-96-109.uvs.sndgca.sbcglobal.net [99.111.96.109]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DA758FC0C for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 17:28:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from laptop_81.private (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by astart2.astart.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p2JHS7K9091651 for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 10:28:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from papowell@astart.com) Message-ID: <4D84E7A4.6060409@astart.com> Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 10:28:04 -0700 From: Patrick Powell Organization: Astart Technologies User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101206 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <4D723F43.4040506@FreeBSD.org> <4lhc48-s332.ln1@news.hansenet.de> <4D73BD6A.7000404@swa.org.ru> <8v9d48-0qi1.ln1@news.hansenet.de> <20110319080231.684d0fd9@ernst.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: <20110319080231.684d0fd9@ernst.jennejohn.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Firefox 4 - Beta X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: papowell@astart.com List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 17:28:23 -0000 On 03/19/11 00:02, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 08:07:28 -0600 > "Edwin L. Culp W." wrote: > >> I'm assuming that we are close to having firefox4 in the tree as >> firefox. It can't be too soon. I have not found any drawbacks to it >> in the couple weeks of testing. >> > Unfortunately, it still goes crazy like the older versions and eats 100% > of the CPU for no apparent reason. > > Otherwise it's no worse than 3.x was. > Ummm... does it support Java? There were some issues with newer versions of firefox requiring newer versions of the JDK which have not been ported/updated. -- Patrick Powell Astart Technologies papowell@astart.com 1530 Jamacha Road, Suite X, Network and System San Diego, CA 92019 Consulting 858-874-6543 Web Site: www.astart.com