From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 9 06:50:56 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gnome@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F7CF16A41C for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2005 06:50:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jannisan@t-online.de) Received: from mailout03.sul.t-online.com (mailout03.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.81]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B508F43D58 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2005 06:50:55 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jannisan@t-online.de) Received: from fwd35.aul.t-online.de by mailout03.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 1DgGsO-0002B3-01; Thu, 09 Jun 2005 08:50:52 +0200 Received: from rochel.dyndns.org (S+pbmkZL8e7Wm0NQjdv-PyDHKvF-hD9k3vrH3S8a9Q0M3Ak0uwDmrM@[84.163.248.142]) by fwd35.sul.t-online.de with esmtp id 1DgGs8-1yCJUm0; Thu, 9 Jun 2005 08:50:36 +0200 Received: from jan by rochel.dyndns.org with local (Exim 4.51 (FreeBSD)) id 1DgGs7-0000AC-A1; Thu, 09 Jun 2005 08:50:35 +0200 Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 08:50:35 +0200 From: jannisan@t-online.de To: Adam Weinberger Message-ID: <20050609065035.GA627@rochel.dyndns.org> References: <20050608130827.GA65807@rochel.dyndns.org> <42A7273C.5060908@magnesium.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42A7273C.5060908@magnesium.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: Jan Rochel X-ID: S+pbmkZL8e7Wm0NQjdv-PyDHKvF-hD9k3vrH3S8a9Q0M3Ak0uwDmrM X-TOI-MSGID: d98b94fa-f80b-4d8c-a138-17cf8964985b Cc: gnome@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Port upgrade: www/firefox. Added GUI selection support X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 06:50:56 -0000 >Huh? This is ridiculous. Why would our user base want the ability to >disable XUL? And why would the majority of our users want the ability >to >build against GTK1? We're trying to get people as far away from GTK1 >as >possible. And IIRC, firefox won't build against Xlib anyway and will >ignore such a request and build against GTK2 anyway. It doesn't ignore that request and was built just fine with Xlib-support without having GTK2 installed on my system. I have an Athlon 500 and applications using GTK2 are generally too slow to be really usable, especially Firefox. Using Xlib instead of GTK2 and disabling XUL made Firefox quite fast and usable again on my system. I didn't test GTK1 support. >If a user wants to disable XUL for some reason, he or she can. But >cluttering up the OPTIONS menu to disable something like XUL is >pointless, unless disabling XUL does more than I think (which it very >well might, in which case please give me some more info). Just because >it can be disabled doesn't mean every single firefox user needs to be >confronted with the choice to do so. I thought, there are a lot of people who own a slower system or just prefer faster browsing experience to some GTK2 eye candy. My build really works fine and is faster. I don't miss GTK2 a bit. So I came to the conclusion, that everybody should have the choice between pretty (GTK2 and XUL) and fast (Xlib without XUL) browsing. I hope this choice will be included in the port (I don't really care whether in OPTIONS or with a documented -DVAR flag). Greetings Jan