[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Why is Firefox such a beast??



On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 22:59 +0000, Beartooth wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:45:52 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 21:32 +0000, Beartooth wrote:
> >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:57:16 -0600, Frank Cox wrote:
> 	[....]
> >> > The language packs are part of
> >> > the Firefox rpms.  So you have to remove them each time after you do
> >> > a Firefox update.
> >> 
> >> 	Aaarrgghhhh : I update firefox more days than not.
> >> 
> >> 	*Why* are the rpms that way?? Can an ordinary non-technoid get
> >> them out? Or get rpms without them somewhere?? If the latter, what will
> >> happen when something involving Firefox turns up on a yum update??
> > 
> > Do you mean you update FF using its builtin updater rather than with
> > yum? (I'm talking about FF itself of course, not the add-ons). In my
> > system the "Check for updates" menu item is greyed out.
> 
> 	Yes, the Firefox updater, which always finishes by telling you to 
> restart Firefox -- whereupon, of course, it usually hangs ....

The only reason I have to restart FF is if I update one of my add-ons.
The rpm version of FF distributed via yum does *not* update itself, i.e.
that funcionality is disabled. On Fedora it relies on you using the
normal "yum update" (or PackageKit) mechanisms. It's not ideal because
the updates consist in a new copy of the entire rpm, rather than the
incremental changes the builtin updater uses, but at least it's
consistent with the rest of Fedora.

Of course you can also download the tarball version from getfirefox.org
and just run it from your own directory. I've also done that on
occasion. What is probably not a good idea is to mix them. I'm wondering
if that's what's happening to you.

> 	That's as big a reason as any why I'm thinking -- very 
> reluctantly, but seriously -- of giving up on it, at least for a year or 
> three.
> 
> > And I don't see any language packs other than English and Spanish, which
> > are the ones I've enabled. The others are there of course (I can enable
> > them if I want), but they don't get in the way and I strongly doubt they
> > using any resources other than a modest amount of disk space (11MB on my
> > system).
> > 
> > I'd seriously doubt this has anything to do with slow start-times.
> 
> 	Probably true, except perhaps on the older smaller EEEPCs (one of 
> which I have -- but seldom use), where every megabyte matters. But it was 
> worth trying.

Of course you want to save space on a small disk, but once again: AFAIK
this has *no* effect on the running FF either in memory consumption or
cpu usage.

poc


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]