| 1 |
2008/11/19 Michael Moore <mikem.unet@×××××.com>: |
| 2 |
> On 11:41 Tue 18 Nov , Paul Hartman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I don't have any on my system, using xulrunner. I can remove firefox |
| 4 |
>> and emerge never tries to bring it back from the dead. However, as you |
| 5 |
>> noticed, xulrunner is basically as big as firefox. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> An added bonus, though, is that firefox itself can build against |
| 8 |
>> xulrunner, so if you're using xulrunner you might as well keep |
| 9 |
>> firefox. Firefox 3.x takes just 45 seconds to compile on my machine |
| 10 |
>> when using the xulrunner USE flag. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Basically, if you want to use any gecko/mozilla/firefox plug-ins, |
| 13 |
>> you're stuck with some form of giant-package, either xulrunner or |
| 14 |
>> mozilla-firefox. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I guess thats it then, i will have to perhaps keep it lying around. |
| 17 |
> I dont want to replace one heavyweight so that i can get punched by |
| 18 |
> another :-) Thanks for everybody's input though. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
well, xulrunner is there as a dependency for firefox and so if you |
| 21 |
want to light up a little your system you could remove |
| 22 |
firefox and go only with xulrunner. just put -firefox xulrunner into |
| 23 |
your make.conf, uninstall firefox and recompile |
| 24 |
the stuff that needs recompilation. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
dott. ing. beso |
Archives