| 1 |
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 03:46:38 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Umm... you mean chromium, not firefox, correct? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Correct, mental bozo bits flipped temporarily ;) |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Either way, having to stick with an old and likely vulnerable browser |
| 10 |
> because the new one won't build isn't a bug I'd like to have. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> (In fact, that's one reason I'm downloading my browser updates direct |
| 13 |
> from upstream, now, at least firefox ebuilds can be far enough behind |
| 14 |
> for even ~arch, that I get worried I'm risking my security due to |
| 15 |
> browsing with an outdated browser with known flaws published for |
| 16 |
> several days, long enough the bad guys are likely exploiting them! |
| 17 |
> Yes, there's additional risk from running the same binary build |
| 18 |
> everyone else is, but when it's days after the upstream update and |
| 19 |
> security flaws notification, and there's no ~arch or even hard-masked |
| 20 |
> ebuild for it, even in the mozilla overlay let alone in the main |
| 21 |
> tree, on an app as security- critical as a browser...) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
<offtopic> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I really wish there was a way to run ancient firefox with security |
| 26 |
fixes :( |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I've started to really draw hate for all the new stuff they're adding. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I put up with australis for a few years, but I've finally had enough of |
| 31 |
it. ( Not merely the look and feel, but how it was implemented has |
| 32 |
rubbed me wrong for far too long, much longer than the typical "people |
| 33 |
hate new things" period ) |
Archives