Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Kent Fredric <kentnl@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: chromium-54 needs ffmpeg-3.0.1
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 11:29:17
Message-Id: 20160831232817.096c2164@katipo2.lan
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: chromium-54 needs ffmpeg-3.0.1 by Duncan <>
1 On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 03:46:38 +0000 (UTC)
2 Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote:
4 > Umm... you mean chromium, not firefox, correct?
5 >
7 Correct, mental bozo bits flipped temporarily ;)
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...)
23 <offtopic>
25 I really wish there was a way to run ancient firefox with security
26 fixes :(
28 I've started to really draw hate for all the new stuff they're adding.
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 )


Subject Author
Firefox bloat (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: chromium-54 needs ffmpeg-3.0.1) Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o>
[gentoo-dev] Re: chromium-54 needs ffmpeg-3.0.1 Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de>
[gentoo-dev] Firefox bloat Was: chromium ... Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>