Mozilla Releases Firefox 3.6

[newbie2]

http://www.dailytech.com/Mozilla+Releases+Firefox+36/article17472.htm
:cool:

[steeleyuk]

In before a mass of people asking when Karmic is going to get 3.6...

It won't. :)

[madnessjack]

Any impressive new features? (I only ask because I can't find any :P)

[Frak]

Just installed it, feels much faster.

[FuturePilot]

I tried the one from the Mozilla daily PPA but the fonts look awful. ](*,)

[Frak]

I'm using Windows, so it looks amazing.

[madnessjack]

I tried the one from the Mozilla daily PPA but the fonts look awful. ](*,)

I'm using Windows, so it looks amazing.
If there's one thing I could steal from Windows in Ubuntu it would be fonts for sure

[lovinglinux]

In before a mass of people asking when Karmic is going to get 3.6...

It won't. :)

Here we go...another round of endless complains about the "ugly" logo and "weird" name of the browser. This time instead of Shiretoko will be Namoroka. Not to mention duplicated threads about the release (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1386735). I smell megathread :)

I guess I need to change my tutorial asap.

[Malakai]

If there's one thing I could steal from Windows in Ubuntu it would be fonts for sure

Interesting, cuz I copy all my fonts from my win7 install into linux, and Ubuntu 9.10 font rendering is FAR superior to windows. Fonts that look meh in windows look incredible on ubuntu.

[Frak]

Interesting, cuz I copy all my fonts from my win7 install into linux, and Ubuntu 9.10 font rendering is FAR superior to windows. Fonts that look meh in windows look incredible on ubuntu.
That's so false even you know it. Ubuntu has a terrible font rendering system.

[andrewabc]

Here we go...another round of endless complains about the "ugly" logo and "weird" name of the browser. This time instead of Shiretoko will be Namoroka.

I guess I need to change my tutorial asap.

Well if it's the final version why can't they just name it firefox 3.6? It wouldn't conflict with firefox 3.5.x naming/files.

Instead they decide to keep the codename, until a new ubuntu is released, which obviously just confuses a lot of people who want to run firefox 3.6


So where is the ppa to update to 3.6 (when ppa gets updated)?

[Zoot7]

Just installed it, feels much faster.


I'm using Windows, so it looks amazing.
Ditto on both accounts.
I'll give it a whirl in Debian later and see what the story is.

[kerry_s]

That's so false even you know it. Ubuntu has a terrible font rendering system.

i think linux has the best font render & i'm using win7.
for example you don't get smooth fonts everywhere in ie8, unless you fix it. i use dejavu in win 7.

[phrostbyte]

Install in Ubuntu 9.10:

EDIT: I don't recommend doing this, the packages have screwed up font rendering. The best idea is to just download it from Mozilla's main website.
Or, 32-bit users go here: http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/ubuntuzilla/index.php?title=Main_Page




sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-mozilla-daily/ppa
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get upgrade

[phrostbyte]

I tried the one from the Mozilla daily PPA but the fonts look awful. ](*,)

Yeah they must have done something weird with the fonts. Either they aren't using freetype or something, or they aren't respecting the system font settings.

[phrostbyte]

Here we go...another round of endless complains about the "ugly" logo and "weird" name of the browser. This time instead of Shiretoko will be Namoroka. Not to mention duplicated threads about the release (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1386735). I smell megathread :)

I guess I need to change my tutorial asap.

What Ubuntu needs to do is actually backport Firefox. It's a bit silly that people have to wait 3 months for a new distro to be released to get a new version of a web browser.

[ratcheer]

Well if it's the final version why can't they just name it firefox 3.6? It wouldn't conflict with firefox 3.5.x naming/files.

Instead they decide to keep the codename, until a new ubuntu is released, which obviously just confuses a lot of people who want to run firefox 3.6




I just installed it and it is named Firefox.

file:///tmp/moz-screenshot.pngfile:///tmp/moz-screenshot-1.pngTim

[Frak]

i think linux has the best font render & i'm using win7.
for example you don't get smooth fonts everywhere in ie8, unless you fix it. i use dejavu in win 7.
You may need to tweak your fonts in 7. It offers a tool to do so in the control panel.

But seriously, nothing beats Mac OS X's font renderer. The next version of IE will allow GPU rendered text (thus making it less suck) while Firefox already has nice fonts. Though, I'll never use IE because of the large amount of fail it is, everywhere.

[phrostbyte]

I just installed it and it is named Firefox.

file:///tmp/moz-screenshot.pngfile:///tmp/moz-screenshot-1.pngTim

How did you install it?

[Frak]

How did you install it?
Magic and pixie dust.

[NoaHall]

You may need to tweak your fonts in 7. It offers a tool to do so in the control panel.

But seriously, nothing beats Mac OS X's font renderer. The next version of IE will allow GPU rendered text (thus making it less suck) while Firefox already has nice fonts. Though, I'll never use IE because of the large amount of fail it is, everywhere.

Psst, suck less.

[Zoot7]

How did you install it?
Download the tarball and extract it to somewhere like /opt. Then point a desktop shortcut there.

[phrostbyte]

Download the tarball and extract it to somewhere like /opt. Then point a desktop shortcut there.

How do the fonts look?

[Zoot7]

How do the fonts look?
The same as they would normally. :)

[kerry_s]

You may need to tweak your fonts in 7. It offers a tool to do so in the control panel.

But seriously, nothing beats Mac OS X's font renderer. The next version of IE will allow GPU rendered text (thus making it less suck) while Firefox already has nice fonts. Though, I'll never use IE because of the large amount of fail it is, everywhere.

i have mine setup good already, no more tweaking needed. i actually like using ie8, i've got it setup just right. plus it's the only thing that works right with the osk, i don't have a real keyboard hooked up, my boy stole it when his broke.
the ads use to keep me from using it, but now theres a blocker:
http://simple-adblock.com/about/

[nanotube]

a good way to install the latest firefox (and thunderbird and seamonkey) is to use the ubuntuzilla repository, which contains the latest mozilla-release packages (32bit only, since mozilla doesn't make 64bit builds).

better than the daily ppa, (which installs latest nightly builds instead of releases), and better than manually installing (because it's easier, and you get automatic updates through the update manager).

http://ubuntuzilla.sourceforge.net/

[Keyper7]

That's so false even you know it. Ubuntu has a terrible font rendering system.

I read this a lot but I never felt particularly annoyed by the font rendering in Ubuntu.

I'm attaching a screenshot of your post in my Karmic, could you post a shot of the same post taken from your Seven?

EDIT: freaking auto-rescaling of this forum... hold on, I'll put it on imageshack or something.

EDIT 2: here http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/5076/screenshot1oz.png

[tinybean]

I'm using Windows, so it looks amazing.


I would not go as far as saying a browser is amazing, lol it's just a browser. ;)

[sdowney717]

run
gksu file-roller
open the firefox tar
extract it to /opt
just click on the firefox shell file

I dont know if this affects anything extracting it as root to opt.

the ppa just gives you namoroka which has no file associations

[kerry_s]

I read this a lot but I never felt particularly annoyed by the font rendering in Ubuntu.

I'm attaching a screenshot of your post in my Karmic, could you post a shot of the same post taken from your Seven?

EDIT: freaking auto-rescaling of this forum... hold on, I'll put it on imageshack or something.

EDIT 2: here http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/5076/screenshot1oz.png

your fonts look thick to me.(my bag,forgot to zoom) :D
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/8951/capturew.png

[Frak]

I would not go as far as saying a browser is amazing, lol it's just a browser. ;)
To a web developer, browsers are a big deal. Internet Explorer is the epitome of bad browsers. I've yet to see one that I can write-up a website that looks good on Webkit/Gecko and look equally as good on Trident. It's just bad.

[lovinglinux]

I have updated my tutorial to reflect the release of FF 3.6 (Namoroka). It has several methods of installation, with detailed explanation of each one, including instructions on how to revert the changes.

See the Installing Other Versions section of Firefox optimization and troubleshooting thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1193567).

[phrostbyte]

I have updated my tutorial to reflect the release of FF 3.6 (Namoroka). It has several methods of installation, with detailed explanation of each one, including instructions on how to revert the changes.

See the Installing Other Versions section of Firefox optimization and troubleshooting thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1193567).

You should do some SunSpider benchmarks too. It's extensive test that focuses specifically on JS runtime performance, which is a big issue in the "new Web". :)

[lovinglinux]

You should do some SunSpider benchmarks too. It's extensive test that focuses specifically on JS runtime performance, which is a big issue in the "new Web". :)

I haven't updated the tutorial lately, since today. I have been busy with work and with the development of my extension. So I haven't done any benchmark recently. But I have noticed that you have done some, so if you don't mind sharing them, I would be glad to post it on the tutorial.

[Keyper7]

your fonts look thick to me.
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/8951/capturew.png

To the point they don't even look the same font... weird.

I can't say one is harder to read than the other, though.

[kerry_s]

To the point they don't even look the same font... weird.

I can't say one is harder to read than the other, though.

yours look fine, i forgot to click on it to zoom. :D
i like how yours is darker, i can't get that in windows with out colors bleeding through.

[ratcheer]

How did you install it?

I just downloaded the bz2 file from the Mozilla Firefox web site. Unzipped it and extracted the tar file. That's all. When I ran it the first time, it picked up all my bookmarks and extensions. No muss, no fuss.

Tim

[Regenweald]

Interesting, cuz I copy all my fonts from my win7 install into linux, and Ubuntu 9.10 font rendering is FAR superior to windows. Fonts that look meh in windows look incredible on ubuntu.

Lets not get too ridiculous here ;) really ? you gave me a big smile :P

[RiceMonster]

I just tried it on Windows 7. Neat how you can see what the personas theme will look like simply by hovering over the picture. Seemed a little faster too.

[lovinglinux]

I just downloaded the bz2 file from the Mozilla Firefox web site. Unzipped it and extracted the tar file. That's all. When I ran it the first time, it picked up all my bookmarks and extensions. No muss, no fuss.

Tim

Yep. Additionally, if you have incompatible extensions you can override compatibility with Add-on Compatibility Reporter (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/15003?src=external-fxfirstrun). It also allows to report of the extension works with the new Firefox version or not, which is pretty nice to help developers determine if they need to update the code of the extension or just update the compatibility declaration.

[Exodist]

In regards to the font rendering issues. Its very easy in Linux/GNOME Desktop to screw up how the fonts looks. If you go into the display properties you can change the pixles per inch. This effects your fonts more then anything IMHO, making them look like legos or smooth.

[lovinglinux]

For the font issue, try this:


gedit ~/.fonts.conf

then replace the content of that file with this:


<?xml version='1.0'?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM 'fonts.dtd'>
<fontconfig>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="rgba" >
<const>none</const>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="hinting" >
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="hintstyle" >
<const>hintslight</const>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="antialias" >
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>
</fontconfig>

Save it and restart firefox.

[FuturePilot]

For the font issue, try this:


gedit ~/.fonts.conf

then replace the content of that file with this:


<?xml version='1.0'?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM 'fonts.dtd'>
<fontconfig>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="rgba" >
<const>none</const>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="hinting" >
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="hintstyle" >
<const>hintslight</const>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="antialias" >
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>
</fontconfig>

I've tried that. It doesn't make a difference. The fonts still ignore the subpixel rendering.

[lovinglinux]

a good way to install the latest firefox (and thunderbird and seamonkey) is to use the ubuntuzilla repository, which contains the latest mozilla-release packages (32bit only, since mozilla doesn't make 64bit builds).

I agree with you that is pretty easy to use Ubuntuzilla, but Xbehave has posted a link to the 64bit download (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8700519&postcount=16), although its labeled 3.6pre, just like the PPA. Don't know if it is different from the final 32bit.

I have already included that link on my tut.

[andrewabc]

It's known that installing wine (and thus MS fonts) screws up firefox fonts.

I've had this happen to me, and difficult to fix as simply uninstalling wine doesn't solve it.

I install wine and firefox fonts look like http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/8951/capturew.png
Before installing wine it looks like http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/5076/screenshot1oz.png

Notice in both screenshots the capital letter I. One has the top/bottom bar, the other has no bars (which looks like crap).

Sigh, when making this post my capital I has top/bottom bar, but when I post it has none. Guess I'm still infected with wine problem.

Either way it sucks when the font changes for no reason (firefox preferences still has same font running).

See:
Firefox 3.5 not following gnome font settings (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1200992)

Firefox fonts (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1301943)

[FuturePilot]

I don't have Wine installed and I'm not just referring to fonts displayed on web pages. I'm talking about all the fonts, including the fonts in the GUI. They are not following my Gnome settings.

[lovinglinux]

I don't have Wine installed and I'm not just referring to fonts displayed on web pages. I'm talking about all the fonts, including the fonts in the GUI. They are not following my Gnome settings.

I'm not sure, because of the GUI condition, but you could try this (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8694772&postcount=335). Since extensions can also overlay the GUI, it might be it. It's a long shot tho.

[lucazade]

That's so false even you know it. Ubuntu has a terrible font rendering system.

What are you talking about? Hilarious!!


By the way Firefox should be patched in order to get antialiased font, this patch is not upstream.. so we should wait a patched released.

[FuturePilot]

I'm not sure, because of the GUI condition, but you could try this (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8694772&postcount=335). Since extensions can also overlay the GUI, it might be it. It's a long shot tho.

Nope. Not it.

[mcdjork]

I browsed this thread quickly, and no one seems to have mentioned the gnome-support package. If you install firefox 3.6 from the ubuntu-mozilla-daily repository, you can install the firefox-3.6-gnome-support package and your fonts will work just fine. Unfortunately there's some kind of bug with this package. What you actually have to do is first uninstall the "firefox" package, then reinstall the firefox-3.6 package and at that point install the "firefox-3.6-gnome-support" package. After that it will look pretty in Gnome. Unfortunately doing it this way means that you're getting it from the daily builds and you're going to get the Namoroka build--in case that bothers you. But at least it's pretty!

[Ric_NYC]

Install in Ubuntu 9.10:

EDIT: I don't recommend doing this, the packages have screwed up font rendering. Just download it from Mozilla's main website.



sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-mozilla-daily/ppa
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get upgrade


Thank you.

[Frak]

What are you talking about? Hilarious!!

You're a funny guy. I guess we both agree that the font rendering system on Ubuntu is terrible then. Agreed.

[lovinglinux]

Install in Ubuntu 9.10:

EDIT: I don't recommend doing this, the packages have screwed up font rendering. Just download it from Mozilla's main website.



sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-mozilla-daily/ppa
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get upgrade


I don't like the font rendering on Ubuntu very much, but I'm using the version from the PPA and I can't see any difference from 3.5 or 3.0. The fonts are all good here, although I'm using KDE.

[lucazade]

You're a funny guy. I guess we both agree that the font rendering system on Ubuntu is terrible then. Agreed.

You don't know what are you talkin about.. agreed!

[Frak]

You don't know what are you talkin about.. agreed!
That wasn't correct English! Fail!

Anyways, you'd have to be delusional to compare the font rendering system on Ubuntu to 7's or OS X's.

[lucazade]

That wasn't correct English! Fail!

Anyways, you'd have to be delusional to compare the font rendering system on Ubuntu to 7's or OS X's.

Are you an english teacher? Are we talking about languages?

My message was clear:
You don't know what are you talking about. so.. stop complains!

[Frak]

My message was clear:
You don't know what are you talking about. so.. stop complains!

My message wasn't clear: I'm a designer, and I've seen first hand how many Linux font rendering systems, predominantly the one used in Ubuntu, butchers fonts. Stop protecting Ubuntu like it's your little child.

[mcdjork]

Quit arguing, ladies!

I forgot to ask a question in my last post. Does anyone know much about the firefox gnome support packages? Do you think there will be one available that will work with the actual firefox 3.6 release?

[nanotube]

I agree with you that is pretty easy to use Ubuntuzilla, but Xbehave has posted a link to the 64bit download (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8700519&postcount=16), although its labeled 3.6pre, just like the PPA. Don't know if it is different from the final 32bit.

I have already included that link on my tut.

these are nightly builds, so they're not the same as the official release builds. they're always going to be a moving target - essentially similar to the ubuntu-mozilla-daily ppa, which has nightlies.

that said, for a 64bit user, since mozilla doesn't make 64bit official releases, they're probably a good alternative. but, /that/ said, since you're using nightlies in this case, you're better off just using the ubuntu-mozilla-daily ppa instead, than doing it manually, i think.

also - in case you haven't looked lately, ubuntuzilla is now a repository, rather than a script - so if your instructions refer to a script, might want to update that. :)

[phrostbyte]

I haven't updated the tutorial lately, since today. I have been busy with work and with the development of my extension. So I haven't done any benchmark recently. But I have noticed that you have done some, so if you don't mind sharing them, I would be glad to post it on the tutorial.

Yeah no problem.

Here is a link to my benchmarks:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1365791

[lovinglinux]

these are nightly builds, so they're not the same as the official release builds. they're always going to be a moving target - essentially similar to the ubuntu-mozilla-daily ppa, which has nightlies.

that said, for a 64bit user, since mozilla doesn't make 64bit official releases, they're probably a good alternative. but, /that/ said, since you're using nightlies in this case, you're better off just using the ubuntu-mozilla-daily ppa instead, than doing it manually, i think.

In fact I'm using the ubuntu-mozilla-daily ppa. This is the first time I use 64bit (switched last night), since I recently upgraded from a P4 to a Core2 Duo. So, I'm kind of a 64bit noob :)


talso - in case you haven't looked lately, ubuntuzilla is now a repository, rather than a script - so if your instructions refer to a script, might want to update that. :)

Yep, I have noticed. Nice job. I also noticed that psychocats is linking to it instead of providing the commands for the manual method. Anyway, I only provide the link to Ubuntuzilla, without any instructions. Thanks for the heads up.

[phrostbyte]

It's worth noting that even tho Mozilla doesn't offically support 64-bit builds yet, there is a lot of improvements to Firefox 3.6 for 64-bit builds. The only 64-bit build I know of is that Mozilla PPA with the screwed up fonts.

[lovinglinux]

Yeah no problem.

Here is a link to my benchmarks:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1365791

Thanks. I will add it. I forgot to mention that since I did those benchmarks I have upgraded my CPU from a P4 single core HT to a Core2 Duo, upgraded my 15" 4:3 LCD monitor to a 22" 16:9 LCD, switched from Gnome to KDE and upgraded from Jaunty 32bit to Karmic 64bit. With so many changes, I guess I would need to start over :)

[lykwydchykyn]

Just noticed something about the font issue:

After upgrading from the PPA, if I launch firefox using "firefox" then fonts are screwed up.

But if I launch it using "firefox-3.6" then the fonts look normal, like they did in 3.5.

Both commands are just symlinks to the same script, but it turns out the script looks to see what command you used to invoke firefox and sets various parameters differently. Can't fathom the purpose of that.

Since I couldn't be bothered to change every launcher and file association on my system to point to "firefox-3.6", my quick and dirty solution was to replace /usr/bin/firefox with a small script like so:


#!/bin/bash
firefox-3.6


Works fine now.

[lovinglinux]

Just noticed something about the font issue:

After upgrading from the PPA, if I launch firefox using "firefox" then fonts are screwed up.

I can't see any difference here.

Is this bad or good on your screwedmeter?

[lykwydchykyn]

I can't see any difference here.

Is this bad or good on your screwedmeter?

Looks good, I guess. Did it look the same in 3.5?

[lovinglinux]

Looks good, I guess. Did it look the same in 3.5?

Yes it did. I was thinking that perhaps my screwedmeter had a wider threshold :)

[nanotube]

In fact I'm using the ubuntu-mozilla-daily ppa. This is the first time I use 64bit (switched last night), since I recently upgraded from a P4 to a Core2 Duo. So, I'm kind of a 64bit noob :)

heh well, welcome to 64bit world. :)



Yep, I have noticed. Nice job. I also noticed that psychocats is linking to it instead of providing the commands for the manual method.


yea, aysiu was a big fan of the repository, so he forwarded his psychocats firefox page to ubuntuzilla. :)


Anyway, I only provide the link to Ubuntuzilla, without any instructions. Thanks for the heads up.

ok cool. enjoy 64bit! :) as soon as mozilla starts making 64bit official releases, i'll be adding them to the ubuntuzilla repo.

EDIT: oh wait, i see that in your 'method comparison' section you still refer to the script... :

#2 - essentially the same as the method #1, but provides a way to check for updates from Mozilla releases site and install them automatically. Also provides an automated method of removal. Initial setup is not as easy as the manual installation, but is not complicated at all, since the automated script is provided as a deb install. It requires a single command to perform installation/removal of Firefox and other Mozilla applications.

[SmittyJensen]

My message wasn't clear: I'm a designer, and I've seen first hand how many Linux font rendering systems, predominantly the one used in Ubuntu, butchers fonts. Stop protecting Ubuntu like it's your little child.
pft, designers.

[sports fan Matt]

I've noticed on Facebook when ever I refresh the main page with no squint the fonts go back to being incredibly small. Not sure why.

[lovinglinux]

EDIT: oh wait, i see that in your 'method comparison' section you still refer to the script... :

Sorry. I will fix that soon.

[SecTa]

Hey guys, i also noticed that when installing ("upgrading") to 3.6, xulrunner-1.9.1 package doesn't upgraded to 1.9.2, but xulrunner-1.9.2 installed additionally instead... is there any way to remedy that (trying to uninstall 1.9.1 from synaptic will force additional packages to be uninstalled)?
Or maybe its better to just wait 1-2 days till ff 3.6 will appear in official repositories (or it won't?)

[FuturePilot]

Hey guys, i also noticed that when installing ("upgrading") to 3.6, xulrunner-1.9.1 package doesn't upgraded to 1.9.2, but xulrunner-1.9.2 installed additionally instead... is there any way to remedy that (trying to uninstall 1.9.1 from synaptic will force additional packages to be uninstalled)?
Or maybe its better to just wait 1-2 days till ff 3.6 will appear in official repositories (or it won't?)

It's usually installed in parallel to the official Ubuntu version. There's nothing wrong there so nothing to be remedied. And no it will not appear in the repos.

[SecTa]

And no it will not appear in the repos.
ouch... im new to all this linux/ubuntu stuff, so ill ask.. why wont it appear in repos?? thats seems quite illogical to me, really.

[nanotube]

ouch... im new to all this linux/ubuntu stuff, so ill ask.. why wont it appear in repos?? thats seems quite illogical to me, really.

asked and answered, about a million times :)

in brief: to keep system stable, they only do security updates for an ubuntu release.

if you want newest firefox on an ubuntu release, install manually, or from the ubuntuzilla repository.

[SecTa]

well, i can understand the that, however its not some beta version but a stable one, was thoroughly tasted and should work faster and be more secure, so its still strange... why would devs force users to look for less user-friendly workarounds?
anyways, is there some way to force apt to upgrade to new packages? something like apt-get force-upgrade package-old to package-new?

[lovinglinux]

Hey guys, i also noticed that when installing ("upgrading") to 3.6, xulrunner-1.9.1 package doesn't upgraded to 1.9.2, but xulrunner-1.9.2 installed additionally instead... is there any way to remedy that (trying to uninstall 1.9.1 from synaptic will force additional packages to be uninstalled)?
Or maybe its better to just wait 1-2 days till ff 3.6 will appear in official repositories (or it won't?)

The weird thing is that I have installed 3.6pre (64bit) from ubuntu-mozilla-daily and only xulrunner-1.9.1 is installed. As far I remember when testing rc1 and rc2 32bit, it should be using xulrunner-1.9.2.

Any ideas?

[Giant Speck]

Is anyone else experiencing problems with Java after the mozilla-daily update?

When ever I try to access a website with Java on it, I get the "Missing Plugins" warning, even though I already have sun-java6-plugin installed, and it was working before the update.

[l-x-l]

a good way to install the latest firefox (and thunderbird and seamonkey) is to use the ubuntuzilla repository, which contains the latest mozilla-release packages (32bit only, since mozilla doesn't make 64bit builds).

better than the daily ppa, (which installs latest nightly builds instead of releases), and better than manually installing (because it's easier, and you get automatic updates through the update manager).

http://ubuntuzilla.sourceforge.net/


Thx for the knowledge.

[SecTa]

The weird thing is that I have installed 3.6pre (64bit) from ubuntu-mozilla-daily and only xulrunner-1.9.1 is installed. As far I remember when testing rc1 and rc2 32bit, it should be using xulrunner-1.9.2.

Any ideas?
aha! actually i got the same issue! so i installed 1.9.2 manually :)
So, maybe newly installed ff 3.6 somehow uses old xulrunner instead of new one?

Giant Speck, i have same issue with java

[nanotube]

Is anyone else experiencing problems with Java after the mozilla-daily update?

When ever I try to access a website with Java on it, I get the "Missing Plugins" warning, even though I already have sun-java6-plugin installed, and it was working before the update.

could be due to this bug in the sun-java6-plugin package:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sun-java6/+bug/509727

use the provided workaround, and maybe it will work (unless the ubuntu-mozilla-daily packages are different than the mozilla-official-build in this regard, in which case no guarantees).

[nanotube]

Sorry. I will fix that soon.

cool. no particular hurry, just pointing it out :)

[lovinglinux]

aha! actually i got the same issue! so i installed 1.9.2 manually :)
So, maybe newly installed ff 3.6 somehow uses old xulrunner instead of new one?

I also installed it manually and removed xulrunner-1.9.1. Working fine.

[00ber n00b]

Mine still says 3.5.7

Why?

Im using lucid...

[nanotube]

Mine still says 3.5.7

Why?

Im using lucid...

ff3.6 hasn't come through to the official repositories yet. if you're up for a wait, just wait a few days and it'll probably be in the lucid repos then.

[m0o]

What's the status on the font rendering? Has anyone found a solution for it? I've tried installing through Ubuntuzilla, directly from Mozilla via /opt, and also Mozilla's Daily PPA, but the problem persists.

Fixes like custom .fontconfig and removing "/etc/fonts/conf.d/10-hinting-slight.conf" didn't help either. Font is still horrible in Firefox 3.6 on Ubuntu Karmic.

I found a Launchpad bug report (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.5/+bug/379761) that seems to point to the problem.

[lovinglinux]

cool. no particular hurry, just pointing it out :)

I have updated both descriptions. Please take a look to see if I got it right.

[bluelamp999]

could be due to this bug in the sun-java6-plugin package:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sun-java6/+bug/509727

use the provided workaround, and maybe it will work (unless the ubuntu-mozilla-daily packages are different than the mozilla-official-build in this regard, in which case no guarantees).

I'm having the same Java issue and have tried the workaround above but no joy...

[nanotube]

What's the status on the font rendering? Has anyone found a solution for it? I've tried installing through Ubuntuzilla, directly from Mozilla via /opt, and also Mozilla's Daily PPA, but the problem persists.

Fixes like custom .fontconfig and removing "/etc/fonts/conf.d/10-hinting-slight.conf" didn't help either. Font is still horrible in Firefox 3.6 on Ubuntu Karmic.

I found a Launchpad bug report (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.5/+bug/379761) that seems to point to the problem.

try the fix offered in this thread:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1387491

[nanotube]

I have updated both descriptions. Please take a look to see if I got it right.

looks great :)

[nanotube]

I'm having the same Java issue and have tried the workaround above but no joy...

well, fwiw, i'm using the official build from the ubuntuzilla repository, and java plugin shows up fine with the workaround.

doublecheck: after you run that update-alternatives command, does a libjavaplugin.so link show up in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins ?

[jacksonpollack]

I'm running into the same problem as FuturePilot, except that Firefox 3.6 obeys the .font.conf file... but only parts of it. (Other methods, like messing with /etc/fonts, didn't do anything.)

For instance, if I set antialias to false, it looks just terrible. So that setting is obeyed. What I want to do is set the "rgba" line to "rgb", since I want subpixel smoothing on. But whether that's on or off FF 3.6 acts as if it's false.

The .font.conf file does affect FF 3.5 fully. If I set the rgba setting to false, the old FF 3.5 looks bad. Set it to "rgb", it looks great again.

I don't get why 3.6 ignores some of the settings, but obeys others...

Any ideas? Thanks!

[bluelamp999]

well, fwiw, i'm using the official build from the ubuntuzilla repository, and java plugin shows up fine with the workaround.

doublecheck: after you run that update-alternatives command, does a libjavaplugin.so link show up in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins ?

Yep. Please see attached...

Cheers

[Ux64]

That's so false even you know it. Ubuntu has a terrible font rendering system.

Because you said it... Check out this issue if you know about font systems.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/keepass/forums/forum/329220/topic/3507964

With Mono Font rendering for Keepass 2.0 is horrible! And sometimes I have to force Firefox to use my own fonts, because preconfigured fonts are unreadable.

[CbrPad]

Aaargh, I'm going insane, my eyes, they burns !

I had been using the daily ppa with 3.6 with absolutely no problems but todays upgrade has brought the dreaded font issue - both the gui and the webpages have appalling fonts with none of my usual hinting getting applied.

I'm running Kubuntu with KDE 4.4 rc and I've tried what I think have been all the tricks listed in the thread so far..

.. the daily mozilla ppa doesn't work, that's what I had been using.

.. changing the font config doesn't work.

.. adding gnome support doesn't work.

.. downloading the source from Mozilla, extracting and bunging into /opt doesn't work.

.. trying to run firefox-3.6 doesn't work.

.. wiping the .mozilla dir, logging in and out, restarting and trying all the above in various combinations doesn't work.

Somebody please find a solution before I throw my laptop away in despair. Hell, I might even have to try Opera or something, but I need my addons :-(

[SilverWave]

Just tested this on a standard Karmic install and it still works fine :)


sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-mozilla-daily
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install firefox-3.6

This works for me :)

Full Details Here: Install The Newest Firefox ppa with command "add-apt-repository" (9.10 & above) (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1352580)

Install the latest: Firefox-3.6 & Firefox-3.7a1(via UMD). Firefox3.5.7(via UMS).

A new command in Karmic makes it easy to add a PPA repository and its key, all at once.

:)

[lovinglinux]

In before a mass of people asking when Karmic is going to get 3.6...

It won't. :)

Breaking news!

Perhaps we will. It seems there is a major change in Firefox update policy going on. See discussion after post #343 at http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1193567&page=35

For instance, ubuntu-mozilla-daily already updates firefox-3.5 package to Firefox 3.6 instead of installing firefox-3.6 side-by-side with firefox-3.5.

[lykwydchykyn]

Just noticed something about the font issue:

After upgrading from the PPA, if I launch firefox using "firefox" then fonts are screwed up.

But if I launch it using "firefox-3.6" then the fonts look normal, like they did in 3.5.

Both commands are just symlinks to the same script, but it turns out the script looks to see what command you used to invoke firefox and sets various parameters differently. Can't fathom the purpose of that.

Since I couldn't be bothered to change every launcher and file association on my system to point to "firefox-3.6", my quick and dirty solution was to replace /usr/bin/firefox with a small script like so:


#!/bin/bash
firefox-3.6


Works fine now.

For the record, this trick worked yesterday, but no longer works after today's update.:mad:

[lovinglinux]

For the record, this trick worked yesterday, but no longer works after today's update.:mad:

I don't have any problems whatsoever, even with today's update. So I guess this is a problem affecting only Gnome users.

[Ric_NYC]

Fonts are not good. Back to Chrome.

[lovinglinux]

Fonts are not good. Back to Chrome.

...or switch to KDE :)

[Ric_NYC]

...or switch to KDE :)

I use both Gnome and KDE.
I was talking about the way Firefox displays fonts.


BTW I found the solution to fix Firefox fonts posted by you. It worked. Thanks.

[lykwydchykyn]

I don't have any problems whatsoever, even with today's update. So I guess this is a problem affecting only Gnome users.

I use KDE.
I've tried messing with my anti-aliasing settings in KDE, but firefox seems to ignore them.

[Excedio]

I'm about to sound kinda dumb..

I'm having Facebook problems with the new Firefox. Every time I load my Restaurant City FF dims like it's not responding. Then after a minute it will come back out of it and say that the game could not connect to the server.

Is anyone else noticing this?

[CbrPad]

I also use KDE but no luck. I've gone back to 3.5.7 for the first time in months and it works perfectly.

[lovinglinux]

I'm about to sound kinda dumb..

I'm having Facebook problems with the new Firefox. Every time I load my Restaurant City FF dims like it's not responding. Then after a minute it will come back out of it and say that the game could not connect to the server.

Is anyone else noticing this?

Have you disabled ipv6? If not see Solution [FOT005] from the Troubleshooting section of the Firefox optimization and troubleshooting thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1193567&highlight=FOT005).

[nanotube]

well, fwiw, i'm using the official build from the ubuntuzilla repository, and java plugin shows up fine with the workaround.

doublecheck: after you run that update-alternatives command, does a libjavaplugin.so link show up in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins ?


Yep. Please see attached...

Cheers


and you have completely exited the browser and restarted it?

[m0o]

try the fix offered in this thread:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1387491


Thanks for replying. I've had no luck with it. It seems like Firefox 3.6 on Ubuntu disregards user font settings all together.

[lykwydchykyn]

Thanks for replying. I've had no luck with it. It seems like Firefox 3.6 on Ubuntu disregards user font settings all together.

This is the conclusion I came to. I managed to get font rendering changed by messing around in /etc/fonts/conf.d, but I never managed to get them looking good so i went back to ffox 3.5.

I figure I'll wait until things are smoothed out before upgrading.

[m0o]

This is the conclusion I came to. I managed to get font rendering changed by messing around in /etc/fonts/conf.d, but I never managed to get them looking good so i went back to ffox 3.5.

I figure I'll wait until things are smoothed out before upgrading.

I'm considering a distro change. I think the updates are going to be in the next Ubuntu release, but that's still uncertain and the wait is too long for simple application updates. I've been dealing with this font rendering non-sense before Jaunty. I have to come to a conclusion that Firefox on Ubuntu is not supported as well as other distros. I'm looking at either Fedora KDE or Sidux.

[Ewingo401]

I'm considering a distro change. I think the updates are going to be in the next Ubuntu release, but that's still uncertain and the wait is too long for simple application updates. I've been dealing with this font rendering non-sense before Jaunty. I have to come to a conclusion that Firefox on Ubuntu is not supported as well as other distros. I'm looking at either Fedora KDE or Sidux.

I highly recommend sidux. I've been running it for about a month now and love it.

[purgatori]

Great news, thanks for the update.

[Excedio]

Have you disabled ipv6? If not see Solution [FOT005] from the Troubleshooting section of the Firefox optimization and troubleshooting thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1193567&highlight=FOT005).

Didn't help :-|

[Frak]

Because you said it... Check out this issue if you know about font systems.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/keepass/forums/forum/329220/topic/3507964

With Mono Font rendering for Keepass 2.0 is horrible! And sometimes I have to force Firefox to use my own fonts, because preconfigured fonts are unreadable.
For one, I'm assuming you're using Wine, because it strongly looks like you are. Secondly, it is defaulting to a monospace font, I believe. You should be able to change that in Winecfg.

It could also be using a Qt frontend, which can be controlled through the KControl dialogs.

[bluelamp999]

and you have completely exited the browser and restarted it?

In the end, I uninstalled and reinstalled all Java stuff via Synaptic and that seems to have fixed my particular issue, the plug-in is now visible under add-ons.

Many thanks!

[SecTa]

fix for java on 64bit:

sudo update-alternatives --install /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libjavaplugin.so mozilla-javaplugin.so /usr/lib64/jvm/java-6-sun/jre/lib/amd64/libnpjp2.so 50

[Psumi]

Install in Ubuntu 9.10:

EDIT: I don't recommend doing this, the packages have screwed up font rendering. The best idea is to just download it from Mozilla's main website.
Or, 32-bit users go here: http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/ubuntuzilla/index.php?title=Main_Page




sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-mozilla-daily/ppa
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get upgrade

I get this when trying to upgrade firefox through that:


The following packages have been kept back:
firefox firefox-3.5 firefox-3.5-branding
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 3 not upgraded.

Nevermind, had to do dist-upgrade instead of upgrade. All good now.

[Starlight]

I installed it from the PPA, and almost everything works well, except for one multiplayer Flash game that I play, and which now crashes the browser while loading. :( I think I'll need to go back to version 3.5...

[Psumi]

I installed it from the PPA, and almost everything works well, except for one multiplayer Flash game that I play, and which now crashes the browser while loading. :( I think I'll need to go back to version 3.5...

I'll bet it crashes Midori then! ;)

[Starlight]

I'll bet it crashes Midori then! ;)

Well, I've just checked :) Midori doesn't crash, but it only opens a new tab that displays a gray page, doesn't even seem to start loading the game. However, when I open the game by clicking "open in a new window", it still opens a new tab (not a new window!), and in that tab, the game loads correctly, but it's surrounded by other elements of the website (normally, the game is supposed to load in a new window that contains only the game and nothing else). But it doesn't crash. :)

I've also checked Epiphany, and it loads the game with no problems at all. :D

Firefox 3.6 had an update in Synaptic today, but after the update, the game still crashes.

[SilverWave]

This works for me :)

Full Details Here: Install The Newest Firefox ppa with command "add-apt-repository" (9.10 & above) (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1352580)

Update:



Note that the way Firefox is being built and maintained in Ubuntu is changing.

As an example, they are quite far along with reducing dependencies.
Unlike a few days ago, installing firefox-3.6 now does not install xulrunner-1.9.2.
See the notes section below for full details.

Installing Firefox-3.6 via the ubuntu-mozilla-daily PPA
You now can't run firefox-3.6 side-by-side with 3.5 as you could up to a couple of days ago.
Rather you are upgrading your existing Firefox-3.5 to the Firefox-3.6.1 package.
The old "sudo apt-get install firefox-3.6" command will no longer work.

New Firefox 3.6 Installation Instructions (Karmic)


sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-mozilla-daily
Now install Firefox as below (or via the Synaptic Package Manager).


sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install firefox(Alternatively "sudo apt-get install firefox-3.5" works as well).

Checkout post #43 (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8708092#post8708092) for the latest news.
________________________________________________

[Malakai]

That's so false even you know it. Ubuntu has a terrible font rendering system.

Im not lying or exaggerating at all. Everyone I work with agrees to, even windows fonts imported over to my ubuntu 9.10 install look amazing. Smooth, no jagged edges, they just look great.

I imported my entire fonts dir from win7 over to ubuntu, plus some fonts that came from various programs & font packs I have apt-get'ed. I forced the dejavu fonts into firefix via the firefox options menu too.

Fonts overall hands down look better than in win7, both on my netbook and desktop. The same fonts that looked just normal in windows, are butter smooth in ubuntu 9.10. Whatever changes came to linux/ubuntu font rendering in the last 2 years while I have been away, they are amazing, cuz fonts look absolutely stunning in Ubuntu 9.10.

At work I have been showing my netbook with 9.10 off to everyone, and all agree, one of the most attractive aspects of the switch is how effing great the fonts look.

Firefox 3.5 (newest in the repos) with simple DejaVu sans/serif/mono forced on in firefox options looks far, far better than default win7 setup.

Now the default firefox fonts look like crap on linux, u need to force a good font like deja va or any of dozens of others.

The rest of my dekstop uses comic sans ms, mv boli, and another script font. It looks drop dead gorgeous as far as font rendering goes!

[Malakai]

i think linux has the best font render & i'm using win7.
for example you don't get smooth fonts everywhere in ie8, unless you fix it. i use dejavu in win 7.

Glad someone agrees, I thought I was going crazy!

I had/have win7 on my netbook and dtop, now both also have ubuntu 9.10 on it. And with some customization fonts look far far better in ubuntu than they did in windows.

I admit the default firefox fonts in linux were terrible. But replace them with some nice truetype fonts ala Dejavu sans/serif and it looks beautiful.

Then I use funky fancy scriptish fonts on my dtop and application fonts, they look amazing rendered in ubuntu. I tried importing some of em into win7 and it totally looked meh.

[Malakai]

I read this a lot but I never felt particularly annoyed by the font rendering in Ubuntu.

I'm attaching a screenshot of your post in my Karmic, could you post a shot of the same post taken from your Seven?

EDIT: freaking auto-rescaling of this forum... hold on, I'll put it on imageshack or something.

EDIT 2: here http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/5076/screenshot1oz.png


Yep that looks fine. Pretty similar to mine. The regular fonts look about the same as they do on 7, but the fun/fancy fonts look way better on ubuntu to me =)

Here's a desktop shot I posted in another forum, it has a firefox window open in it so you can see the text.

I cant tell if that screenshot you have there is from ubuntu or win7, but the fonts are much fuzzier than they are on my ubuntu. Monitor has a huge impact on how fonts look as well. My desktop has a very good monitor, and the screen on the 1000HE netbook I use is also very sharp and good quality.

heres some ubuntu 9.10 dtop shots, the top one is pretty much identical to my current setup; if the fonts dont look sharp and smooth then its your monitor cuz they look great on mine heh, and windows7 fonts look nothing like this, they look plain and normal sure, but ubuntus font rendering like jumps out in your face and screams DONT I LOOK GREAT? =)
http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/1423/malaubuntuboli.png

These others are when I was experimenting with some other fonts. I ended up not liking them as much, but the renderer still does a GREAT job rendering them.
http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/7415/maladtopubuntu.png
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/4779/malaubuntudtop.png


your fonts look thick to me.(my bag,forgot to zoom) :D
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/8951/capturew.png

Those look good, just like my Win7 installs. Theres nothing wrong with win7's font rendering, they just dont stand out as much/look as cool as it does on ubuntu IMO =)

All about preference tho hehe.



Lets not get too ridiculous here ;) really ? you gave me a big smile :P

Im dead serious =)

No windows install I have ever used, nor any amount of tweaking the win7 font settings, has ever yielded results like the desktop shots I posted above,

I love the ubuntu/gnome/xorg/whatever font renderer currently used in ubuntu 9.10.

[SilverWave]

Glad someone agrees, I thought I was going crazy!

I had/have win7 on my netbook and dtop, now both also have ubuntu 9.10 on it. And with some customization fonts look far far better in ubuntu than they did in windows.

I admit the default firefox fonts in linux were terrible. But replace them with some nice truetype fonts ala Dejavu sans/serif and it looks beautiful.


Just tried forcing Dejavu in ff looks great - after selecting the
Dejavu alternatives to the defaults...
I set don't allow pages to choose their own font...
and default font to Dejavu Sans.
Refreshed tabs and they look great.

So what did you do for the desktop?

[Malakai]

Just tried forcing Dejavu in ff looks great - after selecting the
Dejavu alternatives to the defaults...
I set don't allow pages to choose their own font...
and default font to Dejavu Sans.
Refreshed tabs and they look great.

So what did you do for the desktop?

There ya go, yes you need to check the dont allow pages to use their own font box or it doesn't work, I should have noted that.

On the desktop, I just played around with different font selections. I think its a combination of xorg/gnome/compiz that makes the font rendering look so great. But you need to select good quality fonts.

After copying over all the truetype and opentype fonts from my windows font directories, along with installing a bunch of font packs from apt, I have hudreds of fonts to choose from. Some look terrible, some great, you just need to experiment.

I use a combination of Comic Sans MS (imported from windows, or just install the restricted mstcorefonts package, I forget the exact name, I think it has installer in the title somewhere too), MV boli, and DejaVu Mono for my gnome fonts. Plus those changes to firefox, and I find all my fonts look wonderful. =)

If anyone else has font tips feel free to share. Rememeber you can drop any fonts from a windows install or anywhere else into your /home/**name**/.fonts directory, then run fc-cache -f -v to update your font cache and bam they will all show up in any kind of font choice menu in your os/apps. But if you install font packages with synaptic or apt, the end of the install process should run fc-cache for you. I had to run it manually after copying my windows font dir over to my .fonts folder. You probably will not have a .fonts dir by default, you'll need to create it. But running fc-cache will automatically check that dir you wont need to edit any config files to get it to check there or anything, on ubuntu 9.10 anyway.

[speedwell68]

JUst installed the Swiftfox variant of Firefox 3.6 and I have to say that it is lightning quick. I have the a few niggling little extensions that haven't been updated yet, mainly my favourite theme and the Back to Google button.

[WaNaBePi]

I have the same problem as starlight...except its with a java game (chess at flyordie.com)

1. Sometimes the page loads right...

2. Sometimes it doesn't load, but doesn't freeze...

3 .Most of the time a get a gray box where the game should be and Firefox freezes. Seems like changing to a different window or tab or opening from history helps(like 2.), but nothing consistent.

Anyone have a fix besides a diff browser? I like firefox a lot and funny thing was before the most recent update (synaptic) everything worked fine!

[nilarimogard]

JUst installed the Swiftfox variant of Firefox 3.6 and I have to say that it is lightning quick. I have the a few niggling little extensions that haven't been updated yet, mainly my favourite theme and the Back to Google button.

I also use Swiftfox and love it.

To make any extension/theme work, search for "Addon compatibility reporter" extension. Worked for all of my ~30 extensions.

[lovinglinux]

I also use Swiftfox and love it.

To make any extension/theme work, search for "Addon compatibility reporter" extension. Worked for all of my ~30 extensions.

It's a great extension and it allows to report problems to the developers.

[m0o]

OK there's a stable release for Firefox 3.6 (no Namoroka). It's from the Mozilla Team's Firefox Stable PPA:

https://launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+archive/firefox-stable/ (https://launchpad.net/%7Emozillateam/+archive/firefox-stable/)

Only, the font rendering still seems to be an issue. :/

[FuturePilot]

What is up with this font issue? It's driving me nuts. At least it was fixable with 3.5. There seems to be no way to fix it with 3.6. I guess I will be sticking with 3.5 until this gets fixed.

[mister_pink]

I've never understood all the talk about how fonts look, not just in firefox, but generally people go on about it all the time. As long as I can read them then I'm happy

[Uncle Spellbinder]

OK there's a stable release for Firefox 3.6 (no Namoroka). It's from the Mozilla Team's Firefox Stable PPA:

https://launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+archive/firefox-stable/ (https://launchpad.net/%7Emozillateam/+archive/firefox-stable/)

Only, the font rendering still seems to be an issue. :/

Thanks!

[WaNaBePi]

As inconvenient as imperfect fonts are.

Could some one please help me.

I've been trying to get java to work consistently. "swiftfox" and the "stable release for Firefox 3.6" recommended by m0o don't fix the problem. (before posing here)Ive purged firefox, removed java, reinstalled both; same fricken problem. Whats most annoying is that it works sometimes, AFTER I get firefox to crash trying it a few times.

Ever since that synaptic update some time yesterday firefox just hasn't been working java wise.(Had 3.0 and never should have messed with it, this is just retarded. It's not like I'm doing something that its not designed to do, it's just java for christ sake.)

[Uncle Spellbinder]

Anyone have this issue with Firefox 3.6:

3.6 on Ubuntu 9.10. Clean, new profile. No themes section when clicking tools > addons?

http://i45.tinypic.com/ip9nr6.jpg


Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2) Gecko/20100124 Ubuntu/9.10 (karmic) Firefox/3.6 - Build ID: 20100124075447




.

[m0o]

Anyone have this issue with Firefox 3.6:

3.6 on Ubuntu 9.10. Clean, new profile. No themes section when clicking tools > addons?



Nope, there is definitely a theme section. Did you completely close Firefox before installing? Sometimes Firefox might hang around a little while after you close it and it looks like Firefox is closed but it isn't, that can cause something like this.

[WaNaBePi]

Ok well, I figured out exactly when the sometimes is: right after a restart and first time opening firefox. Java will work then, but any time after that, it will just freeze. WTF?!

[Yes]

When it freezes, try killing any instances of Java and reloading the page.

[Uncle Spellbinder]

Nope, there is definitely a theme section. Did you completely close Firefox before installing? Sometimes Firefox might hang around a little while after you close it and it looks like Firefox is closed but it isn't, that can cause something like this.

I never opened Firefox since installing Ubuntu 9.10 about 3 months ago. Updated and opened for the first time earlier today.

[Uncle Spellbinder]

I uninstalled Firefox. deleted the home directory folder. Commented out the repo posted above. Used Ubuntuzilla and installed 3.6. Working without issue. Excellent!

There must be an issue of some sort with the repo (https://launchpad.net/%7Emozillateam/+archive/firefox-stable/) I guess.

Should have used Ubuntuzilla first.

[lovinglinux]

Anyone have this issue with Firefox 3.6:

3.6 on Ubuntu 9.10. Clean, new profile. No themes section when clicking tools > addons?

http://i45.tinypic.com/ip9nr6.jpg


Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2) Gecko/20100124 Ubuntu/9.10 (karmic) Firefox/3.6 - Build ID: 20100124075447.

I can confirm that, but once you install a theme, it shows up.

[MasterNetra]

PPA install/upgrade of 3.6 works...for as long as you don't restart the computer. At least thats how it is for me on Mint 8. :(


I can confirm that, but once you install a theme, it shows up.

+1

Don't need to update for theming either with the Personas add-on.

[WaNaBePi]

Yes,

When it freezes, try killing any instances of Java and reloading the page.

Would their be any out side of firefox? (I use "xkill" from the alt+f2 run application window) Firefox just is frozen otherwise, so I cant do any thing but force close after I click the close button, after a little wait. or run xkill.

Wait, do you mean like run a command like "kill java" or some thing? yea sorry I'm a newb....

Interestingly enough if I constantly re-size the window(drag it's frame around) just before the java game starts it seems to work! but still what the heck.

!!!!!!!!!!!Thanks for replying!!!!!!!!!!

[Uncle Spellbinder]

I can confirm that, but once you install a theme, it shows up.

I only saw the theme I installed. Didn't see the "Default" theme. Anyway, having re-installed through Ubuntuzilla, I got the actual stable Mozilla build, minus the Canonical/Gnome stuff.

[Yes]

Yes,


Would their be any out side of firefox? (I use "xkill" from the alt+f2 run application window) Firefox just is frozen otherwise, so I cant do any thing but force close after I click the close button, after a little wait. or run xkill.

Wait, do you mean like run a command like "kill java" or some thing? yea sorry I'm a newb....

Interestingly enough if I constantly re-size the window(drag it's frame around) just before the java game starts it seems to work! but still what the heck.

!!!!!!!!!!!Thanks for replying!!!!!!!!!!

And it was fine before FF 3.6? That's odd.

I meant running 'kill java' (or whatever Java calls itself) to make sure it's completely gone, then starting it again.

[FuturePilot]

Font rendering issue https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=541319

[WaNaBePi]

Yes,
(Indeed, firefox3.0 was totally fine before, what turned into an epic on going quest to get the functionality of 3.6 like it was with 3.0)

As far as I can tell the killing java doesn't do it; only playing with the window size by dragging it around while loading seems to work(some times that dosent work either though).

I do use noscript, and love it! Its never caused problems before that weren't solvable by a right click or two.

Now I have an additional problem, when I sign on to forums to post(again occasionally): firefox or swiftfox just closes, no warning. Window just goes~ poof!

I almost wish it would just not ever work; so at least I would have a more definite problem, this limbo crap is retarded.

Thanks so much for helping/listening.

[m0o]

I uninstalled Firefox. deleted the home directory folder. Commented out the repo posted above. Used Ubuntuzilla and installed 3.6. Working without issue. Excellent!

There must be an issue of some sort with the repo (https://launchpad.net/%7Emozillateam/+archive/firefox-stable/) I guess.

Should have used Ubuntuzilla first.

I don't think it's the repos, I've installed it on two separate machines. It could be the process of importing your old Firefox settings. Clearing out ~/.mozilla would've surely fixed the issue regardless of repos.

[BigCityCat]

OK there's a stable release for Firefox 3.6 (no Namoroka). It's from the Mozilla Team's Firefox Stable PPA:

https://launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+archive/firefox-stable/ (https://launchpad.net/%7Emozillateam/+archive/firefox-stable/)

Only, the font rendering still seems to be an issue. :/

Yes I'm using this 64bit. I can't tell any difference other than the name and the icon, but I'm using Kubuntu 9.10 so everything is rendered in qtcurve, and I use microsoft core fonts (verdana) so I guess thats why it looks the same. I checked the install it;s definetly 3.6 amd64. I also had to install the uptdated sun java jre 18 to get the mozilla plugin installed. Working very smooth.

http://sites.google.com/site/easylinuxtipsproject/java

[Uncle Spellbinder]

...clearing out ~/.mozilla would've surely fixed the issue regardless of repos.

Did that after uninstalling. Then re-installed from the same repo. The missing theme section was still there. It wasn't until using Ubuntuzilla that the issue was fixed.

The only real difference between the two installs seems to be that the install using Ubuntuzilla is the actual Mozilla build. Whereas the other repo installs the Canonical/Gnome stuff as well.

So, whatever the reason, the Mozilla install via Ubuntuzilla was the one that corrected the issue

[BigCityCat]

If people are having problems with java you can try this. It's the newest updated java. I wasn't able to get the mozilla plugin workin by installing through synaptic so I tried this and it works perfectly.

http://sites.google.com/site/easylinuxtipsproject/java

[nanotube]

If people are having problems with java you can try this. It's the newest updated java. I wasn't able to get the mozilla plugin workin by installing through synaptic so I tried this and it works perfectly.

http://sites.google.com/site/easylinuxtipsproject/java

you probably didn't need to go through all that just to get the plugin working. there's a bug in the sun-java6-plugin package in karmic, so that it fails to install a proper symlink into /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins. there's a simple workaround. for details:
http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/ubuntuzilla/index.php?title=Main_Page#Java_plugin_not_showing_ up_.28on_Ubuntu_Karmic.29

[Malakai]

I wanted to make a quick note, if you want to keep your fonts looking nice, DO NOT install the firefox 3.6 from the nightly repository. It fubared my fonts so bad that I needed to reinstall ubuntu (I had to anyway and it gave me the final excuse to do it, Im sure there is another way but I only had time to try a few fixes, none of ehi===

[D3V11]

http://www.getswiftfox.com/download.htm

swiftfox, lighter faster version of firefox. now updated to 3.6 as well. will keep keep every last one of your firefox plugins and preferences.

[WaNaBePi]

Gents thank you for the input, but I'm running intrepid, and I'm also a newb, not that I wont try both suggestions by BigCityCat and nanotube!!!(what happened to you with that flash ebook thing http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1358644 I need your help? hahaha 'small forum' I guess), but before I do, I felt that should be officially communicated.

So I use:
Interpid, with firefox/swiftfox3.6. They don't initialize java applications* right(*Well the Chess and Go games at flyordie.com) the most annoying part sometimes. I have tried the icedtea thing (mentioned in the link by bigcitycat) before but firefox/swiftfox3.6 didn't seem to recognize. Using the java I had before from the repositories(inside synaptic package manager, have both istalled tried with one alone and the other alone and didn't work{probably something to be done there but I don't know what} having both works sometimes) and it works, but sometimes, read back for details.

For ME firefox3.6 is ironically faster that swiftfox3.6. firefox seems to start faster as well, but it did save all my settings and addons, works well overall. Oh I'm just so special:roll:. I used the installer for swiftfox like the newb I am, what is the best way to remove it? "sudo rm- swiftfox"?

Thankyou again so much, learning ubuntu/linux is not easy but I love it.
Sorry I use parenthesis a lot.

[ETbluez]

how i installed
MANUAL INSTALL
1. Download Firefox 3.6 (http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/firefox.html?from=getfirefox).
2. Assuming that it is downloaded in ~/Downloads, open terminal and execute the two commands given below:
sudo tar -C /opt/ -xf ~/Downloads/firefox-3.6.tar.bz2

sudo ln -sf /opt/firefox/firefox /usr/bin/firefox
3. To launch Firefox 3.6, close Firefox if it is running and start it again. Now you should get Firefox 3.6 with your previous settings.
then

sudo apt-get remove sun-java6-jre sun-java6-plugin sun-java6-fonts
next
sudo apt-get install sun-java6-jre sun-java6-plugin sun-java6-fonts

[ETbluez]

how i installed
MANUAL INSTALL
1. Download Firefox 3.6 (http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/firefox.html?from=getfirefox).
2. Assuming that it is downloaded in ~/Downloads, open terminal and execute the two commands given below:
sudo tar -C /opt/ -xf ~/Downloads/firefox-3.6.tar.bz2

sudo ln -sf /opt/firefox/firefox /usr/bin/firefox
3. To launch Firefox 3.6, close Firefox if it is running and start it again. Now you should get Firefox 3.6 with your previous settings.
then

sudo apt-get remove sun-java6-jre sun-java6-plugin sun-java6-fonts
next
sudo apt-get install sun-java6-jre sun-java6-plugin sun-java6-fonts

this fixed java
sudo update-alternatives --install /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libjavaplugin.so mozilla-javaplugin.so /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun/jre/lib/i386/libnpjp2.so 50

[BigCityCat]

you probably didn't need to go through all that just to get the plugin working. there's a bug in the sun-java6-plugin package in karmic, so that it fails to install a proper symlink into /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins. there's a simple workaround. for details:
http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/ubuntuzilla/index.php?title=Main_Page#Java_plugin_not_showing_ up_.28on_Ubuntu_Karmic.29


It really wasn't difficult at all and it's recomended by Sun for security reasons. It is the latest Java package.

[speedwell68]

I also use Swiftfox and love it.

To make any extension/theme work, search for "Addon compatibility reporter" extension. Worked for all of my ~30 extensions.

That worked great thanks.:D

[howcanireachthesekids]

how i installed
MANUAL INSTALL
1. Download Firefox 3.6 (http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/firefox.html?from=getfirefox).
2. Assuming that it is downloaded in ~/Downloads, open terminal and execute the two commands given below:
sudo tar -C /opt/ -xf ~/Downloads/firefox-3.6.tar.bz2

sudo ln -sf /opt/firefox/firefox /usr/bin/firefox
3. To launch Firefox 3.6, close Firefox if it is running and start it again. Now you should get Firefox 3.6 with your previous settings.
then

sudo apt-get remove sun-java6-jre sun-java6-plugin sun-java6-fonts
next
sudo apt-get install sun-java6-jre sun-java6-plugin sun-java6-fonts
does it say Namoroka 3.6.1 or Mozilla Firefox 3.6 in the about ?

[ratcheer]

does it say Namoroka 3.6.1 or Mozilla Firefox 3.6 in the about ?

If you do it that way, it will say "Firefox 3.6".

Tim

[LightB]

I'm sorry to say that java has never worked better on linux than on google chrome. jre on firefox is crash-o-rama, and icedtea doesn't even support old version applets.

OTOH, firefox 3.6 already has a solid html5 video feature using theora.

And I can't believe people are still trying to say windows has "better font rendering", still. Try using fonts other than the defaults and try saying that; try east asian fonts.

[Uncle Spellbinder]

Without a doubt Ubuntuzilla the BEST way to go to get Firefox 3.6.

Simply add to following to your sources.list:

deb http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/ubuntuzilla/mozilla/apt all main

Add the key:

sudo apt-key adv --recv-keys --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com C1289A29

Then do:

sudo apt-get update

Then do:

sudo apt-get install firefox-mozilla-build

More info here: http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/ubuntuzilla/index.php?title=Main_Page and here: http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=251

[Excedio]

Is anyone else having this problem with their toolbar? The text is white.

[SilverWave]

What is up with this font issue? It's driving me nuts. At least it was fixable with 3.5. There seems to be no way to fix it with 3.6. I guess I will be sticking with 3.5 until this gets fixed.

Anyone having trouble with ff3.6 fonts... may want to have a look at this setting...
(the default is no HQ for fonts under 20points, I set it to 0 so all will be optimized).

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.di..._min_font_size (http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.display.auto_quality_min_font_size)

As I wanted text to be optimized for display quality I set

browser.display.auto_quality_min_font_size = 0 Worked for me.

[wsonar]

Chrome is still a better faster browser

[Uncle Spellbinder]

Chrome is still a better faster browser


I'm frankly tired of these blanket statements on how one thing is better than the other. Just plain silly, actually.

Chrome is Better: Nothing more than opinion. For me, Firefox is vastly superior to Chrome/Chromium. Addons and the massive ability to customize Firefox to your liking puts Chrome to shame....in my opinion

Chrome is Faster: Boils down to nothing more than your computer. Firefox 3.6 is blazing fast on my setup, while Chrome lags far behind.

Bottom line: Blanket statements about Chrome, Firefox (or any app for that matter) are purely based on one user's opinion/experience and hold no real weight whatsoever.

[HappinessNow]

Any impressive new features? (I only ask because I can't find any :P)


Just installed it, feels much faster....and that is a very impressive new feature.

I now split my browsing time between Firefox 3.6 and Google Chrome, I like them both equally.

Thank you Firefox for returning up to par.

[Ric_NYC]

I'm frankly tired of these blanket statements on how one thing is better than the other. Just plain silly, actually.

Chrome is Better: Nothing more than opinion. For me, Firefox is vastly superior to Chrome/Chromium. Addons and the massive ability to customize Firefox to your liking puts Chrome to shame....in my opinion

Chrome is Faster: Boils down to nothing more than your computer. Firefox 3.6 is blazing fast on my setup, while Chrome lags far behind.

Bottom line: Blanket statements about Chrome, Firefox (or any app for that matter) are purely based on one user's opinion/experience and hold no real weight whatsoever.



A lot of extensions. Some of them are excellent.
https://chrome.google.com/extensions?hl=en-US



Chrome has a modern look.

Firefox looks like something from the past (maybe from the 90's).

[Uncle Spellbinder]

Firefox looks like something from the past (maybe from the 90's).

Not to my eyes...


http://content.imagesocket.com/thumbs/FoxShot1ef.jpeg (http://content.imagesocket.com/images/FoxShot1ef.jpeg)

[lovinglinux]

I'm frankly tired of these blanket statements on how one thing is better than the other. Just plain silly, actually.

Chrome is Better: Nothing more than opinion. For me, Firefox is vastly superior to Chrome/Chromium. Addons and the massive ability to customize Firefox to your liking puts Chrome to shame....in my opinion

Chrome is Faster: Boils down to nothing more than your computer. Firefox 3.6 is blazing fast on my setup, while Chrome lags far behind.

Bottom line: Blanket statements about Chrome, Firefox (or any app for that matter) are purely based on one user's opinion/experience and hold no real weight whatsoever.

=D> Well said.

Chrome doesn't even work here recently.


A lot of extensions. Some of them are excellent.
https://chrome.google.com/extensions?hl=en-US

Yep, you are right. Chrome has some excellent extensions....basically those that are already very popular on Firefox and have been ported to Chrome. Besides, while Chrome has some, Firefox has tons of excellent extensions.


Chrome has a modern look.

Firefox looks like something from the past (maybe from the 90's).

Have you heard of Chromifox (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/8782)? Look this screenshot (http://ubuntuforums.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=144745&stc=1&d=1264821336) and tell me if you still believe in that.

Seriously... Chrome doesn't even have a sidebar and you can't even export your passwords (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8721041). With Firefox I run several things in the sidebar and I can store my passwords in KWallet (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/49357) or the Gnome-keyring (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/8737).

I agree that Chrome is much faster and has some nice features, like running each tab as a separate process, but Firefox rarely crashes on me and the performance is excellent. It takes only 5 seconds to start with more than 40 extensions installed (http://lovinglinux.megabyet.net/?p=36) here. I just keep it optimized (http://lovinglinux.megabyet.net/?page_id=220).

[Uncle Spellbinder]

Excellent post, lovinglinux. And 40 extensions?! Wow. My addons (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collection/unclespellbinder) keep me satisfied. :D And Firefox starts in 3 seconds for me.

[lovinglinux]

Excellent post, lovinglinux.

Thanks. ;)


And 40 extensions?! Wow. My addons (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collection/unclespellbinder) keep me satisfied. :D And Firefox starts in 3 seconds for me.

I have several of your list :)

[FuturePilot]

Anyone having trouble with ff3.6 fonts... may want to have a look at this setting...
(the default is no HQ for fonts under 20points, I set it to 0 so all will be optimized).

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.di..._min_font_size (http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.display.auto_quality_min_font_size)

As I wanted text to be optimized for display quality I set

browser.display.auto_quality_min_font_size = 0 Worked for me.

Didn't work for me :(

[Mustache Villain]

Don't mean to change the topic, but I have a question about the font rendering bug. I'm afraid to upgrade to Firefox 3.6 on my freshly installed Kubuntu Karmic box, thinking it might break the good font rendering on Kubuntu's default Firefox 3.5.7. What do you guys think, should I wait until Ubuntu devs work on the issue and get the official release from them?

[FuturePilot]

Don't mean to change the topic, but I have a question about the font rendering bug. I'm afraid to upgrade to Firefox 3.6 on my freshly installed Kubuntu Karmic box, thinking it might break the good font rendering on Kubuntu's default Firefox 3.5.7. What do you guys think, should I wait until Ubuntu devs work on the issue and get the official release from them?

I don't know if anyone can answer that for you. It depends on how important font rendering is to you. For me, crappy font rendering is a deal breaker. Some people really don't care.

[Mustache Villain]

I don't know if anyone can answer that for you. It depends on how important font rendering is to you. For me, crappy font rendering is a deal breaker. Some people really don't care.

You are very correct on font rendering being important, specially with an application where we spend most of our time on.

After reading some unsolved bug reports that date back to 2007, it seems like this problem won't be resolved anytime soon. I think there is still some confusion as to whether this bug is from Ubuntu or Mozilla. I guess I'll wait and see what Lucid brings us.

Thank you for your input.

[Xbehave]

Don't mean to change the topic, but I have a question about the font rendering bug. I'm afraid to upgrade to Firefox 3.6 on my freshly installed Kubuntu Karmic box, thinking it might break the good font rendering on Kubuntu's default Firefox 3.5.7. What do you guys think, should I wait until Ubuntu devs work on the issue and get the official release from them?
Upgrade, see if the bug affects you and cant be fixe using the guides posted, if it does use aptitude to downgrade.

[andrewabc]

Back on topic, when is FF3.6 going to be available on Karmic?
I don't mean force upgrade, but available for those who want to install from official repo.

I searched synaptic for namoroka and didn't show 3.6
Somewhere I can bookmark to know when it will be put into karmic repo?

/no I'm not going to use a PPA etc. as I'd prefer official and easy solution to use for multiple computers.

[Uncle Spellbinder]

...no I'm not going to use a PPA etc. as I'd prefer official and easy solution to use for multiple computers.

Out of curiosity, what's wrong with a PPA? Never had any issues using PPA's myself. Again, just curious.

[andrewabc]

Out of curiosity, what's wrong with a PPA? Never had any issues using PPA's myself. Again, just curious.

Oh I use PPAs, and they're great when they work. They're needed when new software is out and software in regular repo is too old too be useful (openoffice, scribus, GRUB, Deluge).

I just don't want to use one for firefox (my main app). I had problems in 9.04 trying to get 3.5 to work over 3.0. The naming difference didn't help, and it was even from official repo.

I'd rather not use PPA, get everything adjusted for it, then have canonical release official 3.6 for 9.10 which could screw things up switching off PPA.

Thought someone said they were working on 9.10 release, and hope it is soon.
I know they have it in 10.04, so hopefully add a firefox-3.6 to 9.10 repos for people to install if they want.

[nanotube]

andrewabc:
well, judging by history, you're going to see firefox 3.6 in the official ubuntu karmic repos approximately 'never'.

if you're running 32bit ubuntu, you could use the ubuntuzilla ppa. it doesn't mess around with the packages from ubuntu repos, so should not cause any problems with possible later upgrades etc.

or you could also consider the 'firefox-stable' launchpad ppa - but that will overwrite your ubuntu-repos version.

[Xbehave]

Listen to nanotube

Firefox 3.6 will never be in karmic because upgrading the friefox version on a released version of ubuntu would be a terrible idea. The people that know they haven't done anything that requires FF3.5 can get it easy enough. (ppa-stable, ubuntuzilla, ppa-daily, swiftfox, extract to /opt, compile from source, probably more!)

The ubuntu release cycle is simple enough, if you want a feature upgrade on an app, then you need to install the next version of ubuntu. The reason it's like this has been explained about a billion times.

oh and *get of my lawn*

[lovinglinux]

andrewabc:
well, judging by history, you're going to see firefox 3.6 in the official ubuntu karmic repos approximately 'never'.

if you're running 32bit ubuntu, you could use the ubuntuzilla ppa. it doesn't mess around with the packages from ubuntu repos, so should not cause any problems with possible later upgrades etc.

or you could also consider the 'firefox-stable' launchpad ppa - but that will overwrite your ubuntu-repos version.


Listen to nanotube

Firefox 3.6 will never be in karmic because upgrading the friefox version on a released version of ubuntu would be a terrible idea. The people that know they haven't done anything that requires FF3.5 can get it easy enough. (ppa-stable, ubuntuzilla, ppa-daily, swiftfox, extract to /opt, compile from source, probably more!)

The ubuntu release cycle is simple enough, if you want a feature upgrade on an app, then you need to install the next version of ubuntu. The reason it's like this has been explained about a billion times.

oh and *get of my lawn*

I wouldn't be surprised if they actually backport 3.6 into Karmic. Mozilla policy has changed and Canonical is adapting. See the blueprint (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-lucid-new-firefox-support-model) (also posted a billion times).

For instance, Namoroka from the PPA is no longer installed as a separate package. Although the files are installed at /usr/lib/firefox-3.6, the package in Synaptic remains firefox-3.5 and thus the command to launch it. Additionally, the profiles folder is no longer cloned from ~/.mozilla/firefox to ~/.mozilla/firefox-3.6.

So I believe they are already making the necessary changes to adopt major-minor updates from Mozilla and I wouldn't be surprised if Namoroka reaches the official Karmic repos soon.

Namoroka doesn't even require xulrunner anymore.

[Psumi]

Namoroka doesn't even require xulrunner anymore.

*gasp*

Firefox GTK? That's like... back to the future!

[Xbehave]

Namoroka doesn't even require xulrunner anymore.
Are you sure? I thought that was just because of the way the ppas were packaging firefox (i.e xul is in there as a static dependancy, like when you install to /opt). I think the official repos firefox will still use an external xulrunner, so that the footprink of firefox+other xulrunner based apps (miro,songbird,etc) is lower.


Firefox GTK? That's like... back to the future!
meh, abstraction FTW gtk is too restrictive, XUL gives a more flexible UI that can be themed with basic CSS.

[Psumi]

meh, abstraction FTW gtk is too restrictive, XUL gives a more flexible UI that can be themed with basic CSS.

GNOME global menu doesn't work with xul though. :|

[lovinglinux]

Are you sure? I thought that was just because of the way the ppas were packaging firefox (i.e xul is in there as a static dependancy, like when you install to /opt).

Yep, I chose the wrong words. It still depends on xulrunner, but is is packaged with it.


I think the official repos firefox will still use an external xulrunner, so that the footprink of firefox+other xulrunner based apps (miro,songbird,etc) is lower.

I don't think so. I think they will start to package it this way to avoid problems with major-minor updates. The daily PPA was installing xulrunner-1.9.2 as a separate dependency, but since the first update after the release of FF 3.6 by Mozilla, the dependency was gone. For instance, I don't even have any version of xulrunner installed right now ;)

[Xbehave]

I don't think so. I think they will start to package it this way to avoid problems with major-minor updates. The daily PPA was installing xulrunner-1.9.2 as a separate dependency, but since the first update after the release of FF 3.6 by Mozilla, the dependency was gone. For instance, I don't even have any version of xulrunner installed right now ;)
Wouldn't it be easier they offer backports with xulrunner as a static dependency, but the standard one with xulrunner as dynamic? Either way it's cool to hear that they will start backporting it for people who care enough cry about it on the forums but not enough to use a ppa.


GNOME global menu doesn't work with xul though.
Firefox is cross platform and cross DE, it's not a gnome app so i doubt that will happen any time soon (there is DE integration for notifications coming though and perhaps keyrings eventually). There might be an addon for that though (there are a couple of kde+firefox addons to get it to play nice with notifications, etc), if not there are plenty of others like hidemenu, personal menu2, etc that can save your space.

[Psumi]

Firefox is cross platform and cross DE, it's not a gnome app so i doubt that will happen any time soon (there is DE integration for notifications coming though and perhaps keyrings eventually). There might be an addon for that though (there are a couple of kde+firefox addons to get it to play nice with notifications, etc), if not there are plenty of others like hidemenu, personal menu2, etc that can save your space.

Pidgin works with gnome global menu.

gnome global menu is a gnome panel applet, not a firefox extension.

[Xbehave]

Pidgin works with gnome global menu.
Pidgin is pretty much a gnome app, you've ranted about that before. Either way firefox isn't going to have gtk+ menus any time soon so don't hold your breath.


gnome global menu is a gnome panel applet, not a firefox extension.
Right but to get it to work with firefox, it might need a fireox extensions. For example Kde notifications are part of kde but it needs a firefox extension to get firefox notifications (the extension just hides the firefox ones and passes them to kdialog, getting global-menu would be a similar process, hide firefox menu (easy), export the menus to a gtk+ menu object (possibly external process)).

[mamamia88]

my favorite extension doesn't work and it seems slightly slower than 3.5.7 don't think i will use it

[lovinglinux]

my favorite extension doesn't work...

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/15003?src=external-fxfirstrun


...it seems slightly slower than 3.5.7 don't think i will use it

What kind of slow? Startup, page loading or general responsiveness during usage?

[Xbehave]

my favorite extension doesn't work
What is your favorite extension, it probably does work but the developer isn't aware of it (there was very little incompatibility for extensions), you can either modify the install.rdf file or disable compatibility checks to verify this.

it seems slightly slower than 3.5.7 don't think i will use it
Javascript should be a bit faster (http://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/01/javascript-speedups-in-firefox-3-6/), that's the only real improvement AFAIK (well that and personas which I don't like)

[andrewabc]

andrewabc:
well, judging by history, you're going to see firefox 3.6 in the official ubuntu karmic repos approximately 'never'.

if you're running 32bit ubuntu, you could use the ubuntuzilla ppa. it doesn't mess around with the packages from ubuntu repos, so should not cause any problems with possible later upgrades etc.

or you could also consider the 'firefox-stable' launchpad ppa - but that will overwrite your ubuntu-repos version.

Can someone explain why in 9.04 3.0 was default and people could install 3.5 (beta, eventually final) from official repo?

Why can't they do the same for this release. I'm not saying they replace 3.5 with 3.6, just add 3.6 to repo (like in 9.04) so people can install it if they want instead of having to rely on ppa.

[mamamia88]

ok my favorite extension was autoformer. and it just didn't seem nearly as snappy. i think im just going to use chrome for awhile now anyway since i want to test html 5 on youtube as flash has a tendency to crash firefox

[Xbehave]

Why can't they do the same for this release. I'm not saying they replace 3.5 with 3.6, just add 3.6 to repo (like in 9.04) so people can install it if they want instead of having to rely on ppa.
Canonical are working hard on the next release, providing 3.6 implies a level of support and that means more work for them rather than just letting users who want 3.6 use a ppa (that is maintained by the canonical firefox team, just without an implication of support). Others think eventually canonical will get round to packaging and supporting FF3.6 (probably after a few .x patches) as a backport, personally I really don't see the need given ppa-mozilla-stable/ppa-mozilla-nightly/ubuntuzilla exist, but hey thats probably why i'm not in charge of canonical. Anyway the end result is 3.6 will probably be back-ported eventually (with support), but until then it's not exactly rocket surgery to install.

[lovinglinux]

What is your favorite extension, it probably does work but the developer isn't aware of it (there was very little incompatibility for extensions), you can either modify the install.rdf file or disable compatibility checks to verify this.

See the link on my previous post ;)


ok my favorite extension was autoformer...

Probably will work with Add-on Compatibility Reporter (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/15003?src=external-fxfirstrun) installed, since the extension is not abandoned and works with 3.5.

If you are looking for just login automation, then install Secure Login (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4429). It's excellent.


...and it just didn't seem nearly as snappy.

Firefox optimization and troubleshooting thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1193567)


i think im just going to use chrome for awhile now anyway since i want to test html 5 on youtube as flash has a tendency to crash firefox

See this (http://lovinglinux.megabyet.net/?page_id=220#Flash--Optimization-1).

YouTube works perfectly for me.

[Xbehave]

ok my favorite extension was autoformer. and it just didn't seem nearly as snappy. i think im just going to use chrome for awhile now anyway since i want to test html 5 on youtube as flash has a tendency to crash firefox
Not that it will help with youtube as it's the wrong type of html5, but this was the other big improvement for 3.6 video support is much better now.

http://openvideo.dailymotion.com/

[wsonar]

maybe the new update will fix my embeded video problem

hope so

[Mustache Villain]

So I tried upgrading, the problem is still there. I also tried installing Thunderbird 3, same font rendering issue as Firefox 3.6.

[pablolie]

Has anyone figured out the cause and a fix for the font rendering in Mozilla Firefox 3.6.2? It really is a huge step back. It seems to look fine on small laptop monitors, but large monitors (I am using 1600x1200 as we speak) show jagged fonts in Mozilla.

The system fonts look beautiful, so it is clear Mozilla is trying to do its own thing with fonts... and failing miserably.

[Uncle Spellbinder]

Has anyone figured out the cause and a fix for the font rendering in Mozilla Firefox 3.6.2?
Fine here in Lucid Beta 1. Running Firefox 3.6.3

Of course doing to following helped tremendously...



sudo apt-get install msttcorefonts

[Frogs Hair]

Hi,

I installed Namaroko via the ppa , and my fonts were all different colors . I solved the problem in the Ubuntu font settings by selecting the best contrast setting . Appearance >
Fonts > Best contrast

[Psumi]

Too bad I can't get it in iceweasel flavour.

[Frak]

Too bad I can't get it in iceweasel flavour.
Icecat (ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gnuzilla/3.6.2/)

[Psumi]

Icecat (ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gnuzilla/3.6.2/)

Oh, no pre-compiled deb? No thanks.

[Regenweald]

Icecat (ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gnuzilla/3.6.2/)

Oh noes Frak, no .deb, I could sprain my brain on this! with great power.....

[Frak]

Oh, no pre-compiled deb? No thanks.
You mean the precompiled binary is not enough?

[Psumi]

You mean the precompiled binary is not enough?

I'll stick with midori 2.4 from the sid repo, thank you.

[Frak]

I'll stick with midori 2.4 from the sid repo, thank you.
And I'll stick with Chromium.

[pablolie]

Has anyone figured out the cause and a fix for the font rendering in Mozilla Firefox 3.6.2? It really is a huge step back. It seems to look fine on small laptop monitors, but large monitors (I am using 1600x1200 as we speak) show jagged fonts in Mozilla.

The system fonts look beautiful, so it is clear Mozilla is trying to do its own thing with fonts... and failing miserably.

For the record (and a huge coincidence) - this morning the auto update in Ubuntu 10.04 updated Mozilla, and a marked improvement has happened. Of course now the changes I did based on formerly jagged fonts need to be reset, but at least it seems that the Mozilla community has addressed the issue for Ubuntu users.

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.3) Gecko/20100404 Ubuntu/10.04 (lucid) Ant.com Toolbar 2.0.1 Firefox/3.6.3

[penguinv]

Just installed it, feels much faster.

How do you install it? I just get a lot of files wherever I want them. Is that "installed"?

I thought one had to wait for something official from Ubuntu but you seem to know what I dont.

Thanks.



and while I am waiting.... :popcorn:

[lovinglinux]

How do you install it? I just get a lot of files wherever I want them. Is that "installed"?

I thought one had to wait for something official from Ubuntu but you seem to know what I dont.

Thanks.



and while I am waiting.... :popcorn:

See the Installing Other Versions section of Firefox optimization and troubleshooting thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1193567).

[Frak]

How do you install it? I just get a lot of files wherever I want them. Is that "installed"?

I thought one had to wait for something official from Ubuntu but you seem to know what I dont.

Thanks.



and while I am waiting.... :popcorn:
I installed it in Windows. The title isn't specific.