[iyonix-support] Re: Problem installing Firefox-2-r2

  • From: Iyonix.2006a@xxxxxxxxx
  • To: iyonix-support@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 20:45:21 +0100

In message <7de27ac14e.peter@xxxxxxxxxx>
          Peter Naulls <peter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> In message <gemini.jefrk400b0vw5006s.druck@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>           "David J. Ruck" <druck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[the odd snip!]

> > This is not a general discussion forum. Please can we move any debates on
> > the merits of documentation to csa.apps.

No please take *this* discussion if at all to riscos.info...

> > Please keep this list for issues directly relating to Iyonix hardware or
> > the RISC OS 5 operating system, AND NOTHING ELSE.

Sorry to disagree! This is for most IYONIX users the first step in case
of problems and this list is probably read by most IYONIX users. More
often than not help comes here pretty fast and good. I did try on the
odd other list and group and the result was less useful up to no good.

Please accept that quite a few users simply do not have the option or
time to subscribe to all the c.s.a.* groups and different application
support mailinglists. The result is loads of traffic of which usually
99% is no help and it takes much time to sort, clean, delete, move...

Thus for an IYONIX user it is often quicker and easier to ask here
first. What I do agree with is that such discussions are best not done
here ... well best not neede to start with.

This will be my last posting on this topic - promise!

> > Please be clearer as to what's incorrect about my article and I can amend
> > it accordingly if necessary.
> Why bother?  You're determined to pursue this path, whereby you have an
> article that is unhelpful, and only you can update.  Pointing out the
> mistakes completely misses the point.

Indeed why bother? Peter if you had taken the few minutes to amend FF2r2
to simply preinstall a default choices set with a few simply commands in
!Run of FF2r2 to avoid this stupid startup problem (to make the users
happy) this whole mess would not have happend. In a next step the real
problem could then be solved (to make you happy) and the !Run file
amended accordingly.

> > Anyway, this is getting more and more off topic for Iyonix support so I'd
> > suggest taking it to csa.apps or private email - something I'd have thought
> > you might have done anyway if you had a problem with anything I wrote!
> It's ironic that you made no attempt to coordinate efforts with me
> _before_ you posted this.

As is ironic that when www.drobe.co.uk/riscos/artifact1773.html a
work-around for the FF2r2 starting probem was posted it didn't find its
way onto riscos.info/unix/firefox

> In the meantime, someone _has_ made a rather more accurate version on
> my Wiki, and so we once again have a situation because of your
> actions, where we have duplicated information on riscos.info and
> riscos.org.

Then put a link to that version onto your Firefox page so that it can be
found, please! I'd like to read it.

> > I may be fairly technically literate when it comes to RISC OS but I'm
> > certainly not in the same league as Peter and I wouldn't know the first
> > place to look to start solving Firefox issues! :-(
> But Paul, that is _precisely_ what you attempted to do.

Wow, first you claim that is a superficial short-term fix and not
solving of the problem and now you accuse Paul of trying to solve the
problem ...

> > I guess most users agree with you that a real fix would be nice. But
> > until that happens by what do you expect to happen?
> Probably nothing, except opinions from armchair experts.

Well, perhaps the acclaimed expert should avoid the armchair experts to
be asked in the first place by offering the information needed to run an
app (sorry if it is on riscos.info and wasn't found, but well, that's
what links are for which should be on the Firefox page then).

> At this point, all real RISC OS developments have all by gone out the
> window.

Never read such a crap!
There are quite a few companies and individuals supplying new versions
of their RISC OS-applications or the ones they manage now. I'll leave it
to you to figure some out. I needed I can help you solve this problem.

> > Peter, may I suggest that you simply offer a small update for FF2r2
> Then you've missed my point.  No, I won't offer such a download, because
> it is not a fix.  As I said earlier, such things always, *always* cause
> more headaches later on.

Then you've missed my point! I never claimed it to be a fix and even if
I did, hey, what's wrong with a small tweak which makes the app start in
the first place.

Either you want users to use FF2r2 or not.
- If yes, then it should be delivered in a manner that it can be run,
  that is the choices issue should be mentioned with all the other
  things needed to be able to run it until it is really fixed. But even
  worse since !Help suggests to delete Choices.Moilla.Firefox which
  guarantees it not to start!
- If not, then simply tell us!

I think that it can get users to re-cosider their committment to RISC OS
(or any other platform as a matter of fact) when applications are
supplied in a manner that they do not work (unless explicitely stated to
be alpha, beta etc). Add to this lack of support by the supplier by
supplying a fix or documenting a work-around on the home page or in
the FAQ of the product. Then add refusal to even add or at least mention
(on the web site) a possible work-around which is proven to work but
instead flaming those offering help what do you get!

> And if it's still incredibly unclear what I'm talking about, allow me to
> remind you of some fantastic examples of avoiding solving the real
> problem, and patching over it that have occured in RISC OS:

I think that most did fully understand you and agree that a real problem
fixing and thus solving is to be preferred.

But if it's still incredibly unclear what I'm talking about, allow me to
tell you that patches etc. are pretty common as temporary fix or even
security fix for applications to avoid the user to have to wait for a
new release to happen by and to thus give the supplier the time to make
the new release at ease. As a matter of fact quite a few IT companies
supply patches for their tools for just that reason.

But perhaps many other plattforms are thus mediocre, problem-riddled ...
but that is another topic.

> ... purely for selfish short-term gain.

If it is purely selfish short-term gain for me to be able to run FF2r2
and thus me being happs to apply that small hack (please note that I did
not write fix) to make it load I plead guilty!

Well it is perhaps mid-term gain anyhow or is a FF release where the
problem has been fixed or solved or been removed to come soon?

To alter your preferences or leave the group, 
visit //www.freelists.org/list/iyonix-support
Other info via //www.freelists.org/webpage/iyonix-support

Other related posts: