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

  • From: Peter Naulls <peter@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: iyonix-support@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 13:00:45 -0800

In message <dda389c14e.HzN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
          Iyonix.2006a@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

> 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...

...which does not have proper discussion forums.  If you really wanted
this elsewhere, then you shouldn't have made an extensive reply here.

> 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...

...and this is much more on topic than all that stuff.  What's your

> 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.

I'm afraid there are too many assumptions here on your part.  How do you
know it fixes it for everyone - you don't.  How do you know there isn't
a more serious problem underneath - you don't.  How do you know it
wouldn't cause a more serious problem or more confusion in the future -
this is in fact the most likely scenario.

> > 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

How was that ironic?   My comments are just as relevant to that.

> > > 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 ...

... and?  Please finish your sentences.  If you can't, I don't really
think you have a point to make.   Why I would need to accuse anything?
Paul first posts what _he_ says is a guide, then above says he knows
nothing about the issue.  That sounds pretty dumb.

> > 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.

Oh please.  Tell me, where is the movie player?  The flash player?  The
JVM?  There were very few real new applications in 2006, just a bunch of
minor updates.  Little of any real value.  2007 will be the same.

> > 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.

What's wrong is just what I've named already.

> 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!

I'm afraid that's completely false.   In any case, if I were to take the
position that I would not release it unless it worked perfectly for all,
then I would still be sitting on it, and no one would have it.

> 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!

Then you've again missed the point by trying to narrow a broad issue
I've named, which is a serious attitude problem that RISC OS has towards

> 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.

So you have a patch which properly and completely solves the problem,
and doesn't contain misinformation?  Paul's is not this, not by a long

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

Yes they are, and I know better than most, but my Linux desktop works
far better (mostly) and faster and allows me to do way more than under

> > ... 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!

Then whilst I remain the only one who can be bothered to do any actual
development on it, then by supporting Paul's effort, you've affected
everyone, since you're annoying me, and making my work harder - thereby
affecting its long term development. If that's what you wanted, then

> 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?

I have no idea.

Peter Naulls - peter@xxxxxxxxxx        | http://www.chocky.org/
RISC OS Community Wiki - add your own content   | http://www.riscos.info/
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: