[OpenIndiana-discuss] Σχετ: ANNOUNCE: OpenSXCE-org/FireFox-43-port-for-all-OpenSolaris-distros with gcc4 flash-plugin support released at bin PKG and the src on GitHub

Thu Nov 19 09:53:50 UTC 2015

Dear (in chronological order)

/Apostolos Syropoulos/, /Predrag Zečević, //Alexander Pyhalov, //Nikola 
M, //ken mays, //Lou Picciano, //Andreas Wacknitz and /Igor Kozhukhov:
THANK YOU FRIENDS for your nice comradly responses, these are very 
important in those dark times.

Especially given the other (non-)events:

The only person that needed to be added to 
http://svr4.opensxce.org/RELEASE_NOTES__OpenSXCE2014.05_x86_x64_INTEL32-64_AMD32-64____sun4u_sun4v_SPARC.txt 
is Nikola M from Serbia.
He donated 20 EUR (Paypal stole from that another 1,33 EUR) and I thank 
Nikola from my heart for his donation. It will enable me to buy some 
bread and salami for 1 week in 2 days (after the transfer to my bank 
account is completed).

I thank him even more so, because he comes from a West-destroyed country 
where unemployment is at the roof and which is still under western 
sanctions until this minute - 16 years later, although even back then it 
has not committed any cime other than getting carpet-bombed and teared 
apart by our Nobel Peace Prize winners and exceptional Nations and 
Unions of "western values" (because this is a technical list I won't 
provide more url's, as I promised, go to yt and only enter Belgrade 1999 
to watch how dead gils and children and Grand-Ma's look like, Paris is 
harmless in contrast, and France was among the nations co-committing the 
bombings - under a FALSE INVENTED pretext even [as every time]).

Now look, somebody who has no financial stability and no money himself: 
_HE_ did donate 20 EUR.
In relation (the percentage of the money he has versus he donated) to 
most other readers of this mailing list it is, as had one of those 
German and USA- business owners who directly benefit from OpenSolaris 
donated 5000 EUR.

But those did not even donate 1 EUR, not even 0,01 EUR.
Nor offer a sponsorship. Nor offer a paid coding project.

#######################################################
--->>  This is telling and even exceeded my worst imaginations by 
multitudes. <<---
#######################################################

SUMMARY:

8 persons have downloaded the bins, 2 of them in tar file format and 6 
as pkg.

sh-4.2# grep -n _all_distros-i386.pkg.bz2 /var/log/nginx/access.log*|wc -l
6
sh-4.2# grep -n _all_distros-i386.tar.bz2 /var/log/nginx/access.log*|wc -l
2

SRC:

https://github.com/OpenSXCE-org/FireFox-43-port-for-all-OpenSolaris-distros/watchers

TOTAL events:

0 Starred
1 watcher (the other - that's myself)
1 fork

(I bet if anybody took it, then by anonymously cloning it if not taking 
a zip file)
While the NetBSD-stolen FF31 got back then re-shared douzens of times 
under the name of joyent, as if they had actually performed that port.
That's this world.

Response to Jay F. Shachter, ok.
At least you don't call me a terrorist-supporter again.
Therefore I take the unpaid time to respond to your questions:

>  Has anyone succeeded in getting it to run on Solaris 10?  I have a
>  relatively recent (e.g., "zpool upgrade -v" goes up to 32) version of
>  Solaris 10, on which the following occurs:
>
>  /home/jay Nu? firefox43.0b3
>  XPCOMGlueLoad error for file /usr/lib/firefox43.0b3/lib/firefox-43.0/libmozsqlite3.so:
>  ld.so.1: firefox.exe: fatal: relocation error: file /usr/lib/firefox43.0b3/lib/firefox-43.0/libmozsqlite3.so: symbol posix_fallocate64: referenced symbol not found
>  Couldn't load XPCOM.
>  /home/jay Nu?

You could try LD_PRELOAD'ing libs from an older Solaris 11 build (such 
as snv_130) in front of Sol10 libs and then call the runtime linker 
explicitly.
In theory that could do it, but given libxul's complexity I doubt that 
it doesn't segfault in this case.

Answer yourself the question:
Is Solaris 10 / SunOS 5.10 an OpenSolaris based distro (meaning, 
directly incremented from the Nevanda OS/Net base's kernel and libc)?

Solaris has binary ABI backward compatibility, but how would it possibly 
be forward-compatible (as long as it stays under active development, 
that is)?

To get Solaris 10 supported by the bins I should have created my build 
env under Solaris 10 (ideally the 2005 FCS version, to support all 
subsequent Solaris 10 FCS ++ releases (which would then also include all 
OpenSolaris or Solaris11 or upcoming 12).
But honestly - how far back shall I go with the backport? Solaris 2.5.1? 
Back during the days that was the question at Blastwave: Should it stick 
with Sol8 or move ahead to Sol10, and this was more than 10 years ago, 
which is a century in sfw terms.
Admittedly I didn't expect anyone to still run S10 on x86/x64 (because 
unlike on SPARC sun4u, on x86 there really is no reason to do that).
The fact alone that you asked this very question in that odd way makes 
me ask you: What in heaven's name to you want with the SRC code?????
And: Now that you _have_ the SRC code, why don't you take a holiday and 
build it yourself??

Argh, I forgot: I'm the one supposed to do that, and let me guess: FOR 
FREE. Am I correct??
Oh, valued master of the universe: How else may I help you?
No, that's nor sarcasm: It is bitter and serious! Affecting my daily 
reality day in day out.

You asked:

 > Is there something that the user
 > must do to get Flash to load and to render such websites functional?

Yes, if it is Illumos you must be running a hacked kernel, test it again 
on this OS: 
http://svr4.opensxce.org/201405/i386/DVD/OpenSXCE_2014.05_Live_x86.iso.gz
Or it must be Sun/Oracle Solaris,

I did not count how many times and at how many places this was already 
stated by me since 2013.
Obviosly it was not often enough.

Now, in fact I took that time for the other thing you wrote:

 > On Solaris 11.2, in contrast, the program runs, although Flash does
 > not work (I tried it on http://www.att.com/speedtest and the site
 > reported that Flash failed to load).  Is there something that the user
 > must do to get Flash to load and to render such websites functional?

Your scenario description is not very verbose.
Did you at least read _any_ of my README files in 
https://github.com/OpenSXCE-org/FireFox-43-port-for-all-OpenSolaris-distros/tree/master/README_INSTALLATION

such as 
https://github.com/OpenSXCE-org/FireFox-43-port-for-all-OpenSolaris-distros/blob/master/README_INSTALLATION/INSTALL_BINS.txt 
?????

Then you would know the answer to your question already.
No, no action is required, other than installing the Flash plugin either 
for the local user or globally.
I find it too hot to re-distribute the flash plugin, therefore I expect 
from users that they install it themselves.

I'm currently installing Solaris 11.3 and 11.2 (until now only had 
tested its LiveDVD, but as /usr/lib/firefox43.0b3 must be in place 
somehow, be it as symlink or lofs-mount, I could not test that on the 
LiveDVD without first copying all of /usr/lib to some writable location, 
adding the change and then -O mounting over /usr/lib, but for that I 
don't have enough memory and also the vbox usb kit is not currently 
installed, hence a default hdd install is less trouble. I could have 
tested it on a Live env via LD_LIBRARY_PATH_32 or a list of LD_PRELOAD's 
but the most authentic test is a default install).

So let me see .....

(1 yet another hour later [especially for you and unpaid]) :

In Solaris11.3 the Sun-Oracle- Studio compiled included (default) 
FireFox gets instantly frozen on the site you provided:

>  (I tried it onhttp://www.att.com/speedtest  and the site
>  reported that Flash failed to load)

No, in my case this site doesn't report anything if the flash plugin is 
installed.
It instantly freezes the entire Oracle provided Studio-compiled FireFox 
and dies.
If you got any report there, then it means you do not even know the 
difference between "supports the adobe flash plugin" versus "ships the 
adobe flash plugin and has bundled it", even though you appear to be a 
native speaker of {some form of}  English.

Renaming the flash plugin confirmed my guess.
No furter tests needed.
Response: While this site does indeed freeze the entire Browser (the 
Oracle-provided Studio compiled was what I tested first) this appears to 
be related to an incompatibility of that site with old legacy flash 
plugins. While at the same time flash 11.2.202.223 was the last and 
final version of classic flash not only for Solaris (sparc and x86), but 
even for LinUX.

But from all the nonsense you wrote that stole me 2 hours I wonder: Why 
don't you run MS-Windows 10? There you have a newer flash plugin and can 
even run AT&T's fun test.

 > "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"

Now that you have the SRC, why don't you contribute langpacks for Latin 
or Antique Greek?

18.11.15 15:20, ken mays пишет:
> Martin,
>
> As always, most excellent!
>
> Ken
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 18, 2015 6:17 AM, Apostolos Syropoulos via 
> openindiana-discuss <openindiana-discuss at openindiana.org> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Martin,
>
> I am writing this message using your Firefox binary. It works great 
> and the flush plugin works
> just fine. Thank you very much for your contribution.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Apostolos
>
> ----------------------
> Apostolos Syropoulos
>
> Xanthi, Greece
>
> _______________________________________________
> openindiana-discuss mailing list
> openindiana-discuss at openindiana.org 
> <mailto:openindiana-discuss at openindiana.org>
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
>
>
>