[OpenIndiana-discuss] Just get Pale Moon

[Hung Nguyen Gia]

It's all fallacies. You are a BSD guy, so you are very biased.

The FOSS community in general just like that. They are all biased. They judged without any investigations.

Let me tell you: how many CVEs our current outdated Firefox having now, and not yet resolved but just being kept there for the sake of having a browser?

Can you answer me? Pale Moon, at least, update their browser to fix CVEs continuously.

Which is safer? Which is more 'security'? Our outdated Firefox or Pale Moon?

It's hard to answer. The most honest is: they are 'same same'.

Pissed of Pale Moon because of security concerns is just fallacies.

The real reasons is, the Pale Moon people are  being HATRED, so does their browser.


---- On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 23:05:23 +0700 Chris <oidev at bsdos.info> wrote ----

 > On 2021-01-12 04:56, Hung Nguyen Gia via openindiana-discuss wrote: 
 > > De-obfuscation the situation: 
 > > 
 > > The core of this problem is the branding issue. It's the legacy left from 
 > > Mozilla. 
 > > 
 > > Pale Moon has granted atenian200 the rights to use their branding. But he 
 > > has to 
 > > follow their branding guide line, too. This mean: using the libraries 
 > > shipped with 
 > > Pale Moon itself. 
 > > 
 > > atenian200 want to add the Pale Moon package with OFFICIAL BRANDING (since 
 > > he was 
 > > granted this rights from Pale Moon). 
 > > 
 > > We refused because we don't want to use libraries shipped with Pale Moon. 
 > > 
 > > Personal issues of us with the Pale Moon issues. Combining the the BSDs' bad 
 > > experience: hater gonna hate. We rejected Pale Moon. 
 > > 
 > > The solution is very simple: 
 > > 
 > > We build Pale Moon with official branding off, just these two lines: 
 > > 
 > > ac_add_options --disable-official-branding 
 > > export MOZILLA_OFFICIAL=0 
 > > 
 > > Check: http://developer.palemoon.org/build/sunos/ 
 > > 
 > > We are free to do whatever we want now. 
 > > 
 > > But: making Pale Moon works with the system libraries is problematic. It's 
 > > technical issues, not personal preferences issues. 
 > > 
 > > Then: just build Pale Moon with their own shipped libraries! 
 > > 
 > > So, what's different? OFFICIAL BRANDING! Just that. 
 > > 
 > > The key is: Just have Official branding disable. We could ship Pale Moon 
 > > with the 
 > > encumbered repo. 
 > > 
 > > The only thing prevent us is: our own HATRED for the Pale Moon developers. 
 > > 
 > > Put this aside. Then we have a working browser! 
 > In my last attempt, it wasn't quite that simple. If you use the "official" 
 > libs. 
 > you run into potential conflicts with system libs. If that's not enough; you, 
 > as 
 > an OS distributor are responsible for your user' safety -- vulnerabilities 
 > found 
 > in the libs for which you have no control (you depend on upstream). Not 
 > usually 
 > an acceptable situation. This also means that if you *do* choose to depend 
 > upon 
 > them. You must rebuild once they've been fixed. Also not ideal. 
 > > 
 > > Pale Moon will not replace Firefox or installed by default. We just give the 
 > > users 
 > > another option when we are currently stuck with porting Firefox. 
 > > 
 > > But nothing stops Pale Moon from continuing on the encumbered repo even 
 > > after we 
 > > have Firefox ported. 
 > > 
 > > It's all depends on what we choose to do. 
 > > 
 > > Just my 2 cents. 
 > > 
 >  
 > -- 
 >