You are not logged in.

#1 2003-03-14 03:26:40

jon
Member
Registered: 2002-11-28
Posts: 87

mozilla

today i updated mozilla to 1.3 and when i go to run mozilla from an xterm i hear my hd spin up but it just "quits" no error or anything. when i run a "top" in a terminal beside it i see "mozilla-bin" but then after about 3-4 seconds all the "mozilla-bin" entries disappear and nothing is loaded. i rebooted after the update. now i "downgraded" to mozilla 1.2.1

if someone can help me....THANKS.

jon

Offline

#2 2003-03-14 03:59:38

bodgy
Member
Registered: 2003-03-04
Posts: 16

Re: mozilla

Did you grab from the ftp.archlinux ??

I did as well but there were some unstatisfied dependencies (that dont show up originally when attempting to install - but when trying to run - do) - a lib file if I recall correctly (something I obviously dont install).

I grabbed the source and compiled myself without the xtra needed libs.  N works no prob.

Offline

#3 2003-03-14 04:06:13

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: mozilla

hmmm never had any trouble with the arch mozilla package you may need to uninstall what ever mozilla you have then remove your /opt/mozilla afterwards and then reinstall the 1.3b

alternatively you could use the mozilla PKGBUILD in /usr/abs/networking to upgrade. that way you will get a much lighter package than you would straight compiling which sticks you with both the lib and includes for mozilla which you generally do not need.


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#4 2003-03-14 05:28:07

apeiro
Daddy
From: Victoria, BC, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-12
Posts: 771
Website

Re: mozilla

If it dies on you, you can try this.  I don't have this problem (anymore) but some users still experience conflicts with leftover files from previous mozilla versions.

# pacman -R mozilla
# rm -rf /opt/mozilla
# pacman -S mozilla

Offline

#5 2003-03-14 11:15:51

jon
Member
Registered: 2002-11-28
Posts: 87

Re: mozilla

i deleted my /opt/mozilla and did a pacman -Syu and it works perfect

THANKS

Jon

Offline

#6 2003-03-14 18:19:24

Mork
Member
From: Visby, Sweden
Registered: 2003-03-09
Posts: 32

Re: mozilla

I'm also having problems with mozilla 1.3. It loads just fine but freezes up when attemting to open new tabs and while entering text into forms. Aperiros trick didn't make any difference.


"Plurality should not be assumed without necessity" or "keep it simple"
            - William of Ockham (1285-1349)

Offline

#7 2003-03-14 20:00:31

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: mozilla

well 1.3b is a liitle unstable thus the reawson it has not seen official release yet. you could try rebuilding it to see if that resolves any of your troubles.

fwiw 1.3b works here. used the PKGBUILD for the 1.2.1 build though. i don't know if that makes any difference or not.


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#8 2003-03-14 21:23:13

Arielext
Member
From: Amersfoort, the Netherlands
Registered: 2002-08-12
Posts: 362
Website

Re: mozilla

great news sarah: 1.3 is out and in official tongue
ghehe


apt-get install arch

Offline

#9 2003-03-14 21:27:53

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: mozilla

wee /sark


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#10 2003-03-14 22:19:24

Mork
Member
From: Visby, Sweden
Registered: 2003-03-09
Posts: 32

Re: mozilla

It's the official 1.3 build that I'm having problems with. Seems I'm the only one? I will have a go at debugging it tomorrow.

Hmm.. browing forums in links is quite refreshing smile (Certainly beats dillo)


"Plurality should not be assumed without necessity" or "keep it simple"
            - William of Ockham (1285-1349)

Offline

#11 2003-03-15 14:42:06

Mork
Member
From: Visby, Sweden
Registered: 2003-03-09
Posts: 32

Re: mozilla

I have not managed to nail down the problem. Thought I had it for a while when I found pkgs called mozilla-lib and mozilla-include that where not installed by pacman. Installed them manually but it didn't make any difference.. .. In lack of further ideas I downgraded to 1.2.1


"Plurality should not be assumed without necessity" or "keep it simple"
            - William of Ockham (1285-1349)

Offline

#12 2003-03-15 18:39:11

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: mozilla

the lib and include packages are separated out because they are only required for when you are building apps that require those packages such as the current kdebindings or galeon.


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#13 2003-03-16 04:36:12

BluPhoenyx
Member
Registered: 2002-12-23
Posts: 239

Re: mozilla

Here's what worked for me. After uninstalling the mozilla pkg and deleting the /opt/mozilla directory I renamed the .mozilla directory in my home directory then installed mozilla. It started right up after that. This is odd but I figured it was because I had run a beta on this particular system. You will need to reinstall the flashplayer plugin too.


BluPhoenyx

Offline

#14 2003-03-16 12:43:35

Mork
Member
From: Visby, Sweden
Registered: 2003-03-09
Posts: 32

Re: mozilla

Sarah31: Ok, that figures. I was wondering where all those Mb where coming from  roll

BluPhoenyx: Thanks, but it made no difference.

I will go and scout the mozilla buglist to see if something relevant turns up.. maybe it's hardware related (I'm using the vesa-driver so it shouldn't be).


"Plurality should not be assumed without necessity" or "keep it simple"
            - William of Ockham (1285-1349)

Offline

#15 2003-03-16 22:24:37

BluPhoenyx
Member
Registered: 2002-12-23
Posts: 239

Re: mozilla

Check the file /etc/ld.so.conf for the path /opt/mozilla and if it isn't there, add it and run ldconfig. Other than that, it could be a pkg is missing or possibly to old but I'm running out of ideas.


BluPhoenyx

Offline

#16 2003-03-17 07:24:46

Mork
Member
From: Visby, Sweden
Registered: 2003-03-09
Posts: 32

Re: mozilla

No luck, the line /opt/mozilla was there.


"Plurality should not be assumed without necessity" or "keep it simple"
            - William of Ockham (1285-1349)

Offline

#17 2003-03-18 02:27:30

BluPhoenyx
Member
Registered: 2002-12-23
Posts: 239

Re: mozilla

I posted (just this afternoon) a mozilla-1.3 pkg with gtk2 and xft support in the incoming section. It might work for you. I've only been able to test it on two machines. It has the PKGBUILD so you can install locally. The install will overwrite the current (if any) mozilla and, IMHO you should uninstall mozilla first.

Also, it will probably require the recent upgrades and especially the last release of XFree.


BluPhoenyx

Offline

#18 2003-03-18 21:35:42

Mork
Member
From: Visby, Sweden
Registered: 2003-03-09
Posts: 32

Re: mozilla

Didn't work either  :?. I didn't add the stuff about xft that the readme specified but the fonts rendered beutifully anyway (until it froze that is).

You probably know this but having the xft-mozilla only named as mozilla (the xft- being in the relase number) causes a regular pacman -S mozilla to start downloading the current mozilla-1.3-1 instead. The easy hack is to move the custom section in pacman.conf to the top (so that packman checks there first)..

Your post actually solved my problem in an quite unexpeted way: I hadn't realised that the tarballs in incoming contained pkgbuilds and had thus failed in installing my fauvorite browser phoenix.. Well, I'm writing this in phoenix  smile Allthough this doesn't explain the mozilla problem I'm happy to write it off for now..


"Plurality should not be assumed without necessity" or "keep it simple"
            - William of Ockham (1285-1349)

Offline

#19 2003-03-18 22:24:35

Arielext
Member
From: Amersfoort, the Netherlands
Registered: 2002-08-12
Posts: 362
Website

Re: mozilla

I m writing this in the xft build of mozilla, which does work here smile
beautifull
next step for me is to build it against QT, but I need more freespace on my drives ...


apt-get install arch

Offline

#20 2003-03-18 23:31:13

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: mozilla

Mork wrote:

Didn't work either  :?. I didn't add the stuff about xft that the readme specified but the fonts rendered beutifully anyway (until it froze that is).

You probably know this but having the xft-mozilla only named as mozilla (the xft- being in the relase number) causes a regular pacman -S mozilla to start downloading the current mozilla-1.3-1 instead. The easy hack is to move the custom section in pacman.conf to the top (so that packman checks there first)..

Your post actually solved my problem in an quite unexpeted way: I hadn't realised that the tarballs in incoming contained pkgbuilds and had thus failed in installing my fauvorite browser phoenix.. Well, I'm writing this in phoenix  smile Allthough this doesn't explain the mozilla problem I'm happy to write it off for now..

a few points here.

pacman will install from a custom database over any package in the trees but if the version number and name are the same in both it will grab the package from the current/unofficial/unstable trees. you also have to sync your local package database with pacman and to do this you must have the custom PKGBUILD for the custom package. It sounds confusing but it is really very easy to setup and use a local custom package tree.

next...incoming is a stoage area basically. packages contributed by users go here and if the contributor is following instructions found elsewhere on this forum and soon to be documented there should be no .pkg.tar.gz packages in the tree. contributed package should consist of the package, filelist, and PKGBUILD within a directory carrying the base package name which is then tarballed up. it is easier for us maintainers to deal with the packages that way and it keeps the warez fools from upload crud into incoming


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#21 2003-03-19 20:48:38

Mork
Member
From: Visby, Sweden
Registered: 2003-03-09
Posts: 32

Re: mozilla

sarah31 wrote:

pacman will install from a custom database over any package in the trees but if the version number and name are the same in both it will grab the package from the current/unofficial/unstable trees.

Ok, the packages are named mozilla-1.3-1 and mozilla-1.3-xft. I actually tried installing with the complete package name (pacman -S mozilla-1.3-xft) this resulted in the message "not found in sync db"... the only way i could get the package installed with pacman -S was placing the custom-section at the top of the pacman.conf (I did sync the package database and it worked with the phoenix package)..

Good info about incoming (sure will consider it when I try to create my first package), anyway all I was saying was that it took me a while to figure out where those PKGBUILD-files could be hiding  smile


"Plurality should not be assumed without necessity" or "keep it simple"
            - William of Ockham (1285-1349)

Offline

#22 2003-03-19 21:13:11

sarah31
Member
From: Middle of Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 2,975
Website

Re: mozilla

to pacman -S with a custom package set you must have the PKGBUILD for the package(s) in /usr/abs/local and the packages themselves go in /home/custompkgs

then you must sync the two using the gensync command mentioned in the pacman.conf and the custom entry must be uncommented in the conf as well. gensync will create a local database file in your custom package tree.

once this is done you can issue the pacman -Syu command to get pacman to sync with your newly  formed database. then you can install packages from your custom database with the -S option.

of course if you have all of the dependencies already installed then pacman -A <pkgname-pkgversionhere>.pkg.tar.gz will work just fine (or the -U option if -A fails).

edit: using the custom package tree is described in the pacman conf file though it could use some work all of the necessary instruction are there to do what i mentioned above)


AKA uknowme

I am not your friend

Offline

#23 2003-03-20 04:20:14

BluPhoenyx
Member
Registered: 2002-12-23
Posts: 239

Re: mozilla

The package name confusion is probably my fault as it is the same as the default mozilla just the archive name has the xft. I couldn't decide which was better, name the package different and build in a different directory or simply let it replace the mozilla package. I thought most users would rather replace mozilla so I used the simplest method. There would also be some issues with building it in a different pkg name and directory. Since it's stored outside the standard repositories, I felt this shouldn't matter too much.


BluPhoenyx

Offline

#24 2003-03-20 21:28:12

xor
Member
From: Sweden
Registered: 2003-03-20
Posts: 71

Re: mozilla

jon wrote:
today i updated mozilla to 1.3 and when i go to run mozilla from an xterm i hear my hd spin up but it just "quits" no error or anything. when i run a "top" in a terminal beside it i see "mozilla-bin" but then after about 3-4 seconds all the "mozilla-bin" entries disappear and nothing is loaded

I can tell that this is exacly what is happening when I did upgrade my mozilla to 1.3.
I did run pacman -Syu first then tried again yesterday to makepkg to compile it myself, then pacman -A mozilla...pkg.tar.gz with the same result.
1.2 is working great, just wonder if this happens for other peoples aswell

Keep up the good work with AL smile

Offline

#25 2003-03-20 22:24:22

jon
Member
Registered: 2002-11-28
Posts: 87

Re: mozilla

xor wrote:

I can tell that this is exacly what is happening when I did upgrade my mozilla to 1.3.
I did run pacman -Syu first then tried again yesterday to makepkg to compile it myself, then pacman -A mozilla...pkg.tar.gz with the same result.
1.2 is working great, just wonder if this happens for other peoples aswell

Keep up the good work with AL smile

xor: first do the following in this order

# pacman -R mozilla (to remove mozilla)
# rm -rf /opt/mozilla
# pacman -S mozilla

then mozilla should work

[edit]
quote removed by arielext
[/edit]

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB