Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

markg85 · 2009-11-13 13:38:04

Hi,

I was wondering if it would be possible to make a Firefox 1.0 package that uses the latest gecko release (1.9.1).
The reason this would be cool is to just have that old fox back on my desktop for a while ^_^
Another reason is that firefox becomes more and more bloated so going back to version 1 might be interesting if it does support the latest in web technology (in rendering aka gecko and javascript aka tracemeonkey)

I personally have no clue if this is possible. I have never done a single thing with firefox inner workings but i would certainly appreciate a PKGBUILD that can do this (if possible at all).

Thanx,
Mark

skottish · 2009-11-14 16:44:40

xulrunner and Firefox are developed together. If you're going to get FF 1.0 to work with any current xulrunner, it would probably take one hell of a patch set.

markg85 · 2009-11-14 20:08:08

skottish wrote:

xulrunner and Firefox are developed together. If you're going to get FF 1.0 to work with any current xulrunner, it would probably take one hell of a patch set.

So, it's not possible (or easy) to just update gecko and recompile firefox?

skottish · 2009-11-14 20:57:28

markg85 wrote:

skottish wrote:
xulrunner and Firefox are developed together. If you're going to get FF 1.0 to work with any current xulrunner, it would probably take one hell of a patch set.
So, it's not possible (or easy) to just update gecko and recompile firefox?

I don't think so. The current release of Firefox is always dependent on the current release of xulrunner, and they're always released at the same time.

markg85 · 2009-11-14 21:52:56

skottish wrote:

markg85 wrote:
skottish wrote:
xulrunner and Firefox are developed together. If you're going to get FF 1.0 to work with any current xulrunner, it would probably take one hell of a patch set.
So, it's not possible (or easy) to just update gecko and recompile firefox?
I don't think so. The current release of Firefox is always dependent on the current release of xulrunner, and they're always released at the same time.

hmm. then we need someone that can make a Gecko plugin for Qt or a Webkit plugin for Glib. Then one (idiot ^_^) has to make a Firefox 1 clone..
I am quite new in both glib and qt so i sadly can't make this (yet)..

Why Gecko and Webkit? well, i want to run both in one browser

Ranguvar · 2009-11-14 22:28:31

You say "bloat". What exactly do you mean? Too many features, too many options, too slow?
I say this because it'd be far easier to go into the latest Firefox code and cut out some GUI menus and do some re-theming than what you ask.

As for Webkit and Gecko together, I believe that Epiphany can do that, and Kazehakese either can or was working on it. It might be in a hidden config option.

JGC · 2009-11-15 00:24:07

Firefox 1.0 can't build with system xulrunner, support for doing so was added in 3.0. Even with that version, I don't think you'll succeed in building firefox 3.0 against xulrunner 1.9.1.

markg85 · 2009-11-15 00:33:00

Ranguvar wrote:

You say "bloat". What exactly do you mean? Too many features, too many options, too slow?
I say this because it'd be far easier to go into the latest Firefox code and cut out some GUI menus and do some re-theming than what you ask.
As for Webkit and Gecko together, I believe that Epiphany can do that, and Kazehakese either can or was working on it. It might be in a hidden config option.

Well, just look at the difference from ff 1 till ff 3.5 ... besides that the theme is different there isn't a whole lot you notice that is different yet it increasingly becomes a slower and slower browser with a bigger footprint. I personally would like to have it all as simple as possible and let all the rest be added through plugins. Or even let the browser be the plugin engine and let the plugins be the features. So the default plugins add:

- Rendering (Gecko or Webkit)
- Awesome (navigation) bar

Kinda like that.

Note: the actual "bloat" is hard to point out.. they just keep adding more to the core which makes it slow(er). Although rendering speed improved a lot between ff 1 and ff 3.5 but that's more thanx to tracemonkey and gecko then any other firefox part.

Ranguvar · 2009-11-15 02:28:48

I don't understand. You're saying it got slower, but that the rendering speed improved? So you're saying the GUI is slower, but the rendering is faster? As for a bigger footprint, I do agree, it takes up too much RAM.

You also have to remember, the web was simpler and easier to render in the days of FF 1.

The plugin bit is a little silly though. The Awesomebar could be a plugin, but the rendering engine is the core of the browser. It would make development much more painful to turn the core of the browser into a plugin. There's such a thing as getting too carried away

markg85 · 2009-11-15 13:19:45

Ranguvar wrote:

I don't understand. You're saying it got slower, but that the rendering speed improved? So you're saying the GUI is slower, but the rendering is faster? As for a bigger footprint, I do agree, it takes up too much RAM.
You also have to remember, the web was simpler and easier to render in the days of FF 1.
The plugin bit is a little silly though. The Awesomebar could be a plugin, but the rendering engine is the core of the browser. It would make development much more painful to turn the core of the browser into a plugin. There's such a thing as getting too carried away

Firefox itself gets slower and more bloated but the web redering (javascript and html) is just fine and fast.
And before i get crap suggestions (from anyone) that i should upgrade my pc.. The specs (Q6600 and 6 GB ram) are more then fine!

Ranguvar · 2009-11-15 17:48:17

I have the same exact specs o.O (Firefox is always blazing for me, I advise you try firefox-pgo-beta in the AUR).

I can only advise you try uzbl, Arora, Midori, etc. I am "stuck" with Firefox because of its insane configurability and number of extensions, but some others may be able to escape it

Last edited by Ranguvar (2009-11-15 17:48:43)

markg85 · 2009-11-15 21:37:34

Ranguvar wrote:

I have the same exact specs o.O (Firefox is always blazing for me, I advise you try firefox-pgo-beta in the AUR).
I can only advise you try uzbl, Arora, Midori, etc. I am "stuck" with Firefox because of its insane configurability and number of extensions, but some others may be able to escape it

I will give that a try (downloading now) but that will probably not get firefox a lot faster... for that to happen it just has to change a lot..
For example look at Opera. they keep adding features (mostly useless ones if you ask me) yet opera beats ecery other browser in raw speed (startup, shutdown and even in browsing itself!) so a bloated program doesn't have to mean a slow and sluggish pogram..

.. compiling firefox now ..

edit

EWW.. the performance is HORRIBLE: 2317 Points in peacekeeper! that just sucks! my slowish notebook can get roughly the same.
and yes, the options in about:config when searching for "jit" are set to true (be default)

Last edited by markg85 (2009-11-15 22:26:43)

Ranguvar · 2009-11-15 22:46:24

Yeah, I get 2365 there with the same.

I think that test is seriously bugged. On the SunSpider test, firefox-pgo-beta rips normal firefox a new one (over 2x gain, I have x86_64, so firefox-pgo-beta gives me TraceMonkey, which normal Firefox lacks in 64-bit), and the browser just feels a ton faster.

I would more go by actual feel than benchmarks. If you can't tell a difference, it isn't worth it. And if you do go by benchmarks, do more than one.

markg85 · 2009-11-17 18:36:46

Using ff 3.6 (beta) since my last post now and if this is going to be it then it's in general slower then 3.5... which was slower then 3.0... which was slower then 2................. you get the point

Arch Linux

#1 2009-11-13 13:38:04

Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#2 2009-11-14 16:44:40

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#3 2009-11-14 20:08:08

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#4 2009-11-14 20:57:28

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#5 2009-11-14 21:52:56

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#6 2009-11-14 22:28:31

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#7 2009-11-15 00:24:07

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#8 2009-11-15 00:33:00

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#9 2009-11-15 02:28:48

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#10 2009-11-15 13:19:45

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#11 2009-11-15 17:48:17

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#12 2009-11-15 21:37:34

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#13 2009-11-15 22:46:24

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

#14 2009-11-17 18:36:46

Re: Is this possible: Firefox 1.0 with gecko 1.9.1 (from firefox 3.5)

Board footer