:: Re: [DNG] Devuan, Firefox and Apuls…
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: zap
Date:  
To: Miroslav Rovis, Rick Moen
CC: dng
Subject: Re: [DNG] Devuan, Firefox and Apulse

> Let me kindly tell you upfront, you're not more people, only a single
> individual :-) ... I had already looked up Waterfox previously when you told me
> about it.
>
> But only if more people from Devuan or Debian created a traction would I be
> more willing to give it a real try (would be lots of compiling, as in my
> paragraph that survived so far, further down, just as for Palemoon, so lots of
> work)...

Your call, if you want to trust waterfox and my testimony. Up to you. :)
>> about:config has a lot of junk
>> disabled in it in waterfox...
>>
>> such as pocket which is the worst spyware mozilla currently has built
>> into firefox...
>>
>> thankfully it can be disabled though...
>>
>> then there is eme which while enabled by default you can disable it...
>>
>> also it takes me less than a minutes to disable the bad stuff waterfox
>> though I do use privacy settings to get some stuff disabled... hint* hint*
>>
>> firefox takes a bit longer given they also have telemetry and pocket
>> enabled.
>>
>> On the bright side of that though eme is disabled by default in debian's
>> firefox/devuan's firefox.
> And comparing waterfox to firefox may make for an easy win... First mention of
> palemoon only below:

true I would agree
>> Also, palemoon has restrictions on its software which waterfox does not.
>>
>> I believe its on its binaries or executables? I think?
> Rick Moen in the later email, gave good explanation on the page you gave in
> regard:
> https://www.palemoon.org/redist.shtml
> Something like simply overstated protection of their logo, and, let me hope
> that, having corresponded (a little) on the list with the main guy behind Pale
> Moon, Mark Straver (so far, I have had no reason to disbelieve of his
> developer honesty), my impression is that (manual citation follows from that
> page):
>>>> The binaries and/or archives are completely UNALTERED.
> is likely just a good protection against plain abuse.

I suppose
>> But yeah, I look forward to seeing Librezilla become something awesome
>> that blows waterfox and all other firefox based web browsers out of the
>> water. :)
>>> Also, regarding the main topic (as in the Subject line), as I wrote about it
>>> elsewhere today or yesterday: Palemoon, on pure ALSA, in my sans-dbus system
>>> --means I also recompiled Palemoon sans-dbus--, audio/video in HTML5 works
>>> here, as far as I tested it.
>>>
>
> Nice joke!
>
> Ah, but also I'm spending more time than I can afford on these curiosities
> (both the legal one and this https one)... :-)
>
> BTW, I updated unofficial-grsecurity-hardened kernel deb packages this morning:
> https://croatiafidelis.hr/gnu/deb/linux-deb-4.9.51-unofficial+grsec170923-22/
> ( and I wonder if anybody will go past the fat WARNING there that I gave... )
>
> And I need to do just a little more work next, to get:
> https://github.com/miroR/grsec-dev1-compile
> that script in better order (the comments need sorting, else it works
> correctly, and tells all the info a newbie needs).
>
> Regards!

That's fine, I look forward to librezilla. and yes waterfox isn't
perfect either, but I find it more trustworthy than palemoon. We all
make our own choices feel free to ignore my post if you wish.