DebianThis forum is for the discussion of Debian Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I used Iceweasel because it was available in the repos for Etch and I try to stick with stock Debian software from the stable repository if possible. It has allowed me to successfully dist-upgrade from Woody thru Etch with no problems.
There are various things running around the net about why this issue exists---and abundant opinions.
I know, its why I refereed to it as rebrandded in the topic (Firefox couldn't be included due to Debians wish to use only open source software, and while Firefox is, the error reporting tol it comes with isnt, and Firefox doesnt want to allow any distribution of it without that tool included, for now atleast)
I was just curious what people still used, and if they ahd any reasons behind it
Actually my understanding was more along the lines of the copyrighted icons were not freely licensed, and Debians modifications to Firefox code not being run through the mozilla Firefox group.. You can't make unapproved changes and still call it Firefox..
To me they act the same, work the same, use the same extensions, so it's a moot point. I use whichever is readily available..
It seems that Debian is the only distro that has an issue with Firefox. I am used to using Firefox, and it is past annoying to be out distro-hopping and run into the Debian issue--whatever it is. So my vote is that Debian should fix it ---so everyone can worry about something that has a fighting chance of improving my Linux productivity.
well it's not Firefox they didn't like, they are simply following the dfsg. I can't say it's a bad thing for a project to write a contract and stick to it, instead of being wishy washy and changing their views every time they hit a snag, like some politicians
Iceweasel with the useragent changed to Firefox, in order to get Google extensions to install. Other than that Iceweasel IS Firefox, I could care less what its called. They both work the same, I know I ran the same version of Mozilla's Firefox and the debian version for 3 yrs not once did I notice anything different in page rendering, speed, crashes, etc.
Generated: Thu Nov 29 2007 15:06:29 GMT-0500 (EST) User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.10) Gecko/20071115 Firefox/2.0.0.10 (Debian-2.0.0.10-2) Build ID: 2007111502
Actually my understanding was more along the lines of the copyrighted icons were not freely licensed, and Debians modifications to Firefox code not being run through the mozilla Firefox group.. You can't make unapproved changes and still call it Firefox..
To me they act the same, work the same, use the same extensions, so it's a moot point. I use whichever is readily available..
My understanding too. I'm very often on the BTS and there had been conflicts about how mozilla manages their patches.
+1 to you
Quote:
well it's not Firefox they didn't like, they are simply following the dfsg. I can't say it's a bad thing for a project to write a contract and stick to it, instead of being wishy washy and changing their views every time they hit a snag, like some politicians
+2 then
There is nothing to fix. People who don't understand why Debian HAD to take iceweasel shouldn't waste their time with debian.
Also http://www.us.debian.org/social_contract
Please read five times the first point.
I use Iceweasel cause it's free, it's maintained by Debian and it's in the repositories.
Btw, you forget the (c) or (r) next to firefox, it's not legal!
Distribution: Debian Etch (KDE); Mint Daryna (Gnome) and Mandriva 2008 (KDE)
Posts: 39
Rep:
Iceweasel for me - there is no perceivable difference really other than the name. Iceweasel actually seems better than other distros' versions of Firefox.
Iceweasel with the useragent changed to Firefox, in order to get Google extensions to install. Other than that Iceweasel IS Firefox, I could care less what its called. They both work the same, I know I ran the same version of Mozilla's Firefox and the debian version for 3 yrs not once did I notice anything different in page rendering, speed, crashes, etc.
I run Fire Fox 2.0.0.10 on my Slackware box and Ice Weasel 2.0.0.8 on my Etch/Lenny boxes. I agree with craigevil, I don't notice any difference between the two. Fire Fox or Ice Weasel, I don't really care what the browser is called, it does the job for me. Ice Weasel is an excellent browser.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.