SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware 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.
Hey... I have a feeling firefox 3 is somehow doing this to me.. Anyone care to confirm? In the middle of trying to build epiphany svn/webkit/gperf to try another browser...
However, the n/ directory is unpopulated and a couple directories here and there don't have icons. Can anyone else confirm on that? Is the unpopulated n/ directory actually a Slackware FTP issue or is it just me?
I too have seen similar visual effects with my Firefox 3 self-built package. It is definitely to do with Firefox 3 because if I go back to my old Firefox 2 installation it is as previous. The file icons all display a kind of yellow colour and in the Slackware packages directories the icons do not show at all - just the file names. Very strange. We need to know how Firefox 3 is doing this so that we can have control over the configuration.
Thanks for the reply Bill. Saw your thread at mozilla. Don't think you'll get a reply, tho you never know. But to answer your question, yes, it looks as if Firefox is going Gnome.... Unless it displays this type of behavior with KDE themes as well....
I don't know about any Gnome bits being required at build time, but it looks as if it's going Gnome Centric anyway.... That's just fine with me. Gnome is my favorite DE...
Not too happy about the missing icons but I'll see what I can't dig up concerning that.
Can someone visit the n/ directory on Slackware-current and tell me if it is empty for them please? Someone running Opera or firefox-2.x... Still building webkit for epiphany but that'll complete sometime and I'll find out then I guess.
edit - oh. Thanks for the n/ report. Still empty here under FF-3.0. Wow, Just made a huge sigh.... I don't know what to make of FF-3.0 yet... I like it alot but the damn thing is displaying some quirks. Empty directories is a show stopper IMO, unlike an unpopulated applications--> preferences menu...
The file icons all display a kind of yellow colour and in the Slackware packages directories the icons do not show at all - just the file names.
I'll assume your running KDE? Kinda what I gathered from your post at mozilla. That is probably because you didn't build it against Gnome. Guessing anyways...
For everyone getting upset at firefox for these issues, I suppose there is every right to, but you need to remember that your running one of the only Linux distro's that doesn't ship Gnome (or build firefox for that matter).... Who's fault is it really? Ultimately I suppose it's firefox but one could argue the other way around as well.
Historically, Gnome and KDE have conflicted with Desktop Specification usage. Also, if I remember correctly, Slackware doesn't populate KDE icon directories with gtk-update-icon-cache..... That might be a logical place to start but I don't know how firefox is handling this new behavior...
Let's try to remember here that Firefox is a GTK2 based web browser, not QT... This is progress folks, like it or not. You can't be biased towards one toolkit in Linux when there are others actively used. I'm quite the hipocrate for saying that because I run a QT/KDE-less system...
Let's try to remember here that Firefox is a GTK2 based web browser, not QT... This is progress folks, like it or not. You can't be biased towards one toolkit in Linux when there are others actively used. I'm quite the hipocrate for saying that because I run a QT/KDE-less system...
But Firefox 3 isn't strictly GTK2. It would be nice if it was. I have no problem with running strictly GTK2 or QT apps.
On the other hand, the trend seems to be for newer GTK2 apps to start pulling in other parts of Gnome or think because it is GTK2, you have to run gnome. I can tell as I usually get a .gnome populated some way or another these days. Constrast this with QT apps that don't require KDE. I don't get a .kde every time I run them. QT and KDE are fully separated in a sense. Whereas GTK2 is getting muddied with Gnome more and more.
BTW, I only use TWM, so I can tell which apps behave nicely without full DE's. QT ones work far better than the Gnomish ones.
But that was supposed to have been resolved.... I tried to sit down and scroll thru about:config but didn't have the patience for it. Maybe there is a listing that will disable the new ftp look.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.