^^ Just rip the branding off and build it with system libs, works great, compiles fast.

You must not be old enough to remember the 1960's?
Some of the completely stoned out parents of that era did a lot
worst, name wise, to their children.
It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

No, not that old. But I guess that's coming around again. I've seen some interesting children's names recently. But still surprising.

1 members found this post helpful.

OpenBSD distributed neither source or binaries...

Clearly stated, they were creating a port for it yes. For Pale moon to exert control, trademark law would have to extend to any file or possibly even articles written by anyone referring to Pale moon. OpenBSD does not have to be shipping any copyrighted material from Pale moon for there to be a trademark violation. At least if we consider the trademark to be enforceable this way. It's really crossing into free speech zone. After reading some of their philosophy for trying to enforce control this way, and seeing the Pale moon project over time, I think it was right to kick Pale moon to the curb for their distro.

Wait this is a false statement based on the OpenBSD thread conversation alone. The site had the PaleMoon binaries in a public repository. It had more than one person working on re-writing how it was compiled, which means that other persons (regardless if they were programmers or not) did download from the public repository, called distribution. One non-programmer reached out to the PaleMoon forum asking for help and in the process let the Moonchild Production team know where they acquired the download. The Moonchild Production team then was able to download the package and examine it, as Tobin said in the thread. OpenBSD developer wrote that their intent was to modify the build script, add some components and release it for OpenBSD. They did NOT say they were going to rebrand. All of this without contacting the upstream developer or looking at the license for the product. How can you possibly say they didn't distribute source or binaries?

2 members found this post helpful.

Can you link to this? The only thing I have found is that the repo they raised the issue was not used to create or distribute binaries.

I however did find the palemoon thread that started this which also ended up affecting freebsd, it does not seem clear exactly how yet.

https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?t=18256

Read the thread referenced in post #197 in this same thread. It links to the openbsd git conversation. Cheers

One problem I have just found with Pale Moon. I have a mailbox on Yahoo that I use for unimportant mail. All the same, I like to check it regularly. For some time now, I have not been able to do this on LFS because they won't accept Pale Moon as up-to-date. It appears to them like a very old Firefox and they want to update it (i.e. replace it by the latest FF).

For a while, I could circumvent this by clicking on "Update later", but now that has stopped working. I have FF on both Crux and Debian, so I check Yahoo from there. But I find their attitude very annoying. Why shouldn't I use the browser of my choice?

You could try the beta of Basilisk (SBo) which is based on FF 55 and being developed by the Pale Moon team.

Or you could use a useragent spoofer like Secret Agent.

I would probably use a spoofer of some kind and set it to spoof only on sites like yahoo though.

It's simpler just to use another system, since I have three.

Have you tried going to 'Tools, Options, Advanced" and changing "Compatibility/User Agent Mode" to "Firefox Compatibility" and then hitting the
"Reload Current Page" button?

Sure, but lets not get into one of those contests. I have a lot of toys.

It's already set to that by default. I wonder if there's something I can do with about:config -- maybe change the user agent for Yahoo, though I'm leary of doing that.

1 members found this post helpful.

This link? https://github.com/jasperla/openbsd-wip/issues/86

That is where I got the quote from, can you please link what you mean exactly?

Edit: To clarify, my current understanding is that openbsd had a WIP package for palemoon which consisted of just their Makefile and related files while palemoon distributed the source code. So each openbsd developer downloaded the build files which are not covered by any trademark and the corresponding source code from palemoon upstream and then each built their own packages locally for testing. So at no point did the openbsd developers distribute binaries or palemoon source code. If this is wrong corrections are of course welcome.