LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 08-10-2017, 12:36 PM   #106
PROBLEMCHYLD
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2015
Posts: 439

Rep: Reputation: 103Reputation: 103

I have been running the latest Pale Moon and I confirm my issue is rectified. I have watch many new movie trailers on YouTube in HD and no issues. Thanks to alien bob for the package and PM for the update. I'm a happy camper now.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-13-2017, 01:43 AM   #107
Fat_Elvis
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2016
Distribution: FreeDOS 1.2
Posts: 200

Rep: Reputation: 52
Yeah I'm guessing that Palemoon is written by Windows developers and GNU/Linux compilability is an afterthought. Actually, it simply would not compile on GCC when I tried it some time ago. Gave up on it.

For fast browsing needs, like browsing HTML manuals and such, Dillo and Lynx do a fantastic job, depending on content.

Otherwise selectively enabling JavaScript on Firefox helps as well. That also helps reveal the more sinister face of the modern web. i.e. pages that refuse to deliver content unless you run their obfuscated code on your machine.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-13-2017, 05:10 AM   #108
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,785
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629
ok, i've been using palemoon on archlinux for quite a while now.
the arch user repository has a precompiled package (palemoon-bin) and a source package (palemoon).
i have been using the source package for a long time now.
updates are fairly frequent, the compiling always takes a long while, but has never failed so far.
palemoon works just fine and dandy here.

just my 2ct.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-26-2017, 07:59 AM   #109
elcore
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2014
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 368

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by atelszewski View Post
Hi,

I too don't like the profile directory name.
But then, it's an already established name.
I decided not to fiddle with it, in order not to break something and cause me headaches ;-)

--
Best regards,
Andrzej Telszewski
I'm more or less done with this feature, from what I can tell it builds successfully with these flags and then stores the profile into ~/.config/palemoon

Code:
--disable-official-vendor \
--disable-official-branding \
--with-system-distribution-id=org.config \
Another note I made was to set Vendor=config and Name=palemoon in application.ini and define the same in branding.nsi, confvars.sh, and defs.mk.
But I'm not sure all that was needed to be done, anyway it's all set, this is the output now:
Code:
palemoon --version
config palemoon 27.4.2
Have fun.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-29-2017, 03:19 PM   #110
PROBLEMCHYLD
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2015
Posts: 439

Rep: Reputation: 103Reputation: 103
Pale Moon 27.5.0 is on steroids. Pages are opening instantly damn-near. No buffering from Youtube or PBS kids. This is and will continue to be my default browser until it starts to go downhill.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 10-01-2017, 04:33 AM   #111
Ilgar
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2, Slackwarearm-current
Posts: 971

Rep: Reputation: 113Reputation: 113
Hmm, the changelog does not specifically mention any outstanding performance improvements. Are you comparing 27.5 to the 27.4.x series?

I learned about Palemoon in this thread and after some testing converted to it on my little 2-in-1 laptop. However, the Rust-related improvements to Firefox I was talking about recently began to arrive with version 55 and now I am back on FF (version 56 as of today). Memory consumption is now on par with Palemoon and responsiveness is better. The next version 57 is expected to be a huge leap forward and testers seem to confirm this.

One thing about FF 57 is that it is going to break extension/addon compatibility with earlier versions. The only one I am using is NoScript and it is expected to have been ported by then. For those who absolutely need the unported addons Palemoon will probably be a good alternative.

If they could integrate into Palemoon the new FF engine that would be a real killer but I think the two projects have diverged sufficiently to make this improbable.

Last edited by Ilgar; 10-01-2017 at 04:35 AM.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 10-01-2017, 05:52 AM   #112
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,785
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629Reputation: 1629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilgar View Post
If they could integrate into Palemoon the new FF engine
that would make it normal firefox agian?
palemoon started out as keeping alive an old firefox version, surely it has developed since then but i'm guessing it has its limits.
this doesn't sound feasible at all, but whatdoiknow, i am not a coder.

the hype is that FF has gotten much better, faster, less bloated with newer versions.
i still don't believe that hype.

i would like to mention seamonkey.
imo, it's lighter than palemoon, one gets a mail client in the mix - one that is equally much ligther compared to thunderbird - it's actively developed or at least maintained, and it isn't a fork of anything.
it has a fair amount of known working addons, and some firefox only addons also work.
the UX is good.
 
Old 10-01-2017, 07:17 AM   #113
Ilgar
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2, Slackwarearm-current
Posts: 971

Rep: Reputation: 113Reputation: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondoho View Post
that would make it normal firefox agian?
It would be a trimmed-down version. The point was to disable some rarely used options to reduce resource consumption. Since FF aims to be a full-featured browser one can try to do this to any FF version.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ondoho View Post
the hype is that FF has gotten much better, faster, less bloated with newer versions.
i still don't believe that hype.
That claim is made in every new version of every piece of software, isn't it . But seriously, in my experience, at least for the change from FF 54 to 55 this was true. The guys literally developed a new programming language --already getting significant attention by itself-- to achieve what they wanted.
 
Old 10-01-2017, 11:09 AM   #114
Fat_Elvis
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2016
Distribution: FreeDOS 1.2
Posts: 200

Rep: Reputation: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilgar View Post
The guys literally developed a new programming language --already getting significant attention by itself-- to achieve what they wanted.
Ah, I see. The programming language was not a good one, I suppose, that's why it was so incredibly slow!
 
Old 10-01-2017, 02:07 PM   #115
Ilgar
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2, Slackwarearm-current
Posts: 971

Rep: Reputation: 113Reputation: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat_Elvis View Post
Ah, I see. The programming language was not a good one, I suppose, that's why it was so incredibly slow!
. I pointed that out the emphasize the scale of the effort. Most of the speed improvements come from the utilization of better algorithms, of course. The main contribution of Rust is safety and concurrency support. But it is also true that among the programming languages that offer similar features, Rust compiles to faster-running code than most others (if not all).
 
Old 10-01-2017, 02:26 PM   #116
Fat_Elvis
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2016
Distribution: FreeDOS 1.2
Posts: 200

Rep: Reputation: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilgar View Post
. I pointed that out the emphasize the scale of the effort. Most of the speed improvements come from the utilization of better algorithms, of course. The main contribution of Rust is safety and concurrency support. But it is also true that among the programming languages that offer similar features, Rust compiles to faster-running code than most others (if not all).
I fear all that effort may be misplaced, as far as Firefox is concerned, unless they are aiming to rewrite the entire thing.

I'm sure writing a modern browser is not trivial. Otherwise we would have had several alternatives before it got this bad, I would imagine.

Last edited by Fat_Elvis; 10-01-2017 at 02:31 PM.
 
Old 10-01-2017, 02:54 PM   #117
Ilgar
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2, Slackwarearm-current
Posts: 971

Rep: Reputation: 113Reputation: 113
When you say "this bad", which version of FF are you referring to?
 
Old 10-01-2017, 03:02 PM   #118
PROBLEMCHYLD
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2015
Posts: 439

Rep: Reputation: 103Reputation: 103
I haven't tested the new Firefox (compiling from source /w rust) yet. Anyone have any feedback on it?
 
Old 10-01-2017, 03:23 PM   #119
Fat_Elvis
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2016
Distribution: FreeDOS 1.2
Posts: 200

Rep: Reputation: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilgar View Post
When you say "this bad", which version of FF are you referring to?
I am on whichever version is in Slack 14.2 with the latest patches. I am talking about any release within the past several years. Firefox has had dismal performance on ridiculous processors. Low powered machines can not load an average page inside of a minute. (Haven't measured this, but I'd wager it is accurate to within 15 secs with an Atom.)

I'm not the only person who has pointed this out, either.

Last edited by Fat_Elvis; 10-01-2017 at 03:30 PM.
 
Old 10-01-2017, 04:46 PM   #120
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 6,693

Rep: Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019Reputation: 4019
If you have time and bandwidth for the download, you can try my Plasma5 Live ISO, it is based on the latest Slackware-current, and apart from Slackware's Firefox 56.0 it also includes Pale Moon 27.5.0.
If you do not like Plasma 5, you can select several other desktop environments from the graphical login screen: Lumina, LXQT, XFCE. At least it will enable you to compare Firefox and Pale Moon side to side.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
what's the best way to import Firefox bookmarks to Pale Moon? newbiesforever Linux - Software 14 01-30-2017 03:08 AM
[SOLVED] Pale Moon vs Firefox storkus Slackware 35 09-07-2015 02:47 PM
LXer: Want Firefox without Australis? Try Pale Moon LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-01-2014 09:51 PM
Pale Moon - A firefox fork coralfang Linux - Software 9 07-16-2014 02:52 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration