Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: GTK3 Version Of Firefox Up For Fedora Testing

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oleid View Post
    GTK+ does not support stable interfaces for programs? Actually, GTK+ is quite API and even ABI stable. Even binary themes used to work without recompilation and I bet this is still the case.
    So then why are the symbols not versioned?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktyl198 View Post
    Can we please talk about how bullshit this is? I love Mozilla and Firefox but it's not like there's a million lines of GTK code in there; what the hell constitutes 3 years of porting?
    Good question, but it's not just the GTK3 port that is taking forever to complete. The Metro interface version for Win8 was started March 2012 and it's not out yet.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktyl198 View Post
    I could-of swore plugin-container was already a separate process... *shrug*

    At this point, I'd go for a Qt-based Firefox if it meant faster porting to newer versions :/
    (btw, what versions of Qt does flash support?)
    As far as I understand it, it's Flash that requires GTK2. No idea why, though. So that means Flash doesn't support any versions of Qt, and only GTK2.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    So then why are the symbols not versioned?
    Actually, I don't know if symbol versioning is current practice.

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald
    As far as I understand it, it's Flash that requires GTK2. No idea why, though. So that means Flash doesn't support any versions of Qt, and only GTK2.
    It's for their GUI. Try right-clicking any yt-video.


    Quote Originally Posted by Devius
    Good question, but it's not just the GTK3 port that is taking forever to complete. The Metro interface version for Win8 was started March 2012 and it's not out yet.
    AFAIR it's not only porting to GTK3, it's also removing (or better: isolating) direct X11 dependencies to allow the port to Wayland. GTK3 deprecates X11 stuff in favour of cairo calls, c.f. the porting guide. Firefox uses GTK+ mostly for theming and often did the pixmap handling directly via X11. This needs to be ported to cairo which is a lot of delicate work and thus needs time.

    If you used cairo in GTK2 and didn't use any X11 stuff (e.g. from GdkX11.h), porting to GTK3 and thus Wayland is quite simple.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oleid View Post
    It's for their GUI. Try right-clicking any yt-video.
    Huh, now that you said it, I see that the menus I get when right-clicking on a Flash applet and when right-clicking elsewhere are different... That also shows just how poorly Firefox integrates with themes at the moment.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Huh, now that you said it, I see that the menus I get when right-clicking on a Flash applet and when right-clicking elsewhere are different... That also shows just how poorly Firefox integrates with themes at the moment.
    It could be because I'm using Nightly (version 29 currently) with the Australis interface, but I have no trouble at all with Firefox integrating with my GTK theme. Heck, even the flash right-click looks completely integrated... it looks no different from any other right-click in my DE (Cinnamon 2)

    Currently, the only trouble I have with Firefox "integrating" with my theme is that the theme uses a combination of light and dark colors, the dark taking over the tab section of Firefox. If I want to move a button (Like Home or Downloads) into the tab bar, they become really hard to see because they don't change from their own dark-grey color.
    But that's not Firefox's fault, really.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    4

    Default

    [QUOTE=oleid;388742]I think it more has to do with Flash being linked to GTK2; currently it is not possible to use GTK2 and GTK3 in the same process, thus Flash won't work with a GTK3 built of firefox where the plugin lives in the same process as the browser gui.

    Had this same problem with mplayerplug-in when Firefox was transitioning from GTK1 to GTK2. I had to have a bunch of code in configure to try and figure out which GTK to use or to just use X11 code. I was a total pain and then there were problems with reusing the binary in other browsers on the same machine, because those other browsers might be using GTK1 while Firefox was using GTK2.

    When I developed gecko-mediaplayer, the replacement for mplayerplug-in, I made sure not to use any GTK code in the plugin so this kinda stuff would not happen again.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktyl198 View Post
    I could-of swore plugin-container was already a separate process... *shrug*

    At this point, I'd go for a Qt-based Firefox if it meant faster porting to newer versions :/
    (btw, what versions of Qt does flash support?)
    IIRC, Epiphany, the GNOME Web Browser had the same issue that Mozilla has now - flash player couldn't be loaded. The solution was WebKit2 seperate plugin process architecture, where they link plugin process to GTK+2 and libXt and library in some way gets what is necessarry from the web process itself. But still, that wouldn't work on Wayland, at least not without XWayland because of directy dependency on libXwhatever and libgdk-2.0-x11

    As for Firefox, plugin-container is indeed a split process, but it currently uses the same library the browser does - libxul.so. They would need:

    a) to both link to gtk+2 and gtk+3, in order for plugin container to work correctly (which is impossible because of reasons mentioned above)
    b) to rewrite plugin-container to be a standalone binary, without any dependency on libxul.so
    Last edited by Krejzi; 01-13-2014 at 04:15 PM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktyl198 View Post
    I could-of swore plugin-container was already a separate process... *shrug*

    At this point, I'd go for a Qt-based Firefox if it meant faster porting to newer versions :/
    (btw, what versions of Qt does flash support?)
    You still need Gtk2 because the shitty old Flash needs it

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktyl198 View Post
    It could be because I'm using Nightly (version 29 currently) with the Australis interface, but I have no trouble at all with Firefox integrating with my GTK theme. Heck, even the flash right-click looks completely integrated... it looks no different from any other right-click in my DE (Cinnamon 2)
    The Flash right-click looks fine, yes. It's the non-Flash Firefox right-clicks that are square. And I'm using KDE, with the oxygen theme for GTK2.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •