MozillaZine

[Fx/Tb/Sm] RPMozley: 2012-03-17 [Release/OSX] (G3/G4/G5)

Discussion of third-party/unofficial Firefox/Thunderbird/SeaMonkey builds.
tanweileong
 
Posts: 43
Joined: February 18th, 2008, 2:36 am

Post Posted April 25th, 2009, 1:40 am

I used the command-line md5 (in /sbin):

[PowerBook:~ tanweileong] md5 firefox-3.0.9.en-US.PPC.G4-7450.dmg
MD5 (firefox-3.0.9.en-US.PPC.G4-7450.dmg) = 7e3109cf92571131a57372a62daf64c3

(I fired up Disk Utility but I don't see an MD5 checksum option, only CRC-32 ?)

RPMozley wrote:
tanweileong wrote:(but the md5 is 7e3109cf92571131a57372a62daf64c3 , not what you posted above?)

What program are you using to get that Checksum?

RPMozley

User avatar
 
Posts: 502
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 4:47 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, United Kingdom

Post Posted April 25th, 2009, 5:37 am

OK, using the command-line I get the same number now. (7e3109cf92571131a57372a62daf64c3)

tanweileong wrote:I fired up Disk Utility but I don't see an MD5 checksum option, only CRC-32 ?

I think with Disk Utility I added more options to it using OnyX, so that might be why you only see the one option.
My build thread - Camino Builds - http://www.rpm-mozilla.org.uk
MacBook 13" 2.4GHz: OSX 10.6.8
iBook G3 Indigo 366MHz, PowerBook G3 333MHz: OSX 10.3.9

tanweileong
 
Posts: 43
Joined: February 18th, 2008, 2:36 am

Post Posted April 29th, 2009, 9:32 pm

hrmph. that didn't take 'em very long:

http://developer.mozilla.org/devnews/in ... available/

so the lifespan of 3.0.9 is like, what, 2 weeks?

RPMozley

User avatar
 
Posts: 502
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 4:47 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, United Kingdom

Post Posted April 30th, 2009, 2:32 pm

tanweileong wrote:so the lifespan of 3.0.9 is like, what, 2 weeks?

It would seem so. I don't think they tested the fixes rigourously enough and ended up with a regression.

Anyway, my Firefox 3.0.10 builds will be available soon, I just need to upload them. :idea:
My build thread - Camino Builds - http://www.rpm-mozilla.org.uk
MacBook 13" 2.4GHz: OSX 10.6.8
iBook G3 Indigo 366MHz, PowerBook G3 333MHz: OSX 10.3.9

tanweileong
 
Posts: 43
Joined: February 18th, 2008, 2:36 am

Post Posted May 15th, 2009, 5:53 am

RPMozley wrote:Anyway, my Firefox 3.0.10 builds will be available soon, I just need to upload them. :idea:



heh, i've found it's not just 10.3.9 guys like me who needs to rely on your builds, I've been on 10.4.11 machines where Safari (even the latest 3.2.3 patch) has been acting up (specifically, beachballing when trying to quit; it won't disappear unless you nuke it with Cmd-Opt-Esc), so your 3.0.10 builds are coming in handy, thanks!

RPMozley

User avatar
 
Posts: 502
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 4:47 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, United Kingdom

Post Posted June 14th, 2009, 3:52 pm

Well, my optimised builds of Firefox 3.0.11 are up and available.

Oh, just to let people know, the application name has changed now (no, not by me). It was previously called "Minefield" and now it's called "GranParadiso" the proper name for Firefox 3.0 (apparently) :shock:
My build thread - Camino Builds - http://www.rpm-mozilla.org.uk
MacBook 13" 2.4GHz: OSX 10.6.8
iBook G3 Indigo 366MHz, PowerBook G3 333MHz: OSX 10.3.9

tanweileong
 
Posts: 43
Joined: February 18th, 2008, 2:36 am

Post Posted June 14th, 2009, 5:34 pm

RPMozley wrote:Well, my optimised builds of Firefox 3.0.11 are up and available.



Hi, will you be backporting the changes into a 2.0.0.22rpm ?

philcig
 
Posts: 14
Joined: January 11th, 2009, 12:50 pm

Post Posted June 15th, 2009, 7:38 am

Hi,
I had been using elfurbe's builds for a long time, was having trouble with some of them in the last few months and had posted to his forum - you may have seen them. I just realized from a post on there that you do your own builds. For some reason, I've never found you when googling around for optimized Mac builds. I did find a guy in the far east whose builds just crash.
Since elfurbe's not updating official releases and I've run into beachballs and/or very high cpu usage on my agp G4 (1ghz upgrade, 10.4.9) with 3.0.10, I'm wondering if your builds might improve things for me. Is there any difference in the way you compile your builds? Elfurbe's builds used to run fine for me back in the Firefox 2 days.

RPMozley

User avatar
 
Posts: 502
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 4:47 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, United Kingdom

Post Posted June 15th, 2009, 3:46 pm

tanweileong wrote:Hi, will you be backporting the changes into a 2.0.0.22rpm ?

I'm waiting on Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 to be released with Gecko release code on the 1.8.1 branch. Probably in a few days time according to the Mozilla wiki.
My build thread - Camino Builds - http://www.rpm-mozilla.org.uk
MacBook 13" 2.4GHz: OSX 10.6.8
iBook G3 Indigo 366MHz, PowerBook G3 333MHz: OSX 10.3.9

RPMozley

User avatar
 
Posts: 502
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 4:47 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, United Kingdom

Post Posted June 15th, 2009, 3:52 pm

philcig wrote:Is there any difference in the way you compile your builds?

Yes there are differences. I use different optimisation flags and I think, but not quite sure, elfurbe builds against a different SDK (I could be wrong on that though). Anyway, please give it a go, there's no harm in trying or at least I don't think there is. :D
My build thread - Camino Builds - http://www.rpm-mozilla.org.uk
MacBook 13" 2.4GHz: OSX 10.6.8
iBook G3 Indigo 366MHz, PowerBook G3 333MHz: OSX 10.3.9

philcig
 
Posts: 14
Joined: January 11th, 2009, 12:50 pm

Post Posted June 15th, 2009, 9:38 pm

All right, I gave it a go, with the latest versions of both GranParadiso (how exotic!) and Thunderbird and they're both working fine. Thanks for all your good work.
I'm curious, though. Having used optimized FF builds before, I'm used to the app files being smaller, due, I assume, to extraneous code being stripped out and also that the app has a different name because it's not the official release. So how come the optimized Thunderbird is called Thunderbird and is around the same size as the official one (around 33 mb) - not a complaint, just wonderin'? GranParadiso (32 mb) is much smaller than FF (46 mb).
What improvements might be noticeable with the optimized TB?

RPMozley

User avatar
 
Posts: 502
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 4:47 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, United Kingdom

Post Posted June 16th, 2009, 4:52 am

philcig wrote:So how come the optimized Thunderbird is called Thunderbird and is around the same size as the official one (around 33 mb) - not a complaint, just wonderin'?
What improvements might be noticeable with the optimized TB?

Umm... I'm not quite sure you're comparing Thunderbird with an official version. I just checked what size the official version was and it's 50 MB, not really the same size. As for the application name being the same, Mozilla do not want unofficial Firefox builds to be called Firefox but for Thunderbird the name can be the same.
The noticeable improvements would be the application will feel snappier when running, of course there are still speed bottlenecks that can't be speeded up due to physical restrictions and code. I've not run the official version of Thunderbird in a long time so not exactly sure how the differences feel now.
My build thread - Camino Builds - http://www.rpm-mozilla.org.uk
MacBook 13" 2.4GHz: OSX 10.6.8
iBook G3 Indigo 366MHz, PowerBook G3 333MHz: OSX 10.3.9

philcig
 
Posts: 14
Joined: January 11th, 2009, 12:50 pm

Post Posted June 16th, 2009, 7:12 am

Hmmm...My official version of TB is 2.0.0.19 and it's 33.6 MB. Is 2.0.0.21 that much bigger? Or would the file size end up being different if you (as I did) downloaded the original TB 2 when it was introduced and then applied the periodic updates? Did my FF file size figures look right to to you?

RPMozley

User avatar
 
Posts: 502
Joined: August 12th, 2006, 4:47 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, United Kingdom

Post Posted June 16th, 2009, 8:16 am

philcig wrote:Hmmm...My official version of TB is 2.0.0.19 and it's 33.6 MB. Is 2.0.0.21 that much bigger? Or would the file size end up being different if you (as I did) downloaded the original TB 2 when it was introduced and then applied the periodic updates? Did my FF file size figures look right to to you?

Well, none of the official Thunderbird 2.0 releases were that small in size from the dmg image. The only way, that I can think of, for you to get the application down to that sort of size would be to use some other application to strip out the Intel code from the universal binary and leaving just the PPC bits.
My build thread - Camino Builds - http://www.rpm-mozilla.org.uk
MacBook 13" 2.4GHz: OSX 10.6.8
iBook G3 Indigo 366MHz, PowerBook G3 333MHz: OSX 10.3.9

philcig
 
Posts: 14
Joined: January 11th, 2009, 12:50 pm

Post Posted June 16th, 2009, 12:49 pm

Interesting! I was sitting here thinking "I don't remember doing that" so I did a little Googling and came up with Monolingual, which I did use to strip out language files I don't need, but now remember it also can strip out Intel code, so obviously I did that, too. I guess it's OK to run Monolingual periodically to strip out any extraneous files or code from new apps I may have downloaded?

Return to Third Party/Unofficial Builds


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests