Solved Is there a browser in ports that supports old style mozilla plugins?

E

ekvz

I've already heard about the Palemoon debacle and all i can say is i agree with everyone's opinion. The developer and it's minions are a highly unprofessional bunch (to put it extremely lightly) and their behavior concerning *BSD isn't even the second or third time they have publicly proven this. Because of lacking alternatives and an age old config i don't really want to change i still use Palemoon though and while i knew there would be no Palemoon port i thought i might be able to migrate to Waterfox Classic to save most of my old configuration but it seems this one is gone from ports too. Is there any other browser that's actively maintained in ports supporting old mozilla plugins or even better some general pre webextensions Firefox fork?
 
After clicking through 31 pages on freshports.org i am quite certain the answer is no. That leaves me with 2 options: Either migrate to surf early which won't work to well without the needed scripting around it or port Palemoon myself. I guess it'll have to be the latter for now. Thank you very much Moonchild and associated asshats... I'll probably better move to something else sooner than later. It's not like i trust these people to be competent at anything they do anyways.
 
It might not be an ideal solution but in many cases a browser supporting plugins is older which tends to work a little better on Wine. Not to mention on Wine you get the glorious flash plugin!

I did run Opera in Wine (before they changed to a chrome backend). Was that version 11?, cant recall. That worked OK with some plugins. I also explicitly remember Firefox 3.x being pretty good in Wine (Since Mozilla broke their versioning system, '3' sounds even more old haha).
 
kpedersen said:
It might not be an ideal solution but in many cases a browser supporting plugins is older which tends to work a little better on Wine. Not to mention on Wine you get the glorious flash plugin!

I did run Opera in Wine (before they changed to a chrome backend). Was that version 11?, cant recall. That worked OK with some plugins. I also explicitly remember Firefox 3.x being pretty good in Wine (Since Mozilla broke their versioning system, '3' sounds even more old haha).
Click to expand...

Haha, of course for the good old zero-day err... flash plugin i'd certainly run wine. No, joking aside i've actually shortly thought about wine too. I guess that would give me Palemoon with way less effort but let's face it it's a disgusting solution. The last time i ran wine for anything besides games was like 15 years ago and i don't really want to get back into that habit. As for running old Firefox releases: It's somewhat tempting but i'd want at least a little bit of support. Palemoon with it's dev team supporting what is basically a stoneage Firefox fork is already pushing it so i guess i'll have to pass on this also.

To be honest i am not really sure what i'll do right now. Stitching together a private port seems a bit to much like a waste of time but "complying" with those silly demands to "deliver to best Palemoon possible" (like this isn't only used by about 5 nerds who know that a port doesn't necessarily equals a officially supported build) also feels stupid. Isn't there any FreeBSD users in Iran who would volunteer to maintain the port? Sure it couldn't be added to the official ports collection but it would be quite amusing ;)

Well, OK, i'll admit i had a bad day. I'll probably just see how hard it is to build this thing and on the side make plans for how to move to another browser. In the end something like surf likely really is the better browser for me. It just needs a bunch of integration which will be great i am sure but sadly simply does not exist right now (and i want to actually start using my desktop...).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top