SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
LaminatorX
on Saturday October 25 2014, @02:41PM
from the whining-is-not-efficacious dept.
from the whining-is-not-efficacious dept.
A grave bug has been introduced into the "wine" package of Debian Jessie, just days before the November 5th freeze deadline. The /usr/bin/wine launch script fails with an "error: unable to find wine executable. this shouldn't happen." message.
Debian has already suffered much unrest lately over the inclusion of systemd, with threats of a fork being issued, along with the possible cancellation of the GNU/kFreeBSD port and the possible dropping of support for the SPARC architecture. After so much strife and disruption, can Debian afford to have such a serious bug affect such a critical package so soon before such a major freeze?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Wine Fails to Launch under Debian Jessie, Just Days before the Freeze Deadline
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 119 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Everything you know is wrong!
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday October 25 2014, @06:37PM
While a problem, that's not what's hurting Firefox. What's hurting Firefox is trying to coerce desktop users to use the same interface that they think will work well on a tablet, or possibly on a phone.
If they'd just revert the GUI to last year's (or the year before) and concentrate of fixing programming problems things would be much better. If they need a mobile version, have that GUI run out of a totally separate design group. Once you have two good versions, then you can refactor the commonalities, but don't break the working one while chasing after a new market share.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Saturday October 25 2014, @07:25PM
Agreed on the UI part. I recently installed FF on an XP system with 1GB RAM. I haven't used FF in a while and I was surprised to see that it copies Chrome's UI. And to me, it is a blatant rip-off. I would rather they fix their bugs and other niggling issues before trying to copy other peoples UI's and optimize for the tablet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 25 2014, @07:37PM
Copying Chrome's UI wouldn't be a problem if Chrome's UI was good. But it isn't. It's total shit, too.
Firefox used to offer a decent UI, but poor performance. Chrome offered a shitty UI, but excellent performance. Now Firefox offers a shitty UI, and poor performance. Chrome still offers a shitty UI, but excellent performance.
So given that Firefox is bad in both respects, and Chrome is at least good in one, sensible Firefox users have moved to Chrome.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 25 2014, @08:18PM
I consider myself sensible, and I resist Google on all fronts.
I've tried seamonkey, ice weasel, and am now settled on pale moon when doing new installs.
With a 3rd party compiling of pale moon for XP/Server 2003 OSes, it is now my browser of choice for anyone that is creeped out about everything they hear about personal data, or the company store (no matter whose loyalty they have sworn fealty to), etc.
Firefox clearly sold out on themselves and the userbase, even if they made nothing inherently obvious by driving their users away. I can't think of any person I know that uses it--except for perhaps the ESR version 24.5, and only because they have disabled the updating and don't surf the web much. I also do not know anyone that switched from Firefox to Chrome.
People I know/work with already either refused to use Chrome or already had it. I would even pay a modest fee to license a copy of some real firefox and keep the faith alive. I am doubting that will ever be an option; they already are getting funding to do what they are doing which nobody likes. I doubt they will get funding to do something different.