[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Update on Icecat 115

From: chippy
Subject: Re: Update on Icecat 115
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2023 14:52:33 +0200

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 16:52 +0200, al3xu5 wrote:
> > Wed, 06 Sep 2023 17:45:27 +0200 - chippy via help-gnuzilla
> > <>:
> > 
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > Good news and bad news. 
> > > > 
> > > > Good news first:
> > > > 
> > > > I managed to build Icecat version 115.1.0esr.
> > 
> > Could you give detailed steps of the build process, please?
> > 
> > Regards
> > alexus
> > 
> > 
Hi Alexus,

essentially the steps for building icecat 115 should be the same as
icecat 102, once you adjust the script to the changes required for it
to work against version 115.

In my case after running makeicecat, I cd into output/ and
run `./mach configure`

After that I run `./mach build`.

Then if you are interested in installing it on the same machine you can
just do `sudo make install`, if instead you want to install it on
different machine you will have to build the Debian package (I say
Debian because that's my OS). To accomplish that you cd in the
directory obj-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu from where to run `sudo
checkinstall`. You need to install checkinstall from apt if you don't
have done it already.

The first time I tried it failed and by trial/error I figured what to
install in order to complete the configure and the build, like wasm and
some libraries.

If you instead are asking about version 115, I'm just trying and see if
I can get it to work, but it's nothing official. 
So in that case you can find in previoue messages the changes I made to
makeicecat and the few workaround I had to take in order to finish the
build (if you have specific questions let me know).
Ideally, makeicecat should make all the changes in the source, but
adjusting some of these, would have taken time and I instead wanted to
get to a semi-functional build, so in this case 'workaround' means that
I changed the source AFTER running makeicecat (which we should not). 
I had to do that way, because for instance,  I had to swap two lines
and while it looks trivial job, in this context I want to avoid
introducing a new dependencies (like tac)

Unfortunately as you might have read in previous messages, the browser
is not behaving as expected (i.e. it phones home and contacts third
parties services and Librejs wasn't there too), meaning  that there are
either unapplied changes for any given reason or new code from Firefox.
One example is that some files were renamed in 115 source with a
different extension, so changes were not applied to those files. I
expect others like this, and in this case someone with experience on
Firefox might give a substantial help.

At next iteration, on coming Monday I guess, I'll start clean and do
well commented microcommits and put it on Codeberg.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]