• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Install regular Firefox instead of Ubuntu firefox?

Sureshot324

Diamond Member
When I run dpkg --list, in the version column for firefox it says 1.0.7-0ubuntu20. I removed firefox with apt-get and reinstalled it, but it's still the same version. I guess ubuntu hasn't updated their firefox to 1.5 yet. Is there any way to install the regular firefox instead of the ubuntu version?
 
Yes. Download it and install it.

I recommend using the one that comes with Ubuntu's package management. Using the native package management is superior to junking up the system needlessly.
 
Is there a way to get it with apt-get? I'd rather keep everything installed as a package. I might just take your advice though and stick with the ubuntu version though. Hopefully they're upgrade to 1.5 soon.
 
The Ubuntu devs are testing it I read a few days ago on the ubuntu forums. Irks me a bit as well (as a developer); I've been using it since October when beta1 came out on Windows. You might be able to install it from debian unstable repos, or you can always download it from mozilla and install it in your /home directory until Ubuntu gets up to speed.
 
1.5 will not be backported to Breezy...I guess 1.5 has a lot of changes that it would be a huge task (something like needing over 51 libraries to have to back port as well) so we will see 1.5 on dapper. If you REALLY want it, it was suggested in the backports forum to install it in your home directory and run it there since it will be contained.

Oh drats lol now I'm reading the last person's comments 😉

And I'd be against installing it through the unstable repos....Breezy+FF1.5 really don't play along
 
This is partially why it's retarded for Ubuntu to not bother with good Debian-compatability.

Installing firefox from Debian Sid should be dead easy, but there are pitfalls you have to be aware of because Ubuntu feels that since they are making something special that requires them to be incompatable.

Of course with Debian Sid I have all newer packages and software then what is avaible from Ubuntu, but thats besides the point I guess. :roll:
 
Originally posted by: drag
This is partially why it's retarded for Ubuntu to not bother with good Debian-compatability.

Installing firefox from Debian Sid should be dead easy, but there are pitfalls you have to be aware of because Ubuntu feels that since they are making something special that requires them to be incompatable.

Of course with Debian Sid I have all newer packages and software then what is avaible from Ubuntu, but thats besides the point I guess. :roll:

Hmm, I thought Ubuntu packages were basically debian packages anyway. It is my very limited understanding that ubuntu is basically just a refinement and simplification of the debian distro, being completely based on debian packages. Am I wrong?

Why would debian packages be newer if they are pretty much the same thing?
 
Originally posted by: Sureshot324
Originally posted by: drag
This is partially why it's retarded for Ubuntu to not bother with good Debian-compatability.

Installing firefox from Debian Sid should be dead easy, but there are pitfalls you have to be aware of because Ubuntu feels that since they are making something special that requires them to be incompatable.

Of course with Debian Sid I have all newer packages and software then what is avaible from Ubuntu, but thats besides the point I guess. :roll:

Hmm, I thought Ubuntu packages were basically debian packages anyway. It is my very limited understanding that ubuntu is basically just a refinement and simplification of the debian distro, being completely based on debian packages. Am I wrong?

Nope your pretty much right.

Why would debian packages be newer if they are pretty much the same thing?

Ubuntu takes a snapshot of Debian Sid to form it's basis..

Ubuntu is newer then Debian Stable, but by the time Ubuntu gets it's distro out the door Debian Sid has moved on.

But when it comes to package compatability you have to deal with keeping dependancies in sync (different programs can be compiled with different options for different dependancies and such). Also package names and versions as well as the locations of files can be inconsistant.

Debian has strict rules and policies governing all these things to make sure that packages are compatable and such, but even then there is still questions that are up in the air.

Ubuntu is of the opinion that in order to make a seperate distro you have to make some fundamental changes to the system and that basicly software compatability is unimportant. After all you have all of 'universe' which is ubuntu-ized debian packages and that should be good enough for anybody.

DCC ( http://www.dccalliance.org/) on the other hand is of a different opinion.(Xandros, Linspire, Knoppix) Progeny, one of the major backers of this 'DCC alliance' makes a living by taking Debian and repackaging it to fit specific roles.

Like if your building a embedded device, or want a corporate or school-specific distro for training or whatever reason, but lack the expertise to build and maintain your own distro you can hire Progeny to build it for your out of Debian. They beleive that you can take the 'Debian Core'.. That is the GNU/Linux portion of the system along with basic libraries and such and build unique-enough operating systems on that by adding your own 'componate'.

So in the future you should be able to build Linspire by installing Debian Stable and then installing the 'Linspire componate' over it and that would install all the linspire personality software.

So that way you acheive 2 goals:
1. A very high degree of software compatability between Debian-based distros. (to avoid what happenned to RPM-using distros; aka RPM hell)
2. Reduced costs by using software developed and tested by Debian instead of 'reinventing the wheel' to do the same thing yourself. (and Debian does a very good job of it)

Both the DCC and Ubuntu are right and wrong.. I feel that greater compatability is worth the difficulty. But that's just me. (you don't see me going around making the next 'ubuntu' do you?)

A successfull outcome of the DCC stuff depends greatly on Debian Etch becoming the next stable in a reasonable amount of time.. Which is something that historicly Debian has been VERY bad at. It appears that they are very serious about getting Etch frozen by next December, which is a remarkably short time to get a release out the door for Debian..
 
Why would debian packages be newer if they are pretty much the same thing?

Because Debian sid is always moving, it's the entry point into the distro for 99% of the packages in Debian. Packages first enter sid (unstable) then if they're in there for a certain amount of time with no major bugs filed against them it automatically moves into etch (testing) and eventually etch will be released as stable and replace sarge.

There are a few things that Ubuntu tends to have newer than Debian sid, but recently that's pretty much just Gnome since Debian is slower and more careful about those types of big merges.
 
Ubuntu takes a snapshot of Debian Sid to form it's basis..

Ubuntu is newer then Debian Stable, but by the time Ubuntu gets it's distro out the door Debian Sid has moved on.

But like debian, ubuntu packages are updated all the time. If you run apt-get upgrade there are frequently updates to your packages. I would imagine that for most packages, there is no point in modifying them to 'ubuntuize' them. They are just straight debian packages put in the ubuntu repositories. Why wouldn't they just keep putting the newest debian packages there?
 
But like debian, ubuntu packages are updated all the time. If you run apt-get upgrade there are frequently updates to your packages. I would imagine that for most packages, there is no point in modifying them to 'ubuntuize' them. They are just straight debian packages put in the ubuntu repositories. Why wouldn't they just keep putting the newest debian packages there?

I believe Ubuntu follows packaging rules similar to those of Debian stable, meaning no new versions enter the stable release. Any fixes are applied to the version already in stable and that is packaged up. It's a little annoying if you always want to have the newest version but it ensures that package interactions aren't broken by new 'features' in new versions of a package.
 
You could use Automatix

I'm using Ubuntu Breezy 5.10 and I used Automatix to install Firefox 1.5 as well as a *ton* of other stuff. It's almost too easy to install Ubuntu and use Automatix to install all of the add-ons to it. To be honest, that's the biggest reason I'm using Ubuntu instead of Fedora Core 4 right now.

Edit: Here's my Firefox 'About' info... Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051111 Firefox/1.5
 
Back
Top