Package Details: waterfox-classic-kpe 2020.10-0

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/waterfox-classic-kpe.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: waterfox-classic-kpe
Description: Customizable privacy conscious web browser with better integration with KDE
Upstream URL: https://www.waterfox.net/
Keywords: firefox kwaterfox plasma waterfox-classic-kde waterfox-kde
Licenses: MPL
Conflicts: waterfox-classic, waterfox-kde
Provides: waterfox-classic=2020.10
Replaces: waterfox-kde
Submitter: hawkeye116477
Maintainer: hawkeye116477
Last Packager: hawkeye116477
Votes: 8
Popularity: 0.000005
First Submitted: 2019-10-27 10:38
Last Updated: 2020-10-22 09:50

Dependencies (37)

Required by (0)

Sources (11)

Pinned Comments

hawkeye116477 commented on 2019-09-03 16:53

Binary version of this package is available on my repository on OBS and language packs are available as separete waterfox-classic-i18n-* packages.

Source files at: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:hawkeye116477:waterfox/waterfox-classic-kpe.

[home_hawkeye116477_waterfox_Arch]
SigLevel = Never
Server = https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/hawkeye116477:/waterfox/Arch/$arch

If you got 404, then temporarily try to replace download.opensuse.org with downloadcontent.opensuse.org. That should enforce direct download without mirror.

Latest Comments

1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last »

toxygen commented on 2020-08-19 00:48

package cannot be compiled without removing "ac_add_options --with-system-png" line. Same problem exists also in new firefox By removing this line from PKGBUILD, application gets compiled successfully after about two hours and supports properly the APNG (animated PNG) images.

how odd, I was using arch's libpng which apparently until a couple months ago (june 25th) was patching with apng support and waterfox was still building for me as of a week or two ago https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-packages/commits/packages/libpng/trunk

and it was removed due to some (seemingly) random issue https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/67105?project=1&string=libpng&type%5B0%5D=&sev%5B0%5D=&pri%5B0%5D=&due%5B0%5D=&reported%5B0%5D=&cat%5B0%5D=&status%5B0%5D=&percent%5B0%5D=&opened=&dev=&closed=&duedatefrom=&duedateto=&changedfrom=&changedto=&openedfrom=&openedto=&closedfrom=&closedto=&order=lastedit&sort=desc

the patch still exists https://sourceforge.net/projects/libpng-apng/

and going by the 1.6.37-2 version of libpng PKGBUILD should still work (it does for me on 1.6.37-3) by adding a few lines (you can probably diff the two PKGBUILDs, basically a source line, a sha256 line, and the gunzip/patch line). I guess I had added the patch line when 1.6.37-3 came out and forgot about it ;^)

that's neither here nor there, since arch has decided (albeit without much discussion) to just do without the apng patch and let each package that requires apng support to use a bundled version, as firefox/chrome and now waterfox are going to do.

ah well. it's not a big deal other than the extra compilation time, I suppose. but the info is there, if anyone wants to go the old way.

gerstavros commented on 2020-08-16 12:53

package cannot be compiled without removing "ac_add_options --with-system-png" line. Same problem exists also in new firefox By removing this line from PKGBUILD, application gets compiled successfully after about two hours and supports properly the APNG (animated PNG) images.

hawkeye116477 commented on 2020-04-13 15:23

Fixed

toxygen commented on 2020-04-12 19:54

https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=waterfox-classic-kpe#n68

line 68 on PKGBUILD

patch -Np1 -i ../classic-kde-xul-2020.03.patch

should be

patch -Np1 -i ../classic-kde-xul-2020.04.patch

toxygen commented on 2020-02-22 18:32

@hawkeye116477 hey that worked great, and thanks for removing that --with-system-libvpx, no errors were thrown without it.

hawkeye116477 commented on 2020-02-22 16:02

@toxygen In case of Clang issue, seems that disabling elf hack helps.

toxygen commented on 2020-02-19 00:21

looks like the patch worked, so I was able to build. Without getting into a discussion about google/safe-browsing, i'll just say I prefer it off and appreciate your work on this package.

Sadly, even though the patch worked, the clang issue is still present for me, but it's an easy downgrade (until i forget to not clean up the clang/llvm files from pacman cache) so looks like it's building fine.

on a related note, are you having issues with libvpx 1.8.x? i have to manually set --without-system-libvpx for waterfox to build, otherwise i get a vpx error as per https://github.com/MrAlex94/Waterfox/issues/860 and https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1525393

i'm on libvpx 1.8.2 and it still gives the error, so I'm guessing the issue is in waterfox/firefox, not libvpx, but I'm wondering how you got it to build.

hawkeye116477 commented on 2020-02-18 13:14

@toxygen I'm not sure if disabling Safe Browsing is good option. It may reduce security. See also https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/9tycve/how_much_of_a_privacy_issue_is_googles_safe/.

In case of that error, check if fix from https://github.com/mozilla/gecko-dev/commit/8e8d4fdf49032bbd235cc745be2eece2ddfe4141.patch helps.

You can always also branch https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:hawkeye116477:waterfox/waterfox-classic-kpe and change it to like you want.

toxygen commented on 2020-02-17 15:34

so it looks like building with latest llvm/clang is ok now, but now i'm getting some weird graphics lib error that I cant hunt down anywhere:

src/Waterfox/obj-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/dist/include/mozilla/dom/ImageBitmap.h:203:15: error: unknown type name 'gfxAlphaType' 5:17.30 gfxAlphaType aAlphaType = gfxAlphaType::Premult);

so @hawkeye116477, could you be so kind to build your binary version of waterfox-kpe-classic with additional flags:

--disable-safe-browsing --disable-synth-speechd

(only the first one is important to me, but the latter would be nice as well). Reason for this is to avoid browser from calling google on every request, as it does even when you disable in the options->security page ("Block dangerous and deceptive content). Meanwhile I'll keep hunting down that error, looks like a missing library or maybe and incompatible version.

hawkeye116477 commented on 2019-11-24 22:06

@toxygen Oops, sorry, looks like I hurried up a little, anyway on line 231 was correct, name on source field was bad.