Welcome!

Please read this important information about MX sources lists.
News
  • MX Linux on social media: here
  • Mepis support still here
Current releases
  • MX-16.1 release info here
  • antiX-17-b1-full release info here
  • antiX-16.2 release info here
New users
  • Please read this first, and don't forget to add system and hardware information to posts!
  • Read Forum Rules

QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

Message
Author
NevilsStation
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

#31 Postby NevilsStation » Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:35 pm

Way off base.
I'm exploring & trying to understand.
I really like MX-16 and we have it running on 3 computers here.
I'd just like to have one working alternative to the google borg browser
and the behemoth firefox.
Please just ignore my posts if they trouble you.
Custom-built PC w/i7 CPU running MX-16.

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 13055
Age: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

#32 Postby Stevo » Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:38 pm

For GNOME applications, such as Epiphany, it might be possible to install a newer version via Flatpak:

https://www.ostechnix.com/flatpak-new-f ... ons-linux/

Flatpak is in our test repo or in jessie-backports.

Pale Moon is another popular browser in our main repository.

Edit: I got Epiphany 3.24 flatpak installed & running--it shows up in the menu as just "Web". It also seems very feature-poor...like all these stripped-down GNOME apps.

Code: Select all

flatpak remote-add --if-not-exists gnome https://sdk.gnome.org/gnome.flatpakrepo
sudo flatpak install gnome org.gnome.Platform 3.24
sudo flatpak install gnome-apps org.gnome.Epiphany stable


http://www.cupoflinux.com/SBB/index.php?topic=4796.0
Last edited by Stevo on Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:55 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
asqwerth
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 1693
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:37 am

Re: QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

#33 Postby asqwerth » Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:52 pm

NevilsStation wrote:Way off base.
I'm exploring & trying to understand.
I really like MX-16 and we have it running on 3 computers here.
I'd just like to have one working alternative to the google borg browser
and the behemoth firefox.
Please just ignore my posts if they trouble you.


I have already tried to give a detailed explanation why a Debian Jessie based distro will have browser versions that are current for its base but may not be the absolute latest version out there. Your question on Epiphany was already answered by my earlier post.
Desktop: Intel i5-4460, 16GB RAM, Intel integrated graphics
ASUS X42D laptop: AMD Phenom II, 6GB RAM, Mobility Radeon HD 5400

User avatar
v3g4n
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 1745
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:20 pm

Re: QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

#34 Postby v3g4n » Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:32 pm

Keep in mind that just because apps may not be the latest version they are likely still getting security updates from the wonderful Debian Security Team. Also like I said in my earlier post, good luck finding a reasonable alternative to Firefox or Chromium/Chrome. If you do find one I would like to here of it. Even Palemoon fails in comparison to the other two in my opinion, but is probably the closest. My biggest issue with these smaller developed browsers, besides not being the features I want and being overly quirky, is the security issue. I don't believe that they can possibly have the manpower required to keep up with security updates. In my opinion, if Firefox in falling behind of Chromium/Chrome in security features, then the rest are much worse, or doomed. As a basic user your browser is possible your biggest risk to a security breach.

While I just said Firefox is behind Chromium/Chrome in security features, I think that the privacy and security addons that are available make up for it and that is why Firefox remains my browser of choice, but I do keep Chromium around for specific tasks. I also choose to run both in Firejail for an extra layer of security so whatevz.

All just my 2 cents of course and look forward to your findings.

NevilsStation
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

#35 Postby NevilsStation » Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:04 pm

v3g4n wrote:Keep in mind that just because apps may not be the latest version they are likely still getting security updates from the wonderful Debian Security Team.


According to the Epiphany site 3.18.11 is the oldest version he's updating any more.

v3g4n wrote:While I just said Firefox is behind Chromium/Chrome in security features, I think that the privacy and security addons that are available make up for it and that is why Firefox remains my browser of choice, but I do keep Chromium around for specific tasks. I also choose to run both in Firejail for an extra layer of security so whatevz.


I don't have time to do the browser dance right now so I guess I'll retreat to Firefox, load helpful addons, & live with it for now.

Brave looked promising but I think I was previously informed that it's incompatible with MX-16 - it's also still under development & has many bugs.

Thanks ...
Custom-built PC w/i7 CPU running MX-16.

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 13055
Age: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

#36 Postby Stevo » Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:28 pm

Brave runs fine on MX 16, but whether you'll like it...¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Slimjet and Vivaldi also run.


Very slightly related:
A deb that has become unworkable for MX 16 is the latest Qt 5 version of Master PDF Editor, now that it also needs a newer Qt 5 >= 5.4. However, they offer a Qt 4 version in a tarball that still works if you extract it, copy the new folder into /opt, and then the .desktop file in that folder into /usr/share/applications.

It also appears that Calibre 3.4 also requires a newer Qt 5...I can compile it on Stretch, but it fails on Jessie. But it too has a manual Calibre install command that one can use that will install a newer Qt 5 runtime for it in addition to Calibre; see their home page.

User avatar
v3g4n
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 1745
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:20 pm

Re: QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

#37 Postby v3g4n » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:43 pm

NevilsStation wrote:I avoid anything Google-related like the plague as they tend to be anti-privacy

You may find Iridium of interest if you are concerned about Chromium/Googles anti-privacy.
There are many browsers out there. Chrome is fast, stable, and user-friendly but does not meet many organizations’ demands for privacy. Since the tight integration with its inventor (Google) makes many things easier it does not comply to restrictive data environments. Iridium is not another new browser from scratch. It takes the Chromium code base, which is also used for the official Chrome browser, and enhances its security and sets certain policies by default. There are many forks of Chromium-based browsers, yet in our opinion they failed in many other key areas important for adoption:

https://iridiumbrowser.de/

NevilsStation
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

#38 Postby NevilsStation » Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:00 pm

Iridium sounds interesting, thanks!
They are about to release version 60.0 (in August) so I will wait for that to appear in the MX-16 repository & then give it a spin.
Thanks again for all who make MX-16 possible!
You never cease to amaze ...
Custom-built PC w/i7 CPU running MX-16.

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 13055
Age: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: QupZilla 2.1.2 64bit

#39 Postby Stevo » Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:39 pm

We haven't been packaging any Chromium-based browsers; apparently they require very powerful machines with gobs of RAM to compile. You could see if the Iridium developers offer any .deb packages.


Return to “Software / Configuration”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests