Sender: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 2 Jul 2010 17:14:36 -0400 |
MIME-version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
multipart/signed;
boundary="Signature=_Fri__2_Jul_2010_17_14_36_-0400_gCgUGzsgNShtTbmx"; micalg=PGP-SHA1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature" |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Organization: |
p2o2.net |
Comments: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 08:52:39 -0500
Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
(...)
> > After running then closing FF 4.0beta, and starting 3.6.4 (SL 5.5.
> > current), the FF checks for expansions (correct) but it detects too
> > that I'm using unsafe version and suggests to install 3.6.6.
> >
> > How it is with the versionning in SL?
> >
>
> It isn't really the versioning, it is the configurations.
> By default, the firefox that comes from SL (or RHEL) does not check
> to see if it is the latest firefox.
Thank you, I nearly forgot about this option but my question went a
little deeper. Is the SL FF 3.6-8 the same as general FF 3.6.4 or 3.6.6
(newest)?
"About" FF says: Red Hat/3.6-8.el5 Firefox/3.6.4
so - is the version safe (the -8 suffix) or should I (we) ask for
3.6.6 SL package (3.6-9.el5....?) as Mozilla (parent company) presses
for the changes in FF use due to safety issues?
> Sylpheed is not part of Scientific Linux, but the dag or rpmforge
> repository, so this is not the right place to ask your question about
> it. Please ask your question about sylpheed on their mailling list.
OK, but I found Dag repo on SL FTPs
http://ftp1.scientificlinux.org/linux/extra/dag/redhat/el5/en/x86_64/RPMS.dag/
I understand it was put there just for our convenience. Anyway, I asked
Mr Dag Wieërs about the lack of spell-checker option and now I wait for
his replay.
Thank you for your help.
Regards
--
Przemysław Pawełczyk (P2O2)
http://pp.blast.pl, [log in to unmask]
|
|
|