Author Topic: Iron Browser  (Read 2338 times)

Offline Jaycoke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
    • PCLinuxOS Group on identi.ca Join today!
Iron Browser
« on: June 22, 2010, 01:09:26 PM »

Iron 4.0.275.2-1-pclos2010

Code: [Select]
$ iron
./iron: /usr/lib/libz.so.1: no version information available (required by ./iron)
/usr/lib/iron/iron: /usr/lib/libz.so.1: no version information available (required by /usr/lib/iron/iron)
Illegal instruction

I tried copying libz.so.1.2.3 from /lib to /usr/lib and renamed it libz.so.1 to replace the symbolic link, but no joy.

Can't find libz in the repo either (using http://pclosusers.com/pclosfiles/ )

Offline Neal ManBear

  • Administrator
  • Super Villain
  • *****
  • Posts: 15847
  • LXDE! Coffee, Bacon and Cheesecake!
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #1 on: June 22, 2010, 01:16:55 PM »
Jaycoke, libz.so.1 is provided by zlib1. It is in the repos.

Offline Was_Just19

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6852
  • MLU
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #2 on: June 22, 2010, 02:13:02 PM »
Why the note about

Quote
no version information available

though?

Any thoughts?

Offline AndrzejL

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Super Villain
  • *******
  • Posts: 12799
  • RLU #490933
    • Wordpress On The Wardrobe...
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2010, 02:15:31 PM »
This case does not belong to the broken packages section as Iron browser installs. Broken packages section contains a packages that are not installable. This issue should be posted in the Software section.

Just my $0.02 for the future use...

Andy

Offline Neal ManBear

  • Administrator
  • Super Villain
  • *****
  • Posts: 15847
  • LXDE! Coffee, Bacon and Cheesecake!
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2010, 02:20:00 PM »
I agree, Andy. This is a software issue.

Offline AndrzejL

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Super Villain
  • *******
  • Posts: 12799
  • RLU #490933
    • Wordpress On The Wardrobe...
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2010, 02:21:15 PM »
I agree, Andy. This is a software issue.

Thank You kind Sir ;)

Andy

Offline Was_Just19

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6852
  • MLU
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2010, 03:13:07 PM »
This case does not belong to the broken packages section as Iron browser installs. Broken packages section contains a packages that are not installable. This issue should be posted in the Software section.

Just my $0.02 for the future use...

Andy

So if an application installs and does not work properly it does not belong in the broken Packages section?

In that case maybe most of the threads there should be moved elsewhere  :P    :D


In this case Iron does work .......  but what is affected by the reported error?


Offline Neal ManBear

  • Administrator
  • Super Villain
  • *****
  • Posts: 15847
  • LXDE! Coffee, Bacon and Cheesecake!
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2010, 03:14:42 PM »
A broken package is a package (i.e. rpm) that is in some way broken.

Iron can be installed and does work on my system, so it isn't broken.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2010, 03:16:14 PM by Neal »

Offline AndrzejL

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Super Villain
  • *******
  • Posts: 12799
  • RLU #490933
    • Wordpress On The Wardrobe...
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #8 on: June 22, 2010, 03:22:01 PM »
A broken package is a package (i.e. rpm) that is in some way broken.

Iron can be installed and does work on my system, so it isn't broken.

Exactly. Package is a keyword here. Its not a broken software section its a broken package ie. RPM section. If it installs but its not working it belongs somewhere else ;). Otherwise all the software problems would belong to this section :).

Simple example.

Regards.

Andy

P.S. My intention is not to raise any pulses. I am just saying it for future reference. I bet Neal had nothing against moving the thread too. No hurt feelings. No problems here.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2010, 03:26:18 PM by AndrzejL »

Offline Was_Just19

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6852
  • MLU
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2010, 03:42:34 PM »
A broken package is a package (i.e. rpm) that is in some way broken.

Iron can be installed and does work on my system, so it isn't broken.


OK, then please consider this if you will .......

Iron appears to be working properly on this system too, so it is just an example ......

Iron reports what appears to me to be an error when launched from a terminal.

If that 'error' can be repaired only by a rebuild of the package, then the package is obviously broken.

At present I do not know if - in this case - it is a 'real' error that needs to be corrected, or even if it is real is it caused by the Iron package or the package that it complains about.

So in this particular case I did and do agree with moving this thread to software .......  until the cause is located, at which point maybe this or another thread would be needed in broken Packages.

All of that is by way of explanation why I disagree with Andy's post about what is and is not a Broken Package.

There have been many packages which installed and ran, but when some specific option was attempted, that failed.
Those packages were broken, until they were rebuilt to be corrected.

Quote
Its not a broken software section its a broken package ie. RPM section. If it installs but its not working it belongs somewhere else

That is what I disagree with. The cause of something not working may very well be an incorrectly built package.
If it occurs on many installs then some package is likely the cause - as opposed to a user setting or such.

Hopefully you understand what I was trying to say.

No upsets, just comments and clarifications   ;D

regards.

Offline AndrzejL

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Super Villain
  • *******
  • Posts: 12799
  • RLU #490933
    • Wordpress On The Wardrobe...
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #10 on: June 22, 2010, 04:05:24 PM »
A broken package is a package (i.e. rpm) that is in some way broken.

Iron can be installed and does work on my system, so it isn't broken.

OK, then please consider this if you will .......

Iron appears to be working properly on this system too, so it is just an example ......

Iron reports what appears to me to be an error when launched from a terminal.

If that 'error' can be repaired only by a rebuild of the package, then the package is obviously broken.

At present I do not know if - in this case - it is a 'real' error that needs to be corrected, or even if it is real is it caused by the Iron package or the package that it complains about.

So in this particular case I did and do agree with moving this thread to software .......  until the cause is located, at which point maybe this or another thread would be needed in broken Packages.

All of that is by way of explanation why I disagree with Andy's post about what is and is not a Broken Package.

There have been many packages which installed and ran, but when some specific option was attempted, that failed.
Those packages were broken, until they were rebuilt to be corrected.

Quote
Its not a broken software section its a broken package ie. RPM section. If it installs but its not working it belongs somewhere else

That is what I disagree with. The cause of something not working may very well be an incorrectly built package.
If it occurs on many installs then some package is likely the cause - as opposed to a user setting or such.

Hopefully you understand what I was trying to say.

No upsets, just comments and clarifications   ;D

regards.

Its a rule of a thumb. If package installs its not broken. Its broken only when not installing correctly. Even if the app is not working after correct installation of the package and the only way to fix it is by rebuilding the package its still not a broken package.

In other words its only broken and belongs to this section if it refuses to install.

Name of the section may be bit misleading but then Uninstallable Packages doesn't sound any better...

:P :P :P :P :P :P

Hope it makes it all clearer :D!

Andy

Offline Was_Just19

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6852
  • MLU
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #11 on: June 22, 2010, 06:27:39 PM »

Its a rule of a thumb. If package installs its not broken. Its broken only when not installing correctly. Even if the app is not working after correct installation of the package and the only way to fix it is by rebuilding the package its still not a broken package.

In other words its only broken and belongs to this section if it refuses to install.

Name of the section may be bit misleading but then Uninstallable Packages doesn't sound any better...

:P :P :P :P :P :P

Hope it makes it all clearer :D!

Andy

No, Andy, I was quite clear on what you were saying, I was just trying to clarify that I disagree with what you said.

regards.

Offline Jaycoke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
    • PCLinuxOS Group on identi.ca Join today!
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2010, 09:39:32 PM »
Hehe, sorry guys I didn't mean to get you all stirred up ;D
I should have done more investigation, I apologize. :-[

In any case, Iron runs on both of my PCLOS 2010 machines, but the original post was regarding my laptop which is running LXDE 2010. not sure how to resolve this. I would like to use Iron on my old laptop because Iron really screams, and is a great privacy alternative to Chromium.

Offline sammy2fish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3287
  • from the Prairies... Canadian MLU
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #13 on: June 23, 2010, 12:35:10 AM »
Aside from the Iron chitter-chatter...

I installed it, and found it is quite less than Firefox.  Guess you have to like it, to like it...
One of the few things I've learnt as growing older.  Is to choose your battles.. but never loose sight of the war..!

Offline Was_Just19

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6852
  • MLU
Re: Iron Browser
« Reply #14 on: June 23, 2010, 01:07:28 AM »
Hehe, sorry guys I didn't mean to get you all stirred up ;D
I should have done more investigation, I apologize. :-[

In any case, Iron runs on both of my PCLOS 2010 machines, but the original post was regarding my laptop which is running LXDE 2010. not sure how to resolve this. I would like to use Iron on my old laptop because Iron really screams, and is a great privacy alternative to Chromium.

 ;D ;D ;D   no one got stirred up, just healthy discussion is all    ;D ;D ;D

I have the same output in a terminal as you posted above, from Iron running in 2010.1 KDE.

Yet Iron still works .....  and Neal seems to have the same .....

Code: [Select]
$ iron
./iron: /usr/lib/libz.so.1: no version information available (required by ./iron)
/usr/lib/iron/iron: /usr/lib/libz.so.1: no version information available (required by /usr/lib/iron/iron)


I would like to hear from whoever built this package whether this report was there from the start or is something new .....  and what affect it may have on how Iron works .....