MozillaZine

Mozilla Firebird Builds with Installer Now Available for Windows

Friday November 7th, 2003

David Hallowell writes: "After a lot of hard work by Ben [Goodger], the official Mozilla Firebird installer is now available, so just like the Mozilla suite you have the option of the installer or the zip file. The installer builds are available from the usual location ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firebird/nightly/latest-trunk.

"Unlike the app suite, the installer version of Mozilla Firebird does not use the GRE."


#1 Webinstall anyone?

by tomsommer <webmaster@tsn.dk>

Friday November 7th, 2003 6:45 AM

Reply to this message

Wouldn't it be cooler if one could use webinstall, like the unoffical builds

#2 GRE

by cgonyea

Friday November 7th, 2003 6:50 AM

Reply to this message

Why doesn't it use the GRE? I thought the whole point to switching to Firebird/Thunderbird is that at some point the GRE would be used.

#3 Re: GRE

by michaelH

Friday November 7th, 2003 6:59 AM

Reply to this message

The GRE takes a bit of a performance hit with Mozilla Firebird. Hence it's not in there now. Understandable if you ask me.

#19 Re: Re: GRE

by jgraham

Saturday November 8th, 2003 7:04 AM

Reply to this message

This clearly isn't the place to ask, but I'm still interested to know whether the perf. hit from GRE is

a) Only relevant to startup speed

b) Basically an unavoidable consequence of using gecko as a dynamically linked external library rather than as a statically compiled part of firebird

I suspect that both of these things are true. I'd also like to see *how much* of a hit we're talking. Is it 1000%, 100%, 10% 1%, 0.1%? I'd guess O(10%), but without numbers this is really a wild guess.

#20 Re: Re: Re: GRE

by bzbarsky

Saturday November 8th, 2003 3:59 PM

Reply to this message

I asked bryner this same question recently (since Ben claimed bryner was the one who had done the measurements). His response was, in loose paraphrase, "We're using those perf test results for something? We should redo the measurements -- I did them a long time ago and only on Mac. I have no idea how relevant they are to today's situation."

#21 Re: Re: Re: Re: GRE

by Ben_Goodger

Saturday November 8th, 2003 7:46 PM

Reply to this message

When I get time (read: after I finish my .8 work) I'll do some Ts, Txul and PLT tests on static vs. dynamic, and post them to the project page. We can then use the results to decide how to configure the builds from then on.

#22 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: GRE

by bzbarsky

Saturday November 8th, 2003 8:33 PM

Reply to this message

Sounds excellent.

#25 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: GRE

by jgraham

Sunday November 9th, 2003 6:08 AM

Reply to this message

Excellent.

Thanks Ben

#4 Re: GRE

by opi <opi@gmx.at>

Friday November 7th, 2003 7:00 AM

Reply to this message

Only the installer do NOT use GRE ... I thought it is winamp's installer (If I'm right) but haven't try it yet.

#5 Re: Re: GRE

by opi <opi@gmx.at>

Friday November 7th, 2003 7:26 AM

Reply to this message

Tried the installer and I take back my last post.

But it's very buggi for now.

#7 Re: Re: Re: GRE

by maniac <rcsheets@acm.org>

Friday November 7th, 2003 1:08 PM

Reply to this message

How is it very buggy? It seems fine to me...

#6 Re: Re: GRE

by dave532

Friday November 7th, 2003 7:32 AM

Reply to this message

I said the installer version of Firebird, not the installer itself. The installer is Mozilla's own installer with a lot of work by Ben to improve it.

Ben mentioned in a previous post that the GRE wasn't going to be used in Firebird (at least for the moment) because of a slight performance hit. However, I think this puts Thunderbird and any other Mozilla standalone apps at a disadvantage as well as making Mozilla less attractive for embedders.

Without the GRE means that downloading Firebird + Thunderbird will be a lot bigger than download of the app suite, also means that running the two together involves loading two sets of effectively the same libraries into memory. Now if you want to also download the standalone composer and calendar then there's a lot of resource wastage.

Firebird is very quickly becoming the best browser, bar none, although not all design decisions I agree with (e.g. I prefer the search item in the urlbar auto complete rather than a separate search bar). With the right promotion I can see Firebird becoming a very popular application.

The success of Firebird could increase the appeal of Gecko to embeddors, but only if it uses the GRE. No Win32 app developer wants to include all the gecko libs in a download of their application when they can embed IE easily. However, if a lot of people have the GRE installed already then it makes the gecko option more attractive, it'd be easy to code an installer that checked for the presence of the GRE and if it's not available then downloaded that component.

#28 Re: Re: Re: GRE

by janahan

Tuesday November 11th, 2003 6:50 AM

Reply to this message

Yes i prefered the Search in the Autocomplete URL list too. I feel the seperate text box is unessasary, and wasteful. Good to know that I am not the only one with that sentiment!

#29 Re: Re: Re: Re: GRE

by kirjava

Wednesday November 12th, 2003 9:10 PM

Reply to this message

Hmm, me to. I'm using a 'g %s' keyword ATM, but it would be nice.

They should make a seperate Moz for embedding/web dev/and mail browsing is already seperate. Then they need an installer that can do all of them, with option like standard (thunderbird/firedbird/embedded/web dev/business (with mozCalc) etc.

#8 This build doesn't work for me

by mesostinky

Friday November 7th, 2003 1:43 PM

Reply to this message

I just downloaded it and installed in on my XP SP1 box. It installed fine and created a profile but after launching nothing happens. No process even shows up. Maybe its a nightly bug, but like I said after launching nothing happens. Weird.

#9 Re: This build doesn't work for me

by _rgw_ <webbs@fayette.net>

Friday November 7th, 2003 2:06 PM

Reply to this message

confirmed

#11 Re: This build doesn't work for me

by devhen

Friday November 7th, 2003 3:48 PM

Reply to this message

same problem here, XP SP1

#24 Re: Re: This build doesn't work for me

by DJGM2002

Saturday November 8th, 2003 10:40 PM

Reply to this message

Same for me also, on Windows 98/NT/2000/xp . . .

#13 Re: only if there is feature parity

by opi <opi@gmx.at>

Friday November 7th, 2003 4:11 PM

Reply to this message

Same on Win95

#14 Re: This build doesn't work for me

by max_spicer

Saturday November 8th, 2003 12:59 AM

Reply to this message

This happened to me on x86 NT as well.

#26 Re: This build doesn't work for me

by Ben_Goodger

Sunday November 9th, 2003 11:30 PM

Reply to this message

Yes, there was a problem with a chrome package not getting registered. I've fixed this now and Monday's installers should now work for everyone. There may be other problems I don't yet know about. Please file bugs in the new "Installer" component in the Firebird Product in Bugzilla.

#27 Re: Re: This build doesn't work for me

by rothkj1022

Monday November 10th, 2003 7:04 AM

Reply to this message

It's Monday, and it still doesn't work for me :(

#10 wfm

by kwanbis

Friday November 7th, 2003 3:08 PM

Reply to this message

works for me

#12 I thought the installer was going to be x-platform

by devhen

Friday November 7th, 2003 3:52 PM

Reply to this message

I read somewhere that the official installer for Firebird which was in the works was going to be built on the XPT cross-platform GUI but this is obviously a windows-only installer. What's the deal? And what are the plans for the future? Will other OS's get an official installer?

#15 Re: I thought the installer was going to be x-plat

by dave532

Saturday November 8th, 2003 2:30 AM

Reply to this message

It's the same as the installers for the app suite. Each platform will have their own native installer, I think the Linux installer is planned next.

It'd be difficult to make an installer that was built with XPToolkit because the installer would only work if Mozilla was already installed!

#16 registry entries?

by fishbert

Saturday November 8th, 2003 3:02 AM

Reply to this message

Does the installer add info to the registry so that programs such as macromedia flash/shockwave installers will recognize that Mozilla Firebird is an installed browser?

#17 Re: registry entries?

by Down8 <down8@yahoo.com>

Saturday November 8th, 2003 3:21 AM

Reply to this message

That'd be nice to know....

-bZj

#18 Re: registry entries?

by Steffen

Saturday November 8th, 2003 6:43 AM

Reply to this message

Yes, it does.

#23 Google toolbar broken

by mwardle <michael@endbracket.net>

Saturday November 8th, 2003 8:57 PM

Reply to this message

After entering a search term in the Google toolbar, pressing Enter does not start a search in this build of Mozilla Firebird. :-(

#30 Remote images?

by Samnsara

Monday November 17th, 2003 6:16 AM

Reply to this message

I am migrating to TB. I am very happy with the program, but I am unable to display remote images in messages in the preview pain. In the options section there is a check box to block these images, but it is not checked. I have checked and unchecked this box and see no differences. I have searched the form, but do not see any mention of this issue. Any suggestions would greatly be appreciated.

Thanks