Disaster strikes - SeaMonkey removed from ports tree

trev said:
but v6.0.1 on 12-STABLE which seems a tad odd.
Click to expand...
You have an old 12-STABLE.

Code: 
dice@molly:~ % uname -a
FreeBSD molly.dicelan.home 12.0-STABLE FreeBSD 12.0-STABLE r350537 MOLLY  amd64
dice@molly:~ % clang --version
FreeBSD clang version 8.0.1 (tags/RELEASE_801/final 366581) (based on LLVM 8.0.1)
Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd12.0
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /usr/bin
dice@molly:~ %

Not sure when it was updated, it was a few weeks ago I think.
 
Curious.

FreeBSD ghost 12.0-STABLE FreeBSD 12.0-STABLE #3 r350546: Sat Aug 3 12:22:45 AEST 2019
trev@shadow:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/MACMINI amd64

[EDIT] Oops, looks like I built the world and the kernel, but forgot to install the world after rebooting with the new kernel. That'll teach me to $ make -j4 buildworld && make -j4 kernel instead of make -j4 buildworld && make -j4 buildkernel!
 
I was strolling along fine until I ran pkg upgrade yesterday. My locked package of SeaMonkey was deleted.
Don't ask me how it became unlocked, but luckily another laptop had a seamonkey.txz in its /var/cache/pkg/ and I scp'ed the file over pkg add'ed it back but also needed to copy /usr/local/lib/libevent-2.1.so.6 over.
After that it was back to normal.
Trying out Otter-Browser as my refuge.
 
Phishfry said:
I was strolling along fine until I ran pkg upgrade yesterday. My locked package of SeaMonkey was deleted.
Don't ask me how it became unlocked, but luckily another laptop had a seamonkey.txz in its /var/cache/pkg/ and I scp'ed the file over pkg add'ed it back but also needed to copy /usr/local/lib/libevent-2.1.so.6 over.
After that it was back to normal.
Trying out Otter-Browser as my refuge.
Click to expand...
I don't know why but I don't like Otter much.
 
I am outraged!!! Thank god I decided to have a look at what pkg upgrade was actually going to do today so I could stop it! I have so many passwords stored in Seamonkey for several sites and also bookmarks. So now I have to look in options/security/passwords and write them down all, or is thre an "export" function to use them in firefox? Can we start a petition here to make the port maintainers include seamonkey again??? I don't care much about security issues, I want to keep on using seamonkey!
 
cabriofahrer said:
Can we start a petition here to make the port maintainers include seamonkey again
Click to expand...
So, if I understand correctly, you want to start a petition to make others do, on their spare time (remember, port maintainers are volunteers), what you do not want to do. You have everything you need to make a port and shoot yourself in the foot.
cabriofahrer said:
I don't care much about security issues, I want to keep on using seamonkey!
Click to expand...
Fine, just stop upgrading your system.
 
cabriofahrer said:
Some people sometimes just seem to forget that others are just end-users.
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong in being end-users. But in open source project, you ask, you do not require. So there is no point in starting a petition to make someone else do something for you. And if the request is based on the hypothesis that "I don't care much about security issues", you are pretty much on your own.
 
I am sorry if by my post I have violated some convention. I thought a petition was "asking", or at least making aware that there are users that feel left down and would like to continue using a certain software. And I don't think it is just for me, I did not even start this thread, so there are others affected.
 
Well, according to the Cambridge dictionary:
make sb do sth : to force someone or something to do something:
Click to expand...
So in your wording, it was more a petition to force him, not to ask him, hence the misunderstanding.

There have been several threads now asking how to continue using unsupported software. At the moment, there are 2749 ports that depend directly on lang/python27 and I assume a lot of them do not come with other flavors (by picking randomly among them). This version of python will become unsupported starting from 1 January 2020 and there is a risk to see more of those threads popping up here and there.

I don't see why we would ask a port maintainer to maintain a port if, according to him, it represents a security problem. Prove him wrong on that matter and he might reconsider. But if the only reason you give him is "It's convenient and I don't care about security", I doubt he is gonna change his mind.
 
cabriofahrer said:
What kind of answer is that? If everybody here was able to make ports themselves, nobody would complain. Some people sometimes just seem to forget that others are just end-users.
Click to expand...

And what kind of obligation would there be? I always considered the whole project as a gift - as something I get without doing anything for. And I am respectful and thankful for that.

If people deside to drop this piece of software, then one can either accept it, or fix it. I suppose nobody has tagged You an "end-user" and insisted that that has to stay that way.
 
The good news is that SeaMonkey still compiles and runs successfully under FreeBSD 12.0-RELEASE-p9 GENERIC amd64 after the following tweak:

In /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.gecko.mk, temporarily comment out the line:

webp_MOZ_OPTIONS= --with-system-webp

otherwise the build fails almost immediately with "unknown option --with-system-webp".

More good news from the SeaMonkey blog:

rg | August 16, 2019 at 8:57 pm

Full theme support is only dead after 2.57 (ESR60) There are currently no plans and no manpower to tackle post 60 releases. We will first do 2.53 and 2.57 (including at least security backports) and then see what the future brings. And no that does not mean that SeaMonkey is dead!
Click to expand...
 
hukadan said:
I don't see why we would ask a port maintainer to maintain a port if, according to him, it represents a security problem. Prove him wrong on that matter and he might reconsider. But if the only reason you give him is "It's convenient and I don't care about security", I doubt he is gonna change his mind.
Click to expand...

I guess that I have to admit that my statement about security yesterday was not very wise and more a result of my shock at that moment. But I do remember seeing messages after installing packages with warnings considering security issues, so why could this not have been done with seamonkey as well? A message with a warning thus leaving it up to the end-user if he wants to continue using it or not?

And, if I may ask, which security problems are there with the obviously outdated version of seamonkey?

trev said:
The good news is that SeaMonkey still compiles and runs successfully under FreeBSD 12.0-RELEASE-p9 GENERIC amd64 after the following tweak:

In /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.gecko.mk, temporarily comment out the line:

webp_MOZ_OPTIONS= --with-system-webp

otherwise the build fails almost immediately with "unknown option --with-system-webp".
Click to expand...

So how exactly do you do that, when in the portstree the folder "seamonkey" does not even exist anymore?

And in reference to the good news from the seamonkey blog, does this mean that the port would be included again in the future, when the security issues are fixed?
 
Lupin_IV said:
In the meanwhile Seamonkey 2.49.5 has been released... :(
Click to expand...

Does that mean it can be included in the ports again?

yuripv said:
What is so great in seamonkey that is missing from modern Firefox?
Click to expand...

It's the whole look and feel that barely has changed since the old Netscape. Especially the menus for the settings/preferences are clearly arranged and I find my way much better than in the modern settings of firefox and thunderbird. I like the fact that the e-mail client is integrated and that therefore, you can send a webpage (not just a link) directly as an e-mail.
 
yuripv said:
What is so great in seamonkey that is missing from modern Firefox?
Click to expand...

It contains a netnews reader. Netnews is still a practical solution to collect system reports, mailinglists and other repeating textual reports into a common browseable structure, and even reply to them. Certainly there are other approaches possible, and likely there are other netnews readers available, but then that makes a bit of work.
 
yuripv said:
What is so great in seamonkey that is missing from modern Firefox?
Click to expand...
Wow where do I start.
I just setup Ubuntu for a client and it seems like every version FF are changing where the Privacy and Security settings are located.
This is not an accident. The Mozilla Foundation is driven by money, not your privacy.
A simple glance at the 'Search Providers' list should be a big-ole-cluebat.
Amazon and Ebay are not search engines. PERIOD.
The Mozilla Foundation is paid-off by these companies to include them.

The Mozilla Foundation and Firefox have lost their way.
That is what pisses me off by removing the real "community built Mozilla port"(Seamonkey).
Firefox is changing so rapidly that SeaMonkey can't keep up. Some of these changes are really bad for us users.
I am well aware of SeaMonkeys vulnerabilities. I am grown up and can manage risk. Please don't try and be my nanny.
 
cabriofahrer said:
Does that mean it can be included in the ports again?
Click to expand...
Yes, it does mean this. SeaMonkey should be where it belongs - in FreeBSD ports, since it's a living, maintained project. It's so easy to dismiss some software because the frequency of its update cycle may not be on par with that of its major counterparts, but it's not a good reason for deleting it from FreeBSD ports with such explanation, when there's plenty of bizarre old browsers available via the ports - and no one raises a question of their vulnerabilities?
 
evilive said:
Yes, it does mean this. SeaMonkey should be where it belongs - in FreeBSD ports, since it's a living, maintained project.
Click to expand...
Does this mean you're volunteering to maintain that port? Even if the port was resurrected it's still going to need a maintainer. Without a maintainer it's going to become stale again, and eventually it will be removed. Again.

evilive said:
when there's plenty of bizarre old browsers available via the ports - and no one raises a question of their vulnerabilities?
Click to expand...
Which ones?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top