Re: Opera for Linux

[Will Newton <nospam [at] misconception.org.uk>]

"Chris J/#6" <sixie [at] nccnet.co.uk> tapped some keys and produced:

> I'm currently building mozilla from the source I downloaded last night. 
> Hopefully speed it up a tad by leaving a lot of crap out - also 
> switching optimisations on. Let you know how it goes. also seeing how 
> different it is with the qt instead of gtk+ libs. Speed? Look? *shrug* 
> I'll find out.

Sadly doesn't seem to make much difference how you compile it. I think
it has something to do with the foul looking XPToolkit layer.
 
> I've never had netscape 4.6 bring X down on me. Ever. It's crashed, yes, 
> but
> just itself...so maybe you've got a dodgy setup? :)

I've had both bring down my X server, on different X servers on different
machines with different distros.

> Chris...
> ps, or rather *was* building mozilla. Seems the qt stuff isn't 
> perfect...bombed out complaining about some qt stuff being too abstract 
> or summat. time to make distclean and reconfig...

Or rm -rf *... :)
I really am not impressed, if Mozilla is thousands of man hours and Opera
is a fraction of that why is Mozilla so bloated, buggy, slow, ugly,
pointlessly skinnable etc.
I have high hopes for mnemonic, but it's a long long way from being usable.
(www.mnemonic.org) At least the source tree can be downloaded in less than
a week.

-- 
H 3@H 3@

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.