firefox-2.0-gtk1.uci

Forum: Apps
Topic: firefox-2.0-gtk1.uci
started by: spark-o-matic

Posted by spark-o-matic on Mar. 21 2008,01:59

this is in my frugal install. I changed the default firefox (lower left last icon) to point to this instead of the default for convenience instead of multiple clicks. It is now in my backup. Could the extention do this automaticly? I am not advanced enough yet to modify extentions.
Thanks So Much

edit: Is there a way I an remove the included version to conserve recources?

Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Mar. 21 2008,05:31

Quote

Yes. Are you talking about jwm's tray icons, or ...?

You can open up the uci, add the file to the user.tar.gz, and repackage the uci (there's some info in the wiki to start with). You're hinting that you don't want to modify extensions though, so you could just make an extension just for that file instead.

Quote

edit: Is there a way I an remove the included version to conserve recources?

You can remaster the KNOPPIX image. The resource you'd save would be storage space (unless you are using toram).

Posted by mikshaw on Mar. 21 2008,07:14

Quote

Could the extention do this automaticly?

There is no way an extension can automatically do anything. The installation process deals only with making the application files available to you. Any automated tasks must be done by the user. Having that modified icon in your backup is the standard way of making changes like this in a frugal system.

If the extension is being loaded automatically at boot, there should be no need to do anything special. Your backup restores after the extensions are loaded, so any modifications you make to personal files override those of the extension. If you are loading it manually after booting, though, then you will have issues with custom files.

If you really do want to make changes to the extension, Firefox has the quality that it can be put wherever you want and it will still run fine, so you can copy the firfox directory into your home directory (for example) and make whatever changes you need. After that you don't even need to rebuild the extension if you don't want to...just run the application wherever you put it.

Posted by spark-o-matic on Mar. 21 2008,13:36

OK, maybe I'm catching on? A MyDSL Extension is just pre-compiled for my convenience. If I want other things to happen I could write an executable in most any language that loads the extension and does what ever else I want then put an icon to that any place handy.
As an example, I just set up a computer w/ DSL and Apache loading on startup and starting the server in .xinitrc. Luckily i added the Apache configuration files to my backup BEFORE making a bunch of changes. But supposing I did not want it to load at start, I could write something that would load Apache then copy the files from some place else and start the server. Or open up the tar.gz and replace the files. Am I on the right track?
Yes, JWM Tray Icons. I can see where changing icons automaticly could end up having to detect which window manager is in use etc... and would increase file sizes and decrease compatibility. And using toram on that computer.
Thanks

Posted by mikshaw on Mar. 21 2008,14:36

I believe your assumptions are correct.

Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Mar. 21 2008,19:36

Side note: fyi, typically .xinitrc is be reserved for X dependent apps

Posted by spark-o-matic on Mar. 21 2008,20:09

It would be better started in bootlocal.sh? or...? I could use Apache and other non-x dependant in run level 2 and only start a window manager if there was a reason to? Is backgrounding w/ & valid in bootlocal? Is that the equivalent of multitasking? I saw something that *nix is based around the kernel (or? don't recall) were win is based around the window manager.

Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Mar. 22 2008,01:08

bootlocal would be better for root non-X startup, and afaik user scripts are to be placed in a login shell script.
And so your assuming of not running X would be correct.
Backgrounding with a & is valid in any script as it is part of the shell.

Not sure what you mean by multitasking.
Afaik most OS's are built around a central kernel. Windows (NT) does this as well but has some kind of mixed/hybrid kernel of which details I don't know but you could look up. Afaik earlier Windows contained applications built upon DOS.

Posted by spark-o-matic on Mar. 22 2008,05:22

multitasking was a term used a lot about win 3.x's ability to run multiple apps and coordinate sharing things like processor time and memory v.s msdos usualy couldn't. taskman was the task manager. Now it's used more as part of a job description. Like a receptionist doing a bunch of things at once.
Could you point me in the direction of a good site where I could pick up the fundiimental concepts just like that one, without pages of step by step instructions or all the gory details?
thanks