[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2007/01/25]
On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 03:30:23PM -0500, Sean Conner wrote: > Obviously I didn't remember the URL correctly, but that's not that much of > a problem. The system I'm currently using is Linux with X. My computer at > work is Linux that runs X. Easy enough, just ssh to my workstation with X > forwarding and run firefox. Sure, it might be a bit sluggish, but I can get > the URL I need. That you have to open a gui instead of just grepping the obvious datafile is kind of hateful. (And you really do. Where is the profile? .mozilla .firefox? in something mumble/default/md5hash/idiocy/something/ Then the bookmarks.js or whatever is a tag-soup of incomprehensible junk..) > Sigh. I'll close my local Firefox. > > Only *then* did I get the Firefox I wanted. > > I specifically use Linux *because* it has a history of not being user > friendly and doing *exactly* what you tell it to. This business of being > *clever* is disconcerting. I wish it would stop when I wanted it to stop. > > -spc (I suppose there's some command line option to get the behavior I > want, but I certainly didn't see it when I ran "firefox -h") It seems the switch you are looking for is -no-remote. And yes, it does not appear with you run firefox -h, because firefox -h gives you the sitches supported by the program firefox. What's this -no-remote then, you say? Well THAT switch is implemented by the wrapper script. Pish tosh, a wrapper script is some silly linux distribution script, you would think. But look at the license and the copyright and you'll find this is part of the standard firefox distribution. The method for getting the wrapper script appears to be to open it in vi. At least, that's the method I used. My firefox manpage does mention it too, but that's hardly an excuse. Apparently you can also 'export MOZ_NO_REMOTE=1' although I suspect you'll be unhappy with the eventually memory load if you leave that in your environment generally. Why put obvious switches for program behavior into a wrapper script? I have no idea. I see vague hints that these are "mozilla" options, as opposed to "firefox" options. Whatever that means. "remote" also fails my clarity test. They are referring to the idea of "a remote" as in a control widgety thing that controls the central device. But that is pretty ambiguous when dealing with a windowing envonment whose probably sole advantage is that it is network transparent. And as for Linux being a 'do what I say without helping (hurting)' kind of platform, I'd say it has a pretty good track record trending towards helping (hurting). It hasn't gotten quite so far at this as more popular systems yet, but my recent survey has suggested no one is immune. Cf. OpenBSD's /etc/myname. Whose name? Wow that's friendly. -josh
Generated at 23:01 on 06 Feb 2007 by mariachi 0.52