Re: Slow firefox and high cpu usage
On Sat 13 Oct 2018 at 21:48:11 (-0400), bw wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, David Wright wrote:
> > On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 21:04:58 (-0400), bw wrote:
> > > I would sure be interested in your method of running firefox on stretch,
> > > without using extensions or addons from outside the debian repositories?
> >
> > After installing it, I type, say, my-cups to open up the browser for
> > CUPS administration. (Of course I get all the previously opened tabs.)
> > I have a slew of bash functions according to what I want to see come up,
> > like my-weather my-forecast my-radar … …
> >
> > $ type my-cups
> > my-cups is a function
> > my-cups ()
> > {
> > local SITE="${1:-http://localhost:631/}";;
> > -myfirefox "$SITE"
> > }
> > $ type -- -myfirefox
> > -myfirefox is a function
> > -myfirefox ()
> > {
> > grep -q "$HOSTNAME-$MYCODENAME" <<< "$BROWSERCODENAMES" && printf 'myfirefox %s\n' "$1" && ( /usr/bin/firefox "$1" & ) || printf '%s\n' "Incorrect release for firefox"
> > }
> > $
> >
> > As for other packages, here's a list of the origin of packages on this
> > stretch installation, but filtered with grep -v 'main_binary'
> > (it's massaged output from apt-cache dump.)
> >
> > Package: amd64-microcode Version: 3.20180524.1~bpo9+1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch-backports_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: emacs24-common-non-dfsg Version: 24.5+1-2 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: firmware-amd-graphics Version: 20180825+dfsg-1~bpo9+1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch-backports_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: firmware-ipw2x00 Version: 20180825+dfsg-1~bpo9+1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch-backports_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: firmware-iwlwifi Version: 20180825+dfsg-1~bpo9+1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch-backports_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: firmware-linux Version: 20180825+dfsg-1~bpo9+1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch-backports_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: firmware-linux-nonfree Version: 20180825+dfsg-1~bpo9+1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch-backports_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: firmware-misc-nonfree Version: 20180825+dfsg-1~bpo9+1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch-backports_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: firmware-realtek Version: 20180825+dfsg-1~bpo9+1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch-backports_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: intel-microcode Version: 3.20180807a.1~deb9u1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/security.debian.org_debian-security_dists_stretch_updates_non-free_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: iucode-tool Version: 2.3.1-1~bpo9+1 File: /var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_stretch-backports_contrib_binary-amd64_Packages
> > Package: xtoolwait Version: 1.3-6.2 File: /var/lib/dpkg/status
> > Package: youtube-dl Version: 2018.09.10-1 File: /var/lib/dpkg/status
> >
> > > I never mentioned jessie, not sure what the reference is about?
> >
> > Jessie is just a shorthand for "older versions of firefox" which is
> > what I'm comparing with FF on stretch. I've been running FF since at
> > least etch, and perhaps sarge and woody (I'm not sure what the package
> > mozilla-browser actually ran), woody being the last Debian where I ran
> > opera. I don't remember all the FF versions I have run, but they'll
> > all be listed in the mainline Debian distributions of the time.
> >
> > There seems to have been a lot of criticism here of stretch, not just
> > per se (which is to be expected as it's the current version) but in
> > comparison with previous releases, and that's doesn't match my experience.
> > If anything, vanilla stretch has been better for me than recent releases.
> >
> > > My point
> > > was that is ff needs extensions to be "secure" or reliable, and if the
> > > only place to get them is from outside the debian repo, then logically,
> > > the pkg belongs in "contrib" or plain kicked out of the repo.
> >
> > It would surely be more to the point for you to indicate what it is
> > you think I'm missing. I can tell you that Themes is default and
> > Languages is English(GB). That's it. I don't count my doctored
> > /etc/hosts as an add-on because it's not a software component.
>
> Bless your heart for going to all that trouble.
Trouble? It's just two lines of shell, using apt-cache, dpkg-query,
grep, sed and sort; the kind of thing any sysadmin could rustle up in
a couple of minutes, and then stick in a bash function (as I did,
many moons ago).
> I sure didn't need to
> see all your firmware, dear. You remind me of my elderly Aunt who always
> responds to every question with a 30 min story about feeding ducks.
>
> L8r.
Firmware is just what happens to dominate the list which was generated
automatically (as mentioned above). I've installed one package of user
software from non-free, and its appearance there seems to be caused by
some details of its licence. I've installed one ancient (squeeze)
package, xtoolwait, and one more up-to-date (buster) version of the
youtube-dl package, without which I've found it impossible to download
a good proportion of internet videos.
I posted the list to demonstrate that I'm not being economical with
the truth about having no non-free/contrib packages supporting FF.
Thus there's no reason to move FF out of the "main" distribution.
However, the rude attitude you show here is indicative of problems
stretching far beyond technical discussions of Debian.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: