Re: Icecat vs. iceweasel

[Christopher Allan Webber]

Ludovic Courtès writes:

> Andreas Enge <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> there are a number of sites for which I still need to use iceweasel, since
>> icecat will not work on them.
>
> AFAIK the main difference between these two is the set of plugins
> installed by default.  Otherwise it’s essentially the same thing.
>
>> the following error message is displayed:
>> IceCat has detected that the server is redirecting the request for this 
>> address in a way that will never complete.
>> This problem can sometimes be caused by disabling or refusing to accept 
>> cookies.
>>
>> Even when accepting third party cookies, the site does not work.
>>
>> Does anyone have an idea what is happening?
>
> Dunno.  You could try pinging address@hidden
>
> Ludo’.

I think that Iceweasel, requiring far fewer modifications from FireFox,
is also massively more up to date, especially the versions from
http://mozilla.debian.net/ IIRC?

Last I heard the IceCat binaries were a bit further behind.

I don't like the direction Firefox is heading, but we're a bit
constrained by IceCat not being as up to date, especially in the world
of fast and furious "new web features" and "new web vulnerabilities".

In a more ideal world, IceCat, or something like it which has community
development behind it, would totally subsume Firefox as a
community-curated web browser, not falling in with many of the nastier
bits that Mozilla has been keen to ship lately.  But I think given the
present, maybe we should provide both.

But, thoughts from others?
 - Chris