or How Mozilla® Corporation is FUDing on Debian. Again.
This time, Christopher Beard, Mr Mozilla® Marketing is talking about Firefox® in Ubuntu, that it's great, Ubuntu is a good boy, that it cooperates with Mozilla®, and that by cooperating, it can use the great Firefox® name and logo.
To be honest, I don't care that Ubuntu calls Firefox® Firefox® instead of Iceweasel or whatever. I don't care that Ubuntu doesn't care about freedom as much as Debian does. I could not care less.
But, indeed, I do care about (yet other) false claims about Firefox® in Debian.
Let's see what Christopher has to say about it:
I understand that Ubuntu is based upon Debian. Is that the same or different than the IceWeasel browser that Debian is shipping with their latest release?
It's different. The patches that Debian applied to the Mozilla source code (which then resulted in their IceWeasel product) are more significant in scope than those in what Ubuntu is shipping (and branding as an official Mozilla Firefox release). Firefox in Ubuntu represents a somewhat more modest set of divergences from original Mozilla source code.
Let's check out what it is about. And as I don't want people to doubt my words, I'll give you, readers, the ability to check for yourself what it is all about.
First, please download the latest currently available patch for Firefox® 2.0 beta 2 in Debian. It has been in experimental for some weeks now. It is a bit different from the patch I described earlier, so I'll also tell you what has been changed since this 2.0b2 patch:
- security/coreconf/rules.mk is not patched for the perl dependencies thing any more because the patch (taken from bugzilla #325148) has been applied in Firefox® 2.0rc1
- The patch from bugzilla #336056 has been applied because the directory in which we would build the 2.0rc1 version contained a ~ character, which would make the build fail because of this bug.
- The patch from bugzilla #294879 has been applied for obvious reasons. It has been applied later in the Firefox® 2.0 release process.
(Also note that another change has been done since then, which is actually reverting a previous patch on gfx/src/gtk/mozilla-decoder.cpp, that was adding code that became dead code when we changed the way to fix the bug.)
Next, please download the official and supported Firefox® diff from Ubuntu.
Uncompress both these diff files, and create two directories (let's call them ubuntudiff and debdiff) which will contain the individual patches for each file. To fill these directories, please use the following commands:
$ filterdiff --strip=1 firefox_2.0+0dfsg-0ubuntu3.diff > ubuntu.diff
$ filterdiff --strip=1 firefox_1.99+2.0b2+dfsg-1.diff > deb.diff
$ cd ubuntudiff
$ splitdiff -d -a ../ubuntu.diff
$ cd ../debdiff
$ splitdiff -d -a ../deb.diff
If you don't have the splitdiff and filterdiff utilities, you can get them from the patchutils tools (you will also need another of these tools later).
Now, let's have fun with these split patches...
Files that are only patched in Debian: (excluding any file that would be in the debian subdirectory, that contains maintainer scripts for build and installation)
$ LANG=C diff -ru debdiff/ ubuntudiff/ | grep "^Only in deb" | grep -v debian | wc -l
6
So, that's 6 files that Debian patches that Ubuntu doesn't. Let's check what they are:
$ LANG=C diff -ru debdiff/ ubuntudiff/ | grep "^Only in deb" | grep -v debian
(reordering result for convenience)
Only in debdiff/: browser_base_content_aboutDialog.xul
Adds rows=5 to the user agent textbox so as to display the user agent string uncut by default
Only in debdiff/: content_html_content_src_nsGenericHTMLElement.cpp
Only in debdiff/: content_html_content_src_nsHTMLInputElement.cpp
Only in debdiff/: dom_src_base_nsGlobalWindow.cpp
It's a patch I submitted in bugzilla #343953 and that got applied in Firefox® 2.0. No surprise the patch is not applied on Ubuntu.
Only in debdiff/: extensions_reporter_Makefile.in
Patch I submitted in bugzilla #354413 and that got applied in Firefox® 2.0.
Only in debdiff/: security_coreconf_rules.mk
Patch from bugzilla #325148 that got applied in Firefox® 2.0 (see above), and a small patch to build the NSS library with debugging symbols (put -g in CFLAGS).
That leaves only 2 small patches : CFLAGS = -g added to security/coreconf/rules.mk and rows=5 to browser/base/content/aboutDialog.xul
Files that are only patched in Ubuntu: (same exceptions as for Debian)
$ LANG=C diff -ru debdiff/ ubuntudiff/ | grep "^Only in ubuntu" | grep -v debian | wc -l
45
Yes, that's right, that's 45 files that Ubuntu patches that Debian doesn't. Most are windows sizes and similar things that upstream can't get right because they are values adapted to Windows, but that also includes some changes to the code and some other things.
Let's now check differences in files that are patched in both. It's a bit of shell black magic, but you can check by hand that it does nothing wrong :
$ LANG=C diff -ru debdiff/ ubuntudiff/ | filterdiff -p1 -x configure -x debian"*" | lsdiff --strip=1 | while read f; do diff -u debdiff/$f ubuntudiff/ | awk "! /^---|^\+\+\+|^ |^[-+]*\@\@/ { print \"$f\"; exit}"; done
That gives a list of patch files that have more differences than line numbers changes, and that do not apply to the debian directory or the configure script (which is generated from configure.in), which is what we really want to compare here. You can take this list and run interdiff between these files from the ubuntudiff and debdiff directories. I'll explain for you what these differences are:
- Makefile.in: Ubuntu adds a line in order to install the NSS include files,
- browser_app_Makefile.in: Patch from bugzilla #314927 applied by Debian
- browser_app_profile_firefox.js: (interdiff fails because the changes apply to different versions of the file) Ubuntu changes the homepage, and sets profile.allow_automigration to false,
- config_autoconf.mk.in: Ubuntu changes includedir and idldir,
- configure.in: Ubuntu changes MOZ_APP_DISPLAYNAME, and adds some echos,
- gfx_src_gtk_nsFontMetricsXft.cpp: Ubuntu sets FC_ANY_METRICS to some patterns,
- intl_lwbrk_src_nsJISx4501LineBreaker.cpp: Patch from bugzilla #161826 applied by Debian for sparc64, which is not an architecture supported by Ubuntu,
- modules_libpref_src_init_all.js: Ubuntu changes some default fonts from serif to sans-serif, while Debian changes fonts for serif, sans-serif and monospace (setting to generic names instead of Times, Helvetica and Courier) ; I think both should be applied in Debian, actually. Ubuntu also sets dom.event.contextmenu.enabled to false,
- security_nss_lib_freebl_unix_rand.c: (interdiff fails because the changes apply to different versions of the file): both patches have the exact same effect, but are different due to changes to original file between 2.0rc1 and 2.0 final.
Overall, Ubuntu applies the same set of patches as Debian, plus some more. A somewhat more modest set of divergences, huh ?!?
For what it's worth, Ubuntu, like Debian, builds its Firefox® with flat chrome and pango enabled.
What's different in the shipping Ubuntu version of Firefox than the proposed Debian version of Firefox (that didn't ultimately ship)?
Technically, changes include fixes to the User Agent string and the feed preview, a well as addressing issues of coherent branding. More significant than any specific difference in code, however, is Ubuntu's commitment to work together with Mozilla and our community on releases going forward to insure product quality and integrity.
Why are you working with Ubuntu when you wouldn't work with Debian?
We did try to work with Debian and would prefer a situation in which we work together. Ultimately, Debian took a position that was consistent with their own policies, and not compatible with some of the exceptions to Mozilla trademark policies that we offered. While we understand and respect their decision not to work with us under our branding guidelines, Mozilla believes that brands like Firefox are important for consumer protection. In any event, Ubuntu developers are working closely with Mozilla developers to insure product quality and features that are what users expect when they use Mozilla Firefox, which means that they'll ship (and will continue to ship) a fully branded version.
Reading between the lines, that means Debian is not working with Mozilla. It's not like we're submitting patches. No. Never. Ever. I'm also glad to hear from Asa Dotzler, in comments to Mr Beard's article, that this great collaboration with Ubuntu will lead to patches applied to Firefox® (I guess the paid Canonical employees having more time to deal with Mozilla® than the volunteer Debian maintainers may have helped, especially considering they didn't have to do all what we already prepared). Anyways, it's not like some of the patches we sent got applied.
So, while I'm at it, here is an exhaustive list of the bugs where we took or sent the patches that are applied to Iceweasel: #51429, #161826, #252033, #258429, #273524, #287150, #289394, #294879, #307168, #307418, #314927, #319012, #322806, #323114, #325148, #326245, #330628, #331781, #331785, #331818, #333289, #333308, #343953, #345077, #345079, #345080, #345413.
These don't cover the following patches (see the rationale for these in my previous article):
- security/manager/Makefile.in, security/nss/cmd/shlibsign/Makefile: Don't build the shlib signatures, see the rationale in my previous article,
- security/nss/cmd/shlibsign/manifest.mn: Don't build the mangle utility,
- browser/app/Makefile.in: Force linking against libxpcom.so despite -Wl,--as-needed,
- browser/app/profile/firefox.js, gfx/src/gtk/fontEncoding.properties, modules/libpref/src/init/all.js: Preferences changes,
- browser/base/content/aboutDialog.xul: That's one of the patches that Debian applies that Ubuntu doesn't. See above,
- config/autoconf.mk.in: Remainings of an old patch for pangocairo, which is now useless, and setting of mozappdir,
- config/rules.mk, configure.in: Patch from Thiemo Seufer to increase stability and performance on mips, useless upstream until bugzilla #258429 is fixed, but on my to_send list,
- extensions/inspector/Makefile.in: Something that should be added to #331785, but well, it's WONTFIX, anyway,
- layout/build/Makefile.in, layout/build/nsLayoutModule.cpp: Change to the Gecko string,
- modules/libpref/src/nsPrefService.cpp: Add a preferences directory for /etc/firefox/pref,
- widget/src/gtk2/nsWindow.cpp: Extended mouse buttons support, on my to_send list,
- configure.in, xpcom/reflect/xptcall/src/md/unix/Makefile.in: Basic patch for bugzilla #343975,
- configure.in: Check for pangoxft.
It's so great to spend a great amount of time on a package, send patches, try to understand how things work to get patches applied, and yet, see such denial and false claims about our work. So please, Christopher, Asa, and the others, just stop talking about Debian, it will be better for everyone.
PS for Rob in comments out there: No, ColorZilla won't work on Ubuntu, because of the ABI incompatibility I explained in my previous entry, that Mozilla® doesn't seem to care much about.
