Mozilla & third party builds

[Mark Street]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

No specific tinkering that I am aware of.   I run 1.3a on my Red Hat 8 boxes 
without a problem.  Like you say, plugins may be another story.  I don't 
think the choice on which release to include is based on some secret 
formula.... whatever is most stable at the time of distro release.

You can compile your own Mozilla or install a binary package for your distro 
of Linux when it becomes available.

Enigmail installs and works peachy on my build.....

Kmail works nice too.... without all the hoops.... ; ) 

On Wednesday 01 January 2003 21:53, Lorie Obal wrote:
> I know the different distros do things to make Linux "their way" and I was
> wondering if anybody could enlighten me on basically what might be going
> on with RH & Mozilla GCC-incompatability-wise. (I'm looking at enigmail
> plug-ins right now)
>
> Yeah, I know I'll have to pick compatible versions for the plug-ins I
> want, but I was curious about the general level of tinkering going on.
> What are the release number conventions for apps with the distros?  For
> example, the Mozilla page doesn't even list a Mozilla release
> corresponding to the one that came with RH 7.1 as far as I can see.
>
>
> In general, are application releases assumed for a more "standardized"
> version of Linux?
>
> -Lorie

- -- 
Mark Street, D.C.
Red Hat Certified Engineer
Cert# 807302251406074
- --
Key fingerprint = 3949 39E4 6317 7C3C 023E  2B1F 6FB3 06E7 D109 56C0
GPG key http://www.streetchiro.com/pubkey.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+E98Ub7MG59EJVsARAtpOAJwK6nxqtH/maJ7K8tdmfAzHCAnovQCfZE4D
3nh+P2xsD7hYxXgFIGrJ+Mw=
=QiWZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----