I have firefox and firefox-based browser called librewolf ( which is in different overlay at codeberg https://codeberg.org/librewolf/gentoo.git ). After some investigation, I got to next points: 1. To make firefox work with a geckodriver, firefox[+geckodriver] is *not* necessary. 2. To make librewolf work with a geckodriver, librewolf[+geckodriver] is *not* necessary 3. To make firefox work with Selenium library ( https://www.selenium.dev/documentation/webdriver/browsers/firefox/ ), we need a geckodriver, either from firefox[+geckodriver]:/usr/bin/geckodriver -> /usr/lib64/firefox/geckodriver or from github releases ( https://github.com/mozilla/geckodriver ) 4. To make librewolf work with Selenium through geckodriver, we need not firefox's geckodriver, but another one called unchained-geckodriver ( https://github.com/rafiibrahim8/geckodriver-unchained/ ). The geckodriver from librewolf[+geckodriver]:/usr/bin/geckodriver -> /usr/lib64/librewolf/geckodriver is actually firefox's geckodriver, which is impossible to use on librewolf. All of this is checked using the next python code in environment where Selenium library is installed ( `emerge -avtq dev-python/selenium` ): ``` from selenium import webdriver from selenium.webdriver.common.by import By from selenium.webdriver.firefox.service import Service as FirefoxService if __name__ == "__main__": options = webdriver.FirefoxOptions() options.binary_location = '/usr/bin/librewolf' # executable_path = "/usr/bin/geckodriver" executable_path = "./geckodriver-unchained-linux-0.34.0-ff-125.0.1" driver = webdriver.Firefox(service=FirefoxService(executable_path), options=options) url = "https://lite.ip2location.com/russian-federation-ip-address-ranges?lang=en_US" driver.get(url) title = driver.title driver.implicitly_wait(5) ``` Here in the code you can comment and uncomment related lines to check if it works with a combination of a geckodriver and a browser What's more interesting, because of the symlink /usr/bin/geckodriver -> ... You cannot install firefox[+geckodriver] and librewolf[+geckodriver] simultaneously, since there will be a file collision like in the bug https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=693390 I guess, the right stuff to do are either of next solutions: a. Separate geckodriver as a new packages like geckodriver-firefox:slot and geckodriver-unchained:slot , remove USE flags from both firefox and librewolf b. Separate geckodriver as a new package like geckodriver:slot with USE flag for using geckodriver-unchained ( since it's actually just a patch for geckodriver ) c. Remove the symlinks to /usr/bin/geckodriver from both packages , since selenium is stupid and cannot find those without manually writing the path, and /usr/lib64/firefox/geckodriver will be though, /usr/lib64/librewolf/geckodriver will be too d. In all packages that do the symlink make RESTRICTED_USE for to be geckodriver only for one package. Or maybe virtual/package ? e. Remove the useflags in both cases and make users to find the geckodriver by themselves ( actually a. or b. are better in comparison, since the option is like a. or b. but without gentoo's ebuild for geckodriver ) I don't know any uses of geckodriver except selenium. If you know something else that uses it and uses the symlink, it would be great to know.
Here's my proposal: - make a new standalone geckodriver package, since it's simple and doesn't indeed break firefox - remove firefox[geckodriver] use flag after a short migration period Now: I don't know how to truly incorporate the "unchained-geckodriver" into the main standalone geckodriver ebuild. I'd recommend people hosting forks of Firefox to package that in their repos. If there's a simple way to include unchained version, let me know. But it also isn't up-to-date with last official release. I want to keep the /usr/bin/geckodriver symlink just for compatibility - people might find it comfortably there in their current setups. It shouldn't collide anymore as a standalone package. > > I don't know any uses of geckodriver except selenium. If you know something > else that uses it and uses the symlink, it would be great to know. Granted I've never used geckodriver, but I thought it's kind of an API-proxy for e.g. contained Firefox, since e.g. opening links from host applications inside a contained Firefox can be complicated. Geckodriver makes it easy. That's my impression for it anyway. PR incoming shortly, please let me know what you think about it and if it can be enhanced before merging.
(In reply to Joonas Niilola from comment #1) > unchained version, let me know. But it also isn't up-to-date with last > official release. > Or maybe it is, just for some reason it looks like last tag is from 2023 but the release matches: https://github.com/rafiibrahim8/geckodriver-unchained/tags https://github.com/rafiibrahim8/geckodriver-unchained/releases/tag/0.34.0-ff-125.0.2
(In reply to Joonas Niilola from comment #2) > (In reply to Joonas Niilola from comment #1) > > unchained version, let me know. But it also isn't up-to-date with last > > official release. > > > > Or maybe it is, just for some reason it looks like last tag is from 2023 but > the release matches: > https://github.com/rafiibrahim8/geckodriver-unchained/tags > https://github.com/rafiibrahim8/geckodriver-unchained/releases/tag/0.34.0-ff- > 125.0.2 The geckodriver-unchained seems to be just a patch https://github.com/rafiibrahim8/geckodriver-unchained/blob/main/unchained.patch I guess we can do as I proposed in b. : if USE flag "unchained" is turned on for geckodriver, just add the patch. New releases are because the guy have made whole github workflow that makes releases automatically just by applying the patch.
(In reply to Joonas Niilola from comment #1) > > I want to keep the /usr/bin/geckodriver symlink just for compatibility - > people might find it comfortably there in their current setups. It shouldn't > collide anymore as a standalone package. > So, do you expect to have one geckodriver per system, am I right? If yes, it's good actually. Also then we need to ping guys from https://codeberg.org/librewolf/gentoo.git I guess
(In reply to Arniii from comment #3) > > The geckodriver-unchained seems to be just a patch > https://github.com/rafiibrahim8/geckodriver-unchained/blob/main/unchained. > patch > > I guess we can do as I proposed in b. : if USE flag "unchained" is turned on > for geckodriver, just add the patch. > This kind of conditional patching is very frowned upon, but it is a simple patch and doesn't look like it's going to break easily. Just know that it can be dropped any time it breaks and an update isn't available - although if this is everything required, it's easy to rebase until it becomes more complicated. > > So, do you expect to have one geckodriver per system, am I right? > > If yes, it's good actually. Also then we need to ping guys from > https://codeberg.org/librewolf/gentoo.git I guess Yes and yes. I'll drop the use flag for next ESR which is 128 so there's a short migration period to install the standalone. I guess we also need to use this time to re-keyword the standalone on arches currently supported by Firefox. But should be plenty enough.
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=fc5c7855d56b676e619d0fa99bd1748382e09d85 commit fc5c7855d56b676e619d0fa99bd1748382e09d85 Author: Joonas Niilola <juippis@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2024-04-25 11:33:31 +0000 Commit: Joonas Niilola <juippis@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2024-04-25 11:33:31 +0000 net-misc/geckodriver: new package, add 0.34.0 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/930568 Signed-off-by: Joonas Niilola <juippis@gentoo.org> net-misc/geckodriver/Manifest | 182 ++++++++++++++++ ...eckodriver-0.34.0-firefox-125.0-unchained.patch | 17 ++ net-misc/geckodriver/geckodriver-0.34.0.ebuild | 229 +++++++++++++++++++++ net-misc/geckodriver/metadata.xml | 14 ++ 4 files changed, 442 insertions(+)
