Firefox and Gajim take 10 seconds to start

Here are the symptoms:

  • Firefox and Gajim take about 10 seconds’ delay to start. Other apps start instantly (less than a second).
  • Firefox and Gajim also used to start instantly.
  • I am running Manjaro in a virtual machine. Firefox and Gajim start instantly in a different VM, which was cloned from the affected VM some time ago and has had an independent use and update history.
  • After starting in the affected VM, Firefox and Gajim work normally (without delay in e.g. loading a new document).

How should I go about fixing this problem? I know I could just revert to an earlier state (snapshot) in the affected VM or back-clone from the one not having the problem. But it would be very nice to be able to fix the thing like a real sys admin. I can supply any relevant info about my system. I just don’t know what it may be. Thanks.

xdg-desktop-portal-gnome again?
( if it exists remove and replace with xdg-desktop-portal-gtk )

One thing to do would be read the update announcements thread:
[Stable Update] 2023-07-10 - Kernels, Plasma, Gnome, LibreOffice, Pipewire, Mozilla, Wine - #2 by philm
Or the forum in general:
Search results for 'firefox slow start order:latest' - Manjaro Linux Forum


If only you had looked around before posting, then you would have found that this issue has already been reported and answered about 1’000 times since the previous update to Manjaro Stable. :frowning_man:


sudo pacman -Rdd xdg-desktop-portal-gnome && sudo pacman -S xdg-desktop-portal-gtk

The command totally worked.

I will take to heart the lesson of searching the forum first. Thanks.

But if I may try to turn this otherwise repetitive and useless post into something worthwhile, how does the first person to apply the solution know (discover) that that was what you had to do?

Which is to say, is it by some process I could replicate “at home”? Or does it come from deep and extensive knowledge of how things work and therefore knowing where to look?

It was me who put together a comprehensive outline for manjaro here,
but it was really just putting together some bug reports others had made…
It just so happened also that a lot of users have xdg-desktop-portal-gnome installed erroneously because a number of things want a portal and gnome is the first suggestion alphanumerically … hence … many users not paying attention have it installed when they should not.

Thanks. Does that mean at some point I was asked to install (allow the installing of) xdg-desktop-portal-gnome or choose some more appropriate alternative? Maybe in terminal output with Y/n?

Sorta …

Some package needed xdg-desktop-portal (maybe … flatpak, for example)
xdg-desktop-portal has a number of dependencies too.
One of them is xdg-desktop-portal-imp which is not a real package, but will be fulfilled by any of the xdg desktop portal backend packages.
Here is an example output from my system
(in this case explicitly installing portal … but the result is the same)

$ sudo pacman -S xdg-desktop-portal
resolving dependencies...
:: There are 7 providers available for xdg-desktop-portal-impl:
:: Repository extra
   1) xdg-desktop-portal-gnome  2) xdg-desktop-portal-gtk
   3) xdg-desktop-portal-hyprland  4) xdg-desktop-portal-kde
   5) xdg-desktop-portal-lxqt  6) xdg-desktop-portal-wlr
   7) xdg-desktop-portal-xapp

Enter a number (default=1): 

And so you see there the multiple options, but gnome being the automatic choice simply by virtue of being first in the list.
It is also possible that certain package managers or certain options could have obfuscated this selection.
(for example --noconfirm)

Thinking what I might have done, presented with such a screen, I believe the word default might have done me in. Looks like, “If you don’t know what this means, just press 1.” So you do need deep and extensive (relatively speaking) knowledge just to get by.

Its pretty well documented, aside from it being pretty corollary (I use KDE, so kde portal, etc)
As for manjaro …
Its been enough of a problem that the ISOs now include the DE-specific-portals… ex:

So new installs wont have to think about it as much if at all. For whatever thats worth :wink:

…and … to be fair … the portals were not very common not that long ago. Most people dont know what they are, but started relying on them for wayland screens sharing and flatpak, etc. So until recently you would have to want a portal and specifically install it.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 2 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.