Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] WG: Restore Classic Print Preview Dialog Box UI in Mozilla Firefox

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2021, Tanstaafl wrote:


On 3/30/2021 10:50 AM, Tanstaafl wrote

Most importantly, like Thane said, I won't be coming back... unless
Mozilla does something spectacular to make me give it another look -
like, opening up the UI to Addons at the same or similar level that
XUL allowed.


Oh - and only if Mozilla puts an end to the Identity Politics garbage.


Well,
there aint no such thing as a free lunch !

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1601558 and signon.includeOtherSubdomainsInLookup

[Andrew C Aitchison]

Von: Mike Kaply 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. MÀrz 2021 14:53
An: Osdoba, Sascha 
Cc: enterprise@mozilla.org
Betreff: Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] 
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1601558 and 
signon.includeOtherSubdomainsInLookup

All prefs that begin with signon. are included in the Preferences policy:

https://github.com/mozilla/policy-templates/blob/master/README.md#preferences

Mike


On Tue, 16 Mar 2021, Osdoba, Sascha wrote:


doubled checked Mozilla->Firefox->Preferences but cant see them and yes latest 
GPO templates are in place

Please check my screenshot. May I am blind or just too old or both ;-)


The page Mike linked (to) says:

   NOTE On Windows, in order to use this policy, you must clear
   all settings in the old Preferences (Deprecated) section.


From the image you sent, I can see that you will need to do this.


--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] [From: External] Re: Firefox and OneDrive

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021, Verstraete, John wrote:


I appreciate your thoughts on the subject but I tend to disagree,
there are other applications that support more than one service and
giving the capability to choose from several of the most popular
services such as OneDrive, NextCloud and Google Cloud to name a few
and not be limited to only one product. In certain situations such
as mine it would make it easier for users and IT staff to find the
data that is needed when moving from computer to computer all in one
place. All I am asking is it possible to direct Firefox data to
OneDrive and have it available no matter the computer the user is
logged onto.


Even if support for OneDrive, iCloud or whatever were built in to Firefox
*each computer* would have to know your account details on that cloud.
Given that, I don't think it is any harder to install the appropriate
addon or extension *for all users* at the same time.

This does assume that Firefox makes it simple to install the addon or
extension *for all users*. If not, that is where the work should be put.

Whether the cloud support is native to Firefox or an addon/extension
the boot-strap problem remains; how does Firefox know which cloud *account*
to use and importantly, how does it authenticate, in order to read the user
data ...

Edge can cheat, since it would like to assume your Windows login and
your OneDrive are connected to the same account. Similarly Google Chrome 
tries to link your browser login to your gmail account.



-Original Message-
From: Enterprise  On Behalf Of Andrew C 
Aitchison
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 12:16 PM
To: enterprise@mozilla.org
Subject: [From: External] Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox and OneDrive

CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.

On Wed, 10 Mar 2021, Verstraete, John wrote:


I am looking for a way to sync me Firefox profile with OneDrive, I
know that there is a sync service inside Firefox and can be used in
the same manner as OneDrive but it is company policy we use OneDrive
for these purposes. One of the largest reasons why we want to use this
feature is of course have users retrieve their settings no matter
which pc they logon to but also during pc refreshes it allows for a
faster turnaround when all user data is stored into one cloud service.

I have read articles on add-ons and extensions that can be installed
but this doesnâ??t seem like a good fit, it would be nice to be able
to natively configure Firefox to sync profiles with OneDrive. Has
anyone done this or is it possible, if it is not possible is it in the
works to make it possible?


Given the number of cloud services, until and unless there is a standard 
interface (I like Tim BL's idea of user's having control of who can access 
which bits of data, implemented in Solid Pods*), I would prefer that Firefox 
does not attempt to support all of them natively.

Nor should it show favouritism, so it should support *none* of them natively 
(OK I'll accept the Mozilla/Firefox one); addons/extensions *are* the way to go.

* https://solidproject.org/
Solid is a specification that lets people store their data securely in 
decentralized data stores called Pods.


--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox and OneDrive

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Wed, 10 Mar 2021, Verstraete, John wrote:


I am looking for a way to sync me Firefox profile with OneDrive, I
know that there is a sync service inside Firefox and can be used in
the same manner as OneDrive but it is company policy we use OneDrive
for these purposes. One of the largest reasons why we want to use
this feature is of course have users retrieve their settings no
matter which pc they logon to but also during pc refreshes it allows
for a faster turnaround when all user data is stored into one cloud
service.

I have read articles on add-ons and extensions that can be installed
but this doesnâ??t seem like a good fit, it would be nice to be able
to natively configure Firefox to sync profiles with OneDrive. Has
anyone done this or is it possible, if it is not possible is it in
the works to make it possible?


Given the number of cloud services, until and unless there is a
standard interface (I like Tim BL's idea of user's having control of
who can access which bits of data, implemented in Solid Pods*),
I would prefer that Firefox does not attempt to support all of them natively.

Nor should it show favouritism, so it should support *none* of them natively
(OK I'll accept the Mozilla/Firefox one); addons/extensions *are* the way to go.

* https://solidproject.org/ 
Solid is a specification that lets people store their

data securely in decentralized data stores called Pods.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Flash in 78.5 ESR

[Andrew C Aitchison]

Interesting.

I can still allow (the Ubuntu compiled version of) firefox 64bit v83.0
to show flash content.

I appear to have non-default values for the following firefox settings:

flashblock.whitelist
plugin.flash.arch   x86_64-gcc3
plugin.flash.blockliststate 0
plugin.flash.desc Shockwave Flash   32.0 r0
plugin.flash.lastmod_hi
plugin.flash.lastmod_lo
plugin.flash.path
plugin.flash.version32.0.0.445
plugin.state.flash  1
plugins.flashBlock.enabled  false

(I see that Ubuntu are not shipping hte latest flash plugin v32.0.0.453 )

On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Hoang (US), Victor T wrote:


Sorry if this has been addressed before.

So, I know that Flash will be removed in Firefox 85, which is the 78.7 ESR equivalent. 
I've just noticed that by default, the behavior on Firefox 78.5 is different than the 
behavior for 78.4 ESR when handling flash content. I've previously set 78.4 ESR and 
earlier versions to allow flash content, but on a "click-to-play" basis. 
However 78.5 Seems to block it all together (even with flash installed and clicking allow 
on the content). The place holder for the flash content links me to adobe's flash player 
end of life page: https://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/end-of-life.html.

I'm currently using policies.json file and have:
"FlashPlugin": {
 "Allow": ["http://mycompany.org/;],
 "Default": true,
 "Locked": false
   }

I've also looked in the about:config for plugins.flashblock.enabled = false.

Has anyone been able to circumvent this in 78.5 ESR? Or was 78.4 ESR the final 
version for flash support?

Thanks,

Victor Hoang


--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] [From: External] Re: Import legacy profile, but use per-installation profiles thereafter?

[Andrew C Aitchison]

Is it really safe to leave legacy/32bit profiles and upgrade firefox to 
64bit in a classroom or hotdesk environments ?


I'm worried about what happens to an upgraded environment when some
but not all machines are reinstalled, so all machines have the same
64bit version of the firefox binaries installed, but profile and
install dirs are a mixture of legacy/32bit and 64bit ?


On Fri, 13 Nov 2020, Mike Kaply wrote:


In your case, I would just set legacy profiles and leave it. For 99.9% of
users, that's fine. For technical users that use developer edition, they
can create a new profile.

Mike

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 6:29 PM Verstraete, John <
extern.john.verstra...@vw.com> wrote:


I would have to agree with Andrew on this, we are also going from 32bit to
64bit and the profile migration is a real sticking point. I understand
having a different profile for different versions installed but the profile
migration piece should be a smoother process, imagine telling 10,000 users
to migrate their own profiles using about:profiles. There has to be a
better way from Mozilla to overcome this issue.

-Original Message-
From: Enterprise  On Behalf Of Andrew J.
Buehler
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2020 9:40 PM
To: enterprise@mozilla.org
Subject: [From: External] Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Import legacy profile,
but use per-installation profiles thereafter?

On 2020-11-11 at 10:45, Mike Kaply wrote:


When we upgrade or install 64 bit Firefox, if a 32 bit Firefox is
there, we use the same directory.

So my recommendation would be that you not uninstall and then
reinstall, but simply install or let the upgrades happen.


Unfortunately, that would A: leave 64-bit Firefox installed in the 32-bit
program hierarchy, which is undesirable just on general principles, and B:
mean that machines which got a clean install would have Firefox installed
under a different path from machines which got upgraded, which is
undesirable not only from general principles but also because it would make
managing configuration and uninstalls and the like harder (which path do we
need to install distribution\policies.json under? which path do we need to
look under to trigger the uninstall helper? etc.).

I can see why people might choose to go this route, but it really does not
sit well with me.


Unfortunately Windows didn't make this situation easy.


From my perspective, at least at a glance, Windows' contribution to the
situation seems relatively minor.

It also seems to me as if it shouldn't be too difficult to implement the
behavior I'd prefer within Firefox, relative to the behaviors that already
exist; it just apparently hasn't been done. That's a moot point for the
case at hand, because my organization isn't going to wait for a new Firefox
release before upgrading even if that new release would include this
behavior, but it could still be helpful for others.

What we'll probably wind up doing is setting the "use legacy profiles"
flag, running with that for a year or three, and then eventually turning
it off and fixing up any broken profiles that get discovered after that
point manually. That's far from ideal, both because of the risk of having
those broken profiles and because we'll be locked out of
profile-per-install for that long, but it's probably the best we're going
to be able to manage.

I do also still think that a way to explicitly tell Firefox to import a
specific existing profile's contents into the current (new) profile would
be useful, including in other contexts.

--
  Andrew J. Buehler


--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] AD Group Policies under Linux?

[Andrew C Aitchison]

Luca Manganelli  asked:

I know that I can do the file "polciies.json" to put in the
distrution folder, but there's any way to make Firefox under
Ubuntu/Linux to read the group policies on Active Directory?


On Wed, 21 Oct 2020, James M. Pulver replied:

No. Linux doesn't have a group policy engine or a registry to apply them to.


Depends upon the Linux.

For example
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/7/html/windows_integration_guide/sssd-gpo
This enables the administrator to define login policies honored
by both Linux and Windows clients centrally on the AD domain controller.
so a RHEL7 machine, at least, can in principle do what Luca asks,
provided Firefox for Linux is willing and able to play.

RedHat supply their own version of Firefox, so they may support this
feature even if Mozilla haven't.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] What is 3870112724rsegmnoittet-es.sqlite

[Andrew C Aitchison]

Top-posting seems appropriate here.

Some preferences don't exist if they have default values.
You should be able to create and set it.

On Wed, 7 Oct 2020, Timo Pietilä wrote:


Unfortunately no such pref exist in TB or FF.

Also it isn't GB -size large, just 10+MB, but that is large enough to 
cause problems in roaming profiles.


I just changed all dom.indexed -prefs to false, maybe that helps with it 
getting large.


Maybe I can change permissions do that FF/TB can't write in that directory 
just to see if that has any effect on FF/TB. If it doesn't I consider 
making that change university-wide.


Timo Pietilä

On 6.10.2020 18.50, Mike Kaply wrote:
It's used for storing indexedDB data for internal pages. There is a bug 
for the growth:


https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1517145 
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1517145>


One of the comments says you can set:

  "dom.indexedDB.dataThreshold" pref to "-1".


--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Saved username/password list covering input boxes?

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Wed, 30 Sep 2020, James Pearson wrote:


I'm currently using ESR 78 on Linux, but I'm not sure when this behaviour 
changed ...

When I starting typing into username input box, I get a drop-down list of 
possible saved username matches - but the drop-down covers the input box, so 
you can not see what you are typing ... it never used to be like this - so it 
is either something I've changed or some new default behaviour ?

Is there any way I can get this drop-down to not cover a username input box?


I have seen this behavior with a number of input boxes for a few months
on "standard" Linux Firefox (the Ubuntu packages). It is annoying but
isn't common and I hadn't taken much notice until you asked.

If/when it happens again I will note where and report it /
add it to an existing bug.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox ESR release notification

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Thu, 6 Aug 2020, denisrennes.gaut...@orange.com wrote:


Thanks, and is there any official way to be notified for every new release in 
that directory?
(If no other way I will make a script for that)


Every page on https://www.mozilla.org/ has the tag:

which shows the data-latest-firefox and data-esr-versions
In the nearly ten years I have monitored that it has only disagreed with 
that directory if one of the mirrors is still synchronising.



De : Mike Kaply [mailto:mka...@mozilla.com]
Envoyé : vendredi 31 juillet 2020 22:28
À : GAUTIER Denis OBS/CMI 
Cc : enterprise@mozilla.org
Objet : Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox ESR release notification

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 4:27 AM 
mailto:denisrennes.gaut...@orange.com>> wrote:
Hello,


• Is there any way to be notified for every new release of Firefox ESR, 
even for security fix releases like 68.4.1 ?
We generally notify this list of every release. If that hasn't been the case, 
I'll make sure it is. We don't currently have a dedicated release mailing list.

• I noticed that the a new release is available at 
http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ sometimes 1 day before the 
official release date in the Firefox Release Calendar 
https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease/Calendar . Is it safe to deploy this 
release before the official release calendar date?
Once a build has been placed in that directory, it is the build we are going to 
release. Sometimes if we encounter issues on release day, we'll halt the 
release, but in those cases, the fix will be a dot release, not replacing the 
original release.

So I will say it's safe to use that, but be aware me might pull the release 
back if something happens on release day (although this typically doesn't 
happen with ESR updates)

Mike


Thanks

_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org<mailto:Enterprise@mozilla.org>
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or 
send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org<mailto:enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org> 
with a subject of "unsubscribe"

_

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.




--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] End of Adobe Flash support on Firefox ESR ?

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Wed, 20 May 2020, marius.ta...@orange.com wrote:


I've seen that Flash will no longer be supported starting by Mozilla Firefox 84 
near the end of December (22nd of December, I guess ?)
Does it mean that this will happen also with Firefox ESR 78.6 ?


Flash will no longer be supported by Adobe on a similar timescale.
I am fairly sure tht Google Chrome, Safari and Edge are dropping
flash at the end of the year too.

Whether firefox esr supports flash for a little longer, you need
to ensure that the content is available in some other format before
the end of the year.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Security Warning for LogMeIn.com

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Fri, 13 Mar 2020, Eddie Rowe wrote:


I am receiving a failure of https on one system, but not on another
running ESR 68.6 x64.  I don't think it could be a DNS issue since
Chrome and Edge show the https session on the same PC.  Thoughts?

URL:  https://help.logmein.com/pkb_Home?l=en_US==3


I see from
   https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=help.logmein.com
that they only support TLSv1.2 and have an incomplete certificate chain.
Could either of those match a changed setting on that instance of firefox ?

Failing that, does 68.6 support DNS-over-HTTPS ? If so that could be 
another difference, especially as there is a rolling switch-on in the US:

https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2019/09/06/whats-next-in-making-dns-over-https-the-default/

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] Web page: Security Advisories for Firefox ESR

[Andrew C Aitchison]

I see that Firefox ESR68.6 is about to be released:
  https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/
  https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2020-09/

However
  https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox-esr/
still does not show the these fixes or these included in ESR68.5
  https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2020-06/

Has 
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox-esr/

been omitted from some update script ?

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Install/Uninstall/Update distribution

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Thu, 21 Nov 2019, Dimas Streich (Informàtica Trueta) wrote:


Thx for the answers. So...

- In all cases (new versions, x32 to x64, ...) you recommend to uninstall the 
actual version
prior to install the new one (so never updating).

- To migrate 52 to 68 I need to install first version 60. Is it possible to 
update the profile
without user interaction or I've to install 60, wait users to open Firefox, and 
after that
install 68? How can I do it with SCCM?

- To avoid problems with new profiles I need to set the MOZ_LEGACY_PROFILES. 
How do you do it
with SCCM? Executing a script with a "SET MOZ_LEGACY_PROFILES=1" for example?

- Actually we use AutoConfig and I'd like to migrate to Group Policies or use 
policies.json.
With AutoConfig and batch scripting it's possible to detect the Firefox version 
and do different
things depending on it (for example installing one or another extensions for 
compatible
reasons). Is it possible with new methods?
- Before the end of the migrating process we will have some computers with 
version 52, others
with 60 and others with 68. Which problems can I have? Do you think is it 
better to continue
using AutoConfig before we have all computers migrated to version 68?
- Now we've the autoconfig file (mozilla.cfg) in a shared web server, so every 
computer load
before starting. If we need to change a preference is very easy, and we only 
need to modify
mozilla.cfg and restart Firefox. Is it not possible to have the policies.json 
file in a shared
web server like this?

Do you think this could be a good migrating process?
1. Uninstall 52 > Install 60
2. Uninstall 60 > Install 68 x64
3. Remove AutoConfig and use GPO


As I understand it, uninstalling will lose history/bookmarks.
The logical (not necessarily sensible) options (ignoring AutoConfig and GPO) are
A) Upgrade 52->60. Upgrade 60->68.
B) Uninstall 52. Install 68.

With A) you will need ff60 to run *as each user* before you upgrade to 68.
If a user uses multiple machines with different versions of firefox,
going backwards will be "interesting".


El 20/11/2019 a les 18:33, Mike Kaply ha escrit:
  Yeah, definitely need to go to 60 before 68 or you will lose 
history/bookmarks
  (changes to the database).

And if you uninstall 32/reinstall 64, the directory name will be an issue 
unless you use
Program Files (x86) for both.

I did add a GPO for LegacyProfiles for Windows only. Other platforms, you need 
to set the
environment variable

Mike

On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 8:55 AM Kris Lou via Enterprise 
 wrote:
  Also, the change to x64 will likely run afoul of "one profiles per
  installation," where by installing to a different location 
(%programfiles% vs
  %programfiles(x86)%) will cause Firefox to create a NEW user profile, per
  user.  Setting the environmental variable "MOZ_LEGACY_PROFILES" (to 1, or
  anything) will avoid this, but I don't recall if it made it to GPO.

  Kris Lou
  k...@themusiclink.net


On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 5:50 AM James M. Pulver  wrote:
  I will say, I had major profile issues going on (one) PC from ESR52 to
  68. You need to have v60 migrate the user profiles before going to 68 or
  will need to delete all the user profiles before going to 68.

  --
  James Pulver
  CLASSE Computer Group
  Cornell University

  On 11/20/19 7:22 AM, Dimas Streich (Informàtica Trueta) wrote:
  > Hi,
  >
  > Actually we've Firefox 52 ESR installed on over a 1500 PCs and I want
  to
  > update to 68 ESR.
  >
  > When distributing Firefox with SCCM, is it more secure to update
  > previous version by installing the new version over it, or is it
  better
  > to previously uninstall the old version? I've read people doing one or
  > other thing, but is there an official recommendation?
  >
  > Plus that, I'd like to update the x32 versions to x64 where is
  possible.
  > In this case, is it always better to uninstall the x32 version?
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Stop Firefox from creating a new profile on upgrade

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Wed, 2 Oct 2019, Klaus Hartnegg wrote:


Am 01.10.2019 um 23:00 schrieb Mike Kaply:

We're also making a change so 64 bit Firefox installs in the same
directory as 32 bit (which is causing the new profiles).


Oh, no!

You just learned the hard way that not following rules causes problems.
Now instead of fixing the underlying bug you want to break another rule.
Guess what? That will cause more problems.

Every deployment solution, every inventory tool, and Windows itself
assumes everywhere that 64-bit programs are installed in C:\Program Files.

How about this:
When Firefox is installed in its default directory, it uses the default
name for the profile directory.
Only if somebody installs it in a non-standard directory, it uses a
non-standard name for its profile.

Then all users who use defaults will get what they expect, and those who
do not use defaults will get what they deserve: a surprise.


Mike will know better than me, but my recollection is that this issue is 
not new but goes back to around ff56.


At that point 64bit firefox became the default and many users were 
upgraded automatically. Since this would have meant profiles moving from
%ProgramFiles(x86)% to %ProgramFiles% (have I got that the right way 
around?) both versions were installed in the 32bit location, so that the 
profiles did not move.


Now that the chaos has been seen, they wish to scratch another itch
(requests to be able to run multiple versions of firefox) and tackle
two problems at once.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Moving Firefox to a faster 4-week release cycle!

[Andrew C Aitchison]

Paul,

On the whole I agree with you.

However, when my OS was on ESR I found that I often wanted the new features
"under the hood", particularly the security features, much more quickly
than ESR releases made them available.

I do agree that quantum and the switch of plugin api was an unfortunate
"under the hood" change.

On Sun, 22 Sep 2019, Paul Kosinski via Enterprise wrote:


I don't understand why a more rapid release cycle is good for *users*.
Bugs, especially security bugs, obviously should be fixed quickly. But
new features often tend to confuse users (many of whom can barely deal
with existing features).

I am pretty expert in using -- and developing -- software (having done
so since before Unix), but I prefer stability. I don't want changes in
behavior or GUI appearance of software I normally use to take time away
from whatever I'm working on, whether it's writing some C code, looking
up specs, or just watching some video.

The "rapid release" of new features is OK *only* if they do not change
the behavior, or GUI, of *existing* features. Even supposed stable ESR
has been seriously disrupted by Quantum. Quantum has been disaster in
this regard, as it has destroyed a tremendous number of important
Add-Ons, many of which cannot be recreated with the new API.

So I am skeptical of the desirability of a more rapid release cycle. It
might mainly be catering to users who view the browser as a game, rather
than a means to accomplish actual work.


On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 13:16:53 -0700
Ritu Kothari  wrote:


 We?re excited to announce

that we?re adjusting Firefox release cadence to increase our agility,
and to bring you new features more quickly. Starting Q1 2020, we plan
to ship a major Firefox release every 4 weeks.

Shorter release cycles provide greater flexibility to support product
planning and priority changes due to business or market requirements.
It allows us to be more agile and ship features faster while applying
the same rigor and due diligence needed to ship a high-quality and
stable release. *Major
updates to ESR* (Extended Support Release
 for the
enterprise) *will remain yearly, as they do now*. There will be a 3
months support overlap between new ESR and end-of-life of previous
ESR version. The next two major ESR releases will be ~June 2020 and
~June 2021. This change will be deployed gradually starting with
Fx71, achieving 4 week release cadence by Q1 2020. You can refer to
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Release_Management/Calendar for the latest
release dates and other  information.

As we slowly reduce our release cycle length, from 7 weeks down to 6,
5, 4 weeks, there will be close monitoring of aspects like release
scope change; developer productivity impact (tree closure, build
failures); beta code churn (uplifts, new regressions); overall
release stabilization and quality (stability, performance, carryover
regressions). Our main goal is to identify bottlenecks that prevent
us from being more agile in our release cadence. Appropriate
mitigations will be put in place should our metrics highlight an
unexpected trend.

If you have any questions or concerns, please email
release-m...@mozilla.com


Thanks,

Ritu Kothari

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"


___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] (no subject)

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Wed, 18 Sep 2019, James Pearson wrote:
I notice Mozilla have announced that the Rapid Release schedule is moving to 
a 4 week release cycle from next year:


https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/09/moving-firefox-to-a-faster-4-week-release-cycle/

Does this mean we will get ESR point releases every 4 weeks as well?

Also, does this mean the ESR major release schedule will have a 3 (or 4?) 
point release overlap between major version releases?


That link says:
  Starting Q1 2020, we plan to ship a major Firefox release every 4 weeks.
  Firefox ESR release cadence (Extended Support Release for the enterprise)
  will remain the same. In the years to come, we anticipate a major ESR
  release every 12 months with 3 months support overlap between new ESR
  and end-of-life of previous ESR. The next two major ESR releases will
  be ~June 2020 and ~June 2021.

A 3 month support overlap suggests a 3 or 4 point-release overlap to me.

June-September is probably the best time for a 3 month overlap for the
many northern-hemisphere universities that work on a September-June
academic year, but I don't know how well it will work in the southern
hemisphere or anywhere else with a calendar-year academic year.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox ESR 60.9 and Firefox ESR 68.1 released

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Wed, 4 Sep 2019, Fjoerfoks wrote:


70 will become 68.2.
See also: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Release_Management/Calendar


Do you mean that esr68.2 will have the same *features* as 70,
or that esr68.2 will be based on  esr68.0 plus the security
updates and selected bug-fixes from 70 ?

Thanks.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Machine readable version of release notes

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Fri, 19 Jul 2019, Martin Sirringhaus wrote:


Is anybody aware of a place to download a more machine readable version
of the release notes (e.g. simple text format)?
Parsing the web page seems a bit fragile (and complicated).


Are you looking for the full release notes or just the number of the 
current/latest version ?


If the current versions are sufficent
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox-esr/
- and every page I have checked on that server - have:

data-latest-firefox="68.0.1" data-esr-versions="60.8.0 68.0.1" 
data-gtm-container-id="GTM-MW3R8V"  data-stub-attribution-rate="1.0">


which states the latest version(s) of firefox standard and ESR.

This can get a few hours ahead of the download pages (maybe the binaries
take longer to propogate across the world ?) but has been stable over the
many years I have used it (certainly since firefox 3.6 and 4.0 in 2012).

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox update downloader and on-premise update server

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Fri, 17 May 2019, Vladimír Cihlář wrote:


Excuse me, Mike, and how do I know that – for example - esr70 will be needed? 
Is this really not a url address to find out what is the latest version of 
Firefox ESR?


Very near the beginning, every page of www.mozilla.org has a line:


which gives the latest general release and ESR versions.

Over the years, I have found these to be very accurate,
although they can be a few hours ahead of the latest downloadable version
I guess that this may depend on how fast the content delivery network 
propagates new binaries.


--
Andrew C. Aitchison Cambridge, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Add-ons running on Firefox v61

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Sat, 4 May 2019, Karthik Krishnamurthy wrote:


Hello all,

In light of the new add-ons issue, what would be the fate of enterprises
running older versions of Firefox? Our organization runs thousands of
Windows systems with Firefox v61 with a managed add-on installation
using the windows registry method. How is the fix for these older systems
going to arrive for the add-ons bug?


The issue is caused by a certificate expiring.
The released fix is a work-around which reduces security by not checking
the addon's signature.

I'm hoping that Mozilla can get the appropriate certificate re-signed
- some certificates use retired encryption and I don't know which 
certificates are involved, so this may not be possible.

That way the current fix can be reversed and all browsers
will work exactly as before.

Can somone confirm that this is the plan ?

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Cambridge, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] What the heck happened to my addons?

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Sat, 4 May 2019, Klaus Hartnegg wrote:


For passwords we have finally agreed that enforcing frequent changes
was a bad idea. Because the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.
It‘s time to talk about expiring certificates.


I was about to ask what has changed since we started being pushed that way,
but then I remembered that OCSP Must-Staple makes revoking certificates more 
practical.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Cambridge, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit 
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise or send an email to 
enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of "unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] Running Java - was Re: Firefox auto updating issue

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Thu, 4 Oct 2018, Robert Stallknecht wrote:


Hello,

My company, GDC Technics, has been having issues with Firefox auto 
updating to version 60+ for the last few weeks. When this happens our 
entire organization is unable to launch Java functionality in Oracle and 
they are unable to work.


1. Oracle recommend that java aps are run with Java Web Start, rather than 
directly in a browser

https://java.com/en/download/faq/java_webstart.xml

Java Web Start has been available since Java 5, and Java 8 is the last 
version which can be run in a browser.


2. Oracle are dropping free commercial support for Java 8 in January 2019
https://blogs.oracle.com/java-platform-group/end-of-public-updates-is-a-process%2c-not-an-event
(non-free commercial and free non-commercial support will continue for two and 
five years ...)

Java 9 is dead and Java 10 went EOL last month
https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html

I trust that you are looking at your java strategy further ahead,
ad well as solving the immediate problem with Firefox 60.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Cambridge, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

[Mozilla Enterprise] GTK2 and Firefox 60esr

[Andrew C Aitchison]

Just a heads up for anyone running firefox on RHEL6
or clones (CentOS6, Scientific Linux 6 etc) or other
GTK2-based platforms.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 uses gtk2 in firefox 52.8esr,
but I see from
  https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1278282
that Firefox 59 dropped the option to build with gtk2.

In https://access.redhat.com/announcements/3365141
Red Hat talk about plugins and addons with FF60 in RHEL6,
which suggests that they either aren't aware of the gtk2 issue
or have it under control (two very different possibilities).

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Cambridge, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox ESR 60 32bit and support for java applets / NPAPI plugins

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Urbanski Tomasz wrote:


Has it been decided that the next Firefox release ESR 60.x (32bit)
would end support for java applets, making the ESR52.x the last
Firefox offering support for NPAPI plugins (except flash)?

Should this happen, IE11 will be the last browser on the market for
legacy applications using applets... or is there any other
alternative, supported browser?


Oracle recommends Java Web Start
https://blogs.oracle.com/java-platform-group/moving-to-a-plugin-free-web

Is it important that your legacy application runs within a browser ?

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Cambridge, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox ESR App V pacakge too many crashes

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Mike Kaply wrote:


about:crashes was available in Firefox 52 and should work on Linux.


Hmm. I can't find it in 52.7.3esr downloaded just now from mozilla:

# wget 
https://download-installer.cdn.mozilla.net/pub/firefox/releases/52.7.3esr/linux-x86_64/en-GB/firefox-52.7.3esr.tar.bz2
# bzgrep -c about:crash firefox-52.7.3esr.tar.bz2
0

I see about:crash in 55.0
https://download-installer.cdn.mozilla.net/pub/firefox/releases/55.0/linux-x86_64/en-GB/firefox-55.0.tar.bz2
but not 54.0.1
https://download-installer.cdn.mozilla.net/pub/firefox/releases/54.0.1/linux-x86_64/en-GB/firefox-54.0.1.tar.bz2



I would be really disappointed if Red Hat disabled that.

Red Hat are in the clear.


I would suggest getting a build of Firefox directly from the Mozilla
website and try to recreate the problem.


Ah.
https://download-installer.cdn.mozilla.net/pub/firefox/releases/52.7.3esr/linux-x86_64/en-GB/fir
efox-52.7.3esr.tar.bz2
and the latest linux 64 bit, 59.0.2, both have gtk2 directories
- I thought that gtk2 had been dropped. Good.

However when I run these, I get:
  XPCOMGlueLoad error for file firefox-59.0.2/firefox/libxul.so:
  libcairo-gobject.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or 
directory
  Couldn't load XPCOM.

libcairo-gobject doesn't exist on this old linux.
I don't know how soon I will be able to build libcairo-gobject and see 
where I can go from there.




On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 9:41 AM, Andrew C Aitchison <and...@aitchison.me.uk>
wrote:



I've been getting frequent crashes since esr52.7.0 or esr52.7.1.
I'm using the Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 builds*, which use gtk2 not gtk3.

"about:crashes" gives "The address isn't valid" and does not appear in
"about:about". Has Red Hat removed it or is it newer than esr52 ?

* actually Red Hat code, recompiled by Scientific Linux.

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Mike Kaply wrote:

Have any crash reports been submitted that we can take a look at?


Checkout about:crashes in one of the failing browsers.

Mike

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 8:27 AM, Kumar Kondru <kondru.ku...@hm.com>
wrote:

Hi,


We are running with *Firefox ESR 52.7.0 *as App V 4.6 package and
deployed in citrix servers. We are getting too many cases that users are
getting 30 crashes daily and its very difficult to work.

The crashes issue was bit less till ESR 45.9.0 version but from ESR 52
version onwards crashes are very high. To reduce the crashes we have
deployed the following settings via config file and still no change in
crashes count.

*//Disable hardware acceleration- Reduce crashes*

*lockPref("media.windows-media-foundation.allow-d3d11-dxva", false);*

*lockPref ("gfx.direct2d.disabled", true);*

*lockPref ("layers.acceleration.disabled", true);*


Thanks and Regards,

*Ajay Kumar Kondru*

H & M HENNES & MAURITZ AB. IT-DEPARTMENT. WAMS Team

E-mail: client.applicati...@hm.com


___

Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listi
nfo/enterprise or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a
subject of "unsubscribe"




___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox ESR App V pacakge too many crashes

[Andrew C Aitchison]

I've been getting frequent crashes since esr52.7.0 or esr52.7.1.
I'm using the Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 builds*, which use gtk2 not gtk3.

"about:crashes" gives "The address isn't valid" and does not appear in
"about:about". Has Red Hat removed it or is it newer than esr52 ?

* actually Red Hat code, recompiled by Scientific Linux.

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Mike Kaply wrote:


Have any crash reports been submitted that we can take a look at?

Checkout about:crashes in one of the failing browsers.

Mike

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 8:27 AM, Kumar Kondru  wrote:


Hi,

We are running with *Firefox ESR 52.7.0 *as App V 4.6 package and
deployed in citrix servers. We are getting too many cases that users are
getting 30 crashes daily and its very difficult to work.

The crashes issue was bit less till ESR 45.9.0 version but from ESR 52
version onwards crashes are very high. To reduce the crashes we have
deployed the following settings via config file and still no change in
crashes count.

*//Disable hardware acceleration- Reduce crashes*

*lockPref("media.windows-media-foundation.allow-d3d11-dxva", false);*

*lockPref ("gfx.direct2d.disabled", true);*

*lockPref ("layers.acceleration.disabled", true);*


Thanks and Regards,

*Ajay Kumar Kondru*

H & M HENNES & MAURITZ AB. IT-DEPARTMENT. WAMS Team

E-mail: client.applicati...@hm.com

___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox ESR 52.3.0 doesn't work correctly with Xvnc

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Fri, 25 Aug 2017, Ignaz Forster wrote:


Am 25.08.2017 00:19, schrieb Paul Kosinski:

Running the latest Firefox ESR (52.3.0) on Linux is fine when used in a
standard Xorg window (on the machine running Firefox). BUT, if the same
configuration is started using Xvnc (for secure remote access to a single
Firefox window -- and nothing else), NONE of the control "drop-downs"
work, while everything else works as expected.



Any help in tracking this down would be appreciated.


The most obvious thing that came to my mind: With Firefox 52esr (Firefox 46 
to be exact) Mozilla switched from GTK2 to GTK3 by default.


Have you tried executing any other GTK3 application in your setup? Let's see 
if the problems are the same there. You could also try to rebuild Firefox 
52esr with GTK2 instead of GTK3.


The Red Hat 6 / CentOS 6 / Scientific Linux 6 rpm packages of firefox 52.3.0esr
are build against GTK2 (gtk2 >= 2.24). You may be able to use one of these 
packages, or the binaries inside, rather than compiling your own version 
to test.


I'm running firefox-52.3.0-3.el6_9.x86_64 on a Scientific Linux 6.9 
machine, displaying on an android tablet running either bNVC Free or

RemoteRipple.
I use twm window manager but not Classic Theme Restorer
or Classic Toolbar Buttons.

Alt-F brings up the File menu when I am in normal, multi-tab 
mode, but not when I switch to "full-screen, no menu-bar" mode with F11.

In the normal mode I can also use the mouse to navigate the
file/edit/view menus that Paul highlighted in
   http://iment.com/paste-bin/Firefox-CTR-CTB-VNC.jpg

However the same is true for me on the console - I see
no difference with and without Xvnc.

--
Andrew C. Aitchison Cambridge, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Super slow pages after update from 45.9->52.1 ESR

[Andrew C Aitchison]

Or, could the delay be some DNS lookup which times out ?

Firefox has its own DNS cache (which can be overridden).
Maybe the switch to multi-threading has done something to the DNS handling ?

On Sat, 1 Jul 2017, stein.wm wrote:

Perhaps it's the Virus Protection. 
E. g. on my PC a new version of Avira (after last product update from 2017-June-02) now tries to sent requests home with every suspection or internet request. If the firewall blocks this, the virus protection delays the start of the intercepted module for a trial period of about half a minute. 

But this effect should also occur with other software, it is not limited to the new Firefox version. 


stein.wm


-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Enterprise [mailto:enterprise-boun...@mozilla.org] Im Auftrag von Remy 
Molenaar
Gesendet: Samstag, 1. Juli 2017 08:50
An: Jim Weill
Cc: enterprise@mozilla.org
Betreff: Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Super slow pages after update from 45.9->52.1 
ESR

I have that problem also with the official version. I'm still not sure what the problem is. I've noticed that it occurs only with internet pages, none internal. First I thought it was my ad blocker. But I did a clean install (with clean profile) and having the issue back again. 



I'm on Windows 7 Pro btw.


Remy 


Op 30 jun. 2017 om 19:23 heeft Jim Weill  het 
volgende geschreven:



I don't know about anyone else, but I am still having the slowness 
issue with Firefox, even after upgrading to the (unannounced) 52.2.1 release.  
For this reason I am pushing Chrome to our users because we cannot keep having 
random page timeouts slowing us down like this.

I cannot find a way to recreate the issue, other than at least once per 
hour the whole browser stops loading pages and it takes anywhere from 30-60 
seconds before I can use firefox again.  I can open new tabs and start trying 
to load pages, but none of them load until whatever is bottle-necking the 
browser finally releases.

jim



On 6/6/2017 11:50 AM, Lawrence Mandel wrote:


Thanks Samuel. As a follow up, I have filed 
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1370629


Lawrence


On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Samuel Ambaye 
 wrote:


We noticed the issue when one of our users reported a 
similar issue following a minor version ESR update:

Using FF 45.9.0.6310 & Windows 7.
(1) Start FF
(2) goto this URL www.lematin.ch (newspaper in Geneva, 
Switzerland)
Results: Browser waits for the page to load for 
two-three minutes to load (but would actually load);
Results: Other browsers, No issue;
(4) Close browser
Browser hangs and requires a kill process.
(5) Restart Browser and Try different web sites, even 
ones that were ok before;
Results: Browser waits for web site for over two / 
three minutes;
(5) Kill Process, Restart browser and repeat step 2 and 
5:
Same Result;
(6) Kill Process, Replace FF user profile and repeat 
step 2 and 5:
Same Result;
(7) Uninstall FF for users who were affected; Install 
FF 52.1.0.6316
Issue no longer reproducible

We hope this helps.

Best,
Samuel



>>> Jim Weill  19/05/2017 00:17 
>>>

I notice the issue when I first open FF in the morning 
on Windows 7 Pro
x64 machines.  After that I cannot come up with a 
reliable way to
reproduce this issue, other than it happens at random 
times throughout
the day.

I do not notice this on Mac OSX 10.12 at all (we have a 
few of these).
And I have not polled our Linux users on this issue, so 
I do not know
where that stands.

Is there something in the dev tools that I can leave 
open when this
happens again to try to narrow this down?  I've had 
this happen several
times today already.

jim


On 5/11/2017 11:51 AM, Phil Pishioneri wrote:
> On 5/11/17 2:06 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> we've filed a bug at
>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1361865 
  to investigate
>> the issue reported in this thread. Unfortunately so 
far we haven't
   

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Super slow pages after update from 45.9->52.1 ESR

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Mon, 3 Jul 2017, William Spratt wrote:


Since updating to 52.2.0esr and updating Flash to 26.0.0.126 the
issue has apparently disappeared (which now inevitably will result
in it happening as soon as I send this e-mail).


http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/about/ suggests that the
latest flash plugin for firefox is 26.0.0.131

Can you confirm that you *up*graded to 26.0.0.126 ?

Thanks,

--
Andrew C Aitchison  Cambridge, UK
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] Firefox ESR 52.1.0 - Adobe Flash Outdated on Enterprise Linux 7?

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Wed, 17 May 2017, James M. Pulver wrote:

I'm getting This Plugin is vulnerable and should be updated on all flash 
content, but

http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/about/
shows
You have version 25,0,0,171 installed
and says that is the latest version below . . .


https://www.mozilla.org/en-GB/plugincheck/ (and presumably other localisations)
believes
   ~/.mozilla/firefox//pluginreg.dat
which does not get updated if firefox is running when a plugin is updated
(that or the change gets overwritten ...).

Perhaps that information is being used for the "This Plugin is vulnerable"
message ?

On Scientific Linux 6, with the RedHat/SL firefox ESR 52.1.0,
if I closed firefox, remove the libflashplayer lines from pluginreg.dat
and restart firefox, then the plugincheck web page gives the correct 
plugin version.


--
Andrew C Aitchison
___
Enterprise mailing list
Enterprise@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/enterprise 
or send an email to enterprise-requ...@mozilla.org with a subject of 
"unsubscribe"

Re: [Mozilla Enterprise] OT: Duplicate messages from list

[Andrew C Aitchison]

On Thu, 15 Sep 2016, Andrew J. Buehler wrote:


I'm sorry for bothering the list with this, but before I try to report
this to the list admins properly, I want to try to figure out whether or
not it's happening for anyone else.

Is it just me, or have the Mozilla mailing lists started to send out
duplicate copies of messages?

Since sometime yesterday morning, I have been receiving anywhere
from two to five copies of some messages through the Mozilla mailing
lists, including this one.


As others have replied: it is not just you.

Looking at the headers I believe that the problem is somewhere inside google.

Here is part of the header from 3 copies of the same message.
I see that 10.200.43.169 is adding two X-Received: headers:
the earlier (second in reading order) header is the same each time,
but the later (first) has a different SMTP id and timestamp each time.

(This has been cut-n-pasted and the line-wrapping manually fixed ...)

Delivered-To: enterpr...@mailman1.mail.scl3.mozilla.com
Received: from mail-qt0-f200.google.com (mail-qt0-f200.google.com
[209.85.216.200])
by mailman1.mail.scl3.mozilla.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 227ADBFF17
for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 13:52:02 + (UTC)
Received: by mail-qt0-f200.google.com with SMTP id y10so99922432qty.2
for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 06:52:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:dkim-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to
:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=f0rVR1+1QwcPJ4tqfckulT1RqWm9H2Or1ZVt0m3Qp4M=;
b=W47GnL9QilGeG8spc787AqyhC+HAYOYUe2UBeFXlsia/9j1tmhIJ5Q7nMvWhuNkkb/
GsD0sXgXickMARBBj4C3YIkWCQVxHs+XNW8cDJxX7eqmh0ZNkRcFZdkupNxaZ2lnw5jE
Q9Fc38P5CGMjNqpAW2KauMrLEWOqrDmM/JMdVRafxkiZ3lEjbkLvILXT2AIH2wZDKu3N
qCTmhzsct4omJrTzc3cH/h+XrXdxZfv7ooiA6DJY6yai3jUM5k636EWsXOiHuHJCNsxa
ak6IGNXEhkNhR/PxHkoIxFUV2m11QUPMcPBx7+CFOWhhrDTFTsLWeh0662AlkBdhA+gW
vZDQ==
X-Gm-Message-State:

AE9vXwPg4eKazlltsJMoaulbk4J+e7ZD/pTbwPXlDKbZGcZrMzurCFSssKJ+CEtHQATsKXpQJsx4xRNMKKBMRrpCm9suup0kgtPDG/J0bLW
bKQMefMfr6bffg3m/0V1KmaGPmeV52+t7a2EE65CD7q52

Gc1hyPh6I8QpiaHGUqNrpWXMAAXxlgQB+VH5GJTPdJ/zHG6PbueipBoCmeQ8xPy0Ivj43pAyWlEGD926xeVAse/UIGGbjEez5V1mLdOtJlA
CmX3KCyuEgXNt8PEz+Xgr+mBBpaxKR3/3Z2W6NTPlCKRe
oZArBg3lJYKjU4MGVXpIByzDY18p0CnfBBdYeBs5fqYExGA=
X-Received: by 10.200.43.169 with SMTP id m38mr9139281qtm.31.1473947521428;
Thu, 15 Sep 2016 06:52:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.200.43.169 with SMTP id m38mr9139247qtm.31.1473947520878;
Thu, 15 Sep 2016 06:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x236.google.com (mail-qk0-x236.google.com.
[2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m2si3076062qtd.41.2016.09.15.06.52.00
for 
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Thu, 15 Sep 2016 06:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236 is neither
permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
benja...@smedbergs.us) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
dkim=pass header.i=@smedbergs-us.20150623.gappssmtp.com;
spf=neutral (google.com: 2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236 is neither permitted
nor denied by best guess record for domain of
benja...@smedbergs.us) smtp.mailfrom=benja...@smedbergs.us
Received: by mail-qk0-x236.google.com with SMTP id z190so51283139qkc.3
for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 06:52:00 -0700 (PDT)


Delivered-To: enterpr...@mailman1.mail.scl3.mozilla.com
Received: from mail-qt0-f199.google.com (mail-qt0-f199.google.com
[209.85.216.199])
by mailman1.mail.scl3.mozilla.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22947BFFAA
for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 21:20:27 + (UTC)
Received: by mail-qt0-f199.google.com with SMTP id y10so13096qty.2
for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 14:20:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:dkim-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to
:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=f0rVR1+1QwcPJ4tqfckulT1RqWm9H2Or1ZVt0m3Qp4M=;
b=fmAhcNpVVuHm1gyMEvMvnjlzfPAM0bhEUyB7vIxhpQg4J+dcHruQ4eSs6pzP0hs6Rt
HanGKSGaWSKeLE2JJKjxdsFSSguIqrOh7IfWVhvRHeRkXUpz7YYMXcJiUZugfm2tzvXM
1QTyIbQo4H5Oj49RwGDIhs1ycksUoSbBtKQSWaSeabi4V5FfKVxGw81wFXHtcimiJa81
Gs8Ztad6jG4Fia4VH1du/0Q9Xmf26fXMQR8CaZkh3NbLc1niArvz9HuLBrIXyL2O0eDf
whLD3myOYUhJCvpvtu65lIGqkufcp7HfqlwDAxItIdzHn9LszQbb3Bkxfhocyc9/5RWx
b/6Q==
X-Gm-Message-State:

AE9vXwPGYNGvGkeYCrOVAz4ejJOQmwYD637NTsJPrneuJO2+ASuvnQY8VYBFvNjohBKIebZY7Cab8JK1cTQUVgPJ5Uy4sWSYAWbrHYV4ceN
0+pQaqXWW8vDjNQVIehwvtTenrexb2x+5sHi1Qsz1FCw/

77QQBJR+BuzVuopcBlhRk3qhobXmCT0C+1xRn57ePY4HICKp3TFypAODuDtccDHBWE73zF/eO31APnIBVqpJXJ91CCrBNfFKIuy7kfYEC0r