bdelmee wrote on 2016-12-16 09:31:
Edmund Wong wrote on 2016-12-16 04:40:
Daniel wrote:
On 15/12/2016 6:40 PM, bdelmee wrote:
Richmond wrote on 2016-12-14 22:51:
bdelmee writes:
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unofficial dev builds
and encouraging us to try those and report any issu
On 16/12/2016 10:02, Piscium wrote:
> Question: "about:buildconfig" tells me that gcc v. 4.8.5 was used to
> build SM. gcc 4.8.5 is (arguably) old as gcc 4.8.0, the first version
> in that series, was released in March 22, 2013, 3.5 years ago.
>
> Considering that FF is developed at breakneck spe
bdelmee wrote:
Edmund Wong wrote on 2016-12-15 08:36:
bdelmee wrote:
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unoffical dev builds
and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before
2.46 comes out.
I am still using 2.38 as 2.40 had an annoying regression for me,
which i'd like to check
bdelmee wrote:
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unoffical dev builds
and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before
2.46 comes out.
I am still using 2.38 as 2.40 had an annoying regression for me,
which i'd like to check on the next beta and report if still present.
But - wil
Yupidup, that worked. Thanks!
Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote on 2016-12-16 11:26:
Open Sidebar. Set search engine and do a search from there. Default will
be set to this one then. Or do it from the search in the toolbar.
The default engine always reflects the current engine now.
FRG
Daniel wrote:
Open Sidebar. Set search engine and do a search from there. Default will
be set to this one then. Or do it from the search in the toolbar.
The default engine always reflects the current engine now.
FRG
Daniel wrote:
On 16/12/2016 8:57 PM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote:
een duck-ducked!
Did I
On 16/12/2016 8:57 PM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote:
Setting the default search engine no longer works. Has been removed from
Gecko/Firefox.
Tracked in Bug 1265881:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1265881
Check it for a workaround.
FRG
bdelmee wrote:
bdelmee wrote on 2016-12-16 09:
Setting the default search engine no longer works. Has been removed from
Gecko/Firefox.
Tracked in Bug 1265881:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1265881
Check it for a workaround.
FRG
bdelmee wrote:
bdelmee wrote on 2016-12-16 09:31:
B.
odd - even though my profile has goog
bdelmee wrote on 2016-12-16 09:31:
Edmund Wong wrote on 2016-12-16 04:40:
Daniel wrote:
On 15/12/2016 6:40 PM, bdelmee wrote:
Richmond wrote on 2016-12-14 22:51:
bdelmee writes:
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unofficial dev builds
and encouraging us to try those and report any issu
On 16 December 2016 at 03:40, Edmund Wong wrote:
> It should be (officially just as a candidate, but unofficially as a
> release)
> https://archive.mozilla.org/pub/seamonkey/candidates/2.46-candidates/build9/unsigned/
>
> basically.. candidate = unofficial
> soon-to-be-released-but-pending-process
Edmund Wong wrote on 2016-12-16 04:40:
Daniel wrote:
On 15/12/2016 6:40 PM, bdelmee wrote:
Richmond wrote on 2016-12-14 22:51:
bdelmee writes:
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unofficial dev builds
and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before
2.46 comes out.
I am still
Edmund Wong wrote on 2016-12-15 08:36:
bdelmee wrote:
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unoffical dev builds
and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before
2.46 comes out.
I am still using 2.38 as 2.40 had an annoying regression for me,
which i'd like to check on the next beta
Daniel wrote:
> On 15/12/2016 6:40 PM, bdelmee wrote:
>> Richmond wrote on 2016-12-14 22:51:
>>> bdelmee writes:
>>>
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unofficial dev builds
and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before
2.46 comes out.
I am still using 2.
On 15/12/2016 6:40 PM, bdelmee wrote:
Richmond wrote on 2016-12-14 22:51:
bdelmee writes:
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unofficial dev builds
and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before
2.46 comes out.
I am still using 2.38 as 2.40 had an annoying regression for me,
On 15/12/2016 6:40 PM, Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote:
Ahh seems he is looking for an easy way out. Lets just punish him worse.
He needs to do the next releases also!
FRG
Edmund Wong wrote:
if it's the
guy who did the release... he should be sacked!
And he thinks he's going to get some Christ
l10n builds are still broken. Extensions needed to be removed in 2.46
for now. Now stalled with a mac OSX repack problem but this should
hopefully be solved soon.
FRG
Felix Miata wrote:
Edmund Wong composed on 2016-12-15 15:36 (UTC+0800):
Fighting what? Since 18 Nov I've been using the Oct
Edmund Wong composed on 2016-12-15 15:36 (UTC+0800):
There will be betas.. just need the following to happen:
1) 2.46 is released
2) figure out if the next release is a beta (2.48) or
release (2.47).
3) do a post-mortem discussion as to what the smeg went wrong
with 2.46 and why hell b
Ahh seems he is looking for an easy way out. Lets just punish him worse.
He needs to do the next releases also!
FRG
Edmund Wong wrote:
if it's the
guy who did the release... he should be sacked!
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamon
thank you Richmond, but i only see alpha versions in that folder.
my question remains: does seamonkey still follow a release cycle
including public betas ?
Richmond wrote on 2016-12-14 22:51:
bdelmee writes:
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unofficial dev builds
and encouraging us to t
bdelmee wrote:
> Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unoffical dev builds
> and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before
> 2.46 comes out.
>
> I am still using 2.38 as 2.40 had an annoying regression for me,
> which i'd like to check on the next beta and report if still present.
bdelmee writes:
> Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unoffical dev builds
> and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before
> 2.46 comes out.
>
> I am still using 2.38 as 2.40 had an annoying regression for me,
> which i'd like to check on the next beta and report if still present
Hello, I keep seeing people mentioning unoffical dev builds
and encouraging us to try those and report any issue before
2.46 comes out.
I am still using 2.38 as 2.40 had an annoying regression for me,
which i'd like to check on the next beta and report if still present.
But - will there be a bet
22 matches
Mail list logo