Daniel wrote on 09/07/2015 08:37:
On 9/07/2015 4:34 AM, John Duncan wrote:
Daniel wrote:
On 8/07/2015 5:55 AM, John Duncan wrote:
<Snip>
To fix this,
couldn't we try always reporting the Firefox/x.x bit at the end of the
UA string to deal with invalid sniffing? or is that not the issue in
this circumstance?
Yes, you could, John, but then no-one will ever know about SM!! So you
might as well just use FF!
Ha, that is a good point! This doesn't really seem like a big issue
anyway. I have yet to come across a website that denies me access based
on the fact that I'm advertising SeaMonkey instead of Firefox. The
``chrome-optimised'' websites on the other hand... *shudders*
John, that could be because your User Agent, Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh;
Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0
SeaMonkey/2.39a1, is advertising Firefox as well as SM!!
Have you got Edit->Preferences->Advanced->HTTP Networking set to
Advertise FF compatibility??
And did I read elsewhere that you were offering your programming
skills up to the Consortium during a work slowdown?? If so, well done.
I have this option set ... and my UA is advertising seamonkey instead of
FireFox, because Seamonkey is the last on the list.
Anyway, it's abnormal that a browser advertise itself and another one
together :-)
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
