WaltS48 wrote:
On 1/25/18 11:18 PM, Daniel wrote:
David E. Ross wrote:
On 1/25/2018 8:32 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
On 1/25/18 10:56 AM, David E. Ross wrote:
On 1/25/2018 3:44 AM, Daniel wrote:
David E. Ross wrote:
On 1/24/2018 7:51 PM, Daniel wrote:
Frank-Rainer Grahl wrote:
2.49.1 is based on ESR 52.4
2.49.2 should (hopefully) arrive in the next 2-3 weeks and will
be based
on 52.6
Firefox does not show minor version numbers in its UA string.
52.5.3 ESR:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/52.0
2.49.2 x 64 local build:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/52.0 SeaMonkey/2.49.2
As you can see almost identical but as usual google and others
will do
incorrect user agent sniffing.
FRG
That's interesting!! Being a long term SM user, it has always
intrigued
me why the Gecko number has not been updated in yonks
(20100101)... but
now I see that probably stems from FF, which also doesn't seem
to update
its Gecko release date!!
Presumably the Gecko engine *HAS* actually been updated!! ;-P
Not updating the version date for Gecko in the user agent string
is part
of Mozilla's plan to obscure user characteristics. Web servers
sniffing
user data supposedly find it harder to track individual users.
See bug
#1329996 at <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1329996>.
I prefer relying on the Secret Agent extension from
<https://www.dephormation.org.uk/index.php?page=81>.
Then one would have to wonder what use it is to have the Gecko
version
with-in the User-Agent string at all!! ;-(
Some Web servers insist on sniffing the user agent string and expect
some kind of date for Gecko. Mozilla-based browsers fail to work on
such Web sites unless there is a date field.
An example please.
I do not have an example. I recall reading in a bug report (now
apparently closed) that omitting the Gecko date was causing problems
with Web servers that sniff the UA.
I seem to recall that some/many sites fail to function for SeaMonkey
unless the SeaMonkey UA had FF in it ... in some cases *Only FF* in
the SM UA
So why the mention, now, of some sniffing for Gecko?? Is that Gecko
*only* or Gecko *as well* now??
Some light reading for you Daniel, and anyone else that might be
interested.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/User-Agent
Enjoy!
Interesting!! The example Chrome/Chromium and Opera and Safari UA
strings mention "like Gecko" but do not give a version date!!
And, Walt, the link you provided had a further link to ...
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Browser_detection_using_the_user_agent
which mentions ....
"It's worth re-iterating: it's very rarely a good idea to use user agent
sniffing. You can almost always find a better, more broadly compatible
way to solve your problem!"
Which has long been re-iterated in these groups!! And, again, in the
para "Are you trying to check for the existence of a specific feature?",
it states "You should never do user agent sniffing" with the word
"never" in Bold!!
--
Daniel
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171016030418
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171015235623
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
